$ 14 MILLION?

[Palatine]

There is a constant reshuffling but there are only a dozen cards in the deck.

The trick is to break into that top tier. Do that and UConn will likely remain their.

 

[UCFBfan]

now one thing i feel like i have to add is that i've been able to watch every UConn game over the last several years, even against 1AA teams, and there's no guarantee that will be the case if we switch to NBC. sometimes i had to hook my laptop up to my TV for internet coverage (which i actually learned to prefer b/c there's way less commercials and BS on the net broadcasts. sometimes you even see the half time show) but i've always been able to watch them. at the end of the day, fans being able to watch games is the number one priority

This is a great point and one I'd like to know the answer to. What happens with our SNY deal? They usually take the ESPN broadcast and show it on SNY so we can get every UConn game. Is the same going to happen with NBC? Is SNY considered our Tier 3 deal and we can do what we want with it? I'd be interested to know how this works. If we move away from ESPN, will SNY have to provide their own broadcast team, score box on tv, etc or will they take a NBC feed and air it? I can't imagine NBC currently has the ability to cover every Big East game like ESPN does.

 

[metsfan2323]

There is a constant reshuffling but there are only a dozen cards in the deck.

There are more then a dozen cards. Nobody knew what a Boise State was 20 years ago yet now they are a recognized football brand.

Baylor was just a mediocre football team when we played them just 3 years ago, there were not any "Wow, we're playing Baylor" threads in the Boneyard when they were announced on our schedule, most viewed them the way we viewed the Vandy game, yet now they are a recognized brand because of one player.

The same thing happened with BC in the 80's. Virginia Tech is another school that came out of nowhere in the 90's, a Big East team no less. The goal for UCONN should be to be the next Virginia Tech.

 

[whaler11]

This is a great point and one I'd like to know the answer to. What happens with our SNY deal? They usually take the ESPN broadcast and show it on SNY so we can get every UConn game. Is the same going to happen with NBC? Is SNY considered our Tier 3 deal and we can do what we want with it? I'd be interested to know how this works. If we move away from ESPN, will SNY have to provide their own broadcast team, score box on tv, etc or will they take a NBC feed and air it? I can't imagine NBC currently has the ability to cover every Big East game like ESPN does.

SNY is sometimes Tier 3 and sometimes Tier 2 (BEGOW noon Saturday on the syndicated network). ESPN currently produces the Tier 3 games that is why they have an ESPN look.

If the league moved to NBC, I don't know if another company would end up with the production on Tier 3 but if they did it would look different and the on-air talent would be different. SNY could produce the games themselves if they wanted to.

I would imagine if the league moves to NBC we'll still see almost all the games on television. We would lose ESPN3 though for those that rely on that.

 

[huskypantz]

would imagine if the league moves to NBC we'll still see almost all the games on television. We would lose ESPN3 though for those that rely on that.

That would be a major problem for us out-of-state Huskies. Both football and basketball.

 

[whaler11]

aaaaaaaaa


My thinking is that, as has been the recent case, the "talking heads" will dwell on what they were and, assuming 9 or 10 wins seasons, will place them in the "high esteem" category. And you can not down play all that oil money.

Not everyone can win 9 or 10 games. Houston, Boise, SMU, Louisville, hopefully UConn... There is a pretty hard cap on how many teams can consistently win 9 games in a conference. So the idea that all of these teams have a high ceiling is a great concept - but the reality is that mot all of them can reach it.

 

[whaler11]

That would be a major problem for us out-of-state Huskies. Both football and basketball.

NBC could decide to move the games online as well. They clearly have the ability based on the Olympics, so I wouldn't worry about it too much yet.

If they want to play long term they probably have no choice but to move in that direction anyway.

 

[whaler11]

There are more then a dozen cards. Nobody knew what a Boise State was 20 years ago yet now they are a recognized football brand.

Baylor was just a mediocre football team when we played them just 3 years ago, there were not any "Wow, we're playing Baylor" threads in the Boneyard when they were announced on our schedule, most viewed them the way we viewed the Vandy game, yet now they are a recognized brand because of one player.

The same thing happened with BC in the 80's. Virginia Tech is another school that came out of nowhere in the 90's, a Big East team no less. The goal for UCONN should be to be the next Virginia Tech.

I don't know if people think Baylor is around to stay as an above average program. They went 7-6 and 10-3. After finishing under .500 every year from 1996-2009.

