(02-12-2013 01:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That is incorrect. What the contract says is that the Big East cannot enter into an AGREEMENT (read contract) with another party for anything different than what has been offered to ESPN first.

If it's structured like the C-USA deal, then no, the Big East cannot enter into an agreement for anything different than what ESPN was showing in the last contract.

NBC is submitting a bid on essentially an extension of the Big EAst-ESPN contracts. And ESPN has the right to match the bid. (They won't, which is probably why Aresco thought he could work around it.)

Quote: If ESPN passes, then the Big East can sign an AGREEMENT with NBC for that EXACT package that was offered to ESPN.

I think if ESPN passes, then NBC and Aresco can do whatever they darn well please, as long as NBC still pays Aresco the same money or more. (The problem is that NBC won't have much incentive to.)

I think that's why, since ESPN declined to match the 2011 CUSA deal with Fox, Fox and CUSA could shake hands afterwards and say "weeknights? forget weeknights!" CUSA screwed up somehow in sending Fox's offer over to ESPN (email vs FEDEX) which gave ESPN their in.

Quote: This clause does not preclude the Big East from dividing its rights pacakge any way it wishes.

Then why does it say "the same package of rights" and "same package of events"?

(02-12-2013 01:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 01:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That is incorrect. What the contract says is that the Big East cannot enter into an AGREEMENT (read contract) with another party for anything different than what has been offered to ESPN first.

If it's structured like the C-USA deal, then no, the Big East cannot enter into an agreement for anything different than what ESPN was showing in the last contract.

NBC is submitting a bid on essentially an extension of the Big EAst-ESPN contracts. And ESPN has the right to match the bid. (They won't, which is probably why Aresco thought he could work around it.)

Quote: If ESPN passes, then the Big East can sign an AGREEMENT with NBC for that EXACT package that was offered to ESPN.

I think if ESPN passes, then NBC and Aresco can do whatever they darn well please, as long as NBC still pays Aresco the same money or more. (The problem is that NBC won't have much incentive to.)

I think that's why, since ESPN declined to match the 2011 CUSA deal with Fox, Fox and CUSA could shake hands afterwards and say "weeknights? forget weeknights!" CUSA screwed up somehow in sending Fox's offer over to ESPN (email vs FEDEX) which gave ESPN their in.

Quote: This clause does not preclude the Big East from dividing its rights pacakge any way it wishes.

Then why does it say "the same package of rights" and "same package of events"?

You are confusing terminology. An agreement is a contract. The Big East cannot sign a contract with anyone with out giving ESPN the right to buy that pacakge at the same price. The NBC "bid proposal" being submitted to the Big East is not an agreement or a contract. It is just a bid proposal or an offer to purchase. This is what must be submitted to ESPN and is what cannot be changed once ESPN passes on it. If ESPN chooses not to match the proposal, the Big East can then enter into an actual AGREEMENT (read contract) with NBC for the EXACT pacakge that was offered to ESPN. No changes are allowed between what NBC gets and what ESPN passed on.

(02-12-2013 01:36 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 01:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 01:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 12:58 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  News flash the NBE has not accepted a TV deal yet so ESPN cannot match anything.

The McMurphy article says otherwise.

Quote:They won't be able to match anything we are not comfortable with.

We dont want to play mid week games? Add it to the contract with whomever.

The CUSA-ESPN language seems to say you're wrong. The conference can't alter the deal, just put it out for bid.

Quote:ESPN would have to agree to that if they wanted to match the deal.

The problem is the provisions in the contract ESPN already had with the Big East. Whoever wants to bid for football has to put 17 games on an ESPN-like network, about half on Saturdays, plus 5 on an ESPN-U like network.

Whoever wants to bid for Aresco League basketball has to put 45 regular season games on an ESPN-like network, plus 30 on an ESPN-U like network.

That's why you don't have anyone but NBC-Sn bidding.

Of course there's a problem with all that, can NBCSN even meet those demands? The only ESPN-U like network they have is NBCSN itself. ESPN has 3 cable networks and ABC OTA network. NBC doesn't have that many platforms unless they are going to start putting games on CNBC, MSNBC, or other non-sports channels.

I think NBC-SN can handle the ESPN/2 and ESPN-U games all by themselves. All they've got is NHL, MLS, college hockey, and European soccer. There is plenty of empty space on Saturdays for 2 Aresco League football games, and plenty of time on non-hockey nights for basketball. After the college football regular season is done, say 3 basketball games on Saturday, 3 on Sunday, and a doubleheader one night of the week gives you 8 x 10 weeks is 80 games right there. They're not good games, but oh well.

