The Days of Bundlers (networks and cable/satellite providers) Are Nearing an End

[itgoeslike]

But NYC has forever had televised college football and outside of Notre Dame generally gets yawns. Rutgers joining the Big 10 does nothing in the city. Piscataway may as well be on the moon to someone who lives in Manhattan and isn't an RU grad or from North Jersey.

Yes, but it's not the right product. When it's disparate you're not going to get that much traction. You might as well be showing curling on Saturday afternoons. I don't necessarily disagree about Rutgers. All the Rutgers alum I knew lived in New Jersey and commuted into the city, some from as far south as Princeton. But, they are a piece of the puzzle.

Good product and consistency is the key. If the Big Ten (or ACC in basketball) had the Game of the Week in NYC, i.e., UCONN, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska playing conference games or games against high profile OOC opponents in NYC, they would get some mind share. This interest would spill over into regional games. Presently, neither the Big Ten or ACC has is a vehicle to build knowledge, association, or an emotional connection with NYC viewers.

Look at Big East basketball. It was able to achieve a level of critical mass with St. Johns, Seton Hall, Syracuse, UCONN, Notre Dame, PITT, etc. As a result, the Big East Championship drew a large non-alumni following.

 

[zls44]

I have verizon fios and I pay about $110-120 per month for internet (25mb) and tv together, 2 HD boxes one being a DVR. I pay $3-4 a month for a land line through ooma.
We have espn3 because of fios. The quality is average at best and annoying at worst. I can seamlessly stream large youtube videos, but for whatever reason run into issues with espn3. It was great 2 years ago but has gone downhill since then. It's sometimes bad enough that I'll just watch the game from an overseas web site that's not so legal, but at least has a consistent picture. Until consistent HD streaming is available, I wouldn't make the switch.

That is a FIOS issue, not an ESPN issue.

 

[woomba]

Good product and consistency is the key. If the Big Ten (or ACC in basketball) had the Game of the Week in NYC, i.e., UCONN, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska playing conference games or games against high profile OOC opponents, they would get some mind share. This interest would spill over into regional games. Presently, neither the Big Ten or ACC has is a vehicle to build knowledge, association, or an emotional connection with NYC viewers.

There's no way the Big Ten will do a weekly neutral game in NYC for FB - you're then asking every single conference member to forego a home game. The Big Ten's planning something similar but it'll be a single annual game played in NYC played early in the season

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Not sure why thinking NYC isn't interested in college football is doom and gloom. It's a pro sports city and there isn't a school there.

Putting Rutgers in the Big 10 changes nothing in NYC.

Thinking NYC isn't interested in college football isn't particularly gloom and doom. Assuming that the future will be gloomy because the past was is.

 

[itgoeslike]

There's no way the Big Ten will do a weekly neutral game in NYC for FB - you're then asking every single conference member to forego a home game. The Big Ten's planning something similar but it'll be a single annual game played in NYC played early in the season

Nobody suggested a weekly neutral game in NYC, except you.

I'll explain in a little more detail. This package could be anchored by 4-6 conference games played at Yankee Stadium and Northern NJ venues. The home teams could be UCONN, Rutgers, Maryland and Penn State. The revenue split could be adjusted for these games. In addition, other conference games could be crafted, i.e., Nebraska/Wisconsin (and other Western teams) could agree to a NYC game to gain a presence in the market. There could be 1 or 2 neutral games annually that pit a B1G school against a top team from another conference, i.e., Michigan/Notre Dame, Ohio State/Texas, etc. The balance of the games could be regional conference match ups (which would get a bump) or high profile conference match ups played in other parts of the country, i.e., Michigan/Ohio State.

What you are thinking and what I am proposing are two different things.

 

[whaler11]

Yes, but it's not the right product. When it's disparate you're not going to get that much traction. You might as well be showing curling on Saturday afternoons. I don't necessarily disagree about Rutgers. All the Rutgers alum I knew lived in New Jersey and commuted into the city, some from as far south as Princeton. But, they are a piece of the puzzle.

Good product and consistency is the key. If the Big Ten (or ACC in basketball) had the Game of the Week in NYC, i.e., UCONN, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska playing conference games or games against high profile OOC opponents in NYC, they would get some mind share. This interest would spill over into regional games. Presently, neither the Big Ten or ACC has is a vehicle to build knowledge, association, or an emotional connection with NYC viewers.

Look at Big East basketball. It was able to achieve a level of critical mass with St. Johns, Seton Hall, Syracuse, UCONN, Notre Dame, PITT, etc. As a result, the Big East Championship drew a large non-alumni following.

If there was a team in NYC sure they would move the needle. There isn't and I really can't see a conference playing many neutral site games there. Look at the USC attendance last year. The demand doesn't exist. Maryland is going to move a decent home game to NYC? Why so their fans can revolt? Penn State? Who is paying them the difference?

