Obviously nothing truly new to report. But as I monitor it all, share I must.
Paul Tagliabue continues to confound and say things that have to be clarified or nuanced out later. Amazing how not being the Commish of the NFL for a few years have ruined his speaking skills.
After the Big East Commissioner has made big talk about how the Big East, kind of maybe might look into the details of thinking about their own network. You know, in 2013 after the Big East media deal with ESPN ends.
Tags does a bit of undercutting.
“My piece is really in the immediate space, how to create value for conferences in this case without sacrificing the other values that universities need to preserve. It’s going to be an interesting piece of work,” Tagliabue said. “From the Big East perspective, a lot of it will start with discussions with ESPN. Depending on how they go, people would look at other alternatives, but it has to start with ESPN. That’s where others have ended up. The SEC ended up there, the ACC ended up there. Beyond that, it’s hard to speculate.”
Now, he’s not wrong. Every conference needs a significant ESPN presence. Especially the Big East. That said, Tags just made it very clear that the Big East — like Big Something expansion — will just wait and see what another party does and then react. Failing once again to be proactive. Shocking I know.
In this case, waiting to see what ESPN is willing to toss their way rather than truly exploring all options and be more prepared.
But Tags swears there is no waiting around by the Big East.
“I don’t think that anyone, not in the Big East, is waiting for the Big Ten,” Tagliabue said Wednesday. “We’re looking ahead proactively. It starts with ESPN. It starts with listening carefully to all of the university presidents so we have a proper balance between sports and academics.”
Yeah. About that…
The headache has been around for years, but the conference isn’t considering pulling the trigger on a solution and adding a team any time soon because of it would cause major headaches in the league’s signature sport — men’s basketball. The Big East has 16 schools that play basketball and adding another school would throw off the natural balance for the majority of the members.
“It’s funny, we’ve been in existence as a football conference since 1990 and we’ve always had eight schools,” Big East Commissioner John Marinatto said. “We’ve never had nine. Nine would give us the balanced schedule. So it’s not a new issue, but we just keep coming back the issue that there’s no one we can bring in that brings us that value. I don’t want to say a school because I get in trouble every time I say a name. But if there was a school like that that fit from all the other standpoints, then we would certainly make the move and create a 17-team conference, a nine-team conference in football. So that dynamic would certainly help us.”
Unchanged from 2003 to present. The options remain the same for programs they could bring in as a 9th/17th member: UCF, ECU or Memphis. It hasn’t changed. If any had also been brought aboard, perhaps they would have done even more to be more competitive in all aspects. It has been working for USF in hoops and Cinci in football.
Nope. Instead, Marinatto pretends that the Big East is still looking for that just perfect additional member, and they are ready to bring them aboard the minute that school loses its mind to take less conference money.
Marinatto said the Big East has always been open to moving to 17 teams, but it has to be the right team to justify the stress it would put on the conference office and the rest of its members.
“It’s been on the table for the last five years,” he said. “When we reconstituted, we had the foresight to provide a provision in our constitution to allow for that. So if that school became available, we would expand tomorrow. It would take five minutes.”
The Big East knows there is no such school. That is a line of crap they like to throw out there to rationalize the paralysis. There’s no Penn State coming. No Maryland. There’s no Miami. There’s not even a VT or BC.
I mean, hell, Maryland’s AD keeps popping off about not being interested in leaving the ACC for the Big Something. (Personally, if I’m the Big Something and I’m determined to take a team from the East — not named Pitt — Maryland seems like a far superior choice than Rutgers.)
Up in Providence, the basketball-school perspective of course is that it is all about football in the Big East.
This conference that once began with basketball now has its fate dependent upon football. This conference that’s always been so visionary, always been so proactive, now sits and waits for the music to stop to scramble for the open chairs.
Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised.
In many ways, it’s always been about football. Even if around here, we never really understood that.
Bullshit on that canard that the Big East has “always been so proactive.” Aside from its TV deal early in its existence with ESPN, the Big East has existed as a reaction.
Reacting to the threat of a potential Eastern league led by Penn State Providence helped form the Big East to protect themselves. The basketball schools blocked PSU in ’85 (as the piece even admits) — because of the threat it posed to the basketball-schools’ interests.
They have have reacted to the realities of college athletics and the role of football by doing just enough to keep things from completely falling apart. Instead, just leaving things exposed and unstable. In the 80s and 90s it was to tease out the full memberships of VT, Miami, WVU and Rutgers into the conference. Not letting them become basketball members for years. Doing nothing to make those programs feel like members, so much as placating the football. You don’t think Miami and VT forgot it when they made excuses to leave? You don’t think Rutgers fans have forgotten and won’t bring it up if they leave?
I like the Big East from a competitive and overall geographic standpoint. I hate, however, the conference and its leadership.
The b-ball only schools get us into NYC/NJ, Philly, DC, Chicago, Milwaukee (as well as the coveted Providence) markets, plus the added allure of the ND subway alumni fan base. Without the b-ball only schools, our football schools get us small cities and secondary markets.
As I see it, football has 15 to 16 days worth of live programming, maybe 3 games a day on those Saturdays (assuming the only Wed-Thu-Fri games are the ESPN games); basketball can be 7 nights a week, 2 games per night, with several games on each Saturday AND Sunday, for a longer season than football. BE basketball is something people want to see, but BE football not so much. Ad revenue could be bigger for b-ball than football. Something to consider when thinking about leaving the b-ball only schools behind.
