Hansen is killing us

by Koach Karl I on Jan 19, 2008 10:38 AM PST Comment 7 comments

I just watched College Gameday on ESPN and came away pissed off. There was barely a mention of UCLA-USC (maybe 20 seconds near the end), and there was no discussion of any other Pac 10 game. The more I watched, the more angry I became. Not at ESPN for not covering the Pac 10, but at Hansen and the rest of the Pac 10 brain trust for continuing to renew the Pac 10 TV contract with Fox instead of ESPN.

Even though Fox may have offered more cash, we all know that over time an ESPN deal would pay higher dividends in the form of more national exposure for our conference. With the time difference and the natural east coast bias, we are already behind the ball. But the TV contract is something within our control. The Fox contract only serves to place our conference, which at the end of the day will probably be THE premiere conference in the country this year (and definitely in the top 3), in a dark spot on the spectrum where virtually no one East of the Rockies will see us.

Now the intangible penalties are hurting. It's hard to blame ESPN, though. What incentive does ESPN have to hype any team in our conference when they do not broadcast any (or very few) of our conference games? We get the shaft all over that network; not because we are not good, but because ESPN receives no financial benefit for advertising a team or a conference that it does not have the broadcast rights to. At least in football, ABC broadcasts a good number of games which is one reason why ESPN is also referred to as the Trojan Broadcast Network.

I know this is a frequent topic on this board, and I am not the first person to bring this up (not by a long shot), but watching Gameday this morning really brought it home for me and I found myself stewing, looking for an outlet to vent.

I hope we stuff Killa2 and beat the crap out of Timmeh and his traveling band of diploma mill grads today. No mercy. I want every Trojan bandwagoner talking about their football team after the game. As we all know, their first knee-jerk reaction after getting dominated on the basketball court is to talk about Cheatie Peatey. "Eeerrrrrrr, we will kill you guys in football next year!!"

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

it definitely sucks

that the people on the east coast don't get to see nationally-broadcasted pac-10 games, but the upside to our fox sports deal is that those of us with directv get to see every pac-10 game. if we had a deal with espn, wouldn't that mean that only a couple of games would be shown every week? i would rather be able to watch them all, and have espn not pimping us like duke-unc. also, everyone knows the pac-10 is strong this year, and if we win, we'll get our #1 seed, which is all that matters.

by roney85 on Jan 19, 2008 11:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

For out of towners, Fox is much better

I don't have spend a crapload of money on Full Court to see UCLA play. I get most games over basic cable, and pay an extra $5/month for the sports tier which includes a bunch of Fox channels, so if you're not in SoCal, not having a contract with ESPN works out a lot better.

And a few years ago, I would have agreed with you. But that was before a) ESPN became unwatchable, and b) Howland started getting to final fours and getting almost every kid he goes after. If UCLA was struggling to recruit and stay competitive, I'd agree with you, but the Pac 10 doesn't need ESPN. And it certainly doesn't need ESPN dictating when its games will be played. It certainly hasn't hurt the competitiveness of the league this year.

by LA Seitz on Jan 19, 2008 11:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Yes and no

I'm in Chicago like you, and I agree that the Fox package through Comcast is just fine, especially for basketball, since nearly every UCLA game is on it. BUT, we pay a price during football season, since a lot of the UCLA games get picked by ABC for a regional broadcast and that dooms us to eternal Michigan and tOSU broadcasts. IF RN succeeds in bringing UCLA back to a high level, you can be sure that we will not be seeing many football games on Fox.

by ucladj89 on Jan 19, 2008 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Football

That's going to happen either way. The Pac 10 already has a contract with ABC, which is why a few games end up on ESPN every year. That's a problem with simply living outside of LA, not a Pac 10/ESPN problem in general. We still do pretty well, as most of the games are on Fox, and those that aren't, which amount to a few games per year, can be seen at a local bar.

by LA Seitz on Jan 19, 2008 2:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

recruiting is better

but we still don't pull kids from the east coast like we should be. Part of that is because we are not on ESPN where all of their friends can watch them.

As for the league, it is certainly competitive, but that doesn't translate into the rankings. There are only 3 Pac 10 teams in the rankings. Maybe there shouldn't be more, maybe there should. But I guarantee this: as we beat each other up in league play, we don't get the same exposure on ESPN as the ACC, Big East and SEC and that leads to our league getting hurt in seeding at tournament time. Granted, UCLA is a high enough profile team now, and we won't get screwed. But don't be surprised if Washington St. is seeded lower than they should, or another team or two from the Pac 10 are referred to as "bubble teams" merely because of a less than stellar conference record. What that record should tell the committee instead is that those teams deserve to get in because they play in the toughest conference in the country.

by Koach Karl I on Jan 19, 2008 4:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

East Coast

Who cares where they pull recruits from? They have the #1 class in the nation next year.

And as for rankings, again, who cares? The selection committee doesn't look at rankings.

Getting respect is only important if it's coming from people that you respect to begin with. I can't think of one pundit at ESPN about whom I could care less. Not having a ESPN contract means less time on Sportscenter. Big deal. Does anyone actually watch that show anymore?

by LA Seitz on Jan 19, 2008 8:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

ESPN

It is not hard to blame ESPN. If they really wanted to portray themselves as a non-partisan sports information network, then they should be talking about the big games and conferences regardless of whether they have a contract with the station. They should hype the game because it is a big game featuring one of the best teams in the nation. Unfortunately this doesn't happen in the real world, so the Pac-10 commissioner should do what's in the best interest of the conference, and not for a few extra bucks. Hansen is just out of touch with reality.

by UCLA4Life on Jan 19, 2008 11:55 AM PST reply actions 0 recs