This is a pretty good article. ESPN>>>>>>>>FOX.

... "In week 3, FOX went with two games. The Illinois-Washington game at 4 pm was not a glamorous matchup, but did combine the footprints of the Big 10 and PAC 12. That game did a 0.7 rating, whipped soundly in the same slot by Iowa State-Iowa on ESPN (1.0). The noon ESPN game of VT-ECU, with a 1.7 rating, more than doubled the Illinois-Washington rating.

Then in prime time, FOX had #12 UCLA-Texas, featuring Texas’ big brand, an undefeated and highly rated UCLA team, and a pretty close game throughout. It’s 1.6 rating was beaten soundly in its slot by Tennessee-Oklahoma (2.2) and Notre Dame-Purdue (1.9), and was still lower rated than earlier games like VT-ECU and Ohio State-Kent State."... .

http://www.tomahawknation.com/2014/10/9/...-that-look

The C-USA fansters should take a long hard look at these metrics and think twice before coming on here to say they're tv deal is comparable to ours.

If this is correct, VT-ECU had vastly better ratings than the UCLA-Texas game simply because it was on ESPN as opposed to FS1.

Very interesting stuff indeed. Does kinda show that unless the money was going to be drastically better being with ESPN (despite my overall disdain for ESPN) is better than Fox or NBC.

80+% of the public has no idea what Fox Sports 1 even is

ESPN is 35 years old and basically built cable on its back (them HBO, MTV and CNN). Fox Sports 1 and NBCSN are probably less than five years old. It's going to take time to ever be considered on equal footing, however, every game opposite ESPN now takes away from their market share as they no longer monopolize the space.

ratings on FS2 are scary bad!!!!!!!!!!

in 5 years, FS1 will be extinct just like the short lived Sports Illustrated News channel

(10-10-2014 03:14 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  in 5 years, FS1 will be extinct just like the short lived Sports Illustrated News channel

They said the same thing about Fox News. Either way, the competition is good, it's forced ESPN to improve its product and given more variety to the fan.

Yes, yes, yes

There is simply no beating the exposure ESPN gives the conference. Last night the only football was on primetime ESPN until the NFL kick off.

And when it comes to ratings and viewership, ESPN is king.

Even the Big 12 has been grumbling tht their TV exposure is not what they expected with FS1.

ESPN taking over that peanuts offer from NBC is going to be huge for us. ESPN has better production quality, cast, and they have the brand.

Big East is learning that lesson. Pulling the 0.00 ratings for them will hurt recruiting soon as the 8th -9th graders won't even know they exist.

(10-10-2014 04:24 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  ESPN taking over that peanuts offer from NBC is going to be huge for us. ESPN has better production quality, cast, and they have the brand.

Big East is learning that lesson. Pulling the 0.00 ratings for them will hurt recruiting soon as the 8th -9th graders won't even know they exist.

this is completely besies the point..and i agree espn is 10x more exposure than any other sports netwrok

but the "cast" is questionable, espn has the more name brandcast ..but as far as making the game exciting, espn is the worst...

espns cast honestly feels like 2 friends hanging out while also talking about he game...cbssports (depending on the announcers they have a mixture of good and bad) and fox's announcers make the game way more exciting, the best game i watched this year was tcu and oklahoma, and the reason i like it was because the announcers made it more exciting

http://youtu.be/4EcVXK-ihfM?t=27s

(10-10-2014 04:36 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-10-2014 04:24 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  ESPN taking over that peanuts offer from NBC is going to be huge for us. ESPN has better production quality, cast, and they have the brand.

Big East is learning that lesson. Pulling the 0.00 ratings for them will hurt recruiting soon as the 8th -9th graders won't even know they exist.

this is completely besies the point..and i agree espn is 10x more exposure than any other sports netwrok

but the "cast" is questionable, espn has the more name brandcast ..but as far as making the game exciting, espn is the worst...

espns cast honestly feels like 2 friends hanging out while also talking about he game...cbssports (depending on the announcers they have a mixture of good and bad) and fox's announcers make the game way more exciting, the best game i watched this year was tcu and oklahoma, and the reason i like it was because the announcers made it more exciting

http://youtu.be/4EcVXK-ihfM?t=27s

Agree to disagree. When I listen to FOX games it sounds like I'm listening to rookie league broadcasters. It doesn't help the graphics and picture quality blow. CBS does a good just for the major broadcast but cbs sports it is way down a notch.

I guess I'll give fox a few years. So far it blows and ratings agreem

The AAC needed to get its name and brand out there, This TV deal does that. It will pay dividends in the end.

In the world of college sports you want to be linked with ESPN. If you need a secondary brand behind then you go to CBS. Both those entities have control the post-season in college football and college basketball. Fox and NBC are not household names when it comes college athletics, you combine that with the three decade head start ESPN has and you can see why college sports fans pick ESPN branded channels over the rest.

