Analysis: Emotional pull of Big East vs. revenue boost of Big 12. Why UConn may be lured by Power 5 invite (Mike Anthony)

[John]

I think it's a good move potentially, but if we get passed up again and you have to imagine we will (it's our thing), let's just keep on winning (also our thing).

We are in a much better spot in the BE than we were a few years back and not as desperate.

the BE is a great spot for us until better things come along.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

You aren’t wrong. But it’s crazy to assume that streaming may be a net benefit to schools and leagues. It probably means less money not more. (For 90% of schools)

In the last 40 years, the diversity of channels and then the internet actually fragmented the audience for content. In the 60's, 70's and 80's, everyone watched three networks, CBS, NBC and ABC. The ratings for those shows were incredible by today's standards, even though a lot of those shows sucked. Then, as cable channels proliferated, a few people managed to push out syndicated original content like the Star Trek franchise or Baywatch on local channels and places like USA Network. Content for kids started showing up outside the major networks, and ringing up pretty good numbers for non-network shows.

Then HBO started making original content. The Sopranos changed everything. There was NO WAY that show could go on broadcast television, and while its audience numbers were big, they were nothing like the broadcast audiences for even mediocre shows. But it simultaneously changed both television and the movie industry forever. All the cable channels started developing original content, and the networks re-thought what qualified as a hit. Movie producers realized that cable might be a better platform for content targeting people over 30, and started churning out the best television in history. Most importantly, no one needed to produce weak, vanilla content that had to appeal/not offend 20 million people. Artists could make interesting, niche content.

The West Wing would have definitely been cancelled in 2001 or 2002 if not for the Sopranos. The West Wing was expensive to make and it was generally not a Top 20 show. But it was prestige television and NBC was light on that kind of programming at the time. Then AMC, which was hanging by a thread, produced Mad Men and Breaking Bad, which saved the network and launched AMC into this weird hybrid of niche, prestige television and horror. Showtime produced some hits like Shameless and Dexter. FX, TNT and USA all got into the game, along with a lot of the niche channels like Nickelodeon.

Not everyone wanted to watch award winning TV. MTV kicked off the dramality genre, which took over channels like Bravo and TLC. I am guessing that the founders of Bravo are appalled (if they are still alive) that their channel, which was originally targeted at the Lincoln Center set, is now primarily broadcasting middle-aged women wearing $5,000 outfits scream nonsense at each other in front of a drunk Andy Cohen.

Netflix was initially a renter of movies, but transitioned into an incredibly profitable movie and TV studio, churning out mediocre content at good prices that keep its subscribers just happy enough to pay the next month's bill. The major networks and studios all raced to get in the game, with Disney/Hulu (ABC), Peacock (NBC) and Paramount (CBS) all trying to keep up with changes they fought for years. Being a reseller (like a network or certainly a cable provider) is basically a dead business model. The content producers will own the future because they don't need much help from the networks, and they need none from cable.

So where is sports? Kind of like TV was when the Sopranos first went on the air. People are realizing that they can watch what they want, not what ESPN decides they should see. I have some ideas about what might happen, but the only thing I am 100% certain of is that sports broadcasting will look hugely different in 10 years.

 

[djct1999]

In the last 40 years, the diversity of channels and then the internet actually fragmented the audience for content. In the 60's, 70's and 80's, everyone watched three networks, CBS, NBC and ABC. The ratings for those shows were incredible by today's standards, even though a lot of those shows sucked. Then, as cable channels proliferated, a few people managed to push out syndicated original content like the Star Trek franchise or Baywatch on local channels and places like USA Network. Content for kids started showing up outside the major networks, and ringing up pretty good numbers for non-network shows.

Then HBO started making original content. The Sopranos changed everything. There was NO WAY that show could go on broadcast television, and while its audience numbers were big, they were nothing like the broadcast audiences for even mediocre shows. But it simultaneously changed both television and the movie industry forever. All the cable channels started developing original content, and the networks re-thought what qualified as a hit. Movie producers realized that cable might be a better platform for content targeting people over 30, and started churning out the best television in history.

The West Wing would have definitely been cancelled in 2001 or 2002 if not for the Sopranos. The West Wing was expensive to make and it was generally not a Top 20 show. But it was prestige television and NBC was light on that kind of programming at the time. Then AMC, which was hanging by a thread, produced Mad Men and Breaking Bad, which saved the network and launched AMC into this weird hybrid of niche, prestige television and horror. Showtime produced some hits like Shameless and Dexter. FX, TNT and USA all got into the game, along with a lot of the niche channels like Nickelodeon.

Not everyone wanted to watch award winning TV. MTV kicked off the dramality genre, which took over channels like Bravo and TLC. I am guessing that the founders of Bravo are appalled (if they are still alive) that their channel, which was originally targeted at the Lincoln Center set, is now primarily broadcasting middle-aged women wearing $5,000 outfits scream nonsense at each other in front of a drunk Andy Cohen.

