ADVERTISEMENT

Peterson: ESPN woes should worry Iowa, Iowa State

hawkaeg80

HR MVP
Dec 28, 2014
1,043
1,886
113
56
Cedar Rapids
Though I don't particularly like ESPN I do watch college football on their channels (I also watch games on Fox Sports, ABC, CBS). This, as always, has to do with $.
I remember growing up watching the Hawkeye basketball team in the days when there wasn't ESPN and had their own contract with...help me out...I can't remember what the outfit was, but it was on regular TV. I never thought growing up we would have to pay for TV. They did in England and my thought back then was what idiots would pay for TV? Well, I guess I'm an idiot.
http://www.hawkcentral.com/story/sp...espn-woes-problems-iowa-iowa-state/310892001/
 
I think it was KCRG, channel 9 with Bob Hogue and Sharm Scheuerman. I think Bill Bolster was as head of KCRG at that time....

Edit....sorry, it was KWWL, not KCRG
 
giphy.gif
 
Funny to see ISU homer Peterson trying to put UI and ISU on the same level when it comes to conference and financial security. Complete joke. Iowa will be just fine. When the Big 12 contract gets to its final years and their GoR doesn't get renewed ISU may find themselves in a mid-major. They're at UT and OU mercy. Iowa is solid, B1G is solid. Nice try Randy.
 
No matter a person's feelings about ESPN, I'm not sure how this can be right. Competition for CF TV rights drives the money up. The loss of a major contributor means less competition. How does it help CF?
Doesn't necessarily help college football,but the impact will be less on the Big Ten because they have their own network. I see it hurting the Big 12 and the SEC who is tied tightly to ESPN. One must also remember that ESPN also showed a lot of tier 2 CFB particularly during the week that had very limited appeal that they paid for.While the dollars may go down, I actually see the Big Ten coming out of this better than any of the other conferences.
 
No matter a person's feelings about ESPN, I'm not sure how this can be right. Competition for CF TV rights drives the money up. The loss of a major contributor means less competition. How does it help CF?
A total destruction of ESPN isn't good. But if they get knocked down a few pegs it's a good thing. Even with their struggles of late they are still ESPN.
 
The Big Ten always will be in a better place than the rest of the conferences. Look at the population centers.
 
I think it was KCRG, channel 9 with Bob Hogue and Sharm Scheuerman. I think Bill Bolster was as head of KCRG at that time....

Edit....sorry, it was KWWL, not KCRG

In college at Iowa I worked for Carnaby Square Productions, which was the production arm of KWWL. I helped in various facets of the production and had an awesome time! Those were good times!
 
The Big Ten always will be in a better place than the rest of the conferences. Look at the population centers.

This is correct. A market correction in television rights fees would bring some level of sanity to the money involved in college and pro sports. The money won't just disappear, but the days of every new TV rights deal being bigger than the last are probably over.
 
Doesn't necessarily help college football,but the impact will be less on the Big Ten because they have their own network. I see it hurting the Big 12 and the SEC who is tied tightly to ESPN. One must also remember that ESPN also showed a lot of tier 2 CFB particularly during the week that had very limited appeal that they paid for.While the dollars may go down, I actually see the Big Ten coming out of this better than any of the other conferences.

It all depends on what the outcome is. If OSU, Michigan and Penn State push for more latitude to show some of their own games via their own deals, that will hurt Iowa. The Big Ten is helped out by having its own distribution channel in place and not having to rely on others. Big Ten can put more inventory online via BTN if needed. It could go directly to the public with an online model without depending on ESPN or Fox Sports to take its cut as part of the distribution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mustang_hawk
No matter a person's feelings about ESPN, I'm not sure how this can be right. Competition for CF TV rights drives the money up. The loss of a major contributor means less competition. How does it help CF?

if ESPN completely went away... there would still be people wanting to watch College Football.

all that would happen is a void would be created... and somebody to fill that void.

the problem with ESPN is that they have become too big... too powerful.

nobody should have too much power when it comes covering College Sports.
what happens is... with too much power... the TV people start dictating schedules... tv times... and they might even influence who coaches... where high school kids want to play.. and so forth..
Underdog-2.jpg

too much power can be a bad thing... not just in sports.

my biggest beef with ESPN is that they are pro Goliath... and anti David.
 
Does the b1g get paid when sportscenter(if its even a show anymore lol) etc shows replays? If not what does espn firing people have to do with anything?
They cut jobs because people want to watch games and not watch their BS hosts talk about games and other complete non sense! ESPN also has more competition, with more people having access to nfl/nba/mlb tv....again not sure what that has to do with Iowa!

