UConn

lloyde dobler

All World
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2004
11,479
9,181
113
Nope, they are wrong. It's okay you can say it. They know it too.

Yep, but so would the Hall or any other BE team. 10 times the media revenue is too much to walk away from. FWIW, I think, absent financial security, most UConn fans prefer the BE. I really enjoyed this season.

Nope, the NBE split off cost us all millions. Literally. Yeah we are all back in BB centric conference but we have put ourselves way, way behind in the shooting war that is college athletic spending. We are already seeing assistants getting paid $1M and it will only get worse. We really need Fox to step up significantly. I'm not sure that they will. At least not enough.

It’s all about football, and if you don’t have it, you have to do whatever you can to survive. That’s what the C7 did as best as it could.
 

hallgrad80

All World
Oct 27, 2001
19,240
7,098
113
UConn will always be a Lightning Rod attracting debate , heated at times , about its joining this new version of the Big East . I think it’s fair to say that the driving force that led to its acceptance was Fox as it believed that adding UConn would improve viewership, the key metric for sports broadcasting networks. The unanswered questions that I keep coming back to is what the future holds for the BE when the contract with Fox expires . Will it be renewed , will the revenue stream from TV grow for the member schools, if not Fox then who . The BE Commissioner and her staff and the Conference’s media advisors have a daunting challenge in front of them let’s hope they get it right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CL82

STLPirate12

Senior
Gold Member
Mar 17, 2017
1,012
1,080
113
Nope, the NBE split off cost us all millions. Literally. Yeah we are all back in BB centric conference but we have put ourselves way, way behind in the shooting war that is college athletic spending. We are already seeing assistants getting paid $1M and it will only get worse. We really need Fox to step up significantly. I'm not sure that they will. At least not enough.
Maybe it cost you guys millions, but not us. The Fox deal was a significant upgrade for the C7 over the peanut shares of the Big East contract we were given. And really, considering how small of a share the football schools wanted to share with the C7, you guys clearly didn't consider us a significant asset worth many millions to the contract.
 

TheHall87

All World
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
8,058
3,289
113
Nope, the NBE split off cost us all millions. Literally. Yeah we are all back in BB centric conference but we have put ourselves way, way behind in the shooting war that is college athletic spending. We are already seeing assistants getting paid $1M and it will only get worse. We really need Fox to step up significantly. I'm not sure that they will. At least not enough.

It's not the C7's fault that UConn cast its lot with a second-tier football conference which forced it to drag all of its sports teams to Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tampa and Orlando among others. How would that have worked for those of us who weren't getting a share of the football revenue?

We spent years being dictated to by the football schools until we were left with a declining basketball league. That could be tolerated when the football schools included Louisville, Syracuse, Miami and, yes, even, UConn. When it became UConn, Central Florida, South Florida and East Carolina, not so much.

UConn made the decision to chase football gold and paid for it by being left standing when the music stopped and all the chairs were full.
 

lloyde dobler

All World
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2004
11,479
9,181
113
One thing that UConn did - and it could have said no, just like Villanova did - was to upgrade its football program to FBS faster than it wanted to at the behest of the other football schools to get the Big East football conference off the ground. That was a Gruninger-scale mistake by someone at the school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHUSource

Seton75

All Universe
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
47,892
14,563
113
Imo, it wasnit the fb that held them back. Something made ru more attractive. I dont think it was fb.
 

Hallsome

All American
Gold Member
May 12, 2019
2,812
1,525
113
Insult-Somebody-Creatively-Step-10-Version-2.jpg
How I pictured you.
 

CL82

Freshman
Oct 31, 2002
392
292
63
Maybe it cost you guys millions, but not us. The Fox deal was a significant upgrade for the C7 over the peanut shares of the Big East contract we were given. And really, considering how small of a share the football schools wanted to share with the C7, you guys clearly didn't consider us a significant asset worth many millions to the contract.
Really? I didn’t realize this. What were the C7 teams making the old Big East?
 

CL82

Freshman
Oct 31, 2002
392
292
63
It's not the C7's fault that UConn cast its lot with a second-tier football conference which forced it to drag all of its sports teams to Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tampa and Orlando among others. How would that have worked for those of us who weren't getting a share of the football revenue?

We spent years being dictated to by the football schools until we were left with a declining basketball league. That could be tolerated when the football schools included Louisville, Syracuse, Miami and, yes, even, UConn. When it became UConn, Central Florida, South Florida and East Carolina, not so much.

