Who actually brings value

[upstater]

Actually ESPN is in the business of making money. Thus they show their best properties on their best channels at the best time slots. This is what drives advertising revenue. Football is thus the king, with a nod to men's basketball. Women's basketball draws little and makes little money. Putting UConn women's basketball on ESPN3 at 7:00 PM EST with 10 other women's games is not a significant revenue generator, no matter how many times they are on.

Any analysis which does not show advertising dollars generated is meaningless to ESPN.

You apparently have not been paying attention to the ratings. UConn women's is a big deal.

So let me get this straight. You think ESPN is showing UConn bball 33 times because it doesn't value it? Crazy.

 

[JeepCSC]

It is about inventory for ESPN. ESPN wants high ratings. So it chooses the games that are most valuable to give it high ratings. That's the entire point. Don't Wake Forest us. UConn bball is shown 15 times on the marquee networks, which is more than anyone not named Kansas, Kentucky, UNC and Duke. When you add women's basketball to it, which gets as high ratings as the men, UConn's inventory doubles.Nothing to do with Wake Forest.

I agree Wake Forest has nothing to do with this, which is why I don't understand the notion in the first post that UConn is subsidizing Wake. You aren't. UNC is. You have your own mouths to feed. The problem becomes when UNC has more outside assistance to feed Wake, because FSU and Clemson and Louisville and Duke pitch in. UConn has Houston helping them with Tulane et al, but clearly that isn't the same. Just as clearly, football pays more than basketball when the biggest basketball game of the year (UNC/Duke) gets less viewers than the normal College GameDay with Lee Corso.

 

[JeepCSC]

Wrong. If an XFL team were being shown 40 times, it would be making huge sums of money.

I mean the football season is but only so long. Again, it would be an XFL squad shown 5 times on ESPN 2, the Browns showed 0 times anywhere, and the Cowboys/Pats/Steelers/etc shown 40 times everywhere. So while the XFL squad is shown more than the Browns, that is missing the forest for the trees. Browns are paid for who they play, not who they are.

 

[The Funster]

It's pretty simple: the teams that get aired more are worth more. They don't necessarily get paid more, and that is the rub.

 

[JeepCSC]

This is very true but aside from the overarching point (which you are either deliberately ignoring or unable to comprehend) the ultimate end result of what you stated (in this environment where pursuit of further dollars takes precedent) will be schools like FSU asking themselves why schools like Wake & BC are getting the benefit of FSU's success. The next domino to fall here will be the P-5 schools who can't carry their own weight. The move to a P-4 world will be through cherry picking the best of the ACC & B-12.

That's a possibility obviously, but just as possible that the current model continues on. Alabama wants Vandy in their conference, and Ohio State wants Northwestern, not simply because of the money those two bring (or not as the case may be) but because it keeps their conference stable and their schedule tolerable.

 

[HoopsFan21]

Damn ESPN. Trying to kill UConn using our own tax dollars. Then we the taxpayers have to give more tax dollars to make up the University's difference. Just so Wake Forest and BC are able to get a big enough cut of the ACC pie.

 

[JeepCSC]

It's pretty simple: the teams that get aired more are worth more. They don't necessarily get paid more, and that is the rub.

Yes, because teams aren't paid, conferences are. That isn't a new development.

 

[upstater]

I agree Wake Forest has nothing to do with this, which is why I don't understand the notion in the first post that UConn is subsidizing Wake. You aren't. UNC is. You have your own mouths to feed. The problem becomes when UNC has more outside assistance to feed Wake, because FSU and Clemson and Louisville and Duke pitch in. UConn has Houston helping them with Tulane et al, but clearly that isn't the same. Just as clearly, football pays more than basketball when the biggest basketball game of the year (UNC/Duke) gets less viewers than the normal College GameDay with Lee Corso.

Why do you persist in ignoring what we are saying?

I can't say it again cause I've already said it numerous times and it doesn't get through your thick head.

You are wrong about the ratings, by the way. UNC-Duke last year did a 2.6, while last week's college football did 1.9 ABC and .5 on Fox in primetime, while ESPN's Gameday did a 1.0: Saturday cable ratings: College football, playoff baseball rise to the top

 

[HoopsFan21]

That's a possibility obviously, but just as possible that the current model continues on. Alabama wants Vandy in their conference, and Ohio State wants Northwestern, not simply because of the money those two bring (or not as the case may be) but because it keeps their conference stable and their schedule tolerable.

