FSU, ACC In It For The Long Haul

[UPitt]

What is the reason we're giving tax breaks to ESPN? How is the state benefitting from this in the first place?

I'm not saying we don't, but I need a reason why they shouldn't have their tax breaks ripped away considering how much they make and how much they've been perking up the conference that left UConn in the mess that it was in. Not to mention the possibility that other underhanded things may or may not have been going on once the BE rejected offer #1 and was about to take it's inventory to the open market and potential big time competitor.

Considering how close Bristol is to Storrs, it is ironic that the sports empire can't save one of the more popular college brand names in the country (at least in hoops).

Realize that tax breaks are given to thousands of businesses each year. They are given for creating new jobs, hiring diversity, producing economy, opening new facilities, expansion, etc. Tax breaks are an important part of business. Many times companies use empty threats about leaving without additional tax breaks, but then every once in a while someone does leave the city and state (ie. Boeing). Can Connecticut afford for ESPN to pack up its bags and leave? Yes, but it would sting a few people. Can Connecticut afford the aftermath of ESPN losing its tax breaks, even if ESPN does not leave? That answer is NO. Connecticut can NOT afford for other businesses to see ESPN lose its tax breaks (which would become very public). When choosing to relocate, expand or start a business, things like location and resources are important. But most important of all is MONEY (gross - expenses = profits - taxes = MONEY). No matter what happens to Uconn is expansion, do not expect Connecticut to even threaten to remove the tax breaks from ESPN. Its all about perception that your state is welcoming businesses to make more money.

 

[The Viking]

I know. We're not removing their tax breaks. this is just stuff that is talked about on the internet. Malloy can not allow ESPN to leave anyway.
I'm just angry.

 

[UPitt]

Frank, I think you are right on here. We are just incredibly, incredibly frustrated by the fact that we see other companies supporting their home schools while we have someone as powerful as ESPN who can directly help and doesn't offer a hand.

What I haven't seen discussed yet, but which is implicit in every 'yarders position is our intimate relationship with this company. Many outside the area probably don't realize this but the station was founded for the sole purpose of airing Whalers and UConn games (and then other inventory they can get their hands on). So, literally, the school that launched ESPN is the one being hurt the most by them.

I understand the frustration many people are feeling, but I think there is a fine line between ESPN providing Uconn support and ESPN requiring Uconn be included in the ACC. Local businesses support colleges all over the country by provide donations and other support. ESPN may owe it to Uconn to provide donations to the school, buy the weight room and stadium naming rights, and provide interships and jobs. But in my opinion, I think that ESPN would be crossing unethical business barriers if they were to require that Uconn be included in any realignment.

 

[frankthetank]

Frank, I think you are right on here. We are just incredibly, incredibly frustrated by the fact that we see other companies supporting their home schools while we have someone as powerful as ESPN who can directly help and doesn't offer a hand.

What I haven't seen discussed yet, but which is implicit in every 'yarders position is our intimate relationship with this company. Many outside the area probably don't realize this but the station was founded for the sole purpose of airing Whalers and UConn games (and then other inventory they can get their hands on). So, literally, the school that launched ESPN is the one being hurt the most by them.

Oh, I can't imagine the frustration. The only fan base that can really compare in terms of frustration is Cincinnati. I feel for you guys there.

Here's the thing for me personally: over the years, I have developed pretty low expectations of ESPN, so that's why I don't have the emotional reaction to their actions/inactions that a lot of fans have. You mention the Whalers (RIP) and just look at how ESPN treats NHL (or more accurately, simply ignores the completely) now that they're no longer on their networks. They're ruthless and maniacal, which can be grating for sports fans, but at the same time, you can't question their business practices. ESPN alone generates almost as much profit as the rest of the Disney empire *combined*. Just think about what that entails - Disney World, Disneyland, Mickey Mouse and other character licensing, the Disney Princesses, ABC, all of the Pixar movies like Toy Story and Cars, Winnie the Pooh, the Muppets, all of the Marvel properties like The Avengers and the Iron Man movies that are blasting box office records, and now even Star Wars (plus countless of other things that I'm not thinking of). Think about how much of that Disney stuff permeates the lives of you and (if you have them) your kids already... and ESPN generates as much profit as ALL OF THAT COMBINED. It's honestly mind-boggling when you think of that scale. So, it's not just not a local Connecticut company anymore - it's the biggest piece of the biggest and most omnipresent media company in the world.

