As I wade through the latest round of "BCS SUCKS!!! columns, a question

But if you're not an ABC affiliate, who cares?

 

I don't know that cable has ever been a scary concept, except to people's wallets in the earliest days.

The fact is, not everyone has cable. And there are sports fans among those people. If there is or isn't a college football playoff, that does not affect their ability to watch games. This would, potentially.

So if the columnists continue to go to the old standby of "BCS SUCKS!!!!!" then I wonder if and when they will get to something like this. What if they moved the Super Bowl/NBA Finals/World Series to cable? Would that be a big deal? (and this isn't a political thread; I can play the "if" game here). Would any of those sports like the idea of their showcase event being restricted to a segment of the population? A large segment, yes. But still only part of the potential audience.

Do the honchos who run the BCS really want their baby to incur another potential PR hit?

In addition, these games are often used to hype a network's TV shows. I don't get how ESPN thinks they would reach a larger audience by moving the BCS to cable. They will be able to charge higher rights fees, but if the games are on ABC, that would draw even more viewers.

I guess I'm just not understanding the point of moving these games to pay TV. Opens up a major can of worms.

 

There are over 200 of them that do care.
Do you want the parent company taking away one of your bigger properties?

 

This might be a dumb question, but if you're ESPN, why WOULDN'T you want the games on ABC? You have a chance to pimp the hell out of your channel for five nights on primetime network TV. What's wrong with that?

Also, with the BCS's love of money, I'm surprised they haven't tried to hook ALL the networks in. Picture this: Each of the four major networks gets one of the BCS games. Say, for example, the Rose Bowl stays on ABC, Fox gets the Fiesta, NBC takes back the Orange, and CBS (with its SEC ties) gets the Sugar. Each network gets to broadcast the title game when it is held on their bowl's site. I would think the amount of money you could get for each bowl separately with the promise of showing the national championship every four years could draw more than the whole thing as a package deal. Works for the NFL playoffs, after all.

 

You can't make that a viable product if it's not on just one network. The value of each game goes way down.
Let me try to explain what I mean...in your suggestion, let's say the 4 games are divided equally in rights fees, but then, for example, say CBS gets stuck with an FSU/Pitt Orange Bowl. Ratings would be nothing compared to a Penn State/USC Rose Bowl on ABC, but CBS is still paying the same amount as ABC?
Never happen.

 

I really don't think the cable issue is a huge deal. There are playoff games shown on cable for MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL and I believe some of the NASCAR chase races. College BB is the only one that doesn't simply because one network owns its entire playoff. At this point, complaining about playoff games being moved to cable is a bit like complaining about seeing newspaper stories online before they show up in the dead tree version. That ship has sailed.

 

But CHAMPIONSHIP games in the major sports are not shown on cable.

If we look at the bowl games as on huge postseason, then the minor bowls - the Division Series, if you will - is on cable. Then the final round, the biggest games, are on "regular TV," all the better to reach a mass audience and hype that network's TV shows.

 

MLB Playoffs on cable - no huge outrage because MLB ratings as a whole are in the tank.
NFL - when Congress gets involved over the NFL Network/Comcast/Time Warner mess, well, you have a problem.
NBA - Playoffs on ESPN and TNT, forcing overall ratings down. The league partnered with TNT at a time when they thought they needed a new outlet, and Turner threw tons of cash at them, as did ESPN.
NHL - never been on the level of MLB or NBA in this country TV-wise, never will.
NASCAR - not been a problem, because as long as NASCAR has had a good TV presence in this country, part of that was thanks to ESPN.
The biggest college football games in this country have ALWAYS been on broadcast TV - there is no cable precedent for moving what is still a viable and strong product to cable and into fewer homes.

 

For what it's worth, ratings for last year's championship game were down 17 percent from the year before.

 

But 52 million tuned in.
They're not getting that number on cable.

 

You're right. Just threw out the number for discussion.

 

I'd be curious to find this out, I might research this tomorrow...
Has Monday Night Football on ESPN ever reached the same number of eyeballs that it was getting on ABC? just throwing out ratings would be misleading, for obvious reasons, I'd like to know total viewers.