(08-22-2012 10:26 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:19 AM)TripleA Wrote:  ^ Yep, the Tonight Show layoffs sent up a little red flag to me, too. That is one of their most profitable shows, I think.

yet the previous poster FAILED to mention that it was ESPN's parent company/network, ABC, finished the 2011-2012 Network TV ratings in LAST PLACE (4th place) in the key demographic 18-49 adult and 18-34 adult age groups.

Strange how that blogger brings up "bad" NBC news yet doesn't do that with ESPN's parent company?

Wonder why?

But then again...we already know why.

I don't agree with Frank on everything, by any stretch, and you and I certainly butt heads, at times, but I'm not sure why you and a couple others are so hard on Frank.

Yep, he has a Big Ten bias. Yes, he looks at things differently than maybe even you and I do. But he almost always tries to back up his opinions with facts, even if they are looked at through his prism. That 's true of any person.

He's a DePaul fan, too. I don't think he has any inherent dislike for the BE. Otherwise, he wouldn't keep showing up here to take some abuse, lol, which he handles better than I do, at times.

(08-22-2012 10:49 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:26 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:19 AM)TripleA Wrote:  ^ Yep, the Tonight Show layoffs sent up a little red flag to me, too. That is one of their most profitable shows, I think.

yet the previous poster FAILED to mention that it was ESPN's parent company/network, ABC, finished the 2011-2012 Network TV ratings in LAST PLACE (4th place) in the key demographic 18-49 adult and 18-34 adult age groups.

Strange how that blogger brings up "bad" NBC news yet doesn't do that with ESPN's parent company?

Wonder why?

But then again...we already know why.

I don't agree with Frank on everything, by any stretch, and you and I certainly butt heads, at times, but I'm not sure why you and a couple others are so hard on Frank.

Huh?

So that other poster can post information about one late night show on NBC (and you jump all over in agreement), yet its WRONG for other posters, like myself, to post FACTS about ESPN's parent company/network, ABC, finished in LAST PLACE in both key demographic groups last season?

Who knew that posting facts would ever be so wrong.

(08-22-2012 10:26 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:19 AM)TripleA Wrote:  ^ Yep, the Tonight Show layoffs sent up a little red flag to me, too. That is one of their most profitable shows, I think.

yet the previous poster FAILED to mention that it was ESPN's parent company/network, ABC, finished the 2011-2012 Network TV ratings in LAST PLACE (4th place) in the key demographic 18-49 adult and 18-34 adult age groups.

Strange how that blogger brings up "bad" NBC news yet doesn't do that with ESPN's parent company?

Wonder why?

But then again...we already know why.

And then you failed to mention that NBC's ranking ahead of ABC were solely because it had the Super Bowl this year.

Quote:Most of NBC’s new shows struggled this season, and many of its returning shows fell to record-low ratings. Yet Peacock benefited from airing the season’s highest-rated special event (Super Bowl XLVI), the highest-rated regular program (Sunday Night Football) and continued to have success with musical competition series The Voice. The Super Bowl alone is worth at least a tenth of a rating point on a network’s season average.

http://insidetv.ew.com/2012/05/24/nbc-ratings-2012/

The .1 difference between ABC and NBC is literally and completely because of the Super Bowl. (That shows you the power of that single game that it can affect the ratings for a network for the entire season that much.) Of course, I'm certainly not saying that ABC did well. Both ABC and NBC are doing horribly in prime time (and I say this as someone that watches both in prime time much more than CBS or Fox).

(08-22-2012 10:49 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:44 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:24 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 09:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The second is about the people who are NOT Big East fans and whether they'd ever flip to NBCSN. That's where ESPN has the advantage and will continue to have the advantage for a long time because of how many different sports properties that they've locked up with long-term contracts. This is a large reason why industry-types are bullish on how much the Big East is going to get in its next contract in the first place - there is very little else available sports-wise out there and most of that has been gobbled up by ESPN. So, that's the major risk. NBCSN will likely be talking about the Big East more, but the trade-off is that the vast majority of the people that are going to see are only Big East fans. The likelihood of fans of any of the other conferences (or the NFL, NBA or MLB) watching that is lower.

I just don't see the lack of casual viewers as a big negative as some think. Assuming the rights fees are the same or better and assuming the windows are the same or better, how much are the casual viewers really worth to the teams/ leagues? Sure NBCSN won't be able to get as much for advertising, but that's their problem.

