Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

[D2D]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Last year there was a big push to get the rights so a Minny tv station could broadcast the game. The end result was ESPN wanted considerably more than the local folks felt like paying.

But from ESPN's perspective, isn't something better than nothing?

[ARM]

But from ESPN's perspective, isn't something better than nothing?

Here is what we could do. We record the programming that is on ESPN's main station during the time slot of the Frozen Four games, and note all of the sponsors. Then we contact both the sponsors and ESPN and boycott those sponsors for the next year, and do so until ESPN either gives up the rights or starts broadcasting the event. That is the only way ESPN would notice. Until then, they could care less. If you got a few thousand people to tell their sponsors that they are now being blacklisted, they would start to care. Sponsors want people to buy their products when they purchase ad time. They don't want to alienate consumers through no fault of their own. That is about the only way viewers can truly influence programming.

Realistically, we could get about 20 people to commit to following said plan, and maybe five of those would actually follow through. And that is why nobody televises the women's game.

[Eeyore]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

But from ESPN's perspective, isn't something better than nothing?

Not necessarily. There are costs associated with this kind of deal, including but not limited to rebroadcast rights, ownership of footage, other legal costs, and any possible loss of viewership to their own programming because people are watching something else. So someone would have to be willing to pay ESPN enough money to cover its expenses while also paying a small enough figure to be able to cover their own. And ESPN may have concluded, correctly or incorrectly, that the chances of that happening are too small to make it worth the hassle and expense of entering into negotiations.

[Nowheresville]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Exactly - Option #3. We first need to create a demand, then the networks will take notice. Having a building that is 1/2 full for a National Championship game does not help to create demand. Having an overflow crowd, with people being turned away at the door would be a good start!!

As a comparison of interest in the women's game to the men's game, take the outdoor game at TCF Bank stadium in Jan - both Minnesota teams were playing Ohio St. Pretty sure both games were broadcast live on BTN - I was only able to watch on TV the later men's game because of a work commitment. It was my understanding the women's game was played in front of an empty stadium, maybe 1000 - 1500 people? The men's game the same night was a sellout, attended by 48,000. The networks take notice of those kind of numbers.

Sorry, but there are several factual errors here.

First, The past 2 Frozen Fours have been sold out, and last year at Ridder not only were people being turned away, scalpers were getting top dollar for tickets. This year, despite what it looked like on video, they were only selling standing room tickets for a couple weeks leading up to the games.

Second, the outdoor game at TCF was not shown on BTN, and actually the women played Mankato, not Ohio State. The game was only shown online, although that feed was being shown inside Mariucci and several other "pregame" events around campus. The attendance was 6,600, not 1000-1500, although that was going to look plenty empty in a 48,000 seat stadium. It was also played at 4 in the afternoon on a Friday, with the temperatures in the single digits, and obviously most people who were about to spend another 2.5 hours out in those conditions for the mens games, not surprisingly it wasn't exactly most people's priority. It should also be noted that the Men's game also did not sell out.

If the network gets good ratings and can make money, 100% certain they will televise the event. If they cannot sell advertising and make money they will not televise it. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there is just not enough interest throughout the country in women's hockey and broader in women's sports (the exception possibly with women's NCAA hoop tourney) to warrant TV coverage.

But back to the larger issue, it's nowhere near as simple as saying that networks can't make money on women's hockey. While BTN did not show the TCF game, they did show a Gopher game live later in the year, and in a prime Saturday 7pm spot in the lineup, and they've been showing at least one or two live womens games a year for the past few years, and they also have been showing more games taped delayed. BTN also used the NCAA.com video from the Frozen Four to show highlights during their coverage of the B1G mens tourney.

If BTN can justify showing regular season games live, clearly there is the potential market for showing the Women's championship. There also was a market a just a few years ago, when the game was shown on TV, before ESPN got the rights. Face it, there are lots of sports networks these days, and on a Sunday Afternoon during the NCAA Basketball Tournament, no one is expecting to pull big numbers for any other sporting event.