 

[WestHartHusk]

I understand the frustration many people are feeling, but I think there is a fine line between ESPN providing Uconn support and ESPN requiring Uconn be included in the ACC. Local businesses support colleges all over the country by provide donations and other support. ESPN may owe it to Uconn to provide donations to the school, buy the weight room and stadium naming rights, and provide interships and jobs. But in my opinion, I think that ESPN would be crossing unethical business barriers if they were to require that Uconn be included in any realignment.

I think we are all kidding ourselves if we don't think ethical lines are being crossed everyday all across college sports. But again, I don't disagree with you, there are just emotional aspects that make you want to drive to Bristol and kick someones .

 

[UPitt]

I know. We're not removing their tax breaks. this is just stuff that is talked about on the internet. Malloy can not allow ESPN to leave anyway.
I'm just angry.

Everyone should feel free to vent on the internet and let thoughts fly, but I think everyone needs to have a level head about the importance of these tax breaks before calling up your Governor.

 

[The Viking]

I understand the frustration many people are feeling, but I think there is a fine line between ESPN providing Uconn support and ESPN requiring Uconn be included in the ACC. Local businesses support colleges all over the country by provide donations and other support. ESPN may owe it to Uconn to provide donations to the school, buy the weight room and stadium naming rights, and provide interships and jobs. But in my opinion, I think that ESPN would be crossing unethical business barriers if they were to require that Uconn be included in any realignment.

What percentage of corporations are completely ethical?

 

[upstater]

NYC is hardly the be all end all or else ESPN would have just located in that market directly. Turner is located in Atlanta and no one cares about its lack of proximity to NYC. Believe me - a lot bigger companies have ditched a whole lot more in search of a less expensive corporate home. That doesn't mean that ESPN would actually leave (as they wouldn't want to if all things are relatively equal), but NEVER assume that they wouldn't follow through with a threat to leave. It happens all of the time. There are plenty of states that would offer extremely favorable terms to get ESPN to move. ESPN has significantly more leverage than the state here.

A lot of companies are not located in NYC but use it for close proximity. They could in Hoboken, they could be in Stamford. As a matter of fact, NBC Sports just moved TO Stamford. ESPN has spent a whopping huge amount of money in Bristol. It is indeed a very big company.

 

[UPitt]

I think we are all kidding ourselves if we don't think ethical lines are being crossed everyday all across college sports. But again, I don't disagree with you, there are just emotional aspects that make you want to drive to Bristol and kick someones .

College sports defines unethical behavior, but that doesn't mean you want your team to be the king of it. Leave that to a few select B1G teams.

 

[upstater]

At the end of the day, ESPN's job is to make money for Disney's shareholders. That's literally its fiduciary and legal obligation, NOT to make politicians happy. (And even then, making one set of politicians happy can make another set of politicians extremely unhappy. Don't you think that Mitch McConnell might have a different view of the a la carte cable legislation that John McCain just introduced if ESPN actually directed the ACC to take UConn over Louisville? The state of Connecticut tax break is a rounding error compared to what that bill could do to ESPN's profits, so Disney needs McConnell on its side.) A stable ACC (meaning one that still has FSU) is very much in the interest of anyone that owns shares of Disney.

Everyone here well knows what ESPN's obligations are. No one is arguing that. hat they are arguing is that the state should end its tax break to ESPN, an organization that is subsidizing the destruction of UConn sports. For the life of me, I can't understand why this is so difficult.

 

[Fishy]

I think we're dealing with some people here who have never seen the ESPN campus...and, not coincidentally, do not know what they're talking about. Moving that campus is laughable - that is easily a ten-figure proposition. You just can't rent out an office park and move ESPN there - this isn't an insurance agency where you just need to set up the phones.

ESPN received a permanent tax break from the state about 12 years ago that was tied to a half-billion dollar expansion of the campus. (It's a million square feet of space on about 130 acres now - it has its own bus line.)

The most recent incentive ESPN received was the state's First Five program that offers loans and incentives to create a piddling number of jobs. ESPN received a loan to expand some digital production facility and if they hire x number of employees, they do not repay a portion of the loan. They also receive $5M or so in tax exemptions.

But their real bread and butter is the state's tax credits for film and production - that's like $35M a year. That tax break is why YES, NBC Sports, etc., are all setting up in Connecticut.

