Who actually brings value | Page 6 | The Boneyard

Who actually brings value

Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
1,154
Reaction Score
258
The coverage of UConn athletics, on ESPN, major networks and regional sports networks, is far greater than the coverage of BC athletics.
QUOTE]

Does this explain then, in your opinion, the reason that UConn is seemingly uninterested in having a UConn weekly football program televised throughout New England for primarily New England audiences, and negotiated with NESN ? UConn does recruit New England afterall. Why the apparent cede of this exposure in New England then to BC football ? Just asking mind you. Is UConn not much interested in NESN ? Or NESN not interested much in in UConn football for N.E. based audiences ? Again, just posing the question.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
7,313
Reaction Score
2,920
Are you really so stupid that you can't see you are being paid by a TV network that all but refuses to air your program. Let's turn this around, what is BC doing to make ESPN one cent?
BC is helping Miami with Northeast Recruiting.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,789
Reaction Score
4,107
The question however is not how many people in New England watch the BC football program on NESN each week in the Fall ( few do ), the question that is germane to this thread is why nobody in New England watches a UConn football weekly program on NESN in New England, as Bob Diaco and his football program have no such NESN show in the fall for New England audiences. How come ? UConn is not a NY/ NJ school... they are a New England based school, in the N.E. state of Connecticut. Thus, UConn SHOULD have a UConn football devoted program on NESN in the fall, imo. Do you disagree ?

You make it very hard not to say mean things.

The markets served by SNY and NESN are not mutually exclusive. I have SNY here in Boston as part of my basic cable package.

Given SNY was paying a relative boat load for the rights to UCONN leftover games and coaching shows, it is probably reasonable to assume that this agreement would preclude selling the same rights to NESN, who has a smaller but largely overlapping market in comparison with SNY.

Getting paid well to offer your content on SNY was the right choice for UCONN. 14m > 4m.

So, in short, this argument you have painfully constructed, like all of your posts here, is foolish.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
1,154
Reaction Score
258
BC is helping Miami with Northeast Recruiting.
Well, I do live in Florida, and BC ACC games ( including baseball, softball, etc ) are on TV here all the time. BC football barely exists for TV exposure interest in the state of Florida though. USF has less interest in Florida than even BC football TV interest does however ( UConn football interest does not exist here in Florida at all ). All schools recruit Florida for football. Northeast football schools get the " b", and the " C', and the " non " listers however here. Miami recruits that are from Florida that go to Miami were never going to BC or UConn. Miami has not been all that successful recruiting New England over the years, except a recruit here or there. Basically, these Florida schools don't need to recruit N.E. much at all.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
1,154
Reaction Score
258
it is probably reasonable to assume that this agreement would preclude selling the same rights to NESN, who has a smaller but largely overlapping market in comparison with SNY.

Perhaps this is a plausible reason, ..who knows. However, UConn basketball used to have the Jim Calhoun, and the Geno A. shows negotiated with NESN for N.E. audiences, and SNY exposure was never a conflict for these telecasts on NESN for New Englanders.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
405
Reaction Score
458
I completely understand the frustration of the UConn fans here. I would agree that Wake Forest is not worth 10 times as much as UConn. The core issue is that the ACC probably *is* worth 10 times more than the AAC from a TV perspective. The fact that Florida State might be worth $100 million per year while Wake Forest is worth $5 million per year yet are paid the same is (as others have noted) based on the choice of the ACC to distribute TV money equally.

You can see a real-time annual corollary to this in the English Premier League TV distributions. When a club gets promoted, it immediately reaps exponentially more TV money than the prior year when it was in a lower division. Likewise, when a club gets demoted, its TV revenue ends up getting slashed to a fraction of what it received previously (albeit the EPL does have a system where it "smooths out" the reduction over a period of years). Nothing has really substantively changed with those clubs except for their league membership. So, is the club that was just promoted really worth 10 times as much TV-wise as the club that was just relegated? Well, if you're just looking at the value of those clubs individually in a vacuum, the answer is no. However, if you're looking at the value of the overall product that they're a part of (the entire English Premier League versus the entire lower division), you would certainly say that the EPL overall is worth 10 times (and really much more) than the lower division, so the bottom of the EPL receives that benefit.

