What Does NBC Have to lose?

[BlueMAB]

Why did ESPN pay up for a Pac 12 that is mediocre in football and god awful in hoops?

You answered your own question in the previous post.

Exposure.

 

[BlueMAB]

I think HartbeatHusky's original purpose was just to point out there isn't a downside for NBC to make a hypothetical offer to the BE including Pitt/Syr, not to actually debate whether or not it would happen or whether or not Pitt/Syr would even consider the offer.

I agree with him that they could make that offer...I for one don't think any offer would change their minds but money talks and money creates stability. Like he says, what do they have to lose?

The downside is it puts a number on the table that isn't realistic. In negotiations, you don't help out the other side by giving them inflated numbers based on hypotheticals.

If they put a huge number on the table, they've set the bar. Now the Big East can negotiate using that number less the value of the departing 3.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Because they have been in the Pac10/12 forever and ND has been independent just as long. Perhaps they value conference affiliation.

You miss the other points that refute your claim that Pac12 FB is mediocre. 2 BCS bowl teams multiple times including the past 2 years, multiple top 25 teams yearly. And for someone that touts market size, the Pac12 has #2, #5, #13, #14, #17 and #22 markets, otherwise known as 6 of the top 25 markets in the country. And the member schools actually play in those markets, are among the top teams in the conference on a regular basis in those markets and are the top draws for college sports in their respective markets. So yes, there is a reason the Pac12 was able to swing a solid TV deal.

By multiple ranked teams, do you mean 2? Because that is how many Pac 12 teams were ranked at year end last year. They got 4 teams (including Utah) ranked in 2008. The Big East was pretty good back then too.

The Pac 12 has the LA market? The same market that is so valuable that the NFL hasn't been there in about 20 years? A funny thing about living in paradise is that you don't spend a lot of time in the stands or in front of a TV watching sports. But maybe you know more than the NFL? I will give you that the Pac 12, like the Big East, has some pretty good markets.

You ever heard of time zones? You ever wonder why it is still light out in Oregon when it is 7 pm in Connecticut? That same feature means that a prime time game on the east coast kicks off at 4 pm on the west coast, still early enough to capture some audience. The corollary isn't true though. When a prime time game on the west coast kicks off, the east coast audience is either out or in bed. Makes those games a lot less valuable.

We can all agree that Pac 12 basketball, outside of UCLA and Arizona, is pretty awful and has limited market appeal, right?

Yet this league is worth over $300 million a year for 12 schools. And guys like you and Z are saying the Big East is worth 10% of that?

 

[HuskyHawk]

By multiple ranked teams, do you mean 2? Because that is how many Pac 12 teams were ranked at year end last year. They got 4 teams (including Utah) ranked in 2008. The Big East was pretty good back then too.

The Pac 12 has the LA market? The same market that is so valuable that the NFL hasn't been there in about 20 years? A funny thing about living in paradise is that you don't spend a lot of time in the stands or in front of a TV watching sports. But maybe you know more than the NFL? I will give you that the Pac 12, like the Big East, has some pretty good markets.

You ever heard of time zones? You ever wonder why it is still light out in Oregon when it is 7 pm in Connecticut? That same feature means that a prime time game on the east coast kicks off at 4 pm on the west coast, still early enough to capture some audience. The corollary isn't true though. When a prime time game on the west coast kicks off, the east coast audience is either out or in bed. Makes those games a lot less valuable.

We can all agree that Pac 12 basketball, outside of UCLA and Arizona, is pretty awful and has limited market appeal, right?

Yet this league is worth over $300 million a year for 12 schools. And guys like you and Z are saying the Big East is worth 10% of that?

Wow, Nelson and I agree on something this time. Having lived in CA, I respectfully submit that apart from some USC fans in LA, the place is devoid of interest in college football. It's not on the radar. Yes, Stanford and Cal fill the stands when they are good or play each other, but nobody else in the Bay Area cares...everyone who cares is at the game. Oregon and Washington do have solid followings. But the time zone is definitely a problem.

Basketball is different, there is a little interest in college basketball. I disagree it is awful. USC has been good, Washington has been good, and Cal and Stanford as well (and now Utah). It's a much better basketball league than football. But, sadly, I spent 1999 in the Bay Area, watching the Huskies win it all in sports bars where nobody was even aware that the NCAA tournament was going on. I talked to a guy from Jersey for awhile as we watched one game while everyone else was oblivious. It was pathetic. It was the last straw for me, and I moved to Massachusetts.

