Announcements I'd most like at B.E. Media Day...

[nelsonmuntz]

Not really following what discussions you may be referring to but I don't see how the media rights conversation could be dead if it hasn't begun yet? You are aware that ESPN has a 90 day exclusivity in media rights window for negotiations that begins on September 1st right?

It is a 60 day exclusive window, I am aware of it, and since it is ESPN's exclusive right, they don't need to wait until September. The reason ESPN puts in a quiet period in a contract negotiation is to force the other party, in this case the Big East, to sign before the quiet period. The "quiet period" probably began right around the time the Big East turned down ESPN's last offer. As the quiet period comes to an end, the leverage actually switches to the Big East, so it is in ESPN's interest to reopen discussions prior to the beginning of the "exclusive negotiating window".

ESPN and/or the Big East do not seem to have any interest in doing so, because there is not even a whisper of such discussions beginning. On the other hand, ESPN's news coverage of the Big East has become increasingly shrill and nasty, which further indicates that ESPN and the Big East are not speaking to each other and the Big East has already decided which way they want to go.

 

[metsfan2323]

If NBC and ESPN tie, the Big East has to go with NBC. ESPN will marginalize, denigrate and finally, eliminate the Big East, if they are our only customer. Especially if NBC gets effectively knocked out of college sports as a result. ESPN's long term objective has been clear, consolidate control of the industry and reduce the amount of content they need to market.

When you get ripped off by a business partner once, it is their fault. When it happens over and over again, it is your fault. ESPN will never change their spots on this issue. They have made it abundantly clear they want the Big East to be eliminated, and they will not stop until that has happened. The only way the Big East can protect itself is to find a partner that can protect the Big East from ESPN.

or the Big East truly has been the worst of the BCS conferences over the last 8 years. The 2010 season was abysmal for the Big East, we can't blame ESPN for that and the decision by the Big East to remain at 8 football schools for so long significantly hurt the Big East, we can't blame ESPN for that either.

and please don't tell me about our BCS bowl performance vs the ACC's. We can't call these bowl games meaningless and then point to West Virginia's record in them as a significant source of Big East pride.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

If NBC and ESPN tie, the Big East has to go with NBC. ESPN will marginalize, denigrate and finally, eliminate the Big East, if they are our only customer. Especially if NBC gets effectively knocked out of college sports as a result. ESPN's long term objective has been clear, consolidate control of the industry and reduce the amount of content they need to market.

When you get ripped off by a business partner once, it is their fault. When it happens over and over again, it is your fault. ESPN will never change their spots on this issue. They have made it abundantly clear they want the Big East to be eliminated, and they will not stop until that has happened. The only way the Big East can protect itself is to find a partner that can protect the Big East from ESPN.

Say NBC and ESPN both offer $8MM per team for a 10 year contract, why would ESPN marginalize a product they just agreed to pay say $150MM a year too?

In a deal like this, ESPN gets what they want, marquee basketball and some decent basketball. Taking Syracuse, Pitt, WVU out of the equation and adding C-USA filler, in effect probably cut the BE potential deal in half. That's what ESPN wanted. Keep Syracuse, Pitt, WVU under their control and then only having to pay half-rate for UConn, Louisville, Georgetown, etc. basketball.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I am. The question is what do they do with it. Here's my guess:

1) low ball and hope our conference blinks
2) make a generous offer equal but not greater than the ACC deal. This is a possibility, if it comes with the promise of promoting the conference. The best way to guarantee that is to negotiate decent broadcast slots. ESPN will promote us if they need to promote their broadcast schedule.
3) Do nothing because they can't compete.

My guess is it's #1.

Here is what ESPN will offer:

The Big East can choose either:

a) $50MM per year for the whole league, both sports, or
b) ESPN will pay some other league $100MM a year to rip apart what remains of the Big East.

It would be a very credible threat, since ESPN has already paid $78MM a year to the Big 12 and ACC to take 4 teams. Why stop here?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

or the Big East truly has been the worst of the BCS conferences over the last 8 years. The 2010 season was abysmal for the Big East, we can't blame ESPN for that and the decision by the Big East to remain at 8 football schools for so long significantly hurt the Big East, we can't blame ESPN for that either.

and please don't tell me about our BCS bowl performance vs the ACC's. We can't call these bowl games meaningless and then point to West Virginia's record in them as a significant source of pride.

So then it doesn't matter which network the Big East signs with.

And Boise has done OK against the majors. A lot better than WVU in fact, and you are getting your dream of a big conference. So isn't this a big step up?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Say NBC and ESPN both offer $8MM per team for a 10 year contract, why would ESPN marginalize a product they just agreed to pay say $150MM a year too?

In a deal like this, ESPN gets what they want, marquee basketball and some decent basketball. Taking Syracuse, Pitt, WVU out of the equation and adding C-USA filler, in effect probably cut the BE potential deal in half. That's what ESPN wanted. Keep Syracuse, Pitt, WVU under their control and then only having to pay half-rate for UConn, Louisville, Georgetown, etc. basketball.