So, Wake Forest is getting the financial benefit of being a FSU punching bag in the same way that newly-promoted EPL clubs get the financial benefit of being a Manchester United or Chelsea punching bag. The P5 has subscribed to the equal sharing of TV revenue concept with the exception of the reservation of 3rd tier rights in the Big 12... and it's not an accident that the P5 league with the most internal acrimony happens to be the Big 12. With the equal sharing concept pretty entrenched at this point, you're going to see this massive gap between the lowest tier P5 schools and the best G5 programs just as you see the TV revenue gap between the bottom 4 EPL clubs and the top 4 lower division clubs. They're getting paid within the context of the respective values of their overall leagues as opposed to what they are worth individually in a vacuum.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
26,122
Reaction Score
31,435
I completely understand the frustration of the UConn fans here. I would agree that Wake Forest is not worth 10 times as much as UConn. The core issue is that the ACC probably *is* worth 10 times more than the AAC from a TV perspective. The fact that Florida State might be worth $100 million per year while Wake Forest is worth $5 million per year yet are paid the same is (as others have noted) based on the choice of the ACC to distribute TV money equally.

You can see a real-time annual corollary to this in the English Premier League TV distributions. When a club gets promoted, it immediately reaps exponentially more TV money than the prior year when it was in a lower division. Likewise, when a club gets demoted, its TV revenue ends up getting slashed to a fraction of what it received previously (albeit the EPL does have a system where it "smooths out" the reduction over a period of years). Nothing has really substantively changed with those clubs except for their league membership. So, is the club that was just promoted really worth 10 times as much TV-wise as the club that was just relegated? Well, if you're just looking at the value of those clubs individually in a vacuum, the answer is no. However, if you're looking at the value of the overall product that they're a part of (the entire English Premier League versus the entire lower division), you would certainly say that the EPL overall is worth 10 times (and really much more) than the lower division, so the bottom of the EPL receives that benefit.

So, Wake Forest is getting the financial benefit of being a FSU punching bag in the same way that newly-promoted EPL clubs get the financial benefit of being a Manchester United or Chelsea punching bag. The P5 has subscribed to the equal sharing of TV revenue concept with the exception of the reservation of 3rd tier rights in the Big 12... and it's not an accident that the P5 league with the most internal acrimony happens to be the Big 12. With the equal sharing concept pretty entrenched at this point, you're going to see this massive gap between the lowest tier P5 schools and the best G5 programs just as you see the TV revenue gap between the bottom 4 EPL clubs and the top 4 lower division clubs. They're getting paid within the context of the respective values of their overall leagues as opposed to what they are worth individually in a vacuum.

Well Frank, teams in the English Championship get promoted on merit, not grandfathered in or through cable box gerrymandering.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
26,122
Reaction Score
31,435
I completely understand the frustration of the UConn fans here. I would agree that Wake Forest is not worth 10 times as much as UConn. The core issue is that the ACC probably *is* worth 10 times more than the AAC from a TV perspective. The fact that Florida State might be worth $100 million per year while Wake Forest is worth $5 million per year yet are paid the same is (as others have noted) based on the choice of the ACC to distribute TV money equally.

You can see a real-time annual corollary to this in the English Premier League TV distributions. When a club gets promoted, it immediately reaps exponentially more TV money than the prior year when it was in a lower division. Likewise, when a club gets demoted, its TV revenue ends up getting slashed to a fraction of what it received previously (albeit the EPL does have a system where it "smooths out" the reduction over a period of years). Nothing has really substantively changed with those clubs except for their league membership. So, is the club that was just promoted really worth 10 times as much TV-wise as the club that was just relegated? Well, if you're just looking at the value of those clubs individually in a vacuum, the answer is no. However, if you're looking at the value of the overall product that they're a part of (the entire English Premier League versus the entire lower division), you would certainly say that the EPL overall is worth 10 times (and really much more) than the lower division, so the bottom of the EPL receives that benefit.

So, Wake Forest is getting the financial benefit of being a FSU punching bag in the same way that newly-promoted EPL clubs get the financial benefit of being a Manchester United or Chelsea punching bag. The P5 has subscribed to the equal sharing of TV revenue concept with the exception of the reservation of 3rd tier rights in the Big 12... and it's not an accident that the P5 league with the most internal acrimony happens to be the Big 12. With the equal sharing concept pretty entrenched at this point, you're going to see this massive gap between the lowest tier P5 schools and the best G5 programs just as you see the TV revenue gap between the bottom 4 EPL clubs and the top 4 lower division clubs. They're getting paid within the context of the respective values of their overall leagues as opposed to what they are worth individually in a vacuum.

Also, which club is bigger? Aston Villa or Bournemouth?
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2014
Messages
1,154
Reaction Score
258
Iowa state football... in a P5 conference.. has less singular " value" than a sack of potatoes. Washington State football in the PAC12 ? I think their current QB Drew Bledsoe is pretty good, but still in all. Rutgers football hasn't been much good since the leather helmut days. Lots of others we could name as well that have never played in their current league's football Championship game... or else, it was maybe back in the 70's, 80's Paleolithic Age of college football or whatever. Life is so unfair sometimes, so what else is new ?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 1, 2014
Messages
1,363
Reaction Score
1,620
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.