Briles may end up being a brilliant builder - but let's see how they do without their Heisman Winner before deciding they have staying power.

14-98 in the Big 12 from 95-09. Last place every year but 1.

Fourteen and Ninety Eight. That's unbelievable.

 

[UConnDan97]

Wrong. Because you forget that ESPN was, and is, also business partners with the ACC.

You should have said "your business partner tells their business partner (who happens to be your competitor) how to punch you in the face, and then your competitor punches you in the face, the competitor is still to blame.

Slow your roll, friend. My analogy is not inconsistent at all with your "new version" of it. I am not absolving the ACC for the poach. What I'm saying is that ESPN worked with the ACC on who and how to poach, even though they were STILL our partner!

You can ramble on about us turning them down in the early negotiation period, but the fact of the matter is that they are still our partner and they still have a 60 day exclusivity period for negotiations on the next contract. All your rant has successfully done is agree that ESPN was involved in the Big East poach. For that, I thank you (since you got ZLS to "like" it, so therefore, he must agree too)...

 

[whaler11]

Slow your roll, friend. My analogy is not inconsistent at all with your "new version" of it. I am not absolving the ACC for the poach. What I'm saying is that ESPN worked with the ACC on who and how to poach, even though they were STILL our partner!

You can ramble on about us turning them down in the early negotiation period, but the fact of the matter is that they are still our partner and they still have a 60 day exclusivity period for negotiations on the next contract. All your rant has successfully done is agree that ESPN was involved in the Big East poach. For that, I thank you (since you got ZLS to "like" it, so therefore, he must agree too)...

Aren't Syracuse and especially Pittsburgh more to blame than anyone? They could have held out to see what happened.

 

[Adios]

Baylor is 2 games above .500 all-time but has 14 top 25 finishes and 9 college HoFers, 6 of them post-1950.

 

[UConnDan97]

Aren't Syracuse and especially Pittsburgh more to blame than anyone? They could have held out to see what happened.

What is the point again? I'm starting to lose what the point of any of this is, really. Are Syracuse and Pitt to blame for leaving? Yes. Is the ACC to blame for poaching? Yes. Is ESPN to blame for tampering? Yes. Does any of this have anything to do with whether or not NBC can deliver on a 14 million dollar deal? I haven't the slightest clue...

 

[whaler11]

Baylor is 2 games above .500 all-time but has 14 top 25 finishes and 9 college HoFers, 6 of them post-1950.

Well one could say impressive things about Yale and Army if one looks back far enough. Doesn't really mean much going forward. Baylor certainly looks headed in the right direction but they still have OU, Texas and OSU to deal with on top of TCU and whoever else the Big 12 may expand with. Along with aTm and how that may impact Texas recruiting with the SEC foothold.

 

[whaler11]

What is the point again? I'm starting to lose what the point of any of this is, really. Are Syracuse and Pitt to blame for leaving? Yes. Is the ACC to blame for poaching? Yes. Is ESPN to blame for tampering? Yes. Does any of this have anything to do with whether or not NBC can deliver on a 14 million dollar deal? I haven't the slightest clue...

Of course not but if we didn't have the same five subjects what would we do? Edsall, stadium expansion, ACC raid, NBC sports and star ratings account for like 95% of what gets posted about.

 

[businesslawyer]

I don't know if people think Baylor is around to stay as an above average program. They went 7-6 and 10-3. After finishing under .500 every year from 1996-2009.

Briles may end up being a brilliant builder - but let's see how they do without their Heisman Winner before deciding they have staying power.

14-98 in the Big 12 from 95-09. Last place every year but 1.

Fourteen and Ninety Eight. That's unbelievable.

It's not that unbelievable. Syracuse has been on roughly that pace in conference since it fired PP.

 

[whaler11]

It's not that unbelievable. Syracuse has been on roughly that pace in conference since it fired PP.

I count 9-42 (.176), versus (.125) for Baylor. That's an idea of how bad Baylor was. They were worse but for 2.5 times as long. Syracuse even went to a bowl game and beat a Big XII team.

 

[BlueMAB]

ESPN worked with the ACC on who and how to poach, even though they were STILL our partner!

You can ramble on about us turning them down in the early negotiation period, but the fact of the matter is that they are still our partner and they still have a 60 day exclusivity period for negotiations on the next contract. All your rant has successfully done is agree that ESPN was involved in the Big East poach. For that, I thank you (since you got ZLS to "like" it, so therefore, he must agree too)...

