Georgetown sells multimedia rights to Fox Sports

[DFW HOYA]

Jun 21, 2015 10:47:22 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Unless you want to quote a Grantland Rice piece, or inflate the importance of the first Final Four appearance, MCI is correct

Unless he chooses to ignore...

• A nationally regarded track program at the turn of the 20th century, which featured Bernard Wefers, who was given the title "the world's fastest human" in papers all over the world with a 9.8 time in the 100 yard dash, a record which stood for 20 years;
• The 1922 national champions in baseball, with a 22-1 record;
• The national clay court champion in tennis in 1929;
• Two NCAA champions in men's golf within eight years in the 1930's, becoming only the third school outside the Ivies at the time to have ever won the NCAA title
• Fifty alumni selected to NFL rosters within the first 30 seasons of the league;
• A Georgetown track athlete named one of three UPI Men's Athletes of the Year in 1941, alongside Joe Louis and Ben Hogan--outpointing Ted Williams'.406 BA and DiMaggio's 56 game hit streak...

Because if you haven't heard of these accomplishments, they all share one thing in common: they occurred before the age of television. When Hunter Guthrie S.J. proudly proclaimed that "We did not want the clean, patrician features of Georgetown" disfigured by big-time sports, he consigned two decades of athletics at Georgetown to a distinctly regional focus, where a win over NYU was a big deal, and where, as the last major Catholic college not to integrate, was an anomaly in college athletics well into the mid-1960's. As far as the rest of the country saw it, Georgetown was a school for aspiring diplomats and not a place for nationally competitive athletes.

But prior to 1951, Georgetown enjoyed a healthy national reputation. Guthrie saw Georgetown more along the lines as a Washington version of St. Joseph's University, which is where he ended up after being removed from the GU presidency a year later.

[And note: no reference to Grantland Rice or the 1943 Final Four needed.]

[MCIGuy]

Let me clarify my point of view: by being nationally relevant in athletics means to me that the nation is aware of your achievements you made over a number of years. And by nation I only mean those that keep up with sports.

I wasn't suggesting that Gtown never did anything of note outside of the modern day basketball team. I'm implying that the ONLY thing that sports fans in America ever noticed about Georgetown athletics achieving over a period of time is the bball program after John Thompson Jr took over. I didn't include the bball team that went to the Final Four in the 40s because 1) from what I have learned that basketball program, outside of that season, wasn't all that successful and 2) back then I believe the NIT, not the NCAA tourney, was the bigger deal. So even though I was not living round that period of time I tend to doubt most sports fans knew much of anything about Georgetown hoops (basketball was not as big a deal in that era anyway).

I did give some consideration to the successful track and field program of the 80s and 90s but even with that one must admit that it didn't rival the attention-grabbing headlines from the SEC or Pac 10 (or was it * back then?) programs. And track doesn't get much media attention anyway.

To become athletically relevant nationwide one must build a brand name that even casual sports fans are aware of. This is hard to do in sports outside football and men and women's basketball, although not entirely impossible. What Gtown program other than the men's basketball has gotten to a point that the average sports fan immediately recognizes it for its successful run or glorious history?

[DanMcQ]

The soccer programs are on their way to consistent national recognition. In fact, as Elvado pointed out, TWO Georgetown grads started for the Revolution this past week.

(Spare me the expected soccer isn't relevant replies - I'm well aware of that bias).

[DFW HOYA]

Jun 21, 2015 19:29:46 GMT -5 DanMcQ said:

The soccer programs are on their way to consistent national recognition. In fact, as Elvado pointed out, TWO Georgetown grads started for the Revolution this past week.

(Spare me the expected soccer isn't relevant replies - I'm well aware of that bias).

Bias spared.

