NY Post: BE Basketball holds key to TV | Page 2 | The Boneyard

NY Post: BE Basketball holds key to TV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Waquoit said:
Teams have to win. The PAC-10 was on SC all the time when their games were Fox. Couple of years ago it was Jimmer time on SC even though his games were on CBS College Network.
Expand ...
Yeah, even ESPN doesn't have enough hubris to think it can exclude teams from its SC coverage simply because they don't own the broadcasting rights.
 
mcs333 said:
I agree there is a leap of faith. NBC sports is not ESPN. But remember in the mid 90's CNN dominated cable news. Fox news came along and slowly cut into CNN viewership. Now Fox news viewership is 4.5X that of CNN. I am not saying NBC will do this to ESPN but what I am saying I'd that NBC has a lot of room to grow. The BE would just need to win and viewership would sig. improve.
Expand ...

for the longest time ESPN, like CNN, was the only game in town and they took advantage. i know they've lost a lot of luster for me and others, and not just because they don't support the BE the way i'd like, but b/c there's better options in general. if i want quick i check the internet, if I want genuine good quality i read SI, for NFL coverage i prefer the NFL network, and pretty soon for college football games I'll check NBCsports I guess

on a somewhat separate issue, i think it's funny that by being NBC-mates (assuming we go there) with ND, the BE now has more in common with them than we did before all the raids that were meant to squash the BE and force ND's hand. now it looks like we may be united with them against a common enemy:ESPN
 
Marty Jackson said:
Are you saying that in BB people don't care about the teams? That the Uconn brand is on par with Fordham?
I have to disagree with that line of logic.
Expand ...
Marty,
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that you could easily fill the time slot with other games. Would UMass-Fordham draw what UConn-St Johns does? In an average weeknight game, probably not. But I think they'd draw reasonably well, and you could get that one for much less. If you have to pay say $6 million for the Big East but can get the A-10 for $1 million, which I think you could, I'm not sure it makes sense to break the bank for the big East because I doubt that Big East basketball, or any basketball for that matter is going to draw that well as to justify such big numbers. On the other hand, if the big East is so desirable that it is worth those kind of dollars for basketball, it seems pretty unlikely that a move to NBCSports, especially for more money, would be damaging to the conference? Either the big East brings the fans and they'll follow it where ever it lands, or the Big East is simply the beneficiary of ESPN's following to a large extent, and should really take whatever it is offered to stay there. another way of putting it is "Is Big East basketball a creation of ESPN or is it valuable in its own right?"
 
uconnell, that is a possibility too, but the problem from the Big East's perspective is that ESPN has grown to the point where it can do quite well without the Big East. The question is can the Big East do as well without ESPN? by the way, I happen to think it will be fine on NBC. Better football coverage and solid basketball. Maybe a weekend game on NBC, plus regular coverage on NBCSports and the other NBC properties, and regional coverage on various cablevision properties for "lesser" games which don't have national interest. Providence Seton Hall could still be televised in Rhode Island and Bayonnne, while UConn-Louisville is on the Monday Game of the Week on NBCSports. And if the Big East has 10 teams going to the NCAA tourney each year, Sports Center will cover it. If UConn is ranked #1 and Louisville is #3, they'll report on that game in a big way, too...or they will simply lose any credibility they might have.
 
Putting NBE basketball on NBCSports would be a mistake. Not on as many cable systems as ESPN.
 
.-.
Fishy said:
If the gap is millions, there's nothing to do, but hold their noses and pack up for channel 408.

Won't be particularly convenient or pleasant for fan bases and there'll be some withering on the vine when recruits of all stripes find out that Sportscenter is joining the moon as something they will never be on, but money is money.
Expand ...

Within 2-3 years, all the sports channels will be in a row on every cable/ATT/satellite provider. Wait a minute...they already are.

It amazes me that some people would prefer to be on ESPN even if the money is the same. ESPN's goal is to reduce the amount of content they have to pay for in the future. The last thing they want to do is give exposure to yet another league. The only reason ESPN is going to bid up for the Big East is so they can box NBC out forever and then drown the Big East in the bathtub.
 
nelson, I agree. And I don't know about other cable providers, but with mine, ESPN is like 605,608 and 612 for 2 and U and NBCSports is 610. Not a heck of a lot of difference...and it isn't like I have any Super package. And it isn't like I have to push fewer buttons, though that can be a trial...
 
Maybe if NBCU weren't such gigantic d-bags about rebroadcast of highlights...maybe then the MWC games they've had would be on ESPN highlights more. Why do you think their games are never on ESPN3/GamePlan? It's not like ESPN doesn't want to put those games online.

Where is NBC's internet option to watch those games? It doesn't exist. If they had one, if they had any internet/mobile infrastructure to speak of, at ALL, I could get their point. But they don't have one. They're just isolationist.