Netflix was initially a renter of movies, but transitioned into an incredibly profitable movie and TV studio, churning out mediocre content at good prices that keep its subscribers just happy enough to pay the next month's bill. The major networks and studios all raced to get in the game, with Disney/Hulu (ABC), Peacock (NBC) and Paramount (CBS) all trying to keep up with changes they fought for years. Being a reseller (like a network or certainly a cable provider) is basically a dead business model. The content producers will own the future because they don't need much help from the networks, and they need none from cable.

So where is sports? Kind of like TV was when the Sopranos first went on the air. People are realizing that they can watch what they want, not what ESPN decides they should see. I have some ideas about what might happen, but the only thing I am 100% certain of is that sports broadcasting will look hugely different in 10 years.

Spot on. But will it mean more or less money for individual schools?

For example, I recently cut the chord and got YouTube tv. I used to be a diehard yankee fan but over time, my interest has waned a bit. I can get yes network dtc. I chose not to. Why? I don’t care enough and am happy getting scores/updates on Twitter. The same will happen with college sports. In my opinion, streaming will burst this bubble and most schools will suffer.

 

[John]

I don't get why so many people here say the Big East is too different from what it was and people are holding onto nostalgia. All the Big East lost are Syracuse, Pitt, and BC. BC pretty much always sucked outside of a few years. The Big 12 hardly looks anything like what it was. Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado are all gone.

they lost a lot more than that

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Spot on. But will it mean more or less money for individual schools?

Let's look at what happened with TV. 35 years ago, there were three (soon to be 4) networks, and a bunch of local channels showing reruns. I have no idea how many outlets are producing original video content today, but it is a huge number. The idea that a handful of schools will consolidate all the power seems unlikely when there is no way to consolidate access to content. ESPN held life and death sway over the Big East 20 or 12 years ago. Now? They are just a glorified production company with a few middle aged exjock talking heads tacked onto each end of the sports broadcast. ESPN's per box lifeline is drying up. That carriage fee both enabled ESPN to pay a lot for content, and created a huge incentive for ESPN to maintain its semi-monopoly position in sports broadcasting. That is over.

I think every major content provider will at least look into reselling sports, but long-term, I think the sports content producers (i.e. the leagues or schools themselves) are going to be selling their own content directly. That could take a while though.

 

[djct1999]

Let's look at what happened with TV. 35 years ago, there were three (soon to be 4) networks, and a bunch of local channels showing reruns. I have no idea how many outlets are producing original video content today, but it is a huge number. The idea that a handful of schools will consolidate all the power seems unlikely when there is no way to consolidate access to content. ESPN held life and death sway over the Big East 20 or 12 years ago. Now? They are just a glorified production company with a few middle aged exjock talking heads tacked onto each end of the sports broadcast. ESPN's per box lifeline is drying up. That carriage fee both enabled ESPN to pay a lot for content, and created a huge incentive for ESPN to maintain its semi-monopoly position in sports broadcasting. That is over.

I think every major content provider will at least look into reselling sports, but long-term, I think the sports content producers (i.e. the leagues or schools themselves) are going to be selling their own content directly. That could take a while though.

Again, I agree 100%. But in the end, I think schools will all earn much less. My point is, Apple and the pac 12 can be a game changer, especially how we consume pac 12 sports. But for the individual schools, it will be far worse than what they were used to earning.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

If my theory in Post #30 is correct, then the Big 12 may be on exactly the right track. Just grab every decent property they can, because the next contract after ESPN may be direct and they need a critical mass to go direct.

This is why the Pac 12 contract is so important. If Apple enters the game as a reseller, then ESPN is truly finished as the dominant player in sports broadcasting. It could also unleash a landgrab for sports content.

 

[Stinger92860]

Biggest concern from the article was how he mentioned coaches and players hate travel…..our whole season would be one long flight after another…I don’t think the school will look at it as a reason not to go, but it can clearly be an impediment to success.

I was surprised he brought that up. Does anyone think they like the bus rides?

 

[superjohn]

they lost a lot more than that

Who did?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Again, I agree 100%. But in the end, I think schools will all earn much less.

I do not agree on this. While there is downward pricing pressure, the schools are also disintermediating two enormous middlemen, the cable provider and ESPN. The schools will keep a much bigger portion of the value of their content.

 

[jleves]

Don't we have over 90 pages of this on another thread???

 

[Palatine]

Sports are the one thing saving network TV. Sports become more and more valuable as one of the few broadcasts that are meant to be watched live.

 

[djct1999]

I do not agree on this. While there is downward pricing pressure, the schools are also disintermediating two enormous middlemen, the cable provider and ESPN. The schools will keep a much bigger portion of the value of their content.

With a much smaller pool willing to pay.

 

[John]

Who did?

Miami
Va Tech
WVU
Temple (FB)
Cincinnati
Louisville
USF
Rutgers
ND (BB)

 

[superjohn]

Miami
Va Tech
WVU
Temple (FB)
Cincinnati
Louisville
USF
Rutgers
ND (BB)

That wasn't the Big East, they were all add ons many years later. Big East is probably the most true to it's original form out of all the conferences now.