So why isn't ESPN showing it, or allowing others to purchase it? That I can't say, other than clearly it is not a priority for them. But you do need to remember that ESPN didn't go out and bid on the Women's Hockey Championship, they bought a huge package of games from the NCAA, that just happens to include college hockey. Even on the mens side, while they are doing a better job this year, even some of this years regional games will only be broadcast live online. I suspect they bought all the rights in part as a marketing move to say they are the exclusive home of NCAA championships, or something like that, even if they only show a fraction of the actual games they have rights to.

I don't have solutions, and honestly, showing the games online doesn't bother me much, although I wish the production quality was a higher. I think in 5-10 years, people won't even care about it not being on "old fashion" cable, because watching live events online is becoming more and more commonplace each day.

[KTDC]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Minnesota's governor got into the debate:

From the Facebook page of Gov. Mark Dayton: "I just watched the University of Minnesota Women’s Hockey Team lose a heartbreaker to Clarkston, 5-4, in the National Championship game. My eyes are still cross-eyed from trying to follow the puck on a 4”x6” screen, via an NCAA computer link. It’s disgraceful that no national or local television station televised the game for the National Championship."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/blogs/251937101.html

This is online at the Twin Cites newspaper, the StarTribune. Check out the comments at the bottom of the page (44 of them as of now). You can get an education on capitalism from some real sophisticates, check out the lowest common denominator, and see the danger of casting your pearls among swine!

[OldDave]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

There was an hour-long program aired recently on local public television that covered the issue of media coverage of women sports. Here's a link for those who have the time (and interest) to watch. http://www.tpt.org/?a=programs&id=23285 My take away was that attendance is the key component, which is why I keep re-upping my season tickets (well, that and the fact that I really enjoy watching the sport).

Edit: Not well done on my part. The link takes you to a seemingly blank page. Click the Past Shows button to see the show.

[Genbeau]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Better yet, attend in person.

Agreed. Unfortunately, I think that unless one has seen the sport in person and can better see the subleties and nuances of the game, I can see why they would flip the channel. It just doesn't adapt well to t.v. for the casual viewer. When they actually go to a game, my experience is, they generally love it. How many of us have heard, "I can't see the puck, are they really playing with a puck?" (Don't bring back the Fox Puck-Tracker!) It's also such a niche sport in an already shaky economy. On the men's side, attendance figures for the various conference tournaments was down 40% from last year.

[Hux]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Sorry, but there are several factual errors here.

First, The past 2 Frozen Fours have been sold out, and last year at Ridder not only were people being turned away, scalpers were getting top dollar for tickets. This year, despite what it looked like on video, they were only selling standing room tickets for a couple weeks leading up to the games.

Second, the outdoor game at TCF was not shown on BTN, and actually the women played Mankato, not Ohio State. The game was only shown online, although that feed was being shown inside Mariucci and several other "pregame" events around campus. The attendance was 6,600, not 1000-1500, although that was going to look plenty empty in a 48,000 seat stadium. It was also played at 4 in the afternoon on a Friday, with the temperatures in the single digits, and obviously most people who were about to spend another 2.5 hours out in those conditions for the mens games, not surprisingly it wasn't exactly most people's priority. It should also be noted that the Men's game also did not sell out.

But back to the larger issue, it's nowhere near as simple as saying that networks can't make money on women's hockey. While BTN did not show the TCF game, they did show a Gopher game live later in the year, and in a prime Saturday 7pm spot in the lineup, and they've been showing at least one or two live womens games a year for the past few years, and they also have been showing more games taped delayed. BTN also used the NCAA.com video from the Frozen Four to show highlights during their coverage of the B1G mens tourney.

If BTN can justify showing regular season games live, clearly there is the potential market for showing the Women's championship. There also was a market a just a few years ago, when the game was shown on TV, before ESPN got the rights. Face it, there are lots of sports networks these days, and on a Sunday Afternoon during the NCAA Basketball Tournament, no one is expecting to pull big numbers for any other sporting event.

The justification isn't market driven, though Minnesota's winning record the past few seasons certainly provide for more interest than normal. The reason women's games are on is because it was mandated by the league's institutions that there be coverage of women's events when the network was formed.

