ESPN BS

[Mr. Nielsen]

So, last week in other topics some talked about if ESPN College Gameday would be in Milwaukee on Feb. 9. Most did say, no. It's a FOX game. That would be correct, as this is not college football. The football show does go to FOX, FS1, CBS and NBC games. The football show gets 1.8 million in viewers, where the basketball show is no where close to that. Heck, 90% of basketball games on TV don't get viewership numbers in what ESPN College Gameday Football gets.

With that said, ESPN company man Fran Fraschilla was a guest on Sirius XM, channel 84 on the show "The First Team" this morning. The host is Taylor Zarzour. He is a college football guy. He works for the SEC Network, which is owned by ESPN. The topic moved to "Cinderella Teams." Fran said, he would not be shocked if teams like Marquette or Houston would be in the Final Four. They moved to other teams, than got to Markus Howard. Fran said, if Markus Howard was on ESPN he would be this years Trae Young. Not a shot at FOX, but the country doesn't see Markus Howard. Taylor, who is also a company guy IMO said I agree with that as you are conditioned to watch the ACC, Big 12, SEC on ESPN.

While I don't disagree with that, I do. Marquette has been on OTA FOX twice already this season with the Wisconsin and Xavier game. Also, let's not act like Marquette is not on TV. FS1 is in 83 million homes. I'm glad the Big East has a guy in Tim Brando and company on FS1 who said before tip last night, if you have not seen Markus Howard, you have not been watching college basketball! Listen, ESPN slips BS to us. Stop blaming others for not seeing Markus Howard. true fans have! CBSSN talks about him all the time! Let's call it for what it is, ESPN doesn't want to over hype Markus Howard in the way they did with Trae Young. Markus Howard doesn't play on ESPN. It's a massive struggle to get ratings outside of Duke in regular season basketball. Also, ESPN IMO over did it with Trae Young as the country started to dislike him and wanted him to fail. I'm glad that is not the case with Markus Howard as he is a great player and even a better person!

Thoughts!

[IrwinFletcher]

He isn't wrong.

ESPN is a behemouth and the average fan doesn't even know FS1 exists.  I travel a lot for my job.  10% of the hotels have FS1 as part of their cable/satellite package.  More offer ESPNNews and ESPNU that offer FS1.

Bottom line is that it is a bit tougher for someone not on ESPN to get some hype.  Their talking heads are more likely to talk about MH if he were on their network.  Although this morning, Trey Wingo was talking about him a bit.

It's just the reality of college hoops right now and frankly, it doesn't bother me.

[Boozemon Barro]

Who cares if the mouth breathers watching ESPN know about Markus Howard or not?

[GooooMarquette]

Who cares if the mouth breathers watching ESPN know about Markus Howard or not?

This.

Just keep winning, and the clueless will find out soon enough....

[JakeBarnes]

Who cares if the mouth breathers watching ESPN know about Markus Howard or not?

Additionally, Marquette has been the lead on espn twice in the past few weeks. People already know Markus. If they don't, they aren't ncaab fans.

[LoudMouth]

If we were on E$PN Markus would be the next Trae Young and he wouldn't be staying his 4th year...definitely not the best recruiting piece but it isn't wrong

[UWW2MU]

Who cares if the mouth breathers watching ESPN know about Markus Howard or not?

We should all care... because it is a symptom of a much larger problem.  As long as ESPN has such a large hold on a major part of college basketball viewing, they control a lot of aspects of the system itself.  You can look at many parts of CBB, from recruiting, to the AP poll, to monetary resources like tv contracts, and much more and you can see it affecting every other aspect.   

Just one example: more viewers means bigger tv contracts, which means more money for programs, which means better facilities, which means better recruits and better training staff, which means easier path to on court success (which then feeds back into more viewership).   This cycle can be picked up at any point along that line and you can trade in and out other aspects like recruiting and player awards, etc.  You don't NEED huge exposure to be successful... but it certainly is nice to have!

When ESPN plays dirty by not covering conferences they have no control over just to focus on their own brand, they not only do a disservice to their viewer for not being aware of a lot of great basketball, but they also do themselves a disservice because of the resentment they build in a decent size of the fanbase who follows non-SEC/ACC/B12.  It creates a situation where some people begin to hope they fall on hard times.  Not to mention the personal conflict it causes me due to my DIS holdings!   

