Conference realignment discussion - v. 2015

[Hoyas]

If we have to expand in the next year, or if we have to expand in the next two or three years, and we have to do that by picking from A10 schools, does anyone believe Fox would true-up the revenue per school by adding such schools? Is the presumption that, assuming our existing 10 schools are failing at generating some needed ratings benchmark, that adding some combination of two A10 schools is going to get us over the hump such that Fox would true it up? If Fox has to expand for INVENTORY, would they pay an additional approx. $9.4 million per year for those two schools for the balance of the Fox Agreement?

Otherwise, is the presumption here that, with Fox demanding a solution for more INVENTORY through the Big East, that they would somehow modify what apparently is a fixed agreement, diluting the payouts to the existing 10 members by adding the two schools, but at the same $500 million overall effective bucket over the original 12 year period: 10 schools at about $4.2 million per year would adjust to 12 schools at about $3.5 million per year. Even that dilution would probably not be enough, because any two A10 schools would not be accretive enough to make the numbers work.

If the question becomes one focused on INVENTORY, why solve that through the existing Big East Agreement? Why not offer the A10 a package that sufficiently exceeds its existing paltry $300k'ish per school? You could pay the A10 about $10 million per year, doubling their existing TV package, while picking up 14 teams worth of inventory in the process. Perhaps Fox could look at the Mountain West Conference instead, assuming they believe that would be a more attractive option. Of course, the issue is whether or not some other conference is in any position to break its existing television deal, while otherwise making the numbers work for Fox.

marquette wrote an excellent, balanced post. Fox does care about viewership. College basketball is so abundant that high ratings are hard to come by. It's just that, if our existing 10 schools are having trouble with viewership numbers on a go-forward basis, is that because of the schools, is that because of FoxSports1 still growing out of its startup mode, or is that because of a combination of those two things. It gets back to the basic timing premise: not enough of that has expired yet to know where this is headed. The Big East has work to do. Fox has work to do. Two years is too soon to pass judgement on performance. Fox and the Big East probably need about 4 or 5 years to assess their position, which also gives them time to continue to watch developments on the football side of things.

Fox cares about viewership. The existing 10 schools care about viewership primarily as well, because that is what Fox cares about. Other program attributes are secondary. In fact, they would come with any program that does deliver viewership in a meaningful, accretive way. That gets us back to expansion solutions that don't exist today. Otherwise, if Fox believes it has to solve for INVENTORY, its probably can create options for doing that beyond having to pursue adjustments to the existing Big East, which touches upon that brand management thing again.

1 thing about the A10 is that their tv deal is only 2 years old in a 8 year deal. So it's not up for bid for another 6 years.

I know the MVC is coming up for bid pretty soon.

[marquette]

If we have to expand in the next year, or if we have to expand in the next two or three years, and we have to do that by picking from A10 schools, does anyone believe Fox would true-up the revenue per school by adding such schools? Is the presumption that, assuming our existing 10 schools are failing at generating some needed ratings benchmark, that adding some combination of two A10 schools is going to get us over the hump such that Fox would true it up? If Fox has to expand for INVENTORY, would they pay an additional approx. $9.4 million per year for those two schools for the balance of the Fox Agreement?

Otherwise, is the presumption here that, with Fox demanding a solution for more INVENTORY through the Big East, that they would somehow modify what apparently is a fixed agreement, diluting the payouts to the existing 10 members by adding the two schools, but at the same $500 million overall effective bucket over the original 12 year period: 10 schools at about $4.2 million per year would adjust to 12 schools at about $3.5 million per year. Even that dilution would probably not be enough, because any two A10 schools would not be accretive enough to make the numbers work.

If the question becomes one focused on INVENTORY, why solve that through the existing Big East Agreement? Why not offer the A10 a package that sufficiently exceeds its existing paltry $300k'ish per school? You could pay the A10 about $10 million per year, doubling their existing TV package, while picking up 14 teams worth of inventory in the process. Perhaps Fox could look at the Mountain West Conference instead, assuming they believe that would be a more attractive option. Of course, the issue is whether or not some other conference is in any position to break its existing television deal, while otherwise making the numbers work for Fox.

marquette wrote an excellent, balanced post. Fox does care about viewership. College basketball is so abundant that high ratings are hard to come by. It's just that, if our existing 10 schools are having trouble with viewership numbers on a go-forward basis, is that because of the schools, is that because of FoxSports1 still growing out of its startup mode, or is that because of a combination of those two things. It gets back to the basic timing premise: not enough of that has expired yet to know where this is headed. The Big East has work to do. Fox has work to do. Two years is too soon to pass judgement on performance. Fox and the Big East probably need about 4 or 5 years to assess their position, which also gives them time to continue to watch developments on the football side of things.

