Dom Amore: If Big 12 calls, UConn will have to choose between Big East love and Power Five money. | Page 22 | The Boneyard

Dom Amore: If Big 12 calls, UConn will have to choose between Big East love and Power Five money.

CL82 said:
Yormark said ESPN has indicated that it will treat certain G5 programs as if they were P5 programs under the contract and pay a full pro rata share for them if they join. He gave a very strong indication that Connecticut was one of those programs.

You're welcome!
Expand ...
 
This whole pro-rata thing by the TV networks is such nonsense. Does ESPN really believe that -for example- Oregon State is intrinsically worth a full revenue share if they somehow got an B12 invite just because they currently reside in a power conference?

That’s why it’s so important to take the first power conference invite that comes our way
 
Jbirdp5 said:
Expand ...

In the spirit of turnabout is fair play, you seem to be going out of your way to try to pour cold water on the idea of a move to the B-12.

Even if things end up as that that tweet suggests. If we (as a G-5) are added, ESPN kicks in their 63% at full value and Fox decides to pay 75 cents on the dollar for their 37%, it still gives us 91% of what other B-12 schools are receiving for media rights, which by the way is substantially more than what we would be receiving from the BE.

An additional point, if the BE is as strong and respected a conference as you (and others) claim, how would Fox be able to justify calling us a G5 school?
 
mussels said:
You answered my question, so yeah thanks, but I’m having a hard time believing that the “strong indication” (in whatever form it took), wasn’t for purposes of deception to gain leverage in some other transaction. (like assisting the big 12 in recruiting some other school. (you better get on board before UConn takes your spot)

I know football fans are justifiably optimistic about the direction of the program, but given the last decade I just can’t see how a network would be convinced we are a good buy.

We‘ll see I guess.
Expand ...
Yeah that "strong indication" language is just my memory being flawed. At the time I thought it was pretty clear.
 
Jbirdp5 said:
Expand ...

1687136056629.png


Your mark indicated that Connecticut would be treated "as a P5 edition" for the purposes of the contract.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
In the spirit of turnabout is fair play, you seem to be going out of your way to try to pour cold water on the idea of a move to the B-12.

Even if things end up as that that tweet suggests. If we (as a G-5) are added, ESPN kicks in their 63% at full value and Fox decides to pay 75 cents on the dollar for their 37%, it still gives us 91% of what other B-12 schools are receiving for media rights, which by the way is substantially more than what we would be receiving from the BE.

An additional point, if the BE is as strong and respected a conference as you (and others) claim, how would Fox be able to justify calling us a G5 school?
Expand ...
I’m not making a claim in any direction I’m just saying what’s out there. My point was if we are looked at by the networks as G5 then the university presidents probably do not vote us through as they would be giving up some of their share.
The big east is respected as a basketball conference on par with any. The payouts are from football.
So in football we are group of 5 basketball we are a power conference.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
View attachment 89044

Your mark indicated that Connecticut would be treated "as a P5 edition" for the purposes of the contract.
Expand ...
I don’t see UConn mentioned in the tweet you added.
I personally have seen people reporting on both sides. Some have claimed we would qualify for the full share and some have said we wouldn’t. But the answer to that question is probably the answer to whether we get the invite or not.
 
Jbirdp5 said:
I’m not making a claim in any direction I’m just saying what’s out there. My point was if we are looked at by the networks as G5 then the university presidents probably do not vote us through as they would be giving up some of their share.
The big east is respected as a basketball conference on par with any. The payouts are from football.
So in football we are group of 5 basketball we are a power conference.
Expand ...
Not long ago you pointed out that it is too early to view USC & UCLA moving to the B1G as a success (when someone pointed out the travel they were taking on compared to what we would face in the B-12). The thread I most recently responded to was in response to your pointing out that Fox (slightly more than one third of the broadcast contract) wasn't necessarily on board with a full share to a G-5 member. In all candor,

I don't know how that part of it will shake out but regardless, it will still be more than a sufficient enough increase to justify the move. One thing that is obvious is that you feel so negative about the possibility of our moving to the B-12 that you feel it necessary to point out all possible pitfalls while ignoring any possible benefits.

I get it, you are too emotionally attached to our games with Seton Hall, Georgetown, Providence et al to look at this rationally. The good news for you is that it is still quite a longshot for us to get an invitation from the B-12.
 