That doesn't mean it isn't a stronger league than the NBE, it is. It means that the Pac10 contract was way overvalued, and a mistake.

 

[06029]

By multiple ranked teams, do you mean 2? Because that is how many Pac 12 teams were ranked at year end last year. They got 4 teams (including Utah) ranked in 2008. The Big East was pretty good back then too.

The Pac 12 has the LA market? The same market that is so valuable that the NFL hasn't been there in about 20 years? A funny thing about living in paradise is that you don't spend a lot of time in the stands or in front of a TV watching sports. But maybe you know more than the NFL? I will give you that the Pac 12, like the Big East, has some pretty good markets.

You ever heard of time zones? You ever wonder why it is still light out in Oregon when it is 7 pm in Connecticut? That same feature means that a prime time game on the east coast kicks off at 4 pm on the west coast, still early enough to capture some audience. The corollary isn't true though. When a prime time game on the west coast kicks off, the east coast audience is either out or in bed. Makes those games a lot less valuable.

We can all agree that Pac 12 basketball, outside of UCLA and Arizona, is pretty awful and has limited market appeal, right?

Yet this league is worth over $300 million a year for 12 schools. And guys like you and Z are saying the Big East is worth 10% of that?

Okay. If in 2010 having the #2 and #4 ranked teams, and this year having the #4 and #5 teams means mediocre football (excluding USC which was probably a top 10 team this year), then what is the BE? And your point about time zones shows your ignorance as well. The west coast watches the late game but I doubt they are watching the noon EST starts. So it flows both ways. Just because you are having dreams after 11 on Saturday night, other parts of the country have just finished dinner and are settling in for some TV watching.

I am not suggesting anything other than your characterization of the Pac10 as a mediocre FB league is wrong. I can see its value based on its markets and its teams and I can see how they garner a decent sized contract. I ask you once again, tell me what the BE is if the Pac10/12 is mediocre in FB? And if time zones are an issue, then what the hell value does SDSU and Boise add to the conference?

And if the BE is going to be so valuable, then why does every team that is not a directional state school or a pending addition to the conference want to leave?

 

[uconnbill]

I'm a UConn fan. At this point, I'm no longer a Big East fan. Some of the programs that I was interested in are leaving. I have never had the slightest interest in USF, DePaul or Cincinnati and my only interest in Louisville is an intense dislike. I have zero interest in SMU or USF, and Boise is interesting only if they are playing UConn and are highly ranked. I wish good things on Rutgers and Georgetown. Marquette is ok too. Glad to see them revive the program. My speculation on Boise is based on the fact that they have a flimsy foundation. Mediocre recruiting territory, not very appealing school, not much money, no real history. They may surprise. But schools with more going for them (Colorado) have risen and fallen over the years.

In any case, my days as a flag waving BE fan are over. We can't get out soon enough. I want what's best for UConn and this isn't it.

I am not happy with how things turned out and blame ESPN 100% for this debacle. I want UConn to be successful no matter where they go. I am hoping for the ACC but if that doesn't happen I want the Big East to be successful as it only helps UConn out.

 

[RS9999X]

Will the PAC-12 network be on every cable set in their Footprint? Yes. There's no college competition. And likely sets in New Mexico and Nevada.

65 million people in their 6 state footprint and estimated to grow to 78 million by 2020.
20 milllon plus cable subscribers and the only legit college game in town.

The big question: can the PAC field one national game of interest each week for the 7:00 PM EST slot and can it pull a consistent 4.0 or better so that ESPN wins its time slot? Will it draw better than a non-Cincy BE game in Cincy pror Luisville in the same time slot? We know that answer. USC v. Oregon or Oregon v Boise or USF v Rutgers?

 

[ctchamps]

Okay. If in 2010 having the #2 and #4 ranked teams, and this year having the #4 and #5 teams means mediocre football (excluding USC which was probably a top 10 team this year), then what is the BE? And your point about time zones shows your ignorance as well. The west coast watches the late game but I doubt they are watching the noon EST starts. So it flows both ways. Just because you are having dreams after 11 on Saturday night, other parts of the country have just finished dinner and are settling in for some TV watching.

