Good SBJ article on 2019 TV predictions (re: ACCN)

[Sean Miller Fan]

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2018/12/24/Media/Sports-media.aspx

Highlights:

- Says ACCN wont be a complete success at first but will bring enough $ in to keep schools happy

- think the American will get $8 million per year per team. That would be game-changing for them.

- WWE on FS1? Come on, its not an actual sport. Have to draw the line there

- NHL will split up its rights packages. Think this would be a great idea. I have said for years the NHL needs to be back on ESPN. I dont like hockey and love college hoops but on a random Wednesday there are like 12 college hoops games on ESPN networks, wouldnt it make sense to diversify just a little and add in some hockey?

 

[JD1976]

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2018/12/24/Media/Sports-media.aspx

Highlights:

- Says ACCN wont be a complete success at first but will bring enough $ in to keep schools happy

- think the American will get $8 million per year per team. That would be game-changing for them.

- WWE on FS1? Come on, its not an actual sport. Have to draw the line there

- NHL will split up its rights packages. Think this would be a great idea. I have said for years the NHL needs to be back on ESPN. I dont like hockey and love college hoops but on a random Wednesday there are like 12 college hoops games on ESPN networks, wouldnt it make sense to diversify just a little and add in some hockey?

I’m a hockey fan who is more than pleased with NBC and NBCSN and hopes ESPN never gets a sniff of NHL. Games 4-5 nights a week, preceded by a 30-minute pregame and a full hour post-game highlights show. NBC has outstanding coverage and programming. Hopefully the NHL realizes that its best strategy is to focus on growing fans within the footprint of the league’s 32 markets (that includes Seattle) and doing so with a National broadcast partner that doesn’t fragment its coverage.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I’m a hockey fan who is more than pleased with NBC and NBCSN and hopes ESPN never gets a sniff of NHL. Games 4-5 nights a week, preceded by a 30-minute pregame and a full hour post-game highlights show. NBC has outstanding coverage and programming. Hopefully the NHL realizes that its best strategy is to focus on growing fans within the footprint of the league’s 32 markets (that includes Seattle) and doing so with a National broadcast partner that doesn’t fragment its coverage.

NHL ratings suck. They need to be on ESPN to grow the sport.

 

[BigBird80]

I'm good with the NHL on NBC also. Only change I think they need to make is to put every game of the finals on the main station, not their sports network.

 

[California Panther]

Will the ACCN have its own channel on DirecTV like the BTN and SEC do or will it be pay through ESPN+ only?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Will the ACCN have its own channel on DirecTV like the BTN and SEC do or will it be pay through ESPN+ only?

Identical to SECN

 

[JD1976]

NHL ratings suck. They need to be on ESPN to grow the sport.

You just said you don’t know anything about hockey. The only way to grow the sport is to do exactly what the NHL has done over the last 25 years. It has strategically added franchises in sunbelt cities with excellent success except for Atlanta. South Florida and Phoenix have had Arena and ownership issues but have survived and are on the rebound. This has nothing to do with ESPN. There are 25 American cities that care about hockey... just grow the game and each team’s brand within that footprint and the league will be just fine with what it has with its local RSNs and NBCSN, which is a network that is basically its own from a programming standpoint.

 

[DiehardPanther]

I hope they put the NHL on the most obscure channel out there.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

You just said you don’t know anything about hockey. The only way to grow the sport is to do exactly what the NHL has done over the last 25 years. It has strategically added franchises in sunbelt cities with excellent success except for Atlanta. South Florida and Phoenix have had Arena and ownership issues but have survived and are on the rebound. This has nothing to do with ESPN. There are 25 American cities that care about hockey... just grow the game and each team’s brand within that footprint and the league will be just fine with what it has with its local RSNs and NBCSN, which is a network that is basically its own from a programming standpoint.

