It's been more than three months since the Big Ten Network's launch, and television viewers are still calling on network president Mark Silverman for better access to the conference's "grand vision."
Sport networks like the Big Ten's were supposed to revolutionize television for its watchers. All of "Big Ten Country," before the states in the Southeastern Conference (SEC), before any other region, was to behold the bounty of games a single-conference network could provide. Instead, Silverman hears the groans of Comcast customers, who have been without the network all season as Comcast and the Big Ten fight through a bitter dispute.
The Big Ten wants Comcast to carry the network on its basic cable plan, but Comcast has been only open to carrying it on its sports-tier package.
Through the battle, Silverman continues to hear the complaints.
"Why can't you get a deal done with Comcast?" one subscriber might ask, as his college football team is blacked-out on television that week. "I can't switch to DirecTV," they complain, as a tree in the backyard would block a satellite dish.
In Centre County, where Comcast is the area's largest cable provider, many Penn State football fans missed an away game against Illinois. And as long as Comcast rejects proposals to carry the Big Ten Network, fans will continue to call on Silverman.
"And that is, to me, the most frustrating part of my job," Silverman said, "because there is nothing I can tell these people."
But the Big Ten Network isn't a novel idea and the distribution battles that follow are nothing new. A year ago, the Mountain West Sports Network (The Mtn.) hit airwaves to be carried by its co-owner, Comcast, only to have DirecTV and Dish Network shut out the network. To this day, The Mtn. has no distribution agreements with either satellite company.
If a network could put itself on TV, like those across the Big Ten's eight states, maybe Silverman could foresee a clearer future for conference-focused networks. Yet forming a network is intricate. Schools need to buy the idea, broadcast rights to games have to be available, and, most importantly, someone has to air the product.
Now, other conferences are watching the progress of the Big Ten's "grand vision," wondering whether it will fulfill that destiny -- or if business as usual will render such networks an empty mirage. For now, everyone, even Silverman, has to wait and see.
"I don't really think within the next five years or so you will see any more than the SEC Network and maybe one other one that will try," Silverman said. "I don't think it is going to be as commonplace as some people are speculating."
Money Matters
TV experts are looking upon the Big Ten Network to set a precedent of whether such a niche network can survive.
What if other NCAA conferences are ready to hit the airwaves with networks? SEC spokesman Charles Bloom said the conference is "in the process of determining whether a network would be in the best interest of the SEC and its member institutions," but the earliest it might launch is the 2009-2010 academic year.
Could the SEC, Big 12, Pac-10 and other conferences eventually join the Big Ten Network and The Mtn., to outnumber ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPN Regional? Or could "The Worldwide Leader in Sports" produce a conference network of its own?
"These things have enough of an appeal that ESPN and all of the other networks want to cash in on it," Syracuse communications professor and popular television expert Robert Thompson said. "We could get to a point in five to 10 years where we can have lots of channels dedicated to individual teams and conferences."
Proof of Fox Cable Network's desire to control the Big Ten Network is in its 20-year pact with the conference. It's a deal heavily front-loaded in the Big Ten's favor.
For every conference game it broadcasts, Fox has to pay the Big Ten rights fees. Additionally, the TV giant must fully fund the network until it can support itself. At the same time, the Big Ten still gives ABC/ESPN (owned by Disney) first choice of football and basketball games to air for another rights fee.
Because of huge profits the Big Ten garners from partnering with ABCs of the world, Silverman said the conference would probably never move a game normally aired on ABC/ESPN -- like Penn State-Ohio State -- and broadcast it on the Big Ten Network.
Regardless of cost, a media conglomerate like ESPN hankers for the prestige that comes with owning sports coverage. Events called "loss leaders," or programs that cost more to produce than advertising could ever make back, are broadcast because they add value to the station's overall brand by attracting more viewers.
For example, ESPN bought exclusive rights to an unknown product like Arena Football hoping to make a profit on it. Even if money isn't made in the short-term, it is another piece no one else has. The more programs a company owns, the more advertising it can pull in, the more muscle it wields in future rights negotiations with cable companies.
