Six of the eleven Big East telecasts on FOX this season had less than a 0.5 overnight — including a 0.3 for a nonconference game between Butler and Northwestern in December — and 12 of the network’s 13 total telecasts had
less than a 0.8.
For perspective, the Memphis - UC game was a .8
That must hurt.
And the product is better than last year overall...they have a Top 10 team to market...
Bottom line is that the "Big East" brand is not worth much...folks are more and more aware of the American brand because of its year round value.
It reminds me of comments former ECU AD Terry Holland made when trying to get ECU's brand more in the marketplace...he talked about how "competitive" the marketplace was in NC. That is exactly the deal in college basketball. Even though the Big East can compete at a high level, there are also 7-8 other conferences that can compete at a high level...its college basketball so you can have programs like Gonzaga, Wichita State, SMU or whoever competing at a Top 25 level. No one really cares about the Big East...Villanova is just another high level program...it doesn't matter what conference they belong to. And it's regular season college basketball, which does not have a high value in the marketplace, overall...unlike regular season college football.
(03-10-2015 08:48 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote: [ -> ]And the product is better than last year overall...they have a Top 10 team to market...
Bottom line is that the "Big East" brand is not worth much...folks are more and more aware of the American brand because of its year round value.
It reminds me of comments former ECU AD Terry Holland made when trying to get ECU's brand more in the marketplace...he talked about how "competitive" the marketplace was in NC. That is exactly the deal in college basketball. Even though the Big East can compete at a high level, there are also 7-8 other conferences that can compete at a high level...its college basketball so you can have programs like Gonzaga, Wichita State, SMU or whoever competing at a Top 25 level. No one really cares about the Big East...Villanova is just another high level program...it doesn't matter what conference they belong to. And it's regular season college basketball, which does not have a high value in the marketplace, overall...unlike regular season college football.
Exactly. I venture to say FOX would love to rebid for the AAC.
I notice in the Fox advertisements on Facebook, they usually hype up that league by putting up old pictures of Chris Mullin and other 80s players. I'm not exactly sure what demographic they're going for. The younger generation thinks of the Old Big East as UCONN, and they're in the AAC now. Most High School/college age kids don't know Chris Mullin.
Games on Fox draw less than games on ESPN. 0.8 might be good for Fox.
The Big East is the 2nd or 3rd best basketball league in America. Their 10 teams will produce 6 bids.
They'll be fine.
I think it's just as much the channel offering as much as the content. Typically I know exactly what game I want to watch, but if I'm just scrolling looking to put a game on to pass time, I'm never making it all the way to foxsports1/2 buried somewhere on the guide list. The whole Foxsports1 channel being a "rival" to ESPN is an absolute joke. Has anyone ever watched their version of Sportscenter? Like it or not ESPN and their networks are how you get exposure and there is nothing FOX can do to change that.
I think if the roles were reversed and we were on Fox and they were on ESPN, they'd be beating us in the ratings. ESPN just pulls in more viewers than the new networks (FS1, FS2, NBCSN, CBSS) do.
Big East took the money, we took the exposure. What happens next round will be interesting.
(03-10-2015 09:29 AM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ]I think if the roles were reversed and we were on Fox and they were on ESPN, they'd be beating us in the ratings. ESPN just pulls in more viewers than the new networks (FS1, FS2, NBCSN, CBSS) do.
Big East took the money, we took the exposure. What happens next round will be interesting.
I think it would not even be close. If we were on Fox and the bottom 5 AAC team were playing, I don't know if it would pull a 0.1.
To me the bigger question is that Fox is paying double for Bball only and misses out on legit content come the fall. Sure the BE has a very good product in Bball but we all know America would rather watch any decent FBall content over Bball.
(03-10-2015 09:26 AM)CougarRed Wrote: [ -> ]Games on Fox draw less than games on ESPN. 0.8 might be good for Fox.
The Big East is the 2nd or 3rd best basketball league in America. Their 10 teams will produce 6 bids.
They'll be fine.
True - no surprises. The FOX - Big East deal was an additional money for less exposure trade from the beginning. As far as the Big East 'product' I'm sure FOX is very happy. And I'd imagine that the Big East teams are ok with their 4M each for basketball. But I doubt FOX or the Big East expected ESPN type numbers.
