Tennis Forum banner

Rule Changes All About Money - TV Money

8K views 57 replies 8 participants last post by  USTennisfan 
#1 ·
No one is looking at this from the NCAA's perspective.. Why the changes? Well did you watch all the televised NCAA championship events lately.. Did you see Women's Softball? College Baseball? This is becoming a BIG TIME TV MONEYMAKER.. All of this is to set up ESPNU, or NBC Sports Network, or CBS Sports Network to bid on the rights to televise NCAA Tennis.. Final 4 Big Money. You have to admit the quality will be there. When you get to a final 4 in tennis, 1 - 6 in the lineup are good solid players, just below WTA, or high Challenger level. It can be packaged and sold as such, and because it has a pro ATP and WTA level after, it can be sold as up and coming future stars.... Now lets set the format for TV.. Shorter matches.. Let's move it to bigger Venues!..Stop and think.. This is about money... Big Money..., and it makes sense... So all of you traditionalist, sorry... but that don't pay the bills... Just think about it...
 
#2 ·
When was the last time that the NCAA singles match finals were on television? A long time ago, and there is no problem scheduling those matches. No, this is about blindness. It doesn't take long to think about that, and was there any agreement to share the pie in the sky.
 
#4 ·
The NCAA doesn't do anything without thinking about money.. This is to sell the rights to NCAA Tennis, and "they" believe they need to clean it up to put it in a format that is palatable for the viewer.. MONEY. Just 2 years ago, ESPN televised the selection show. ESPNU has carried the finals.. Now NBC Sports, needs programming... sports programming, and like CBS Sports, and others, the NCAA see's a potential to sell and package this to TV. All these new Sports Networks are begging to buy programming (Just ask the Big East in Football, when it goes to bid after ESPN's exclusive rights expire). So, we shall see, but I bet you'll see Tennis on TV when you get to the final 4, and I bet millions are passed around... so, again..slow down and follow the money
 
#5 ·
I don't believe the money is there, or that TV is that desperate to televise tennis, because lots of tennis goes un-televised. But if they seriously believe the money is there, then the sharing agreement should be spelled out in contract detail, not some unstated future non-promise. Tell the top teams, if your in the final four, you're guaranteed take is, $XXXX.00 and percentage of the ...
 
#6 ·
Any money is new money for NCAA Tennis. With advent of Big10 Network, and NBC Sports Network.. The money is there... They are now searching for programming.. If I would have asked you to tell me who is going to watch NCAA Women's Softball Prelims, and Finals... ah... just 4 years ago... You would have said what you said earlier... well guess what it scored HUGE rating this year... They made a bundle on it.. And it has no PRO entity beyound "barnstorming". Oh, and by the way, little girls all over this country now want what they saw.. being TV stars playing softball... Stop and now think about NCAA Tennis.. it's the next big sport they will "tinker" with.. So what if they didn't ask "the experts" and "traditionalists".. Don't take it personal players, but they don't care what you think. They are only thinking how can this NEW FOUND money fund someone's pockets... Remember the saying... follow the money... not the passion. It's just business, and last we saw Teams were cutting funding on non Football-Basketball sports...
 
#7 ·
Yeah, there was previously no girls' softball on television, and lots of people play or have played softball. There is women and men's tennis on television. So adding a watered down version is going to attract what identifiable group.

So to answer you, I would not have said that four years ago, and they are not at all comparable.
 
#9 ·
One other thing. Never underestimate people desire to either follow their local college, or alma mater...Especially if you now have an avenue via TV Sports Programming.. Evil Empire (Stanford) will be the new Yankees!! LOL! "Buying" all of the top US Girls... But really all kidding aside, you have to understand just how much available TV time or Programming is out there.. Networks are looking everywhere to find the next "thing".. College sports always gets people's attention.. no different than the big boys of football and basketball. And now even Women's sports, basketball, softball and anything else they can "package" to the networks.. and SELL... Not trying to instigate anyone... I just want you to understand that all of the big boy sports start somewhere... and that's how it grows.. This change is to kick start that growth. It is amazing to see colleges treat women's sports as an "after thought".. why? The Money. So if you want respect, understand that TV changes the game... Every major sport (NFL, NBA,etc has changed rules, becuase of what... TV... the money that pays the bills... That's the point.
 
#11 ·
One other thing. Never underestimate people desire to either follow their local college, or alma mater...Especially if you now have an avenue via TV Sports Programming.. Evil Empire (Stanford) will be the new Yankees!! LOL! "Buying" all of the top US Girls... But really all kidding aside,
Most of the "experts" think the opposite, that Stanford has years of already "buying" most of the top US girls, so nothing new there. Most traditional experts are saying that this will end college tennis as a pathway to the pros, which is a feature that has benefited Stanford and its peers.
 
#12 ·
College tennis may prove to be a new "buy"... College allegience may spur renewed interest... The US has lost a lot of WTA Events in the last 20 years. why? Maybe college tennis on TV can halp rejuvenate interest. you never know.. I put my money on anything that promotes more TV exposure, will mean more revenue from Suppliers, manufactures, pro tournaments, etc. Again.. something is more than they get now.

But hey... you know what you can say... "any" dollars coming in are good dollars, and as far as Women's College Tennis is concerned.. Just ask the dying Men's programs. Currently the women only get what title IX gives them... But really... today I had a chance to look at the actual document, thanks to Zoo Tennis... And bingo... TV is written all over it... they also use other words, fan friendly, etc, but TV is the idea... I don't have a positive or negative opinion of what happenned... I'm just saying why it happenned.

As far as a "draconian" view of the "end of college tennis as a pathway".. please... why do traditionalist and experts use drama to make a point... People throw up hands and predict doom... oh boy.. It won't be the end of college tennis... It may be the beginning of some really exciting 3 hour matches that fit into the programming slots that networks may pay someone millions to fill... When little girls are watching Florida vs. Stanford on TV, and all of Northern Florida is following and the "water cooler talk" is about them Gators, and the camera's are swithing from court to court in rapid sequence, and they are watchng at the tennis club or with thier parents, dreaming of being there (because only so few become Venus and Serena - but all these confernces, are now giving this new exposure)and if not them, then lets' make the Golden Domers champs.. guess what.. that helps Womens' College Tennis...To the NCAA, welcome to the real world, the one where they can make money on it and expand it's marketing.

As far as a path to the pros is concerned.. that is a different debate.. and one that really hasn't been proven even today in women's tennis for 4 year players... so few follow that path and of course we have exceptions... but shorter matches, and WTT thrills not withstandinig... you can still play pro tennis in the summer and fall, and still become a pro while playing in season at your college (while getting that degree - as your fall back)... so let's not write the obit too soon on College Tennis Pro Path Death...
 
#14 · (Edited)
The US has lost a lot of WTA Events, …College tennis didn't cause that, … So are you suggesting that Nicole Gibbs has to save Serena Williams.

Don't say “any” dollar is a good dollar, … Joe Paterno is a lesson that blinding oneself to chase any $ and television is costly. Please, lets not chase bad dollars.

That networks may pay someone millions to fill … still pie in the sky without any contract saying who would get the millions. More likely road show flim-flam. So show me the money details who get the profit, and who eats it if it loses. Or better, let the NCAA escrow a performance bond, and if the ITA franchise loses millions of dollars of value because of this, turn it over.
 
#16 ·
On Friday morning USTA national released the following statement: "The USTA is aware of the proposed format changes being made by the NCAA Division I Men's and Women's Tennis Committee to the NCAA Division I Men's and Women's Tennis Championships. Working with the Intercollegiate Tennis Association (ITA), the USTA is preparing a joint opposition letter to these changes. The letter will be distributed to the committee in advance of its Monday, August 20th meeting."

http://www.florida.usta.com/news/usta_fl_friday_blog_college_tennis_firestorm_weekend_tv111/
 
#18 · (Edited)
MASON, Ohio—Changes in the format of college tennis announced by the N.C.A.A. Wednesday have drawn a furious and seemingly one-sided response across social media, with players and coaches weighing in with their objections.

Under the new rules, singles matches will no longer be played as a full best-of-three, but with a first-to-10-points tiebreaker played in lieu of a third set. Doubles has also been shortened from an eight-game pro-set to one six-game set, and the gap between the doubles matches and singles will be only five minutes. Changeovers have been reduced from 90 to 60 seconds, and opponents will no longer warm up with one another before playing. The changes only apply to Division I matches.

The rationales given were that no other collegiate sport makes its athletes compete for up to four-and-a-half hours in a day, and that a shorter duration would be more media- and fan-friendly.

“By shortening the format and bringing greater excitement to the dual match, programs will be able to attract fan support and attention to tennis,” the N.C.A.A. said.

An additional clause in the rationale section of the decision explained that shortened tennis matches would be more television-friendly, despite college tennis never having had much of any footprint on television.

“The shortened format may provide exposure opportunities through television coverage, live streaming and local media coverage,” the N.C.A.A. said. “It is difficult and cost prohibitive for television to air a 4.5 hour college tennis match. In addition, it is very challenging for local media (television or print) to watch and cover an entire dual match. Therefore, the sport lacks local and national coverage, which will be improved with a format that consistently finishes within a three-hour time frame.”

As soon as the changes were confirmed, the backlash on social media was nearly instant. A Facebook group opposing the reforms quickly gained more than 2,000 members, and the hashtag “#savecollegetennis” was created.

“Well looks like effective September 1st I can start eating all the burgers I want since I won’t be playing any three set matches,” tweeted Emina Bektas of the University of Michigan.

“This new NCAA tennis format is a total joke,” tweeted Aaron Pfister of Michigan State. “Beyond disappointed to hear about it. Changes the way matches will go 100%. #furious”

Pfister added: “I think people looking to go pro will look to avoid college tennis because those format matches don’t help.”

“Disturbing news re: future NCAA tennis format,” tweeted University of Georgia coach Manny Diaz. “Will kill our college game as we know it today.”

“Or we could just flip a coin for doubles point,” Diaz added. “That would shorten it. Don’t see baseball playing 6 innings or BB 3 quarters.”

Reaction was also negative from overseas, as Mark Edney of Athlete Development for Tennis Australia also tweeted his disapproval.

“The more I think of it, the new NCAA rules may be a detriment,” Edney said. “Recruiting athletes could be impossible as it is not longer ‘real’ tennis.

N.C.A.A. champion Nicole Gibbs of Stanford was also outspoken about the changes. “@NCAA thank you for reducing my sport to a joke at the collegiate level #wasteoftime,” she tweeted.

“I play tennis for tennis, not for tv coverage and frat boy attendance,” Gibbs added. “Playing a tb for a third set compromises the integrity of the sport!”

Recent Stanford grad Bradley Klahn agreed.

“It is unfortunate that in this era media accessibility and popularity trumps the best interests of those student athletes who have sacrificed much to achieve their dreams,” Klahn tweeted. “You can’t sell your program as a stepping stone to pro tennis with super breakers for a third set.”

“I don’t think I love it,” said Brian Baker, the current A.T.P. No. 78 and a former coach at Belmont University. “Just for the fact that, typically, the shorter the match, the more luck that can come into play, and sometimes the better team doesn’t always come out on top. I know maybe they did it to try to shorten some matches, you know, try to get it done earlier, but I would rather see the full third play out. It adds another element of fitness to it, and that’s a big part of tennis. That’s why the Grand Slams are played three-out-of-five, to try to get the best players to win. I guess it’s going to have to play out and see how it goes, but I would think that most of the people that have played college tennis would prefer to play the longer match, just because you feel like you have more chances to showcase who’s the better player.”

