It's ESPN

[Palatine]

UConn would be in another conference if they had backing in Bristol. But Bristol is not in UConn's corner in any way. You can be sure Wade and Herbst did everything they could but that added up to zip. One word from the worldwide leader on our behalf would have made a huge difference.

What's really sad is that Connecticut's politicians yield zero political leverage at ESPN. Of course, Connecticut's politicians spend most of their time digging out of holes they have created themselves. Who has time to help UConn?

 

[Deepster]

Huh?

a) How or why would ESPN's say factor into the decision?
b) Why should CT politicians have any leverage at ESPN?

Basically you're saying the CT politicians should strong arm ESPN who would, in turn, strong arm the ACC?

 

[Palatine]

Huh?

a) How or why would ESPN's say factor into the decision?
b) Why should CT politicians have any leverage at ESPN?

Basically you're saying the CT politicians should strong arm ESPN who would, in turn, strong arm the ACC?

a. Because they control match ups, television money, they shape perceptions and have a direct line to all the commissioners.
b. Because politicians in every state in America have a direct line to the major businesses and employers in that state, they share interests, one hand washes the other.

NO, that is not what I am saying. I'm saying they have no influence, which I believe is self-evident.

 

[suzyq]

Huh?

a) How or why would ESPN's say factor into the decision?
b) Why should CT politicians have any leverage at ESPN?

Basically you're saying the CT politicians should strong arm ESPN who would, in turn, strong arm the ACC?

I think RosaDeLauro should do the Sunday NFL show.

 

[Palatine]

I think RosaDeLauro should do the Sunday NFL show.

Better for "free diapers DeLauro" to do that than sit in Congress.

 

[Pudge]

Palatine is right.

The State gave Tax PILOT & grants to this business; but, Malloy, Blumenthal et al never looked them in the eye & said: get us in.

I'd f----- them Bigtime. They're vested & they, like DeFillippo said call the shots behind the scene. Raise their Assessment 400%.

 

[Dogdeacon]

You guys are reaching. Exactly who (and be specific) is the 'they' at espn? Who (again be specific) do they petition at the ACC on UConn's behalf? Are they certain this won't get out (wouldn't you ultimately have to talk to everyone at the voting table!?) and thereafter jeopardize their journalistic integrity (am I the first to use this phrase and espn in same sentence ?

I think ESPN does make a subtle effort not to be UConn homers because they are in the state. But ESPN has zero hand in negotiating conference realignments other than being one of the bidders for games.

Tax credits are very common for larger companies in smaller areas. The company saves money, the municipality gets jobs and ultimately more tax revenue via the economic boost. It is not two guys sitting down arranging a quid pro quo that says OK, here are your tax credits but after this you agree to do us a favor, this day may never come etc... A million reasons why that can't happen.

Lastly, in contrast to this point IF ESPN were to approach someone at the ACC on UConn's behalf (and the only legit reason would be its cheaper/more efficient for ESPN to cover/broadcast UConn) the very first thing the ACC rep would say would be; "Will you give us more $ in exchange for adding UConn?"

 

[Deepster]

It's Stu Scott's fault! He went to North Carolina! He got ESPN to put Louisville in the ACC!!!

Oh, and the sky is falling!

 

[Dogdeacon]

It's Stu Scott's fault! He went to North Carolina! He got ESPN to put Louisville in the ACC!!!

Oh, and the sky is falling!

That knee jerk reaction is closer to the mark. I went too far into rationale analysis.

The conference realignment boards were a necessary still-birth from the vapid world of conference shifting. Almost because schools move conferences for questionable, money only reasons there is a need to fill the void with vast strategic conspiracies to make sense of the nonsense.

Even if its not entirely true, I like what Herbst said recently about putting students first and I liked UNC saying that they never intend to leave the ACC. Might be too late for UConn to do the same as the BE isn't the BE anymore. But UNC clearly recognizes its 'brand' is the ACC despite recent additions eroding that brand. UNC understands if they went say Big Ten or whatever their rivalries and identity would suffer. Even if you are 100% cynical, it is at least a happy coincidence that this identity enhances UNC for their students. Not coincidentally this is part of why BC athletics stink right now, they are in a conference that has almost nothing to do with their culture.