What's perfectly clear is that Connecticut has always created a favorable situation for ESPN - ESPN has frequently mentioned that the state has always created a good environment for their business. This year, around $60,000,000 in incentives will flow from the state of Connecticut to ESPN.

What is also perfectly clear is that ESPN has not reciprocated. ESPN effectively owns the ACC - they have their rights tied from top to bottom. They have repeatedly rewarded their 'house' conference for their persistent raids that destroyed the Big East and largely marginalized UConn athletics. To think that they did not have influence in that process is ignorant.

I have no doubt the state could have exerted some pressure on ESPN as other governments or reps have exerted pressure on various entities in realignment. For whatever reason, they didn't - perhaps electing a Martian as governor is a bad thing.

 

[upstater]

I agree it looks bad on paper when you connect the dots the way you did, but remember that the ESPN tax breaks have nothing to do with Uconn. Those tax breaks are only in place to provide jobs and economy. ESPN is a private business that has every right to add more money to the ACC after they added Pitt and Cuse. If the State of Connecticut decides they do not like the way ESPN is running its private business, they have every right to refuse to renew those tax breaks next time. At which time ESPN would weigh its options and considering moving to Charlotte, LA, etc. These tax breaks are only in place to provide benefits for jobs and economy.

I know it seems unfair that ESPN receives tax breaks and has not helped Uconn, but understand that those tax breaks were not given to ESPN to help benefit Uconn.

We're largely in agreement here. The point we're making is that the state should not subsidize a corporation that is forking over the money to destroy UConn sports. As for ESPN, no--it doesn't need to top off the ACC. It has never done it in the past with its holdings. It simply needs to come up with an extra $17m for each of Pitt, Ville and Cuse. It doesn't need to chip in an extra $45 million a year (which it just did). This creates the perverse conditions in which the ACC has an actual incentive to kill off the BE. Indeed, ESPN could sit on their window with the ACC when the contract comes up. Sure, they may get blown out of the water, but we are now at $20m per team. We are already near the absolute top of a conference that has Wake Forest and BC as members. ESPN has the right of refusal.

 

[upstater]

Just because ESPN isn't benefiting UConn specifically does not mean that ESPN isn't benefiting the state of Connecticut. At a minimum, every person that ESPN employs at its Bristol campus is earning income and, therefore, pays taxes to the state. Many of those people own homes in the state, meaning that they also pay property taxes and support businesses locally (who then can hire their own employees that then earn income and pay taxes to the state, and the cycle continues).

So, the $20 million per year that UConn isn't receiving in TV money by not being in a power conference is a speck of dust compared to what ESPN would be contributing to the state's economy. There's just no comparison. Like I've said, it's a big chunk of change to the UConn athletic department, but it's miniscule compared to the economic impact of having a large employer like ESPN located in your state.

If it's that big, the loss of $15 million a year in subsidy won't hurt them.

 

[upstater]

Realize that tax breaks are given to thousands of businesses each year. They are given for creating new jobs, hiring diversity, producing economy, opening new facilities, expansion, etc. Tax breaks are an important part of business. Many times companies use empty threats about leaving without additional tax breaks, but then every once in a while someone does leave the city and state (ie. Boeing). Can Connecticut afford for ESPN to pack up its bags and leave? Yes, but it would sting a few people. Can Connecticut afford the aftermath of ESPN losing its tax breaks, even if ESPN does not leave? That answer is NO. Connecticut can NOT afford for other businesses to see ESPN lose its tax breaks (which would become very public). When choosing to relocate, expand or start a business, things like location and resources are important. But most important of all is MONEY (gross - expenses = profits - taxes = MONEY). No matter what happens to Uconn is expansion, do not expect Connecticut to even threaten to remove the tax breaks from ESPN. Its all about perception that your state is welcoming businesses to make more money.

ESPN cannot leave.

 

[alsacs]

@Frankthetank I have a question for you if the ACC stayed at 15 and Notre Dame eventually joined the ACC as full members in 2026 or whenever as I have hypothesized. Who do you see the ACC picking for the 16th slot between Cincinnati, Connecticut, or South Florida. Assuming that the ACC kept the 15 it had now and the B1G and SEC remained at 14.

