Who actually brings value

[upstater]

Again, for our visitors, (and I don't know why this is so difficult), ESPN pays the conference $19.8m a year (1.8m x 11). UConn alone brings in close to that.

This is what we are talking about. UConn's profits are then redistributed elsewhere by ESPN in order to keep a hold on its in-house branded conference (ACC).

 

[lne001]

You assume a "cliche" Women's game.

That simply is not what UConn WBB had been. It's not ESPN3 ... It's prime time. Prime network. Holidays as the premier match. I'm sorry that you are ignorant & some kind of WBB hating gnome ... but the Women's program has more demand than probably 25 Power 5 Football programs easy.

Prime time is one or two games a year on the national networks. Weeknights is not prime time. As far as ignorant, I'll bet you right now that I have watched more basketball in total, including UConn women's games, than you. And finally, you are so far off your rocker with your last sentence I'll let you slide into the abyss.

 

[Yawkey Way]

The women did a .7 and .8 rating multiple times last year. Against teams like South Carolina and Baylor, they pulled decent numbers. These are not world-beating numbers, though the finals are great (5 ratings in NYC). I don't think Pudge's assumption is off at all. You'll find a lot of P5 football games below that. As a matter of fact, this week's Primetime Saturday night at 8 pm game pulled a .5. UConn women beat that number multiple times last year.

You have to compare apples to apples however. If we take some of the P5 football games matchups with uasppealing or mediocre opponents, that would be relative then to matching that up with Uconn's Women's Basketball games ratings with an inferior or unattractive opponent TV game ratings as well. As such, a BC- Uconn football game ( both suck in football ) would still outdraw in TV ratings a Uconn- BC Women's Basketball game TV rating, where only BC sucks in that sport, but Uconn is in a class by itself in the college sport. Uconn Women's basketball does no better on the West Coast for example with its TV ratings there for a game with a non west school, than a Uconn football game thats televised there does on the West Coast for a non west school's team.

 

[auror]

Again, for our visitors, (and I don't know why this is so difficult), ESPN pays the conference $19.8m a year (1.8m x 11). UConn alone brings in close to that.

This is what we are talking about. UConn's profits are then redistributed elsewhere by ESPN in order to keep a hold on its in-house branded conference (ACC).

How do you know the ACC deal isn't profitable to ESPN by itself? As one of the only bidders in the marketplace, they have most of the leverage in these deals.

 

[upstater]

Prime time is one or two games a year on the national networks. Weeknights is not prime time. As far as ignorant, I'll bet you right now that I have watched more basketball in total, including UConn women's games, than you. And finally, you are so far off your rocker with your last sentence I'll let you slide into the abyss.

You don't know what you are talking about. Pudge is right.

 

[upstater]

How do you know the ACC deal isn't profitable to ESPN by itself? As one of the only bidders in the marketplace, they have most of the leverage in these deals.

Because they just bid against themselves. They just raised up the ACC when they were in the middle of a long-term contract. What they are now doing to the B12 is exactly what they did to the Big East. They will grab up valuable properties, for which they will pay over--and they'll make out in the end because they will then pay a bunch of others less than what they are worth. They screamed at the pro-rata clauses in the B12 contract for precisely this reason.

 

[Fishy]

Some people are too dumb or too impressed with their own thoughts so they can't follow a simple directive.

This thread is now presented without interruption from the Beantown pinhead.

 

[lne001]

Your math is a total failure. The money made by ESPN far exceeds the conference payout. This is the entire point of this thread. It's right in the OPs post.

Really? How much money did ESPN 'make' off UConn, then, in dollars? I'm afraid I don't see it in the OP. Don't worry about answering that question, however, because you can't.

 

[auror]

How do you know the ACC deal isn't profitable to ESPN by itself? As one of the only bidders in the marketplace, they have most of the leverage in these deals.

Because they just bid against themselves. They just raised up the ACC when they were in the middle of a long-term contract. What they are now doing to the B12 is exactly what they did to the Big East. They will grab up valuable properties, for which they will pay over--and they'll make out in the end because they will then pay a bunch of others less than what they are worth. They screamed at the pro-rata clauses in the B12 contract for precisely this reason.

The ACCs contract is apparently flat for the extended term, they did not escalate the value. Also, being willing to extend the contract seems to suggest it was profitable for them.

 

[upstater]

You have to compare apples to apples however. If we take some of the P5 football games matchups with uasppealing or mediocre opponents, that would be relative then to matching that up with Uconn's Women's Basketball games ratings with an inferior or unattractive opponent TV game ratings as well. As such, a BC- Uconn football game ( both suck in football ) would still outdraw in TV ratings a Uconn- BC Women's Basketball game TV rating, where only BC sucks in that sport, but Uconn is in a class by itself in the college sport. Uconn Women's basketball does no better on the West Coast for example with its TV ratings there for a game with a non west school, than a Uconn football game thats televised there does on the West Coast for a non west school's team.

I have no idea you are trying to say, but if you are arguing that watching the #5 college football team in the country play a game over broadcast TV on a Saturday night is less appealing than watching the UConn women, I'll say many more people agree with you than disagree. Look at the ratings of top 25 teams this year. Pudge was not wrong. Several games this past weekend were well over the women's threshold, but most of them weren't. Not USC-Arizona, not FSU-WF, not West Va.-Texas Tech, not Miami-Ga. Tech or Illinois-Nebraska. This is Pudge's point. No one is beating Ohio State-Wisconsin.

 

[upstater]

Really? How much money did ESPN 'make' off UConn, then, in dollars? I'm afraid I don't see it in the OP. Don't worry about answering that question, however, because you can't.

Asked already and answered. My multiple posts already answered this.

 

[upstater]

The ACCs contract is apparently flat for the extended term, they did not escalate the value. Also, being willing to extend the contract seems to suggest it was profitable for them.

Can't be right. The thing that set off the B12 was the extra money coming to the ACC from an ESPN run network for them.

 

[uconndogs]

Some people are too dumb or too impressed with their own thoughts so they can't follow a simple directive.

This thread is now presented without interruption from the Beantown pinhead.

And for this we give thanks.

 

[lne001]

Asked already and answered. My multiple posts already answered this.

OK, you are officially an idiot. After having to suffer rereading all your inane posts in this thread I found 2 that even mentioned a dollar amount, and they did not address the question at all. I asked how much ESPN made in profits off broadcasting UConn games and your answer was some amount the women received 6 years ago and a wild ass guess as to what the men might generate. No mention of football at all.

 

[upstater]

OK, you are officially an idiot. After having to suffer rereading all your inane posts in this thread I found 2 that even mentioned a dollar amount, and they did not address the question at all. I asked how much ESPN made in profits off broadcasting UConn games and your answer was some amount the women received 6 years ago and a wild ass guess as to what the men might generate. No mention of football at all.

Wow, you blew a gasket. Thanks for informing us that weeknight TV isn't primetime. Don't embarrass your alma mater by telling us which dreg school you graduated from. We figured that out already.

 

[billybud]

Can't be right. The thing that set off the B12 was the extra money coming to the ACC from an ESPN run network for them.

We do not know the specifics of the ACC media contract...

What has been reported:

......The ACC Network will increase the league's overall value. Swofford said the many agreements will put the ACC in "the upper echelon of Power 5 conferences" and secure the league's future over the next 20 years.

.....It’s impossible to say how much revenue the ACC Network might generate. That answer will come in time, yet Jordan said with confidence recently that if the network “performs even moderately, it’ll put the ACC in a situation where they’ll be very, very competitive financially” with the SEC and Big Ten.

.....“We don’t announce the numbers on the rights fees but the rights fees, obviously, go up and there’s a more significant jump during the years before we launch the linear network, the ACC Network, in ’19,” Swofford said Thursday. “And then we’re very confident in what the network will bring financially.”

......There are the obvious financial ramifications of adding a conference network. Though no one would discuss specifics, once launched in August 2019, the ACC’s network will likely add between $5 million and $8 million to each school’s budget (and for the next two years, in the run-up to launch, the ACC’s rights deal will increase). It will lift the ACC into third place in revenue among Power Five leagues, behind the Big Ten and SEC but ahead of the Big 12 andPac-12. It’s not necessarily a bonanza, but it’s not insignificant.

 

[epark88]

We basically we need to become the Texas or Oklahoma of the AAC.

Pffft.

What, becoming the UConn of College Basketball wasn't enough?...

 

[huskymedic]

Prime time is one or two games a year on the national networks. Weeknights is not prime time. As far as ignorant,

Curious - When is "prime time" in your world?

 

[JeepCSC]

Again, for our visitors, (and I don't know why this is so difficult), ESPN pays the conference $19.8m a year (1.8m x 11). UConn alone brings in close to that.

This is what we are talking about. UConn's profits are then redistributed elsewhere by ESPN in order to keep a hold on its in-house branded conference (ACC).

UConn's profits are being redistributed to the rest of the AAC. If your argument is that the AAC is subsidizing the ACC, I'd be interested in the argument. But that is different than UConn subsidizing Wake Forest. Because that last sentence is not any way to look at anything happening with contracts and conferences.

 

[JeepCSC]

Your math is a total failure. The money made by ESPN far exceeds the conference payout. This is the entire point of this thread. It's right in the OPs post.

If you are venturing away from UConn subsidizing Wake Forest to the AAC subsidizing the ACC (which I'm now getting the impression is where you now want to take this), that becomes a different conversation.

So obviously ESPN makes more money than the conference payout. They'd be a poor business model if they merely broke even. I guess you are saying they have a bigger profit margin on the AAC and they use that to funnel money to the ACC where their profit margin is smaller. Is that the gist? Because that's nowhere in the original post or any subsequent post I've seen (to be fair I've merely glossed the last few pages). I don't know the rate of return on AAC football brings them compared to ACC football, as I imagine that is where most of the profit is made. I can guesstimate given viewers who see games, but it would be crude and not really beneficial in the end since we don't actually have access to to ESPN's books. It's an interesting theory, perhaps compelling for UConn fans who are getting screwed by being so out of place in your conference. But it's still a much different argument than the original post which was almost exclusively about UConn subsidizing teams in other conferences, which is just bizarre on the face when it has actual conference mates it is actually subsidizing without having to twist the term subsidizing beyond all normal uses of the word.

 

[CL82]

I don't assume that "any" P5 game is worth than any G5 game. However, I do think there's quite a bit of evidence that the top 1 or 2 games from each P5 conference per week consistently get bigger ratings than what the G5 can offer. Those top 1 or 2 games are where the outsized ratings come from (and in turn, what the outsized payouts are based upon).

The point, Frank, is that we aren't talking "any" G5 team. We are talking about the University of Connecticut. We routinely outdraw P5 teams.

 

[CL82]

UConn's profits are being redistributed to the rest of the AAC. If your argument is that the AAC is subsidizing the ACC, I'd be interested in the argument. But that is different than UConn subsidizing Wake Forest. Because that last sentence is not any way to look at anything happening with contracts and conferences.

I think one can fairly make the argument that money not spent on the American is money that is available to be spent elsewhere. ESPN has with some regularity decided the winners and losers in CR, most recently by telling the B12 that no network money was available and then publicly announcing that were going to establish one for the ACC. That single decision devalued the B12 and likely started a chain of event that will result in it's demise.

