Fox Sports in Negotiations to Hold a New Tourney

[MUPanther]

https://themessenger.com/sports/fox-spo ... atest_news

[Bogg]

I mean, whatever to the idea of an NIT alternative, but this is a good indication that Val and Fox are deep into the details on a new contract. Also important for the Big East to stay attached to the Big 12 and (especially) the B1G in the public's eye, so if indulging Fox on a so-so at best project is part of the cost of a new contract and getting their political weight behind renewing the conference challenges, that's fine.

[Burrito]

The NIT is an ESPN product. This would be Fox's version.

[Jet915]

The Gavitt renewal leak and now this makes me think we are sticking with Fox which i love. Hopefully we get a raise. Not loving this idea but if it keeps us at the big boy table im all for it.

[ArmyVet]

Requiring participation is actually a pretty bold move. You'd think Val could get a sweetened pot for the media deal by committing to this.

[Django]

Yes this is great news and shows Val continues her great work!

[GoldenWarrior11]

Love this. Very positive developments regarding continued partnership with FOX.

[kayako]

Love this. The NIT was becoming a little too mid-major, and with no MSG it's even less desirable.

[GumbyDamnit!]

I've been thinking about this for a while now, and this announcement further confirms my suspicions... "Post-season tourney with NIL implications..." Think that through for a second. What is to keep the free market from placing its thumb all over college basketball, all driven by corporate dollars? Want to get the BEST college program to commit to a certain pre-season tourney? Huddle up with a corporate sponsor and/or city/state or country Tourism Bureau and just flat out pay for the best talent. Don't you think Duke or UK or anyone else would love to provide avenues for their players to maximize earning potential? If it's built into a specific tournament, why not just entertain the highest bidder? Tourney organizers would have to set it up within the rules, but are there really any rules anymore?

What's to keep a couple of Las Vegas casinos who promote on-line wagering, and the Las Vegas tourism board to incentivize certain kids to go to a certain schools who will be competing in their tourney the next year? Hunter Dickenson going to Kansas, will absolutely affect who tunes in to watch KU this year. Why wait around and hope it turns out for you, when you might be able to directly affect things as a sponsor/ It's basically the tail wagging the dog in this new Wild West. Or in the case of the post-season NIT alternative from Fox, they'll just offer NIL well ahead of time to their media partners and provide them a competitive advantage in recruiting. It's akin to saying, well even if you don't make the tourney, the consolation prize is $1M split among teammates (in terms of a collective NIL offering) for the winner of this tourney. Then kids know that if you are a Fox affiliated school you'll have additional NIL opportunities preseason, post-season--or heck, why stop there and just offer it if you're in a conference they are affiliated with.

Talk about a true arms race. For the media partner they just want the most eyeballs so they can charge more for advertising. For the advertiser they want the same. We're talking big money here. Proactively setting up a trickle-down approach would be on my radar if I were in charge of sports programming for college athletics. God, I hate what college hoops has become.

[Django]

I've been thinking about this for a while now, and this announcement further confirms my suspicions... "Post-season tourney with NIL implications..." Think that through for a second. What is to keep the free market from placing its thumb all over college basketball, all driven by corporate dollars? Want to get the BEST college program to commit to a certain pre-season tourney? Huddle up with a corporate sponsor and/or city/state or country Tourism Bureau and just flat out pay for the best talent. Don't you think Duke or UK or anyone else would love to provide avenues for their players to maximize earning potential? If it's built into a specific tournament, why not just entertain the highest bidder? Tourney organizers would have to set it up within the rules, but are there really any rules anymore?

What's to keep a couple of Las Vegas casinos who promote on-line wagering, and the Las Vegas tourism board to incentivize certain kids to go to a certain schools who will be competing in their tourney the next year? Hunter Dickenson going to Kansas, will absolutely affect who tunes in to watch KU this year. Why wait around and hope it turns out for you, when you might be able to directly affect things as a sponsor/ It's basically the tail wagging the dog in this new Wild West. Or in the case of the post-season NIT alternative from Fox, they'll just offer NIL well ahead of time to their media partners and provide them a competitive advantage in recruiting. It's akin to saying, well even if you don't make the tourney, the consolation prize is $1M split among teammates (in terms of a collective NIL offering) for the winner of this tourney. Then kids know that if you are a Fox affiliated school you'll have additional NIL opportunities preseason, post-season--or heck, why stop there and just offer it if you're in a conference they are affiliated with.

Talk about a true arms race. For the media partner they just want the most eyeballs so they can charge more for advertising. For the advertiser they want the same. We're talking big money here. Proactively setting up a trickle-down approach would be on my radar if I were in charge of sports programming for college athletics. God, I hate what college hoops has become.

It’s always been an arms race. Creighton was a national power as an independent until they joined the MVC in 1979, the same year ESPN created the Big East dynasty. We dropped off the face we of the earth and became this thing called a “mid major” while y’all took over college basketball. Just be glad we’re on the right side of the tracks Gumby. And pray like hell we stay here for a long time.