“If college is used as developmental step for kids to then play on tour, it would help if it was the same scoring, obviously,” said Rajeev Ram, the current A.T.P. No. 100 in singles and No. 55 in doubles who played one semester of college tennis at Illinois before turning professional. “If I’m going into a match knowing that all I’ve got to do is win one set and then I’m into a breaker, I think I would play a little differently. And out here that never happens.”

Ram said that the new scoring system would have hurt the appeal of college tennis to him as a stepping stone to the professional ranks.

“I think it would, just because I think it’s not the same,” he said. “And there’s a big part of fitness, a big part of spending time to figure out your opponent that now is kind of taken away from you a little bit, because you don’t have that luxury of playing your way in, seeing if it’s going to work, maybe if it doesn’t work then changing it. By the time that happens you already know that the best you can do is a breaker.”

Ram appeared skeptical about the possibility for massive improvement in media coverage for college tennis, one of the intended results of the change.

“If all the sudden college tennis becomes a media phenomenon, then I’m going to give it to them,” he said. “I mean, I was fortunate to be on a team where we would have 800 to 1,000 people come to our matches.”

“I think there’s still a lot of benefit to it,” he said of college tennis. “You still get practices, you still get ability to play with the team, a coach, and everything is taken care of. I think they can get a lot of benefit from that, even if the matches are not like normal conditions.”


Credit. This is the NY Times artile by Ben Rothenberg. The accompanying photo is Nicole Gibbs returning serve against Serena William.
 
#21 ·
playing singles first might allow them to televise 3 matches in their three hour window. maybe they can get an oxiclean spokesman to hype the matches for them since we won't have doubles to add excitment very often. Finish those matches and follow it with 9 holes of college putt putt golf.
 
#22 ·
Again we are looking at this from a very short sided perspective...more televised tennis originating in the US helps tennis. Of course college tennis didn't cause the US to lose WTA event. But lack of US stars. Did. The globalization of the sport did... And many other factors... but more televised tennis in the US certainly wont hurt women's tennis.

dollars are indeed good for tennis... the sport won't survive without more dollars, or at least it will lack money to grow a sport. If someone throws dollars don't you think both the NCAA and the institutions will chase them? Do you know any sport that doesnt?

Do you understand how TV rights contracts work? the risk is on the network. Not the NCAA. They buy the product and sell the commercial time? The loss is on the Network!!!! Gee, that's pretty basic... No risk? If they lose money they cancel the show... But. Hint hint. Someone is whispering in someone's ear to make your product more TV friendly. And we will buy it...

So, whatever you may think wont matter. Unless you can open your wallet and pay them what they think they will get! Then they don't care what you think. how do you say, Show me the money and money talks and ?? Walks...

All I'm saying is us fan boys aren't offering money to change this engine thats leaving the station...but you can still think about following the evil perils of money. And Joe Paterno stuff.... And we will have to wait to see if they follow the purists, and traditionalist. Or will they just follow the money. My bet is ...the money.

Oh and by the way, did you see the talk today about moving away from a five set men's Grand Slam??? What is driving that talk...THE MONEY and TV
 
#23 ·
Currently the mother ship ESPN an all it's networks including ESPNU, and CBS sports network, AND the new boy at the table NBC Sports Net formally Versus are climbing all over each other to bid on LIVE Sports programming. Someone has indeed whispered in the ear of the NCAA that just like with some of your new additional sports like womens softball we will PAY YOU IF it can fit into programming slots...

ESPN wants to hang on and the new boys want to carve into the pie.... That's why we are here today.... He who pays up gets to tell the others to shut up... Let's see what they do!
 
#25 · (Edited)
You sound that you have inside knowledge of the television business, but I saw that much of the OLYMPICS on NBC was TAPED. For this tennis championship, ESPNU (for University) did the NCAA Championships live, and then in the evening, they were in a condensed version on ESPN. I spent spent time at a sports bar watching ESPNU so that I could see the event live. But the taped version was good too and available to me on my more limited cable selection.
 
#24 ·
Well, yeah, we talk sports all the time, and we don't expect that the coaches and owners are going to do what we think.

I don't have any special experience with TV rights contracts, but its a flawed business structure courting irresponsible aggressive bets, if the NCAA can get millions by putting someone else assets into an experiment while the NCAA does not bear any of the risks if the experiment is a flop.
 
#26 ·
No...actually the overwhelming majority of tennis at the Olympics was LIVE... Not on NBC, but BRAVO, a Sister Network.. If you had multiple TVs, it (the Olympics) was on MSNBC, CNBC, BRAVO, NBC Sports Network, and it's Flagship, NBC... And I woke up every day, and at 6 or 7 AM, BRAVO had the Tennis on LIVE, all day long.....

Remember the song, it was something like "200 stations and nothing on".. With digital Cable, Satellite TV, FIOS, there are almost 300 channels now... all looking for programming... and do you know why Sports is the most coveted...It can't be TIVO'd to the degree any other TV is... With Internet, Twitter,etc. people know the score, and it ruins the event.. That's why SPORTS works LIVE, and the advertisers love that people dont' time shift sports (probably because of gambling), but I don't want to bore you, but the Tennis at the Olympics was live and in charge... actually all of it was (on the sister networks)... They then repackaged it and showed it on tape delay for the average consumer at night prime TV for the big bucks!

The plan for Tennis, will follow what they are building on similar to Women's softball(here I go again).. They made that event sports programming.. they did the Regionals, then Nationals and built the audience from just those interested in the schools, to every school girl, (and more importantly) the parents...

You couldn't give away College Tennis, just 5 years ago...and now it's event TV.. they have remade the sport to rival the ratings of the pros... The College World Series!!! Big time packaged product today, and just 5 years ago,they had to pay the networks to Televise it...

Of and if you really thinka I'm joking... Follow the Little League World Series... on TV.... and what it's become...

So... you have to believe someone has a plan..
 
#28 ·
really appreciate the input, USTennisfan. just some musings;

What does it have to do with the length of the dual match? Will drastically shortening the match length really help promoting college tennis? Was the softball format drastically changed(shortened) to be broadcast?

I'm not sure the 'audiences' will mind whether the singles match is 2 of 3 or 3rd set supertiebreaker..dbls match format too, for that matter(8 to 6, what's the big difference here?). Did the network request specific time restraint, like 3 hrs, so NCAA had to find every possible means to cram the match to fit it? :lol: How long is a typical softball match?

I actually think 3 of 5 is too long :lol: Creates massive headache for scheduling too :lol:
 
#29 ·
The devil is in the details.. By appearance it looks like they (NCAA) was either told or was hinted to find a way to fit your product into a 3 hour window. Must other sports have been or they have taken steps to reduce the length to fit into that window. Every sport is taking steps to shorten the match to fit the 3 hour window, including the Granddaddy of all, football, and just now have they conceded the time to extend 15 minutes beyond, but by and large the average football match is 3 hours. Tennis even with all of it's grand tradition, at this level (college) will have to capitualate, to have a chance to hitch it's wagon to the money train.

Now how they come to the conclusion of how to trim it, is something I am not privy to. I do agree with you, this is where you may see fine tuning, but the key will be the 3 hour slot. Now smarter minds have to come to an agreement on the give and take to make it work, unless they are hellbent on shoving this change through, and will wait and make adjustments a year later.
 
#30 ·
I would guess an average 3 set match between even players wiil "average" 3 hours..with 6 positions, and probably 2 going 3 sets, that's too long for the window (and heaven forbid we get players like Reka).. They will try to package this into 2 hours of singles, and 30 to 45 minutes of dubs, Throw in the open to set the stage, and closing, and you have it.