But even soccer is not making headway in the one measurement of national recognition--the amount of coverage ESPN develops to a sport. In this measurement, at least, Bernard Muir was ahead of his time for suggesting Georgetown should get behind baseball and softball because that's where the TV coverage was headed. Instead, Georgetown has zero TV visibility in these sports and the number of graduating seniors which has ever seen their own school's teams play at Shirley Povich Field or Guy Mason Park may be in the low two digits.

Meanwhile, building national interest in lacrosse is not going well--TV ratings for the lacrosse final dropped 50 percent this year, drawing a 0.2 rating--fewer viewers than the NCAA wrestling championships.

[DanMcQ]

Jun 21, 2015 19:59:24 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

Jun 21, 2015 19:29:46 GMT -5 DanMcQ said:

The soccer programs are on their way to consistent national recognition. In fact, as Elvado pointed out, TWO Georgetown grads started for the Revolution this past week.

(Spare me the expected soccer isn't relevant replies - I'm well aware of that bias).

Bias spared.

But even soccer is not making headway in the one measurement of national recognition--the amount of coverage ESPN develops to a sport. In this measurement, at least, Bernard Muir was ahead of his time for suggesting Georgetown should get behind baseball and softball because that's where the TV coverage was headed. Instead, Georgetown has zero TV visibility in these sports and the number of graduating seniors which has ever seen their own school's teams play at Shirley Povich Field or Guy Mason Park may be in the low two digits.

Meanwhile, building national interest in lacrosse is not going well--TV ratings for the lacrosse final dropped 50 percent this year, drawing a 0.2 rating--fewer viewers than the NCAA wrestling championships.

Well, setting aside mixed agendas (i.e., the number of graduating seniors who have ever seen their own baseball team play a home game is really not related to whether said team gets coverage on ESPN), Georgetown has hitched its athletic wagon to Fox and in that sense getting covered by ESPN will have more to do with how successful those teams are and whether they get into NCAA tournaments (mostly broadcast by ESPN). To the extent that the Fox relationship provides $$ to improve the athletic department as a whole one would hope it would float all boats (as it were). The baseball team playing on campus has more to do with the campus development plan, currently being discussed in another thread (as you know). Bernard may have been prescient, but he also had his eyes set westward at Stanford, which has had a top 10 baseball team for decades.

[MCIGuy]

Jun 21, 2015 19:29:46 GMT -5 DanMcQ said:

The soccer programs are on their way to consistent national recognition. In fact, as Elvado pointed out, TWO Georgetown grads started for the Revolution this past week.

(Spare me the expected soccer isn't relevant replies - I'm well aware of that bias).

Wasn't going to dismiss soccer. The UNC's women team has developed a well earned national reputation based upon its success.

[seaweed]

Jun 21, 2015 14:20:28 GMT -5 MCIGuy said:

Let me clarify my point of view: by being nationally relevant in athletics means to me that the nation is aware of your achievements you made over a number of years. And by nation I only mean those that keep up with sports.

I think you limited your paradigm so as to support your premise. "Those that keep up with sports" is essentially a way of saying mainstream popular media viewers. In many ways in our lifetimes, that has meant those who watch whatever ESPN is providing. With FoxSports trying to shift that phenomenon, naturally they will have to appeal to those "fans" but also will have to shift the viewers focus to material that they can provide in the face of ESPN's 30 year head start on locking down content. As long as ESPN is the gold standard for what "those who keep up with sports" watch, nobody can crack into your group of "nationally relevance" without ESPN's support, which we are not going to get. So FS shifts the focus, maybe gradually, while at the same time it adds more "mainstream" content.

Look at it from a different view and we are nationally relevant in many sports. Many high school all Americans in track, lacrosse or soccer are thrilled to come to GU. Sailing is considered one of the top programs nationally and I can personally say I was lobbied hard by a prominent local sailor and his family this year in an effort to get in to GU (they knew a lot more about sailing than they did about my clout). The same can probably be said about other programs of which I am less aware personally. Rugby and ultimate are two of the most popular games on HS campuses these days and none gets a scrap of media coverage, but both are strong club programs at GU that draw kids who want to keep sports a part of their lives but not the all-consuming focus of their university careers.