Because ESPN would make sure this is the last time they ever had to pay the Big East a nickel.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Because ESPN would make sure this is the last time they ever had to pay the Big East a nickel.

That is what baffles me. If ESPN added UConn/Rutgers to the ACC and Louisville/Boise State (or USF, Cincy, Houston, whatever) to the Big12, every attractive BE property would be accounted for in football. The catholics would break off and form an attractive all hoops conference, and the remaining schools would reform C-USA.

 

[metsfan2323]

So then it doesn't matter which network the Big East signs with.

And Boise has done OK against the majors. A lot better than WVU in fact, and you are getting your dream of a big conference. So isn't this a big step up?

We're going to 14 no matter who we sign with. I have no love for ESPN, it's just my opinion that NBC's offer needs to be much better then ESPN's because of their current place in the market.

If we are tying ourselves to Jerry Maguire (the upstart with one client), he better show us the money.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

We're going to 14 no matter who we sign with. I have no love for ESPN, it's just my opinion that NBC's offer needs to be much better then ESPN's because of their current place in the market.

If we are tying ourselves to Jerry Maguire (the upstart with one client), he better show us the money.

We are tying ourselves to Jerry Maguire, because he is the one most likely to get us the "quan". We will not get that with Bob Sugar.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

That is what baffles me. If ESPN added UConn/Rutgers to the ACC and Louisville/Boise State (or USF, Cincy, Houston, whatever) to the Big12, every attractive BE property would be accounted for in football. The catholics would break off and form an attractive all hoops conference, and the remaining schools would reform C-USA.

ESPN looks at the landscape, and is asking themselves why they are paying schools like Wake Forest and Syracuse as much as they are, not how they can get a few more schools under the tent. If ESPN had its way, there would be 30 schools that mattered and everything else would be an exhibition game.

 

[CL82]

Here is what ESPN will offer:

The Big East can choose either:

a) $50MM per year for the whole league, both sports, or
b) ESPN will pay some other league $100MM a year to rip apart what remains of the Big East.

It would be a very credible threat, since ESPN has already paid $78MM a year to the Big 12 and ACC to take 4 teams. Why stop here?

Since we're likely to be the next in line, the thought of the BE being raided again isn't very daunting. I think that if ESPN felt like it can promote another raid, without exposing itself, it would have happened already. The plan is to talk the league down.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Since we're likely to be the next in line, the thought of the BE being raided again isn't very daunting. I think that if ESPN felt like it can promote another raid, without exposing itself, it would have happened already. The plan is to talk the league down.

ESPN has over 3 months to raid the Big East before the exclusive window closes. It probably only took them a month to get the ACC to take Pitt and Syracuse. If UConn was next in line, then we haven't we been taken already? It seems like UConn is a pariah in Bristol for some reason.

The cheapest way for ESPN to raid the Big East would be to convince the ACC to take Georgetown and Villanova. That would definitely kill the combined conference, and possibly drive Boise and SDSU back to the MWC, or to form a new league.

 

[huskyjawz]

I get it, ConnHuskBask, you don't want to shell out an extra 15 bucks a month for NBC Sports.

 

[Marty Jackson]

Two points to this comment:

1) The first point has already been made by Jerry27, but it's worth reiterating; this conference is dying WITH ESPN! ESPN is clearly aware that they have plenty of college football under their umbrella, and they seem content with the amount that they have. Hence, the constant Big East bashing to eliminate our product from the discussion of college football.

2) EVEN IF the Big East were to sign a deal with ESPN, what type of treatment do you think that we would receive?? They would stop the bashing, but they would not market us. They would label us the sixth best conference (perhaps resurrecting the name "Big Six" for us), and they would make sure that everyone knew who conference #6 was. Get used to Wednesday night games, fellas. We would have bragging rights only on the MW and CUSA, which we already have.

No, unfortunately it seems painfully clear that we almost need to have a different network take us up. It's sad, because of the long history of the Big East with ESPN as well as the fact that they reside in our state, but the situation is what it is. I think we need to find a new life without them....and fast!

ESPN isn't going to invest in the BE and then continue this recent activity of trying to marginalize our stature in big boy football.
ESPN is trying to reduce the marketability of the league and with it, the winning bid for our TV rights. If you can get a $1B contract at a 25% discount then you do what it takes to get the discount. But once the deal is signed, ESPN and the Big East are business partners again.

I'm not suggesting that the BE go with ESPN. But if that's the best bid, then I think the BE leadership would be foolish not to consider it.

This jilted lover angle is getting old.

 

[UConnDan97]

ESPN isn't going to invest in the BE and then continue this recent activity of trying to marginalize our stature in big boy football.
ESPN is trying to reduce the marketability of the league and with it, the winning bid for our TV rights. If you can get a $1B contract at a 25% discount then you do what it takes to get the discount. But once the deal is signed, ESPN and the Big East are business partners again.

