johnbragg
Five Minute Google Expert
Posts: 16,361
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
|
RE: What does the Tulsa add do for UConn, Cincy, Temple, etc
(04-02-2013 12:13 PM)apex_pirate Wrote: But it all points to football driving the value of contracts. I'm not arguing that C-TBA will get a bigger contract than the C-7, just that your comment that Quote:"football drives the bus" is no longer as obvious as it was six months ago
is far from true. It is quite obvious at all levels. Whether it gets them more than a basketball league is not the issue. That was part of debate with the other poster. I took issue only with the bolded sentence. The fact is that football drives C-TBA and any other conference that sponsors that sport when it comes to TV negotiations...period...and undeniably obvious.
I think it's plausible to argue that the value of the Aresco LEague contracts was depressed by Aresco insisting that any contract include national-basic-cable football. Given the money the C-7 Big East is looking at, I think that the combined Big East could have gotten a good basketball contract, from Fox or ESPN or Turner. But that would have sacrificed football, putting Aresco LEague football on FoxSports2 or ESPN syndicated coverage or CBS-SN or something like that.
That may or may not be a wise move--we'll know in 5 years or so when the next contract is negotiated, does the ESPN exposure for Aresco League football increase the value of AL football to the point where there's a decent TV deal.
|
|
04-02-2013 01:39 PM |
|
Melky Cabrera
Bill Bradley
Posts: 4,716
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 100
I Root For: UConn
Location:
|
RE: What does the Tulsa add do for UConn, Cincy, Temple, etc
(04-02-2013 12:13 PM)apex_pirate Wrote: But it all points to football driving the value of contracts. I'm not arguing that C-TBA will get a bigger contract than the C-7, just that your comment that "football drives the bus" is no longer as obvious as it was six months ago is far from true. It is quite obvious at all levels. Whether it gets them more than a basketball league is not the issue. That was part of debate with the other poster. I took issue only with the bolded sentence. The fact is that football drives C-TBA and any other conference that sponsors that sport when it comes to TV negotiations...period...and undeniably obvious.
It rally doesn't point to football driving the bus. It points to certain power football programs driving the bus. It's not football per se, but football at sate flagships with enrollment a of 30-50 K, with long histories and traditions, and with rabid alumni bases.
The idea that football drives the bus implies that the American sports fan simply can't get enough of the sport and will watch any football game that the networks broadcast. That simply isn't true and the networks know it.
It's money that drives the bus. The matchups that can generate large audiences are worth fighting over for the networks, but they could care less about football as an entity in and of itself.
The truth is that the Big American Metro simply doesn't have the kinds of programs that command big audiences. If they did, the networks would be fighting over them and would be throwing big bucks at them.
(This post was last modified: 04-02-2013 03:53 PM by Melky Cabrera.)
|
|
04-02-2013 03:51 PM |
|