I am not suggesting anything other than your characterization of the Pac10 as a mediocre FB league is wrong. I can see its value based on its markets and its teams and I can see how they garner a decent sized contract. I ask you once again, tell me what the BE is if the Pac10/12 is mediocre in FB? And if time zones are an issue, then what the hell value does SDSU and Boise add to the conference?

And if the BE is going to be so valuable, then why does every team that is not a directional state school or a pending addition to the conference want to leave?

I think nelson is understating the Pac football wise and you are understating the contract. The Pac has the best contract and is arguably the fourth or fifth best conference, currently the fourth. So I'm scratching my head on the Pac contract as well as the ND contract, both of which are not close to where logic tells me they should be.

This doesn't indicate one way or the other where the NBE contract will be. All it says is that there is more than just logic in the valuation of contracts.

 

[mattp]

They have everything to gain. Period. It's that simple. Making an offer that would be predicated on keeping Cuse, Pitt, and/or WVU costs nothing.

what do you mean it would cost nothing, didn't you just say you thought it would cost them $20 million/team? Question Mark. i don't know why you think NBC can afford to lost a billion dollars over the next 6 years if this doesn't work out

 

[HartbeatHusky]

what do you mean it would cost nothing, didn't you just say you thought it would cost them $20 million/team? Question Mark. i don't know why you think NBC can afford to lost a billion dollars over the next 6 years if this doesn't work out

I really can't believe this has to be explained but maybe this is why so many of you don't get this. Before any contract is signed various offers and counter offers will be made contingent on many variables. It cost nothing to say here is what we pay for the contract IF Cuse and Pitt can somehow be retained and if they are not retained there will be a completely different number. Before this offer including Cuse and Pitt can be signed they would obviously have to agree in writing to remain in the BE for the duration of the contract. This costs nothing to do and most likely will cost nothing since everyone is so sure there is no amount that could change their minds.

 

[mattp]

the rest of us need it explained to us because we don't think the NBC executives are bored enough to sit around and conjure up bids at conferences that don't exist on the off chance that it will make something happen.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

the rest of us need it explained to us because we don't think the NBC executives are bored enough to sit around and conjure up bids at conferences that don't exist on the off chance that it will make something happen.

Kind of like ESPN did when it told the ACC which schools to add?

 

[HartbeatHusky]

the rest of us need it explained to us because we don't think the NBC executives are bored enough to sit around and conjure up bids at conferences that don't exist on the off chance that it will make something happen.

Kind of like ESPN did when it told the ACC which schools to add?

Exactly, Nelson. And the major difference here is that they don't have to use their imagination one bit. These schools will still be in the Big East when the deal is negotiated and finalized. It would be much easier then instigating a conference to raid another conference. Everyone will be able to talk to each other. All they have to do is ask is this amount enough to get you to stay? The answer can either be no and no amount would be enough or it can be no that is not enough but are you willing to increase the offer. This is not imaginary at all. Contrary to what you guys think this will definitely happen if nothing changes regarding their departure dates.

 

[RS9999X]

Kind of like ESPN did when it told the ACC which schools to add?

You devalue headhunters and media consultants and wannabe movers and shakers and alumni armed with the Nielsen regionals, logo sales, advertiser demographics for local markets, bowl ratings, population growth across demographic segments, and everything else that gets packed into a first rate media proposal.

It's good to be king. ESPN is king. They hold court and listen to the proposals. The BE as "The Sick Man fo the BCS" ready to be carved up like the Ottoman Empire is nothing new.

There's only 5 teams left and no ones talking USF seriously. UConn remains a small market and Rutgers is a complete screw up. Put UConn in NJ and UConn would be in the ACC. Put Rugers in CT and they'd be in the MAC if lucky.

 

[HartbeatHusky]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/sports/nbc-sports-chief-aims-to-build-an-empire.html

"The quail-hunting Lazarus will reduce Versus’s successful hunting and fishing shows while seeking college rights, like the overhauled Big East Conference’s, and others that will become available in the next year or two, like those of Major League Baseball and Nascar. An eight-game Thursday night N.F.L. schedule could be auctioned even sooner."​

Nobody knows how much they are going to pay but what we do know is that they are trying to build their network and that the Big East is a part of that vision. I'd say they need the Big East more than the Big East needs them but that is just this one man's opinion. I think they will want a strong and viable Big East so I don't know it will be a blockbuster deal but it should be enough to keep the most attractive members. ​

 

[nelsonmuntz]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/sports/nbc-sports-chief-aims-to-build-an-empire.html