If you only talk about people who "keep up with " sports as a general phenomenon, i.e. mainstream viewers, you limit the target group to those who follow sports currently popular with the media. If you look at the members of any given sports community, you see GU's brand in a more positive light. Maybe sailing doesn't matter to you, but it is big business to those who participate and they know GU is a major player in the sport. The beauty of the FS deal is that targeted marketing within smaller communities like that transition "unpopular" (i.e. no ESPN coverage) sports into "media darlings."

In short, those who watch it on TV may not know us as much as you want, but those who are out there doing it every day respect our brand.

[MCIGuy]

Jun 22, 2015 8:41:16 GMT -5 seaweed said:

Jun 21, 2015 14:20:28 GMT -5 MCIGuy said:

I think you limited your paradigm so as to support your premise.

Actually by limiting it I made it easier for those who think Gtown has a slew of programs that are highly thought of nation-wide. I would have set too difficult a standard if I had set a criteria in which even non-sports fans had to be aware of the teams' reputations. Non sports fans are aware of the Yankees, and know that the New England patriots won a bunch of Super Bowls and that Duke basketball is a pretty big deal. I don't expect those folks, ones who don't follow sports, to know ANYTHING about Georgetown athletics other than possibly the men's basketball program.

Instead my argument only asks for sports fans, even relatively knowledgeable ones, to know about Hoya programs outside of the men's basketball teams. No, I do not think such fans only pay attention to ESPN. Plenty of sports fans still get their info from newspapers as well as blogs and radio broadcasts that are not associated with ESPN at all. And IMO you would be hard press to find many of these sports fans, whether those who follow ESPN or those who don't, who have any inkling about the accomplishments of Georgetown athletics outside the hoops teams. But again...this is only an opinion. I'm sorry if that upsets some of you because that wasn't my intent.

[DanMcQ]

Jun 22, 2015 4:22:05 GMT -5 MCIGuy said:

Jun 21, 2015 19:29:46 GMT -5 DanMcQ said:

The soccer programs are on their way to consistent national recognition. In fact, as Elvado pointed out, TWO Georgetown grads started for the Revolution this past week.

(Spare me the expected soccer isn't relevant replies - I'm well aware of that bias).

Wasn't going to dismiss soccer. The UNC's women team has developed a well earned national reputation based upon its success.

Wasn't trying to say you were, just bringing them up as part of the discussion.

[seaweed]

So you picked the appropriate measure to support your opinion. No big deal, but you gave zero consideration in your response to the alternate paradigm I suggested.

Non-sports fans are aware of the Yankees, Patriots and Blue Devils. Not all main stream sports fans are influenced by ESPN alone. Fine points, though I would argue you cannot find another media outlet of national relevance in sports. By your measure, I think the "average American" still thinks of USC as a powerhouse in college football. Fact is we still have one brand that is relevant to the non-sports fan, which is more than many schools can say. This includes our entire conference, not one of which has a single program with as valuable a brand as GU Hoops by your measure.

But I stand by the original point - To define 'national relevance' as "known to the nation of mainstream sports fans" is way too limited. In essence, you are saying that everything except commercial pro sports, March Madness and college football is not relevant (and probably never will be because they won't get main stream media coverage). To illustrate, ask yourself how many people, even in the small universe of "sports fans" know the teams in this years College World Series. If you can't name two or three, you are either not a "national sports fan" or you are proving my (side)point that ESPN determines relevance under your standard. I prefer my measure of "relevant within the national community that participates in and/or follows that sport." Sailing, field hockey, soccer, ultimate, rugby, college golf and tennis - none of these will ever matter by your measure. But they will generate media revenue, they will get "coverage" on a smaller scale and many have massive fan bases with ideal demographics for advertisers. More importantly, they will enrich the lives of 1000s of GU students.