Totally agree. Only issue is how much profit are we really talking about here on women's basketball for ESPN, and how does that relatively small amount factor into their overall strategic planning.
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
10,397
Reaction Score
38,199
Well Frank, teams in the English Championship get promoted on merit, not grandfathered in or through cable box gerrymandering.

Ha - when FTT's lesson plans go awry!
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
405
Reaction Score
458
Well Frank, teams in the English Championship get promoted on merit, not grandfathered in or through cable box gerrymandering.

I agree. I'm just looking at the EPL as an example outside of college football of where TV money completely changes depending upon league membership even if you field the exact same team with the exact same fans. There's not a linear financial distribution from league-to-league - instead, it's a cliff.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
405
Reaction Score
458
Also, which club is bigger? Aston Villa or Bournemouth?

Well, this actually displays how college football TV distributions are similar. Aston Villa is certainly the bigger club in a vacuum. However, games aren't played in a vacuum and, as of now, Bournemouth is getting exponentially more TV revenue as part of the EPL compared to the relegated Aston Villa. The issue is more long-term - if Bournemouth stays in the EPL for the next 5 years while Aston Villa continues to be in the lower division, then Aston Villa's relegation is inherently going to drag down their individual value (whether they can control it or not) just as G5 schools are going to see a wider gap compared to their P5 counterparts every year with TV contracts increasing.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
26,122
Reaction Score
31,435
I agree. I'm just looking at the EPL as an example outside of college football of where TV money completely changes depending upon league membership even if you field the exact same team with the exact same fans. There's not a linear financial distribution from league-to-league - instead, it's a cliff.

Yes, but the disproportionate increase can at least correlate to performance, investment and sound sporting decisions.

The P5 people and the Charlie Stillitano's of the soccer world are trying to preclude college sports from having an Oakland As or a Leicester City. Those stories are part of what make sports so compelling.
 

Waquoit

Mr. Positive
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,188
Reaction Score
82,249
Well Frank, teams in the English Championship get promoted on merit, not grandfathered in or through cable box gerrymandering.
Plus, the revenue of the clubs getting relegated doesn't drop to total overnight, like what happened us.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
26,122
Reaction Score
31,435
Well, this actually displays how college football TV distributions are similar. Aston Villa is certainly the bigger club in a vacuum. However, games aren't played in a vacuum and, as of now, Bournemouth is getting exponentially more TV revenue as part of the EPL compared to the relegated Aston Villa. The issue is more long-term - if Bournemouth stays in the EPL for the next 5 years while Aston Villa continues to be in the lower division, then Aston Villa's relegation is inherently going to drag down their individual value (whether they can control it or not) just as G5 schools are going to see a wider gap compared to their P5 counterparts every year with TV contracts increasing.

This is funny. Because nobody that really understands English Football would say that Bournemouth could be bigger than Villa or Newcastle.

Not when the European leagues will charge a huge premium when English clubs are buying.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2012
Messages
405
Reaction Score
458
Yes, but the disproportionate increase can at least correlate to performance, investment and sound sporting decisions.

The P5 people and the Charlie Stillitano's of the soccer world are trying to preclude college sports from having an Oakland As or a Leicester City. Those stories are part of what make sports so compelling.

Once again, I agree. EPL promotion is based on on-the-field performance, whereas P5 promotion has only a loose correlation at best to on-the-field performance (and no correlation if you happen to occupy the correct real estate such as Rutgers).
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
26,122
Reaction Score
31,435
Plus, the revenue of the clubs getting relegated doesn't drop to total overnight, like what happened us.

Yup, they get a year or two of parachute payments.

Plus there is no way Villa or Newcastle stay down. They are too big to fail.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
26,122
Reaction Score
31,435
Once again, I agree. EPL promotion is based on on-the-field performance, whereas P5 promotion has only a loose correlation at best to on-the-field performance (and no correlation if you happen to occupy the correct real estate such as Rutgers).

So basically, Middlesbrough is worth the money because they earned it. And Wake and BC didn't.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,147
Reaction Score
45,612
I completely understand the frustration of the UConn fans here. I would agree that Wake Forest is not worth 10 times as much as UConn. The core issue is that the ACC probably *is* worth 10 times more than the AAC from a TV perspective. The fact that Florida State might be worth $100 million per year while Wake Forest is worth $5 million per year yet are paid the same is (as others have noted) based on the choice of the ACC to distribute TV money equally.