The industry and NCAAB would be better served if CBSSN and FS1 continue to increase their share of viewership.  If that happened I'd imagine you'd either see the networks cover across the tv contract lines more... or at least you can get more exposure to the average fan as they flip between the channels. 

[Heisenberg]

Did FS1 hurt Jalen Brunson or Doug McDermott's chances of winning NPOY?  No.

I think Fran's full of it ... just another way of being a good company guy and putting down the competition.

[Mr. Nielsen]

FS1 is in 83 million homes
FS2 is in 57 million homes
BTN is in 58 million homes

ESPNU is in 63 million homes
ESPNEWS is in 61 million homes

[LoudMouth]

Used to happen all the time with NFL and PGA where NBC/CBS/FOX wouldn't even mention any other game or the next weekend tournament if it was on a different network. That seems to pretty much go by the wayside now as they want to promote the sport

[MU82]

We should all care... because it is a symptom of a much larger problem.  As long as ESPN has such a large hold on a major part of college basketball viewing, they control a lot of aspects of the system itself.  You can look at many parts of CBB, from recruiting, to the AP poll, to monetary resources like tv contracts, and much more and you can see it affecting every other aspect.   

Just one example: more viewers means bigger tv contracts, which means more money for programs, which means better facilities, which means better recruits and better training staff, which means easier path to on court success (which then feeds back into more viewership).   This cycle can be picked up at any point along that line and you can trade in and out other aspects like recruiting and player awards, etc.  You don't NEED huge exposure to be successful... but it certainly is nice to have!

When ESPN plays dirty by not covering conferences they have no control over just to focus on their own brand, they not only do a disservice to their viewer for not being aware of a lot of great basketball, but they also do themselves a disservice because of the resentment they build in a decent size of the fanbase who follows non-SEC/ACC/B12.  It creates a situation where some people begin to hope they fall on hard times.  Not to mention the personal conflict it causes me due to my DIS holdings!   

The industry and NCAAB would be better served if CBSSN and FS1 continue to increase their share of viewership.  If that happened I'd imagine you'd either see the networks cover across the tv contract lines more... or at least you can get more exposure to the average fan as they flip between the channels.

Totally understand what you're saying ... and yet I still have a hard time getting outraged over it.

Flipping around the channels last night, "The Lead" on the bottom line featured 3 stories: one was Super Bowl related, one was an NBA game and the third was "No. 10 Marquette wins 8th straight; Howard scores 32."

We get pub. Almost surely not as much as if we were on ESPN, but we get pub.

The Big East made a choice, went for much, much bigger money on FS1 than the league would have gotten from ESPN. I don't blame BE honchos for making that choice, and it has been a good relationship. But one of the small consequences of the choice is that ESPN is a business that is not in the business of overly promoting another network's product.

Win a few NCAA games and we'll be swimming in publicity, from ESPN and everybody else.

[UWW2MU]

FS1 is in 83 million homes
FS2 is in 57 million homes
BTN is in 58 million homes

ESPNU is in 63 million homes
ESPNEWS is in 61 million homes

What are the numbers on their flagship channels?

Also curious, what's the rough average viewership of a midweek power conference game on ESPN vs. FS1 or CBSSN game?

[UWW2MU]

Totally understand what you're saying ... and yet I still have a hard time getting outraged over it.

Flipping around the channels last night, "The Lead" on the bottom line featured 3 stories: one was Super Bowl related, one was an NBA game and the third was "No. 10 Marquette wins 8th straight; Howard scores 32."

We get pub. Almost surely not as much as if we were on ESPN, but we get pub.

The Big East made a choice, went for much, much bigger money on FS1 than the league would have gotten from ESPN. I don't blame BE honchos for making that choice, and it has been a good relationship. But one of the small consequences of the choice is that ESPN is a business that is not in the business of overly promoting another network's product.

Win a few NCAA games and we'll be swimming in publicity, from ESPN and everybody else.

I was going to say more and go into these thoughts as well, as I agree.  I just figured my post was long enough already!           

[fjm]

I honestly don't know the last time I watched ESPN.

Jk. I remember. It was the Preseason NIT cause MU was plying. Haven't watched since then. Not even a bowl football game.