But so far this is just for the NCAA's.. Regular dual matches may not follow. The NCAA rules the Championships, and ITA rules the regular season.. Two different bodies... Will ITA take a wait and see? Maybe.. Don't know. Will it be coaches options, like today, but understand travel costs, and you've seen even now with rain, or flight schedules, and expenses, coaches "shorten" dual matches to meet a flight schedule (extremely costly for a team to reschedule a flight due to long matches) and kids do have to get back from a road trip for classes next day...

It just looks like from both the NCAA and schools perspective this could save money... again ... money...
 
#31 ·
If college tennis goes down this route the US will have no WTA tennis stars doing well so as to get more WTA events televised it the states. Because players will go on to the tour too early because college tennis is a waste of time, they will not be ready, and they will flounder.

I'm afraid your argument just doesn't hold, and it is you who is being short sighted.

The only hope is that this is NCAA only, and the ITA refuse to do likewise in dual play for the regular season.
 
#33 ·
To follow this thought... We are more passionate than the stats bear out. Of the current US WTA Top 200 out of 20 US girls only Julia Cohen, Irina Falconi, Jill Craybas, and, and ...guess what no one else even played college tennis. So you haven't made your point. We will do fine again drama...passionate but unsubstantiated. We will still have US WTA stars with this change at the NCAA dual match championships..

I agree with you however it may only be a NCAA Chmp thing, so everyone can relax.
 
#32 ·
Let editors work during a match and for one hour afterward. Slice, dice and then televise the match. It does not take a rocket scientist to advise a TV person what can be cut. Hardcore people can still watch live video college feeds or live scores. Tweak match starting times to help TV starting times and keep them as close to live as possible. Get stricter on college facility requirements for outdoor court numbers and more importantly six onsite indoors. You then control weather. Rich, successful, but no 6 indoor--if you want on TV, play on the road or build. There are many ways to attack a TV friendlier model before wiping out what makes college tennis exciting.
 
#34 ·
Good thought and may just pan out...but. TV pays more for LIVE college sports... You know why? Because people don't already know the outcome...Too much twitter, instant messaging, Internet etc. Follow the other sports the NCAA are collecting TV revenue off of and they are Live!

Gosh you'd think college tennis is blowing the doors off the current attendance numbers if you follow all of us fanboys. But in reality the live crowds are terrible and the ticket revenue is minuscule in comparison to other sports. So I wish all of you make a real run and fill the stands in support of the current format and bring your friends because again someone is saying it isn't working the way it is now and the revenue stream is dry and that's the bottom line.
 
#39 ·
If you think college tennis wil translate to television ratings that break even.......well I just don't know what to say other than your comments are not very well thought out.....that much is clear!
I've never said that. I think live TV Sport telecasting will bring in far far more money than anything that is currently being produced with the current fan and fanboy interest level.

I'm actually saying that with the same promotion that is given to the buildup of the other current sports that the NCAA sells its TV product to it can bring in huge dollars. And I'm only comparing to the non big boy football basketball sports , just the other sports.
 
#36 ·
The NCAA qualifies for the non-profit exemption because it claims to be "organized and operated exclusively for educational purposes."

The NCAA is willing to take a crap shoot with tennis with a maybe 5% chance of a payout, because they are making zero dollars from it now

If I read correctly what USTennisfan writes, these changes are not being organized and operated exclusively for educational purposes.
 
#40 ·
Bingo. but really yes and no.

You need to follow how other major sports are handled.... They claim the are thinking of the kids and the institutions educational goals but dollars drive the bus. They just use education as a framework to continue its legal status. The joke is everyone laughs at it's mission statement when TV waives the dollars around.

As far as a 5% chance of a payout. Given a 3 to 7 year TV contract it's going to be far more than that, which is why this is even being considered.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top