I'm not suggesting that the BE go with ESPN. But if that's the best bid, then I think the BE leadership would be foolish not to consider it.

This jilted lover angle is getting old.

Settle down, Marty. It has nothing to do with being a "jilted lover." The point I was making is that if ESPN wins the bid (and we both agree that the marginalization was to lower the bid), then ESPN will stop the marginalization. I even made the comment earlier that they would likely resurrect the "Big 6" terminology, as well as making the comment that if they were the largest bid, that it would be difficult to walk away from.

However, they would not have very much reason to PROMOTE the league. There is a gigantic difference between not marginalizing the league and promoting it. So get used to the least favorable timeslots and not much in terms of commercial promotion. That's all I was saying.

Alright, gotta run. I have a few ex-girlfriends to call up and bi%^h to...

 

[Hoophound]

Bringing back the term "Big 6" is going to be hard to sell unless we have a spot in the Orange Bowl.

 

[UConnDan97]

Bringing back the term "Big 6" is going to be hard to sell unless we have a spot in the Orange Bowl.

...or at least a rotating tie-in to one of the "Big 6 Bowls," i.e., Fiesta / Sugar / etc. I agree with your statement though.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I get it, ConnHuskBask, you don't want to shell out an extra 15 bucks a month for NBC Sports.

Clearly you don't. It's not about fans of Big East schools, it's about the casual fan/recruit who no longer is going to tune in to watch a UConn game.

 

[Marty Jackson]

Settle down, Marty. It has nothing to do with being a "jilted lover." The point I was making is that if ESPN wins the bid (and we both agree that the marginalization was to lower the bid), then ESPN will stop the marginalization. I even made the comment earlier that they would likely resurrect the "Big 6" terminology, as well as making the comment that if they were the largest bid, that it would be difficult to walk away from.
I'm settled...
I hear what you're saying. But if we are the 6th best league on Espn i wouldn't expect them to slot us over the other 5. I agree they would stop the attacks and promote us but not over the other leagues in FB... Bb would be a different story...
I guess the question is whether being #6 on Espn is better than being 1 or 2 on fox or NBC...
Money is a part of the equation.
Do we think anyone in the big east leadership is well versed enough to make that decision? Besides Carl spackler?


However, they would not have very much reason to PROMOTE the league. There is a gigantic difference between not marginalizing the league and promoting it. So get used to the least favorable timeslots and not much in terms of commercial promotion. That's all I was saying.

Alright, gotta run. I have a few ex-girlfriends to call up and bi%^h to...

I'm settled...

 

[Jerry27]

Clearly you don't. It's not about fans of Big East schools, it's about the casual fan/recruit who no longer is going to tune in to watch a UConn game.

Clearly you don't get it. As someone already pointed out NBC is not only NBC Sports Network. You have no idea what someone will or will not tune into so stop it with the ESPN is our only hope to a better future garbage. The casual fan can find NBC just as easy as they can ESPN. And if a recruit is interested in a program they will find them no matter where the game airs. And news flash, the game highlights will still get on ESPN, because lets face it, that is what they truly want! DaDaDa...DaDaDa! (ESPN theme) Now back to watching the MMA feature on NBCSN!

 

[UCFBfan]

I thought Versus, now NBCSN was standard on cable packages now....am I missing something here? It's not like MLB Network of NFL Network here....Is it not standard on Satellite? I never even considered the fact that NBCSN is not on standard cable because it's so low in the cable numbering....

 

[whaler11]

I know this much, for the same product (MLS) NBCS gets 1/10th the audience that ESPN does.

 

[UConnDan97]

I know this much, for the same product (MLS) NBCS gets 1/10th the audience that ESPN does.

And that has nothing to do with the games that they have had, right? Galaxy vs. Chivas in the L.A. derby, Galaxy vs. Red Bulls (to watch Beckham vs. Thierry Henry), Portland vs. Seattle in the Northwest rivalry, and New York vs. Seattle (two of the biggest fanbases in the country).

Very shocking that those games would draw more than San Jose versus Kansas City. Very shocking indeed...

 

[whaler11]

NBC might be the worst network in the history of broadcasting. They just showed a commercial for Today promoting an appearance by a gold medalist... right before they showed the race she won.

It's a no win situation. ESPN treats them like dogcrap and no one watches NBCS.

 

[whaler11]

And that has nothing to do with the games that they have had, right? Galaxy vs. Chivas in the L.A. derby, Galaxy vs. Red Bulls (to watch Beckham vs. Thierry Henry), Portland vs. Seattle in the Northwest rivalry, and New York vs. Seattle (two of the biggest fanbases in the country).

Very shocking that those games would draw more than San Jose versus Kansas City. Very shocking indeed...

I'd have to look up the games, but would that be any different than ESPN showing Michigan State and Iowa and
NBCS showing Rutgers and Central Florida?