(06-21-2022 05:39 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-21-2022 11:23 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-21-2022 10:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-21-2022 10:34 AM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(06-21-2022 09:39 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  The SEC commitments might hurt the PAC or Big 12, but it won't hurt the B1G.

The SEC commitments will not hurt the PAC. The PAC will own the 10:30 pm EST slot with ESPN, which got good ratings last season. ESPN needs the PAC because the MWC is with FOX and CBS. The PAC should be able to get enough games on ABC and ESPN2 to make the contract work. The Big 12 is another story. They go into negotiations with ESPN and FOX without Oklahoma and Texas, plus they are the last power conference up.

Good point about the PAC.

People seem to say that the PAC's time zone hurts it, but when it comes to TV one can argue it helps, because it often isn't going H2H vs top B1G and SEC games.

It gives them a time slot, but a quick perusal and I didn't see any late game getting better than a 1.1 rating and it was usually much lower. None of them got 2 million viewers. And they complain about it and the ADs want to reduce the number of those games. Its not a positive for them. Maybe for the MWC.

Is two million viewers a magic number? I want to see how these night games compare to games played earlier in the day. For example, Week 11 of last season had Washington State at Oregon. That 10:30 EST game had 1.991 million viewers, ranked 8th overall for the week. That beat the Miami at Florida State game at 3:30 pm on ESPN, which had 1.534 million viewers, and the Mississippi State at Auburn game at 12:00 on ESPN, which had 1.529 million viewers.

Week 2 had Utah at BYU which came in 8th in the rating on ESPN with 1.503 million viewers and the Stanford at USC game on FOX at the same time got 1.441 million viewers. That day the Pac-12 was involved in the top three rated games with Oregon at Ohio State on FOX, Washington at Michigan on ABC and Texas A&M at Colorado on FOX. Five in the top Nine.

USC at Arizona State at 10:30 pm in Week 10 on ESPN got 1.608 million viewers. That was a bad USC team. This season, they should easily get 2 million viewers. They beat the 3:30 pm EST game on ESPN of Oklahoma State at West Virginia, which got 1.1 million viewers.

There was not a game on every Saturday Night on ESPN, for whatever reason and there will not be this season. The Saturday Night games are on ESPN/ESPN2 and FOX/FS1. In Week 1 of this season, the late night game will be Boise State at Oregon State on ESPN. In Week 2, FS1 will broadcast Mississippi State at Arizona, a game that will start at 11:00 pm in the east. In Week 3, Fresno State at USC on FOX in a late night game, and San Diego State will be at Utah on ESPN2. Those games should do well without competition from other conferences.

Those night games appeared to be mostly middle of the pack. Some were lower half.
The problem is that those games are just too late for the east coast. I liked to watch those 10:30 ET games when I lived in the Central Time zone, but they're just too late when you are in the eastern time zone. Halftime is after midnight.

If the Big Ten gets a 3:30 pm CBS game to go against the SEC on ABC at 3:30 pm, I don't think the Big Ten is the one that has to worry about the impact to tv ratings. The SEC has had favorable TV exposure for decades - they are already operating at optimum; the Big Ten has more upside IMHO.

Besides, would the Big Ten really want its best games at night in late Fall?

It appears that we have graduated from thinking of realignment as a game of Risk to thinking of tv negotiations as a game of Risk.

(06-20-2022 10:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-20-2022 08:47 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  ESPN hates the Big Ten. However, despite the wishful thinking of the pro-SEC honks on this board, they realized we're too strong to be brought down. So they're trying to find a way to use the Big Ten to their advantage.

At the end of the day, I just don't think the conference is better off with a network that has made its biases well known and go, instead, with a combo that can give the conference its unique ecosystem which, therefore, removes the need to play nice with a corporation that is aligned with the anti-North bias.

The Walt Disney Company might be many things, but anti-North isn’t one of them.

Speaking as Big Ten guy, I think a lot of Big Ten fans simply whine too much about supposed ESPN bias. I’m frankly tired of it. The editorial bias on the talking head shows will ALWAYS be for whoever is winning at the time, whether it’s the Yankees, Warriors or, yes, the SEC. If the Big Ten isn’t winning national championships in football or basketball, why on Earth should we ever expect editorial bias in our favor? Unless the Big Ten starts consistently beating the SEC in the playoff games that matter, what leg do we have to stand on here? As a conference, we’re essentially like those teams that are the richest in the sport with the highest payrolls yet don’t win the big one. Those types of entities don’t exactly engender much sympathy with the general public. It’s like expecting ESPN to provide glowing coverage to a Yankees team that loses the division to a Rays team with a fraction of its payroll. No one outside of partisan Yankees fans cares to hear it. I love the Big Ten as much as anyone, but objectively speaking, our performance in the key sports of football and basketball has simply been underwhelming this century considering that we have had the biggest financial advantages of anyone.

Now, financial bias is separate purely about green: whoever makes them money is favored and, on that front, the Big Ten will always be favored and an important property for ESPN or any other network. ESPN might spend entire days serving up hot takes on the Cowboys, LeBron and the Big Ten, but when it comes to actual important part of the schedule in prime time, ESPN badly wants and pays up for all of their respective games.

They don't need the 4-letter monopsony to do that when they have YES. YES is the New York Yankees organ. That's also the beauty of BTN. I don't necessarily want the 4-letter monopsony to heap glowing praise on the conference. If I want to watch Big Ten news then I can tune in there. The 4-letter doesn't really need to hype up properties when they already get subscriber $$$ up the wazoo. They do it BECAUSE OF POLITICS, Frank! They are a political organization masquerading as a sports network. Because you're so in love with Disney you don't want to see it.

This is what I see when I have to watch a Big Ten game on the 4-letter: "Hey, gang. Are you ready for another SEC Saturday? The bestest ever college football for this and every other Saturday in the fall! Best football! Greatest fans! Packed stadiums! Big, hard, fast players! There's no conference like us...I mean... it! Everyone is either SEC or jealous of S-E-C! Look at the great coaches! Bestest coaches and best paid coaches ever! Don't turn the dial! And if that can't satisfy your thirst there's also the complimentary option of the few football brands from the ACC, Big 12, etc., etc., etc.. You know what you came for....

...but first we have to show you our obligated, contracted, boring BigTen game..."

Let's just leave all that nonsense behind and chart our own course. Staying at the 4-letter guarantees being second fiddle.

ESPN hates the Big Ten!

(06-22-2022 02:06 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(06-20-2022 10:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-20-2022 08:47 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  ESPN hates the Big Ten. However, despite the wishful thinking of the pro-SEC honks on this board, they realized we're too strong to be brought down. So they're trying to find a way to use the Big Ten to their advantage.

At the end of the day, I just don't think the conference is better off with a network that has made its biases well known and go, instead, with a combo that can give the conference its unique ecosystem which, therefore, removes the need to play nice with a corporation that is aligned with the anti-North bias.

The Walt Disney Company might be many things, but anti-North isn’t one of them.

Speaking as Big Ten guy, I think a lot of Big Ten fans simply whine too much about supposed ESPN bias. I’m frankly tired of it. The editorial bias on the talking head shows will ALWAYS be for whoever is winning at the time, whether it’s the Yankees, Warriors or, yes, the SEC. If the Big Ten isn’t winning national championships in football or basketball, why on Earth should we ever expect editorial bias in our favor? Unless the Big Ten starts consistently beating the SEC in the playoff games that matter, what leg do we have to stand on here? As a conference, we’re essentially like those teams that are the richest in the sport with the highest payrolls yet don’t win the big one. Those types of entities don’t exactly engender much sympathy with the general public. It’s like expecting ESPN to provide glowing coverage to a Yankees team that loses the division to a Rays team with a fraction of its payroll. No one outside of partisan Yankees fans cares to hear it. I love the Big Ten as much as anyone, but objectively speaking, our performance in the key sports of football and basketball has simply been underwhelming this century considering that we have had the biggest financial advantages of anyone.

Now, financial bias is separate purely about green: whoever makes them money is favored and, on that front, the Big Ten will always be favored and an important property for ESPN or any other network. ESPN might spend entire days serving up hot takes on the Cowboys, LeBron and the Big Ten, but when it comes to actual important part of the schedule in prime time, ESPN badly wants and pays up for all of their respective games.

They don't need the 4-letter monopsony to do that when they have YES. YES is the New York Yankees organ. That's also the beauty of BTN. I don't necessarily want the 4-letter monopsony to heap glowing praise on the conference. If I want to watch Big Ten news then I can tune in there. The 4-letter doesn't really need to hype up properties when they already get subscriber $$$ up the wazoo. They do it BECAUSE OF POLITICS, Frank! They are a political organization masquerading as a sports network. Because you're so in love with Disney you don't want to see it.

This is what I see when I have to watch a Big Ten game on the 4-letter: "Hey, gang. Are you ready for another SEC Saturday? The bestest ever college football for this and every other Saturday in the fall! Best football! Greatest fans! Packed stadiums! Big, hard, fast players! There's no conference like us...I mean... it! Everyone is either SEC or jealous of S-E-C! Look at the great coaches! Bestest coaches and best paid coaches ever! Don't turn the dial! And if that can't satisfy your thirst there's also the complimentary option of the few football brands from the ACC, Big 12, etc., etc., etc.. You know what you came for....

...but first we have to show you our obligated, contracted, boring BigTen game..."

Let's just leave all that nonsense behind and chart our own course. Staying at the 4-letter guarantees being second fiddle.

ESPN hates the Big Ten!

Well the problem is BTN doesn't have the audience ESPN or ABC has. Good thing FOX does and FOX probably will be the Big Ten's cheerleaders and has been recently and if CBS signs with the Big Ten they will likely become Big Ten cheerleaders during their coverage as well. If NBC has contracts with both the Big Ten and Notre Dame, who do they cheerlead?

(06-22-2022 02:06 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  (snip)

ESPN hates the Big Ten!

I don't know where this idea comes from. I which ESPN a lot and to me, they provide lots of coverage of B1G content, and the talk is usually pretty favorable. They also have plenty of guys with B1G backgrounds on their CFB shows, e.g. Herbstreit and Howard, two of the five regulars on GameDay, have B1G backgrounds.

IMO the B1G is very prominent on ESPN, IMO, both football and basketball.

(06-22-2022 02:06 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(06-20-2022 10:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-20-2022 08:47 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  ESPN hates the Big Ten. However, despite the wishful thinking of the pro-SEC honks on this board, they realized we're too strong to be brought down. So they're trying to find a way to use the Big Ten to their advantage.

At the end of the day, I just don't think the conference is better off with a network that has made its biases well known and go, instead, with a combo that can give the conference its unique ecosystem which, therefore, removes the need to play nice with a corporation that is aligned with the anti-North bias.

The Walt Disney Company might be many things, but anti-North isn’t one of them.

Speaking as Big Ten guy, I think a lot of Big Ten fans simply whine too much about supposed ESPN bias. I’m frankly tired of it. The editorial bias on the talking head shows will ALWAYS be for whoever is winning at the time, whether it’s the Yankees, Warriors or, yes, the SEC. If the Big Ten isn’t winning national championships in football or basketball, why on Earth should we ever expect editorial bias in our favor? Unless the Big Ten starts consistently beating the SEC in the playoff games that matter, what leg do we have to stand on here? As a conference, we’re essentially like those teams that are the richest in the sport with the highest payrolls yet don’t win the big one. Those types of entities don’t exactly engender much sympathy with the general public. It’s like expecting ESPN to provide glowing coverage to a Yankees team that loses the division to a Rays team with a fraction of its payroll. No one outside of partisan Yankees fans cares to hear it. I love the Big Ten as much as anyone, but objectively speaking, our performance in the key sports of football and basketball has simply been underwhelming this century considering that we have had the biggest financial advantages of anyone.

Now, financial bias is separate purely about green: whoever makes them money is favored and, on that front, the Big Ten will always be favored and an important property for ESPN or any other network. ESPN might spend entire days serving up hot takes on the Cowboys, LeBron and the Big Ten, but when it comes to actual important part of the schedule in prime time, ESPN badly wants and pays up for all of their respective games.

They don't need the 4-letter monopsony to do that when they have YES. YES is the New York Yankees organ. That's also the beauty of BTN. I don't necessarily want the 4-letter monopsony to heap glowing praise on the conference. If I want to watch Big Ten news then I can tune in there. The 4-letter doesn't really need to hype up properties when they already get subscriber $$$ up the wazoo. They do it BECAUSE OF POLITICS, Frank! They are a political organization masquerading as a sports network. Because you're so in love with Disney you don't want to see it.

This is what I see when I have to watch a Big Ten game on the 4-letter: "Hey, gang. Are you ready for another SEC Saturday? The bestest ever college football for this and every other Saturday in the fall! Best football! Greatest fans! Packed stadiums! Big, hard, fast players! There's no conference like us...I mean... it! Everyone is either SEC or jealous of S-E-C! Look at the great coaches! Bestest coaches and best paid coaches ever! Don't turn the dial! And if that can't satisfy your thirst there's also the complimentary option of the few football brands from the ACC, Big 12, etc., etc., etc.. You know what you came for....

...but first we have to show you our obligated, contracted, boring BigTen game..."

Let's just leave all that nonsense behind and chart our own course. Staying at the 4-letter guarantees being second fiddle.

ESPN hates the Big Ten!

I think this is all confirmation bias: you're bringing in your own perception of how the Big Ten is treated by ESPN and then use any instance that you see as confirmation of that perception. I'm not blaming you - we all do that as sports fans if we are honest with ourselves. That's how we see referees and umps (where they are ALWAYS making bad calls against our own team, no matter who it might be), announcers (e.g. every NFL and MLB fan seems to think that Joe Buck is biased against their team), local reporters (who seem to ALWAYS be negative towards our favorite teams), etc. We are hyper-aware of all the negative things that go against our favorite teams and all of the positive things that go in favor of our rivals, so we all have this internal narrative that everyone is biased against us. It's a universal belief among all sports fans.

What I actually care about for the Big Ten is that it's NOT about us as the hard core committed Big Ten sports fan. Getting maximum value in the marketplace for the long-term is not about people like us. Instead, it's about reaching the casual sports fan and continuing to maximize our viewership among that group. It's about putting us in the same plane as the NFL as opposed to, say, how the NHL was over the past 20 years. Sure, NHL fans knew which channels to turn to in order to watch their games, but the casual fans weren't brought in, which is why the league wanted to get back onto ESPN badly.

It's not that I love Disney, but I think you're greatly underestimating how much more power and, more importantly, stability that they have relative to everyone else in entertainment industry compared to even 6 years ago when the Big Ten signed their last TV contract. Disney bought most of the assets that made FOX a more equal player during the last Big Ten TV contract negotiations - where FOX used to be a multi-platform conglomerate 6 years ago, they essentially have no network effects or synergy with any other properties at all along with no viable standalone streaming service.

The Big Ten fans that complain about ESPN bias are honestly complaining about small time details about on-air personalities and failing to see the much bigger picture. While I trust CBS and NBC to exist in 6 years, the issue that I see is that the reason why they're willing to spend money (and why Wall Street is currently OK with it) is for streaming... and I don't trust that either (a) Paramount+ and/or Peacock will still exist in 6 years or (b) that CBS and NBC are going to have the same ownership in 6 years. In contrast, the Disney that you see today is very likely going to be the same core Disney that you see 6 years from now - I don't think ABC, ESPN or their streaming platforms (whether they continue to be separate entities or combined into one giant Disney+ service) are going anywhere.

As I've stated before, I'm not talking about the #1 and #2 games on OTA. FOX is obviously getting the #1 package and if CBS and/or NBC gets the #2 package, then that's great for the Big Ten. OTA games for the highest profile games should be the goal and I don't disagree with anyone on that front.

What my focus on is where the #3 package goes along with everything else (particularly basketball and streaming rights). We can whine about editorial coverage all day, but the ABC/ESPN/ESPN+ combo is miles ahead in terms of the other media companies on this front. Remember that there are 6, 7 or more (during non-conference weeks) Big Ten games per week on any given Saturday.

We need to understand the TOTAL package, NOT just the top 2 games. At the same time, we also need to have faith that whoever we're putting our brand and exposure into the hands of for the next 6 years (or however long the next contract will be) is actually going to be the same core company by the end of the contract. The only ones bidding that I actually have faith in that being the case are Disney and Amazon. Everyone else is totally in flux. These are global industry issues that dwarf any issue about on-air personalities. Who gives a crap about on-air pundits - this is about long-term money and power in the corridors of Hollywood and beyond and the Big Ten needs to keep its presence there.

Boy the UCLA-USC news changes the Big 10 contract a lot.

Do you think FOX had anything to do with getting the LA schools to the Big Ten? Is it a coincidence that both LA schools are involved? There's certainly a Los Angeles connection to FOX. Maybe FOX did to the Pac 12 what ESPN did to the Big 12.

(06-30-2022 06:11 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Boy the UCLA-USC news changes the Big 10 contract a lot.

Do you think FOX had anything to do with getting the LA schools to the Big Ten? Is it a coincidence that both LA schools are involved? There's certainly a Los Angeles connection to FOX. Maybe FOX did to the Pac 12 what ESPN did to the Big 12.

This was not an 11th hour coup. The inclusion of USC/UCLA has likely been a parameter in TV negotiations (even if only theoretical) for over a month. Money looked good for the Big Ten so they back-channeled to the LA pair for a move to close out the fiscal year.

(04-15-2022 10:15 PM)Tmac13 Wrote:  The best news in this article for college football is how many networks are interested in bidding. NBC, looking to add, CBS, looking to replace the SEC, and Turner Sporrs looking to get into the college football business. That should bode well for conferences with expiring media deals in the next few years..

NBC looking to add? They dropped NBCSN. They gutted a few other channels they would simulcast/multicast sports on depending on the event. Still have a hand in ND football. Not saying they wouldn't do it but I'd think CBS and CBSSN are more players than NBC.

Hold on to your horses! There are more twists and turns coming...

What are Cal and Stanford doing? They could be fighting over the 20th slot should Oregon, Washington, and ND become members 17-19.

(06-30-2022 07:16 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  What are Cal and Stanford doing? They could be fighting over the 20th slot should Oregon, Washington, and ND become members 17-19.

I call Berkeley. I have family as alums.