(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ESPN2 is close to OTA? No, it's not close.

Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.

Quote:Yes, they have obligations to a few Pac and XII games. Those can be squeezed in with some lower tier B1G games being sold to CBSSports or NBCSports.

Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.

Quote:Now with regards to MLB playoffs looking at the schedule from last year Fox/FS1 only had 3 Saturday postseason games. Saying that that can't be worked around is silly. The B1G game gets moved to FS1 for 3 weeks or they work out a deal where the baseball games are aired on TBS or a mix of both.

It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.

Quote:This idea that Fox can't handle it is beyond silly. If they want the money they will make it work. They aren't going to take less just to stay on ESPN.

Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.

Quote: The B1G is like the NFL and NBA. Their fans will find where the games are on regardless. Thats why the BTN has done well, while the Pac-12 and LHN hasn't.

People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national. Pac suffers from a lack of a strong and loyal fan base as well as late start times that keep away casual viewers. The B1G doesn't have those issues. Just because FS1 was a drag on Pac ratings doesn't mean it will be the same for B1G games. At least not as bad as the Pacs. Also FS1 has seen increased viewership each year since it's inception so more people are familiar with the channel.

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ESPN2 is close to OTA? No, it's not close.

Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.

Quote:Yes, they have obligations to a few Pac and XII games. Those can be squeezed in with some lower tier B1G games being sold to CBSSports or NBCSports.

Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.

Quote:Now with regards to MLB playoffs looking at the schedule from last year Fox/FS1 only had 3 Saturday postseason games. Saying that that can't be worked around is silly. The B1G game gets moved to FS1 for 3 weeks or they work out a deal where the baseball games are aired on TBS or a mix of both.

It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.

Quote:This idea that Fox can't handle it is beyond silly. If they want the money they will make it work. They aren't going to take less just to stay on ESPN.

Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.

Quote: The B1G is like the NFL and NBA. Their fans will find where the games are on regardless. Thats why the BTN has done well, while the Pac-12 and LHN hasn't.

People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national. Pac suffers from a lack of a strong and loyal fan base as well as late start times that keep away casual viewers. The B1G doesn't have those issues. Just because FS1 was a drag on Pac ratings doesn't mean it will be the same for B1G games. At least not as bad as the Pacs. Also FS1 has seen increased viewership each year since it's inception so more people are familiar with the channel.

Every B1G game on ESPN in that one split slot was on ESPN2 in the regions it wasn't on ESPN. So every B1G game was national. It was the Big 12/ACC/Pac 12 games that were only on in half the country.

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

That game was at Army, ya mope. The home team controls the TV rights, and CBS controls the rights to Army's home games.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Army_...tball_team
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Rutge...tball_team

Quote:Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure.

The regional split games are on ABC/ESPN2. So when Sparty plays Indiana, it's on ABC in Chicago and Cleveland and Detroit. MEanwhile in Los Angeles, ABC is carrying let's say USC-UCLA. You can watch the USC-UCLA game on ESPN2. Or your alums in Los Angeles can watch the Michigan STate game on ESPN2. That's how the reverse-mirror works. [/quote]

Quote:Fox games would be national. Pac suffers from a lack of a strong and loyal fan base as well as late start times that keep away casual viewers.

PAC and Big 12 games of comparable quality get noticeably lower ratings on FoxSports1 than on ESPN or ABC or ESPN2. FoxSports1 doesn't have the habit-viewing that the ESPN or OTA channels have.

Part of the reason for Fox to go hard after the Big Ten package is to establish FoxSports1 as that sort of habit-viewing channel, raising ratings overall and then they turn around and ask for more money in subscription fees.

The B1G may or may not be interested in taking money to do that for FS1.

Quote: The B1G doesn't have those issues. Just because FS1 was a drag on Pac ratings doesn't mean it will be the same for B1G games. At least not as bad as the Pacs. Also FS1 has seen increased viewership each year since it's inception so more people are familiar with the channel.

Yeah, that's the plan for FS1. But at least at first, FS1 *will* be a drag on Big TEn ratings. Maybe not the 50-66% hit that Big 12 and PAC 12 games take, but it's real.

Maybe by a few years into the contract, FS1 is closer to parity with ESPN. OR maybe cord-cutting and unbundling blows the whole thing up. IT's a risk.

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ESPN2 is close to OTA? No, it's not close.

Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.

Quote:Yes, they have obligations to a few Pac and XII games. Those can be squeezed in with some lower tier B1G games being sold to CBSSports or NBCSports.

Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.

Quote:Now with regards to MLB playoffs looking at the schedule from last year Fox/FS1 only had 3 Saturday postseason games. Saying that that can't be worked around is silly. The B1G game gets moved to FS1 for 3 weeks or they work out a deal where the baseball games are aired on TBS or a mix of both.

It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.

Quote:This idea that Fox can't handle it is beyond silly. If they want the money they will make it work. They aren't going to take less just to stay on ESPN.

Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.

Quote: The B1G is like the NFL and NBA. Their fans will find where the games are on regardless. Thats why the BTN has done well, while the Pac-12 and LHN hasn't.

People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national.

You seriously believe that Fox would think that there is OTA-level interest nationally in Rutgers vs Illinois?

There really isn't any reason to think that every B1G game worthy of national OTA broadcast isn't already being broadcast nationally OTA.

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ESPN2 is close to OTA? No, it's not close.

Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.

Quote:Yes, they have obligations to a few Pac and XII games. Those can be squeezed in with some lower tier B1G games being sold to CBSSports or NBCSports.

Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.

Quote:Now with regards to MLB playoffs looking at the schedule from last year Fox/FS1 only had 3 Saturday postseason games. Saying that that can't be worked around is silly. The B1G game gets moved to FS1 for 3 weeks or they work out a deal where the baseball games are aired on TBS or a mix of both.

It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.

Quote:This idea that Fox can't handle it is beyond silly. If they want the money they will make it work. They aren't going to take less just to stay on ESPN.

Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.

Quote: The B1G is like the NFL and NBA. Their fans will find where the games are on regardless. Thats why the BTN has done well, while the Pac-12 and LHN hasn't.

People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

The games we've had on CBS Sports Net since joining the Big Ten, were controlled by our opponents contracts (Army, Navy). Just to be fair the conference never controlled the rights to those games to begin with.

FS1 is definitely a drag on ratings, but it has slowly been improving emphasis on slowly. However, yes the Big Ten is big enough to offset that some just as baseball is big enough to offset that some.

(03-23-2016 02:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  There really isn't any reason to think that every B1G game worthy of national OTA broadcast isn't already being broadcast nationally OTA.

There are Big Ten games on ESPN/2/U that would do just fine OTA. They're on ESPN because they reinforce ESPN's subscriber model.

Looking at Michigan STate, because that's what autocomplete gave me.

#4 Michigan State @ #12 Michigan was on ESPN.
Penn State @ #6 Michigan STate was on ESPN.
#6 Michigan STate @ Nebraska on ESPN.

Those 3 are easily OTA quality games.

Then there's
Western Michigan @ Michigan STate (ESPNU, Sept 4)
Purdue @ Michigan STate (ESPN2)
Maryland @ Michigan STate (ESPN2)

Those look pretty ecch, but NBC televises UMass and Wake Forest @ Notre Dame, so I think they'd sign up.

as you can see, the Big Ten had no games they controlled on CBSSN...
http://mattsarzsports.com/Contract/GameL...vL92THmouU

I just think with Delaney, unless fox absolutely blows ESPN out of the water, ESPN will be getting a good share of the rights. If it's something like Fox at 250 million(just throwing a number out there) and ESPN at 240 million, they'd go with ESPN for the much stronger exposure. Like it or not, ESPN's name resonates with sports fans.

(03-23-2016 03:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  as you can see, the Big Ten had no games they controlled on CBSSN...
http://mattsarzsports.com/Contract/GameL...vL92THmouU

I just think with Delaney, unless fox absolutely blows ESPN out of the water, ESPN will be getting a good share of the rights. If it's something like Fox at 250 million(just throwing a number out there) and ESPN at 240 million, they'd go with ESPN for the much stronger exposure. Like it or not, ESPN's name resonates with sports fans.

Whats a good share? 75%? How is the exposure better when ESPN also has to air ACC, SEC, Big XII and Pac-12? How does the B1G get more exposure while ESPN is fulfilling it's obligations to those conferences? You bring it up with Fox but ESPN has even MORE obligations.

(03-23-2016 01:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ESPN2 is close to OTA? No, it's not close.

Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.

Quote:Yes, they have obligations to a few Pac and XII games. Those can be squeezed in with some lower tier B1G games being sold to CBSSports or NBCSports.

Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.

Quote:Now with regards to MLB playoffs looking at the schedule from last year Fox/FS1 only had 3 Saturday postseason games. Saying that that can't be worked around is silly. The B1G game gets moved to FS1 for 3 weeks or they work out a deal where the baseball games are aired on TBS or a mix of both.

It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.

Quote:This idea that Fox can't handle it is beyond silly. If they want the money they will make it work. They aren't going to take less just to stay on ESPN.

Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.

Quote: The B1G is like the NFL and NBA. Their fans will find where the games are on regardless. Thats why the BTN has done well, while the Pac-12 and LHN hasn't.

People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national. Pac suffers from a lack of a strong and loyal fan base as well as late start times that keep away casual viewers. The B1G doesn't have those issues. Just because FS1 was a drag on Pac ratings doesn't mean it will be the same for B1G games. At least not as bad as the Pacs. Also FS1 has seen increased viewership each year since it's inception so more people are familiar with the channel.

Every B1G game on ESPN in that one split slot was on ESPN2 in the regions it wasn't on ESPN. So every B1G game was national. It was the Big 12/ACC/Pac 12 games that were only on in half the country.

Once again, ESPN2 isn't the same as Fox OTA. Can we please stop saying it is? OTA beats cable every time and yes that goes for ESPN as well. CBS, NBC, Fox and ABC are all better options for exposure than even ESPN.

(03-23-2016 02:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ESPN2 is close to OTA? No, it's not close.

Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.

Quote:Yes, they have obligations to a few Pac and XII games. Those can be squeezed in with some lower tier B1G games being sold to CBSSports or NBCSports.

Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.

Quote:Now with regards to MLB playoffs looking at the schedule from last year Fox/FS1 only had 3 Saturday postseason games. Saying that that can't be worked around is silly. The B1G game gets moved to FS1 for 3 weeks or they work out a deal where the baseball games are aired on TBS or a mix of both.

It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.

Quote:This idea that Fox can't handle it is beyond silly. If they want the money they will make it work. They aren't going to take less just to stay on ESPN.

Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.

Quote: The B1G is like the NFL and NBA. Their fans will find where the games are on regardless. Thats why the BTN has done well, while the Pac-12 and LHN hasn't.

People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national.

You seriously believe that Fox would think that there is OTA-level interest nationally in Rutgers vs Illinois?

There really isn't any reason to think that every B1G game worthy of national OTA broadcast isn't already being broadcast nationally OTA.

When did I say that? Also NYC/Chicago markets would be a factor if they wanted to show that game at like noon depending what other match ups were that weekend.

(03-23-2016 03:56 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Whats a good share? 75%?

If it's an ESPN-Fox split, it's probably 50-50.

Quote:How is the exposure better when ESPN also has to air ACC, SEC, Big XII and Pac-12?

Because ESPN is established as the World Wide Leader.

Quote:How does the B1G get more exposure while ESPN is fulfilling it's obligations to those conferences? You bring it up with Fox but ESPN has even MORE obligations.

Yes, ESPN has more obligations than Fox Sports. But they also have more channels to meet those obligations with (ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU plus ESPNews, SEC network).

(03-23-2016 03:59 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Once again, ESPN2 isn't the same as Fox OTA. Can we please stop saying it is? OTA beats cable every time and yes that goes for ESPN as well. CBS, NBC, Fox and ABC are all better options for exposure than even ESPN.

ESPN2 isn't as good as Fox OTA. But you seem to thing that having 30 games on Fox OTA is a viable option. It's not. Fox would be hard-pressed to fit 20 Big Ten games on Fox OTA and 20 on FoxSports1.

(03-23-2016 04:05 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 03:56 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Whats a good share? 75%?

If it's an ESPN-Fox split, it's probably 50-50.

Quote:How is the exposure better when ESPN also has to air ACC, SEC, Big XII and Pac-12?

Because ESPN is established as the World Wide Leader.

Quote:How does the B1G get more exposure while ESPN is fulfilling it's obligations to those conferences? You bring it up with Fox but ESPN has even MORE obligations.

Yes, ESPN has more obligations than Fox Sports. But they also have more channels to meet those obligations with (ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU plus ESPNews, SEC network).

(03-23-2016 03:59 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Once again, ESPN2 isn't the same as Fox OTA. Can we please stop saying it is? OTA beats cable every time and yes that goes for ESPN as well. CBS, NBC, Fox and ABC are all better options for exposure than even ESPN.

ESPN2 isn't as good as Fox OTA. But you seem to thing that having 30 games on Fox OTA is a viable option. It's not. Fox would be hard-pressed to fit 20 Big Ten games on Fox OTA and 20 on FoxSports1.

Wait, so CBSSports isn't good enough but ESPN News is? ESPNU? C'mon guys, I know you all have a hard on for ESPN but if Delany is adamant about exposure why would he sign off on any of those (SEC Network? )? If they sign off on ESPN News thats no different than CBSSports.

You don't think they can have at least 2 OTA games a week on Fox? MLB is over by Halloween, Pac and XII are combined on once a week tops. Whats the actual hold up to them showing multiple OTA games?

(03-23-2016 04:01 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 02:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 12:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ESPN2 is close to OTA? No, it's not close.

Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.

Quote:Yes, they have obligations to a few Pac and XII games. Those can be squeezed in with some lower tier B1G games being sold to CBSSports or NBCSports.

Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.

Quote:Now with regards to MLB playoffs looking at the schedule from last year Fox/FS1 only had 3 Saturday postseason games. Saying that that can't be worked around is silly. The B1G game gets moved to FS1 for 3 weeks or they work out a deal where the baseball games are aired on TBS or a mix of both.

It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.

Quote:This idea that Fox can't handle it is beyond silly. If they want the money they will make it work. They aren't going to take less just to stay on ESPN.

Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.

Quote: The B1G is like the NFL and NBA. Their fans will find where the games are on regardless. Thats why the BTN has done well, while the Pac-12 and LHN hasn't.

People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national.

You seriously believe that Fox would think that there is OTA-level interest nationally in Rutgers vs Illinois?

There really isn't any reason to think that every B1G game worthy of national OTA broadcast isn't already being broadcast nationally OTA.

When did I say that? Also NYC/Chicago markets would be a factor if they wanted to show that game at like noon depending what other match ups were that weekend.

Point was, many seem to think that FOX has an advantage over ESPN re the B1G rights because they can air more OTA national games, and your post read that way to me. My contention is that this is a chimera, because the B1G already gets all of its games with national interest aired OTA anyway. It's not like there are Michigan - Ohio State games that are currently relegated to ESPN2 that FOX can jump in and say "we'll put that on Big Fox for you!".

If you aren't one of those who seem to think that, my apologies.

(03-23-2016 04:29 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Wait, so CBSSports isn't good enough but ESPN News is?

ESPNews is in 72 million homes on basic cable.
ESPN-U is in 73 million homes on basic cable.
CBS-SN is in 61 million homes, not on the basic cable tier.
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/02...uary-2015/
http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...rks-050715

Quote:ESPNU? C'mon guys, I know you all have a hard on for ESPN but if Delany is adamant about exposure why would he sign off on any of those (SEC Network? )? If they sign off on ESPN News thats no different than CBSSports.

I wasn't listing SEC network as an option for Big Ten games, but if ESPN has some kind of issue where they have to figure out how to show all of these games, they could run 3 SEC games on the SEC network.

And the games on ESPNews, I'm fairly sure, are games that otherwise would have been on BTN on a split feed, where half the footprint is watching Rutgers vs LAfayette and half the footprint is watching Illinois vs Southern Illinois. I don't think Delaney is going to sign off on Tier 1 Big Ten games on ESPNews.

Quote:You don't think they can have at least 2 OTA games a week on Fox? MLB is over by Halloween, Pac and XII are combined on once a week tops. Whats the actual hold up to them showing multiple OTA games?

Because they are contractually obligated to show other things.

EDIT: Here's a PDF of the Fox college football schedule for 2015. And here's a link to the Fox MLB regular season schedule. There was also a playoff game on FS1 on Sat Oct 17 and a World Series game on big FOX on Sat, OCt 31.

Plus UFC, and various other things Fox Sports has.

(03-23-2016 07:16 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 04:29 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Wait, so CBSSports isn't good enough but ESPN News is?

ESPNews is in 72 million homes on basic cable.
ESPN-U is in 73 million homes on basic cable.
CBS-SN is in 61 million homes, not on the basic cable tier.
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/02...uary-2015/
http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...rks-050715

Quote:ESPNU? C'mon guys, I know you all have a hard on for ESPN but if Delany is adamant about exposure why would he sign off on any of those (SEC Network? )? If they sign off on ESPN News thats no different than CBSSports.

I wasn't listing SEC network as an option for Big Ten games, but if ESPN has some kind of issue where they have to figure out how to show all of these games, they could run 3 SEC games on the SEC network.