[aleutianhoya]

I'm not sure the framing of the discussion really matters. Isn't the issue more simply that the average American sports fan (let alone the average American) doesn't give a hoot about any collegiate sport aside from men's basketball and football? Sure, women's basketball gets some publicity and attention, and the average fan there probably knows the schools that have been the most consistently excellent (Tenn., UConn, etc.), but that's fairly limited. Maybe the average fan knows that Cuse is historically good in men's lacrosse, or Oregon in track, or whatever, but that's one or two schools (at most) in these ancillary sports. That's an impossible standard.

What does the average American sports fan think of when it thinks of Purdue? Maybe some impression of their men's basketball and football programs because that's all that's relevant nationally. Or, even a Duke or Virginia or Stanford or Notre Dame (schools that have wide-ranging success) -- does anyone think that Joe Blow down the street really knows about their wide-ranging success? I don't believe so.

Promotion, financial resources, etc. may be a necessary precondition to national relevance, but I don't believe it's sufficient in and of itself. I'm not sure anything is sufficient!

[kchoya]

Jun 21, 2015 13:13:52 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

Jun 21, 2015 10:47:22 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Unless you want to quote a Grantland Rice piece, or inflate the importance of the first Final Four appearance, MCI is correct

Unless he chooses to ignore...

• A nationally regarded track program at the turn of the 20th century, which featured Bernard Wefers, who was given the title "the world's fastest human" in papers all over the world with a 9.8 time in the 100 yard dash, a record which stood for 20 years;
• The 1922 national champions in baseball, with a 22-1 record;
• The national clay court champion in tennis in 1929;
• Two NCAA champions in men's golf within eight years in the 1930's, becoming only the third school outside the Ivies at the time to have ever won the NCAA title
• Fifty alumni selected to NFL rosters within the first 30 seasons of the league;
• A Georgetown track athlete named one of three UPI Men's Athletes of the Year in 1941, alongside Joe Louis and Ben Hogan--outpointing Ted Williams'.406 BA and DiMaggio's 56 game hit streak...

Because if you haven't heard of these accomplishments, they all share one thing in common: they occurred before the age of television. When Hunter Guthrie S.J. proudly proclaimed that "We did not want the clean, patrician features of Georgetown" disfigured by big-time sports, he consigned two decades of athletics at Georgetown to a distinctly regional focus, where a win over NYU was a big deal, and where, as the last major Catholic college not to integrate, was an anomaly in college athletics well into the mid-1960's. As far as the rest of the country saw it, Georgetown was a school for aspiring diplomats and not a place for nationally competitive athletes.

But prior to 1951, Georgetown enjoyed a healthy national reputation. Guthrie saw Georgetown more along the lines as a Washington version of St. Joseph's University, which is where he ended up after being removed from the GU presidency a year later.

[And note: no reference to Grantland Rice or the 1943 Final Four needed.]

I guess it depends on what your definition of "nationally relevant" is. I take the to mean the school's athletics program is known to the general public, not just hard core sports fans. Under that definition, UNC athletics is not relevant because of what Anson Dorrance and his teams did. Iowa athletics is not relevant because of Dan Gable and his teams. In fact, Hawkeye athletics are probably more well known for the pink locker room(s) in Kinnick Stadium.

There are really only two sports that lead to a "healthy national reputation," football and basketball.

[bigelephant]

I support this move 110% And as far as O'Reilly, I rather have Greta - she at least taught at the Law School. Is she an alumna?
Run with the best I always say.

[TBird41]

Jun 21, 2015 13:13:52 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

Jun 21, 2015 10:47:22 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Unless you want to quote a Grantland Rice piece, or inflate the importance of the first Final Four appearance, MCI is correct

Unless he chooses to ignore...