You can see a real-time annual corollary to this in the English Premier League TV distributions. When a club gets promoted, it immediately reaps exponentially more TV money than the prior year when it was in a lower division. Likewise, when a club gets demoted, its TV revenue ends up getting slashed to a fraction of what it received previously (albeit the EPL does have a system where it "smooths out" the reduction over a period of years). Nothing has really substantively changed with those clubs except for their league membership. So, is the club that was just promoted really worth 10 times as much TV-wise as the club that was just relegated? Well, if you're just looking at the value of those clubs individually in a vacuum, the answer is no. However, if you're looking at the value of the overall product that they're a part of (the entire English Premier League versus the entire lower division), you would certainly say that the EPL overall is worth 10 times (and really much more) than the lower division, so the bottom of the EPL receives that benefit.

So, Wake Forest is getting the financial benefit of being a FSU punching bag in the same way that newly-promoted EPL clubs get the financial benefit of being a Manchester United or Chelsea punching bag. The P5 has subscribed to the equal sharing of TV revenue concept with the exception of the reservation of 3rd tier rights in the Big 12... and it's not an accident that the P5 league with the most internal acrimony happens to be the Big 12. With the equal sharing concept pretty entrenched at this point, you're going to see this massive gap between the lowest tier P5 schools and the best G5 programs just as you see the TV revenue gap between the bottom 4 EPL clubs and the top 4 lower division clubs. They're getting paid within the context of the respective values of their overall leagues as opposed to what they are worth individually in a vacuum.

Again, this isnt even the point people are making.

It boggles the mind why this is so hard to understand.

We are talking about ESPN and the fact that ESPN has a property (UConn) that it shows (men's BB 15, women's BB 18, men's football 3 or 4) many, many times a year, and worse it owns the property's 3rd tier rights, from which it earns a tidy profit. Because of this, ESPN gets UConn cheap and tries to hold onto this profit center at a pittance. The money it makes is then used to subsidize other schools that hardly ever even appear on ESPN.

This doesn't have anything to do with the conference breakdowns. We all know that the big dogs like FSU feed the smaller schools. This has to do with revenue at ESPN and how ESPN retains valuable properties at a pittance in order to subsidize less valuable properties elsewhere.

It is really hard to see how you guys aren't getting that.
 
Joined
Sep 20, 2011
Messages
981
Reaction Score
826
Again, this isnt even the point people are making.

It boggles the mind why this is so hard to understand.

We are talking about ESPN and the fact that ESPN has a property (UConn) that it shows (men's BB 15, women's BB 18, men's football 3 or 4) many, many times a year, and worse it owns the property's 3rd tier rights, from which it earns a tidy profit. Because of this, ESPN gets UConn cheap and tries to hold onto this profit center at a pittance. The money it makes is then used to subsidize other schools that hardly ever even appear on ESPN.

This doesn't have anything to do with the conference breakdowns. We all know that the big dogs like FSU feed the smaller schools. This has to do with revenue at ESPN and how ESPN retains valuable properties at a pittance in order to subsidize less valuable properties elsewhere.

It is really hard to see how you guys aren't getting that.

I think Frank gets that. It's the BC and Wake fans that are arguing that their schools value is on par with UConn's in a vacuum that is silly.
 
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
1,741
Reaction Score
7,580
Iowa state football... in a P5 conference.. has less singular " value" than a sack of potatoes. Washington State football in the PAC12 ? I think their current QB Drew Bledsoe is pretty good, but still in all. Rutgers football hasn't been much good since the leather helmut days. Lots of others we could name as well that have never played in their current league's football Championship game... or else, it was maybe back in the 70's, 80's Paleolithic Age of college football or whatever. Life is so unfair sometimes, so what else is new ?

So you've gone from making idiotic arguments to, "It sucks to be you guys?"

LOL F off dude.
 

CL82

2023 NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,516
Reaction Score
206,313
Big 12 issues go deeper with uncertain future following expansion talks

"In July, the Big 12 announced that expansion was back on the table. Candidates surfaced and lobbying began, especially in Texas. The Big 12 eventually narrowed the pool to 12 schools. Of those, six -- Houston, BYU, Cincinnati, Connecticut, South Florida and Central Florida -- generated the most attention."

ESPN is helping, willingly or unwillingly, with exposure.
Were there any great candidates out there? No, not with the potential toxicity swirling around BYU. But think about some of the recent Power 5 expansion additions: Maryland, Rutgers, Colorado, Utah, TCU, West Virginia, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, even Louisville.

This. The whole "no one brings value" thing is
images
 
Last edited:

CL82

2023 NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
56,516
Reaction Score
206,313
I'd argue that UConn, and perhaps few others, account for a disproportionate share of revenue, then we ought to receive disproportionate share of profit. Now the problem is that absent having a place to go, we can't go to Aresco and say pay us what we are worth or we leave.
 
Last edited:

Online statistics

Members online
547
Guests online
3,942
Total visitors
4,489

Forum statistics

Threads
155,811
Messages
4,032,265
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom