(09-20-2012 03:34 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 08:43 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The fact that Comcast says that it wants to spend money on sports isn't anything special. The thing is that all of ESPN, Fox and Turner have been bidding against Comcast for all of these top properties and BEATING Comcast. So, it seems to me that Comcast isn't willing to overpay for at thing at all.

While I tend ot agree in general with what you are saying about Comcast Frank, I don't think NBC or CBS ever had a chance to bid on the MBL contract. Fox, TBS, and ESPN resigned MLB before it ever hit the open market as far as I can tell.

(09-20-2012 01:29 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  NBC OTA sends Stanley Cup Final games to NBCSN just to avoid conflicts with America's Got Talent, so buyer beware there is all I'm saying.

While it is true they do that, it was more to prop up the value of NBC Sports (or at least try to) then a conflcit with AGT, whcih they could simply schedule around.

Everyone who has had the NHL rights in the last 20 years has done this. Fox and ESPN split the Stanley Cup Finals and so did ABC/ ESPN. It's not a big deal.

My bigger concern is that NBC may be trying to do things on the cheap.

(09-20-2012 05:00 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  If NBC is offering OTA prime time slots then it is a good deal. If you will be primarily on NBC SN then it will hurt you. The fans of the BE schools will seek out the games, but the casual fan who is looking for a good game by channel surfing is going to miss you if you are on a channel like NBC SN. Like it or not, sports fans have a habit of checking ABC and ESPN for college football. NBC SN, not so much. Can that change? Absolutely but it will take time for people to form new habits. First of all you will need marquee match ups that will cause people to seek the games, and enough of them that NBC SN becomes part of the search pattern. ESPN has 3 channels playing college fb, and they will be pimping those games not the ones on NBC. So there is 3 times the chance that the fans of college fb who don't have a tie to a BE school will hear about games on ESPN or ABC rather than NBC SN.

Sent from my Toshiba Thrive using Tapatalk2.

Fine, but we don't get Saturday games on ABC or ESPN/2 as it is.

Here are the # of Saturday appearances on ESPN or ESPN2 for each season since 2005:

2005 - 3 ESPN, 2 ESPN2. Only one a conference game
2006 - 4 ESPN, 5 ESPN2. 7 conference games
2007 - 3 ESPN, 3 ESPN2, 4 conference games
2008 - 2 ESPN, 4 ESPN2, 2 conference games
2009 - 1 ESPN, 2 ESPN2, 2 conference games
2010 - 2 ESPN, 5 ESPN2, 3 conference games
2011 - 1 ESPN, 2 ESPN2, 3 conference games

(09-20-2012 03:44 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 03:34 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 08:43 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The fact that Comcast says that it wants to spend money on sports isn't anything special. The thing is that all of ESPN, Fox and Turner have been bidding against Comcast for all of these top properties and BEATING Comcast. So, it seems to me that Comcast isn't willing to overpay for at thing at all.

While I tend ot agree in general with what you are saying about Comcast Frank, I don't think NBC or CBS ever had a chance to bid on the MBL contract. Fox, TBS, and ESPN resigned MLB before it ever hit the open market as far as I can tell

The kind of interesting thing with MLB is that they actually did let the rights hit the open market (they let the exclusive negotiating window expire, similar to what the Big East is in now with ESPN), yet never really took any offers from NBC or CBS seriously and just focused upon its existing partners even outside of the negotiating window. It might have been the case that MLB really wanted to stay with ESPN/Fox/Turner, but let the negotiating window expire in order to put pressure on them to up their bids.

I think it might have been different if NBC had faxed over a $2B a year proposal, with 150 games on NBC-SN, 50 on NBC-OTA and 150 on MLB network, with NBC handling MLB.com live streaming.

But Comcast didn't go out and spend the big bucks. Again.

(09-20-2012 05:45 PM)General Mike Wrote:  NBC may be trying to do things on the cheap.

Praise Jesus, he has seen the light!

(09-20-2012 06:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 03:44 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 03:34 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 08:43 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The fact that Comcast says that it wants to spend money on sports isn't anything special. The thing is that all of ESPN, Fox and Turner have been bidding against Comcast for all of these top properties and BEATING Comcast. So, it seems to me that Comcast isn't willing to overpay for at thing at all.

While I tend ot agree in general with what you are saying about Comcast Frank, I don't think NBC or CBS ever had a chance to bid on the MBL contract. Fox, TBS, and ESPN resigned MLB before it ever hit the open market as far as I can tell

The kind of interesting thing with MLB is that they actually did let the rights hit the open market (they let the exclusive negotiating window expire, similar to what the Big East is in now with ESPN), yet never really took any offers from NBC or CBS seriously and just focused upon its existing partners even outside of the negotiating window. It might have been the case that MLB really wanted to stay with ESPN/Fox/Turner, but let the negotiating window expire in order to put pressure on them to up their bids.

I think it might have been different if NBC had faxed over a $2B a year proposal, with 150 games on NBC-SN, 50 on NBC-OTA and 150 on MLB network, with NBC handling MLB.com live streaming.

But Comcast didn't go out and spend the big bucks. Again.

The failure of Comcast/NBC to win the MLB is not really about being cheap with thier money---its about strategy. Seems to me this would have been the perfect chance to employ the same strategy that Fox and ESPN use. I wonder why NBC didnt team with CBS and split the package? They could have made a deal that cost less but brought both networks a presitigious top tier sports TV property.

The point that is being missed over and over is that NBC is bidding by themselves. I wouldnt be surprised to learn that they had the highest MLB bid of any SINGLE network (just as they were the highest bid by a SINGLE network during the Pac-12 negotiations). However, as was the case with the Pac12, Big-12, and now the MLB---the NBC bid is being topped by 2-networks that have pooled resources to outbid NBC.

Coog that doesn't fly on this one. Fox and TBS did not team up or split anything. They each bought a separate package. It's not at all like the espn/fox situation.

(09-20-2012 07:31 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Coog that doesn't fly on this one. Fox and the did not team up or split anything. They each bought a separate package. It's not at all like the espn/fox situation.

yup---I think you are correct---I see that now. I had read a different article that wasnt as specific. Though--it is possible that seperate packages were not always the case. Toward the end of the article it says they considered combining the packages--but it doesnt say if the idea was discarded before or after bidding began. So it is possible they divided the packages after the bids were not as high as they hoped---I doubt it though. I think its probably just as you indcated--the two networks just bid for thier current packages.

(09-20-2012 06:13 PM)General Mike Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 05:00 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  If NBC is offering OTA prime time slots then it is a good deal. If you will be primarily on NBC SN then it will hurt you. The fans of the BE schools will seek out the games, but the casual fan who is looking for a good game by channel surfing is going to miss you if you are on a channel like NBC SN. Like it or not, sports fans have a habit of checking ABC and ESPN for college football. NBC SN, not so much. Can that change? Absolutely but it will take time for people to form new habits. First of all you will need marquee match ups that will cause people to seek the games, and enough of them that NBC SN becomes part of the search pattern. ESPN has 3 channels playing college fb, and they will be pimping those games not the ones on NBC. So there is 3 times the chance that the fans of college fb who don't have a tie to a BE school will hear about games on ESPN or ABC rather than NBC SN.

Sent from my Toshiba Thrive using Tapatalk2.

Fine, but we don't get Saturday games on ABC or ESPN/2 as it is.

Here are the # of Saturday appearances on ESPN or ESPN2 for each season since 2005:

2005 - 3 ESPN, 2 ESPN2. Only one a conference game
2006 - 4 ESPN, 5 ESPN2. 7 conference games
2007 - 3 ESPN, 3 ESPN2, 4 conference games
2008 - 2 ESPN, 4 ESPN2, 2 conference games
2009 - 1 ESPN, 2 ESPN2, 2 conference games
2010 - 2 ESPN, 5 ESPN2, 3 conference games
2011 - 1 ESPN, 2 ESPN2, 3 conference games

Your math is a bit off. The numbers are:

2006 - 7 games
2007 - 6 games
2008 - 6 games
2009 - 3 games
2010 - 7 games
2011 - 3 games

I get your point, but looking at it from ESPN's view, why put a BE game on that won't draw better ratings than an SEC or B1G game? By putting BE games in an exclusive time slot, it increases the ratings with casual fans who just want to see a good game. Fans of the school will find the game no matter where it is. Casual fans are what makes up the difference.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

(09-20-2012 07:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think its probably just as you indcated--the two networks just bid for thier current packages.

In this case, they just reupped the current packages they had, with some minor tweaks.

(09-21-2012 11:02 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 06:13 PM)General Mike Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 05:00 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  If NBC is offering OTA prime time slots then it is a good deal. If you will be primarily on NBC SN then it will hurt you. The fans of the BE schools will seek out the games, but the casual fan who is looking for a good game by channel surfing is going to miss you if you are on a channel like NBC SN. Like it or not, sports fans have a habit of checking ABC and ESPN for college football. NBC SN, not so much. Can that change? Absolutely but it will take time for people to form new habits. First of all you will need marquee match ups that will cause people to seek the games, and enough of them that NBC SN becomes part of the search pattern. ESPN has 3 channels playing college fb, and they will be pimping those games not the ones on NBC. So there is 3 times the chance that the fans of college fb who don't have a tie to a BE school will hear about games on ESPN or ABC rather than NBC SN.

Sent from my Toshiba Thrive using Tapatalk2.

Fine, but we don't get Saturday games on ABC or ESPN/2 as it is.

Here are the # of Saturday appearances on ESPN or ESPN2 for each season since 2005:

2005 - 3 ESPN, 2 ESPN2. Only one a conference game
2006 - 4 ESPN, 5 ESPN2. 7 conference games
2007 - 3 ESPN, 3 ESPN2, 4 conference games
2008 - 2 ESPN, 4 ESPN2, 2 conference games
2009 - 1 ESPN, 2 ESPN2, 2 conference games
2010 - 2 ESPN, 5 ESPN2, 3 conference games
2011 - 1 ESPN, 2 ESPN2, 3 conference games

Your math is a bit off. The numbers are:

2006 - 7 games
2007 - 6 games
2008 - 6 games
2009 - 3 games
2010 - 7 games
2011 - 3 games

I get your point, but looking at it from ESPN's view, why put a BE game on that won't draw better ratings than an SEC or B1G game? By putting BE games in an exclusive time slot, it increases the ratings with casual fans who just want to see a good game. Fans of the school will find the game no matter where it is. Casual fans are what makes up the difference.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

You missed the whole ******* point. People argue that we should stay with ESPN because its in more homes then NBC SN, but that doesn't matter if you are getting 40 games, compared to 4.

ESPN has very little space available for Big East football. I can see them wanting basketball bad though.

I dont expect ESPN to target BE BB badly... For those who forgot, ESPN is creating a BE-BB-Type League in the ACC... Cuse + Pitt were certainly not added for their FB... ESPN is already badmouthing BE BB which will certainly not abate...

I expect ESPN to continue lowballing us in both BB and FB; I hope that Aresco can maneuver the BE to the open market where Fox/Cbs/Nbc and others can give the BE the optimum level of exposure and $$$ figures

(09-21-2012 01:32 PM)Gopper Wrote:  I dont expect ESPN to target BE BB badly... For those who forgot, ESPN is creating a BE-BB-Type League in the ACC... Cuse + Pitt were certainly not added for their FB... ESPN is already badmouthing BE BB which will certainly not abate...

I expect ESPN to continue lowballing us in both BB and FB; I hope that Aresco can maneuver the BE to the open market where Fox/Cbs/Nbc and others can give the BE the optimum level of exposure and $$$ figures

I still think the Big East can support plenty of prime spots in hoops. Memphis, Louisville, Georgetown, Uconn, Marquette, St Johns, etc still have major appeal. It isn't like the Big East will be a bottom feeder at all.

(09-20-2012 05:00 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  If you will be primarily on NBC SN then it will hurt you. The fans of the BE schools will seek out the games, but the casual fan who is looking for a good game by channel surfing is going to miss you if you are on a channel like NBC SN. Like it or not, sports fans have a habit of checking ABC and ESPN for college football. NBC SN, not so much. Can that change? Absolutely but it will take time for people to form new habits.

I hear that NBC Sports is going to change to a new channel number this Fall, so that they will be right next to the ESPN channels instead of out in right field. That should help get the attention of channel surfers. I don't think it will take all that long for the general public to begin including NBC SN in their viewing habits.

General Mike ' Wrote:  You missed the whole ******* point. People argue that we should stay with ESPN because its in more homes then NBC SN, but that doesn't matter if you are getting 40 games, compared to 4.

If you are going to use that as a basis for argument, you need to include ESPNU games in the mix as well. ESPNU games have equal visibility to NBC SN games. I imagine it will be about a three fold increase over current ESPN appearances, assuming that NBC SN runs 3 games each Saturday.

I am not advocating remaining with ESPN or jumping to another provider. I don't have enough information to make a call either way. I see a lot of fans who have it fixed in their mind that ESPN is out to screw them, and they want to "show" them. That is a foolish tact to take IMHO if the end game is to maximize exposure and revenue. To do that you need as many players at the table as you can get.

The negotiations are really the chicken and egg scenario. The networks will argue that the BE ratings dictate x dollars. The Big East will argue that their ratings would improve if they had better time slots. The problem is that Alabama vs Dog Crap U draws more eyeballs than a lot of BE games do. Should the network lose ratings by putting a BE game on instead of the AL -DCU game? With NBC SN any BE game is likely to be an improvement over what they are airing currently. But is it enough improvement to break the bank to get the rights? I have no idea. Neither does anyone else, yet.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

(09-21-2012 02:04 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

General Mike ' Wrote:  You missed the whole ******* point. People argue that we should stay with ESPN because its in more homes then NBC SN, but that doesn't matter if you are getting 40 games, compared to 4.

If you are going to use that as a basis for argument, you need to include ESPNU games in the mix as well. ESPNU games have equal visibility to NBC SN games. I imagine it will be about a three fold increase over current ESPN appearances, assuming that NBC SN runs 3 games each Saturday.

I am not advocating remaining with ESPN or jumping to another provider. I don't have enough information to make a call either way. I see a lot of fans who have it fixed in their mind that ESPN is out to screw them, and they want to "show" them. That is a foolish tact to take IMHO if the end game is to maximize exposure and revenue. To do that you need as many players at the table as you can get.

The negotiations are really the chicken and egg scenario. The networks will argue that the BE ratings dictate x dollars. The Big East will argue that their ratings would improve if they had better time slots. The problem is that Alabama vs Dog Crap U draws more eyeballs than a lot of BE games do. Should the network lose ratings by putting a BE game on instead of the AL -DCU game? With NBC SN any BE game is likely to be an improvement over what they are airing currently. But is it enough improvement to break the bank to get the rights? I have no idea. Neither does anyone else, yet.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

Actually I think both arguments are correct. The Rutgers vs Louisville game at 2 on Saturday will have a larger audience on ABC than on ESPN-U. It would also be outdrawn by the Alabama game on CBS. One argument doesnt necessarily negate the other. In this instance, both sides are correct. The reason it matters is that while ESPN may have better alternatives for the prime slots on thier most watched networks, the same is not true of NBC. The reality is that staying with ESPN means poor time slots on ESPN-U for the most part while NBC would result in more games on the NBC-OTA network in better time slots. Even the games on NBC-Sports would be equal to the exposure of ESPN-U and would likley be in better time slots. Not saying ESPN has no value for the Big East, just saying that the liklihood that the Big East would enjoy better ratings and more exposure on NBC is probably valid.

(09-21-2012 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 02:04 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

General Mike ' Wrote:  You missed the whole ******* point. People argue that we should stay with ESPN because its in more homes then NBC SN, but that doesn't matter if you are getting 40 games, compared to 4.

If you are going to use that as a basis for argument, you need to include ESPNU games in the mix as well. ESPNU games have equal visibility to NBC SN games. I imagine it will be about a three fold increase over current ESPN appearances, assuming that NBC SN runs 3 games each Saturday.

I am not advocating remaining with ESPN or jumping to another provider. I don't have enough information to make a call either way. I see a lot of fans who have it fixed in their mind that ESPN is out to screw them, and they want to "show" them. That is a foolish tact to take IMHO if the end game is to maximize exposure and revenue. To do that you need as many players at the table as you can get.

The negotiations are really the chicken and egg scenario. The networks will argue that the BE ratings dictate x dollars. The Big East will argue that their ratings would improve if they had better time slots. The problem is that Alabama vs Dog Crap U draws more eyeballs than a lot of BE games do. Should the network lose ratings by putting a BE game on instead of the AL -DCU game? With NBC SN any BE game is likely to be an improvement over what they are airing currently. But is it enough improvement to break the bank to get the rights? I have no idea. Neither does anyone else, yet.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

Actually I think both arguments are correct. The Rutgers vs Louisville game at 2 on Saturday will have a larger audience on ABC than on ESPN-U. It would als be outdrawn by the Alabama game on CBS. One argument doesnt necessarily negate the other. In this instance, both sides are correct. The reason it matters is that while ESPN may have better alternatives for the prime slots on thier most watched networks, the same is not true of NBC. The reality is that staying with ESPN means poor time slots on ESPN-U for the most part while NBC would result in more games on the NBC-OTA network in better time slots.

If they are offering exposure on the OTA NBC channels then it is a no brainer IMHO. So far, we have only speculation since NBC can't negotiate with the BE. That's why I say I don't have enough info to make an informed opinion whether the BE should stay or go.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

(09-21-2012 02:31 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 02:04 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

General Mike ' Wrote:  You missed the whole ******* point. People argue that we should stay with ESPN because its in more homes then NBC SN, but that doesn't matter if you are getting 40 games, compared to 4.

If you are going to use that as a basis for argument, you need to include ESPNU games in the mix as well. ESPNU games have equal visibility to NBC SN games. I imagine it will be about a three fold increase over current ESPN appearances, assuming that NBC SN runs 3 games each Saturday.

I am not advocating remaining with ESPN or jumping to another provider. I don't have enough information to make a call either way. I see a lot of fans who have it fixed in their mind that ESPN is out to screw them, and they want to "show" them. That is a foolish tact to take IMHO if the end game is to maximize exposure and revenue. To do that you need as many players at the table as you can get.

The negotiations are really the chicken and egg scenario. The networks will argue that the BE ratings dictate x dollars. The Big East will argue that their ratings would improve if they had better time slots. The problem is that Alabama vs Dog Crap U draws more eyeballs than a lot of BE games do. Should the network lose ratings by putting a BE game on instead of the AL -DCU game? With NBC SN any BE game is likely to be an improvement over what they are airing currently. But is it enough improvement to break the bank to get the rights? I have no idea. Neither does anyone else, yet.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

Actually I think both arguments are correct. The Rutgers vs Louisville game at 2 on Saturday will have a larger audience on ABC than on ESPN-U. It would als be outdrawn by the Alabama game on CBS. One argument doesnt necessarily negate the other. In this instance, both sides are correct. The reason it matters is that while ESPN may have better alternatives for the prime slots on thier most watched networks, the same is not true of NBC. The reality is that staying with ESPN means poor time slots on ESPN-U for the most part while NBC would result in more games on the NBC-OTA network in better time slots.

If they are offering exposure on the OTA NBC channels then it is a no brainer IMHO. So far, we have only speculation since NBC can't negotiate with the BE. That's why I say I don't have enough info to make an informed opinion whether the BE should stay or go.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

NBC was able to make presentations to the Big East AD's at the last Big East meetings---they just are not able to discuss money. NBC, ESPN and Fox were each given time to make a pitch for how the Big Est would be presented by each network. Double headers (sometimes triple headers) on the NBC-OTA (with Notre Dame being one of the games) was a big part of the NBC presentation. The rest of the games would be primarily broadcast on NBC-Sports. A featured Thursday or Friday night game on NBC-Sports was also part of the presentation.