Jbirdp5 said:
I’m not making a claim in any direction I’m just saying what’s out there. My point was if we are looked at by the networks as G5 then the university presidents probably do not vote us through as they would be giving up some of their share.
The big east is respected as a basketball conference on par with any. The payouts are from football.
So in football we are group of 5 basketball we are a power conference.
Expand ...
I actually think UConn is in a better position than being “G5”. UConn isn’t G5, it is independent.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
Not long ago you pointed out that it is too early to view USC & UCLA moving to the B1G as a success (when someone pointed out the travel they were taking on compared to what we would face in the B-12). The thread I most recently responded to was in response to your pointing out that Fox (slightly more than one third of the broadcast contract) wasn't necessarily on board with a full share to a G-5 member. In all candor,

I don't know how that part of it will shake out but regardless, it will still be more than a sufficient enough increase to justify the move. One thing that is obvious is that you feel so negative about the possibility of our moving to the B-12 that you feel it necessary to point out all possible pitfalls while ignoring any possible benefits.

I get it, you are too emotionally attached to our games with Seton Hall, Georgetown, Providence et al to look at this rationally. The good news for you is that it is still quite a longshot for us to get an invitation from the B-12.
Expand ...
You make up this narrative of my opinion in your mind.
I said you can’t call usc and ucla a success because they haven’t made the move and been successful yet. If their play is not as good due to the constant travel would that have any effect on your opinion?
I know you love bringing up seton hall and providence as my reasons for wanting to stay, but my concern is constant travel having a negative impact on our ability to succeed at a high level. With zero road trips that would be easy without so much as a single travel partner in the league.
I’d jump at an acc or big ten invite.
 
Zissou said:
I actually think UConn is in a better position than being “G5”. UConn isn’t G5, it is independent.
Expand ...
Fox and espn are the only 2 who have an opinion that counts on the matter. I’d agree we are in sort of a gray area as to what we are considered.
 
Jbirdp5 said:
I don’t see UConn mentioned in the tweet you added.
I personally have seen people reporting on both sides. Some have claimed we would qualify for the full share and some have said we wouldn’t. But the answer to that question is probably the answer to whether we get the invite or not.
Expand ...
Yeah, it's somewhere on The Boneyard, because I read it here.

The post I put up was just to address the notion that ESPN had a greed to a pro rata share for P fives but fox has not.
 
.-.
Zissou said:
I actually think UConn is in a better position than being “G5”. UConn isn’t G5, it is independent.
Expand ...

The current TV money UConn receives for football is bottom of the barrel G5. I don't like it but that's what it is. It's a lousy deal.
 
CL82 said:
Yeah, it's somewhere on The Boneyard, because I read it here.

The post I put up was just to address the notion that ESPN had a greed to a pro rata share for P fives but fox has not.
Expand ...
Saw that espn is 63% of the deal, fox is 37%. Espn hasn’t been kind to us in the past
 
Zissou said:
The conference seeks agreement / negotiates with the network to plus up the compensation to UConn so that the rest aren’t diluted. The Network agrees if they see the value.
Expand ...
This may be the most important point. From media reports, the Big 12 basketball coaches want to add UConn, but the Big 12 more football-centric athletic departments currently don't see significant value in adding UConn (from a revenue or perceived quality of football perspective). The school presidents will probably not add a school unless such move is, at a minimum, revenue neutral for the existing schools at day one, and with the prospect of higher revenues in the future. UConn is probably only in the conversation because of its basketball teams and the Big 12 commissioner's stated objective to capitalize on his conference's basketball strength, and the potential to expand that strength into a national footprint (to generate more revenue for the schools). While not the driver like football, conference basketball telecasts and the NCAA Basketball Tournament are revenue generators, and with more consolidation of schools into the power conferences, the money will potentially flow moreso to the power conferences (that can leverage negotiating strength from both football and basketball) in the future.

There's also been media reports that when new schools join a conference, their share of revenue starts at a lower level and then increases over time in some type of stepped up formula. In order for something to happen, the starting amount of revenue initially shared with the new school might need to be the amount that keeps revenue neutral for the existing schools while covering the increased costs (for travel, etc.) for the new school and also increasing in a stepped fashion over time. Hopefully, such a mutually beneficial share amount exists for both sides because the networks are in control of how the revenue numbers are projected.