 

[BeanTownBob]

You guys are reaching. Exactly who (and be specific) is the 'they' at espn? Who (again be specific) do they petition at the ACC on UConn's behalf? Are they certain this won't get out (wouldn't you ultimately have to talk to everyone at the voting table!?) and thereafter jeopardize their journalistic integrity (am I the first to use this phrase and espn in same sentence ?

I think ESPN does make a subtle effort not to be UConn homers because they are in the state. But ESPN has zero hand in negotiating conference realignments other than being one of the bidders for games.

Tax credits are very common for larger companies in smaller areas. The company saves money, the municipality gets jobs and ultimately more tax revenue via the economic boost. It is not two guys sitting down arranging a quid pro quo that says OK, here are your tax credits but after this you agree to do us a favor, this day may never come etc... A million reasons why that can't happen.

Lastly, in contrast to this point IF ESPN were to approach someone at the ACC on UConn's behalf (and the only legit reason would be its cheaper/more efficient for ESPN to cover/broadcast UConn) the very first thing the ACC rep would say would be; "Will you give us more $ in exchange for adding UConn?"

ESPN has a major hand in the conference realignment and it is directly associated with being the only major bidder in the game. Despite what type of tv deal any conference gets you are not going to grab an exclusive contract with CBS, NBC, or FOX unless they also have a significant number of games on a smaller affiliated network that has insignificant viewership. Are we forgetting that ESPN is a Disney/ABC company?

They are THE sports news juggernaut and mold country-wide perceptions in sports. What other network even comes remotely close? None. Now im not claiming some wild conspiracy theory but there are certainly some issues at play here. For example, BE football coverage is almost nonexistent on ESPN. I'm not talking about games (because they are contracted to show them this year) but on every major CFB show ESPN has there is next to zero coverage. I know currently there is not much to talk about but I am referring to the period this year when the BE had 3 teams in the top 25, more than the Big Ten and ACC. Yet still no coverage at all.

Ever wonder why the NHL (while they were playing) gets almost ZERO coverage on sportscenter or why ESPN doesnt have its own NHL show in season like every other major sport (even soccer)? Thats because the NHL does not have a contract with the NHL for games. Their hand is forced to put some highlights on because it is a major sport but the percentage of time spent on the NHL is little to nothing.

Lastly, ESPN has been pushing for the major upheaval of conferences for sometime. Does everyone forget that the recent ESPN-ACC deal (prior to Pitt/Syracuse defection) included a provision that gave significantly more money to the ACC if it added two or more teams to its conference. There are other rumors of Pitt being influenced by ESPN during the last BE TV negotiations, but I have no information to credibly stand behind that. However, ESPN is clearly in a position of strength and can easily dictate the college sports landscape.

 

[Pudge]

You're naive.

There was truth in what BCs Gene D. said. Even if he's a moron. Then ... Just look at what motivates Delaney. Cable is the game.

 

[selles]

That knee jerk reaction is closer to the mark. I went too far into rationale analysis.

The conference realignment boards were a necessary still-birth from the vapid world of conference shifting. Almost because schools move conferences for questionable, money only reasons there is a need to fill the void with vast strategic conspiracies to make sense of the nonsense.

Even if its not entirely true, I like what Herbst said recently about putting students first and I liked UNC saying that they never intend to leave the ACC. Might be too late for UConn to do the same as the BE isn't the BE anymore. But UNC clearly recognizes its 'brand' is the ACC despite recent additions eroding that brand. UNC understands if they went say Big Ten or whatever their rivalries and identity would suffer. Even if you are 100% cynical, it is at least a happy coincidence that this identity enhances UNC for their students. Not coincidentally this is part of why BC athletics stink right now, they are in a conference that has almost nothing to do with their culture.

You're right about conference shifts not having the per se impact on the quality of product on the field that people are taking as a given on this day of panic.

But I think you're wrong about everything else. ESPN has a lot of money invested, it's absurd to think they just sit back and watch everything play out without any sort of backroom role. Heck, DeFilippo came out and said "ESPN told us what to do" during the last round of expansion.

And while I'm sure all other things being equal UNC would prefer to remain in a healthy, strong ACC, if FSU/Clemson bolt and it's possible within their political landscape, watch how fast UNC rolls on to the B1G or SEC. It's horrible for college sports, but the reality is that it's one big prisoner's dilemna right now, and no one (except maybe - maybe - ND) is exempt.

