Fox throws a big bucket of cold water on the B12

[upstater]

■Saber Rattling

I was surprised that the comments Fox Sports President Eric Shanks said about the Big 12 didn’t get more play. The college conference has been kicking around the idea of adding two or four teams, which would trigger a contract clause that would force Fox and ESPN to pay a higher rights fee.

Shanks essentially warned that any expansion could wind up being a fatal decision for the conference.

Shanks: “We don’t think expansion in the Big 12 is a good idea for the conference. We think it will be dilutive to the product in the short term. In the long term, it’s probably harmful to the future of the conference. Who knows where expansion is going to go. Reading the smoke signals, [expansion talk has] cooled off. I don’t know why. We’re still in discussions with them. We still have a long way to go in the deal. We’ll work through it the best way that we can.”

NFL’s Twitter ‘experiment’ a glimpse into sports media’s future

 

[UConnSportsGuy]

“We don’t think expansion in the Big 12 is a good idea for the conference. We think it will be dilutive to the product in the short term. In the long term, it’s probably harmful to the future of the conference. Who knows where expansion is going to go. Reading the smoke signals, [expansion talk has] cooled off. I don’t know why. We’re still in discussions with them. We still have a long way to go in the deal. We’ll work through it the best way that we can.”

That sounds like a pretty clear warning to the B12 schools (veiled in a hypothetical scenario). If you make us pay for these additi0ns, we will tear the c0nference apart using our existing resources (encouraging current P5 conference expansion) so that we don't have to pay this huge price and will eliminate the B12 in the process. Basically, we will do to you what was done to the Big East by ESPN when they declined the initial contract.

The interesting questions is if the powers in the B12 (Texas & Oklahoma) would actually see this as a good thing. Just like when Pitt led the charge to vote down the huge ESPN contract, only to be leading exodus to the ACC. Is there a fox in the hen house again? Maybe Texas & Oklahoma will decide to vote for expansion knowing that it will result in the acceleration of the B12's demise by getting the conference expansion bus rolling again fueled by the networks and the P5 power brokers.

Very interesting backroom dealings and strategy going on here.

 

[Adios]

Adding UConn and Cincinnati would not dilute the content. Other schools would.

 

[UConnTrumbull]

I think that's as indicative as anything. Big 12 is not expanding. Maybe they announce to "table" the decision for the time being.

 

[upstater]

He waited until now to say this publicly.

Thing is, this is a saber rattling. And ESPN just told all these schools that Wake Forest and BC are much more valuable than you. Oklahoma must be looking at that and saying, WTF!!!

In other words, it's the type of thing that can boil someone's blood.

Does the Fox President have more nuts than Boren?

 

[Pudge]

He waited until now to say this publicly.

Thing is, this is a saber rattling. And ESPN just told all these schools that Wake Forest and BC are much more valuable than you. Oklahoma must be looking at that and saying, what!!!

In other words, it's the type of thing that can boil someone's blood.

Does the Fox President have more nuts than Boren?

This is what has my brain scrambling ...

You are going to pay $40m plus for Rutgers? And contracts of $23-30something for Wake Forest and BC? While some new distribution point ... the Houston's & USF & UConn & BYU & UCF in better market positioning and ADs can be getting $2m?

For decades?

So ... what does Oklahoma think? Or Kansas?

 

[upstater]

ESPN gets to do what it wants, but it doesn't mean a conference with leverage must comply. Same with Fox.

 

[noeynox]

This is what has my brain scrambling ...

You are going to pay $40m plus for Rutgers? And contracts of $23-30something for Wake Forest and BC? While some new distribution point ... the Houston's & USF & UConn & BYU & UCF in better market positioning and ADs can be getting $2m?

For decades?

So ... what does Oklahoma think? Or Kansas?

You keep posting this. I respect you as a long time poster, but I think the biggest thing that has changed in the last 18 months has been the impact of cord cutting on the cable industry and thus the networks. They're hurting due in large part to the locked in rights fees for sports.

This is why it was imperative to get in the club earlier. Everyone assumed UConn was going to be alright by kicking the can further down the road but at some point that door is going to close permanently. I have no idea if that is now, but this is the FIRST time networks are advocating AGAINST expansion. This is very telling.

 

[upstater]

You keep posting this. I respect you as a long time poster, but I think the biggest thing that has changed in the last 18 months has been the impact of cord cutting on the cable industry and thus the networks. They're hurting due in large part to the locked in rights fees for sports.

This is why it was imperative to get in the club earlier. Everyone assumed UConn was going to be alright by kicking the can further down the road but at some point that door is going to close permanently. I have no idea if that is now, but this is the FIRST time networks are advocating AGAINST expansion. This is very telling.

While this is true, and the networks said this to the B12 a while back, the ACC just got a network and a massive raise.

 

[Eskapeesto]

Sources: Big 12 expansion on hold for now

 

[noeynox]

While this is true, and the networks said this to the B12 a while back, the ACC just got a network and a massive raise.

Here is the thing, much like the Big 12 pro rata clause in the contract, the ACC had the 45 million dollar if no network clause in their contract. It was never clarified if it was yearly or a one time thing and it was speculated upon an awful lot. Looking back it was probably a yearly thing and espn decided it was best to lock them in longer.