Also, my second question what do you think about this hypothesis I have come with a week ago or so on the Syracusefan board. BTW feel free to use this a hypothesis as I don't know anything and its all speculation on my part.
This is all my opinion and obviously have no support or evidence for this except I think the Big XII is the conference that will get eaten alive. I think 4 team pods are in the future of the B1G, SEC, ACC I don't know when it will happen. My guesses are Texas/Oklahoma, Oklahoma State as the 15th and 16th SEC team, Oklahoma/Texas, Kansas/UConn to the B1G, and Notre Dame and one of WVU/Cincinnati/UConn to the ACC. With the 5/6 leftover Big XII teams forming a new league with UConn/Cincinnati, Temple, USF, UCF, and 1/2 others

SEC pods
Pod 1
Texas/Oklahoma
Texas A&M
Oklahoma State
Missouri

Pod 2
Auburn
Alabama
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

Pod 3
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Kentucky

Pod 4
LSU
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Arkansas

B1G (I don't know how the B1G would do it with UConn instead of Kansas you know that conference better)
Pod 1
Penn State
Rutgers
Maryland
Illinois

Pod 2
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Northwestern

Pod 3
Oklahoma/Texas
Kansas
Nebraska
Iowa

Pod 4
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Purdue
Indiana

ACC
Pod 1
Syracuse
Boston College
Pittsburgh/Connecticut
Notre Dame

Pod 2
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Louisville
Cincinnati/West Virginia/Pittsburgh

Pod 3
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Duke
Wake Forest

Pod 4
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Miami
Clemson

 

[upstater]

I understand the frustration many people are feeling, but I think there is a fine line between ESPN providing Uconn support and ESPN requiring Uconn be included in the ACC. Local businesses support colleges all over the country by provide donations and other support. ESPN may owe it to Uconn to provide donations to the school, buy the weight room and stadium naming rights, and provide interships and jobs. But in my opinion, I think that ESPN would be crossing unethical business barriers if they were to require that Uconn be included in any realignment.

ESPN could have said, bring UConn and everyone gets topped off. It's really that simple. ESPN already does this by telling the conference how much it's willing to pay. This is precisely what the BC AD was referring to in that article.

 

[huskymedic]

... I don't disagree with you, there are just emotional aspects that make you want to drive to Bristol and kick someones .

 

[UPitt]

I think we're dealing with some people here who have never seen the ESPN campus...and, not coincidentally, do not know what they're talking about. Moving that campus is laughable - that is easily a ten-figure proposition. You just can't rent out an office park and move ESPN there - this isn't an insurance agency where you just need to set up the phones.

ESPN received a permanent tax break from the state about 12 years ago that was tied to a half-billion dollar expansion of the campus. (It's a million square feet of space on about 130 acres now - it has its own bus line.)

The most recent incentive ESPN received was the state's First Five program that offers loans and incentives to create a piddling number of jobs. ESPN received a loan to expand some digital production facility and if they hire x number of employees, they do not repay a portion of the loan. They also receive $5M or so in tax exemptions.

But their real bread and butter is the state's tax credits for film and production - that's like $35M a year. That tax break is why YES, NBC Sports, etc., are all setting up in Connecticut.

What's perfectly clear is that Connecticut has always created a favorable situation for ESPN - ESPN has frequently mentioned that the state has always created a good environment for their business. This year, around $60,000,000 in incentives will flow from the state of Connecticut to ESPN.

What is also perfectly clear is that ESPN has not reciprocated. ESPN effectively owns the ACC - they have their rights tied from top to bottom. They have repeatedly rewarded their 'house' conference for their persistent raids that destroyed the Big East and largely marginalized UConn athletics. To think that they did not have influence in that process is ignorant.

I have no doubt the state could have exerted some pressure on ESPN as other governments or reps have exerted pressure on various entities in realignment. For whatever reason, they didn't - perhaps electing a Martian as governor is a bad thing.

Fishy, I feel like I am one of those people you are talking about. I do not think it is practical to pack up ESPN and move it (although just about everyone said the same of Boeing). My earlier quote stated in other words: "Connecticut can afford for ESPN to move (stinging a few people), but Connecticut can NOT afford to get a bad reputation with respect to the tax breaks benefits. Like you said, the tax break is what brings in business (ie. YES, NBC Sports, etc.) My only argument is that the tax break (which is promised) is not tied to ESPN helping to find Uconn an ACC home. I think that everyone should seperate the tax break from equation because it is not related.