Fox cares about viewership. The existing 10 schools care about viewership primarily as well, because that is what Fox cares about. Other program attributes are secondary. In fact, they would come with any program that does deliver viewership in a meaningful, accretive way. That gets us back to expansion solutions that don't exist today. Otherwise, if Fox believes it has to solve for INVENTORY, its probably can create options for doing that beyond having to pursue adjustments to the existing Big East, which touches upon that brand management thing again.

My post, much like every post in this thread, was based on certain assumptions. We each have our own that we work from, and that is perfectly legitimate. My assumptions were
(1) The BE doesn't feel the need to expand right now.
(2) If the BE expands it will be due to pressure from Fox. Probably due to missing out on B1G rights. If they decide to fill that inventory with the A10, then that changes this assumption. They might be willing to double the A10's current contract, or they might not. CBS/NBC/ESPN might be willing to give just a little bit more. We don't know. If they want more inventory, and the contract is written right, then they can simply demand the BE expand and get an extra 18 games for inventory. No messy negotiations.
(3) The original contract is written in such a way that it includes the increased payouts for 2 new schools. This is the shakiest of my assumptions, but without it we won't expand no matter how much pressure comes from Fox.
(4) Georgetown (and possibly Nova) is willing to give up the bargaining chip it got from the last round in exchange for 2 choices in the next round. Another shaky assumption, but a requirement for immediate expansion might necessitate extreme actions.
(5) We need large arenas. Big arenas look big-time. That's the image we want to project. This is based largely on the current membership, and the fact that Siena received serious consideration for playing in a 15,000 seat arena. That was their only qualification at the time. They didn't get in, but they got a look. Fan support in those arenas is also a major factor, which is why even before their success in the last couple of years Dayton was on the short list (not the first 3 short list, but not far out). I feel arena size is underrated by many fans here, but it should be taken very seriously.
(6) We want like-minded institutions. Speaks for itself.
(7) We want basketball success. Dayton brings recent success, moderate long-term success. SLU brings some recent success, slightly less long-term success. They are heavily investing in their program right now (thanks in no small part to Dr. Chaifetz). If they somehow wind up landing Jayson Tatum (long shot, but they are still alive), you will see one hell of a team in the near future. Even forgoing that (admittedly small) possibility, they are investing too much money to not right the ship eventually.
(8) We want recruiting ties. SLU gives a great recruiting area. The BE cares about markets, but not for the same reasons as other major conferences or Fox. They care about tv households, we care about recruits. Tv does play a role, but we aren't trying to support our own network. We are helping Fox build their brand, but St. Louis is a valuable recruiting ground no matter who we sign with next.

If all of these assumptions are correct, then my theory that the presidents will select UD and SLU stands. If things are different (most notably if Georgetown decides to stick to their guns), then things can change.

Once again, these are my OPINIONS and ASSUMPTIONS. They may or may not be accurate. I am taking a position based on these. If I wind up being wrong, or circumstances change, feel free to throw it in my face/give me a hard time about it. I will own it and take my punishment.

EDIT: There are several new decision-makers this time around. There could be new criteria

[marquette]

And I definitely think Georgetown is going to balk at adding 2 more Midwestern schools. Think Richmond has a shot there. Then it becomes Dayton vs SLU- and Dayton should win that easily.

This is what I had heard from UR's President. Also that Nova was on the same page as Georgetown, but again that was 18 months ago. As to the Robin Center being too small, UR could always play a few games down at the Richmond Coliseum if needed. It is not as nice as the stunning on campus arena, but it seats 12,000 for basketball.





But as I said I don't think it is near as nice, nor looks as good on TV as UR's own arena

It is a beautiful arena. However, the history of the decisions make it look like 10,000 is the minimum. If I'm Richmond I'm on the phone with Georgetown and maybe Nova every day lobbying them to stick to their guns. That's your best bet. I wish you the best of luck.

[marquette]

1 thing about the A10 is that their tv deal is only 2 years old in a 8 year deal. So it's not up for bid for another 6 years.

I know the MVC is coming up for bid pretty soon.