 

[upstater]

Here is the thing, much like the Big 12 pro rata clause in the contract, the ACC had the 45 million dollar if no network clause in their contract. It was never clarified if it was yearly or a one time thing and it was speculated upon an awful lot. Looking back it was probably a yearly thing and espn decided it was best to lock them in longer.

They raised them though. They didn't need to do that.

 

[billybud]

ESPN was the big winner in this decision....they continue to pay a little less than $20 million combined for UConn, BYU. Houston, and Cincinnati...

 

[Pudge]

You keep posting this. I respect you as a long time poster, but I think the biggest thing that has changed in the last 18 months has been the impact of cord cutting on the cable industry and thus the networks. They're hurting due in large part to the locked in rights fees for sports.

This is why it was imperative to get in the club earlier. Everyone assumed UConn was going to be alright by kicking the can further down the road but at some point that door is going to close permanently. I have no idea if that is now, but this is the FIRST time networks are advocating AGAINST expansion. This is very telling.

Ask yourself ... each of us ... What is "Conference" or "Network" worth?

I'm impacted by a long ago work study I did at UCLA about the technology change in cinema when talkies entered. The Econ professor was more interested in hobnobbing with Industry friends & execs. But I am left thinking: Cord cutting is a real tech advancement. Signing a deal til 2035 is crazy in that environment. Keeping Conference contracts when they include $40m+ to Rutgers & $25/30m to BC & Wake is nuts. This is a whole new environment.

Frankly, I have no acceptance to this notion that WE (UConn) missed anything. We are building a market with our biggest deficiency still that we started this road in 2003 (really) and that was far too late for BC to prove that they had zero market appeal beyond a zipcode & that this NE/NY corridor had real appeal beyond the 2003 participants.

All we can do is be the top AD we can be. And fill the Rent. The latter - I feel- we've placed in the good hands of David Benedict. It's a significant problem. Our 2016 schedule, in my estimation is quite good, and we aren't near the draw we had a half dozen years ago.

 

[ZooCougar]

How much in tax credits does ESPN get? Is it more or less than what they would paid if the Big 12 expanded?

It's time to teach ESPN a lesson.

 

[Dooley]

How much in tax credits does ESPN get? Is it more or less than what they would paid if the Big 12 expanded?

It's time to teach ESPN a lesson.

The state gives them around a $27M/yr tax credit. That does not count the $270M package they received when they expanded digital.

Dialogue needs to happen right now.

 

[upstater]

What a huge mistake it was to build the Rent there.

On campus, you start off with 15,000 students attending the game, and a bunch of locals. You only need 15,000 more diehards to make the drive. There's your 40k a week.

 

[Pudge]

What a huge mistake it was to build the Rent there.

On campus, you start off with 15,000 students attending the game, and a bunch of locals. You only need 15,000 more diehards to make the drive. There's your 40k a week.

I am not going to agree with that. You simply could not build that stadium on campus in the town of Mansfield with the ingress/egress issue that 40,000 would have. You have yet to really figure out how the STATE team can pull in all towns in a small state with the facility smack in the middle of the state. When 80% of your market population is Hartford to New Haven, you have the location.

 

[don356]

Eric Shanks, how to go from relative obscurity to a marked stooge.

 

[upstater]

I am not going to agree with that. You simply could not build that stadium on campus in the town of Mansfield with the ingress/egress issue that 40,000 would have. You have yet to really figure out how the STATE team can pull in all towns in a small state with the facility smack in the middle of the state. When 80% of your market population is Hartford to New Haven, you have the location.

25,000.

15,000 students. Make it a campus all day affair. People come and go at all hours. There are bigger issues elsewhere.

 

[ZooCougar]

25,000.

15,000 students. Make it a campus all day affair. People come and go at all hours. There are bigger issues elsewhere.

I agree with you, but it's cold comfort at this point.

We filled the Rent in the past where it is.

The downturn correlates to the fact that the team isn't fun to watch unless you are related to one of the players.

 

[upstater]

I agree with you, but it's cold comfort at this point.

We filled the Rent in the past where it is.

The downturn correlates to the fact that the team isn't fun to watch unless you are related to one of the players.

I still hold out hope.

It just created an additional hurdle--which UConn football didn't need. The money lost yearly in subsidy makes it kind of a penny-wise/pound-foolish kind of argument.

 

[ZooCougar]

I still hold out hope.

It just created an additional hurdle--which UConn football didn't need. The money lost yearly in subsidy makes it kind of a penny-wise/pound-foolish kind of argument.

The next stadium should be on campus for sure.

 

[TRest]

The next stadium should be on campus for sure.

I'm thinking a multi-use one for soccer and football, 10-15k. If there is a next stadium that's what we're looking at.

 

[ZooCougar]

I'm thinking a multi-use one for soccer and football, 10-15k. If there is a next stadium that's what we're looking at.

That's a great idea. When and if the NCAA reinstates freshman football they will need a facility to play in

 

[SubbaBub]

$27M you say? That is an interesting number. Assuming you would lose ESPN as an employer, a big if, that amount could be repurposed in a number of ways to keep UConn as a P5 level program.

1. Payouts to schedule premium FB opponents
2. Investments in recruiting and facilities
3. AAC exit fees allowing a recapture of broadcast rights