So why isn't ESPN showing it, or allowing others to purchase it? That I can't say, other than clearly it is not a priority for them. But you do need to remember that ESPN didn't go out and bid on the Women's Hockey Championship, they bought a huge package of games from the NCAA, that just happens to include college hockey. Even on the mens side, while they are doing a better job this year, even some of this years regional games will only be broadcast live online. I suspect they bought all the rights in part as a marketing move to say they are the exclusive home of NCAA championships, or something like that, even if they only show a fraction of the actual games they have rights to.

I don't have solutions, and honestly, showing the games online doesn't bother me much, although I wish the production quality was a higher. I think in 5-10 years, people won't even care about it not being on "old fashion" cable, because watching live events online is becoming more and more commonplace each day.

ESPN is a strange beast. A friend who worked there for years told me that overall the attitude towards hockey was always luke warm (heavy percentage of personnel from non-hockey regions), even when they had a contract to cover the NHL. We saw them bail out of consistent coverage on ESPN and ESPN2, including their nightly recap show, in favor of occasional games on an inconsistent schedule and an increase in college football and hoop and "entertainment" programing like poker matches.

Of course, the bigger issue is $$$$. ESPN is owned by Disney. The bean counters go where the numbers show there will be ratings and profit from ad revenue. They dropped the ball on the NHL, and we were the beneficiaries when Outdoor Life Network (which soon became Versus) picked up the contract. The heavy emphasis on NHL coverage helped build viewership and interest in the league. While the level of actual game coverage has decreased somewhat since the purchase by NBC/Comcast, the overall effect has been to greatly increase the number of viewers and fans of the sport. An added benefit has been, thanks to NBC's contract with Notre Dame, a dramatic increase in the number of college games airing on National TV.

I expect over time we will see the increase in fans of the game spread to the women's side, though I doubt very much we will see it translate into TV coverage.

[Hux]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Agreed. Unfortunately, I think that unless one has seen the sport in person and can better see the subleties and nuances of the game, I can see why they would flip the channel. It just doesn't adapt well to t.v. for the casual viewer. When they actually go to a game, my experience is, they generally love it. How many of us have heard, "I can't see the puck, are they really playing with a puck?" (Don't bring back the Fox Puck-Tracker!) It's also such a niche sport in an already shaky economy. On the men's side, attendance figures for the various conference tournaments was down 40% from last year.

True. I find it odd (though I guess it is a $$$ thing) that Northeastern can distribute an awesome hi-def web stream for its games and the NCAA cannot for a championship event.

I think that if the crowds continue to show up and "sell-out" the Championship venue we will be more likely to see TV coverage. Packed houses, even if only 3-4K create a great atmosphere and a backdrop that lends itself better to TV. It looks like an event that is worthy of coverage. Supply and demand principles apply...to a degree.

Quinny was banged out. Ridder is likely to be jammed next year as well. Unfortunately, waaaay too many people opted to stand along the concourse rail rather than be in seats, making it look like there were fewer people there than actually attended. (Same at Ridder last year)

I worry about a place the size of the Whittemore Center at UNH (6000+), with a mile of rail on the concourse to boot.

[Timothy A]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Isn't it the ncaa's fault for selling the rights to someone who has no intentions of showing it? Now nbc, cbs and fox all have sports channels, surely one of those would love to show a sport that is recognizable to the common person. The ncaa should split the rights of the different sports off or combine a few together for seperate bidding for the broadcast rights. Better yet, why haven't they just done their own channel?

[brookyone]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Isn't it the ncaa's fault for selling the rights to someone who has no intentions of showing it? Now nbc, cbs and fox all have sports channels, surely one of those would love to show a sport that is recognizable to the common person. The ncaa should split the rights of the different sports off or combine a few together for seperate bidding for the broadcast rights. Better yet, why haven't they just done their own channel?

It was CSTV that was broadcasting the FF when it first became a NCAA championship...I think. If I recall it was CBS that bought CSTV and first cancelled broadcast of semifinals, then shortly thereafter the final as well. I don't think CBS has, or had a great interest, based on that course of events. I would think best chance would be for a regional affiliate in the FOX Sports Network as a most likely candidate...such as they broadcast the occasional regional college women's ice hockey game. The only one with any interest at all in airing the sport as far as I can tell.