Here are the cities that care about hockey and by care mean arent just bandwagon fans like Nashville:

Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Boston
Philadelphia
Chicago
Detroit
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Las Vegas (think they can become a good hockey city)

The following cities could care less about hockey unless their team is extremely good:

Columbus
Miami
Tampa
NYC
Newark
Nashville
Dallas
Denver
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Etc

Dont tell me 25 American cities care. Half the American teams are only in business because their share of Canadien TV money pays the bills.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Half the American teams are only in business because their share of Canadien TV money pays the bills.

NHL teams don't get nearly as much money from Canadian television as you seem to think that they do.

 

[ThePanthers]

With regard to the ACC network, I've read like 3 different interviews with school AD (including Lyke) that has stated that they expect the full reward of the ACC Network around year 3 (2022) due to the timing of some contract negotiations with cable providers and paying down some start up costs.

Something like year 1 (2020 payout) - $5-7M per school
Year 2 (2021 payout) - $10M per school
Year 3 (2022 payout) - $15M per school

And then holds steady with slight increases each additional year.

 

[cease10]

I was about to ask if Pitt Gymnastics will be shown on ACCN, even though the ACC doesn't sponsor the sport. However, I see that the home meets are currently shown on ACCNE, so I guess gymanistics will also be shown on the new network.

I really believe that this is a growing sport in popularity and can pull in good ratings for the network. The demographics will also be great for the network. The sport looks to be doing well on SECN, and the the meet attendance is great.

The larger schools like Clemson and FSU should look into adding the sport.

 

[chethejet]

ACC will probably be third in the P5 as to payout even with the ACC network. But for Pitt if the projections are close to 10 million in 2021, then approx 35 million or gives Pitt some real cash to grow the athletic programs. With BB returning to profitability and football perhaps gaining more fan support and more intrenched with ACC building rivalries, some real positives here.

 

[ThePanthers]

ACC will probably be third in the P5 as to payout even with the ACC network. But for Pitt if the projections are close to 10 million in 2021, then approx 35 million or gives Pitt some real cash to grow the athletic programs. With BB returning to profitability and football perhaps gaining more fan support and more intrenched with ACC building rivalries, some real positives here.

Yeah it's always going to be the BIG/SEC at the top in payouts and then the ACC/Big XII/Pac 12 in the next grouping. Still in the ballpark and still financially strong, but the BIG/SEC has the largest schools, most fans, etc.

The thing to keep in mind, every peer school (ACC School) is getting that bump, so while Pitt will get extra cash, so is every other school they compete with for championships.

I know people are sick of hearing it, but what seperates schools financially is donations and ticket sales. Just the way it is in college athletics.

 

[anon_vmuicqnzlyp3u]

With regard to the ACC network, I've read like 3 different interviews with school AD (including Lyke) that has stated that they expect the full reward of the ACC Network around year 3 (2022) due to the timing of some contract negotiations with cable providers and paying down some start up costs.

Something like year 1 (2020 payout) - $5-7M per school
Year 2 (2021 payout) - $10M per school
Year 3 (2022 payout) - $15M per school

And then holds steady with slight increases each additional year.

Thats not to bad in addition to league revenues already

 

[JD1976]

Here are the cities that care about hockey and by care mean arent just bandwagon fans like Nashville:

Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Boston
Philadelphia
Chicago
Detroit
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Las Vegas (think they can become a good hockey city)

The following cities could care less about hockey unless their team is extremely good:

Columbus
Miami
Tampa
NYC
Newark
Nashville
Dallas
Denver
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Etc

Dont tell me 25 American cities care. Half the American teams are only in business because their share of Canadien TV money pays the bills.

You are missing my point, of course. I didn't say 25 cities were rabid about hockey. Of course not. But the fact of the matter is that the 25 American cities have proven that hockey can be successful, and the collective produces enough fans and popularity to be successful.

Last year, the NHL and its teams received nearly $600 million in sponsorship dollars and 24 teams played at 95% capacity or better. Yes that sponsorship figure is half of the NFL, and trails the NBA and MLB, but that's still pretty impressive and wouldn't be possible without the NBC deal.

The bottom line is that the NHL knows its lane and is plenty healthy and plenty viable just where it is despite the opinion of people who don't care about the league and make the same tired opinion about not being on ESPN. The NHL's problem hasn't been revenues or ratings, it's been the consistent lack of labor peace that has stopped any serious momentum (remember 1994 when the Rangers Stanley Cup was a bigger deal than the Knicks in the NBA finals, only to be followed by a lockout).

 

[pittdan77]

Here are the cities that care about hockey and by care mean arent just bandwagon fans like Nashville:

Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Boston
Philadelphia
Chicago
Detroit
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Las Vegas (think they can become a good hockey city)

The following cities could care less about hockey unless their team is extremely good:

Columbus
Miami
Tampa
NYC
Newark
Nashville
Dallas
Denver
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Etc

Dont tell me 25 American cities care. Half the American teams are only in business because their share of Canadien TV money pays the bills.

I think I'd toss Minnesota and NYC fans in the "yeah, they care" column.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I think I'd toss Minnesota and NYC fans in the "yeah, they care" column.

NYC is a terrible hockey town. Just because 19K out of 20 million find their way to midtown does not make it a good hockey town. Ratings for their 3 teams suck and I'd guess 95% of New Yorkers cannot name 1 Rangers player.

 

[pittdan77]

NYC is a terrible hockey town. Just because 19K out of 20 million find their way to midtown does not make it a good hockey town. Ratings for their 3 teams suck and I'd guess 95% of New Yorkers cannot name 1 Rangers player.

I didn't realize NY was held to a higher standard. You should consider that they essentially have three hockey teams.

 

[PittFanDan17]

Here are the cities that care about hockey and by care mean arent just bandwagon fans like Nashville:

Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Boston
Philadelphia
Chicago
Detroit
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Las Vegas (think they can become a good hockey city)

The following cities could care less about hockey unless their team is extremely good:

Columbus
Miami
Tampa
NYC
Newark
Nashville
Dallas
Denver
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Etc

Dont tell me 25 American cities care. Half the American teams are only in business because their share of Canadien TV money pays the bills.

Could not be more wrong. Ludicrous take

 

[prez41]

Could not be more wrong. Ludicrous take

Consider the source.......

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

Here are the cities that care about hockey and by care mean arent just bandwagon fans like Nashville:

Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Boston
Philadelphia
Chicago
Detroit
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Las Vegas (think they can become a good hockey city)

The following cities could care less about hockey unless their team is extremely good:

Columbus
Miami
Tampa
NYC
Newark
Nashville
Dallas
Denver
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Etc

Dont tell me 25 American cities care. Half the American teams are only in business because their share of Canadien TV money pays the bills.

I don’t think this is accurate at all. I think Columbus is actually an exceptional market, considering their team has never even won a playoff series.

If they ever start to win, that’s going to become one of the best markets in the NHL.

Also, New York is the same for all of its sports. If the Knicks are good, they love basketball. If not, they have plenty of other things to do. It’s the same with every other sport including hockey.

San Jose is also a very good hockey market and so is Dallas.

 

[kma0043]

Hockey is a regional sport and always has been. New England, Great Lakes/Rust Belt, and Upper Midwest. I’d assume those regions make up the bulk of the ratings, and with recent US population shifts it probably doesn’t bode well for massive NHL ratings. That being said, we are in a traditional hockey region and I love it!

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

I also think the people who are saying the NHL needs to be on ESPN to be legitimized are missing the boat. ESPN has very clearly jumped the shark and that power dynamic has dramatically changed.

NBC/Comcast has been a phenomenal partner for the NHL and I can’t think of a single good reason to get away from it.

Now, that doesn’t mean that I’m necessarily against splitting the contract. If they want to throw some games on ABC or ESPN, that could work too. However, the NHL is CLEARLY healthier now than it has ever been in any of our lifetimes and there’s just no doubt about that.

Just look at the participation levels. In the United States alone, hockey registration is off-the-charts. There was a time, not too long ago, where all of the American players came from one of the M states: Massachusetts, Minnesota or Michigan.

Those are still the preeminent producers of American talent, but players — and not just any players, world class players — now come from Texas, California, Arizona, Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, you name it.

