Creighton or Dayton for #10?

[BillEsq]

I'm aware of the PAC-12, but Gonzaga would play half their games in the East and weekend games don't have to be at night. If they draw better they might be a better add even with only a partial set of games available for the Eastern slots. Also, if you don't think Fox wants Gonzaga or cares much beyond Duke, why on Earth do you think Fox bothered to come to the table with a hard set of 12 teams?

Heck, a quick browse of the list you posted makes it look like Gonzaga would definitely be a preferred choice for Fox.

Bradley outperformed VCU against Wichita St. Both were on ESPN, though VCU had a Tuesday slot. Creighton vs Wichita St., though 4-5 times larger draw (ESPN2). VCU didn't have the greatest opponents, but they don't have a single good national draw on here.

True... but outside of your usual suspects... teams from Indiana-Kentucky-North Carolina-Kansas The college Basketball ratings are pretty similar across the board. Your talking about a difference of a few 100,000 people for most games. In the land of Cable where you make money in markets by licensing and bundling you will make more than twice that from people who don't even watch your games. So from Fox's perspective they just need to have some game on air and find a way to get into the big media markets. It sounds odd but that is the bizarre world of cable economics.

[yorost]

Um, scale? 100k is a huge deal when you're comparing games below 100k. Sure, it isn't a huge deal when you're comparing shows drawing 10's of millions, but so? If 100l's of difference didn't matter, Fox could just pay the A-10 the same money as we're getting and leave it at that.

[cm5yz6]

Um, scale? 100k is a huge deal when you're comparing games below 100k. Sure, it isn't a huge deal when you're comparing shows drawing 10's of millions, but so? If 100l's of difference didn't matter, Fox could just pay the A-10 the same money as we're getting and leave it at that.

100K is immaterial to Fox, it doesn't matter to them if the viewership is 50K compared to 150K. Its immaterial. Its about the markets and bundling.

[yorost]

...so a team that draws 100k's vs one that draws 10k's is worth the same? I will never, ever, buy that. Maybe the individual sale of the game doesn't matter, but that difference represents a lot more than just one broadcast. It shows more support and interest. Is Fox going to make the same money overall on a conference that draws around 50k a game as they will a conference that draws 250k a game?

Worse, you can apply the 100k doesn't matter onto the one penny doesn't matter rule. Keep giving 100k and all of a sudden 10 million viewers is the same as 0 viewers. Every bit counts, even in places not immediately tangible.

[BillEsq]

Um, scale? 100k is a huge deal when you're comparing games below 100k. Sure, it isn't a huge deal when you're comparing shows drawing 10's of millions, but so? If 100l's of difference didn't matter, Fox could just pay the A-10 the same money as we're getting and leave it at that.

Easily it could, thats what sports stations do... The lock down on the major media markets sign bundle deals with all of their programs that you have to watch whether you watch them or not... lets take a city like louisville over a million people out of this lets say there are 500,000 subscribing households (including bars and what not) Fox will be charging 99cets for FX 1 thats $500,000 right there without advertising and regardless of whether anyone watches one game. Now people in Louisville love college basketball but they arn't going to pay 99 cents just to watch GU play Marquette because they don't care. But Fox being smart has now bundled all of its Fox programs together. That means in order to get Reds games of Fox Ohio you now need to pay for Fox 1 Fox 2 Fox Ohio Fox South FX1 FX2 and what ever fox station you have.... well now fox is making bank. The trick is now fox needs inventory to put on its stations, so it needs to get more C7 games on its Sports stations and it needs more reality tv on its non sports stations... why do you think there is so much garbage on TV now... just filler. The insanity of cable television is that broadcasters now make more money on programming you don't watch as opposed to programming that you do watch. Therefore even if gonzaga would guarantee 1 million people watching every game it would not be worth getting a team in the large Media Markets, where Fox will crank in revenue regardless of who is watching.

[CFA Jay]

Hey. Creighton will be in for sure, Jack. Hey

[yorost]

I get that, but as I got at above, more viewers gives them more power. It doesn't matter if the individual broadcast can vary wildly for the same money, to make any sales they have to build a package. Every bit counts. All other things equal, a team with 5x's more draw will be mroe valuable to them.

[kcjaysfan]

Brian Hamilton ‏@ChiTribHamilton
Either way, new Big East add of #Butler, #Xavier and #Creighton probably official midweek. Creighton is in, for sure, barring unexpected.

[BillEsq]

I get that, but as I got at above, more viewers gives them more power. It doesn't matter if the individual broadcast can vary wildly for the same money, to make any sales they have to build a package. Every bit counts. All other things equal, a team with 5x's more draw will be mroe valuable to them.

True but if you look at the numbers not even UK or Indiana averages close to 5x more draw, and if UK and Indiana can't do it... it can't be done....

[yorost]

5x more draw than who? Teams with really bad draws can be beaten by 5x's all over the place, but the actual difference, which is more complicated than 1 number I'm sure, isn't important to what I was saying. All other things equal, the team that draws better will be more valuable to them. Do you think Fox would be happy if we swapped Marquette out for Milwaukee?