College basketball has always been popular in NYC. Building the Big East Tournament is nothing like trying to get a college football stronghold.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

But NYC has forever had televised college football and outside of Notre Dame generally gets yawns. Rutgers joining the Big 10 does nothing in the city. Piscataway may as well be on the moon to someone who lives in Manhattan and isn't an RU grad or from North Jersey.

Looking at the past to determine a vision is not the definition of a visionary.

 

[whaler11]

Looking at the past to determine a vision is not the definition of a visionary.

Yeah any stupid idea in the world can be defended with nonsense like that so it doesn't really add all that much.

 

[itgoeslike]

If there was a team in NYC sure they would move the needle. There isn't and I really can't see a conference playing a dozen neutral site games there. Look at the USC attendance last year. The demand doesn't exist.

College basketball has always been popular in NYC. Building the Big East Tournament is nothing like trying to get a college football stronghold.

You are missing the point. A single USC game is akin to showing curling once a year. You are not going to build a following that way. You need consistency and buzz that achieves a critical mass. I am sure people said similar things about the car, airplane, and an all sports network. Lastly, I stated above, I wasn't proposing 12 neutral site games.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Yeah any stupid idea in the world can be defended with nonsense like that so it doesn't really add all that much.

And UConn never became nationally relevant in basketball because it was a stupid idea a cow college located in a forgettable pasture outside Willimantic could never, and I mean NEVER, compete with the basketball bluebloods in North Carolina/Kentucky/Kansas.

 

[woomba]

Nobody suggested a weekly neutral game in NYC, except you.

I'll explain in a little more detail. This package could be anchored by 4-6 conference games played at Yankee Stadium and Northern NJ venues. The home teams could be UCONN, Rutgers, Maryland and Penn State. The revenue split could be adjusted for these games. In addition, other conference games could be crafted, i.e., Nebraska/Wisconsin (and other Western teams) could agree to a NYC game to gain a presence in the market. There could be 1 or 2 neutral games annually that pit a B1G school against a top team from another conference, i.e., Michigan/Notre Dame, Ohio State/Texas, etc. The balance of the games could be regional conference match ups (which would get a bump) or high profile conference match ups played in other parts of the country, i.e., Michigan/Ohio State.

What you are thinking and what I am proposing are two different things.

YOU said Game of the Week. Jeez man. So instead of 12 games your idea is about half that (5-7) being played in around the NYC area. The general premise is fine, it's still way too many games to ever get off the ground.

The current idea that is being kicked around is 2 regular season games (1 regional neutral game for Rutgers/Penn/Maryland + 1 OOC for non-Eastern team) + 1 bowl game (Pinstripe).

 

[itgoeslike]

YOU said Game of the Week. Jeez man. So instead of 12 games your idea is about half that (5-7) being played in around the NYC area. The general premise is fine, it's still way too many games to ever get off the ground.

The current idea that is being kicked around is 2 regular season games (1 regional neutral game for Rutgers/Penn/Maryland + 1 OOC for non-Eastern team) + 1 bowl game (Pinstripe).

No. What's being proposed provides better visibility, but doesn't necessarily build a following. A NYC Game of the Week is a concept that provides a consistent presence over the course of the season, which is anchored by 6 B1G conference games played at a NYC venue. It's all about the mix.

4 Penn State/UCONN/Rutgers/Maryland Home Conference Games at NYC venues
1 B1G versus high-profile OOC at NYC venues
1 Western team matchup at NYC venue
4 Penn State/UCONN/Rutgers/Maryland games played at their respective stadiums against top tier B1G opponents or conference rivals
2 High-Profile conference matchups not played in NYC, i.e. Michigan at Ohio State

Throw in a B1G championship game and select bowls and you have your programming. There will be logistical issues and it won't happen overnight, but I suspect this is what Delany is working towards.

 

[woomba]

No. What's being proposed provides better visibility, but doesn't necessarily build a following. A NYC Game of the Week is a concept that provides a consistent presence over the course of the season, which is anchored by 6 B1G conference games played at a NYC venue. It's all about the mix.

4 Penn State/UCONN/Rutgers/Maryland Home Conference Games at NYC venues
1 B1G versus high-profile OOC at NYC venues
1 Western team matchup at NYC venue
4 Penn State/UCONN/Rutgers/Maryland games played at their respective stadiums against top tier B1G opponents or conference rivals
2 High-Profile conference matchups not played in NYC, i.e. Michigan at Ohio State

Throw in a B1G championship game and select bowls and you have your programming. There will be logistical issues and it won't happen overnight, but I suspect this is what Delany is working towards.

As long as you realize that an extensive plan like that has a 0% chance of actually happening nor is in the works that's fine.

 

[whaler11]

And UConn never became nationally relevant in basketball because it was a stupid idea a cow college located in a forgettable pasture outside Willimantic could never, and I mean NEVER, compete with the basketball bluebloods in North Carolina/Kentucky/Kansas.

If your argument for any crackpot scheme is something unlikely happened in the past then really this is just another platitude that means nothing and has little to nothing to do with the issue at hand.

 

[whaler11]

Thinking NYC isn't interested in college football isn't particularly gloom and doom. Assuming that the future will be gloomy because the past was is.

Why is it gloomy to understand that College Football is probably never going to be popular in NYC. Why do I care if college football is popular in NYC. UConn fans would do well to worry about college football being popular in Connecticut before they worry about other places.

 

[whaler11]

I'm not convinced that I won't end up paying similar money for fewer channels.

Because you shouldn't be. You'll pay at least the same and get less in the long run. Not sure where people think the revenue to create programming comes from - netflix has programming to stream because the networks like AMC and FX collect subscriber fees to create the shows. If the small amounts they get from 100 million homes go away - they raise the monthly fee to a point where few sign up and it's a revenue death spiral.

Whatever it is you or anyone likes it's subsidized by the 95%+ of people who don't watch it.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

If your argument for any crackpot scheme is something unlikely happened in the past then really this is just another platitude that means nothing and has little to nothing to do with the issue at hand.

I don't think UConn being nationally relevant in football is a "crackpot scheme." That you do is why I think of you as gloomy.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Why is it gloomy to understand that College Football is probably never going to be popular in NYC. I suppose because someone who believes others will never amount to anything strikes me as less than sunny. Why do I care if college football is popular in NYC. You don't, obviously. UConn fans would do well to worry about college football being popular in Connecticut before they worry about other places. Mmmm, yeah, think small, that's the ticket.

 

[whaler11]

I don't think UConn being nationally relevant in football is a "crackpot scheme." That you do is why I think of you as gloomy.

We have been talking about NYC as a college football television market not if UConn can be nationally relevant in football. Your posts are constant moving targets and your rationalization is generally DREAM BIG but no substance on how to actually deliver on any of these dreams. So you can go on planning on how to spend your powerball winnings and I'll continue to worry about incremental gains. One can't get nationally relevant until they are locally relevant.

 

[itgoeslike]

As long as you realize that an extensive plan like that has a 0% chance of actually happening nor is in the works that's fine.

Listen man, or woman, the only thing certain is that you don't have a clue about the B1G's plans. What was put forth are hypotheticals for discussion on a forum, and was initially in response to Whaler as to why college football has such little mind share in NYC. Since there isn't a hometown team, one has to devise a viable product that will build a following. FYI, the B1G has already implemented moves to increase visibility in New York. The next you and Delany are grabbing dinner together, you need to tell him that he's making a big mistake. Oh, and thank you for your continued enlightenment and keeping us all grounded in your reality.

 

[woomba]

Listen man, or woman, the only thing certain is that you don't have a clue about the B1G's plans. What was put forth are hypotheticals for discussion on a forum, and was initially in response to Whaler as to why college football has such little mind share in NYC. Since there isn't a hometown team, one has to devise a viable product that will build a following. FYI, the B1G has already implemented moves to increase visibility in New York. The next you and Delany are grabbing dinner together, you need to tell him that he's making a big mistake. Oh, and thank you for your continued enlightenment and keeping us all grounded in your reality.

You don't need to have the ear of a conference president to tell what ideas have no chance of making it. Teams with very large stadiums bring in up to $10M for each home game and millions more for the local economy. You think they will leave that on the table for a lower payout for the sake of raising the profile of the NYC market to the extent your scenario would entail - especially for teams like Nebraska and Wisconsin who have a pretty small NYC alumni base? Neutral site payouts do not come close to the money that these schools will be leaving on the table.

A few games a year is fine, but the scope of what you're suggesting will mean leaving tons of money on the table for the local economies of these schools - it'll never work.

If you feel strongly about this, you should push for UConn playing all of its major home games in NYC instead of the Rent and see how much buyin you get.

 

[whaler11]

Listen man, or woman, the only thing certain is that you don't have a clue about the B1G's plans. What was put forth are hypotheticals for discussion on a forum, and was initially in response to Whaler as to why college football has such little mind share in NYC. Since there isn't a hometown team, one has to devise a viable product that will build a following. FYI, the B1G has already implemented moves to increase visibility in New York. The next you and Delany are grabbing dinner together, you need to tell him that he's making a big mistake. Oh, and thank you for your continued enlightenment and keeping us all grounded in your reality.

You have to be open to seeing the flaws in what you posted. It would make some sense in connecting the league to NYC and I could see the Big 10 trying to get involved with the Kickoff Classic but these big schools aren't playing a ton of OOC games against name schools and they need them to sell their season tickets because the Big 10 is pretty watered down. The bigger it gets the less you see OSU or Wisconsin or Michigan or Nebraska at home.

If you've got a year where your home games are Maryland, Penn State, Rutgers and Purdue you aren't going to be in much of a hurry to harm your season ticket sales and give up home field advantage to play Penn State at the Meadowlands.

Bowl games in NYC are terrible for anyone who can't get in and out the same day. Impossibly expensive flights and hotels at the holidays for an outdoor game in the dead of winter is hardly attractive to Wisconsin, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa etc.

 

[woomba]

You have to be open to seeing the flaws in what you posted. It would make some sense in connecting the league to NYC and I could see the Big 10 trying to get involved with the Kickoff Classic but these big schools aren't playing a ton of OOC games against name schools and they need them to sell their season tickets because the Big 10 is pretty watered down. The bigger it gets the less you see OSU or Wisconsin or Michigan or Nebraska at home.

If you've got a year where your home games are Maryland, Penn State, Rutgers and Purdue you aren't going to be in much of a hurry to harm your season ticket sales and give up home field advantage to play Penn State at the Meadowlands.

Bowl games in NYC are terrible for anyone who can't get in and out the same day. Impossibly expensive flights and hotels at the holidays for an outdoor game in the dead of winter is hardly attractive to Wisconsin, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa etc.

Good point about season ticket sales - gate revenue still makes up about 45% of the total revenue for a FB program despite the rise of TV deals so there's sensitivity there in general.

 

[itgoeslike]

You have to be open to seeing the flaws in what you posted. It would make some sense in connecting the league to NYC and I could see the Big 10 trying to get involved with the Kickoff Classic but these big schools aren't playing a ton of OOC games against name schools and they need them to sell their season tickets because the Big 10 is pretty watered down. The bigger it gets the less you see OSU or Wisconsin or Michigan or Nebraska at home.

What does that have to with what I proposed? Nothing.

If you've got a year where your home games are Maryland, Penn State, Rutgers and Purdue you aren't going to be in much of a hurry to harm your season ticket sales and give up home field advantage to play Penn State at the Meadowlands.

No teams gives up home field advantage under what I proposed, except in remote instances. See below.

Bowl games in NYC are terrible for anyone who can't get in and out the same day. Impossibly expensive flights and hotels at the holidays for an outdoor game in the dead of winter is hardly attractive to Wisconsin, Nebraska, Minnesota, Iowa etc.

I never proposed adding more NYC bowl games beyond the Pinstripe which already exists. What are you talking about?

The following is what I proposed, which has little to do with what you posted. The key is have enough games to achieve a critical mass.

Penn State/UCONN/Rutgers/Maryland Home Conference Games at NYC venues

No one loses a home game to come and play a regularly scheduled away game at the schools mentioned above. UCONN would end up playing 1 home game in NYC instead of the Rent (UCONN would have to get a pass on home game restrictions). Maybe UCONN plays every other year in NYC. Either way not a big deal and would be great for building the UCONN brand. I don't think any school gets affected at the box office except maybe Penn State. UCONN, Penn State and Rutgers all have large alumni bases in NYC. All schools are within a short driving distance to NYC. We're talking 1 game every year or two years.

B1G versus high-profile OOC at NYC venues

A particular Big school would only see this game once in 6-10 years, and the conference is actively pursuing these types of matchups.

Big Ten West team matchup at NYC venue

This translates into a BTW school traveling to New York every 4 years, which is a home game once every 8 years (but it's an in-conference split, it's not like they are losing revenue to another conference. Easily solvable). Again, maybe this gets pushed out every two years and alternates with the BIG versus OOC game, so it could work out to a home game every 16 years.

Penn State/UCONN/Rutgers/Maryland games played at their respective stadiums against top tier B1G opponents or conference rivals

These are regular conference games. You could feature a school a week from the above list over a four week period.

High-Profile conference matchups not played in NYC, i.e. Michigan at Ohio State

These are regular conference games.

This is not a stretch (no matter what you and Woomba believe) and most of the games are plain vanilla conference games just like they'll be played in the coming year. The key here is to build up the frequency, locally, so people are familiar with the product and can start to build an emotional connection. Like I said earlier, it isn't going to happen overnight, but with time, the Big Ten could develop a following beyond their alumni bases. The ACC should be trying to do the same with basketball.

 

[whaler11]

People don't make emotional attachments to conferences. They make emotional attachments to teams/schools.

You might remember how many UConn fans complained about playing Notre Dame at neutral sites. Iowa and Nebraska are never going to want to play each other in NYC in front of 30k people. Minnesota/Wisconsin? Purdue/Northwestern might not draw 15k.

The schools will never do what you are proposing. Maryland playing home games jn NYC? Their fan base would revolt and it makes zero sense. No one in NYC who isn't related to Boomer Esiason is going to be a Maryland fan.

The conference works for the schools. Not the other way around.