You can kiss this idea goodbye when revenues stagnate or even start to contract. There's one thing Ohio State likes more than its conference, and that's money.

 

[The Funster]

I mean the football season is but only so long. Again, it would be an XFL squad shown 5 times on ESPN 2, the Browns showed 0 times anywhere, and the Cowboys/Pats/Steelers/etc shown 40 times everywhere. So while the XFL squad is shown more than the Browns, that is missing the forest for the trees. Browns are paid for who they play, not who they are.

The NFL media deal is collectively bargained by all participants. Conference sports is not. The Browns are irrelevant because they are a member of a SINGLE entity, not a member of one of 5 or 10 entities which bargain independently.

 

[upstater]

I mean the football season is but only so long. Again, it would be an XFL squad shown 5 times on ESPN 2, the Browns showed 0 times anywhere, and the Cowboys/Pats/Steelers/etc shown 40 times everywhere. So while the XFL squad is shown more than the Browns, that is missing the forest for the trees. Browns are paid for who they play, not who they are.

You're nuts if you think an XFL product that grabs time from an NFL product wouldn't be paid bigtime. In any hypothetical, they would. Especially if the XFLs ratings were as high as the NFLs.

 

[lne001]

You apparently have not been paying attention to the ratings. UConn women's is a big deal. So let me get this straight. You think ESPN is showing UConn bball 33 times because it doesn't value it? Crazy.

Like I said above, show me the money. Nothing you are spouting is of any value until you distill it to its true essence, how much does ESPN make showing each game.

 

[upstater]

Like I said above, show me the money. Nothing you are spouting is of any value until you distill it to its true essence, how much does ESPN make showing each game.

This is the OPs whole point. my god, how did you miss that?

Wait a minute: do you not know how ratings work?

 

[lne001]

It's pretty simple: the teams that get aired more are worth more. They don't necessarily get paid more, and that is the rub.

No, no no. A men's basketball game aired on Saturday afternoon on CBS is worth far more than 15 women's basketball games shown on weeknights on ESPN3 (just a guess, but you get the idea).

 

[husky210]

No, no no. A men's basketball game aired on Saturday afternoon on CBS is worth far more than 15 women's basketball games shown on weeknights on ESPN3 (just a guess, but you get the idea).

Your totally missing the mark. Those 15 wbb games were on ESPN and ESPN2 not ESPN3 (which is the home network of BC)

 

[billybud]

UConn would have more value even than it now does if placed in a P5 conference...everyone has that fact right.

And so would Houston, or BYU..or..etc.



And...you can truly blame Wake Forest.

It was their President who Chaired the Division I Board of Directors and led the charge for autonomy for the P5.

 

[JeepCSC]

Why do you persist in ignoring what we are saying?

I can't say it again cause I've already said it numerous times and it doesn't get through your thick head.

You are wrong about the ratings, by the way. UNC-Duke last year did a 2.6, while last week's college football did 1.9 ABC and .5 on Fox in primetime, while ESPN's Gameday did a 1.0: Saturday cable ratings: College football, playoff baseball rise to the top

Mea culpa. I must have looked at the wrong numbers for GameDay. Still, the point stands. Something like Tulsa-Ohio State football gets better ratings than UNC/Duke. Go here, and you'll see like 30 football games already with better ratings than the 3 million or so that watched UNC-Duke. College Football TV Ratings — Sports Media Watch

And I still don't know what your point is. So UConn is shown 20 times vs Wake's 0. I'm sure ACC basketball is shown 100 times or so across ESPN's networks. And that's before you get to football games shown, where the real money is. ESPN is paying for the ACC collectively. Wake is getting subsidized by the ACC. UConn doesn't enter the picture, so leave weak Wake out of it. You are really mad at AAC's ESPN contract, so aim there, not at Winston-Salem.

 

[lne001]

This is the OPs whole point. my god, how did you miss that?

Wait a minute: do you not know how ratings work?

And you apparently don't understand that advertising dollars available per rating point vary widely by event and time slot. Thus revenues, the only important thing here, are not solely governed by ratings.