FS1 needs to land the Big Ten or the NFL to survive and maybe both. I actually believe Fox is going to make a huge play for the Big Ten but I can't see a scenario where ESPN gets shut out. In my view, everyone in this conference needs to root for Fox outbidding ESPN. If ESPN losses the Big Ten then everyone in the American moves up the food chain.

NBCSN is a wasteland that had an opportunity to offer the Big East/American a boatload of money but didn't step up to the table. I still believe NBC made a mistake because money is what defines a power conference or at least one on the fringe. A $10 million per school deal would have kept the Big East together or at least the western football only wing. That would allowed the current group of schools in the American a big advantage over the rest of the G5 in terms of resources.

CBSSN is a mixed bag. It probably ahead of NBCSN in terms of content but its behind FS1.Cross promotion from CBS and the use of the traditional CBS graphics makes that network feel like the big time. Its probably better than having your second tier games on regional TV or internet only..

(10-10-2014 05:35 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  In the world of college sports you want to be linked with ESPN. If you need a secondary brand behind then you go to CBS. Both those entities have control the post-season in college football and college basketball. Fox and NBC are not household names when it comes college athletics, you combine that with the three decade head start ESPN has and you can see why college sports fans pick ESPN branded channels over the rest.

FS1 needs to land the Big Ten or the NFL to survive and maybe both. I actually believe Fox is going to make a huge play for the Big Ten but I can't see a scenario where ESPN gets shut out. In my view, everyone in this conference needs to root for Fox outbidding ESPN. If ESPN losses the Big Ten then everyone in the American moves up the food chain.

NBCSN is a wasteland that had an opportunity to offer the Big East/American a boatload of money but didn't step up to the table. I still believe NBC made a mistake because money is what defines a power conference or at least one on the fringe. A $10 million per school deal would have kept the Big East together or at least the western football only wing. That would allowed the current group of schools in the American a big advantage over the rest of the G5 in terms of resources.

CBSSN is a mixed bag. It probably ahead of NBCSN in terms of content but its behind FS1.Cross promotion from CBS and the use of the traditional CBS graphics makes that network feel like the big time. Its probably better than having your second tier games on regional TV or internet only..

FS1 successful outbid (?) for the NLCS in the MLB playoffs:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/22254...redictions

It's going to take time but it doesn't look like they're going away quietly.

(10-10-2014 05:35 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  A $10 million per school deal would have kept the Big East together or at least the western football only wing. That would allowed the current group of schools in the American a big advantage over the rest of the G5 in terms of resources.

The schOols in the American do have a big payout per school advantage over the other g5 schools. The big east makes more money per school than the mountain west, and they make more than the other 3. The AAC makes significantly more money per school than the big east, even with our deflated tv deal and the big east's overly inflated deal. But your point is taken that it is ultimately in a networks best interest to ensure a conference they are paying to televise is getting paid enough to hold an advantage over a lesser conference they don't own the rights to.

We should receive a bump in TV pay though. Espn has been thrilled so far with the product they purchased.

(10-10-2014 03:22 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(10-10-2014 03:14 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  in 5 years, FS1 will be extinct just like the short lived Sports Illustrated News channel

They said the same thing about Fox News. Either way, the competition is good, it's forced ESPN to improve its product and given more variety to the fan.

Wow you do realize that Fox News filled a void ....FS1 is coming in to a jam packed market. The two are not a like in any way other than they both have Fox in their name.

(10-11-2014 10:56 AM)airbornepirate Wrote:  

(10-10-2014 03:22 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(10-10-2014 03:14 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  in 5 years, FS1 will be extinct just like the short lived Sports Illustrated News channel

They said the same thing about Fox News. Either way, the competition is good, it's forced ESPN to improve its product and given more variety to the fan.

Wow you do realize that Fox News filled a void ....FS1 is coming in to a jam packed market. The two are not a like in any way other than they both have Fox in their name.

I was more referring to the deep-pockets of Fox giving the new outlet time to take hold. Also, there didn't seem to be a void when Fox hit the airwaves to compete against ABC, CBS and NBC yet they managed to survive and ultimately thrive.

(10-11-2014 10:56 AM)airbornepirate Wrote:  

(10-10-2014 03:22 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(10-10-2014 03:14 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  in 5 years, FS1 will be extinct just like the short lived Sports Illustrated News channel

They said the same thing about Fox News. Either way, the competition is good, it's forced ESPN to improve its product and given more variety to the fan.

Wow you do realize that Fox News filled a void ....FS1 is coming in to a jam packed market. The two are not a like in any way other than they both have Fox in their name.

Really good point. All the other news outlets lean heavy to the left and Fox News is the lone station that leans right. Easy to see why they crush it in the ratings with no other stations on the right. If a new station wanted to get into the left leaning news, it would be a good example of FS1 getting into a crowded market.

Fox News was only the second 24 hour news network after CNN and it catered of conservatives. Not a comparable situation.