 

[HoopsFan21]

UConn's profits are being redistributed to the rest of the AAC. If your argument is that the AAC is subsidizing the ACC, I'd be interested in the argument. But that is different than UConn subsidizing Wake Forest. Because that last sentence is not any way to look at anything happening with contracts and conferences.

The tax payers of the State of Connecticut are subsidizing the ACC. That's enough to annoy me, never mind the hit the University has taken as a result of ESPN's meddling in conference realignment to protect the high profit margin UConn content provides. This shell game of "your beef is not with ESPN, Wake Forest, or the ACC, it's with your own conference!" isn't fooling anyone. It's a zero sum game: the dollars taken out of UConn and the tax payers pockets are helping fund the ACC network and the Wake Forests of the P5 conferences. You guys can pretend that the ACC dollars are siloed, but we all know it doesn't work that way anymore than you and your spouse keeping your incomes and expenses separate.

 

[JeepCSC]

I never said your beef wasn't with ESPN. It was the AAC and ESPN that came up with your contract, and if you feel your contract is wrong it is with those two you have your problems. Wake just wouldn't hurt a fly, so I wish you wouldn't pick on them. If you must go after a bottom-feeder in a different conference, make it NC State. I still might not understand the logic except in the most convoluted of ways, but it's doubtful I'd interrupt your bashing.

 

[MattMang23]

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.

I never said your beef wasn't with ESPN. It was the AAC and ESPN that came up with your contract, and if you feel your contract is wrong it is with those two you have your problems. Wake just wouldn't hurt a fly, so I wish you wouldn't pick on them. If you must go after a bottom-feeder in a different conference, make it NC State. I still might not understand the logic except in the most convoluted of ways, but it's doubtful I'd interrupt your bashing.

Well, according to billybud, it appears Wake skipped hurting flies and jumped right to hurting about 65 Division 1 FBS athletic departments.

 

[auggie22]

I'm surprised this conversation is still a thing.

To keep FSU from bolting, ESPN had to further overpay Wake in order to satisfy the "valuable properties" in the ACC... to make their numbers and still fill the air with something watchable, they had to acquire other properties (AAC) more valuable than Wake and under pay them. UCONN is subsidizing the majority of the AAC. The AAC is subsidizing the ACC contract. Te valuable properties in the ACC are subsidizing Wake. Thus, UCONN is subsidizing Wake.

 

[TerryD]

I think one can fairly make the argument that money not spent on the American is money that is available to be spent elsewhere. ESPN has with some regularity decided the winners and losers in CR, most recently by telling the B12 that no network money was available and then publicly announcing that were going to establish one for the ACC. That single decision devalued the B12 and likely started a chain of event that will result in it's demise.

Agreed. I think that ESPN had to pick a horse, and picked the East Coast ACC versus the Plains States Big 12.

I think that it was as simple as that.

 

[upstater]

Agreed. I think that ESPN had to pick a horse, and picked the East Coast ACC versus the Plains States Big 12.

I think that it was as simple as that.

Yes, you get it. Many of us said this.

 

[upstater]

This came from the Mizzou 2010 article posted elsewhere:

"They were gone and then ESPN was like if that deal blows up, we’ve got to go back and rework all of our contracts and FOX has the Pac-12 contract and it was a, there’s a term for it, not sunken costs, it was a loss leader. This idea like we’re gonna lose money on this Longhorn thing, maybe forever. Maybe eventually we’ll make money on it, but we’re gonna lose a whole hell of a lot more money if all of a sudden OU and Texas and Oklahoma State and somebody else goes to the PAC 12. Chip Brown had it right. At the last second that thing got blown up.”

There you go. Overpay for one, profit from another.

 

[Stinger92860]

Wow, you blew a gasket. Thanks for informing us that weeknight TV isn't primetime. Don't embarrass your alma mater by telling us which dreg school you graduated from. We figured that out already.

Upstater, what's wrong with you? We all know that ESPN shows UConn wbb in prime time to lose money. It's a producers like scheme.