 

[JeepCSC]

You can kiss this idea goodbye when revenues stagnate or even start to contract. There's one thing Ohio State likes more than its conference, and that's money.

It isn't inconceivable that the top 40 or so schools pull away NFL style and recongregate, but it's hard to see a path there at this time. But who knows what the future will bring. We might all be soccer fans in 50 years.

 

[NYUConn]

I did not have an opinion about UConn (you read too fast)...I only state the fact that teams are valued as a collection in a conference...there is a conference value that is determined by the market.

This argument doesn't hold water when the majority of AAC basketball games shown on ESPN or ESPN2 feature some combination of UConn.

@Fishy is right on the money here.

Here are the 2015-16 AAC conference games on ESPN or ESPN2. Notice a pattern?

Temple at Cincinnati, ESPN2
SMU at Tulsa, ESPN2
Memphis at Connecticut, ESPN2
Connecticut at Tulsa, ESPN
Cincinnati at Connecticut, ESPN
Connecticut at Memphis, ESPN2
Connecticut at Temple, ESPN
Tulsa at Connecticut, ESPN2
SMU at Connecticut, ESPN
Connecticut at Cincinnati, ESPN/2
Connecticut at SMU, ESPN

I mean this is comically transparent here. Of all the American conference games featured on ESPN or ESPN2 last season, 9 of the 11 featured UConn.

This doesn't even count the three OOC games we had on ESPN/2 (Maryland, Cuse and Texas) and the two national games we played on CBS (Ohio State and Georgetown).

We are criminally underpaid for the value we are bringing to that network.

 

[lne001]

Your totally missing the mark. Those 15 wbb games were on ESPN and ESPN2 not ESPN3 (which is the home network of BC)

Hardly makes a difference. They are not prime time on Saturday. Women's basketball games on weekday nights are filler, along with women's volleyball, soccer, softball, whatever. What are advertisers willing to pay for these "high ratings"? That's the only question.

 

[JeepCSC]

This argument doesn't hold water when the majority of AAC basketball games shown on ESPN or ESPN2 feature some combination of UConn.

@Fishy is right on the money here.

Here are the 2015-16 AAC conference games on ESPN or ESPN2. Notice a pattern?

Temple at Cincinnati, ESPN2
SMU at Tulsa, ESPN2
Memphis at Connecticut, ESPN2
Connecticut at Tulsa, ESPN
Cincinnati at Connecticut, ESPN
Connecticut at Memphis, ESPN2
Connecticut at Temple, ESPN
Tulsa at Connecticut, ESPN2
SMU at Connecticut, ESPN
Connecticut at Cincinnati, ESPN/2
Connecticut at SMU, ESPN

I mean this is comically transparent here. Of all the American conference games featured on ESPN or ESPN2 last season, 9 of the 11 featured UConn.

This doesn't even count the three OOC games we had on ESPN/2 (Maryland, Cuse and Texas) and the two national games we played on CBS (Ohio State and Georgetown).

We are criminally underpaid for the value we are bringing to that network.

You are criminally underpaid because no one in your conference is helping you carry the load. You are however much of your conference's value and then divvied up equally. Wake isn't in the equation. Tulane is.

 

[Exit 4]

Hardly makes a difference. They are not prime time on Saturday. Women's basketball games on weekday nights are filler, along with women's volleyball, soccer, softball, whatever. What are advertisers willing to pay for these "high ratings"? That's the only question.

BC doesn't even off content worthy of filler status.

Moreover, any talk about filler is misdirected as ESPN is always going to air what maximizes eye balls at any given hour. Filler or not, they put on what product they have in their inventory that offers the best chance at the most viewers. Period. Anything else leads directly to lower ad revenue and a weaken position bargaining with cable carriers over subscriber fees.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

That's a possibility obviously, but just as possible that the current model continues on. Alabama wants Vandy in their conference, and Ohio State wants Northwestern, not simply because of the money those two bring (or not as the case may be) but because it keeps their conference stable and their schedule tolerable.

It is clear that you are intentionally ignoring points that may be detrimental to the school your allegiance lies with (my guess is BC).

I did not include the B1G or the SEC in my statement as they both have far more secure footing than any other conference. Each also has been more discriminatory in adding members than the ACC has and appears to always have planned their moves better than has the ACC.