If you feel that ESPN has a good relationship with Uconn, the nearby cities, and the state of Connecticut, then by all means you can argue that they should be more supportive of the University. I just don't think you should argue that because they receive tax breaks, they owe it to Uconn. They owe Uconn being a good friend and providing support.

 

[upstater]

Fishy, I feel like I am one of those people you are talking about. I do not think it is practical to pack up ESPN and move it (although just about everyone said the same of Boeing). My earlier quote stated in other words: "Connecticut can afford for ESPN to move (stinging a few people), but Connecticut can NOT afford to get a bad reputation with respect to the tax breaks benefits. Like you said, the tax break is what brings in business (ie. YES, NBC Sports, etc.) My only argument is that the tax break (which is promised) is not tied to ESPN helping to find Uconn an ACC home. I think that everyone should seperate the tax break from equation because it is not related.

If you feel that ESPN has a good relationship with Uconn, the nearby cities, and the state of Connecticut, then by all means you can argue that they should be more supportive of the University. I just don't think you should argue that because they receive tax breaks, they owe it to Uconn. They owe Uconn being a good friend and providing support.

This is maybe the 3rd or 4th time I've said this, but ESPN has been the enemy of UConn. They top off ESPN and create a perverse incentive to destroy the BE. It is not good business.

 

[frankthetank]

ESPN could have said, bring UConn and everyone gets topped off. It's really that simple. ESPN already does this by telling the conference how much it's willing to pay. This is precisely what the BC AD was referring to in that article.

OK, but if ESPN went ahead and did this, does Mitch McConnell let McCain's new a la carte cable legislation get killed in some committee or is he going to let a fairly popular concept that would single-handedly cut off hundreds of millions of dollars (if not *billions* of dollars) of revenue from ESPN's coffers come to the Senate floor for a vote because he's heard that ESPN told the ACC to take UConn instead of Louisville? The current cable structure is why ESPN is the most profitable media entity in the country (if not the world), as I had mentioned in an earlier post. ESPN isn't just dealing with Connecticut politicians in a vacuum here - there are literally *much* bigger fish to fry in that respect.

This is what I'm talking about in the first post that I had on this subject earlier today: someone in your position is going to consider whatever mechanism is used to get UConn into a power conference as inherently good no matter what the broader repercussions might be. I get that from a UConn fan perspective. However, take a big step back and look at the broader picture: the last thing that ESPN can do nationally is to be perceived as pushing one school over another to curry political favor. One political favor in Connecticut can backfire big-time when you suddenly need to lobby the Senate Majority Leader whose alma mater you just directed the ACC to pass over. Regardless of whether you believe that ESPN directly inserted itself into conference realignment, the fact is that "merely" greed will be forgiven in a way that attempting to inserting itself for political reasons simply won't be. I don't think you're quite realizing how awful ESPN and UConn would look nationally if what you wanted to happen had occurred (and it wouldn't be one of those things that would go away as long as guys like McConnell are around).

 

[UPitt]

Upstarter, I saw you mentioned BC and Wake Forest earlier. The ugly part of realignment that frustrates people is the fact that the top 64 Schools will not be included in a 64 team model. Right now the Big 5 conferences have 64 teams plus ND. Assuming ND joins that 65. Do you think Uconn is in the top 65 Schools, Markets, Fan Base, etc? I absolutely do. I think I can safely say that Uconn is in the top 60 and maybe 50 of just about every category you can name (and top 25 or 10 some). What about Pitt? Cuse? Louisville? Cincy? USF? UCF? Houston? I think you can safely say Pitt, Cuse, and Ville are similar to Uconn. Cincy and USF are maybe to 50 in some, but most likely at least the top 60 for most things? UCF, Houston, and a few others would be near the 65 to 75, but I do not expect them to have any impact on realignment.

Uconn is not alone in the frustration of possibly being left out. When it looked like the ACC may be raided I felt the same way. Teams like Baylor would play for championships while Pitt was in a conference with Wake and ECU.