• A nationally regarded track program at the turn of the 20th century, which featured Bernard Wefers, who was given the title "the world's fastest human" in papers all over the world with a 9.8 time in the 100 yard dash, a record which stood for 20 years;
• The 1922 national champions in baseball, with a 22-1 record;
• The national clay court champion in tennis in 1929;
• Two NCAA champions in men's golf within eight years in the 1930's, becoming only the third school outside the Ivies at the time to have ever won the NCAA title
• Fifty alumni selected to NFL rosters within the first 30 seasons of the league;
• A Georgetown track athlete named one of three UPI Men's Athletes of the Year in 1941, alongside Joe Louis and Ben Hogan--outpointing Ted Williams'.406 BA and DiMaggio's 56 game hit streak...

Because if you haven't heard of these accomplishments, they all share one thing in common: they occurred before the age of television. When Hunter Guthrie S.J. proudly proclaimed that "We did not want the clean, patrician features of Georgetown" disfigured by big-time sports, he consigned two decades of athletics at Georgetown to a distinctly regional focus, where a win over NYU was a big deal, and where, as the last major Catholic college not to integrate, was an anomaly in college athletics well into the mid-1960's. As far as the rest of the country saw it, Georgetown was a school for aspiring diplomats and not a place for nationally competitive athletes.

But prior to 1951, Georgetown enjoyed a healthy national reputation. Guthrie saw Georgetown more along the lines as a Washington version of St. Joseph's University, which is where he ended up after being removed from the GU presidency a year later.

[And note: no reference to Grantland Rice or the 1943 Final Four needed.]

How was our horse racing program?

[CaliHoya]

Given how tied Georgetown now is to Fox Sports, everyone should be rooting for the US Women's National Team. They are setting records for viewership on FS1, hopefully making it more likely casual sports viewers will start checking the channel out:

www.mlssoccer.com/womensworldcup/2015/news/article/2015/06/24/uswnt-victory-colombia-ratings-record-fox-sports

[Elvado]

How can this be anything but positive? Given the competencies displayed by McDonough over the years, having Fox, or anyone else, run our marketing can only be an improvement.

[hoya95]

I've seen a local Nissan commercial during the Olympics the last couple of nights filmed at McDonough with some cheerleaders and students cheering on Georgetown Olympians, and it says that Nissan is the official car sponsor of Georgetown athletics. Not sure I've ever seen us get a sponsor like that before. I assume this is the first sponsor we've gotten after turning over our Multimedia rights to Fox, right? If so, good start.

I know none of this means a thing if we don't win. But with the Thompson Center and some other things, it looks like the business side of Georgetown athletics is improving significantly.

[IDenj]

The network that brought us the glowing puck is not something that should ever be discussed.

[DanMcQ]

Aug 12, 2016 23:36:49 GMT -5 hoya95 said:

I've seen a local Nissan commercial during the Olympics the last couple of nights filmed at McDonough with some cheerleaders and students cheering on Georgetown Olympians, and it says that Nissan is the official car sponsor of Georgetown athletics. Not sure I've ever seen us get a sponsor like that before. I assume this is the first sponsor we've gotten after turning over our Multimedia rights to Fox, right? If so, good start.

I know none of this means a thing if we don't win. But with the Thompson Center and some other things, it looks like the business side of Georgetown athletics is improving significantly.

Nissan was signed last fall by the local Fox team; there's a Georgetown only spot for the local market and a national one that includes 5 others. Great exposure.

[sleepy]

In the end is Fox really the place to go. I'm of the mind that the Mouse will slowly begin to divest of much of the operation in Bristol and not sure Fox Sports will even exist in it's current format in less than 5 years. Really is twitter going to be the next platform or is some not yet invented app going to monetize itself to fill the void.
money.cnn.com/2016/08/16/technology/twitter-sports-nfl-apple/index.html?category=technology

I'm of the mind that we are fast approaching a financial bubble that will radically impact the future financing of college sports especially at the P5 level.