"The quail-hunting Lazarus will reduce Versus’s successful hunting and fishing shows while seeking college rights, like the overhauled Big East Conference’s, and others that will become available in the next year or two, like those of Major League Baseball and Nascar. An eight-game Thursday night N.F.L. schedule could be auctioned even sooner."​

Nobody knows how much they are going to pay but what we do know is that they are trying to build their network and that the Big East is a part of that vision. I'd say they need the Big East more than the Big East needs them but that is just this one man's opinion. I think they will want a strong and viable Big East so I don't know it will be a blockbuster deal but it should be enough to keep the most attractive members. ​

It's no secret that the Big East and NBC are basically a done deal, and this is likely what inspired ESPN's ferocious attack. The Big East is not the goal for NBC, just a foothold to get started. I still think the right strategic move would be for NBC to sponsor a playoff with whoever would participate, but they have to be in college athletics to do that. The playoff would crush everything else on the table, and break ESPN's kneecaps in college football.

I think the political pressure at both the federal and state level is there, and there will be insane pressure on AD's to make even more money from their football programs, which puts enormous pressure on the bowl system since it is a loser for the schools for the most part.

 

[HartbeatHusky]

It's no secret that the Big East and NBC are basically a done deal, and this is likely what inspired ESPN's ferocious attack. The Big East is not the goal for NBC, just a foothold to get started. I still think the right strategic move would be for NBC to sponsor a playoff with whoever would participate, but they have to be in college athletics to do that. The playoff would crush everything else on the table, and break ESPN's kneecaps in college football.

I think the political pressure at both the federal and state level is there, and there will be insane pressure on AD's to make even more money from their football programs, which puts enormous pressure on the bowl system since it is a loser for the schools for the most part.

Yeah, I don't even think it's that complicated. I'm not sure how one network would start a playoff. I think they just need to make sure they buy the most attractive property possible to get their start in college sports. The article says this guy Lazarus once wanted to start a rival football league to the NFL with Eborsol when NBC lost the NFL so who knows what he could possibly try. That alone certainly implies that he is not opposed to thinking outside the box and aggressively though.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

You devalue headhunters and media consultants and wannabe movers and shakers and alumni armed with the Nielsen regionals, logo sales, advertiser demographics for local markets, bowl ratings, population growth across demographic segments, and everything else that gets packed into a first rate media proposal.

It's good to be king. ESPN is king. They hold court and listen to the proposals. The BE as "The Sick Man fo the BCS" ready to be carved up like the Ottoman Empire is nothing new.

There's only 5 teams left and no ones talking USF seriously. UConn remains a small market and Rutgers is a complete screw up. Put UConn in NJ and UConn would be in the ACC. Put Rugers in CT and they'd be in the MAC if lucky.

Connecticut is about the same size as Oklahoma, and larger than Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, Arkansas, West Virginia, and Nebraska. South Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky and Oregon are all within about 1 million people of Connecticut. Factor in that Connecticut has a PCI that dwarfs those states. Connecticut's market is not the problem.

The problem is the media rights deal. That has always been the problem. The last two times the Big East has renegotiated that deal, there was only one buyer (ESPN) and the Big East was always in some kind of crisis, and the only difference this time is that there is a second buyer. But that is a big difference.

The Pac 12 got the deal they got because of NBC. Fox and ESPN wanted to keep NBC out of the Pac 12, and they made no secret of that fact. When it came to the Big East, ESPN ran the numbers and decided paying up for 2 or 3 teams and trying to destroy the league was cheaper than paying for the whole league or risking losing it to NBC. As the OP pointed out, NBC may choose to play rough too. UConn is just a pawn in a much larger struggle between media titans.

 

[BlueMAB]

Connecticut is about the same size as Oklahoma, and larger than Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, Arkansas, West Virginia, and Nebraska. South Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky and Oregon are all within about 1 million people of Connecticut. Factor in that Connecticut has a PCI that dwarfs those states. Connecticut's market is not the problem.

I love when self proclaimed market experts make statements like this that completely ignore the different value placed on, interest in, and money spent supporting college football in those states. As if UConn is comparable to Nebraksa because the states are roughly the same size.

In 2013 (possibly 2012) those states will represented by teams in the: Big 12, Big 10, SEC, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Big 10. SEC, SEC, SEC, and Pac 12.

Why continue beating the drum that UConn will never be in the ACC or Big 10 if we have so much in common with those states?