But that's not really matching the deal. NBCSN has about the same distribution level as ESPN-U does, so you aren't matching the top half of that deal with the 17 games on an ESPN like network. All the games would be on an ESPNU like network.

(02-12-2013 02:01 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 01:36 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 01:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 01:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 12:58 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  News flash the NBE has not accepted a TV deal yet so ESPN cannot match anything.

The McMurphy article says otherwise.

Quote:They won't be able to match anything we are not comfortable with.

We dont want to play mid week games? Add it to the contract with whomever.

The CUSA-ESPN language seems to say you're wrong. The conference can't alter the deal, just put it out for bid.

Quote:ESPN would have to agree to that if they wanted to match the deal.

The problem is the provisions in the contract ESPN already had with the Big East. Whoever wants to bid for football has to put 17 games on an ESPN-like network, about half on Saturdays, plus 5 on an ESPN-U like network.

Whoever wants to bid for Aresco League basketball has to put 45 regular season games on an ESPN-like network, plus 30 on an ESPN-U like network.

That's why you don't have anyone but NBC-Sn bidding.

Of course there's a problem with all that, can NBCSN even meet those demands? The only ESPN-U like network they have is NBCSN itself. ESPN has 3 cable networks and ABC OTA network. NBC doesn't have that many platforms unless they are going to start putting games on CNBC, MSNBC, or other non-sports channels.

I think NBC-SN can handle the ESPN/2 and ESPN-U games all by themselves. All they've got is NHL, MLS, college hockey, and European soccer. There is plenty of empty space on Saturdays for 2 Aresco League football games, and plenty of time on non-hockey nights for basketball. After the college football regular season is done, say 3 basketball games on Saturday, 3 on Sunday, and a doubleheader one night of the week gives you 8 x 10 weeks is 80 games right there. They're not good games, but oh well.

But that's not really matching the deal. NBCSN has about the same distribution level as ESPN-U does, so you aren't matching the top half of that deal with the 17 games on an ESPN like network. All the games would be on an ESPNU like network.

You guys are chasing shadows. The deal can be sliced however they want. Its doesnt have to match the current all or nothing deal.

(02-12-2013 02:01 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  But that's not really matching the deal. NBCSN has about the same distribution level as ESPN-U does, so you aren't matching the top half of that deal with the 17 games on an ESPN like network. All the games would be on an ESPNU like network.

I think if ESPN pushes that, they hit antitrust issues. Defining it that strictly, there are no ESPN-like networks except for ESPN2.

You know what, though, the C-USA precedent says you're right. The C-USA games went from ESPN to Fox Sports Net regional coverage. And the language says "same package of rights", "same package of events." So it's probably just the number of games. Google could theoretically come in and bid to show the 22 football games on Youtube, as long as it's 22 games.

But if that's true, maybe it's less of an obstacle than I've been making it. The "same package of events" is all Big East football/basketball games, not the 22 game package. There were clauses about how many ESPN would put here and there, and how ESPN would handle syndication for a Big East network and ESPN3.

I think the ESPN deal had a clause that every Big East game would be made available somehow, so a bidder would have to match that portion. But after that, what you do with the games may not be as important as I've made it out to be. You buy the whole package, with the obligation to make it available somehow, and then do whatever you want with it.

If Fox could buy the CUSA tier one football games and put them on FSN, then it's not as restrictive as I've been thinking. You buy the package of events, how you distribute it is not relevant.

(02-12-2013 01:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 12:58 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  News flash the NBE has not accepted a TV deal yet so ESPN cannot match anything.

The McMurphy article says otherwise.

A deal has been presented. Aresco has not agreed to said deal. There is a difference.

(02-12-2013 01:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 12:58 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  They won't be able to match anything we are not comfortable with.

We dont want to play mid week games? Add it to the contract with whomever.

The CUSA-ESPN language seems to say you're wrong. The conference can't alter the deal, just put it out for bid.

How are we altering a deal when we don't have a deal? ESPN has the right to match any deal we accept. Just for grins my point was "IF" we liked the NBC deal have them put in the contract we will play on Saturday's and the odd Friday. ESPN would then in turn need to agree to those conditions or allow the deal to pass to NBC.

Why would NBC/Fox agree to a 1-year deal? They need content and it would help the BE but it also takes away all of their negotiating strength.

