B1G Ramblings

[JwittersPAC]

Why would I include those schools?

What are we talking about now?

No, they would not be bottom dwellers.

Did you miss the fact that one of those schools was in the national championship game the year before last.

This is a crazy discussion.

I have no idea how you think for example UCLA, Wisconsin or Nebraska would win anything in the SEC (football). Yes Washington was good two years ago prior to losing their coach to Alabama. Since then they have been very average.

 

[uconnyankee]

They have a lot more than that, if we're talking about football.

PSU, USC, Oregon, Washington, Michigan, Ohio State, UCLA, Wisconsin, Iowa and even Nebraska.

These are big college brands.

The minnows are Rutgers, Michigan St., Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue, Indiana.

In the SEC, Texas, Texas A&M, Auburn, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Tennessee, Ole Miss are the brands.

The others are like the minnows of the B1G: South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Arkansas, Missouri, Mississippi St., Missouri, Kentucky.

Oklahoma says hello!
Pretty sure they are a top brand in FB.

 

[upstater]

I have no idea how you think for example UCLA, Wisconsin or Nebraska would win anything in the SEC (football). Yes Washington was good two years ago prior to losing their coach to Alabama. Since then they have been very average.

I didn't say they'd beat the top teams. But looks at Wisconsin. Consistently at the top for 3 decades before a bad half decade under their current coach. They outperformed all those bottom half SEC teams.

In the last 25 years under Bielma and Chryst, they went .450 (4-5) against the TOP of the SEC, and in bowls, they beat LSU, Auburn 2x, and Arkansas. Only loss to bottom SEC teams was to South Carolina. The other 4 losses were to LSU, Alabama, Tennessee and Georgia.

So, you wrote "win anything." They have shown not only that they could win in the ACC, but win against the top brands.

Nebraska is a brand the way Indiana is a brand in basketball.

 

[upstater]

If I were a B1G school, I'd take the deal. Given all the outside dents to the budgets of research institutions over the last several years, patching the big holes now will forestall some huge decisions that would make some schools much lesser than they are now.

You have 20 years to get your finances in order to meet the new demands of players and stadiums.

(but, at the end of the day, you shouldn't have gotten your school in a bad jam with spending in the first place.)

Am I the only one who really doesn't care about the quality of the stadium?

 

[Kolumbo]

We all have our own perceptions of who the top brands are regardless of actual performance. I always considered Nebraska for example a top football brand but they don't win anything anymore. Now that the P2 contain 34 programs more brands will be diluted while others such as Indiana may surprise.

The average PE injection is $133 million per program but 13 will take less than average so 5 can get more. Northwestern just spent almost $900 million on a new stadium. NU does not need the extra $110 million. Michigan does not need anything nevermind $80 million more than Michigan State. I'm sure it will help ruttie try to get out of financial trouble but it will just ruttie itself into trouble again anyway.

I'm not sure if this equity deal is for the next 20 years or permanent. If 20 years, that's an average of $5.5 million received per year for the 13 rank and file, so that needs to be compared to how much it is costing each program per year.

"The Big Ten is in the middle of a seven-year, $7 billion media rights package that runs through 2030. The money infusion is believed to be acutely needed at several Big Ten schools that are struggling to pay down debt on new construction and budgeting for direct revenue ($20.5 million this year and expected to rise annually) to athletes."

AD: USC wants long-term benefits of equity deal

USC athletic director Jen Cohen addressed the school's stance on the pending Big Ten private capital deal Friday, saying University leadership is focused on the long-term benefits.

www.espn.com

 

[CL82]

I'm sure it will help ruttie try to get out of financial trouble but it will just ruttie itself into trouble again anyway.

Yep. Rutgers will find a way to Rutgers it.

 

[UConnJim]

The other SEC schools are much higher in value than UCLA, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Washington? Really? Let's name some of them: Vandy, Miss St, Ole Miss, Arkansas, Mizzou, South Carolina, Kentucky. I would say that NONE of these 7 SEC schools are much higher value for football than the 4 B1G schools I listed.