1) That's not what his quote said.
2) The Big East turned down the offer, and rolled the dice.
3) You continue to ignore the fact that ESPN is also a partner to the ACC. In fact, based on the money involved, it should be obvious and common sense that ESPN is more vested in the ACC, because they have more invested in the ACC. Why is this so shocking and appalling? It's business.

The extent of ESPN's involvement is unknown, but it really is irrelevant. The ACC knew they could take Big East teams to make themselves more profitable because.....they did it before and it worked.

Blaming ESPN for it is just dumb. Blame sPitt, Fruit U, and the ACC. They are responsible for their own actions. ESPN can't "make" the ACC poach anyone, and they certainly couldn't "make" sPitt and Fruit U leave.

 

[CL82]

SNY is sometimes Tier 3 and sometimes Tier 2 (BEGOW noon Saturday on the syndicated network). ESPN currently produces the Tier 3 games that is why they have an ESPN look.

If the league moved to NBC, I don't know if another company would end up with the production on Tier 3 but if they did it would look different and the on-air talent would be different. SNY could produce the games themselves if they wanted to.

I would imagine if the league moves to NBC we'll still see almost all the games on television. We would lose ESPN3 though for those that rely on that.

I believe a streaming component is part of what NBC is looking to develop.

I believe that SNY is developing a broadcast capability as part of the woman's BB coverage, so as long as those rights aren't bundled into the NBC (or Fox, or ESPN) deal SNY should still be available. It wouldn't surprise me if SNY bought delayed (next day) broadcast rights.

I wonder if a part of SNY's taking the women's BB team was a hedge against lost Tier 3 broadcasts.

 

[whaler11]

Unless they sell tier 3 to the bidder SNY would still get a ton of WBB. I would imagine the Big East schools would keep the tier three rights as they are probably worth more to the schools individually than bundled together. I would venture that if they did sell all tier three at the very least the buyer would sublet UC WBB to someone.

Oh and Im sure that NBC will develop online further. They went all in on the Olympics even if the delivery has sort of sucked.

 

[UConnDan97]

1) That's not what his quote said.
2) The Big East turned down the offer, and rolled the dice.
3) You continue to ignore the fact that ESPN is also a partner to the ACC. In fact, based on the money involved, it should be obvious and common sense that ESPN is more vested in the ACC, because they have more invested in the ACC. Why is this so shocking and appalling? It's business.

The extent of ESPN's involvement is unknown, but it really is irrelevant. The ACC knew they could take Big East teams to make themselves more profitable because.....they did it before and it worked.

Blaming ESPN for it is just dumb. Blame sPitt, Fruit U, and the ACC. They are responsible for their own actions. ESPN can't "make" the ACC poach anyone, and they certainly couldn't "make" sPitt and Fruit U leave.

Why are you still going on and on about me ignoring the fact that ESPN is a partner with the ACC. I KNOW THAT ESPN IS A PARTNER WITH THE ACC!!! What is your friggin' point??? Is your point that they have more money invested in the other partner so that they screwed with their smaller partner in the Big East?? If so, then yes, I agree! So what is your point, exactly?

There is no doubt that ESPN tampered with the ACC / Big East poach. There is none. If you want to blame ESPN more than the ACC or SyraPitt, go ahead. If you want to blame SyraPitt more than the ACC and ESPN, again go ahead. But stop spouting on about this ridiculous notion that I am unaware of the ACC being a partner of ESPN, please...

 

[UConnDan97]

Unless they sell tier 3 to the bidder SNY would still get a ton of WBB. I would imagine the Big East schools would keep the tier three rights as they are probably worth more to the schools individually than bundled together. I would venture that if they did sell all tier three at the very least the buyer would sublet UC WBB to someone.

Oh and Im sure that NBC will develop online further. They went all in on the Olympics even if the delivery has sort of sucked.

I have really enjoyed SNY's UConn coverage in the past. I think they have done a great job, and if we choose to go with NBC, I would hope that SNY would pick up the UConn games that are not picked up by NBC's network. And I am a huge fan of the next day replay, Huskies Power Hour on SNY. It lets me watch the game about 3 times before the following week's game comes up.

 

[whaler11]

I have really enjoyed SNY's UConn coverage in the past. I think they have done a great job, and if we choose to go with NBC, I would hope that SNY would pick up the UConn games that are not picked up by NBC's network. And I am a huge fan of the next day replay, Huskies Power Hour on SNY. It lets me watch the game about 3 times before the following week's game comes up.