With that formula in mind, high school sports could one day have a separate network, Thompson speculated. It was once rumored that the mother of amateur competition, the Olympic Games, would create a network.
"There will be an Olympic Network," said TV expert Jimmy Schaeffler, who quickly added to "never use the words 'never, will or always' " when talking about the television industry.
The speculation, though wavering, stems from a basic principle. If enough people want to watch, television companies are not shy about spending money.
NBC (owned by General Electric) shelled out $2.2 billion to purchase broadcast rights to the 2010 and 2012 Olympics.
CBS bought College Sports Television (CSTV) for $325 million in 2005. That's a bargain in TV money, as CBS signed an 11-year contract for rights to the NCAA men's basketball tournament and spent $360 million for just 2003's "March Madness."
By 2012-13, CBS will pay a $764 million annual rights fee for the same tournament.
But as the prices go up, the number of buyers go down. Media powers like Fox and cable providers like Comcast rule the market. Potential networks always deal with familiar foes when meeting at the negotiating table for carriage (household distribution).
Big Ten partner Fox is owned by News Corporation, which owns satellite provider DirecTV, a Big Network distributor. The Mtn. partnered with Comcast and CSTV, and, naturally, Comcast airs the network on its basic cable packages in the Mountain West region.
As The Mtn. goes into its second year of fruitless negotiations with satellite providers, Kim Carver, The Mtn.'s general manager, said she won't "negotiate through the press" like the Big Ten Network.
She did, however, say most networks face similar troubles when looking for distribution in the first few years. While the wrath of die-hard college sports fans highlights the negative of those who can't watch, Carver optimistically said she would advise other conferences to "go for it" and create a network.
Will the other NCAA conferences follow her lead?
"Million dollar question," Carver said. "I think so. I think it's a direction a lot of conferences will eventually look to go to. When you have a network dedicated 24-hours a day to your conference, you can really get invested into it."
Seeking Approval
As negotiations with Comcast remain non-existent, theories loop through Silverman's head.
What if Comcast is bitter because the Big Ten Network partnered with Fox? Couldn't be, he says, but what if the nation's largest cable provider is using his network as leverage in an attempt to partner with the SEC to form its conference network? Maybe.
"[Comcast] can sit there, look at the SEC and dare them. 'Yeah, go ahead, partner with Fox or somebody else, you are not going to get carriage,' " Silverman said. "I really do think to an extent, they are holding the network and the Big Ten, they are holding us hostage until the SEC figures out what they are doing."
For his own sanity, Silverman hopes he has heard correctly and the SEC has set an early 2008 deadline to find a partner. But he knows all conferences need to "get their ducks in a row" when it comes to the network debate.
Last year, Big 12 officials discussed a potential network for months. Kevin Weiberg, league commissioner at the time, was its main proponent.
He reminded university presidents that a conference network broadcasts sports rarely seen on TV, such as soccer, wrestling, volleyball, lacrosse and track and field. Advocates of airing women's sports could hop onboard.
"[Forming a network] is a great opportunity to try and brand your conference," Weiberg said.
Weiberg took the reigns of the Big 12 in 1998, two years after the Big Eight merged with four Texas schools from the now-defunct Southwest Conference. He had raised league revenues to $106 million through television deals with ABC/ESPN.
Last year, Weiberg was asking his membership to trust each other, despite a short working relationship, to create a network. He needed all 12 schools to give up individual television rights.
While the Big 12 sold national telecasts to bigger networks, leftover basketball and football games were handed down to schools like Texas to be auctioned off to regional stations for another rights fees. In the Big Ten model, all television rights and subsequent revenues are owned by the conference and redistributed evenly to member institutions.
A sports program like Oklahoma could make more TV money than Baylor in the Big 12 system, creating television money for bigger athletic departments to thrive.
When Weiberg finished talking, Big 12 university presidents still favored their way. Before resigning in June, Weiberg oversaw new TV deals with ABC/ESPN to lock up the conference's broadcasts through the 2015-2016 academic year.
Coincidentally, Weiberg's new job is as Silverman's vice president of university planning and development at the Big Ten Network.
"I thought it was an interesting opportunity," he said, " ... It is kind of a wave of the future, I think."
Other conferences are not so sure yet. Duane Lindberg, the Pac-10's associate commissioner for electronic communications, said his conference considered a network before signing five-year agreements with ABC/ESPN and Fox SportsNet (FSN) in the spring.
It's not clear if taking one small step away from established television models is worth it. Both the Big Ten Network and The Mtn. have yet to reach profitability.
"When we were going through our process of negotiations we most certainly looked at [forming a network]," Lindberg said. "But we determined it wasn't something we really wanted to go forward with.
"These are interesting times. There are models that will be tested and tried, and we will just sit back and see how things turn out."
Risky Business
To run a business, Silverman needs viewers.
Viewers pay cable companies, which pay the Big Ten Network to air its programming. Comcast brings more than 24 million televisions to the table.
What hits Silverman in the gut most is the struggle that comes with extending the Big Ten Network's viewership past 30 million households.
Silverman doesn't even want to challenge ESPN with the Big Ten Network. ESPN dominates the all-sports domain, as more than 100 million households internationally are tuning in. Nobody is really looking to compete with "The World Wide Leader."
"If we could be considered the ESPN of the Big Ten, that would be fantastic," Silverman said. "I don't want to reach all of the fans with all of the sports. I want it to be, 'Here is your fill of all the 11 Big Ten schools.' "
The Big Ten Network is admittedly geared toward a niche audience. Carver loves her job at The Mtn. more than a previous gig with STAR Television in Hong Kong because she doesn't have to worry about broadcasting material to an audience base that stretches from India to Taiwan. Students even produce some of these conference networks' cheaper programming.
At Penn State, students can enroll in Comm 497F (Big Ten Network), which requires them to produce at least two half-hour programs that will run on the network.
But Comcast doesn't want to air that, or Penn State-Buffalo, on its extended basic programming, or the first 60-70 channels on a regular cable box. It asks, why can't the Big Ten Network be bought on a sports tier like the NFL Network, which reaches 43.8 million households?
"We have stated from Day 1, we want to carry the [Big Ten] Network, but on a sports tier," Comcast spokesman Jeff Alexander said. "That would give customers a choice instead of charging an extra $13 per year in Big Ten tax."
The Big Ten Network finds itself among the Golf Channel, the Fox Soccer Channel, and G4, a station committed to video games. Networks like SPEED, focused solely on automotive sports, are not out of the ordinary. But some are on a sports tier package, some are not.
Silverman has maintained that the Big Ten Network deserves extended basic in the conference's eight states, and Comcast could shift it to a sports tier outside of the region after basketball season.
True sports tier subscriptions, Silverman said, wouldn't cover the network's costs for its HD telecasts, because it requires a consumer to buy a digital box. Eventually, the network has to make enough money to become self-sufficient.
If the Big Ten Network bent and took the sports tier with Comcast, Silverman said it would also force the network to tear up every contract it has with other providers.
"They know we don't come close to covering our costs," Silverman said, "because they are in the same industry we are, but it's an interesting thing for them to hide behind, for them to say, 'We are not going to carry it.' "
The Mountain West conference has gone as far to hire an attorney, entertainment industry specialist Kelly Crabb -- writer of the book "The Movie Business" and co-counsel for the Beijing Olympic Organizing Committee -- to assist in getting The Mtn. carriage from satellite providers.
"All of us have reason to be frustrated," Carver said. "We want everyone in the world to be able to see [The Mtn.]. If you don't have cable, you have a problem."
Silverman said the Big Ten Network might consider a similar legal action if cable issues flow over into next year.
If he still has to talk about Comcast negotiations at this time next year, Silverman said he would almost be speechless. Even during his time as general manager and senior vice president at ABC, he hasn't had this much drama.
Said Silverman of the feud with Comcast, if it's an issue next fall: "It would be the worst issue in my professional career."
"I do think [legal action] is a possibility. Members of Congress could get involved, if there is enough of an outrage from fans," he added. "I am not anticipating any types of legal proceedings from our side yet. We want to negotiate with the networks.
"We hopefully want to get them engaged with us. But down the road, fans are going to see this."