ESPN doesn't need to win the lawsuit. They just need an injunction then drag their feet. The BE gets no TV time and no money for a year(?).

(02-12-2013 01:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 12:58 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  ESPN would have to agree to that if they wanted to match the deal.

The problem is the provisions in the contract ESPN already had with the Big East. Whoever wants to bid for football has to put 17 games on an ESPN-like network, about half on Saturdays, plus 5 on an ESPN-U like network.

Whoever wants to bid for Aresco League basketball has to put 45 regular season games on an ESPN-like network, plus 30 on an ESPN-U like network.

That's why you don't have anyone but NBC-Sn bidding.

That is the deal with ESPN. For BB the deal is over next month. For FB the deal is over in December. ESPN only holds the rights to match any offer made.

End of story!!!

(02-12-2013 02:54 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 01:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 12:58 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  News flash the NBE has not accepted a TV deal yet so ESPN cannot match anything.

The McMurphy article says otherwise.

A deal has been presented. Aresco has not agreed to said deal. There is a difference.

[/quote]

Then why is, per McMurphy, that non-deal being presented to ESPN?

(02-12-2013 09:37 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I think part of the reason that the Aresco League is so screwed is they have to sell a package that was designed for a 16 team premier basketball conference and an 8 team AQ football league, and they don't have the schools that made those timeslots make sense.

I was W-R-O-N-G about this part. The CUSA-ESPN RFR didn't cover timeslots or what kind of network it was, just number of games and number of dollars. The Conference has to offer the same number of games ("exact same package of rights"), and has to get at least as many dollars as what ESPN turned down.

For Aresco, the "number of games" was "all football" and basically "all basketball." But, since C-USA went from ESPN to FSN and that wasn't part of the lawsuit, it doesn't matter what the TV network does with the games they buy. (Any terms that the conference and the network agree to on that simply wouldn't be binding on ESPN if they matched.)

So Fox _could_ buy the Aresco League football package and show 1 game on Fox, 2 on FoxSports1 and put the rest on FoxSports2 and FSN. Not saying they will, but all they'd have to do is get Aresco to sign and pay more than ESPN would.

The bad news for the Big East is, I think, that it means ESPN wouldn't be bound by the old provisions about how many games on ESPN, how many weeknights, how much ESPN-U, etc.

(02-12-2013 02:54 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  [quote='johnbragg' pid='8957533' dateline='1360699057']
Then why is, per McMurphy, that non-deal being presented to ESPN?

@McMurphyESPN: NBC Sports Network offers Big East $20M-$23M/year for media rights, sources tell @ESPN

Where does it say that Aresco (and the presidents for that matter who really are the final word here) have accepted the deal?

Your are getting caught up in semantics. Yes, ESPN will be given the opportunity to match the "official" offer given to the NBE but we are not in a position to be forced to accept the deal made by NBC and matched by ESPN.

We will get the best deal possible from whomever. ESPN will be given the chance to match and if they do we go with ESPN per the agreement.

We are not forced to go with ESPN under any circumstance with the exception that we find a deal we like and they match. They can't just jump in at the bottom and make us take it.

Try again.

(02-12-2013 03:21 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 02:54 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  [quote='johnbragg' pid='8957533' dateline='1360699057']
Then why is, per McMurphy, that non-deal being presented to ESPN?

@McMurphyESPN: NBC Sports Network offers Big East $20M-$23M/year for media rights, sources tell @ESPN

Where does it say that Aresco (and the presidents for that matter who really are the final word here) have accepted the deal?

In the article that posted two days ago now, an hour or two after the tweet. http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...ghts-deals

NBC Sports Network is expected to submit an official offer to the Big East by next week. Once the Big East receives an official offer from NBC Sports Network, the league must give ESPN, the Big East's current rights-holder, the opportunity to match the deal.

It does not say the words "Aresco has accepted the deal", but if you "must" give ESPN the opportunity to match the deal, then it's at a pretty advanced point.

Your are getting caught up in semantics. Yes, ESPN will be given the opportunity to match the "official" offer given to the NBE but we are not in a position to be forced to accept the deal made by NBC and matched by ESPN.

A right-of-first-refusal doesn't mean an auction. It means you get the best offer you can find, and the RFR holder has the chance to match it. If ESPN matches it, ESPN gets it for that price. If not, the other guy gets it--for that price.