Maybe I'm biased because the last 3 or 4 years were clearly some of our best years ever and we created our own exposure. But I've always thought the ESPN "exposure dollars" were way overvalued by fans, and last several years pretty much proved it in my mind. And the BE deal is going to be way better than what we had in the MWC.

If I'm a BE fan, I don't think twice about leaving ESPN "exposure dollars" on the table.

It might be NBCSN's problem that they won't draw advertising dollars but those projections will directly affect what NBC/Comcast will pay the Big East in their media deal.

That's the great part of NOT starting up your own tv conf network...in addition to the HUGE start-up costs, its the current TV Network that takes all the risk (i.e. TV contract payments are guaranteed...regardless if only 1 person watches a show or 1 million).

Also, for NBC and NBC Sports (as with other channels), they receive carriage rates from cable & sat providers (NBC Sports has approx 80 Million subscribing homes post Olympics)...as in other guaranteed income per month rolls in...NOT INCLUDING advertising $$$$$.

Yep I know advertising isn't the only thing driving revenue but it will definitely affect how much the Big East gets in their next deal. It's not a deciding factor but my point was that more advertising $$ = higher Big East contract and visa versa.

(08-22-2012 10:51 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:49 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:26 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:19 AM)TripleA Wrote:  ^ Yep, the Tonight Show layoffs sent up a little red flag to me, too. That is one of their most profitable shows, I think.

yet the previous poster FAILED to mention that it was ESPN's parent company/network, ABC, finished the 2011-2012 Network TV ratings in LAST PLACE (4th place) in the key demographic 18-49 adult and 18-34 adult age groups.

Strange how that blogger brings up "bad" NBC news yet doesn't do that with ESPN's parent company?

Wonder why?

But then again...we already know why.

I don't agree with Frank on everything, by any stretch, and you and I certainly butt heads, at times, but I'm not sure why you and a couple others are so hard on Frank.

Huh?

So that other poster can post facts about one show on NBC (and you jump all over in agreement), yet its WRONG for other posters, like myself, to post FACTS about ESPN's parent company/network, ABC?

Sorry I posted facts, not feelings in my post above.

Read your last 3 lines in the post about Frank. Does that seem like just facts, and not opinion, to you? Do you not sound irritated with Frank in that post?

And BTW, I don't "jump all over" somebody else's opinion b/c it's a certain poster. I jump all over things I agree with, even with you, lol.

And I'm not talking about this one time. I'm talking about in general, with Frank. Just my impression. If you don't think that's the case, then fine. I'm entitled to my opinion, though. SF Husky is another example of someone who seems to disagree with Frank on most everything, and is irritated by him. TOGC is another.

And I wasn't trying to start one more stupid internet pissing contest. I was seriously wondering why Frank irritates some people so much. It was an honest, polite observation, not an attack on you. You are entitled to your opinion, which I never have denied.

Anyone want to guess what was the HIGHEST rated regular prime time TV show/series (i.e. not a one time event) in 2011-2012 season and what channel it was on?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
NBC's Sunday Night Football!!! (OMG!!! NBC does well with a SPORTS PROGRAM!!! More so than any dance or singing show or tv drama).

Also, NBC showed the highest year-to-year percentage growth in both key demographics (18-34 at 5% growth and 18-49 at 9% growth), while ABC showed declines in both groups (-4% and -5% respectively).

(08-21-2012 10:49 PM)BatonRougeEscapee Wrote:  "First off, I think we need to go with NBC because there is no room for Big East football on ESPN, plus they've buried us anyway."

You have obviously answered your own question. espn will give us espnu at best for football. I find it hard to believe we won't find a better option.

Just be ready to be blackmailed by ESPN even more. Look what happened to the CAA. CAA made the right choice going with NBCSN, bit paid for it by losing a couple of key schools. But since BE already lost schools...

It seems obvious that NBC would be best for BE FB, with ESPN getting at least a part of basketball.

(08-22-2012 11:07 AM)TripleA Wrote:  It seems obvious that NBC would be best for BE FB, with ESPN getting at least a part of basketball.

This.

(08-22-2012 10:49 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I don't agree with Frank on everything, by any stretch, and you and I certainly butt heads, at times, but I'm not sure why you and a couple others are so hard on Frank.

Yep, he has a Big Ten bias. Yes, he looks at things differently than maybe even you and I do. But he almost always tries to back up his opinions with facts, even if they are looked at through his prism. That 's true of any person.

He's a DePaul fan, too. I don't think he has any inherent dislike for the BE. Otherwise, he wouldn't keep showing up here to take some abuse, lol, which he handles better than I do, at times.

Thank you, TripleA. I appreciate that. I certainly don't have any dislike for the Big East - it was an institutional goal for DePaul to get into the Big East (much like it was for Memphis and UCF) for many years. This was one of the few boards that was actively talking about conference realignment years and years ago (which is a subject that I've long been interested in), so that's I've been contributing here for quite awhile. And yes, I likely look at things from a different prism here than many of the others here, but I would hope that's the entire point of having a message board in the first place as opposed to having an echo chamber. I know that some people like an echo chamber atmosphere where every dissenting viewpoint is dismissed as trolling, but that's not me (and certainly isn't interesting to me). I'm a large believer in performing a full due diligence in every situation (which is why I'm an attorney in the first place), so that means that you have to understand the negative possibilities in a seemingly glowing optimistic view of a deal (which I've seen come to bite people in the a-ss MANY MANY MANY times) or, in turn, temper over-the-top negative criticisms with what's actually been beneficial in a situation. In that respect, I actually like people such as KnightLight that attempt to present data in counterpoints. The people that drive me nuts are the ones that just accept the best possible spin as-is (or, on the flip side, have convinced themselves that nefarious conspiracies are behind every negative thing that happens) and run with it without any logic behind it.

Big East basketball is the key. I don't care what Frank, or anyone else that is critical of The Big East dumping the four letter network says, college basketball fans will seek out Big East basketball no matter what channel it is on. Let's see ESPN hype college basketball while ignoring 1/3 to 1/2 of the Top 25. College basketball will drive an audience to an NBC platform. It's up to Notre dame and Big East football to keep them there once they get in the habit of tuning in.
CJ

If NBCSN is able to get MLB rights this fall, then a Big East fan can legitimately start feeling a lot more comfortable about the network drawing more than just a limited hardcore audience of fans that are only focused upon the NHL and Big East.

Even if NBC-SN gets the MLB package, I still don’t think it drives NBC-SN traffic to anywhere near ESPN levels. The MLB package will be for national games, and outside of the playoffs and World Series, baseball fans watch their team pretty much exclusively.

For me, I want to know how many Saturday and Sunday games the NBC network is giving the Big East—the Jay Leno and Sunday Night Football channel, not NBC Sportsnet. In 2011-12, CBS showed 44 regular season games. That’s the kind of number I’m looking at, as the price for burying another 50-70 games on NBC-SN.

NBC has a plan (and money) for their sports programming...something tells me that they will be very successful in the coming years.
They didn’t get where they are by doing things that lose money.
They lost the bidding for Pac-12 rights.
The Comcast spin was that they were being fiscally responsible, and wouldn’t go over $235 million. If they didn’t panick-bid for USC football, I don’t think they’ll overpay for USF football.

NBC's Sunday Night Football!!! (OMG!!! NBC does well with a SPORTS PROGRAM!!! More so than any dance or singing show or tv drama)
Yeah. NBC, the established over-the-air network. NBC-OTA also gets good ratings with hockey, for the Winter Classic and the NHL finals. The question is whether NBC Sportsnet is going to bring any kind of audience to Big East basketball and football. Judging by the Pac-10 ratings on Versus, and the Big 12 and PAC ratings on FX, probably not.

*****
All that said, I expect that NBC and NBC Sportsnet will be the best option for Big East football—six to eight games a year plus the CCG and the BEast Bowl on NBC, four games every Saturday on NBC-SN (1, 4, 7, and 10pm eastern), the rest syndicated on RSNs or local TV. I can’t see ESPN or Fox Sports offering more than a game-of-the-week package, with the rest syndicated or on ESPN3.

(08-22-2012 11:31 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Big East basketball is the key. I don't care what Frank, or anyone else that is critical of The Big East dumping the four letter network says, college basketball fans will seek out Big East basketball no matter what channel it is on. Let's see ESPN hype college basketball while ignoring 1/3 to 1/2 of the Top 25. College basketball will drive an audience to an NBC platform. It's up to Notre dame and Big East football to keep them there once they get in the habit of tuning in.
CJ

Well, I actually agree with this in part. That's why I think basketball is going to end up being more important (or at least a greater portion) of the new Big East TV contract than what a lot of people are thinking.

(08-22-2012 11:31 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Big East basketball is the key. I don't care what Frank, or anyone else that is critical of The Big East dumping the four letter network says, college basketball fans will seek out Big East basketball no matter what channel it is on. Let's see ESPN hype college basketball while ignoring 1/3 to 1/2 of the Top 25. College basketball will drive an audience to an NBC platform. It's up to Notre dame and Big East football to keep them there once they get in the habit of tuning in.
CJ

But not being on ESPN is still going to hurt. Last fall, over 1,000,000 people watched Temple vs Ohio football on a Tuesday, because that's what ESPN put on when the NBA was locked out. Meanwhile quality PAC and Big 12 games were getting half that rating on Saturday nights on FX.

There's a big risk in the medium to long term in not being on the channel kids, who are future recruits, watch. Unless you're going deep in the NCAA tournament, ESPN will spin you (and us, especially us Johnnies) as a second-rate program on a rinky-dink channel that doesn't get seen.

The only ways to counter that are A) to stay with ESPN or B) to secure a serious over-the-air network package. If you're on the channel the NHL is on, you're toast. If you're on the channel the NFL is on, you're gonna be fine.

(08-22-2012 11:39 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 11:31 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Big East basketball is the key. I don't care what Frank, or anyone else that is critical of The Big East dumping the four letter network says, college basketball fans will seek out Big East basketball no matter what channel it is on. Let's see ESPN hype college basketball while ignoring 1/3 to 1/2 of the Top 25. College basketball will drive an audience to an NBC platform. It's up to Notre dame and Big East football to keep them there once they get in the habit of tuning in.
CJ

Well, I actually agree with this in part. That's why I think basketball is going to end up being more important (or at least a greater portion) of the new Big East TV contract than what a lot of people are thinking.

Because ESPN will seriously big on the Big EAst basketball package. I don't think they'll try very hard to keep Big East football.

(08-22-2012 09:39 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  NBC has a plan (and money) for their sports programming...something tells me that they will be very successful in the coming years.

My concern is that NBC has been slashing budgets across the board. That is not something I like to see when other cable networks are spendign money likes it's water.

(08-22-2012 10:41 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 10:24 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(08-22-2012 09:36 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The second is about the people who are NOT Big East fans and whether they'd ever flip to NBCSN. That's where ESPN has the advantage and will continue to have the advantage for a long time because of how many different sports properties that they've locked up with long-term contracts. This is a large reason why industry-types are bullish on how much the Big East is going to get in its next contract in the first place - there is very little else available sports-wise out there and most of that has been gobbled up by ESPN. So, that's the major risk. NBCSN will likely be talking about the Big East more, but the trade-off is that the vast majority of the people that are going to see are only Big East fans. The likelihood of fans of any of the other conferences (or the NFL, NBA or MLB) watching that is lower.

I just don't see the lack of casual viewers as a big negative as some think. Assuming the rights fees are the same or better and assuming the windows are the same or better, how much are the casual viewers really worth to the teams/ leagues? Sure NBCSN won't be able to get as much for advertising, but that's their problem.

Maybe I'm biased because the last 3 or 4 years were clearly some of our best years ever and we created our own exposure. But I've always thought the ESPN "exposure dollars" were way overvalued by fans, and last several years pretty much proved it in my mind. And the BE deal is going to be way better than what we had in the MWC.

If I'm a BE fan, I don't think twice about leaving ESPN "exposure dollars" on the table.

I see it the opposite way where I believe that a lot of focused college sports fans severely undervalue the casual sports fan. We are all college football fans here, so we don't care about what channel *our* team is playing on as long as we have that channel in their cable package, so we place a higher value on a better time slot as opposed to whether it's on ESPN or the Big Ten Network or local syndication. That audience is MUCH smaller than the casual sports fan audience and, yes, it matters a ton. Why is Florida somehow ranked in this year's AP preseason poll? Why does Notre Dame get an Orange Bowl tie-in that entire conferences aren't able to get? Why is the ACC still in the power club despite a horrific BCS bowl record while the Big East is getting shunned? Would your 2010 TCU team have been in the national championship game if it were in the Big 12 that year as opposed to the MWC?

Whether people like it or not, public perception plays a massive role in college football if only because we need to have polls and committees to determine the national championship as opposed to an NCAA Tournament-style playoff. The new top 4 playoff is going to track heavily with who John Q. Public believes is the top 4, and it's often "out of sight, out of mind" for John Q. Public. That's the system that's going to be in place no matter how many of us will complain about it, and with that system comes a great premium on maximum exposure.

I don't know about that. I actually wonder if what networks you play has any effect on rankings. We reached #3 in 2010 and #4 in 2009 in the MWC. We played two games on ESPN in 2010 (Oregon State and @ SMU), and none in 2009 and got to the basically same spot each year. If there was any bias holding us back, I would argue it was preconceived non-BCS bias and not didn't-play-on-ESPN bias. In 2009, despite playing in a non-BCS league and not playing one game on ESPN, we were basically tied with Cincy in the polls and BCS (actually ahead in the polls), who played several games on ESPN. Didn't seem like the ESPN exposure that year did the Bearcats much good, at least relative to us.

The reality is that the people who vote in polls don't watch a ton of games each week. The coaches basically don't watch any except their game. If they read a boxscore they are goign above and beyond. The AP is largely full of beat writers and national pundits who take in one game in person and catch highlights. Stewart Mandel in his book "bowls, polls, and tattered souls" has an interesting article on polls and how the voters are pretty much used preconceived biases and box scores to rank teams.

The only area I think increased exposure on ESPN might help is with recruiting. But even then, I think it is a minor issue that might help open a door or two, but unlikely to be a major factor in where a kid goes.

(08-22-2012 09:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  So, here's what's left prior to the 2020s that isn't just niche programming:

Big East
MLB
NBA
Big Ten

That's literally it until the end of the decade.

This right here is why NBC must pay whatever it takes to get the Big East. It is not that the Big East itself is that valuable to NBC (it has value, but I beleive more of its value lies in what it can lead to). NBC has a couple of years to pick up the Big East and show they can be a serious player and promote a sports porperty, so that when those contracts come up, they will be taken seriously. Plus the idea is that adding Big East teams will up their distribuition in BE cities, which wil make them more attractive down the line. 'Tis better to have to overpay the Big East by 30% or so as a startup, then it is to have to overpay one of the above that same premium to get them.

Thus the Big East is of absolute importance to NBC, and I think in the Big picture is a big enough deal that Fox and ESPN will try to keep us away from them, just to spite them. It will make for an interesting war to see who comes out on top.

(08-22-2012 10:41 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I see it the opposite way where I believe that a lot of focused college sports fans severely undervalue the casual sports fan. We are all college football fans here, so we don't care about what channel *our* team is playing on as long as we have that channel in their cable package, so we place a higher value on a better time slot as opposed to whether it's on ESPN or the Big Ten Network or local syndication. That audience is MUCH smaller than the casual sports fan audience and, yes, it matters a ton.

Casual fans are by far the most valued viewers of any media company on any channel. Most programs/sports/enterainment shows appeal to their fanbase. The ability to draw in casual fans, is what separates the top tier shows (NFL, Oscars, Emmy's, Sports Championships, American Idol, etc) from the rest.

(08-22-2012 11:31 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Big East basketball is the key. I don't care what Frank, or anyone else that is critical of The Big East dumping the four letter network says, college basketball fans will seek out Big East basketball no matter what channel it is on. Let's see ESPN hype college basketball while ignoring 1/3 to 1/2 of the Top 25. College basketball will drive an audience to an NBC platform. It's up to Notre dame and Big East football to keep them there once they get in the habit of tuning in.
CJ

Stealing my thunder

I am just kidding. I only say that because for the past three years I have pointed that out to anyone who woudl listen, often getting the dated and hollow response of "football drives the bus."

(08-22-2012 12:24 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  'Tis better to have to overpay the Big East by 30% or so as a startup, then it is to have to overpay one of the above that same premium to get them.

30% yes. But not 100% or more.

If ESPN offers $40M a year for Big East football, NBC will likely bid $50M, maybe $60M including an NBC-Big East owned bowl, but not with $100M.