 

[MTHusky]

Assuming we sign with NBC when the contract with ESPN is up, anyone willing to hazzard a guess what happens with 90% of our games that are currently being broadcast on ESPN's Full Court?

 

[HartbeatHusky]

Assuming we sign with NBC when the contract with ESPN is up, anyone willing to hazzard a guess what happens with 90% of our games that are currently being broadcast on ESPN's Full Court?

I would think that since NBC doesn't have nearly as much inventory that most of it's broadcasts would be national and not regional so that Versus/NBC sports will probably be playing the same game for the entire nation. I also wouldn't be surprised if the deal is not exclusively with NBC and that ESPN and CBS still end up getting some content.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Connecticut is about the same size as Oklahoma, and larger than Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, Arkansas, West Virginia, and Nebraska. South Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky and Oregon are all within about 1 million people of Connecticut. Factor in that Connecticut has a PCI that dwarfs those states. Connecticut's market is not the problem.

The problem is the media rights deal. That has always been the problem. The last two times the Big East has renegotiated that deal, there was only one buyer (ESPN) and the Big East was always in some kind of crisis, and the only difference this time is that there is a second buyer. But that is a big difference.

The Pac 12 got the deal they got because of NBC. Fox and ESPN wanted to keep NBC out of the Pac 12, and they made no secret of that fact. When it came to the Big East, ESPN ran the numbers and decided paying up for 2 or 3 teams and trying to destroy the league was cheaper than paying for the whole league or risking losing it to NBC. As the OP pointed out, NBC may choose to play rough too. UConn is just a pawn in a much larger struggle between media titans.

In Nebraska, every man, woman and child is either at the game or watching it when the Cornhuskers play. In Connecticut, apart from the 30-40k in the stadium, almost nobody else cares. Size of the market, and wealth of the market are not nearly as important as whether the market is interested in the product. Israel can have money and people and be a lousy market for ham. Connecticut is a very weak college football market.

I'm convinced that ESPN really wants Big East basketball, it isn't nearly as valuable to anyone else, who doesn't have so many channels. But I don't think they value BE football very highly. I'm not surprised. Somebody asked the question about say Oregon v. Washington competing with Louisville v. Cincinnati. I can say that even here in New England, I'd watch the Pac 10 game. If Georgia was playing Alabama, or Florida was playing Arkansas, those would be more appealing as well.

 

[MTHusky]

I can see CBS still getting games, they haven't lost anything if the NBE switches, but ESPN does, my money would be on that we can kiss our games on Full Court goodbye

 

[nelsonmuntz]

In Nebraska, every man, woman and child is either at the game or watching it when the Cornhuskers play. In Connecticut, apart from the 30-40k in the stadium, almost nobody else cares. Size of the market, and wealth of the market are not nearly as important as whether the market is interested in the product. Israel can have money and people and be a lousy market for ham. Connecticut is a very weak college football market.

I'm convinced that ESPN really wants Big East basketball, it isn't nearly as valuable to anyone else, who doesn't have so many channels. But I don't think they value BE football very highly. I'm not surprised. Somebody asked the question about say Oregon v. Washington competing with Louisville v. Cincinnati. I can say that even here in New England, I'd watch the Pac 10 game. If Georgia was playing Alabama, or Florida was playing Arkansas, those would be more appealing as well.

So now demographic information doesn't matter, just your opinion. That is one way to win an argument.

Do you think BMW cares about a 40 share in Mississippi, or a 20 share in Connecticut (which is roughly what basketball draws)? I suspect more BMW's are sold in the top 5 dealerships in Connecticut than in the entire state of Mississippi.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I love when self proclaimed market experts make statements like this that completely ignore the different value placed on, interest in, and money spent supporting college football in those states. As if UConn is comparable to Nebraksa because the states are roughly the same size.

In 2013 (possibly 2012) those states will represented by teams in the: Big 12, Big 10, SEC, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Big 10. SEC, SEC, SEC, and Pac 12.

Why continue beating the drum that UConn will never be in the ACC or Big 10 if we have so much in common with those states?

It is worth noting that the secondary market for tickets to the Pinstripe Bowl is stronger than it is for the Orange, Fiesta and Sugar. The cheapest ticket available to the Pinstripe is $59, while the other bowls are $2, $29 and $39.

Someone should have asked WingU though, but YOU and only YOU know which schools are really in demand for fans.