Less Money than Expected

[mviusa]

 

 

 

 

I think you're all reading into it a bit much.

+1010101002907810810829048209890144123441

ESPN/NBC literally put the most important schools in a group in writing and you're still in denial. What will it take to make some of you not so biased? It's a punch to the gut, but I'm not going to ignore it and spin it every way possible to make myself feel better.

In YOUR opinion that's what those groups meant to NBC. NBC is not the end all be all of University worth and quality. Unless you were there when the contract was being written up, you have no idea.

 

@usfvoodoo5 ESPN matched NBC's contract exactly. NBC owns Comcast. Comcast has regional sports channels in Philly and Houston. Thus UH and Temple are A

 

Comcast does not exist in the Tampa market, at all. ESPN could not negotiate terms or change verbage in the contract, it was an "accept or pass" option.

 

 

 

I think you're all reading into it a bit much.

+1010101002907810810829048209890144123441

ESPN/NBC literally put the most important schools in a group in writing and you're still in denial. What will it take to make some of you not so biased? It's a punch to the gut, but I'm not going to ignore it and spin it every way possible to make myself feel better.

In YOUR opinion that's what those groups meant to NBC. NBC is not the end all be all of University worth and quality. Unless you were there when the contract was being written up, you have no idea.

 

@usfvoodoo5 ESPN matched NBC's contract exactly. NBC owns Comcast. Comcast has regional sports channels in Philly and Houston. Thus UH and Temple are A

 

Comcast does not exist in the Tampa market, at all. ESPN could not negotiate terms or change verbage in the contract, it was an "accept or pass" option.

Plus, the Houston and Philly markets are larger than ours. You've got 2 in group A due to brand naming, based on history and 2 due to TV market. Neither reasons of which anybody at USF can do a thing about.

I doubt Houston and Temple were put in group A because of market size, as neithwr of those schools comes close to owning its market. Like cincy and ucon, they were singled out for being bigger brand names than us. Temple is a second tier basketball brand while Houston is semi-known in both football and basketball.

Both are clearly better known athletic programs than us.

 

Size does matter!

[Triple B]

Plus, the Houston and Philly markets are larger than ours. You've got 2 in group A due to brand naming, based on history and 2 due to TV market. Neither reasons of which anybody at USF can do a thing about.

I doubt Houston and Temple were put in group A because of market size, as neithwr of those schools comes close to owning its market. Like cincy and ucon, they were singled out for being bigger brand names than us. Temple is a second tier basketball brand while Houston is semi-known in both football and basketball.

Both are clearly better known athletic programs than us.

So all 4 are there because of branding, to some extent ... I can buy that ... Bottom line still, there's nothing anybody at USF can do about it but roll with the punches.

[Florida Bull]

I think you're all reading into it a bit much.

+1010101002907810810829048209890144123441

ESPN/NBC literally put the most important schools in a group in writing and you're still in denial. What will it take to make some of you not so biased? It's a punch to the gut, but I'm not going to ignore it and spin it every way possible to make myself feel better.

In YOUR opinion that's what those groups meant to NBC. NBC is not the end all be all of University worth and quality. Unless you were there when the contract was being written up, you have no idea.

@usfvoodoo5 ESPN matched NBC's contract exactly. NBC owns Comcast. Comcast has regional sports channels in Philly and Houston. Thus UH and Temple are A

Comcast does not exist in the Tampa market, at all. ESPN could not negotiate terms or change verbage in the contract, it was an "accept or pass" option.

I think you're all reading into it a bit much.

+1010101002907810810829048209890144123441

ESPN/NBC literally put the most important schools in a group in writing and you're still in denial. What will it take to make some of you not so biased? It's a punch to the gut, but I'm not going to ignore it and spin it every way possible to make myself feel better.

In YOUR opinion that's what those groups meant to NBC. NBC is not the end all be all of University worth and quality. Unless you were there when the contract was being written up, you have no idea.

@usfvoodoo5 ESPN matched NBC's contract exactly. NBC owns Comcast. Comcast has regional sports channels in Philly and Houston. Thus UH and Temple are A

Comcast does not exist in the Tampa market, at all. ESPN could not negotiate terms or change verbage in the contract, it was an "accept or pass" option.

Plus, the Houston and Philly markets are larger than ours. You've got 2 in group A due to brand naming, based on history and 2 due to TV market. Neither reasons of which anybody at USF can do a thing about.

I doubt Houston and Temple were put in group A because of market size, as neithwr of those schools comes close to owning its market. Like cincy and ucon, they were singled out for being bigger brand names than us. Temple is a second tier basketball brand while Houston is semi-known in both football and basketball.

Both are clearly better known athletic programs than us.

I really do not know that Houston and Temple are significantly bigger brands than USF or even UCF. It would be difficult to find a fully comprehensive anaylsis of tv ratings open to the general public, so I am open minded in that regard, at less for Houston.