Comcast owns 51% of SNY don't they? I don't think UConn's relationship with SNY is in any danger as long as they are in the Big East.

 

[UConnDan97]

Comcast owns 51% of SNY don't they? I don't think UConn's relationship with SNY is in any danger as long as they are in the Big East.

True (I'm not sure what the percentage is, but I just saw that Comcast was the network that launched SNY). So apparently, NBC / Comcast / SNY is all the same family. I wasn't aware there was an SNY / NBC connection.

 

[BlueMAB]

Why are you still going on and on about me ignoring the fact that ESPN is a partner with the ACC. I KNOW THAT ESPN IS A PARTNER WITH THE ACC!!! What is your friggin' point??? Is your point that they have more money invested in the other partner so that they screwed with their smaller partner in the Big East?? If so, then yes, I agree! So what is your point, exactly?

There is no doubt that ESPN tampered with the ACC / Big East poach. There is none. If you want to blame ESPN more than the ACC or SyraPitt, go ahead. If you want to blame SyraPitt more than the ACC and ESPN, again go ahead. But stop spouting on about this ridiculous notion that I am unaware of the ACC being a partner of ESPN, please...

Because you are playing the role of the victim simply because we were business partners with ESPN, as if they owe the Big East something, and as if they shouldn't work with another business partner to do what's best for the both of them. Particularly after being rejected by the Big East.

 

[UConnDan97]

Because you are playing the role of the victim simply because we were business partners with ESPN, as if they owe the Big East something, and as if they shouldn't work with another business partner to do what's best for the both of them. Particularly after being rejected by the Big East.

Nobody is playing the role of victim, and certainly not me. I have already stated twice in this thread that if ESPN is the best bid out of the negotiating period, then so be it. I want the best deal that UConn can possibly get, end of story. Is that clear enough for you??

 

[cubuffsdoug]

Comcast owns 51% of SNY don't they? I don't think UConn's relationship with SNY is in any danger as long as they are in the Big East.

New York Mets (65%)
Time Warner Cable (27%)
NBC Comcast (8%)

Still it should change the relationship.

 

[mattp]

it'll be interesting if the BE signs with NBC to see if that spurs ESPN to try to persuade "their conferences" to try to raid NBC's further. if the ACC wanted the BE out of business, you can only imagine how badly ESPN will want the BE and therefore NBC to lose their top properties. we should certainly be seen as one of their top properties so that might be an ancillary benefit to signing with NBC

 

[cubuffsdoug]

it'll be interesting if the BE signs with NBC to see if that spurs ESPN to try to persuade "their conferences" to try to raid NBC's further. if the ACC wanted the BE out of business, you can only imagine how badly ESPN will want the BE and therefore NBC to lose their top properties. we should certainly be seen as one of their top properties so that might be an ancillary benefit to signing with NBC

The BE (and NBC) better be prepared to face the wrath of ESPN with ACC playing the good little milion. ESPN might even get the Big 12 involved with a few promises. What the BE saw a few months ago would be welcomed consider what ESPN will probably unleash on Nov. 1, 2012.

 

[Jimdish255]

Maybe the BE has seemed a little week-kneed about challenging the tactics of the ACC and ESPN for a variety of reasons. Still being under contract was certainly one good reason. With NBC as a partner, I'm guessing their attorneys won't be as accomodating and certainly not as reluctant to take legal action if necessary to protect their investment. ESPN only has a brief window left to wield their influence. After that it's game on.

 

[FAIRTIDES]

1) That's not what his quote said.
2) The Big East turned down the offer, and rolled the dice.
3) You continue to ignore the fact that ESPN is also a partner to the ACC. In fact, based on the money involved, it should be obvious and common sense that ESPN is more vested in the ACC, because they have more invested in the ACC. Why is this so shocking and appalling? It's business.

The extent of ESPN's involvement is unknown, but it really is irrelevant. The ACC knew they could take Big East teams to make themselves more profitable because.....they did it before and it worked.

Blaming ESPN for it is just dumb. Blame sPitt, Fruit U, and the ACC. They are responsible for their own actions. ESPN can't "make" the ACC poach anyone, and they certainly couldn't "make" sPitt and Fruit U leave.

It's only relevant if it can be proven that ESPN and the ACC are colluding with the stated goal being the ruination of the BE. Good luck with that.