In contrast to what the B1G, SEC and P-12 have done with expansion, the ACC has been trying to build sufficient membership around their weak sisters that the conference could be viewed as a power conference. There is as much dead weight in the ACC as there is quality. That cannot be said about the B1G or SEC.

 

[Drumguy]

@billybud I'm pretty sure this conversation is over your head.

I just "ignored" him.

 

[NYUConn]

You are criminally underpaid because no one in your conference is helping you carry the load. You are however much of your conference's value and then divvied up equally. Wake isn't in the equation. Tulane is.

Thanks for explaining how contracts work.

When one school's games out of a conference are optioned to be broadcast on the flagship stations of a network 85% of the time, it's clear that school brings value above and beyond that of their conference peers. That combined with 30+ years of evidence that UConn is a ratings draw from it's time in the Big East, it's clear that UConn is being underpaid for what they are providing to ESPN.

 

[Excalibur]

The evidence is right there - who is ESPN featuring on their most valuable real estate?

Overwhelmingly, it's UConn.

Cheap labor built the pyramids. It's in ESPN's overwhelming interest to keep some schools trapped in no-revenue leagues to provide inventory at below market remuneration.

I mentioned this yesterday, but ESPN must realize that this strategy only works so long as the content that they are selling for peanuts actually has demand. As our games become less compelling, fewer people will watch, and ESPN loses the benefit of selling our games for next to nothing.

 

[JeepCSC]

You're nuts if you think an XFL product that grabs time from an NFL product wouldn't be paid bigtime. In any hypothetical, they would. Especially if the XFLs ratings were as high as the NFLs.

The point is the NFL isn't paid because of who watches the Browns. And a hypothetical league isn't paid as much as the NFL because one team beats non-existent ratings from the Browns.

 

[JeepCSC]

Thanks for explaining how contracts work.

When one school's games out of a conference are optioned to be broadcast on the flagship stations of a network 85% of the time, it's clear that school brings value above and beyond that of their conference peers. That combined with 30+ years of evidence that UConn is a ratings draw from it's time in the Big East, it's clear that UConn is being underpaid for what they are providing to ESPN.

But not because of Wake. You aren't subsidizing Wake.

 

[auror]

This argument doesn't hold water when the majority of AAC basketball games shown on ESPN or ESPN2 feature some combination of UConn.

@Fishy is right on the money here.

Here are the 2015-16 AAC conference games on ESPN or ESPN2. Notice a pattern?

Temple at Cincinnati, ESPN2
SMU at Tulsa, ESPN2
Memphis at Connecticut, ESPN2
Connecticut at Tulsa, ESPN
Cincinnati at Connecticut, ESPN
Connecticut at Memphis, ESPN2
Connecticut at Temple, ESPN
Tulsa at Connecticut, ESPN2
SMU at Connecticut, ESPN
Connecticut at Cincinnati, ESPN/2
Connecticut at SMU, ESPN

I mean this is comically transparent here. Of all the American conference games featured on ESPN or ESPN2 last season, 9 of the 11 featured UConn.

This doesn't even count the three OOC games we had on ESPN/2 (Maryland, Cuse and Texas) and the two national games we played on CBS (Ohio State and Georgetown).

We are criminally underpaid for the value we are bringing to that network.

Yes, we are criminally underpaid for the value we are bringing to that network. The fault of that is Aresco, the AAC, and with us.. 1) We shouldn't have taken an even share of the TV deal. 2) How were our ratings in those games? just because UConn draws better ratings than Tualen vs. Tulsa, doesn't mean we draw well enough to move the needle for ESPN. 3) Because of the contract, ESPN is required to show a number of AAC games. They will, of course, pick the shiniest apple each time, but how shiny is our apple compared to other schools? If it were shiny enough, we'd be in a P5 conference. 4) What is the actual value of 1 football game shown on ABC vs. 5 basketball games on ESPN2? Ad prices don't scale linearly with ratings. More efficient use of money draws exponentially higher prices and you need to weight the value of the schools bringing those games exponentially higher as well. UConn in the AAC championship had half the viewers of Kentucky vs. Tex A&M right before it, and that's on the basketball scale. One of the marquee UConn football games last year (UConn - BYU) drew a 0.4 on ESPN. Quantity doesn't necessarily mean Spartacus.