UConn made the decision to chase football gold and paid for it by being left standing when the music stopped and all the chairs were full.
Interesting viewpoint. Some might argue that the C7 schools we’re behind the decisions that made the Big East unstable. Voting against Penn State’s membership being the biggest example.
 

CL82

Freshman
Oct 31, 2002
392
292
63
One thing that UConn did - and it could have said no, just like Villanova did - was to upgrade its football program to FBS faster than it wanted to at the behest of the other football schools to get the Big East football conference off the ground. That was a Gruninger-scale mistake by someone at the school.
Big East football was well-established before UConn and Villanova got the offer to join.
 

CL82

Freshman
Oct 31, 2002
392
292
63
Imo, it wasnit the fb that held them back. Something made ru more attractive. I dont think it was fb.
We’ve talked about this a lot before, but basically it was demographics. Connecticut has 3 million people and New Jersey has 9 million people. Since both states have a footprint inside the New York DMA, either school would have given access to that key market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHUisNJsTeam

STLPirate12

Senior
Gold Member
Mar 17, 2017
1,012
1,080
113
Really? I didn’t realize this. What were the C7 teams making the old Big East?
I don't remember the exact number but I want to say the Fox deal roughly doubled our old Big East media rights payouts (I could be wrong on the amount). We definitely didn't get full shares though. The football schools essentially told us "all of the money's in football and you don't play, so you're getting a reduced cut."

The more football schools in the league, the less voice we have and the more the football schools can push us around. It's why we voted against football only additions (such as Penn State), insisted on including non-football schools (like Marquette and DePaul) in the expansion we did have, and ultimately left when you guys flooded the conference with more football schools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHUMA04 and CL82

CL82

Freshman
Oct 31, 2002
392
292
63
I don't remember the exact number but I want to say the Fox deal roughly doubled our old Big East media rights payouts (I could be wrong on the amount). We definitely didn't get full shares though. The football schools essentially told us "all of the money's in football and you don't play, so you're getting a reduced cut."

The more football schools in the league, the less voice we have and the more the football schools can push us around. It's why we voted against football only additions (such as Penn State), insisted on including non-football schools (like Marquette and DePaul) in the expansion we did have, and ultimately left when you guys flooded the conference with more football schools.
I knew you got a reduced share but I had no idea it was so low. That's interesting and certainly informative about the logic of the split.

Penn State would have been an all-sports member. I believe Rutty and Temple were the only football onlies. (Initially. Both became all sport members.)

(EDIT: Miami, VaTech, WVU were also football onlies initially.)

6a729dc22d42d456d1cbcb7a7437ec18.png
 
Last edited:

STLPirate12

Senior
Gold Member
Mar 17, 2017
1,012
1,080
113
I knew you got a reduced share but I had no idea it was so low. That's interesting and certainly informative about the logic of the split.

Penn State would have been an all-sports member. I believe Rutty and Temple were the only football onlies. (Initially. Both became all sport members.)
Yes, I mispoke saying football-only for PSU, I meant football playing. As far as the non-football schools receiving a reduced cuts of the media deal, it makes sense since we also don't have the massive football expenses. The split was more about voting power (we wanted to keep an even balance of football-non-football schools) and watering down the basketball quality than money, though the Big East did get a financial win as well with the Fox deal we landed.
 

TheHall87

All World
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
8,058
3,289
113
Interesting viewpoint. Some might argue that the C7 schools we’re behind the decisions that made the Big East unstable. Voting against Penn State’s membership being the biggest example.

One more football voice that would have done next to nothing for the basketball conference.

At least they're a national brand as opposed to the additions from the second Conference USA raid.
 

CL82

Freshman
Oct 31, 2002
392
292
63
One more football voice that would have done next to nothing for the basketball conference.

At least they're a national brand as opposed to the additions from the second Conference USA raid.
Exactly. That national brand would have served to anchor the conference. We likely would not have seen the later defections from BC, Cuse and Pitt. We would have had a stable all sports eastern conference. I think we all would have been better off (except for Penn St.)

I could not agree more more about the Conf USA members. Particularly since Louisville took Maryland's spot in the ACC.
 

Seton75

All Universe
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
47,892
14,563
113
One more football voice that would have done next to nothing for the basketball conference.