Simultaneously while the revenue numbers are looked at, media reports indicate some of the Big 12 schools have the same geographic and culture arguments against an invitation to UConn that have been discussed from UConn's perspective on this forum. But foremost, from each side's perspective, there must be a prospect for more increased revenue in the future.
 
Jbirdp5 said:
Saw that espn is 63% of the deal, fox is 37%. Espn hasn’t been kind to us in the past
Expand ...
True, but with the Big East media contract coming up for renegotiation, Fox may see value in taking their highest value property out of that Conference and ESPN may see value in regaining control of our games.
 
.-.
For many years we were kicked to the curb in this realignment in favor of schools like BC, Rutgers, Syracuse.

But, now frankly, most conferences would be lucky to have us right now. National champions in BB with a historic run in tourney, a respectable bowl and great game vs Marshall and nothing but sunny days on the horizon. Women’s basketball stands alone for perennial Final 8/4/NC.

When you look at the train wreck some of these teams we were passed over for - and what they have become (BC etc.) frankly the ACC or Big 12 would be fortunate to have us. We are growing in all the right ways and like Hurley said “better catch us now.”
 
In this world it us difficult to discern whether a few different sources mentioning the same piece of information is corroborating evidence or merely repeating comments from the same source.

It has been mentioned a few times about UConn being viewed as a P-5 addition if added (I only remember seeing SDSU mentioned once) but there is no guarantee that this will be the case if we do get the offer. One item most have overlooked (and is the reason media partners don't give blanket pro-rata shares for additional schools) is that with this, a conference could just add members at will, diluting the quality of the product without any financial ramifications.

My guess is that if we or SDSU are coupled with a current P-5 then there will be a pro-rata share but if it is only a pair of G-5 additions there will be a lesser share.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
It has been mentioned a few times about UConn being viewed as a P-5 addition if added (I only remember seeing SDSU mentioned once) but there is no guarantee that this will be the case if we do get the offer.
Expand ...
I agree. There also is no guarantee that we would actually get the full value of a pro rata share. It's possible that the big 12 might sprinkle some of that money around to the other members. Even if it does not, our share will be reduced by our buy in, witch, intern, could be sprinkled among the other members.
 
CL82 said:
True, but with the Big East media contract coming up for renegotiation, Fox may see value in taking their highest value property out of that Conference and ESPN may see value in regaining control of our games.
Expand ...
Or fox could see the value in keeping us in the big east and paying us 1/4 of what they would be paying us in the new league. ESPN hasn’t seemed to respect us in the past maybe the latest title has changed that….if that was the case though and espn did value us wouldn’t they want us in the acc which they control for a longer time at a better rate
 
metsfan2323 said:
The current TV money UConn receives for football is bottom of the barrel G5. I don't like it but that's what it is. It's a lousy deal.
Expand ...
That was a tradeoff for not having all your games behind a paywall and basically having all your games televised. CBS sports does a nice job with theri quality/production. That one game against FIU on + was seizure inducing.
 
.-.
Jbirdp5 said:
Or fox could see the value in keeping us in the big east and paying us 1/4 of what they would be paying us in the new league. ESPN hasn’t seemed to respect us in the past maybe the latest title has changed that….if that was the case though and espn did value us wouldn’t they want us in the acc which they control for a longer time at a better rate
Expand ...
Yes, for fox the analysis would be can our paying 33%, theoretically, of UConn's big 12 pro rata share ($10M, roughly) be offset by the fact that the value of the big east conference drops if Connecticut is not a part of it? So right now Fox pays us roughly $4 million per year. The difference between what they pay for us now and what they would for pay us as a full share member of the big 12 is roughly $6 million ($10M-&4M). I think the answer to that is, probably.

Say conference rights for the big east with us in the conference is worth $8 million per team, but without us is worth $7 million per team, then it is more profitable for Fox to pay us their portion of a full share in the big 12 then to pay a premium for the entire big east conference in the next media deal. Also keep in mind that they also would have access to our football games, if they want them, which they don't currently have.
 
CL82 said:
Yes, for fox the analysis would be can our paying 33%, theoretically, of UConn's big 12 pro rata share ($10M, roughly) be offset by the fact that the value of the big east conference drops if Connecticut is not a part of it? So right now Fox pays us roughly $4 million per year. The difference between what they pay for us now and what they would for pay us as a full share member of the big 12 is roughly $6 million ($10M-&4M). I think the answer to that is, probably.