We'll see what Wardle can do at Bradley, but right now there are only 2 teams worth watching in the MVC. They could get the same 18 game inventory by having the BE expand. Admittedly, Wichita State is better than any candidate currently on our radar but there are rumblings of movement to the A10. Unstable conferences will never garner the tv contracts of stable conferences.

[Bill Marsh]

WARNING OPINION POST TO FOLLOW


WHY NOT...?
Gonzaga: Nothing has changed since the last round of expansion. Gonzaga had the reputation, success, visibility, and best resume of any of the original candidates. They were not added because it is too far to Spokane, they don't have a large arena, their fans won't travel to MSG, and we won't get much of a recruiting boost by playing in Washington.

Marquette, I have heeded your caveat that you are posting your opinion. Having noted that, I'll post mine with regard to Gonzaga in reply.

1. No one who was not involved in the discussions back in 2012 knows why Gonzaga or anyone else was not taken at that time. No one knows why they stopped at 10 but leaked that they were seriously considering expanding to 12 within a few years.

2. Nothing has changed? Actually circumstances have changed. Only 5 of the 7 decision makers at the time remain in their positions. There are 5 new decision makers at the table, so the dynamic can be completely different. Furthermore, ratings need a boost, so there may be a different motivation to overcome obstacles like geography.

3. Gonzaga has a 6000 seat on campus arena which is sold out for every game and for which there is a waiting list of 1000 for tickets. In addition they have access to Spokane's Veteran's Memorial Coliseum, which seats 12,600 where they have played games in the past. I don't see any difference between their situation and schools like St. John's or Villanova who split their games between a smaller on-campus arena and a larger downtown arena, which is what Gonzaga likely would do if they were a member of the Big East,

4. How do you know that their fans won't travel to MSG? NYC is the #1 tourist destination in the country. That's the whole point of playing a tournament there. Fans come for more than just the basketball games. Gonzaga obviously has a dedicated following and they might well travel to the tournament. If you have more information about how well their fan base travels, please post it. The same thing could have been speculated about Creighton's fan base, but they ere selected anyway. Such speculation would have been wrong about Creighton fans and may well be wrong about Gonzaga's as well.

5. The Big East needs a recruiting base? News to me. With the conference's already existing recruiting territories, the Big
East is in as good shape as anyone in the country. Regardless, recruiting is national these days. Despite being in NYC, I don't think that St. John's had a single NYC player who saw significant minutes this year. Maybe one? A recruiting base is anon-issue.

[Butlerfan28]

The Big East is a Catholic basketball league. I don't know why you see that as a bad thing. Catholic schools have a great sports tradition at both the high school and college level and have large fan bases in major urban cities. The new Big East provides stability and partnership that never existed when we were aligned with public universities. This conference is designed to last into perpetuity, not just until the next round of realignment by the football conference. When the Big East looks to expand(and I agree the conference is in no hurry to do so) they will look to other successful Catholic Universities with great sports traditions to maintain our institutional cohesiveness.

I think your perception is the current one among most fans. In my opinion it is the driving force behind the low ratings on Fox and the low ratings will continue if the league image is sustained as the Catholic League. Now perhaps my opinion is tainted by living on the west coast. But again, the league wasn't founded as a Catholic league so I'm not clear why it's a good idea now.

The Catholic market is small and shrinking. Even worse you don't have Notre Dame who also clearly was not enthused about being associated with an all catholic league. It's seems amazing you can spend hours debating Dayton and little time discussing if the league is really viable long term with the image of being a Catholic league first and foremost.

[marquette]

WARNING OPINION POST TO FOLLOW


WHY NOT...?
Gonzaga: Nothing has changed since the last round of expansion. Gonzaga had the reputation, success, visibility, and best resume of any of the original candidates. They were not added because it is too far to Spokane, they don't have a large arena, their fans won't travel to MSG, and we won't get much of a recruiting boost by playing in Washington.

Marquette, I have heeded your caveat that you are posting your opinion. Having noted that, I'll post mine with regard to Gonzaga in reply.

1. No one who was not involved in the discussions back in 2012 knows why Gonzaga or anyone else was not taken at that time. No one knows why they stopped at 10 but leaked that they were seriously considering expanding to 12 within a few years.

2. Nothing has changed? Actually circumstances have changed. Only 5 of the 7 decision makers at the time remain in their positions. There are 5 new decision makers at the table, so the dynamic can be completely different. Furthermore, ratings need a boost, so there may be a different motivation to overcome obstacles like geography.