Yeah, it is not the NBA or MLB, and it’s obviously not on the same planet as the NFL or the Premier League. However, it is the fifth most lucrative/powerful sports league on the globe and that is no small thing. La Liga, Serie A, Bundisliga, etc., are all looking up at the NHL.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

However, it is the fifth most lucrative/powerful sports league on the globe and that is no small thing. La Liga, Serie A, Bundisliga, etc., are all looking up at the NHL.

Huh?

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

What’s complicated or controversial about what I said? The NHL is the fifth wealthiest sports league on the planet by revenue. And it has far more growth potential than the league’s already trailing it.

The point is it is not exactly in trouble. In fact, by any reasonable measurement, it is clearly flourishing. It’s just not flourishing quite as well as the three other major sports leagues in the United States. There’s no crime in that – neither is any other league in the world.

A group of savvy investors in Seattle were desperate to pay $500 million to buy their way into the club. Two years ago, Las Vegas did the same thing and another group of investors (media giant, Quebecor) in Quebec City would give their left arm to do it. That’s the point I’m trying to make – that people forecasting the NHL’s demise are about 20-25 years too late. The worm has clearly turned and those people are very obviously dead wrong.

https://nexchange.com/article/10475

Again though, that does not mean that the NHL should not throw ESPN the bone and try to get a weekly game on the four letter network. That certainly wouldn’t hurt the NHL. Also, maybe they can get some games on ABC? However, the notion that they are somehow dying on the vine on NBC and NBCSN is factually incorrect and quite honestly a ludicrously ill-informed opinion.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

What’s complicated or controversial about what I said? The NHL is the fifth wealthiest sports league on the planet by revenue. And it has far more growth potential than the league’s already trailing it.

The point is it is not exactly in trouble. In fact, by any reasonable measurement, it is clearly flourishing. It’s just not flourishing quite as well as the three other major sports leagues in the United States. There’s no crime in that – neither is any other league in the world.

A group of savvy investors in Seattle were desperate to pay $500 million to buy their way into the club. Two years ago, Las Vegas did the same thing and another group of investors (media giant, Quebecor) in Quebec City would give their left arm to do it. That’s the point I’m trying to make – that people forecasting the NHL’s demise are about 20-25 years too late. The worm has clearly turned and those people are very obviously dead wrong.

https://nexchange.com/article/10475

Again though, that does not mean that the NHL should not throw ESPN the bone and try to get a weekly game on the four letter network. That certainly wouldn’t hurt the NHL. Also, maybe they can get some games on ABC? However, the notion that they are somehow dying on the vine on NBC and NBCSN is factually incorrect and quite honestly a ludicrously ill-informed opinion.

Nobody is saying the NHL is dying. It is THE national sport for 50 million Canadiens and its super popular in a few American cities. The league is doing well. I am saying its American TV ratings are awful which they are and being on ESPN would help that.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

What’s complicated or controversial about what I said? The NHL is the fifth wealthiest sports league on the planet by revenue. And it has far more growth potential than the league’s already trailing it.

The point is it is not exactly in trouble. In fact, by any reasonable measurement, it is clearly flourishing. It’s just not flourishing quite as well as the three other major sports leagues in the United States. There’s no crime in that – neither is any other league in the world.

A group of savvy investors in Seattle were desperate to pay $500 million to buy their way into the club. Two years ago, Las Vegas did the same thing and another group of investors (media giant, Quebecor) in Quebec City would give their left arm to do it. That’s the point I’m trying to make – that people forecasting the NHL’s demise are about 20-25 years too late. The worm has clearly turned and those people are very obviously dead wrong.

https://nexchange.com/article/10475

Again though, that does not mean that the NHL should not throw ESPN the bone and try to get a weekly game on the four letter network. That certainly wouldn’t hurt the NHL. Also, maybe they can get some games on ABC? However, the notion that they are somehow dying on the vine on NBC and NBCSN is factually incorrect and quite honestly a ludicrously ill-informed opinion.

