There was a report out yesterday that ESPN is considering dropping the NFL from their quiver.

From Awful Announcing...

Could ESPN really bail on MNF after 2021?

Here are the 5 points from Jim Miller as he breaks down the issue:

Quote:1. ESPN has removed language from its contracts with cable companies that promises NFL games to justify subscriber fees.

2. The network is disappointed with the games it winds up with on MNF, as more appealing games land at NBC, Fox, and CBS.

3. ESPN would likely be able to negotiate for rights to the NFL highlights it needs without ponying up for MNF.

4. Competition from digital companies like Amazon, Twitter, and Facebook will (likely) have increased by 2021, driving up rights fees.

5. The NFL is “cuddling up closer” to broadcast networks, which are considered more stable than cable networks like ESPN.

We already know that ESPN loses money on its Monday Night Football broadcast. In an era of streaming, does it really pay dividends to have that sort of content for branding purposes if you can't recoup your costs?

Point being...

If ESPN is worried about what makes money and what doesn't then not only does good content matter, but affordable content.

College leagues should get the benefit of this. While they may not necessarily see any big bumps in the future, ESPN should be willing to commit long term which undergirds the stability of the game.

(10-31-2017 07:37 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  There was a report out yesterday that ESPN is considering dropping the NFL from their quiver.

From Awful Announcing...

Could ESPN really bail on MNF after 2021?

Here are the 5 points from Jim Miller as he breaks down the issue:

Quote:1. ESPN has removed language from its contracts with cable companies that promises NFL games to justify subscriber fees.

2. The network is disappointed with the games it winds up with on MNF, as more appealing games land at NBC, Fox, and CBS.

3. ESPN would likely be able to negotiate for rights to the NFL highlights it needs without ponying up for MNF.

4. Competition from digital companies like Amazon, Twitter, and Facebook will (likely) have increased by 2021, driving up rights fees.

5. The NFL is “cuddling up closer” to broadcast networks, which are considered more stable than cable networks like ESPN.

We already know that ESPN loses money on its Monday Night Football broadcast. In an era of streaming, does it really pay dividends to have that sort of content for branding purposes if you can't recoup your costs?

Nobody is in business to lose money. And when that 2 billion dollar expense ticks off a large % of the nation and gets an immediate 10% reduction in viewers over a matter that will take some time to be forgiven then losing money on them makes even less sense.

(10-31-2017 08:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Nobody is in business to lose money. And when that 2 billion dollar expense ticks off a large % of the nation and gets an immediate 10% reduction in viewers over a matter that will take some time to be forgiven then losing money on them makes even less sense.

I won't deny your position JR, as clearly some people do feel that way. But I simply think we as a country have simply hit 'Peak NFL'. If ESPN can negotiate for highlights and clips then it will be OK I think.

It fits the narrative. ESPN could add Hockey, The Canadian football league, and all of the FCS programs for less than what they are paying the NFL. Plus they would still get the highlights. With Disney moving toward its own streaming service. This would make moving into Canada much easier.

If the old adage that networks bought the NFL to advertise their regular programming is true, I doubt that works for ESPN. they are better off buying more live programming at a better value I would think.

(11-01-2017 03:50 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Nobody is in business to lose money. And when that 2 billion dollar expense ticks off a large % of the nation and gets an immediate 10% reduction in viewers over a matter that will take some time to be forgiven then losing money on them makes even less sense.

I won't deny your position JR, as clearly some people do feel that way. But I simply think we as a country have simply hit 'Peak NFL'. If ESPN can negotiate for highlights and clips then it will be OK I think.

NFL peaked when fantasy leagues took off. Now fans/viewers that would not normally care about , say a bunch of west coast teams, are now tuning in to watch their players wrack up points. Yes the politics is hurting the league, but NFL ratings were bound to drop off .

Now what espn is finally doing, weather forced to or not, is drop money losing contracts. NFL MNF is the worst one. The LHN is probably the next one.

(11-01-2017 05:48 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  It fits the narrative. ESPN could add Hockey, The Canadian football league, and all of the FCS programs for less than what they are paying the NFL. Plus they would still get the highlights. With Disney moving toward its own streaming service. This would make moving into Canada much easier.

ESPN already holds the CFL. TSN *IS* ESPN Canada. And yes, I do watch *a TON* of CFL games because for months on end it is the only football on TV. And ESPN knows they're getting a bunch of football fans from the States watching because of that. The announcers on TSN constantly tell you what college and city the players in the game hailed from. Because most of the skill players are CFB players who didn't quite make it in the NFL, and you'd be surprised how readily recognizable a lot of the players in the CFL are. Cato, the former Marshall QB who set practically every Marshall record you could as a QB (and a NCAA record IIRC), was lighting it up for Montreal two years ago.

(11-01-2017 01:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-01-2017 05:48 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  It fits the narrative. ESPN could add Hockey, The Canadian football league, and all of the FCS programs for less than what they are paying the NFL. Plus they would still get the highlights. With Disney moving toward its own streaming service. This would make moving into Canada much easier.

ESPN already holds the CFL. TSN *IS* ESPN Canada. And yes, I do watch *a TON* of CFL games because for months on end it is the only football on TV. And ESPN knows they're getting a bunch of football fans from the States watching because of that. The announcers on TSN constantly tell you what college and city the players in the game hailed from. Because most of the skill players are CFB players who didn't quite make it in the NFL, and you'd be surprised how readily recognizable a lot of the players in the CFL are. Cato, the former Marshall QB who set practically every Marshall record you could as a QB (and a NCAA record IIRC), was lighting it up for Montreal two years ago.

Ratings would be nuts if CFL signed Manziel, Griffey and Keappernick

(11-01-2017 02:15 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  Ratings would be nuts if CFL signed Manziel, Griffey and Keappernick

ESPN runs commercial bumpers showing the college careers of the biggest CFL players. The best kick returner in the CFL was a special teams star for the Gators... think he was even All-SEC and maybe even an All-American.

(11-01-2017 03:50 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Nobody is in business to lose money. And when that 2 billion dollar expense ticks off a large % of the nation and gets an immediate 10% reduction in viewers over a matter that will take some time to be forgiven then losing money on them makes even less sense.

I won't deny your position JR, as clearly some people do feel that way. But I simply think we as a country have simply hit 'Peak NFL'. If ESPN can negotiate for highlights and clips then it will be OK I think.

I agree that there are multiple reasons for their imminent decline, but the 10% was an immediate turn off due to the protests. It was a factor which merely piled onto those that were already trending lower. It's not a tipping point, but it sure puts them closer to finding one.

It's always surprised me a little bit the degree to which ESPN abandoned the NHL. I know it's not in the top 3 and they had some work issues there for a while, but it's still one of the more popular sports in the country.

College sports is basically the bread and butter of ESPN. It's always been good for them. Now they've invested heavily in the NBA and that's probably weighing them down a little, but it is what it is.

If I were ESPN then I would try to split coverage with NBC on the NHL. There's plenty of games to go around. FOX gets a lot of content there for their regional networks and FOX is more of a threat than NBC I think. Then I would expand my coverage of MLS and try to nail down either La Liga or the EPL.

Between that and their other packages, I think they could put together a much more affordable and profitable portfolio without paying so much for a handful of NFL games.

ESPN may want to completely change their strategy on college football.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/wh...eakingnews
​What might be the repercussions for ESPN if it decided not to seriously chase down another NFL rights package? There would be both bad and good news. Bad: it would be forced to come up with provocative and meaningful alternatives to replace 17 weeks of lost NFL games. But the good news is the network would have some serious spending money it hasn't had in years. Take the $2 billion that it is now giving the NFL, subtract say $350 million for rights to highlights as described above, and another $250 million to send back to Burbank the way Henry Hill gave Paulie that “tribute” money after a big haul, and that still leaves a billion and a half dollars for ESPN to play the media rights version of Wheel of Fortune. While it’s true that nothing drives a sub fee like the NFL, ESPN could go on a spending spree targeting CBS’ college football deal with the SEC, a Big 12 deal, baseball post-season, rights to NHL hockey, EPL soccer and a whole buffet table of other properties that would prove beneficial in its negotiations with distributors who would want to lower their sub fees.

College games played on Monday night?
What is the best way to save the Big 12?

(11-01-2017 03:36 PM)XLance Wrote:  ESPN may want to completely change their strategy on college football.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/wh...eakingnews
​What might be the repercussions for ESPN if it decided not to seriously chase down another NFL rights package? There would be both bad and good news. Bad: it would be forced to come up with provocative and meaningful alternatives to replace 17 weeks of lost NFL games. But the good news is the network would have some serious spending money it hasn't had in years. Take the $2 billion that it is now giving the NFL, subtract say $350 million for rights to highlights as described above, and another $250 million to send back to Burbank the way Henry Hill gave Paulie that “tribute” money after a big haul, and that still leaves a billion and a half dollars for ESPN to play the media rights version of Wheel of Fortune. While it’s true that nothing drives a sub fee like the NFL, ESPN could go on a spending spree targeting CBS’ college football deal with the SEC, a Big 12 deal, baseball post-season, rights to NHL hockey, EPL soccer and a whole buffet table of other properties that would prove beneficial in its negotiations with distributors who would want to lower their sub fees.

College games played on Monday night?
What is the best way to save the Big 12?

The problem with going all in on college sports is that the bulk of the viewership resides in states that are diametrically opposed to ESPN's current social media narrative. The Mothership would have to broadcast like SEC Now does to have any chance of making such an investment work.

JrSec i agree with you to some degree...Alot of ESPN survival will depend on it Streaming platform to be launched...But more and More comp for content though and Streaming Services will get more aggressive...Again Alot will depend on ESPN Streaming Platform...Time will tell..

(11-01-2017 03:20 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If I were ESPN then I would try to split coverage with NBC on the NHL. There's plenty of games to go around. FOX gets a lot of content there for their regional networks and FOX is more of a threat than NBC I think. Then I would expand my coverage of MLS and try to nail down either La Liga or the EPL.

Between that and their other packages, I think they could put together a much more affordable and profitable portfolio without paying so much for a handful of NFL games.

I would wait to see how the Independence of Catalonia from Spain plays out before making any European bids. La Liga has threatened to kick out all Catalonian clubs should their country declare independence.

Two options exist for those clubs:
1. Join French League 1 and start new "el Classico" with PSG. Note: Liga 1 already allows the independent country of Monaco to play in their leagues.
2. Join England's Premier League and have an entire season of juicey match ups with Manchester United, Manchester City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Tottenham, and Arsenal. Note: Arsenal Coach Arsene Wenger recently said discussing adding the Catalonian teams should also prompt discussions of integrating the Scottish teams too. So add Celtic and Rangers to that lineup and the TV rights package should explode.

Something that's not being factored in is that ESPN might want to start creating it's own content again. Changing ESPN news into a full time entertainment network might be away to go.

(11-01-2017 04:19 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  The problem with going all in on college sports is that the bulk of the viewership resides in states that are diametrically opposed to ESPN's current social media narrative. The Mothership would have to broadcast like SEC Now does to have any chance of making such an investment work.

This is a problem for which I don't have an easy answer. The wheels are greased for the three P5 red state conferences to converge and the two blue state conferences to converge (+ the ACC's northern flank). But FOX holds the blue and ESPN holds the red. Which is bass ackwards from what it probably would be better off being.