Teams like Wake, BC, Northwestern, Vandy, ISU, Baylor, KSU, Colorado, Utah, and a few others would likely fall in behind Uconn, but many of teams will be saved because their conference survives. I think Uconn should root for TX and OK to take their baby sisters out west and open 5 empty spots on the east coast. I think Uconn would find a home in the ACC or B1G before the remains of the Big 12.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I think we're dealing with some people here who have never seen the ESPN campus...and, not coincidentally, do not know what they're talking about. Moving that campus is laughable - that is easily a ten-figure proposition. You just can't rent out an office park and move ESPN there - this isn't an insurance agency where you just need to set up the phones.

ESPN received a permanent tax break from the state about 12 years ago that was tied to a half-billion dollar expansion of the campus. (It's a million square feet of space on about 130 acres now - it has its own bus line.)

The most recent incentive ESPN received was the state's First Five program that offers loans and incentives to create a piddling number of jobs. ESPN received a loan to expand some digital production facility and if they hire x number of employees, they do not repay a portion of the loan. They also receive $5M or so in tax exemptions.

But their real bread and butter is the state's tax credits for film and production - that's like $35M a year. That tax break is why YES, NBC Sports, etc., are all setting up in Connecticut.

What's perfectly clear is that Connecticut has always created a favorable situation for ESPN - ESPN has frequently mentioned that the state has always created a good environment for their business. This year, around $60,000,000 in incentives will flow from the state of Connecticut to ESPN.

What is also perfectly clear is that ESPN has not reciprocated. ESPN effectively owns the ACC - they have their rights tied from top to bottom. They have repeatedly rewarded their 'house' conference for their persistent raids that destroyed the Big East and largely marginalized UConn athletics. To think that they did not have influence in that process is ignorant.

I have no doubt the state could have exerted some pressure on ESPN as other governments or reps have exerted pressure on various entities in realignment. For whatever reason, they didn't - perhaps electing a Martian as governor is a bad thing.

UCONN needs more elected officials in Hartford, that support the best interests of the University in all matters. I'm pretty sure all it would take is a grassroots movement, among rabid UCONN fans to change things. just need somebody to step up to the plate and get it rollin.......and the politicians in office quaking........

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

Everyone here well knows what ESPN's obligations are. No one is arguing that. hat they are arguing is that the state should end its tax break to ESPN, an organization that is subsidizing the destruction of UConn sports. For the life of me, I can't understand why this is so difficult.

Because ESPN is about 20 times the size of UConn and probably 20 times more important to Connecticut's economy?

 

[SAMCRO]

Uhhhh, no.

Expansion 101 for the B1G/SEC - do not add schools already in your footprint.

SEC already owns FL with U of FL. FSU was NEVER going to the SEC.

Uhhh re-read it. I didn't say the SEC wanted to add FSU, I said the only conference FSU would have left the ACC for was the SEC. Point being, FSU was never interested in the B12 as the WVU board would have the world believe.

 

[frankthetank]

UCONN needs more elected officials in Hartford, that support the best interests of the University in all matters. I'm pretty sure all it would take is a grassroots movement, among rabid UCONN fans to change things. just need somebody to step up to the plate and get it rollin.......and the politicians in office quaking........

This kind of gets into what I stated earlier: do you really have as much political influence as you think that you do (or should have)? Probably not.

One consistent theme in conference realignment is that every fan base overrates their favorite school's position. They overrate how they deliver their home TV market. They overrate how much money they'll bring in. They overrate how much better attendance would be in a better conference. They overrate their political influence with their home state politicians. They overrate the strength of their national brand. They overrate how good their facilities are. Everyone does it. Louisville did it. Syracuse did it. UConn did it. Even Texas did it in thinking that schools like FSU and Clemson would just flock to them for the privilege of third tier TV rights and visiting Austin regularly. That might be OK for fan bases to have a certain level of confidence/cockiness, but the leaders of any schools that have been left behind can't think that way in practice. They need to look at every one of those areas and say, "That's not good enough" and improve on them all across the board. Like I've said previously, UConn's competition isn't Louisville anymore. It's going to be the Big 12 (the most likely power conference to expand within the next decade) looking at Cincinnati... and UNLV with a brand new football palace in the open market of Las Vegas... and a geographically-friendly flagship like New Mexico that has a great basketball fan base with broad state-wide support but has lingering football issues (sound familiar?)... and a school with a worldwide fan base and its own network like BYU. Assuming that "we're next in line" is unbelievably dangerous thinking in this environment - perception can change very quickly. If anyone thought that TCU and Utah were going to have power conference homes 10 years ago, they would have been called nuts. There's always someone out there trying to one-up everyone else in facilities, TV market penetration, attendance, etc.