[HowardsWorld]

If people don't know who Howard is by now then thats on them for living under a rock. What Howard is doing is even more impressive than what Stephen Curry did at Davidson. This guy is must watch tv every game.

On the ESPN note, because Marquette is not on ESPN they are forced to talk about leading NCAA scorer Chris Clemons from Campbell who hit a game winning shot yesterday improving his teams record to a blistering 12-9 record. IMO Howard is more fun to watch than Zion is. Not a homer here but the dunks form Zion are nice but the step backs by Howard are Kemba Walker like and I will watch that all day.

Ja Morant is a fun player to watch as well but ESPN is forcing these guys since they aren't going to talk about the best player in college right now due to different networks.

[Mr. Nielsen]

What are the numbers on their flagship channels?

Also curious, what's the rough average viewership of a midweek power conference game on ESPN vs. FS1 or CBSSN game?

CBSSN is not a rated network.

The Big Ten does very good on FS1. The Friday night hoops has been good for FS1. Having Michigan at Indiana last Friday gave Butler at Creighton a very good rating. Big East gets solid numbers when on FOX compared to FS1.

ESPN kills FS1. Yet, it's not apples vs apples when you have Duke, Kentucky and Kansas on your network. Funny thing is ESPN smokes ESPN2 in most cases. The only big numbers ESPN gets is when Duke is on. Yet, that would just an average number if it is a college football game.

[MomofMUltiples]

I think this can shift with B1G games now on FS1.  Hard to ignore Michigan/MSU/other long time teams especially when the B1G is "up" this year. 

[Mr. Nielsen]

Great post by FranktheTank on the UCONN board about the Big East that I thought should be shared here: FranktheTank is a lawyer that has a good sports media blog that everyone respects.

To this day, I don't understand the arguments that the Big East would be a league that's going downward. They already make more TV money than any of the Group of 5 conferences and they don't even play football (meaning they're getting a MUCH MUCH MUCH higher ROI without those football expenses). The on-the-court product has also ended up being signicantly better than expected - there isn't any "Requiem for the Big East" talk anymore.

At the same time, anyone in the TV industry knows that trying to compare FS1 ratings to ESPN ratings is ridiculous - there's an artificial depression on ratings for the exact same event on FS1 compared to ESPN. You can see this clearly in Pac-12 ratings where the same matchup will have 3 or 4 times the viewers on ESPN compared to FS1. (Note that the Big East consistently beats the Pac-12 on FS1 in the ratings, so that's a much better indicator of the Big East's leverage.) If the Big East were going to market for a new contract today, it would most certainly get a significant increase with multiple bidders. To be sure, TV rights fees are in flux for the future because of so many unpredictable changes in the industry overall, but that's a macro issue as opposed to a conference-specific issue.

The point is that the "football is all that matters" mantra is true... for the P5 conferences. The problem is that the G5 conferences are lemmings in trying to chase the P5 in a game that they will never be even in the vicinity of being competitive (much less win). Meanwhile, the Big East found a way to make more TV money with fewer expenses with an identifiable brand and schools that actually want to be there by going in a totally different direction (if only because they were forced to do so). Frankly, considering the circumstances of the split of the Old Big East, the New Big East has actually been the best managed conference that has maximized its assets better on a pound for pound basis than any other conference (including the P5) since conference realignment quieted down. The Big East shouldn't be criticized for being a league without football - they should be *commended* for figuring out a way to be successful and resurrecting a brand without football while the G5 members swim in debt in the name of football.

If the P5 conferences are Amazon, then the G5 conferences are Sears - a dying retailer that tried to figure out online retail when it was too little and too late while much better competitors swamped them. Meanwhile, the Big East is like Nordstrom - a targeted high value brand retailer whose success is doing what Amazon *doesn't* do well in terms of a different focus and experience. The irony of all of this is that the P5 actually sees the Big East as a legitimate equal in basketball with this approach to the point where 2 leagues (the Big Ten and Big 12) have challenges with them. Anyone who thinks that the Big East is more in danger of a hypothetical P5 split from the rest of the NCAA than, say, the AAC is kidding themselves.