At least they're a national brand as opposed to the additions from the second Conference USA raid.
I remember PSU not wanting to join and convincing RU not to join cause they were going to spearhead and all sprort conference, back in the beginning. We got Pitt instead. Was PSU rejected later? (If so, did Pir8tes have the controlling vote?)

The bb onlies were in an impossible situation. Continued fb expansion was needed to keep up and that diminished our power in the conference. I suggested back when that fb expansion should be allowed, but the bb only schools would keep a 50% voting percentage so we were not squeezed oujt of the conference created for schools like ours.

The converence saved our school. But it outgrew itself and no longer made sense. And like it or or not, adding Uconn the best step we could take to make sure we can survive for the long term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vegaspaul82

MBF72

All American
Sep 15, 2003
4,526
1,861
113
Has any football team in Div. I history plummeted more than UCONN from 2011 to today, or even as rapidly as to about 2015? I realize this has little to do with BE basketball ---- or does it?--- but an interesting thought.
Comparing Villanova dropping D 1 football and UCONN dropping it de facto are two completely different sets of circumstances.
 

hinson32

All American
Gold Member
Jul 29, 2005
4,412
935
113
Honestly, it all worked out for the best. Everyone is in a place that suits them, either competitively, monetarily or both.
Agree for the most past. The C7 schools ended up in the perfect spot with a hoops only conference.
 

dehere23

All World
Gold Member
Feb 28, 2015
5,651
3,572
113
Proximity to NY
I've read that too, but honestly I don't think RU penetrates the NY market at all from a ratings or fandom standpoint. The average NY sports fan cares about one college team and only when they are solid/good or have a little juice. They don't care about Rutgers, football or basketball. And many in the tri-state area love and follow college football generally, so they are going to tune in no matter what (I'm one of those - when I'm around on a Saturday I have the SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and other games on all day). And then there is the gambling interest element.

Now I think the Big 10 liked having RU in Jersey where many of those schools recruit and have a significant alumni presence. You have Michigan, Penn State, Wisc, Ohio St play at Rutgers and those schools are going to have a substantial alumni presence, and they like that. Also Rutgers football, while not on the level historically as most Big 10 schools, is ions better than Uconn. Schiano showed Rutgers can be a solid high major football school and maybe even a tad better than that with some recruiting luck, and I think he's going to do that again. Not on the level of the Big 10 best, of course, but where they are pretty decent most years and perhaps better than that some years.
 

dehere23

All World
Gold Member
Feb 28, 2015
5,651
3,572
113
I remember PSU not wanting to join and convincing RU not to join cause they were going to spearhead and all sprort conference, back in the beginning. We got Pitt instead. Was PSU rejected later? (If so, did Pir8tes have the controlling vote?)

The bb onlies were in an impossible situation. Continued fb expansion was needed to keep up and that diminished our power in the conference. I suggested back when that fb expansion should be allowed, but the bb only schools would keep a 50% voting percentage so we were not squeezed oujt of the conference created for schools like ours.

The converence saved our school. But it outgrew itself and no longer made sense. And like it or or not, adding Uconn the best step we could take to make sure we can survive for the long term.
Adding Uconn back for basketball was a no-brainer. With what Calhoun built, they are a relevant program both in our markets and nationally (though not back to Calhoun level). The best version of our league has a good Uconn and that's what matters to the powers-that-be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CL82

lloyde dobler

All World
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2004
11,479
9,181
113
I've read that too, but honestly I don't think RU penetrates the NY market at all from a ratings or fandom standpoint. The average NY sports fan cares about one college team and only when they are solid/good or have a little juice. They don't care about Rutgers, football or basketball. And many in the tri-state area love and follow college football generally, so they are going to tune in no matter what (I'm one of those - when I'm around on a Saturday I have the SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and other games on all day). And then there is the gambling interest element.

Now I think the Big 10 liked having RU in Jersey where many of those schools recruit and have a significant alumni presence. You have Michigan, Penn State, Wisc, Ohio St play at Rutgers and those schools are going to have a substantial alumni presence, and they like that. Also Rutgers football, while not on the level historically as most Big 10 schools, is ions better than Uconn. Schiano showed Rutgers can be a solid high major football school and maybe even a tad better than that with some recruiting luck, and I think he's going to do that again. Not on the level of the Big 10 best, of course, but where they are pretty decent most years and perhaps better than that some years.