 

[John]

That wasn't the Big East, they were all add ons many years later. Big East is probably the most true to it's original form out of all the conferences now.

of course it was the Big East. The best combination of a basketball and football conference.

 

[UConniki]

he's a great basketball coach, but let's leave the strategic business decisions to the professionals.

You mean the ( meatheads ) professionals that got us where we are today. Those professionals???

 

[superjohn]

of course it was the Big East. The best combination of a basketball and football conference.

It came to be the Big East at one point just like how the Big 12, Big 10, SEC, and ACC are all different now but it was nothing like the original Big East. The Big East is the closest to it's original form out of all the conferences.

 

[Jbirdp5]

If it was that big of a concern, I don’t think UCLA and USC would’ve agreed to join a conference where their second nearest conference mate is in eastern Nebraska.

It’s just the way of the world now.

UCLA and usc have also not moved yet so we don’t have an answer to the question…..they obviously felt it was worth the risk, that doesn’t make them correct in their assumption…they also have each other and probably a few more west coast teams in the future we would be on even more of an island

 

[CL82]

Don't we have over 90 pages of this on another thread???

Just 1?

 

[Lynyrd]

Forget the B12 … I want to go to The Garden and dominate the BE Tournament every year. I’m selfish like that.

 

[Hunt for 7]

Don't we have over 90 pages of this on another thread???

Yeah it’s kind of funny but only in a boneyard way …in all other venues it would be described as sad. This one topic has everyone hating on everyone. It has more people disagreeing with each other than the play the two big men opinions during the season.

 

[Jbirdp5]

I was surprised he brought that up. Does anyone think they like the bus rides?

Do you not think it’s a valid point?

 

[JohnFSilver]

Gosh darn it, I'm so conflicted and @nelsonmuntz didn't help

I guess the best thing about this whole process, It's not my decision

I'll just buy tickets and hope for the best

Whatever Hurley wants, I want

Hurley can express his opinions to management. But what he prefers has no bearing in the decision. This is a university level decision. It a basketball decision.

 

[JohnFSilver]

In the last 40 years, the diversity of channels and then the internet actually fragmented the audience for content. In the 60's, 70's and 80's, everyone watched three networks, CBS, NBC and ABC. The ratings for those shows were incredible by today's standards, even though a lot of those shows sucked. Then, as cable channels proliferated, a few people managed to push out syndicated original content like the Star Trek franchise or Baywatch on local channels and places like USA Network. Content for kids started showing up outside the major networks, and ringing up pretty good numbers for non-network shows.

Then HBO started making original content. The Sopranos changed everything. There was NO WAY that show could go on broadcast television, and while its audience numbers were big, they were nothing like the broadcast audiences for even mediocre shows. But it simultaneously changed both television and the movie industry forever. All the cable channels started developing original content, and the networks re-thought what qualified as a hit. Movie producers realized that cable might be a better platform for content targeting people over 30, and started churning out the best television in history. Most importantly, no one needed to produce weak, vanilla content that had to appeal/not offend 20 million people. Artists could make interesting, niche content.

The West Wing would have definitely been cancelled in 2001 or 2002 if not for the Sopranos. The West Wing was expensive to make and it was generally not a Top 20 show. But it was prestige television and NBC was light on that kind of programming at the time. Then AMC, which was hanging by a thread, produced Mad Men and Breaking Bad, which saved the network and launched AMC into this weird hybrid of niche, prestige television and horror. Showtime produced some hits like Shameless and Dexter. FX, TNT and USA all got into the game, along with a lot of the niche channels like Nickelodeon.

Not everyone wanted to watch award winning TV. MTV kicked off the dramality genre, which took over channels like Bravo and TLC. I am guessing that the founders of Bravo are appalled (if they are still alive) that their channel, which was originally targeted at the Lincoln Center set, is now primarily broadcasting middle-aged women wearing $5,000 outfits scream nonsense at each other in front of a drunk Andy Cohen.

Netflix was initially a renter of movies, but transitioned into an incredibly profitable movie and TV studio, churning out mediocre content at good prices that keep its subscribers just happy enough to pay the next month's bill. The major networks and studios all raced to get in the game, with Disney/Hulu (ABC), Peacock (NBC) and Paramount (CBS) all trying to keep up with changes they fought for years. Being a reseller (like a network or certainly a cable provider) is basically a dead business model. The content producers will own the future because they don't need much help from the networks, and they need none from cable.

So where is sports? Kind of like TV was when the Sopranos first went on the air. People are realizing that they can watch what they want, not what ESPN decides they should see. I have some ideas about what might happen, but the only thing I am 100% certain of is that sports broadcasting will look hugely different in 10 years.

Agree with this take.

Carriage is yesterdays news. Now? Have great content, or parish. This makes valuable brands important.

Men’s Basketball is undervalued and UConn women are massively undervalued due to its cultural influence.