How is that good? How is that better for ANYBODY?

Take a look at the BeINSport situation. The leagues got a whole lot more cash, but the fans are furious. No internet option, and it's on TV in far, far, far fewer homes than Gol or FSC.
 
zls44 said:
Maybe if NBCU weren't such gigantic d-bags about rebroadcast of highlights...maybe then the MWC games they've had would be on ESPN highlights more. Why do you think their games are never on ESPN3/GamePlan? It's not like ESPN doesn't want to put those games online.

Where is NBC's internet option to watch those games? It doesn't exist. If they had one, if they had any internet/mobile infrastructure to speak of, at ALL, I could get their point. But they don't have one. They're just isolationist.

How is that good? How is that better for ANYBODY?

Take a look at the BeINSport situation. The leagues got a whole lot more cash, but the fans are furious. No internet option, and it's on TV in far, far, far fewer homes than Gol or FSC.
Expand ...

Good point. And the ESPN "partnership" has been tremendous for the Big East so far.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Good point. And the ESPN "partnership" has been tremendous for the Big East so far.
Expand ...

Yeah, the last 30 years have really sucked. Especially the part where they have broadcast every conference basketball game for the past 6 years.

But they went from Rutgers-Louisville on Thursday nights to major programs, how dare they try and get higher ratings and better teams. How dare they not cater to you.
 
.-.
hey ZLS do you have the authority at ESPN to fire Mike Greenberg and bring back Tony Bruno?
 
specialisthusky said:
hey ZLS do you have the authority at ESPN to fire Mike Greenberg and bring back Tony Bruno?
Expand ...

I don't have any authority. Sorry.

I'm guessing this is based on Santini's absurd accusation that where I work clouds my judgement. The best thing for my career would be for NBC, CBS, Fox to become a competitor. More jobs in a specialized industry increases opportunity as well as salaries.
 
I think that we can all agree that if ESPN is the highest bidder, that we will be happy to go back to ESPN. Of course, I said "I think that we can all agree"...
 
mcs333 said:
I agree there is a leap of faith. NBC sports is not ESPN. But remember in the mid 90's CNN dominated cable news. Fox news came along and slowly cut into CNN viewership. Now Fox news viewership is 4.5X that of CNN. I am not saying NBC will do this to ESPN but what I am saying I'd that NBC has a lot of room to grow. The BE would just need to win and viewership would sig. improve.
Expand ...


All conservatives watch Fox News because it panders to conservatives. Everyone else is divided among all the other news stations. You know, the ifidel stations.

This situation is different. College football fans will watch live major college football over filler when it's available regardless of network.
 
Seems to me that NBC had internet coverage for the Olympics, so it isn't as if they never heard of that platform...
 
Hoophound said:
All conservatives watch Fox News because it panders to conservatives. Everyone else is divided among all the other news stations. You know, the ifidel stations.

This situation is different. College football fans will watch live major college football over filler when it's available regardless of network.
Expand ...

No, conservatives watch Fox News because doesn't have wacko up the leg thrill guys and shrill chicks yelling crazy stuff and foreign guys with their pompus attitudes and black guys claiming niggerezation.
 
.-.
Husky68 said:
No, conservatives watch Fox News because doesn't have wacko up the leg thrill guys and shrill chicks yelling crazy stuff and foreign guys with their pompus attitudes and black guys claiming niggerezation.
Expand ...
No, it just has pompous white guys, by golly. Reglar Americans...and of course guys who make stuff up...but this probably belongs in the cesspool, not here.
 
freescooter said:
Seems to me that NBC had internet coverage for the Olympics, so it isn't as if they never heard of that platform...
Expand ...

ZLS already stated in another thread that NBC didn't broadcast Notre Dame games online... but they've broadcast every game they've had rights too (home games) for the last two years on the web and iPhone. NBC seems to have a pretty decent online setup. They did the Olympics, they did the Tour De France... they offer additional coverage with their Sunday Night Football broadcast... I think this is a non-issue. NBC Sports definitely has an adequate online presence.
 
UConnDan97 said:
I knew this was going to come up, and I guess I should have put it in parentheses as a "I know, I know....Syracuse." I thought that my addition of the name Memphis in the Final Four on that post was enough to let everyone know that I was talking about the Big East going forward, but perhaps not.

