http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/vie...p?t=485052

ABC/ESPN have made their offer now that Fox's exclusive window has ended and their offer has the possibility of all their bowl games to end on ESPN instead of ABC.

This would be a horrible idea. The BCS' greed will be their downfall. ESPN will not get the ratings needed to sustain the insane amount of money that the BCS wants. Only an OTA network can get those kind of ratings.

Metropolis777 Wrote:This would be a horrible idea. The BCS' greed will be their downfall. ESPN will not get the ratings needed to sustain the insane amount of money that the BCS wants. Only an OTA network can get those kind of ratings.

But, next year, everything will be digital, meaning everyone has to get either cable or satellite. So, theoretically, ESPN should be everywhere.

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:But, next year, everything will be digital, meaning everyone has to get either cable or satellite. So, theoretically, ESPN should be everywhere.

Wrong--you can still elect to just get free OTA TV if you have a digital TV (i.e. HDTV) or the little converter box for your old school TV.

Jose_Jalapeno_on_a_Stick Wrote:

Metropolis777 Wrote:This would be a horrible idea. The BCS' greed will be their downfall. ESPN will not get the ratings needed to sustain the insane amount of money that the BCS wants. Only an OTA network can get those kind of ratings.

But, next year, everything will be digital, meaning everyone has to get either cable or satellite. So, theoretically, ESPN should be everywhere.

Not true. You are confusing the need for an over-the-air signal to be digital vs. cable companies using digital technology to increase capacity to deliver more HD content.

Some cable companies have converted over parts of their systems to cable, such as Comcast's Chicagoland systems. Most will continue to have an analog (ie. no cable box required) tier for a few years.

Over-the-air TV using an antenna will require a digital tuner, but that has no bearing on ESPN being available to everyone.

ESPN is bidding for something that won't be around for long. A playoff is inevitable...

Metropolis777 Wrote:This would be a horrible idea. The BCS' greed will be their downfall. ESPN will not get the ratings needed to sustain the insane amount of money that the BCS wants. Only an OTA network can get those kind of ratings.

ESPN is actually paying more for Monday Night Football than any of the OTA networks are for their NFL games (and ESPN doesn't have the flexibility in scheduling the same way as the other networks - a bad December MNF matchup picked last spring can't be switched, while the other networks can adjust):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_on_television

The deal is that ESPN can actually afford to pay much more for sports programming than the OTA networks. ESPN, like all basic cable networks, receive a dual revenue stream of both subscriber fees and advertising fees, so they are able to turn a profit on major sports programming. OTA networks, on the other hand, only get advertising fees that often don't cover the cost of sports programming - for the OTA networks, sports are often loss leaders to draw in viewers to promote and lead-in to their other programs. Since ESPN garners the most subscriber fees of any cable network by a large margin (not to mention the additional fees they get from ESPN2, ESPN News, etc.), they have a ton of cash to spend on sports programming. Of course, when they start buying up premium sports programming such as the NFL (or, as we're discussing here, possibly the BCS), then ESPN is then perceived to be even more valuable and can subsequently charge even more per subscriber (and the circle of prosperity for them continues).

I don't think that it's a good idea for the BCS to go entirely to cable from an access standpoint (college football isn't a niche sports property), but be forewarned that ESPN absolutely can pay more than anyone else from a pure financial angle. It's not an accident that we already see events such as the NBA conference finals and the MLB LCS moving to cable, which were previously thought to be untouchable OTA properties. Sports unequivocally aid the bottom line at cable networks such as ESPN and TBS/TNT while they are often a financial drag at OTA networks.

ESPN would be making a big mistake. BCS is exclusion and no americans wants to be excluded from anything. ESPN is not the only sport station around and that number is growing everyday. The BCS is serious danger because of their greed. Every columnist and sport broadcaster is calling for a play off system from ESPN to newspaper to talk radio. Fans are not buying the bull the BCS is sprewing. ESPN run a huge risk of alienating the fans from them if they do this. ESPN would be saying they all for this, when the own announcer are calling for a play off system and a station job is to give their viewer what they want. The backlash could be almost impossible to overcome.
BCS percception is that of exclusion and american dont want to be excluded from anything. BCS was flawed from the beginning and now it has spread threw the conference it was set up to benefit. When coaches are questioning the criteria to make a nc games and no one knows what they are, then they are in trouble. When the people who are supposed to be in charge dont know, then you know things are bad. People are sick and tired of the same few teams being the only ones who can play for nc and find out that they shouldnt have been in one to begin with. This has been what the BCS has become.
The facts are the BCS was set up for attendance in bowl game and people have figured this out. Whether it is in writing or not, people know this is what the BCS is all about and nothing more. The Orange, Rose, Sugar and Fiesta bowls have damage their reputation for the greed of the almighty dollar. Those bowls will never be able to get the fine reputation that they once enjoyed. When the play off starts, they will be religated to weeknite games or games stuck in between play off games. Viewership will suffer because of this and then what kind of tv deals will they get for their greed. Station like people remember greediness and so they should.
ESPN must know that cable companies and satellites have more choice of sport station than just them. People will remember this and as always they usually turn on you when you betrayed them. American are fickle when comes to sports. A reporter said the difference between fb and bb is that the excitement of the NCAA tournament is so much more than the fb NC game because the "Cinderella" factor is missing. That is why the NCAA tournament is more exciting and has people talking more about bb than fb bowl games put together. Americans loves to root for the underdogs, but the fb side of thing dont have this. Maybe, that why the rating for fb bowl game is not near what the tournament gets. The reporter said look at last year fb nc game compared to the bb. two powerhouses teams didnt create the interest that the bb final did. Again he said the Cinderella factor has peak americans interest and that is something fb needs to figure out how to bring that into the NC games. Remember Boise ST beating Oklahoma in the Fiesta bowl, remember a downtrowned WVU playing without their HC, and found a way to beat powerhouse Georgia. This is what is missing in football games for the NC games. Under the policies of the BCS, a non-bcs will never get the opportunities to play under no circumstance. I guess, you can add the Big East to that list also unless you are the only undefeated team in the country, and I am willing to bet that the SOS wiil used against you to get another big BCS school in your place. I mean that with no disrespect to the Big East either. Perception is what the BCS is set up for.

Chattanooga: FCS final will move to January
By: John Frierson | (Contact)
Wednesday, Oct. 29, 2008 , 12:00 a.m.

The plan for expansion of the Football Championship Subdivision playoffs is set, NCAA director of football and baseball Damani Leech said Tuesday, and the 2010 championship game will be played on Jan. 5, 2011, the night before the Bowl Championship Series title game.

Chattanooga’s Finley Stadium has been the title game’s home since 1997, and the game has traditionally been played on the Friday before the third Saturday in December, such as this year’s game on Dec. 19.

Leech said the latest expansion proposal was approved earlier this month by both the FCS committee and the NCAA Sport Management Cabinet, and it will be presented in its final form to the NCAA Presidents Advisory Group today in Indianapolis.

“It has been approved at this point, it’s set, and what’s happening tomorrow is just the presentation of the updated proposal,” Leech said.

Beginning in 2010, the playoffs will expand from 16 to 20 teams and thus require an extra round of games. They will begin as they do now, a week after the regular season ends. The semifinals will be played on that third weekend in December and then the title game will be played between Dec. 29 and the BCS title game, depending on ESPN’s schedule, Leech said.

“I think this opens up some pretty interesting possibilities,” said Tom Yeager, commissioner of the Colonial Athletic Association. “At the end of the day, there’s questions about what is good for the regular season and what can help the championship grow. There could some be some neat tie-ins (by putting the title games back to back).”

When playoff expansion was discussed last year, two of the other proposals for how to deal with the extra round of the playoffs were to start the season a week earlier or eliminate the off week. Neither idea was popular for a variety of reasons, Leech said, but most of the FCS conferences approved the date change. The two that didn’t were the Southern Conference, home to the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, the host school for the title game, and the Big Sky.

“One of the big concerns we had, and I know the Big Sky had similar concerns, was that we would lose the momentum that we’ve built over the years,” SoCon commissioner John Iamarino said. “We felt like the path of least resistance was to eliminate the open week, which would allow us to keep the championship game where it was.”

UTC athletic director Rick Hart is also against the switch.

“I don’t personally think this decision is in the best interests of the game,” he said Tuesday. “I think it could significantly impact a lot of the equity that has built up in the game.

Because of the flexibility with the dates, Hart said, “it’s going to be challenging, year to year, to commit to a game, not only as a host institution, when you don’t know when it’s going to occur.”

A Finley Stadium-record crowd of 23,010 attended last year’s championship game between Appalachian State and Delaware, and local interest and attendance has grown dramatically in recent years.

For the Greater Chattanooga Sports and Events Committee, which coordinates the event, the primary issue with expansion was keeping the game and game-week activities from taking place right around Christmas, which would create staffing problems and likely affect ticket sales.

“The thing that we absolutely wanted to avoid (playing around Christmas), we avoided,” Sports Committee president Merrill Eckstein said. “One of the advantages would be a ‘National Championship Week,’ if ESPN promoted it that way. It could end up giving us a heck of a national TV audience and we could do well at the gate as well.”

“The reaction here would be, let’s go do it in 2010 and see what happens.”

Chattanooga has a contract to host the game this year and in 2009, as well as an exclusive negotiating window to host the game the next two years. Eckstein said in the past the committee has always opted for a two-year contract, but because the move to late December or early January would be such a dramatic change, he would consider a one-year deal for 2010 to see how it goes before committing to anything beyond that.

“We love having the game in Chattanooga,” Leech said, “and we want the game to stay in Chattanooga.”

This article appeared in the Chattanooga Times Free Press on Wednesday, October 29, 2008.

bitcruncher Wrote:ESPN is bidding for something that won't be around for long. A playoff is inevitable...

i'm unsure about that

FCS title game could be moved
If approved, teams would play on eve of national title game
By JOHN O'CONNOR | TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER

The Football Championship Subdivision title game may move to the eve of the Bowl Championship Series title game, starting with the 2010 season.

The proposal has been endorsed by the FCS committee and could be approved this week by the NCAA Board of Directors, according to Colonial Athletic Association Commissioner Tom Yeager.

"Not only is this a good option, it might very well be a better option," Yeager said.

Since 1997, the FCS championship game has been held in mid-December in Chattanooga, Tenn., and concluded four consecutive weekends of tournament competition. This proposal would suspend the FCS tournament following mid-December semifinals, allow the championship-game qualifiers to break for the holidays, then meet in a nationally televised game the night before the early-January BCS (Football Bowl Subdivision) championship game.

"We think it's going to present a fairly unique opportunity for us," Yeager said. Athletic directors at schools that play CAA football and their coaches enthusiastically support the proposal, he added.

"This way, it's going to replicate kind of a bowl experience," Yeager said. The missing piece so far is a venue. Yeager said the NCAA would study warm-weather and indoor possibilities.

The plan, if passed, will address an FCS scheduling issue. Beginning in 2010, the Big South Conference and the Northeast Conference get automatic bids to the FCS playoffs. The field will grow from 16 to 20, with two at-large bids added. But the FCS title game would have stayed in mid-December, per TV consideration.

That would have caused regular-season competition to end a week earlier than usual to accommodate expanded playoffs, meaning no byes during the regular season. A January FCS title game would allow for the continuation of teams' regular-season bye weeks because the tournament, even with an expanded field, would not need to start sooner than it currently does. Semifinals would be held when the championship game has been played.

This article appeared in the Richmond Times-Dispatch on Tuesday, October 28, 2008.