Interesting article from S Fla

[Fishy]

There is zero chance ESPN would sue us. First, they really don't care about the conference tv rights. Second, the very last place ESPN wants to be is in court where they would open themselves to a counter-suit. Discovery has the potential to be a nightmare for them.

Are you delusional? It would take them one second to put their legal peeps into action.

This board has gone duck*ing mad.

The conference can't simply tell ESPN to go duck* off because...

1) ESPN has contractual rights.
2) This s*** storm of a conference freaking needs to be on ESPN.

We can't shop our individual rights because we need a conference. Without a television deal, there is no conference. We're going to sign the ESPN deal because we have no better options.

 

[pj]

There's no need to do anything precipitous. Collect the exit fees and NCAA credits, build up the university so it's more attractive to major conferences, explore options, and in two years pull the trigger on something new. Whether it's B1G or ACC, C7 and football-only affiliation with another conference or independence in football, join the MWC with a Boise-like deal, renegotiate the Big East deal, form a new conference with Houston/SMU/USF/UCF/Navy/Cincy, or something else, start working up credible options. It shouldn't be hard to improve on this deal.

All I can say is: (1) This deal better not have an exit fee. (2) This deal better preserve our Tier 2/3 rights for us to sell independently. If the revenue money is shared equally across schools, there better be a limit on how many home games from individual schools are included in the deal. (3) This deal better be short-term without an option for the network to match offers at the next go-round.

 

[upstater]

There's no need to do anything precipitous. Collect the exit fees and NCAA credits, build up the university so it's more attractive to major conferences, explore options, and in two years pull the trigger on something new. Whether it's B1G or ACC, C7 and football-only affiliation with another conference or independence in football, join the MWC with a Boise-like deal, renegotiate the Big East deal, form a new conference with Houston/SMU/USF/UCF/Navy/Cincy, or something else, start working up credible options. It shouldn't be hard to improve on this deal.

Essentially, you're highlighting why there are no other options. C7 would kill football and doom the school forever, MWC won't take them because why would anyone want to travel cross-country to Storrs regularly (for what?), and I don't understand the last: why forma new conference with the same people in the current conference?

 

[pj]

Essentially, you're highlighting why there are no other options. C7 would kill football and doom the school forever, MWC won't take them because why would anyone want to travel cross-country to Storrs regularly (for what?), and I don't understand the last: why forma new conference with the same people in the current conference?

(1): Just as Navy, San Diego State, and Boise State had football only options, UConn would too. A C7 for all sports and other conference (nBE?) for football would be an improvement on the current deal. If we go football only in the NBE, we're obviously better off. If it's OK to let Navy be football only, why wouldn't it be OK to let UConn? So we don't lose anything.
(2) I admit the MWC part is doubtful, but not so much as you think -- MWC teams have god-awful travel as it is, UConn is not terribly more expensive or longer to fly to than many MWC destinations, and the MWC might like northeast TV exposure -- but I was using the MWC as a stand-in for any of the second-tier conferences. For example, the MAC might give us a preferential deal like Boise got in the MWC. $3 mn for bball + $2 mn for fball would be more than double what the proposed contract gives for all sports.
(3) Why form a new conference? Because Aresco designed the old conference to go to 12 to have a conference championship game assuming that would increase revenue. It's now been proven that it doesn't, in fact the dilution from worthless programs is more negative than a championship game is positive. If we take the best 7 teams, have a 6-game conference schedule, and schedule more marquee OOC games with ACC/B1G/SEC/Pac/B12 teams, we'll generate far more TV revenue, far more gate revenue, and be far more visible on the national scene.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I remember how giddy Marinatto was when the last contract was signed (what at the time was 60 cents on the dollar the the ACC was earning) believing the BE hit some sort of lottery. Limited vision due to small minded thinking and too narrow of a future picture destroyed this conference on every level possible.

 

[upstater]

(1): Just as Navy, San Diego State, and Boise State had football only options, UConn would too. A C7 for all sports and other conference (nBE?) for football would be an improvement on the current deal. If we go football only in the NBE, we're obviously better off. If it's OK to let Navy be football only, why wouldn't it be OK to let UConn? So we don't lose anything.
(2) I admit the MWC part is doubtful, but not so much as you think -- MWC teams have god-awful travel as it is, UConn is not terribly more expensive or longer to fly to than many MWC destinations, and the MWC might like northeast TV exposure -- but I was using the MWC as a stand-in for any of the second-tier conferences. For example, the MAC might give us a preferential deal like Boise got in the MWC. $3 mn for bball + $2 mn for fball would be more than double what the proposed contract gives for all sports.
(3) Why form a new conference? Because Aresco designed the old conference to go to 12 to have a conference championship game assuming that would increase revenue. It's now been proven that it doesn't, in fact the dilution from worthless programs is more negative than a championship game is positive. If we take the best 7 teams, have a 6-game conference schedule, and schedule more marquee OOC games with ACC/B1G/SEC/Pac/B12 teams, we'll generate far more TV revenue, far more gate revenue, and be far more visible on the national scene.

1. The difference between the schools you listed and UConn are many. one, SD St and Boise only wanted to be football only because of travel for other sports including bball. Navy doesn't compete well in bball because of height restrictions. And one of the main attractions for the CUSA schools coming to the BE is the chance to compete against UConn bball.

2. if you reduce UConn to Mac-level football, you'll kill off football. The CUSA teams entering the conference other than Tulane all have something more to offer than every Mac school.

3. Those are details that are not in evidence yet. We simply don't know what the make up will be.

 

[mcs333]

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8977673/big-east-conference-espn-agree-tv-rights-deal
Will broadcast 65 FB games and 150+ BB games each year. 7 years for BB, 6 years for FB.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The presidents can opt not to sign a television contract and broadcast the games via smoke signal.

The right to match is a right to match.

But the right to match only applies to a deal the league would accept from another network. Have the Presidents accepted the NBC bid? If so this is done. If not we might be better off letting each team sell its rights ala carte.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[CL82]

Are you delusional? It would take them one second to put their legal peeps into action.I doubt it. It would open the door to the BE exploring whether ESPN acted in bad faith. Why would they do that? To buy the rights to games they are never going to broadcast? It would never happen.

This board has gone duck*ing mad.

The conference can't simply tell ESPN to go duck* off because...

1) ESPN has contractual rights. ..to match the NBC offer. Once they changed the terms, it becomes debatable whether they've done that.
2) This s*** storm of a conference freaking needs to be on ESPN. Yes it does, but this deal is no guarantee that will be. Being on ESPN3 with every other third rate conference is death to us.

We can't shop our individual rights because we need a conference. Without a television deal, there is no conference. There still would be but it would effectively be a scheduling alliance. We're going to sign the ESPN deal because we have no better options. Yep.

 

[Jimdish255]

Insanity is how I define the current situation we find ourselves in. Seriously, how the hell did this happen?

If only the fans had gotten to their seats on time none of this would have happened!

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The smart move is to reject the contract. The emotional move is to accept it because we think we have no options.