Say conference rights for the big east with us in the conference is worth $8 million per team, but without us is worth $7 million per team, then it is more profitable for Fox to pay us their portion of a full share in the big 12 then to pay a premium for the entire big east conference in the next media deal. Also keep in mind that they also would have access to our football games, if they want them, which they don't currently have.
Expand ...
I get all this, but I don't think the math works that way. You could do this with Houston, Cinci, BYU and UCF and you couldn't make the math work. The real question is: can this school, if added to a P5 conference, step up and become a more reliable draw on TV. For basketball, UConn is there. Football, based on name recognition from basketball, maybe? I think they see the huge alumni base at UCF and are gambling that they can step up. Cinci football is very good, and Ohio loves football. Houston is a huge school like UCF, and has some history of success in both sports. BYU has it's own built in fan base nationally, and history on the football side (and some history at basketball).

For example, you simply can't project UMass making that leap. Temple has shown it can't do it. UConn was given a shot and briefly did it. Pac is looking at SMU because they were bigtime in football, it's a rich school with good academics, and even basketball was good at one time. So they project as possibly making the leap.
 
HuskyHawk said:
I get all this, but I don't think the math works that way. You could do this with Houston, Cinci, BYU and UCF and you couldn't make the math work.
Expand ...
That's a simplified example, obviously, but I think it works. What's giving you pause about it? I'm just curious if you're seeing something that I'm not.

HuskyHawk said:
The real question is: can this school, if added to a P5 conference, step up and become a more reliable draw on TV.
Expand ...
Sort of. The real question is do ESPN and Fox believe it brings added value, for whatever reason. That could be ratings, it could be brand awareness, it could be devaluation of the Big East. It doesn't matter. All that matters is that the big 12 network partners are willing to pay a full pro rata share for us. Apparently, they are.
 
CL82 said:
That's a simplified example, obviously, but I think it works. What's giving you pause about it? I'm just curious if you're seeing something that I'm not.


Sort of. The real question is do ESPN and Fox believe it brings added value, for whatever reason. That could be ratings, it could be brand awareness, it could be devaluation of the Big East. It doesn't matter. All that matters is that the big 12 network partners are willing to pay a full pro rata share for us. Apparently, they are.
Expand ...
I don't think we're disagreeing here. Take Miss State out of the SEC and are they independently valuable enough to be added to the SEC? No. Not even closer. Teams playing a P5 slate of games are going to get more attention, generate more fans, and grow their ratings numbers and fanbase. So I don't think Fox or ESPN are running the numbers based on the Big East payout. It's more: UConn basketball blew up when in a top league, can football do that? Now it's Fox has UConn hoop. B12 would be ESPN and Fox share UConn hoops and football, each of which could be boosted by presence in the league.

I do think they run that straight "we have those rights" numbers for a school like FSU or Clemson. Because it's pure ESPN on both the SEC and ACC (minus CBS), so ESPN would likely not want to pay up for something they have 100% of now. It's the biggest flaw in the whole "ACC is doomed" argument.
 
CL82 said:
Yes, for fox the analysis would be can our paying 33%, theoretically, of UConn's big 12 pro rata share ($10M, roughly) be offset by the fact that the value of the big east conference drops if Connecticut is not a part of it? So right now Fox pays us roughly $4 million per year. The difference between what they pay for us now and what they would for pay us as a full share member of the big 12 is roughly $6 million ($10M-&4M). I think the answer to that is, probably.

Say conference rights for the big east with us in the conference is worth $8 million per team, but without us is worth $7 million per team, then it is more profitable for Fox to pay us their portion of a full share in the big 12 then to pay a premium for the entire big east conference in the next media deal. Also keep in mind that they also would have access to our football games, if they want them, which they don't currently have.
Expand ...
Well thought out except for the fact that it’s reported fox doesn’t want to pay the full share
 
Jbirdp5 said:
Well thought out except for the fact that it’s reported fox doesn’t want to pay the full share
Expand ...
Not according to the two articles in the tweet I posted earlier. Here let me put it here as well:

 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,236
Messages
4,559,171
Members
10,445
Latest member
Azerion


Top Bottom