 

[CTBasketball]

Ever since the Big East turned down ESPN's TV deal the writing has been on the wall.

 

[Dogdeacon]

You're right about conference shifts not having the per se impact on the quality of product on the field that people are taking as a given on this day of panic.

But I think you're wrong about everything else. ESPN has a lot of money invested, it's absurd to think they just sit back and watch everything play out without any sort of backroom role. Heck, DeFilippo came out and said "ESPN told us what to do" during the last round of expansion.

And DeFilippo immediately apologized for that comment and backtracked.
http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/football/articles/2011/10/12/bcs_defilippo_issues_apology/
Notwithstanding the apology, I think DeFilippo simply implied too much when he said; "they told us what to do". Most likely BC called and asked what they should do and took ESPN's advice to heart = he should have said; "we asked ESPN what we should do and because their coverage and resulting revenues are important, their recommendation to move to ACC confirmed our reasoning."
ESPN and conferences/schools can and do certainly have conversations and its absolutely worthwhile and likely that someone at the ACC (or BC) calls someone at ESPN and asks what they think and what XX team [sic school] will mean in terms of $ and coverage. I question the assertion that this is done proactively by ESPN and that ESPN picks teams for various conferences based on secret agendas. Again, give me a who does this at ESPN and exactly who this person talks to at the ACC to assure necessary votes? I'm simply saying one due diligence guy at a school or the ACC offices calls ESPN and gets an opinion saying what their viewership and advertising revenues are with various teams/schools and this (picking highest eyeballs/$) is ONE of the factors weighed by each school in casting votes for what school to pick. Not as sexy as a vast conspiracy and mostly reliant on facts or projections based on facts.

 

[UConnJim]

ESPN could have said to the ACC, add UConn and we increase the payout. Add Louisville, no increase. Connecticut has given tax breaks to ESPN that would more than pay for an increase in the ACC payout.

 

[businesslawyer]

Palatine is right.

The State gave Tax PILOT & grants to this business; but, Malloy, Blumenthal et al never looked them in the eye & said: get us in.

I'd f----- them Bigtime. They're vested & they, like DeFillippo said call the shots behind the scene. Raise their Assessment 400%.

I'd simply say "you're right" but I want to go further. Based on Malloy's silence after Flippers public "we engaged in clear Sherman Act violations and ESPN was behind it" statement, Malloy must have talked to ESPN. And I fully believe that Malloy and Herbst, based on conversations with ESPN and either the ACC offices or member institutions, determined that they were being added and told the Big East that. And then weren't.

I have no other explanation.

 

[Palatine]

ESPN has a role.

ESPN could help UConn's cause or not.

They are obviously not interested in helping UConn in any way.

If past rumors are true, they have actively hurt UConn and promoted other universities.

The fact ESPN is a Connecticut based company and that neither politicians nor the state university has any influence is pathetic.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Malloy is such a clown. How corporate welfare are we giving ESPN? $150 million? Close the budget that way.

 

[Dogdeacon]

ESPN has a role.

ESPN could help UConn's cause or not.

They are obviously not interested in helping UConn in any way.

If past rumors are true, they have actively hurt UConn and promoted other universities.

The fact ESPN is a Connecticut based company and that neither politicians nor the state university has any influence is pathetic.

Who, what, where, when and why - still no specifics? The argument that ESPN got tax breaks and therefore should reward UConn is only relevant if those tax breaks were contingent upon helping UConn which is at best hindsight but mostly unrealistic (i.e. what's the purpose of the tax break if you then give it back by picking less revenue, since ESPN doesn't directly control any conference writing an influence clause into a tax abatement is practically impossible, tax break is from a city/county not the state of CT etc..).

What about that fact that ABC/Disney owns ESPN?

People at ESPN are obligated to do what's best for ESPN and if advocating for UConn isn't that then why the fuss? Please return to blaming Herbst or Manuel. I heard that Manuel proposed a 7-month trial period for UConn in the ACC and they threw him out of the room.

 

[Palatine]

Malloy should call John Skipper today.

Yes, the horse is gone from the barn but he should at the very least make it known he is displeased.