[Eeyore]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Isn't it the ncaa's fault for selling the rights to someone who has no intentions of showing it? Now nbc, cbs and fox all have sports channels, surely one of those would love to show a sport that is recognizable to the common person. The ncaa should split the rights of the different sports off or combine a few together for seperate bidding for the broadcast rights. Better yet, why haven't they just done their own channel?

I'm not sure why NBC, CBS, or Fox would be any more enthusiastic about showing it than ESPN is. And here, too, from the NCAA's perspective the costs of breaking up the package may well be higher than what anyone else would pay for just the women's tournament. That would involve the costs of a separate negotiation and contract writing, dealing with a different organization for implementation, monitoring compliance, and general administrative hassle. In all of these things the transaction costs are greater than zero, so zero is not the number that someone would have to beat in order to secure the rights.

The NCAA is to blame for selling the rights to someone that doesn't want to show it but that doesn't mean that not having sold those rights to ESPN would necessarily have led to someone else acquiring them.

While it is true that it wasn't that many years ago that someone wanted to broadcast the women's tournament, that also doesn't necessarily mean that anyone would want to do so now. The value of the rights to sporting events has moved in two different directions since the recession. The price broadcasters are willing to pay for marquee events has shot up, but it has actually gone down for everything else. The dirty secret of a lot of the second and third tier college football and basketball contracts involving not just the less powerful conferences but also some of the secondary games from the majors is that the schools are hardly getting paid at all for the rights and in many cases you find that the schools are effectively paying the broadcaster if you dig into enough details of the contract.

In sports like basketball and football schools are often willing to do this because they have convinced themselves, rightly or wrongly, that the exposure on television has ancillary benefits for them that make it worth the expenses involved. I have a hard time seeing the NCAA deciding that it is worth it to them to sell women's hockey rights for less than cost.

[BigAl]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Minnesota's governor got into the debate:

From the Facebook page of Gov. Mark Dayton: "I just watched the University of Minnesota Women’s Hockey Team lose a heartbreaker to Clarkston, 5-4, in the National Championship game. My eyes are still cross-eyed from trying to follow the puck on a 4”x6” screen, via an NCAA computer link. It’s disgraceful that no national or local television station televised the game for the National Championship."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/blogs/251937101.html

This is online at the Twin Cites newspaper, the StarTribune. Check out the comments at the bottom of the page (44 of them as of now). You can get an education on capitalism from some real sophisticates, check out the lowest common denominator, and see the danger of casting your pearls among swine!

First off Gov. Mark Dayton it is spelled Clarkson. I was at the game and it was awesome. I am also fairly confident Minnesota can hang with men's teams (imagine the team with their 5 Olympians)

I'm sorry but these games will not be televised in the near future. Men's Hockey is just starting to make strides when it comes to TV so I think it'll take a bit before women's does. Clarkson winning this year is a good start for women's hockey. The East must be more relevant in women's hockey for it to receive the national attention it deserves. Hockey, in general, still has a long way to go. I know a lot of people reading this are in Minnesota and you have to remember what hockey is in Minnesota is not replicated anywhere else in the country. Unfortunately, ESPN will not broadcast a championship game if it will just get an audience in Minnesota. But it's something we can all hope for in the near future

[PuckLuck81]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

First off Gov. Mark Dayton it is spelled Clarkson. I was at the game and it was awesome. I am also fairly confident Minnesota can hang with men's teams (imagine the team with their 5 Olympians)

I'm sorry but these games will not be televised in the near future. Men's Hockey is just starting to make strides when it comes to TV so I think it'll take a bit before women's does. Clarkson winning this year is a good start for women's hockey. The East must be more relevant in women's hockey for it to receive the national attention it deserves. Hockey, in general, still has a long way to go. I know a lot of people reading this are in Minnesota and you have to remember what hockey is in Minnesota is not replicated anywhere else in the country. Unfortunately, ESPN will not broadcast a championship game if it will just get an audience in Minnesota. But it's something we can all hope for in the near future