None of that really matters. It was all about getting BTN placed on cable TV systems in the NYC Metro area. It’s worth a ridiculous amount of money. With Rutgers, they got it.
 

dehere23

All World
Gold Member
Feb 28, 2015
5,651
3,572
113
None of that really matters. It was all about getting BTN placed on cable TV systems in the NYC Metro area. It’s worth a ridiculous amount of money. With Rutgers, they got it.
Ah so you don’t think they would have gotten that without RU? Because I have a pretty standard sports package with a basic cable provider (optimum) and I have the SEC, ACC and Big 10 networks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHUisNJsTeam

lloyde dobler

All World
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2004
11,479
9,181
113
Ah so you don’t think they would have gotten that without RU? Because I have a pretty standard sports package with a basic cable provider (optimum) and I have the SEC, ACC and Big 10 networks.

BTN got placed on basic cable (packages, not systems).

As an example, I don’t pay extra for sports on Comcast, and I get BTN but not any of the other channels you mentioned. Not even ESPNU or ESPN News.

Those decisions were made by people a lot smarter than us. Same thing was a factor getting Maryland invited in their area. It sounds crazy that Rutgers could warrant BTN on basic throughout the area, but that’s what happened.
 

TheHall87

All World
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
8,058
3,289
113
BTN got placed on basic cable (packages, not systems).

As an example, I don’t pay extra for sports on Comcast, and I get BTN but not any of the other channels you mentioned. Not even ESPNU or ESPN News.

Those decisions were made by people a lot smarter than us. Same thing was a factor getting Maryland invited in their area. It sounds crazy that Rutgers could warrant BTN on basic throughout the area, but that’s what happened.

I'm also a Comcast customer without a dedicated sports package. With my bundle, I get all the ESPNs they offer (1, 2, U and News) plus MLB and NFL network and the various regional channels but don't get BTN or the other dedicated conference channels.

I also live in NY which probably makes a difference with regards to the BTN.
 

lloyde dobler

All World
Gold Member
Jan 26, 2004
11,479
9,181
113
I'm also a Comcast customer without a dedicated sports package. With my bundle, I get all the ESPNs they offer (1, 2, U and News) plus MLB and NFL network and the various regional channels but don't get BTN or the other dedicated conference channels.

I also live in NY which probably makes a difference with regards to the BTN.

Exactly. It’s all about the location. If we could actually pick the channels we wanted, the business would be so much different. Instead, think of all the carriage fees that get passed along to us for all sorts of stuff that we never watch. The people who get ripped off the most are the non-sports fans who pay a ton for ESPN and a bunch of regional networks starting with MSG, MSG+, YES and SNY that they’ll never tune into.
 

hinson32

All American
Gold Member
Jul 29, 2005
4,412
935
113
I've read that too, but honestly I don't think RU penetrates the NY market at all from a ratings or fandom standpoint. The average NY sports fan cares about one college team and only when they are solid/good or have a little juice. They don't care about Rutgers, football or basketball. And many in the tri-state area love and follow college football generally, so they are going to tune in no matter what (I'm one of those - when I'm around on a Saturday I have the SEC, Big 10, Big 12 and other games on all day). And then there is the gambling interest element.

Now I think the Big 10 liked having RU in Jersey where many of those schools recruit and have a significant alumni presence. You have Michigan, Penn State, Wisc, Ohio St play at Rutgers and those schools are going to have a substantial alumni presence, and they like that. Also Rutgers football, while not on the level historically as most Big 10 schools, is ions better than Uconn. Schiano showed Rutgers can be a solid high major football school and maybe even a tad better than that with some recruiting luck, and I think he's going to do that again. Not on the level of the Big 10 best, of course, but where they are pretty decent most years and perhaps better than that some years.
It’s was and is all about carriage fees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CL82

SPK145

All Universe
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
30,920
13,972
113
Maybe it cost you guys millions, but not us. The Fox deal was a significant upgrade for the C7 over the peanut shares of the Big East contract we were given. And really, considering how small of a share the football schools wanted to share with the C7, you guys clearly didn't consider us a significant asset worth many millions to the contract.
Where do you get all your misinformation from?

It took until the year ended June 30, 2018 for the C7 to receive more operating revenues than they did in the last year of the old Big East.

The killer was the TV rights fees that the footballs schools (under Rutgers and Pittsburgh's direction) turned down. That would have given the basketball schools far more than they've ever made in the new Big East.