Just like the Big East can no longer talk about our football championship with Miami, we can probably no longer talk about Syracuse with Carmelo...
Expand ...
I assumed that was the case.
I don't agree though. The acc had nothing to do with that NC.
The notion of re-writing history so it aligns with football realignment is silly.
 
freescooter said:
Marty,
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that you could easily fill the time slot with other games. Would UMass-Fordham draw what UConn-St Johns does? In an average weeknight game, probably not. But I think they'd draw reasonably well, and you could get that one for much less. If you have to pay say $6 million for the Big East but can get the A-10 for $1 million, which I think you could, I'm not sure it makes sense to break the bank for the big East because I doubt that Big East basketball, or any basketball for that matter is going to draw that well as to justify such big numbers. On the other hand, if the big East is so desirable that it is worth those kind of dollars for basketball, it seems pretty unlikely that a move to NBCSports, especially for more money, would be damaging to the conference? Either the big East brings the fans and they'll follow it where ever it lands, or the Big East is simply the beneficiary of ESPN's following to a large extent, and should really take whatever it is offered to stay there. another way of putting it is "Is Big East basketball a creation of ESPN or is it valuable in its own right?"
Expand ...
There is value to Uconn over umass. More often than not,Uconn will have national implications.
There are x number of MLB teams (lost track so someone I'm sure will tell me)... Similar to BB, there is an over abundance of games. Would you rather televise the Yankees or the brewers. In your example Uconn is a lot closer to the yankees while the brewers could be Fordham. Sure people will watch the brewers. But the money is with the Yankees.
And it's not just the regular season. Unless the BET is being bid out separately, that's a hefty draw with almost guaranteed nationally ranked teams in feb/march...
 
If its 2006 again and the BE has Rutgers, UofL and USF or Cincy in the top 10, I don't care if we're on NBC or ESPN. People will watch the games. Same way they did back then.
 
UConnDan97 said:
I think that we can all agree that if ESPN is the highest bidder, that we will be happy to go back to ESPN. Of course, I said "I think that we can all agree"...
Expand ...

It would dpend on the numbers and terms.
 
.-.
Marty Jackson said:
There is value to Uconn over umass. More often than not,Uconn will have national implications.
There are x number of MLB teams (lost track so someone I'm sure will tell me)... Similar to BB, there is an over abundance of games. Would you rather televise the Yankees or the brewers. In your example Uconn is a lot closer to the yankees while the brewers could be Fordham. Sure people will watch the brewers. But the money is with the Yankees.
And it's not just the regular season. Unless the BET is being bid out separately, that's a hefty draw with almost guaranteed nationally ranked teams in feb/march...
Expand ...
Don't entirely disagree, but my main point was that thinking that big East basketball was going to be the leading money maker is a mistake. Yes it is valuable, but it isn't so valuable that at some point it can't be replaced. And that is especially true in dealing with ESPN. While UMass-Fordham won't generate the audience and thus the advertizing dollars of UConn-St Johns, it won't be nearly as costly to acquire either. And I'm not certain that the distinction is that great except in the Tournament.
 
freescooter said:
Don't entirely disagree, but my main point was that thinking that big East basketball was going to be the leading money maker is a mistake. Yes it is valuable, but it isn't so valuable that at some point it can't be replaced. And that is especially true in dealing with ESPN. While UMass-Fordham won't generate the audience and thus the advertizing dollars of UConn-St Johns, it won't be nearly as costly to acquire either. And I'm not certain that the distinction is that great except in the Tournament.
Expand ...
I guess I just disagree on your notion that people will watch umass vs Fordham if that's the option provided. Unless both schools were ranked, I think they would watch something else.
 
Marty Jackson said:
I guess I just disagree on your notion that people will watch umass vs Fordham if that's the option provided. Unless both schools were ranked, I think they would watch something else.
Expand ...

I also don't believe that casual fans would watch UMass vs Fordham.
 
The alternative isn't Fordham and UMass. It's extra SEC, ACC, Big 10 and Big 12 games. It's still Big Monday if it's Big 10 and Big 12 instead of Big East and Big 12. Big East-ACC Wednesday just becomes SEC-ACC Wednesday.
 
freescooter said:
No, it just has pompous white guys, by golly. Reglar Americans...and of course guys who make stuff up...but this probably belongs in the cesspool, not here.
Expand ...

Yeah, that refugee from NPR is mighty white. And I guess Geraldo is a white hispanic like Zimmerman.
 
whaler11 said:
The alternative isn't Fordham and UMass. It's extra SEC, ACC, Big 10 and Big 12 games. It's still Big Monday if it's Big 10 and Big 12 instead of Big East and Big 12. Big East-ACC Wednesday just becomes SEC-ACC Wednesday.
Expand ...
Right. and you just fill in the blanks with the A-10. But if you wanted to do it, I suspect you could "make" the A-10 a major conference simply by pushing it on ESPN. But again, the bottom line point is that the Big East basketball league is more of an extra benefit. Nobody is going to pay $5-6 million just for that. There are too many alternatives.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,287
Messages
4,561,455
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom