Yes, seems this channel started as Outdoor Living Network, then Versus, and only recently became NBCSN. NBC must want this to succeed, which might bode well for our exposure. It's up to NBC how much effort they put into pushing the channel, but they have the big hammer at their disposal with their broadcast channel.

Look-ins are standard in every TV contract these days. It appears that ajerseyguy has received some type of directive from Providence to spin it into a unique positive to fans that don't realize that this is boilerplate language that means very little. We haven't seen any network simply add more money to a contract unilaterally under a look-in clause even though these look-ins have existed for many years with many different conferences. All renegotiations of contracts have been spurred by some type of trigger (e.g. expansion, networks deciding that they don't want a conference that's under attack to split apart like how Fox and ESPN saved the Big 12, etc.). Remember that ratings were hard to come by in the Big East even with Louisville, Rutgers, Pitt and Syracuse in this league. As a result, it's foolhardy to think that the league will end up getting some type of bonus based on the lineup that the Big East is offering with viewership numbers on fledgling NBC Sports Network. I know that's what the optimists will latch onto for the next couple of years (and I can't blame them for trying to put the best face on the situation), but like every single other rosy projection that has been made (and has turned out to be false), it's not realistic.

(02-13-2013 10:53 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Look-ins are standard in every TV contract these days. It appears that ajerseyguy has received some type of directive from Providence to spin it into a unique positive to fans that don't realize that this is boilerplate language that means very little. We haven't seen any network simply add more money to a contract unilaterally under a look-in clause even though these look-ins have existed for many years with many different conferences. All renegotiations of contracts have been spurred by some type of trigger (e.g. expansion, networks deciding that they don't want a conference that's under attack to split apart like how Fox and ESPN saved the Big 12, etc.). Remember that ratings were hard to come by in the Big East even with Louisville, Rutgers, Pitt and Syracuse in this league. As a result, it's foolhardy to think that the league will end up getting some type of bonus based on the lineup that the Big East is offering with viewership numbers on fledgling NBC Sports Network. I know that's what the optimists will latch onto for the next couple of years (and I can't blame them for trying to put the best face on the situation), but like every single other rosy projection that has been made (and has turned out to be false), it's not realistic.

Oh I agree unless there is language in the deal that specifically says if you guys accomplish this or meet some sort of tangible threshold the idea they'd give more money to the league out of the goodness of their heart is stupid. The only glimmer of hope I am holding out for is that there is going to to be a specified number of football games a year on NBC OTA, but that's probably a pipe dream more than anything based in reality. The likely truth is they are going to treat the Big East like a second rate product since they are paying a second rate price.

The ACTUAL contract has not been seen yet nor signed. Yet when a guy like the jersey guy makes it look somewhat attractive to the Big East, then he is spinning. But when Mc Murphy from ESPN brings in the crappy news then thats a fact.

Sorry I think the truth lies somewhere in between. We will probably get not great money but will get more exposure.

At the end it will be up to each school to succeed and move on.

(02-13-2013 11:02 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The ACTUAL contract has not been seen yet nor signed. Yet when a guy like the jersey guy makes it look somewhat attractive to the Big East, then he is spinning. But when Mc Murphy from ESPN brings in the crappy news then thats a fact.

Sorry I think the truth lies somewhere in between. We will probably get not great money but will get more exposure.

At the end it will be up to each school to succeed and move on.

Actually the fact that JerseyGuy is trying so hard to spin this shows that McMurphy was right and the contract is horrible.

The money is no doubt horrible. It's worse than even the biggest pessimist ever predicted. The question at this point is how is the exposure and the non-monetary details of the deal?

(02-13-2013 11:02 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The ACTUAL contract has not been seen yet nor signed. Yet when a guy like the jersey guy makes it look somewhat attractive to the Big East, then he is spinning. But when Mc Murphy from ESPN brings in the crappy news then thats a fact.

Sorry I think the truth lies somewhere in between. We will probably get not great money but will get more exposure.

At the end it will be up to each school to succeed and move on.

Perhaps... but we keep hearing that this is a deal aimed toward a long-term vision as a GROUP. Early ESPN has been mentioned, with their history with the Big East.
Since it's been clearly stated that the long-term vision is to be competitive with conferences 1-5, I'm wondering what tangible road from this contract is there to achieve that jump. What can we (our universities) do?
It's also been said that this lowball figure is the result of a perception problem (stemming from the defections). Thus, it would stand to reason that if we tangibly curbed perception than we should be paid for it.
Now, I realize that winning a MNC is the longest of longshots considering the revenue gap. Nevertheless, if our horse came in, you'd think that it should yield a bountiful harvest. Why WOULDN'T NBC sign off on that given the (un)realistic odds?
Having an incumbent national champion in our ranks would be a windfall for the network, as well as a statement that the gap has largely closed.
In professional sports contracts, these kinds of incentives are fairly common. I'm wondering (if our objective is really long-term parity with conferences 1-5) how else are we going to affect that upward mobility?
As has been said, we're going to need comparable cashflow, eventually, if the league is to grow with the network. If we build prestige to sell, than some of the profits should be put back into the programs. This goes for basketball and football.

(02-13-2013 10:53 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Look-ins are standard in every TV contract these days. It appears that ajerseyguy has received some type of directive from Providence to spin it into a unique positive to fans that don't realize that this is boilerplate language that means very little. We haven't seen any network simply add more money to a contract unilaterally under a look-in clause even though these look-ins have existed for many years with many different conferences. All renegotiations of contracts have been spurred by some type of trigger (e.g. expansion, networks deciding that they don't want a conference that's under attack to split apart like how Fox and ESPN saved the Big 12, etc.). Remember that ratings were hard to come by in the Big East even with Louisville, Rutgers, Pitt and Syracuse in this league. As a result, it's foolhardy to think that the league will end up getting some type of bonus based on the lineup that the Big East is offering with viewership numbers on fledgling NBC Sports Network. I know that's what the optimists will latch onto for the next couple of years (and I can't blame them for trying to put the best face on the situation), but like every single other rosy projection that has been made (and has turned out to be false), it's not realistic.

Exactly. There is absolutley nothing unique about this contract. Its just a crap contract on an underfunded network that has never recieved any significant support from the parent company. NBC buys bargain basement sports (ice skating, college hockey, D-3 football, foriegn soccer, sailing, off brand fighting, etc.) and cheap to make talking head shows to fill all that unwatched air time. Any argument to the contrary ignores the factual history of this network. Unless there is some guranteed exposure on NBC OTA, then this is a disaster.

(02-13-2013 11:02 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The ACTUAL contract has not been seen yet nor signed. Yet when a guy like the jersey guy makes it look somewhat attractive to the Big East, then he is spinning. But when Mc Murphy from ESPN brings in the crappy news then thats a fact.

Sorry I think the truth lies somewhere in between. We will probably get not great money but will get more exposure.

At the end it will be up to each school to succeed and move on.

You have to admit, every single good news spin for this conference has been wrong up to now....so, expecting the bad to be correct is just kinda goin with the flow at this point...

(02-13-2013 11:02 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The ACTUAL contract has not been seen yet nor signed. Yet when a guy like the jersey guy makes it look somewhat attractive to the Big East, then he is spinning. But when Mc Murphy from ESPN brings in the crappy news then thats a fact.

Sorry I think the truth lies somewhere in between. We will probably get not great money but will get more exposure.

At the end it will be up to each school to succeed and move on.

McMurphy and Ralph Russo from the AP (someone that went out of his way to Tweet me last night that he didn't believe that ESPN was clean in conference realignment, so he's definitely not in the bag with the Bristol people) are reporting the exact same thing. This isn't a "truth lies somewhere in between" situation. You could have argued that back when we were talking about estimates from vague industry sources, but this offer is real and the likelihood of the terms becoming significantly different at this point are very low. I know some people have this knee jerk reaction to whatever McMurphy says for various reasons (whether it was his time in Florida or the fact that he now works for ESPN), but let's face it: he's been a LOT more right than wrong compared to ajerseyguy or really anyone other than possibly Pete Thamel on all realignment, TV contract and playoff issues. He's been reporting a lot of bad news because there simply HAS been a lot of bad news about the Big East lately when it comes down to it. I have no idea why anyone (even the biggest Big East optimist) believes a single position coming out of Aresco's office at this point - EVERY single one has been wrong in the past 5 months (if not worse than what was expected). Why is the latest spin from the conference office going to suddenly be correct? How can anyone be anything less than 100% skeptical of anything that comes out of Providence with this horrific track record? It boggles my mind.

(02-13-2013 08:58 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  I understand that the proposed contract could/would be revisted every 2 years. I'd be interested to know the parameters under which it would get bumped.

To my knowledge, these were assumptions (re: hopes) made by some posters on here, not anything that has been reported as actually part of the contract.I don't know that it's not, but has not been reported anywhere that it has, and that would be uncommon in the industry (as far as a lookin every two years).

This is NBC we are talking about. Let's put it this way. The Tonight Show last year had the highest ratings it had in the past 5 years, killing it's competition. Their reward: a 10% reduction in of staff and paycuts across the board. That is how Comcast "rewards" people.

(02-13-2013 12:13 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 08:58 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  I understand that the proposed contract could/would be revisted every 2 years. I'd be interested to know the parameters under which it would get bumped.

To my knowledge, these were assumptions (re: hopes) made by some posters on here, not anything that has been reported as actually part of the contract.I don't know that it's not, but has not been reported anywhere that it has, and that would be uncommon in the industry (as far as a lookin every two years).

This is NBC we are talking about. Let's put it this way. The Tonight Show last year had the highest ratings it had in the past 5 years, killing it's competition. Their reward: a 10% reduction in of staff and paycuts across the board. That is how Comcast "rewards" people.

Unless NBC/Comcast was paying big bucks, I have no idea why anyone would sign with them. This is a huge mistake.

Maybe everybody gets a free trip to Universal Studios in Florida....actually hold the conference tournament in Orlando. Conference champion of the Big East versus MWC conference champion in Houston as the top bowl game?

(02-13-2013 11:37 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  Perhaps... but we keep hearing that this is a deal aimed toward a long-term vision as a GROUP. Early ESPN has been mentioned, with their history with the Big East.

That was spin by jerseyguy. That idea did not come from NBC, or any other articles on the offer.

(02-13-2013 11:46 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Its just a crap contract on an underfunded network that has never recieved any significant support from the parent company. .

This isn't really true. Did you know that NBC outbid everyone else for the original Thursday Night NFL package? They also were goign to bid nearly $1 billion for the other half of the Thrusday package that recently was created, which is twice as much per game as ESPN pays for Monday Night football, only with a much worse slate of games. They also had th ehighest bid for the ACC (EPSN matched) and had the single highest bid for the PAC 12 (ESPN and Fox combined to outbid them). So it's unfair to say that it does not receive support.

(02-13-2013 12:05 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 11:02 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  The ACTUAL contract has not been seen yet nor signed. Yet when a guy like the jersey guy makes it look somewhat attractive to the Big East, then he is spinning. But when Mc Murphy from ESPN brings in the crappy news then thats a fact.

Sorry I think the truth lies somewhere in between. We will probably get not great money but will get more exposure.

At the end it will be up to each school to succeed and move on.

McMurphy and Ralph Russo from the AP (someone that went out of his way to Tweet me last night that he didn't believe that ESPN was clean in conference realignment, so he's definitely not in the bag with the Bristol people) are reporting the exact same thing. This isn't a "truth lies somewhere in between" situation. You could have argued that back when we were talking about estimates from vague industry sources, but this offer is real and the likelihood of the terms becoming significantly different at this point are very low. I know some people have this knee jerk reaction to whatever McMurphy says for various reasons (whether it was his time in Florida or the fact that he now works for ESPN), but let's face it: he's been a LOT more right than wrong compared to ajerseyguy or really anyone other than possibly Pete Thamel on all realignment, TV contract and playoff issues. He's been reporting a lot of bad news because there simply HAS been a lot of bad news about the Big East lately when it comes down to it. I have no idea why anyone (even the biggest Big East optimist) believes a single position coming out of Aresco's office at this point - EVERY single one has been wrong in the past 5 months (if not worse than what was expected). Why is the latest spin from the conference office going to suddenly be correct? How can anyone be anything less than 100% skeptical of anything that comes out of Providence with this horrific track record? It boggles my mind.

So plain and simple do you believe Aresco should be fired?

(02-13-2013 12:20 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Unless NBC/Comcast was paying big bucks, I have no idea why anyone would sign with them. This is a huge mistake.

In a more ideal world, let's say the BE as we knew it coming into this year had stayed in tact. Lousiville, Rutgers, ND, the C7, Boise, and SD St are all in the n.BE. Even then, and even if NBC was paying an average of $12 million a year to "all-sport members" as some had suggested, NBC alone STILL would have been a bad idea. NBC in conjuction with someone else, maybe. But the problem with NBCis the BE football brand simply is not, nor was ever, strong enough to "carry" a network alone. And as good as the basketball is, with little promotion, it would still be hard for non-BE fans to find, especially football. Not the way they currently operate anyway (if they reopened NBA OTA to full fledged weekend sports like they used to be, it might be a different animal). That was my feeling 8-9 months ago.

My preference was always a package with Turner, who does more to promote their shows than anyone. If you watch any show on Thrusday on TNT or TBS, you will see an add, a decal, or a superimposed image on the screen for NBA on TNT. During the summer, the same thing happens on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday for Sunday baseball on TBS. That's how you promote something.

The people I've spoken to seem pretty satisfied/mildly happy with whatever is on the table for this deal. Don't have any details yet.... still fishing.

(02-13-2013 12:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 12:05 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I have no idea why anyone (even the biggest Big East optimist) believes a single position coming out of Aresco's office at this point - EVERY single one has been wrong in the past 5 months (if not worse than what was expected). Why is the latest spin from the conference office going to suddenly be correct? How can anyone be anything less than 100% skeptical of anything that comes out of Providence with this horrific track record? It boggles my mind.

So plain and simple do you believe Aresco should be fired?

I know you weren't asking me, but the only thing worse than the spin put out, would have been the truth. So can you blame him?

(02-13-2013 12:20 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Unless NBC/Comcast was paying big bucks, I have no idea why anyone would sign with them. This is a huge mistake.

At this point it doesn't appear anyone was offering anything. Could the league seriously just negotiate no TV deal and let every school negotiate their own deals? Hell ECU could probably do something regionally with their full complement of rights that could make more than 2 million a year.

(02-13-2013 12:32 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 12:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 12:05 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I have no idea why anyone (even the biggest Big East optimist) believes a single position coming out of Aresco's office at this point - EVERY single one has been wrong in the past 5 months (if not worse than what was expected). Why is the latest spin from the conference office going to suddenly be correct? How can anyone be anything less than 100% skeptical of anything that comes out of Providence with this horrific track record? It boggles my mind.

So plain and simple do you believe Aresco should be fired?

I know you weren't asking me, but the only thing worse than the spin put out, would have been the truth. So can you blame him?

No the truth would have been better, because Aresco allowed people to continue thinking a good TV deal was still achievable. He continued to oversell and if this is truly the value he should have long ago started trying to reign people in and brace people.