 

[upstater]

OK, but if ESPN went ahead and did this, does Mitch McConnell let McCain's new a la carte cable legislation get killed in some committee or is he going to let a fairly popular concept that would single-handedly cut off hundreds of millions of dollars (if not *billions* of dollars) of revenue from ESPN's coffers come to the Senate floor for a vote because he's heard that ESPN told the ACC to take UConn instead of Louisville? The current cable structure is why ESPN is the most profitable media entity in the country (if not the world), as I had mentioned in an earlier post. ESPN isn't just dealing with Connecticut politicians in a vacuum here - there are literally *much* bigger fish to fry in that respect.

This is what I'm talking about in the first post that I had on this subject earlier today: someone in your position is going to consider whatever mechanism is used to get UConn into a power conference as inherently good no matter what the broader repercussions might be. I get that from a UConn fan perspective. However, take a big step back and look at the broader picture: the last thing that ESPN can do nationally is to be perceived as pushing one school over another to curry political favor. One political favor in Connecticut can backfire big-time when you suddenly need to lobby the Senate Majority Leader whose alma mater you just directed the ACC to pass over. Regardless of whether you believe that ESPN directly inserted itself into conference realignment, the fact is that "merely" greed will be forgiven in a way that attempting to inserting itself for political reasons simply won't be. I don't think you're quite realizing how awful ESPN and UConn would look nationally if what you wanted to happen had occurred (and it wouldn't be one of those things that would go away as long as guys like McConnell are around).

I said this already. This has happened 3x. Did McConnell insert himself after it happened to Ville and ESPN topped off the ACC? No. ESPN could have made its stance clear LONG ago. It didn't have to do it by telling the ACC anything other than that it would PAY more for UConn. UConn has a bigger market, makes a ton of money on TV rights and licensing (more than Ville). Instead, ESPN topped off the ACC and continued to encourage them to raid the BE by rewarding them each time.

You haven't acknolewdged that even once.

 

[WestHartHusk]

Maybe we just need 'a la carte tv'. We know our bball teams alone will drive tons of revenue in that model that some of these other grandfathered programs can't (looking at you Wake, WSU, OSU, Vandy, NW, BC).

Ugh, so tired of it all. I may just start focusing on hockey, at least there we are in the top league in the nation (and how ironic is that, really!).

 

[upstater]

Because ESPN is about 20 times the size of UConn and probably 20 times more important to Connecticut's economy?

D'Oh? Really? You sure? $300m in private funds come through the university every year, not to mention the residuals from having a higher educated and skilled workforce, that can ATTRACT companies LIKE ESPN BECAUSE of the workforce UConn produces. When the add the public private partnerships like Jackson Labs and the potential for the future (i.e. U. Albany's efforts have created a pool of $15 billion -- yes, billion with a B -- in private investment in the region), and you quickly see how schools are huge economic engines.

 

[The Viking]

ESPN is in our state and we are giving them sweet tax deals. That is why ESPN should value us regarding realignment.
Things get done in back rooms plenty of times, every second of every day. Things that a few visitors to this board apparently deem unethical. this isn't CandyLand folks.
Malloy and a top official from ESPN just need to be in a dark room with no reporters or pens or papers or recording devices, and Malloy just has to make it clear that if ESPN finds room for us in a major conference, Malloy and CT will find a way to spice up ESPN's deal at some point in the near future to make it work for both sides.
ESPN then needs to present offers to a particular conference that wants to expand in UConn's area and make sure that one of the offers would make the conference give pause and may cause them to invite UConn. ESPN isn't FORCING a conference to take UConn, but they're making it a little more financially appealing to the conference.
Wow, how awful.
Now, this was written in all present tense, but this should have been done in past tense over the past couple of years.
Who knows for sure if it has, but nothing has been leaked to make one think that the ACC had a more lucrative offer with UConn included. So I'm guessing it wasn't done.
Am I way out of line with this concept?

 

[ruskin]

Because ESPN is about 20 times the size of UConn and probably 20 times more important to Connecticut's economy?

Loop, I think you're way over-valuing ESPN (and way undervaluing the U). They are about to experience their own version of realignment issues when Fox starts going toe-to-toe with them, with Comcast/NBC Sports right on their heels.