To be clear, this doesn't mean UConn should just drop football (or even go independent) and join the Big East. As long as UConn sincerely believes that it has a chance at the P5, it's essentially forced to stay in the AAC (or whatever successor league in the event that it gets poached). Holding onto that P5 lottery ticket is probably still to important for an athletic department of UConn's stature to ever unilaterally give it up. It's just a strange situation since UConn might be the only school in the country where *having* an FBS football program actually *takes away* a potentially higher revenue/more profitable option (basketball in the Big East

[MU82]

Great post by FranktheTank on the UCONN board about the Big East that I thought should be shared here: FranktheTank is a lawyer that has a good sports media blog that everyone respects.

To this day, I don't understand the arguments that the Big East would be a league that's going downward. They already make more TV money than any of the Group of 5 conferences and they don't even play football (meaning they're getting a MUCH MUCH MUCH higher ROI without those football expenses). The on-the-court product has also ended up being signicantly better than expected - there isn't any "Requiem for the Big East" talk anymore.

At the same time, anyone in the TV industry knows that trying to compare FS1 ratings to ESPN ratings is ridiculous - there's an artificial depression on ratings for the exact same event on FS1 compared to ESPN. You can see this clearly in Pac-12 ratings where the same matchup will have 3 or 4 times the viewers on ESPN compared to FS1. (Note that the Big East consistently beats the Pac-12 on FS1 in the ratings, so that's a much better indicator of the Big East's leverage.) If the Big East were going to market for a new contract today, it would most certainly get a significant increase with multiple bidders. To be sure, TV rights fees are in flux for the future because of so many unpredictable changes in the industry overall, but that's a macro issue as opposed to a conference-specific issue.

The point is that the "football is all that matters" mantra is true... for the P5 conferences. The problem is that the G5 conferences are lemmings in trying to chase the P5 in a game that they will never be even in the vicinity of being competitive (much less win). Meanwhile, the Big East found a way to make more TV money with fewer expenses with an identifiable brand and schools that actually want to be there by going in a totally different direction (if only because they were forced to do so). Frankly, considering the circumstances of the split of the Old Big East, the New Big East has actually been the best managed conference that has maximized its assets better on a pound for pound basis than any other conference (including the P5) since conference realignment quieted down. The Big East shouldn't be criticized for being a league without football - they should be *commended* for figuring out a way to be successful and resurrecting a brand without football while the G5 members swim in debt in the name of football.

If the P5 conferences are Amazon, then the G5 conferences are Sears - a dying retailer that tried to figure out online retail when it was too little and too late while much better competitors swamped them. Meanwhile, the Big East is like Nordstrom - a targeted high value brand retailer whose success is doing what Amazon *doesn't* do well in terms of a different focus and experience. The irony of all of this is that the P5 actually sees the Big East as a legitimate equal in basketball with this approach to the point where 2 leagues (the Big Ten and Big 12) have challenges with them. Anyone who thinks that the Big East is more in danger of a hypothetical P5 split from the rest of the NCAA than, say, the AAC is kidding themselves.

To be clear, this doesn't mean UConn should just drop football (or even go independent) and join the Big East. As long as UConn sincerely believes that it has a chance at the P5, it's essentially forced to stay in the AAC (or whatever successor league in the event that it gets poached). Holding onto that P5 lottery ticket is probably still to important for an athletic department of UConn's stature to ever unilaterally give it up. It's just a strange situation since UConn might be the only school in the country where *having* an FBS football program actually *takes away* a potentially higher revenue/more profitable option (basketball in the Big East

Thanks for posting that, Mr. N. Very thought-provoking.

[UWW2MU]

Thanks for posting that, Mr. N. Very thought-provoking.

Ditto.

[Oldgym]

To be clear, this doesn't mean UConn should just drop football (or even go independent) and join the Big East. As long as UConn sincerely believes that it has a chance at the P5, it's essentially forced to stay in the AAC (or whatever successor league in the event that it gets poached). Holding onto that P5 lottery ticket is probably still to important for an athletic department of UConn's stature to ever unilaterally give it up. It's just a strange situation since UConn might be the only school in the country where *having* an FBS football program actually *takes away* a potentially higher revenue/more profitable option (basketball in the Big East

Taken as a whole, Frank writes a great analysis.  But on this last statement - and I'm sure it's been hashed out over and over elsewhere - does UCONN have some reason to sincerely believe a P5 invite is coming?  The financials revealed a couple weeks ago suggest that its whole athletic department is shaky because its FBS program can't be sustained as is.  How long can they wait?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

ESPN is a behemouth and the average fan doesn't even know FS1 exists.  I travel a lot for my job.  10% of the hotels have FS1 as part of their cable/satellite package.  More offer ESPNNews and ESPNU that offer FS1.