(03-10-2015 09:39 AM)wavefan12 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:29 AM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ]I think if the roles were reversed and we were on Fox and they were on ESPN, they'd be beating us in the ratings. ESPN just pulls in more viewers than the new networks (FS1, FS2, NBCSN, CBSS) do.
Big East took the money, we took the exposure. What happens next round will be interesting.
I think it would not even be close. If we were on Fox and the bottom 5 AAC team were playing, I don't know if it would pull a 0.1.
To me the bigger question is that Fox is paying double for Bball only and misses out on legit content come the fall. Sure the BE has a very good product in Bball but we all know America would rather watch any decent FBall content over Bball.
What is the better path for the American?
I don't know if the current contract retains the part about ESPN getting to match, but say we have a choice to be on Fox for 8 million a year per team or ESPN for 3 million per team? What is the exposure worth?
Our coaches talk about the exposure helping on the recruiting trail, but the money is also important.
(03-10-2015 09:44 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:26 AM)CougarRed Wrote: [ -> ]Games on Fox draw less than games on ESPN. 0.8 might be good for Fox.
The Big East is the 2nd or 3rd best basketball league in America. Their 10 teams will produce 6 bids.
They'll be fine.
True - no surprises. The FOX - Big East deal was an additional money for less exposure trade from the beginning. As far as the Big East 'product' I'm sure FOX is very happy. And I'd imagine that the Big East teams are ok with their 4M each for basketball. But I doubt FOX or the Big East expected ESPN type numbers.
I doubt they are happy. They wanted to pull viewers away from espn which isn't happening. The big East is small private colleges with smaller following vs massive public schools. I'm curious what damage poor ratings will have on recruiting in the next 5-7 years in the Big East. They don't have football either to carry the brand in the off season.
(03-10-2015 09:44 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:26 AM)CougarRed Wrote: [ -> ]Games on Fox draw less than games on ESPN. 0.8 might be good for Fox.
The Big East is the 2nd or 3rd best basketball league in America. Their 10 teams will produce 6 bids.
They'll be fine.
True - no surprises. The FOX - Big East deal was an additional money for less exposure trade from the beginning. As far as the Big East 'product' I'm sure FOX is very happy. And I'd imagine that the Big East teams are ok with their 4M each for basketball. But I doubt FOX or the Big East expected ESPN type numbers.
You do realize that less than .8 means less than 500,000 viewers. I would think the advertisers are not happy with that.
(03-10-2015 09:59 AM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:39 AM)wavefan12 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:29 AM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ]I think if the roles were reversed and we were on Fox and they were on ESPN, they'd be beating us in the ratings. ESPN just pulls in more viewers than the new networks (FS1, FS2, NBCSN, CBSS) do.
Big East took the money, we took the exposure. What happens next round will be interesting.
I think it would not even be close. If we were on Fox and the bottom 5 AAC team were playing, I don't know if it would pull a 0.1.
To me the bigger question is that Fox is paying double for Bball only and misses out on legit content come the fall. Sure the BE has a very good product in Bball but we all know America would rather watch any decent FBall content over Bball.
What is the better path for the American?
I don't know if the current contract retains the part about ESPN getting to match, but say we have a choice to be on Fox for 8 million a year per team or ESPN for 3 million per team? What is the exposure worth?
Our coaches talk about the exposure helping on the recruiting trail, but the money is also important.
At this point i'd take $3 million (espn) vs $8 million on fox. Until the overall exposure is better on FOX, we just need to make the mouse happy.
(03-10-2015 10:03 AM)Bearcat61 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:44 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:26 AM)CougarRed Wrote: [ -> ]Games on Fox draw less than games on ESPN. 0.8 might be good for Fox.
The Big East is the 2nd or 3rd best basketball league in America. Their 10 teams will produce 6 bids.
They'll be fine.
True - no surprises. The FOX - Big East deal was an additional money for less exposure trade from the beginning. As far as the Big East 'product' I'm sure FOX is very happy. And I'd imagine that the Big East teams are ok with their 4M each for basketball. But I doubt FOX or the Big East expected ESPN type numbers.