3. Gonzaga has a 6000 seat on campus arena which is sold out for every game and for which there is a waiting list of 1000 for tickets. In addition they have access to Spokane's Veteran's Memorial Coliseum, which seats 12,600 where they have played games in the past. I don't see any difference between their situation and schools like St. John's or Villanova who split their games between a smaller on-campus arena and a larger downtown arena, which is what Gonzaga likely would do if they were a member of the Big East,

4. How do you know that their fans won't travel to MSG? NYC is the #1 tourist destination in the country. That's the whole point of playing a tournament there. Fans come for more than just the basketball games. Gonzaga obviously has a dedicated following and they might well travel to the tournament. If you have more information about how well their fan base travels, please post it. The same thing could have been speculated about Creighton's fan base, but they ere selected anyway. Such speculation would have been wrong about Creighton fans and may well be wrong about Gonzaga's as well.

5. The Big East needs a recruiting base? News to me. With the conference's already existing recruiting territories, the Big
East is in as good shape as anyone in the country. Regardless, recruiting is national these days. Despite being in NYC, I don't think that St. John's had a single NYC player who saw significant minutes this year. Maybe one? A recruiting base is anon-issue.

Fair criticism.

(1) Correct.

(2) Correct. However, the goals of the conference have likely not changed. Although Marquette's new president is devoutly catholic and would likely follow in the footsteps of his predecessors. I don't know much about the others.

(3) How many of those 7,000 fans are coming to MSG? It would take more than half to make it worthwhile. Also, 6,000 fans brings down our average attendance. A conference that want to be considered major isn't going to be too excited about this. Maybe they play some games at the larger arena, but that's speculative and unlikely considering how much they've invested in the arena.

(4) Creighton draws 17,000+ per game. That's triple what Gonzaga does. No comparison. The WCC final between Gonzaga and BYU in Vegas did sell out the arena and draw 8,500, but so did Pepperdine v. San Diego. My guess is that Vegas shows up for entertainment events and most of those were not fans flying in from Spokane. Unfortunately there's no way to prove that. I could try to hunt down the preseason tournament numbers, but I'm not sure what that would prove either. Most WCC gyms are so small that there's no way to tell what kind of attendance bump they get from the visitor. There's also the fact that most Gonzaga alumni stay on the west coast.

(5) Recruits who want to get away from home but still want their parents to be able to come to a game care about recruiting areas. There is also the fact that our fellow schools are allowed to guest host recruits for us in their arena. We did this for DePaul this season. National or not, recruiting will always be a major concern. We may be doing fine now, but you can always do better. The reason the Big East cares about large cities is the recruiting. We are not selling the BE tv network.

Once again, opinion. Mine is no more valid than yours.

[ta111]

Expansion will occur when Fox says so. Always follow the money.

[Xudash]

If we have to expand in the next year, or if we have to expand in the next two or three years, and we have to do that by picking from A10 schools, does anyone believe Fox would true-up the revenue per school by adding such schools? Is the presumption that, assuming our existing 10 schools are failing at generating some needed ratings benchmark, that adding some combination of two A10 schools is going to get us over the hump such that Fox would true it up? If Fox has to expand for INVENTORY, would they pay an additional approx. $9.4 million per year for those two schools for the balance of the Fox Agreement?

Otherwise, is the presumption here that, with Fox demanding a solution for more INVENTORY through the Big East, that they would somehow modify what apparently is a fixed agreement, diluting the payouts to the existing 10 members by adding the two schools, but at the same $500 million overall effective bucket over the original 12 year period: 10 schools at about $4.2 million per year would adjust to 12 schools at about $3.5 million per year. Even that dilution would probably not be enough, because any two A10 schools would not be accretive enough to make the numbers work.

If the question becomes one focused on INVENTORY, why solve that through the existing Big East Agreement? Why not offer the A10 a package that sufficiently exceeds its existing paltry $300k'ish per school? You could pay the A10 about $10 million per year, doubling their existing TV package, while picking up 14 teams worth of inventory in the process. Perhaps Fox could look at the Mountain West Conference instead, assuming they believe that would be a more attractive option. Of course, the issue is whether or not some other conference is in any position to break its existing television deal, while otherwise making the numbers work for Fox.

marquette wrote an excellent, balanced post. Fox does care about viewership. College basketball is so abundant that high ratings are hard to come by. It's just that, if our existing 10 schools are having trouble with viewership numbers on a go-forward basis, is that because of the schools, is that because of FoxSports1 still growing out of its startup mode, or is that because of a combination of those two things. It gets back to the basic timing premise: not enough of that has expired yet to know where this is headed. The Big East has work to do. Fox has work to do. Two years is too soon to pass judgement on performance. Fox and the Big East probably need about 4 or 5 years to assess their position, which also gives them time to continue to watch developments on the football side of things.