The best judge of value we have is TV ratings as that is what makes a brand valuable. So, for 2024, there were 12 SEC schools with higher TV ratings than Wisconsin, Washington, and UCLA, and 8 SEC schools with higher ratings than Nebraska. Of course, TV ratings in a given year are not an ideal way to measure brand value as you probably want a 5 year average.

Of the schools you mentioned, Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Arkansas had TV ratings above UCLA, Wisconsin, and Washington and Kentucky had equal ratings.

 

[JwittersPAC]

The best judge of value we have is TV ratings as that is what makes a brand valuable. So, for 2024, there were 12 SEC schools with higher TV ratings than Wisconsin, Washington, and UCLA, and 8 SEC schools with higher ratings than Nebraska. Of course, TV ratings in a given year are not an ideal way to measure brand value as you probably want a 5 year average.

Of the schools you mentioned, Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Arkansas had TV ratings above UCLA, Wisconsin, and Washington and Kentucky had equal ratings.

The SEC has so many good college football teams is that some of the good teams may struggle going above 500 some years in the conference. The BIG 10 is very top heavy with really only 4 teams with a good chance to win the conference.

 

[Kolumbo]

The best judge of value we have is TV ratings as that is what makes a brand valuable. So, for 2024, there were 12 SEC schools with higher TV ratings than Wisconsin, Washington, and UCLA, and 8 SEC schools with higher ratings than Nebraska. Of course, TV ratings in a given year are not an ideal way to measure brand value as you probably want a 5 year average.

Of the schools you mentioned, Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Arkansas had TV ratings above UCLA, Wisconsin, and Washington and Kentucky had equal ratings.

As we have seen though, it's partially the chicken and the egg. Ratings are largely based on which programs espn is putting on tv and who they are playing. Mississippi State will probably get higher ratings than it would otherwise draw because it is playing Ole Miss, Florida, Georgia, Texas, TAMU, Tennessee.

 

[JwittersPAC]

As we have seen though, it's partially the chicken and the egg. Ratings are largely based on which programs espn is putting on tv and who they are playing. Mississippi State will probably get higher ratings than it would otherwise draw because it is playing Ole Miss, Florida, Georgia, Texas, TAMU, Tennessee.

Same could be said for UCLA they played Michigan, Penn State and will play USC.

 

[JwittersPAC]

Same could be said for UCLA they played Michigan, Penn State and will play USC.

Sorry meant to say Ohio State instead of Michigan.

 

[upstater]

The best judge of value we have is TV ratings as that is what makes a brand valuable. So, for 2024, there were 12 SEC schools with higher TV ratings than Wisconsin, Washington, and UCLA, and 8 SEC schools with higher ratings than Nebraska. Of course, TV ratings in a given year are not an ideal way to measure brand value as you probably want a 5 year average.

Of the schools you mentioned, Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Arkansas had TV ratings above UCLA, Wisconsin, and Washington and Kentucky had equal ratings.

In any given year, depends on who your opponents are. You mentioned 3 of the 7 schools I listed had higher ratings. Did the other 4 have lower ratings? A lot would depend on if the 3 played Alabama and the other 4 didn't.

 

[UConnJim]

In any given year, depends on who your opponents are. You mentioned 3 of the 7 schools I listed had higher ratings. Did the other 4 have lower ratings? A lot would depend on if the 3 played Alabama and the other 4 didn't.

There were 3 with lower ratings: Miss. St., Missouri, and Vandy. Kentucky was similar. 8 of the top 11 schools were from the SEC, 2 from the Big 10, and Colorado (Sanders effect).

 

[ZooCougar]

The best judge of value we have is TV ratings as that is what makes a brand valuable. So, for 2024, there were 12 SEC schools with higher TV ratings than Wisconsin, Washington, and UCLA, and 8 SEC schools with higher ratings than Nebraska. Of course, TV ratings in a given year are not an ideal way to measure brand value as you probably want a 5 year average.

Of the schools you mentioned, Ole Miss, South Carolina, and Arkansas had TV ratings above UCLA, Wisconsin, and Washington and Kentucky had equal ratings.

You mean there aren’t other indicators like revenue?

If you really think Arkansas is more valuable than Wisconsin then you really are brain dead.