But, it has been estimated USF and UCF only trail UConn for fanbase size in the conference.

On paper, UConn is certainly the biggest member in the Big East. There are rumors of UConn and Cincinnati being on the doorstep of the ACC and possibly Big 12. They are the expected favorites to leave, so it makes sense they are in Group A.

But, I think it is logical Temple is included in Group A because of pure media market size, Comcast's location, and perhaps as a theoretical third option for the ACC.

Houston also has a very large media market, a possible future as the ACC's fourth choice (especially if FSU and/or Miami are still in), and as mentioned regional sports channels. And, it does not hurt they are probably going to be one of the best conference football teams with on the field performance-although it may technically not be a factor in being listed.

[DELdaBull]

What is wrong with people. Temple has been in the public eye for decades. With Bill Cosby and coach Cheney most know that school. USF and especially UCF haven't ever done jack athletically for any kind of name brand.

[Gismo]

In my experience living in Texas almost two years, and based on my observations from visits to Houston, Austin, San Antonio and Dallas, I would estimate that both USF and UCF each have more followers than Houston.

[inTransit]

There is a lot of mixing within this thread between what schools mean to a conference (academics, recruiting, reputation, facilities, travel considerations, etc) and what they mean to a TV contract (market size, fanbase, rivalries). Yes there is some overlap between the two but just because we are not tier A in a TV contract doesn't mean we won't move to a better conference if a Florida presence is sought and the dominoes fall in our favor.

[Bull-by-Marriage]

 

Plus, the Houston and Philly markets are larger than ours. You've got 2 in group A due to brand naming, based on history and 2 due to TV market. Neither reasons of which anybody at USF can do a thing about.

I doubt Houston and Temple were put in group A because of market size, as neithwr of those schools comes close to owning its market. Like cincy and ucon, they were singled out for being bigger brand names than us. Temple is a second tier basketball brand while Houston is semi-known in both football and basketball.

Both are clearly better known athletic programs than us.

 

So all 4 are there because of branding, to some extent ... I can buy that ... Bottom line still, there's nothing anybody at USF can do about it but roll with the punches.

 

 

Not so fast my friend...USF needs to start being the puncher!! Just win baby!

[Who'sYourData?]

 

 

 

I think you're all reading into it a bit much.

+1010101002907810810829048209890144123441

ESPN/NBC literally put the most important schools in a group in writing and you're still in denial. What will it take to make some of you not so biased? It's a punch to the gut, but I'm not going to ignore it and spin it every way possible to make myself feel better.

In YOUR opinion that's what those groups meant to NBC. NBC is not the end all be all of University worth and quality. Unless you were there when the contract was being written up, you have no idea.

 

@usfvoodoo5 ESPN matched NBC's contract exactly. NBC owns Comcast. Comcast has regional sports channels in Philly and Houston. Thus UH and Temple are A

 

Comcast does not exist in the Tampa market, at all. ESPN could not negotiate terms or change verbage in the contract, it was an "accept or pass" option.

Group B designation obviously means the networks regard us as less valuable than the Group A teams.

Sometimes, statements are open to alternative interpretations. This is not one of them.

 

Actually, the fact that Comcast is in the "A" designated markets makes a lot of sense.  Sometimes not everything in world is about you, or USF.

[Quo Vadis]

Plus, the Houston and Philly markets are larger than ours. You've got 2 in group A due to brand naming, based on history and 2 due to TV market. Neither reasons of which anybody at USF can do a thing about.

I doubt Houston and Temple were put in group A because of market size, as neithwr of those schools comes close to owning its market. Like cincy and ucon, they were singled out for being bigger brand names than us. Temple is a second tier basketball brand while Houston is semi-known in both football and basketball.Both are clearly better known athletic programs than us.

So all 4 are there because of branding, to some extent ... I can buy that ... Bottom line still, there's nothing anybody at USF can do about it but roll with the punches.

I agree 100%. We have to struggle forward.

[Danm1983]

There is a lot of mixing within this thread between what schools mean to a conference (academics, recruiting, reputation, facilities, travel considerations, etc) and what they mean to a TV contract (market size, fanbase, rivalries). Yes there is some overlap between the two but just because we are not tier A in a TV contract doesn't mean we won't move to a better conference if a Florida presence is sought and the dominoes fall in our favor.

 

I agree, though the longer USF is in this current TV deal, the worse it will get as we have to shrink back our budgets, and the domino effect of that (money to hire coaches, facilities, recruit) is what has people worried I think (granted, I'm sure money can come from elsewhere, but it's very tight these days and shifting general or academic money to athletics is a touchy subject). The only thing USF can rely on is that the two big money sports (football and men's basketball) start winning consistently (tournament/bowl revenues and winning = coaching stability, even if they get raises), and the fact that the other schools in this conference are in the same boat for now and being on an equal monetary playing field enforces the fact that we need to WIN to at least stand out from the other leftovers.