Games draw viewers which means money. If espn doesn't want to pay up, someone else will!
 
During the Lute years, late 70's. The Iowa Basketball Network was what it was called. 5 stations, locally it was KWWL channel 7.
 
Two different topics:
First is the potential downfall of the big 12, I agree this could be disastrous for the and no impact to the Hawks.

Second is the question of television future tv contracts. If NFL, College Football, etc start moving to other mediums, what impact will it have on the broadcast rates. If ESPN $ is replaced by another network, internet source, etc. then everyone is happy. In the next decade or so, I do not see any cause for worries.

Overall the tv cash for the NFL and college football seems to be escalating quickly. His question is does the ESPN cost saving steps signal a future slowdown? A reduction? I think this would impact all of college football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mustang_hawk
Was Randy Peterson a cheerleader in high school?I do not remember a so called journalist acting in such a way.
 
Actually, they are pro-money, and anti-no money. Which is kind of the same thing. ;)
it is the same thing... however, they try to dictate where they make the money from.
for example... they believe they will make a million dollars if Alabama makes the Playoffs.
and they will...
but they would also make a million dollars if Utah makes the Playoffs...
as an Iowa Hawkeye fan... why would I find the Playoffs more compelling to watch if Alabama was in the Playoffs and not Utah?
I wouldn't...
so begs the question... why does ESPN promote Alabama over the likes of Utah?
it could be because they have an SEC Network... and their promotion of Alabama is simply advertisement for their SEC Network.
therefore you have to also consider that they are now the enemy of the likes of Utah...
and so they are invested in belittling the likes of Utah, in an effort to exalt their SEC Network.
if Utah becomes greater than Alabama... that cuts into their value of the SEC Network.
so it is incumbent for ESPN to do whatever is necessary to maintain their hierarchy with Alabama at the very top.
because lets face it... Alabama wins the SEC every year, they have nobody who can compete with them in that conference.
in 2011 we saw 2 SEC teams in the Championship Game... and who gains the most by this?... you guessed it... ESPN...
even though there was another team equally qualified for the Championship Game.. the people in power choose 2 SEC teams...
you'd be fooling yourself if you didn't think ESPN had direct influence over making that game happen..
the simple fact is, ESPN has become too powerful.
they are dictating champions.
 
it is the same thing... however, they try to dictate where they make the money from.
for example... they believe they will make a million dollars if Alabama makes the Playoffs.
and they will...
but they would also make a million dollars if Utah makes the Playoffs...
as an Iowa Hawkeye fan... why would I find the Playoffs more compelling to watch if Alabama was in the Playoffs and not Utah?
I wouldn't...
so begs the question... why does ESPN promote Alabama over the likes of Utah?
it could be because they have an SEC Network... and their promotion of Alabama is simply advertisement for their SEC Network.
therefore you have to also consider that they are now the enemy of the likes of Utah...
and so they are invested in belittling the likes of Utah, in an effort to exalt their SEC Network.
if Utah becomes greater than Alabama... that cuts into their value of the SEC Network.
so it is incumbent for ESPN to do whatever is necessary to maintain their hierarchy with Alabama at the very top.
because lets face it... Alabama wins the SEC every year, they have nobody who can compete with them in that conference.
in 2011 we saw 2 SEC teams in the Championship Game... and who gains the most by this?... you guessed it... ESPN...
even though there was another team equally qualified for the Championship Game.. the people in power choose 2 SEC teams...
you'd be fooling yourself if you didn't think ESPN had direct influence over making that game happen..
the simple fact is, ESPN has become too powerful.
they are dictating champions.

Right. They are in it to make money. And, they do what's good for them.

Shocking.:eek:
 
it is the same thing... however, they try to dictate where they make the money from.
for example... they believe they will make a million dollars if Alabama makes the Playoffs.
and they will...
but they would also make a million dollars if Utah makes the Playoffs...
as an Iowa Hawkeye fan... why would I find the Playoffs more compelling to watch if Alabama was in the Playoffs and not Utah?
I wouldn't...
so begs the question... why does ESPN promote Alabama over the likes of Utah?
it could be because they have an SEC Network... and their promotion of Alabama is simply advertisement for their SEC Network.
therefore you have to also consider that they are now the enemy of the likes of Utah...
and so they are invested in belittling the likes of Utah, in an effort to exalt their SEC Network.
if Utah becomes greater than Alabama... that cuts into their value of the SEC Network.
so it is incumbent for ESPN to do whatever is necessary to maintain their hierarchy with Alabama at the very top.
because lets face it... Alabama wins the SEC every year, they have nobody who can compete with them in that conference.
in 2011 we saw 2 SEC teams in the Championship Game... and who gains the most by this?... you guessed it... ESPN...
even though there was another team equally qualified for the Championship Game.. the people in power choose 2 SEC teams...
you'd be fooling yourself if you didn't think ESPN had direct influence over making that game happen..
the simple fact is, ESPN has become too powerful.
they are dictating champions.
I don't know that their dictating champions, but they surely have a couple fingers in the pie.
 
Funny to see ISU homer Peterson trying to put UI and ISU on the same level when it comes to conference and financial security. Complete joke. Iowa will be just fine. When the Big 12 contract gets to its final years and their GoR doesn't get renewed ISU may find themselves in a mid-major. They're at UT and OU mercy. Iowa is solid, B1G is solid. Nice try Randy.
You guys don't seem to get it. Iowa has the same limitations as ISU. They are rustbelt schools in a small market with no metro areas to draw from. On the flip side, both are AAU and highly respected in their areas of expertise. In the eyes of athletic power brokers, both are similar in appeal.
 
You guys don't seem to get it. Iowa has the same limitations as ISU. They are rustbelt schools in a small market with no metro areas to draw from. On the flip side, both are AAU and highly respected in their areas of expertise. In the eyes of athletic power brokers, both are similar in appeal.
You are full of crap the BIG 10 is a cash cow(see BTN)for Iowa and the BIG 12 doesn't even have their own network.Within 10 years the better schools of the BIG 12(i.e.not ISU)will be in other leagues and the remaining will be in the Mountain West and MAC..
 
You are full of crap the BIG 10 is a cash cow(see BTN)for Iowa and the BIG 12 doesn't even have their own network.Within 10 years the better schools of the BIG 12(i.e.not ISU)will be in other leagues and the remaining will be in the Mountain West and MAC..
You think it is about leagues. You still don't get it. There may be a day when the schools have to stand on their own with all warts exposed and see where the chips fall. If there is a major overhaul in collegiate athletics, do you think OSU & Mich will give a shit about what happens to Iowa? Iowa is at near the bottom of the pecking order in the B10 just like ISU is in the B12. You can deny it all you want, but it doesn't change Iowa's limitations.
 
You are full of crap the BIG 10 is a cash cow(see BTN)for Iowa and the BIG 12 doesn't even have their own network.Within 10 years the better schools of the BIG 12(i.e.not ISU)will be in other leagues and the remaining will be in the Mountain West and MAC..
You think it is about leagues. You still don't get it. There may be a day when the schools have to stand on their own with all warts exposed and see where the chips fall. If there is a major overhaul in collegiate athletics, do you think OSU & Mich will give a shit about what happens to Iowa? Iowa is at near the bottom of the pecking order in the B10 just like ISU is in the B12. You can deny it all you want, but it doesn't change Iowa's limitations.
Clearly , you are the one who doesn't get it.
 
Oh no the douche is back. Dude, you and the Clones, including Randy, need to stoop trying to get on our shoulders and claim you are tall. The Big 10 is by far the most prestigious and profitable conference. And unlike the Big 12 (funny you only have 10), the Big 10 gains teams while the Big 12 has lost what 4 teams?! Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri and A&M bailed. While I was not a big fan of adding Rutgers and Maryland, it brings the east coast. So the Big 10 now has foothold markets everywhere but LA, the southeast and Texas. Peterson is just a jealous puppy for the little brother. Sorry Clowns the Big 10 is not going anywhere but the Big 12 is going down.
 
if ESPN completely went away... there would still be people wanting to watch College Football.

all that would happen is a void would be created... and somebody to fill that void.

the problem with ESPN is that they have become too big... too powerful.

nobody should have too much power when it comes covering College Sports.
what happens is... with too much power... the TV people start dictating schedules... tv times... and they might even influence who coaches... where high school kids want to play.. and so forth..
Underdog-2.jpg

too much power can be a bad thing... not just in sports.

my biggest beef with ESPN is that they are pro Goliath... and anti David.
Have no fear, Underdog is here!
 