Agreed. However, Men's hockey is struggling with attendance and TV ratings as well. The conference tournaments played this weekend were down 40% over last year. I think the numbers were actually much worse than reported by the leagues and media - the old tickets sold vs number in the stands argument. There are bigger issues at stake overall with the fringe college sports - both men and women. Just be careful not to bite the hand that feeds you - ESPN, CBS, BTN and other sports networks - pay huge sums of money to televise the college football games and NCAA basketball. Those revenues are what helps fund University athletic budgets and pay for the participation sports and non-revenue sports. We should just celebrate the fact that so many additional athletes - men and women - have the opportunity to play a sport in college, regardless of whether it is on TV or not. What I am more worried about and what could really get ugly is whether the current lawsuit against the NCAA being a monopoly will be upheld, thus eliminating the NCAA altogether. Imagine a scenario where Universities would be bidding on an athletes services and players becoming free agents and changing schools. I think the NCAA is in trouble.


On Minnesota hanging with a men's team, I would suggest that Minnesota could hang with a lower end boys HS team. They would lose by 10 to the worst Men's college hockey team, Army or UAH. That really doesn't matter though as it is an unfair comparison. Different game, different players, different strength and speed, so apples and oranges. To offer proper perspective there have been games between women's teams and boys teams. The 2010 US Women's Olympic team played a series of games against Minnesota HS boys teams. Those games were even. The HS boys teams won a few and the Women's Olympic team won a few. That is a good comparison of the levels between the two genders. Mn HS boys is equivalent to US Women's Olympic team.

[Eeyore]

Re: Televise the Women's D1 National Championship Game - how do we make it happen?

Just be careful not to bite the hand that feeds you - ESPN, CBS, BTN and other sports networks - pay huge sums of money to televise the college football games and NCAA basketball. Those revenues are what helps fund University athletic budgets and pay for the participation sports and non-revenue sports. We should just celebrate the fact that so many additional athletes - men and women - have the opportunity to play a sport in college, regardless of whether it is on TV or not.

Just remember that the NCAA and its member schools can't say this in court. Over the decades, they have successfully argued in numerous lawsuits (the Marc Buoniconti case being just one) that scholarship athletes are not employees. A key element of these arguments is that generating revenue (and note that it is revenue that is key, not profit) is not in any way a significant consideration for football and basketball programs. No, that argument doesn't pass the giggle test but a number of juries and judges have found it credible and so the NCAA can't now talk in court about the importance of the revenue generated by football or basketball for other sports without invalidating their claims that athletes are not employees and even possibly exposing them to perjury charges.

Note that this is also what prevents NCAA schools from going to court and claiming that football and basketball should be excluded from Title IX considerations because without them they couldn't support women's athletics. That would be admitting that generating revenue is a significant part of those sports.

What I am more worried about and what could really get ugly is whether the current lawsuit against the NCAA being a monopoly will be upheld, thus eliminating the NCAA altogether. Imagine a scenario where Universities would be bidding on an athletes services and players becoming free agents and changing schools. I think the NCAA is in trouble.

The main reason that the NCAA is in trouble is because it pretty clearly is a cartel that is rigging the market. Why it thinks that right now is a good time to further collude with the NBA in restricting the ability of 19- and 20-year old basketball to get paid to play the sport eludes me but they seem to think that it is and so it digs the hole a bit deeper.

I'm pretty sure that the NCAA is going to lose at least some of the actions currently being pursued. I like to think that its pursuit of cash has become so blatant that no one will continue to accept that it plays no role in the proceedings. So, yes, major changes are coming. I welcome them because I think the current system is both vile and unsustainable. Oddly enough, just about the only way that they are going to be able to save the idea of scholarship limits, limits on what players can be paid above and beyond scholarships, and transfer restrictions is to accept the creation of a union that represents the athletes, because if the players are determined to be employees and thus that there is an actual labor market then collective bargaining is the only way that it is legal to impose those kinds of restrictions on a free market in labor.