And the games on ESPNews, I'm fairly sure, are games that otherwise would have been on BTN on a split feed, where half the footprint is watching Rutgers vs LAfayette and half the footprint is watching Illinois vs Southern Illinois. I don't think Delaney is going to sign off on Tier 1 Big Ten games on ESPNews.

Quote:You don't think they can have at least 2 OTA games a week on Fox? MLB is over by Halloween, Pac and XII are combined on once a week tops. Whats the actual hold up to them showing multiple OTA games?

Because they are contractually obligated to show other things.

EDIT: Here's a PDF of the Fox college football schedule for 2015. And here's a link to the Fox MLB regular season schedule. There was also a playoff game on FS1 on Sat Oct 17 and a World Series game on big FOX on Sat, OCt 31.

Plus UFC, and various other things Fox Sports has.

Matt Sarz' website lists the CFB games they ended up showing on Fox OTA. In 2015 they aired 10 Pac-12 games (they have to show at least 8) and 8 Big 12 games (they have to show at least 6) on Fox OTA.

Another thing is Fox has shown absolutely no interest in having 3 football games a weekend on Big fox...

Also, a lot of the games shown on ABC on Saturday night are full national broadcast...

Also you might not like it- but ESPN2=FS1 in TV ratings. So ESPN has 3 very viable options for showing stuff, while Fox has only 2.

Bottom line, Fox would have to blow ESPN out of the water for Delaney to take everything to Fox. And ESPN isn't going to settle for tier 2 level games. So your thought that Fox would get all the top stuff and ESPN would get mediocre garbage- that isn't happening. You might not think a lot of ESPN, but Big Ten sure as hell does.

(03-23-2016 08:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Another thing is Fox has shown absolutely no interest in having 3 football games a weekend on Big fox...

Also, a lot of the games shown on ABC on Saturday night are full national broadcast...

Also you might not like it- but ESPN2=FS1 in TV ratings. So ESPN has 3 very viable options for showing stuff, while Fox has only 2.

Bottom line, Fox would have to blow ESPN out of the water for Delaney to take everything to Fox. And ESPN isn't going to settle for tier 2 level games. So your thought that Fox would get all the top stuff and ESPN would get mediocre garbage- that isn't happening. You might not think a lot of ESPN, but Big Ten sure as hell does.

Any split is going to be 50-50, with alternating picks.

(03-23-2016 05:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 04:01 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 02:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:32 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Withdrawn. I shouldn't have used ESPN2.


Think this through. You're Jim Delaney. Are you going to sign off on a contract that lets Fox dump Big Ten games on CBS freakin' SportsNet?

The whole point of creating BTN and fighting for 10 years to get it on basic cable is so that your games aren't on dirt-necked broke-down loser channels like CBS-SN, that your fans and alumni can see all the games they want to see.


It can't be worked around if you're talking about 3 Big Ten games every Saturday for 13 weeks. Which is what you said.


Here I mostly agree with you. They won't take less money just to stay on ESPN. But they're also not going to entertain bids to put the games on channels people don't watch. Delaney wants these games on your TV. He doesn't want the games on some channel you have to call your provider to order, or on some channel you get but don't watch.

FoxSports1 is probably the limit.

Fox and FoxSports1 can only show but so many college football games in a season. They have existing contracts and commitments. They didn't even bid on the Aresco League/AAC package, largely because they didn't have room for the inventory.

But that doesn't mean Fox isn't an option. It just means that Fox needs a partner. That could be ESPN, or that could be CBS-OTA and NBC-OTA. The OTA networks would be happy to have Big Ten games, and the Big Ten would be happy to have the games on OTA networks.

FrankTheTank a while ago pointed out that last season, there were some Big Ten games on ESPNews. I went through the schedules, and I'm pretty convinced that those games were ones that BTN didn't have room for. (There was another game on BTN at the time). Those games on ESPNews don't mean that Delaney is okay with having Big Ten games on just any old channel, just that basic-cable ESPNews is better than having BTN do a regional split.


People have the ratings information for the Big 12 and PAC on ESPN networks, on Big Fox and on FoxSports1. FS1 is a drag on your ratings. The Big Ten is big enough to overcome some of that. But what Delaney has said indicates that having the games on high-profile platforms is more important than the last dollar of TV money.

The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national.

You seriously believe that Fox would think that there is OTA-level interest nationally in Rutgers vs Illinois?