Have you noticed NJ/NYC got the 2013 Super Bowl to be played in an outdoor stadium! What other cold weather City could pull that off? Where does the gorilla sleep in the jungle? The answer is: any place it wants.
Because of the BB schools we own the biggest markets. Before we allow other people to come in and take away our biggest market, let’s find out what it is worth. Chas, that is what Tagliabue is doing. The Big East wants ESPN to make an offer for the future now, so the Big East Universities can make a judgement on whether to start their own network or to take others steps.
The key is to keep our rough diamond (Rutgers),or whoever else may be targeted to leave, by showing them what will/could happen in the Big East. I mean $$$$.
I consider Pitt an Eastern school and believe the University has a better future aligning itself with that part of the country. I don’t feel there is a good future with the Big Ten.
The A-10 claims markets in Philly (Temple, St. Joe’s), DC (GW), Charlotte (Charlotte), Pittsburgh (Duquesne), Cinci (Xavier), Boston/New England (UMass, Rhode Island) and NYC (Fordham). They can barely get seen on their local Fox or regional sports channel. It’s not because they don’t play good basketball in the A-10. Most of their schools are smaller, private and with lower alumni bases. They are also competing in many spots with pro teams, so unless they are doing well the local folk aren’t going to care so much in a casual viewing way.
Plus I don’t believe the Big East and the member schools have the finances or courage to put the money into their own channel. They want to stick to ESPN if at all possible.
The advantage the Big East has always had over the A-10 is that in each of those markets, the more popular team is in the Big East (formerly BC over UMass, now Providence over URI, Villanova over Temple and St. Joe’s, Pitt over Duquesne, Syracuse over St. Bonaventure, G-Town over all the rest in DC, plus Cincy over Xavier & Dayton, etc.). That’s why ESPN wanted the BE as a partner back in the day, and why we’re potentially in a good position now.
And forget this talk of an ultimatum for ND – we need ND more than they need us, and they can prove quite useful in marketing basketball as well as football (away games at BE football schools like Pitt, UConn, etc)…would NBC, CNBC, MSNBC et al want to partner with the BE?? Who knows, maybe MSNBC will show BE football and b-ball instead of “Lockup 2013..A Touching Story of Tenderness and Anal Rape in Ossining, NY” 8 times a day on weekends.
If I am understanding Patrick’s argument, one of the issues that I see is that it assumes that the strength of the basketball markets will force a network (either ESPN or a “Big East” Network) to pay big bucks for the entire package, including football. The problem is, there is virtually no interest in Big East football in Milwaukee, Chicago, New York and Boston, and history suggests that the basketball strength will not force anyone’s hand on the football side.
Pantherman, I believe there is a great deal of interest in Big East football in the metro NYC market. Rutgers Stadium is sold out. The Empire State Building being lite up scarlet red is enough proof for me! I don’t care about Chicago or Milwaukee for our football teams.
Sorry guys, I don’t like the idea of Memphis in the Big East. I think we would do ourselves more good with UCF, Temple, and Navy.
UCF because the future is in the South. The other two schools because we are after all the BIG East Conference!
Not “sticking it to them.” It is “stick to ESPN.” As in being too conservative, risk-averse and afraid. I think most of the basketball schools of the Big East would rather take the sure money of ESPN, then take a chance on setting up a network. Those schools don’t have the athletic departments or budgets to put the money at risk. Besides, they would still see smaller cuts since they offer no football programming.
I don’t disagree about long term and better control over the media rights of having a Big East network. For all the success of the Big Ten Network, there is the cautionary situation of “The Mtn.” Aside from deep on the sports tier, few people see the Mountain West channel.
I liked what the MWC did in this case when it was announced because they were sick of being used as program filler by ESPN. The tradeoff has been exposure. Even as they have success on the field and court.
Rutgers isn’t a draw in NYC just because 4 years ago they were briefly hot and playing a big game on Thursday night on ESPN that got a lot of attention. That is a blip. Not sustained.
I understand not wanting to give up the market of NYC for the Big East, but that should not be the only reason to cling to programs.
As far as Memphis goes, I don’t particularly want them in the Big East. I’d almost be willing to bring back Temple ahead of Memphis.
As an adviser, Tagliabue is a fool.
Temple was booted out of the BE years ago but they deserve another look. I don’t know so much about their BB right now but their football has improved in the MAC. They have been a title contender there and a bowl participant.
Temple could easily replace Rutgers if Rutgers goes to the Big 11.
I still think the long term solution is for UConn, Syracuse, Pitt and WVU to end up in an expanded ACC.
Whether the ACC will want this in a few years or not, nobody knows.
Penguins Fan, I also prefer the ACC, however I don’t think they want us. Pitt has to get serious about Lacrosse, plus any Big East school added to the ACC would bail out Boston College and I want them to suffer!
Mulcany (former Rutgers AD) stated in an interview any team invited will have to pay the money and make the move. Again, I do not see Rutgers spending freely in this economic climate. Mulcany lost his job for spending too freely on stadium expansion and salaries at a time New Jersey thought they had money. The watchdog State Senator that got him (Loretta Weinberg) is still active. I do not like that woman!
My thinking has evolved into the Big East pushing the present TV deals into more money or starting a Big East. Let’s invite a couple of additional schools, at least, into the Football part of the conference. UCF, Temple, and Navy.
Bottomline strengthen or position. Remember we still own 25% of the media market in the country.