Fox cares about viewership. The existing 10 schools care about viewership primarily as well, because that is what Fox cares about. Other program attributes are secondary. In fact, they would come with any program that does deliver viewership in a meaningful, accretive way. That gets us back to expansion solutions that don't exist today. Otherwise, if Fox believes it has to solve for INVENTORY, its probably can create options for doing that beyond having to pursue adjustments to the existing Big East, which touches upon that brand management thing again.

My post, much like every post in this thread, was based on certain assumptions. We each have our own that we work from, and that is perfectly legitimate. My assumptions were
(1) The BE doesn't feel the need to expand right now.
(2) If the BE expands it will be due to pressure from Fox. Probably due to missing out on B1G rights. If they decide to fill that inventory with the A10, then that changes this assumption. They might be willing to double the A10's current contract, or they might not. CBS/NBC/ESPN might be willing to give just a little bit more. We don't know. If they want more inventory, and the contract is written right, then they can simply demand the BE expand and get an extra 18 games for inventory. No messy negotiations.
(3) The original contract is written in such a way that it includes the increased payouts for 2 new schools. This is the shakiest of my assumptions, but without it we won't expand no matter how much pressure comes from Fox.
(4) Georgetown (and possibly Nova) is willing to give up the bargaining chip it got from the last round in exchange for 2 choices in the next round. Another shaky assumption, but a requirement for immediate expansion might necessitate extreme actions.
(5) We need large arenas. Big arenas look big-time. That's the image we want to project. This is based largely on the current membership, and the fact that Siena received serious consideration for playing in a 15,000 seat arena. That was their only qualification at the time. They didn't get in, but they got a look. Fan support in those arenas is also a major factor, which is why even before their success in the last couple of years Dayton was on the short list (not the first 3 short list, but not far out). I feel arena size is underrated by many fans here, but it should be taken very seriously.
(6) We want like-minded institutions. Speaks for itself.
(7) We want basketball success. Dayton brings recent success, moderate long-term success. SLU brings some recent success, slightly less long-term success. They are heavily investing in their program right now (thanks in no small part to Dr. Chaifetz). If they somehow wind up landing Jayson Tatum (long shot, but they are still alive), you will see one hell of a team in the near future. Even forgoing that (admittedly small) possibility, they are investing too much money to not right the ship eventually.
(8) We want recruiting ties. SLU gives a great recruiting area. The BE cares about markets, but not for the same reasons as other major conferences or Fox. They care about tv households, we care about recruits. Tv does play a role, but we aren't trying to support our own network. We are helping Fox build their brand, but St. Louis is a valuable recruiting ground no matter who we sign with next.

If all of these assumptions are correct, then my theory that the presidents will select UD and SLU stands. If things are different (most notably if Georgetown decides to stick to their guns), then things can change.

Once again, these are my OPINIONS and ASSUMPTIONS. They may or may not be accurate. I am taking a position based on these. If I wind up being wrong, or circumstances change, feel free to throw it in my face/give me a hard time about it. I will own it and take my punishment.

EDIT: There are several new decision-makers this time around. There could be new criteria

We're not in the Roman Coliseum here in some kind of verbal death match - I have absolutely no desire to throw anything in your face or give you a hard time. There is no punishment to take.

You offered you're opinion and specific scenario. As I noted in my earlier post, I think your post was well reasoned. If it had to be next year and Georgetown and Villanova, in particular, did not care about East/West balance, then it probably would work out the way you described it.

I was simply adding a perspective that had to do with whether or not Fox would address it's inventory issues in some manner other than expanding our conference. Hoya, thanks for pointing out where the A-10 television agreement stands.

[DudeAnon]

I think that "Brand" should be top priority if any team is ever added. We are trying to build a brand that is respected nationwide. Had we not collapsed in the NCAA, we would've been much closer to that goal. But it was still a net positive. Most schools seem to be a positive trajectory with maybe Creighton being the only question mark. B12 had a bad NCAA tourney but no-one is going to realistically question their pedigree. We need to aim for that same stature.