There really isn't any reason to think that every B1G game worthy of national OTA broadcast isn't already being broadcast nationally OTA.

When did I say that? Also NYC/Chicago markets would be a factor if they wanted to show that game at like noon depending what other match ups were that weekend.

Point was, many seem to think that FOX has an advantage over ESPN re the B1G rights because they can air more OTA national games, and your post read that way to me. My contention is that this is a chimera, because the B1G already gets all of its games with national interest aired OTA anyway. It's not like there are Michigan - Ohio State games that are currently relegated to ESPN2 that FOX can jump in and say "we'll put that on Big Fox for you!".

If you aren't one of those who seem to think that, my apologies.

Actually, the fact that Ohio State-Michigan is no longer shown nationally on ABC could be the way that FOX can get the contract. The Big Ten is something that has enough popularity that it could transfer it's popularity to the various FOX networks.

Consider...

Adidas seemed to be the dominant worldwide leader in athletic apparel until Nike used Michael Jordan to propel them to the top.

Microsoft had a near monopoly on computing systems until the iPhone and "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" commercials started coming out, and lots of loyal iPod users switched to Apple.

There are lots of similar examples, like the NFL taking over the MLB as the most popular team sport in the US, etc. I'm not saying that the Big Ten is as popular as Michael Jordan, the iPod, or the NFL, but it does have quite a bit of a loyal national following, and if the Michigan-Rutgers game is on FS2, there will be lots more demand for FS2.

(03-24-2016 02:14 AM)dxdtdemon Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 05:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 04:01 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 02:41 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-23-2016 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  The B1G already has games on CBSSports. Rutgers played a few games there last season so it looks like ESPN does and will continue to do the same thing.

Here's the thing though. Those day games on ESPN/ABC are all regional. Thats not exposure. Fox games would be national.

You seriously believe that Fox would think that there is OTA-level interest nationally in Rutgers vs Illinois?

There really isn't any reason to think that every B1G game worthy of national OTA broadcast isn't already being broadcast nationally OTA.

When did I say that? Also NYC/Chicago markets would be a factor if they wanted to show that game at like noon depending what other match ups were that weekend.

Point was, many seem to think that FOX has an advantage over ESPN re the B1G rights because they can air more OTA national games, and your post read that way to me. My contention is that this is a chimera, because the B1G already gets all of its games with national interest aired OTA anyway. It's not like there are Michigan - Ohio State games that are currently relegated to ESPN2 that FOX can jump in and say "we'll put that on Big Fox for you!".

If you aren't one of those who seem to think that, my apologies.

Actually, the fact that Ohio State-Michigan is no longer shown nationally on ABC could be the way that FOX can get the contract. The Big Ten is something that has enough popularity that it could transfer it's popularity to the various FOX networks.

Consider...

Adidas seemed to be the dominant worldwide leader in athletic apparel until Nike used Michael Jordan to propel them to the top.

Microsoft had a near monopoly on computing systems until the iPhone and "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" commercials started coming out, and lots of loyal iPod users switched to Apple.

There are lots of similar examples, like the NFL taking over the MLB as the most popular team sport in the US, etc. I'm not saying that the Big Ten is as popular as Michael Jordan, the iPod, or the NFL, but it does have quite a bit of a loyal national following, and if the Michigan-Rutgers game is on FS2, there will be lots more demand for FS2.

I agree that the B1G is a popular conference. But comparing them to Air Jordan and the Iphone is beyond a bit of a stretch, don't you think? If FOX is going to surpass ESPN it will take a whole lot more than the B1G.

No question, FOX would like to air B1G games. All networks would. Their is clearly interest and good value their. Whether it can wake up those FS1 and FS2 channels? Maybe we'll see.

FWIW, i saw Michigan-Ohio State this year on ABC, and I live in the deep south.

(03-24-2016 02:14 AM)dxdtdemon Wrote:  I'm not saying that the Big Ten is as popular as Michael Jordan, the iPod, or the NFL, but it does have quite a bit of a loyal national following, and if the Michigan-Rutgers game is on FS2, there will be lots more demand for FS2.

If Fox could convince the Big Ten to allow Michigan-Rutgers to go on FS2, when it is in the Big Ten's interest to have it on BTN if it is not going OTA/ESPN, nor something in the ESPN2 / FS1 level of basic cable availability.

I don't know whether the Big Ten would allow some Big Ten basketball games on FS2 for the right price, but Big Ten FB games on FS2 does not sound like a plausible scenario.