(02-12-2013 03:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  So Fox _could_ buy the Aresco League football package and show 1 game on Fox, 2 on FoxSports1 and put the rest on FoxSports2 and FSN. Not saying they will, but all they'd have to do is get Aresco to sign and pay more than ESPN would.

Comcast could also air a lot of games on the RSNs. Comcast, like Fox, owns a lot of RSNs, and they could also offer games aired on their RSNs to Fox's RSNs. (Comcast has 11 RSNs, see the list here.)

(02-12-2013 03:34 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 03:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  So Fox _could_ buy the Aresco League football package and show 1 game on Fox, 2 on FoxSports1 and put the rest on FoxSports2 and FSN. Not saying they will, but all they'd have to do is get Aresco to sign and pay more than ESPN would.

Comcast could also air a lot of games on the RSNs. Comcast, like Fox, owns a lot of RSNs, and they could also offer games aired on their RSNs to Fox's RSNs. (Comcast has 11 RSNs, see the list here.)

Oh good grief I hope they don't end up on those RSN's. I don't know if a single one of those channels is available on my cable package in North Carolina.

(02-12-2013 03:34 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 03:04 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  So Fox _could_ buy the Aresco League football package and show 1 game on Fox, 2 on FoxSports1 and put the rest on FoxSports2 and FSN. Not saying they will, but all they'd have to do is get Aresco to sign and pay more than ESPN would.

Comcast could also air a lot of games on the RSNs. Comcast, like Fox, owns a lot of RSNs, and they could also offer games aired on their RSNs to Fox's RSNs. (Comcast has 11 RSNs, see the list here.)

Sure. I just wanted to let people know I was backing off the bit about NBC-SN having to match the # of games on ESPN/ESPNU/etc.

(02-12-2013 03:33 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  NBC Sports Network is expected to submit an official offer to the Big East by next week. Once the Big East receives an official offer from NBC Sports Network, the league must give ESPN, the Big East's current rights-holder, the opportunity to match the deal.[/i]

It does not say the words "Aresco has accepted the deal", but if you "must" give ESPN the opportunity to match the deal, then it's at a pretty advanced point.

Your are getting caught up in semantics. Yes, ESPN will be given the opportunity to match the "official" offer given to the NBE but we are not in a position to be forced to accept the deal made by NBC and matched by ESPN.

A right-of-first-refusal doesn't mean an auction. It means you get the best offer you can find, and the RFR holder has the chance to match it. If ESPN matches it, ESPN gets it for that price. If not, the other guy gets it--for that price.

Yes, they have submitted their first "official" offer. Per the agreement Aresco has to disclose the terms and offer ESPN the right to match.

If this is the only deal we will ever get and ESPN matches yes we will be tied to ESPN.

This is just the first "official" offer that NBC has made and the NBE is holding up their end and giving ESPN their right to match.

Does not mean we have to accept this deal. We just are required to keep ESPN in the loop.

End of story. Why is this a difficult concept?

I've got two TV contracts in my hot little hand that were uh provided to me.

In each of them the nutshell of right of refusal is this.

The conference does NOT have to bid out exactly what was on that contract. If after the expiration of the exclusive negotiation window of the existing TV partner the entity is free to negotiate any form of deal it wishes.

If they want to bid the same number of games in the same broadcast window, they can do that. If they want to bid more games or fewer games they can do that as well. If they want to bid different broadcast windows they can do that or any combination thereof.

Once they've done that they have to take the package to the rights holder and the rights holder has set time frame to either accept the terms of that deal (must match broadcast windows, number of games, available households, and dollars).

ASSUMING the Big East/ABC/ESPN contract uses similar language (and I have every reason to believe it is identical or nearly identical) the Big East deal with NBC does not have to be for the same number of games or broadcast windows as the existing deal.

If Aresco is as smart of a TV guy as he is supposed to be. My guess is that the NBC Sports offer is designed to be untenable to ESPN/ABC. That is it probably has 14 to 28 games for Saturday broadcast windows that ESPN/ABC simply cannot match. Simply placing a number of games in the Saturday noon Eastern time slot is virtually impossible for ESPN/ABC to match. NBC Sports has fewer households than ESPN or ESPN2 and is roughly the same number of households as ESPNU and ESPNnews. ESPN/ABC can only match by showing the games on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU/ESPNnews and with the recent growth of households for NBC Sports, I'm not sure that News or U matches.

So ESPN won't exercise first refusal if they can't do it.

Then the Big East can start selling off what is left.