You do realize that less than .8 means less than 500,000 viewers. I would think the advertisers are not happy with that.
Just imagine if the league has a few off years. Last year had games with a 0.00 rating
What did they expect? The best basketball brands from the old Big East (UConn, Syracuse, Louisville) are gone, leaving behind a bunch of small, Catholic schools that don't move the needle nationally. Georgetown used to, but JT Jr. and Patrick Ewing aren't walking through that door anymore. It's great basketball, but casual fans don't care.
(03-10-2015 10:00 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:44 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:26 AM)CougarRed Wrote: [ -> ]Games on Fox draw less than games on ESPN. 0.8 might be good for Fox.
The Big East is the 2nd or 3rd best basketball league in America. Their 10 teams will produce 6 bids.
They'll be fine.
True - no surprises. The FOX - Big East deal was an additional money for less exposure trade from the beginning. As far as the Big East 'product' I'm sure FOX is very happy. And I'd imagine that the Big East teams are ok with their 4M each for basketball. But I doubt FOX or the Big East expected ESPN type numbers.
I doubt they are happy. They wanted to pull viewers away from espn which isn't happening. The big East is small private colleges with smaller following vs massive public schools. I'm curious what damage poor ratings will have on recruiting in the next 5-7 years in the Big East. They don't have football either to carry the brand in the off season.
Well I think they're happy with the Big East product --- how could they not be. The Big East will probably be rated the #2 basketball conference this season. On the other issue --- I have no idea what the TV projections were in the first year. So it's hard to say where FOX is on this. I think the only safe position is that neither party expected ESPN-type numbers --- hence the high price paid by FOX.
Is FOX happy with the product?
I guess...but that product is pretty much reproduced with even the American...heck UConn and Memphis are NOT tourney teams (unless one makes a run) and they command good TV numbers for their regular season games.
Having a bunch of tourney teams doesn't necessarily make it a better product for advertisers.
Fox was idiotic to pay that much for a basketball product...only. The Big East's TV value is inflated by Fox right now...it unsustainable. If the American can do better with its football product in the next few years (and Navy coming in should really help), in reality the next TV package should blow the Big East away.
(03-10-2015 09:59 AM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:39 AM)wavefan12 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2015 09:29 AM)Chappy Wrote: [ -> ]I think if the roles were reversed and we were on Fox and they were on ESPN, they'd be beating us in the ratings. ESPN just pulls in more viewers than the new networks (FS1, FS2, NBCSN, CBSS) do.
Big East took the money, we took the exposure. What happens next round will be interesting.
I think it would not even be close. If we were on Fox and the bottom 5 AAC team were playing, I don't know if it would pull a 0.1.
To me the bigger question is that Fox is paying double for Bball only and misses out on legit content come the fall. Sure the BE has a very good product in Bball but we all know America would rather watch any decent FBall content over Bball.
What is the better path for the American?
I don't know if the current contract retains the part about ESPN getting to match, but say we have a choice to be on Fox for 8 million a year per team or ESPN for 3 million per team? What is the exposure worth?
Our coaches talk about the exposure helping on the recruiting trail, but the money is also important.
It' a tough call, I lean exposure. But still something isn't right with the difference in contract value despite the fact that the exposure on ESPN is better I mean Fball matters, but I digress.
(03-10-2015 09:52 AM)shere khan Wrote: [ -> ]Quo in 3, 2, 1
He speaks for the Big East!
Seriously though... many of you guys are probably not old enough to remember the launch of Fox news. I was pretty young myself, but at the time CNN absolutely dominated and ruled cable news. Heck, they invented the 24 hour news channel. When Fox lanuched it's news network, it was (IIRC) derided and given no chance... and now it's number 1. (Lets not get into politics here... I'm strictly talking about marketplace success and a business model)
Point is, FOX sports COULD succeed even under the umbrella of ESPN. They just need to be smart, build up their brand, and keep trying. Their big payout for the BE was probably an attempted step along this path. Maybe it's not a perfect analogy, but I would not sell Fox sports short just yet. How many of us have been demanding some alternative to ESPiN?