  • Like
Reactions: thirteenandtwo
You guys don't seem to get it. Iowa has the same limitations as ISU. They are rustbelt schools in a small market with no metro areas to draw from. On the flip side, both are AAU and highly respected in their areas of expertise. In the eyes of athletic power brokers, both are similar in appeal.
You think it is about leagues. You still don't get it. There may be a day when the schools have to stand on their own with all warts exposed and see where the chips fall. If there is a major overhaul in collegiate athletics, do you think OSU & Mich will give a shit about what happens to Iowa? Iowa is at near the bottom of the pecking order in the B10 just like ISU is in the B12. You can deny it all you want, but it doesn't change Iowa's limitations.
Well there's certainly someone here who doesn't get it, or your just ignorant or high. Haven't figured out which yet. So The University of Iowa, and ISU have the same limitations when it comes to NCAA football. Cmon dude. So OSU and Michigan don't care about Iowa? So when these power brokers spurn all these no account schools, who do you think their going to play? By accounts in national publications Iowa is somewhere between 25 and 40 when it comes to their relevance now and historically. These big name schools are going to have teams on their schedule and the top 60 to 65 schools are not going anywhere. Now ISU is a different story, as they rank somewhere in the 90's, so I doubt they'd be showing up on any major's schedule. The BIG has been an excellent example that the high tide floats all boats. In other words its in OSU's best interest share the wealth. This is another reason the BIG is successful, in direct contrast to the issues with the Texas 10. Keep hoping though, its what you have to hold onto.
 
KC - don't even bother with the Clones and their fans. Randy is just as insane. Like I said trying to either pump themselves up or down by trying to align with Iowa. So delusional and odiotic. Iowa is in the top 25 in the country historically in football, basketball and name recognition. ISU is in the 50's in basketball and 90's in football and basically unknown out of Story County and on CF. Plus, they are only an engineering and vet school with zero diversity. Iowa has all the graduate programs including Top 20 in law and medicine which is huge for land grant schools. And the Clones make fun of all the Chicago suburb grads that go to Iowa. You know what idiots, many of those grads go back to Chicago as well as other large cities because they are marketable which is in part why Iowa has a national following and ISU will quickly be in the MAC.
 
KC - don't even bother with the Clones and their fans. Randy is just as insane. Like I said trying to either pump themselves up or down by trying to align with Iowa. So delusional and odiotic. Iowa is in the top 25 in the country historically in football, basketball and name recognition. ISU is in the 50's in basketball and 90's in football and basically unknown out of Story County and on CF. Plus, they are only an engineering and vet school with zero diversity. Iowa has all the graduate programs including Top 20 in law and medicine which is huge for land grant schools. And the Clones make fun of all the Chicago suburb grads that go to Iowa. You know what idiots, many of those grads go back to Chicago as well as other large cities because they are marketable which is in part why Iowa has a national following and ISU will quickly be in the MAC.

There are many idiotic things that clones say, but this has always been one of my faves. Yeah, what a horrible thing, having people from the larger world interested in your world-class University. Story county and the immediate surrounding area is where it's at.
 
Drummer - you are 100 percent correct. So people from outside Iowa want to go to Iowa, pay out of state tuition, and help diversify the entire state and this is a bad thing? Many of us are from out of state but now live here. And Iowa is one of the most progressive and diverse schools in the country. And once again exactly why ISU fans and Randy are so clueless. We are a nationally relevant school outside of just sports where we are also clearly relevant. It really is so pathetic that Randy Peterson writes an article trying to put Iowa in the same picture with Iowa State when it comes to the future. Randy - The Big 12 is done and ISU isn't landing anywhere close to resembling a good conference. And great reporting Randy. You compare the contract the Big 12 has with ESPN versus the Big 10 showing how much more money ESPN is into the Big 12. Well 2 problems there Randy. First, that means if ESPN goes down that hurts the Big 12 more than the Big 10. Second, ever heard of the Big 10 network and revenue it generates? What an f-in idiot. Is he senile?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DixieHawkeye
You guys don't seem to get it. Iowa has the same limitations as ISU. They are rustbelt schools in a small market with no metro areas to draw from. On the flip side, both are AAU and highly respected in their areas of expertise. In the eyes of athletic power brokers, both are similar in appeal.

You don't seem to understand that as long as Iowa is in the B1G, our future is secure. The B1G isn't going anywhere, and Iowa will always be a valued member. Same can't be said of the Big 12. If the Big 12 folds, ISU is screwed. No P5 conference is going to take them, for the very reasons you mentioned... small market, no TVs, etc. To try aligning Iowa and ISU's fate as it relates to conference and financial stability is stupid and desperate.
 
ADVERTISEMENT