It was about control over their own destinies for the C7 and was made possible by a decent FOX TV offer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CL82

SPK145

All Universe
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
30,920
13,972
113
I am not 100% positive, but I believe the current FOX deal gives each member around $4mm annually.
Nope.

Here's what they've been:

2014 = $3,038,869
2015 = $3,157,276
2016 = $3,280,526
2017 = $3,406,882
2018 = $3,534,236
2019 = $3,665,295

Of these amounts, approximately 32% goes towards conference expenses.
 

metalpirate07

Freshman
Gold Member
Mar 28, 2006
379
409
63
It’s was and is all about carriage fees.

RU and Maryland are there for BTN carriage fees in the NYC/NJ and DC/Baltimore media markets. Also I remember reading a few years back that under Big Ten bylaws for expansion that candidates must be in a state that borders an existing Big Ten member state, which NJ and MD do share borders with PA but CT does not, Same goes for Nebraska bordering Iowa. Also I think Big Ten required all candidates to have Middle States accreditation or some other exclusive academic accolades which I forget the specifics of, RU and MD have it, I think Nebraska might not which was a source of minor controversy at the time. I forget if UNL actually ended up getting that accreditation or if the BIG just waived the requirement for them. I’m not sure if UConn has that or not. I think they do but I have no idea for sure. One of both of those technicalities I believe was cited as reasons for the BIG not inviting UConn but it’s just splitting hairs since they couldn’t come right out and say “Connecticut doesn’t have enough TV eyeballs for us” even though everybody knows that’s the real reason.
 

SHUisNJsTeam

All World
Jan 2, 2005
5,799
3,101
113
RU and Maryland are there for BTN carriage fees in the NYC/NJ and DC/Baltimore media markets. Also I remember reading a few years back that under Big Ten bylaws for expansion that candidates must be in a state that borders an existing Big Ten member state, which NJ and MD do share borders with PA but CT does not, Same goes for Nebraska bordering Iowa. Also I think Big Ten required all candidates to have Middle States accreditation or some other exclusive academic accolades which I forget the specifics of, RU and MD have it, I think Nebraska might not which was a source of minor controversy at the time. I forget if UNL actually ended up getting that accreditation or if the BIG just waived the requirement for them. I’m not sure if UConn has that or not. I think they do but I have no idea for sure. One of both of those technicalities I believe was cited as reasons for the BIG not inviting UConn but it’s just splitting hairs since they couldn’t come right out and say “Connecticut doesn’t have enough TV eyeballs for us” even though everybody knows that’s the real reason.
The Big Ten wasn’t taking Rutgers unless Maryland said they were joining. If Maryland didn’t say yes they weren’t even asking Rutgers. Most Big 10 schools are members of the AAU.
 

Seton75

All Universe
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
47,892
14,563
113
Was rowan added to the sec so i can get their cable station. Was fdu added to the acc? Cause I get them both.

While this is about sports. Doesn't ru better fit the academic profile of the big 10?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobbie Solo

STLPirate12

Senior
Gold Member
Mar 17, 2017
1,012
1,080
113
Where do you get all your misinformation from?

It took until the year ended June 30, 2018 for the C7 to receive more operating revenues than they did in the last year of the old Big East.

The killer was the TV rights fees that the footballs schools (under Rutgers and Pittsburgh's direction) turned down. That would have given the basketball schools far more than they've ever made in the new Big East.

It was about control over their own destinies for the C7 and was made possible by a decent FOX TV offer.
Perhaps a fuzzy memory. I agree we would have done better with the ESPN offer that was turned down, but after the prior defections that was no longer on the table. I do still see that we did significantly better with the Fox deal than we would have with the best available offer for the hybrid league (NBC offer), so perhaps that's what I had confused. I'm not seeing details on the prior Big East deal so maybe I don't remember correctly, but I didn't think it was particularly favorable for the non-football schools.
 

SPK145

All Universe
Gold Member
Jun 4, 2001
30,920
13,972
113
Perhaps a fuzzy memory. I agree we would have done better with the ESPN offer that was turned down, but after the prior defections that was no longer on the table. I do still see that we did significantly better with the Fox deal than we would have with the best available offer for the hybrid league (NBC offer), so perhaps that's what I had confused. I'm not seeing details on the prior Big East deal so maybe I don't remember correctly, but I didn't think it was particularly favorable for the non-football schools.
Without FOX, the alternative was a MAAC-style bus league so FOX is great in that sense, just not in comparison to what was and could have been financially.
 

Latest posts