Also, we arent exactly comparing apples to apples. The NHL has 31 teams who play 84 games plus playoffs. How many NHL games are in a season? 1500? There are only 400 or so games in a La Liga or Bundesliga season. The NHL is doing well but generating more revenue than leagues with 1/3 to 1/4 as many games isnt something to brag about.

 

[JD1976]

Nobody is saying the NHL is dying. It is THE national sport for 50 million Canadiens and its super popular in a few American cities. The league is doing well. I am saying its American TV ratings are awful which they are and being on ESPN would help that.

Again you are wrong, wrong, wrong. Just take 10 minutes to google and research. Go look at the Stanley Cup Finals ratings history on American TV. 10 of the last 11 years the Finals have averaged over 4 million viewers (the lone exception interestingly was 2012 when the teams from the LA and NYC markets squared off — Kings/Devils). And I should point out that every single one of those years had at least two games on cable (either VS or NBCSN).

Compare that to the ABC/ESPN ratings from 2000-04. The numbers aren’t anywhere close. The best two Finals in terms of viewership on ABC/ESPN barely got over an average of 4 million. Same for the years when FOX carries the NHL (2nd Half of the 90s).

You can go back to the years when hockey was only on ESPN and the numbers once again show that any broadcast network exposure is better for ratings/viewership than cable alone.

But most importantly, 9 out of 10 hockey fans will tell you that NBC/NBCSN kicks the shit out of what we used to get on ESPN. Plus, NBC is starting to put more games on Saturday prime time on top of the 4-5 games a week we get on NBCSN. It’s just better and as I said previously, unless ESPN wants to come out with a new network mostly dedicated to hockey, it would never be able to provide the bandwidth we get on NBCSN.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Again you are wrong, wrong, wrong. Just take 10 minutes to google and research. Go look at the Stanley Cup Finals ratings history on American TV. 10 of the last 11 years the Finals have averaged over 4 million viewers (the lone exception interestingly was 2012 when the teams from the LA and NYC markets squared off — Kings/Devils). And I should point out that every single one of those years had at least two games on cable (either VS or NBCSN).

Compare that to the ABC/ESPN ratings from 2000-04. The numbers aren’t anywhere close. The best two Finals in terms of viewership on ABC/ESPN barely got over an average of 4 million. Same for the years when FOX carries the NHL (2nd Half of the 90s).

You can go back to the years when hockey was only on ESPN and the numbers once again show that any broadcast network exposure is better for ratings/viewership than cable alone.

But most importantly, 9 out of 10 hockey fans will tell you that NBC/NBCSN kicks the shit out of what we used to get on ESPN. Plus, NBC is starting to put more games on Saturday prime time on top of the 4-5 games a week we get on NBCSN. It’s just better and as I said previously, unless ESPN wants to come out with a new network mostly dedicated to hockey, it would never be able to provide the bandwidth we get on NBCSN.

NBCSN is a niche network. Its literally only watched by NHL and EPL fans. The NHL needs to grow its audience by being on ESPN just for the promos they'd do during other programming such as NBA games/playoffs. Also, having the Celtics/76ers playoff game leading into some Western Conference series couldnt hurt.

I would probably agree that hockey fans like NBC's coverage but they need to think bigger. ESPN is where the big boys play. There's room for both.

 

[JD1976]

NBCSN is a niche network. Its literally only watched by NHL and EPL fans. The NHL needs to grow its audience by being on ESPN just for the promos they'd do during other programming such as NBA games/playoffs. Also, having the Celtics/76ers playoff game leading into some Western Conference series couldnt hurt.

I would probably agree that hockey fans like NBC's coverage but they need to think bigger. ESPN is where the big boys play. There's room for both.

Bringing up promos isn’t your strongest argument. The NHL has live and commercial promos during Sunday Night Football, the most watched program on network television most weeks in the fall. NBC also runs NHL promo commercials during the Today Show and weeknight NBC programming too.

I will concede that the one area where the NHL could benefit from ESPN would be to strike a content deal so highlights are shown daily on SportsCenter and better placement on ESPN.com. Otherwise, I still contend the NHL’s need for ESPN is just a weak theory by those who really don’t follow the game or how it is consumed by fans.