What hotels are you staying at? I've literally never been to a hotel without FS1. I don't travel a ton but am in a hotel every few months.

[Bad_Reporter]

Stay at a Hilton brand hotel.

Marriott also has a nice umbrella of hotels. Both have FS1 and FS2

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Thanks for posting that, Mr. N. Very thought-provoking.

Ditto.

Thirded

[Herman Cain]

Great post by FranktheTank on the UCONN board about the Big East that I thought should be shared here: FranktheTank is a lawyer that has a good sports media blog that everyone respects.

To this day, I don't understand the arguments that the Big East would be a league that's going downward. They already make more TV money than any of the Group of 5 conferences and they don't even play football (meaning they're getting a MUCH MUCH MUCH higher ROI without those football expenses). The on-the-court product has also ended up being signicantly better than expected - there isn't any "Requiem for the Big East" talk anymore.

At the same time, anyone in the TV industry knows that trying to compare FS1 ratings to ESPN ratings is ridiculous - there's an artificial depression on ratings for the exact same event on FS1 compared to ESPN. You can see this clearly in Pac-12 ratings where the same matchup will have 3 or 4 times the viewers on ESPN compared to FS1. (Note that the Big East consistently beats the Pac-12 on FS1 in the ratings, so that's a much better indicator of the Big East's leverage.) If the Big East were going to market for a new contract today, it would most certainly get a significant increase with multiple bidders. To be sure, TV rights fees are in flux for the future because of so many unpredictable changes in the industry overall, but that's a macro issue as opposed to a conference-specific issue.

The point is that the "football is all that matters" mantra is true... for the P5 conferences. The problem is that the G5 conferences are lemmings in trying to chase the P5 in a game that they will never be even in the vicinity of being competitive (much less win). Meanwhile, the Big East found a way to make more TV money with fewer expenses with an identifiable brand and schools that actually want to be there by going in a totally different direction (if only because they were forced to do so). Frankly, considering the circumstances of the split of the Old Big East, the New Big East has actually been the best managed conference that has maximized its assets better on a pound for pound basis than any other conference (including the P5) since conference realignment quieted down. The Big East shouldn't be criticized for being a league without football - they should be *commended* for figuring out a way to be successful and resurrecting a brand without football while the G5 members swim in debt in the name of football.

If the P5 conferences are Amazon, then the G5 conferences are Sears - a dying retailer that tried to figure out online retail when it was too little and too late while much better competitors swamped them. Meanwhile, the Big East is like Nordstrom - a targeted high value brand retailer whose success is doing what Amazon *doesn't* do well in terms of a different focus and experience. The irony of all of this is that the P5 actually sees the Big East as a legitimate equal in basketball with this approach to the point where 2 leagues (the Big Ten and Big 12) have challenges with them. Anyone who thinks that the Big East is more in danger of a hypothetical P5 split from the rest of the NCAA than, say, the AAC is kidding themselves.

To be clear, this doesn't mean UConn should just drop football (or even go independent) and join the Big East. As long as UConn sincerely believes that it has a chance at the P5, it's essentially forced to stay in the AAC (or whatever successor league in the event that it gets poached). Holding onto that P5 lottery ticket is probably still to important for an athletic department of UConn's stature to ever unilaterally give it up. It's just a strange situation since UConn might be the only school in the country where *having* an FBS football program actually *takes away* a potentially higher revenue/more profitable option (basketball in the Big East

The Big East has built a very cohesive and readily identifiable brand with a persistent TV viewership base.  As such when the renewal comes up there will definitely be multiple bidders. I not only expect the dollars to be attractive but I also expect the terms to be enhanced. For example a number of league games are on Fox Broadcast, that could possibly go up. Also the junior partner CBS Sports networks puts a handful of games on CBS Broadcast and that may go up. With the track record in place the bids  will be tighter and the Big East may very well end back up at ESPN.