Big Ten payout in '17/'18....$44.5M

[itgoeslike]

1st is anyone suspicious that the BUG seemingly doubled their payout overnight?

2nd how does adding a 9th conference game increase inventory? Are they going to 13 games per season or just cancelling a non-conference game?

If the 9th game always features two conference members the conference is always guaranteed to control the revenue. Now, that may only represent a handful of games, but it would still potentially cut in half the OOC games played on the road. Additionally, any conference game not picked up by the 1st tier rights holders would be additional inventory for the BTN, which could be replayed numerous times.

With regard to your first point, it's possible they are forecasting too rich of a deal based upon some reports of valuations slowing down. One could bench mark ND's deal to see what percentage of a hike they received. But, the one thing that the B1G has over all other conferences is living alumni. I think Michigan and OSU have over 1,000,000 living alumni between the two of them.

 

[uconndogs]

Yup, because the state of CT doesn't have any professional franchises the Huskies are our states athletic identity. Huge investments have been made and we are not even remotely close to any tipping point that would encourage the state to abandon their investment. Schools like Temple should be concerned, UCONN will always find a way to compete at the highest level.

With 3 national championships this year, PGDL out of the way and Hockey East about to get started these are clearly the best of times for the UCONN sports fan. The Boneyard bean counters can suck it.

Ward: Susan, all good here. Stacking up championships like cord wood. Oh, by the way, we're going to run a little deficit here of about 20 mil. Would you mind asking the legislature to cut that check......ummm annually.....

 

[NotreDameJoe]

1) Don't be jealous of their payouts - we will be reading similar stories about the SEC in the coming years. There will be the have-alots, the haves and the have-nots.

2) More Big Ten games means more Big Ten games. Conference games are more appealing than cupcakey games.

That'll be the day.

Find but the article said "more inventory" not better inventory. It hints he hasn't thought it through. 14 teams playing an extra game against each other transformed 14 buy games into 7.

 

[metsfan2323]

Ward: Susan, all good here. Stacking up championships like cord wood. Oh, by the way, we're going to run a little deficit here of about 20 mil. Would you mind asking the legislature to cut that check.ummm annually.....

20 million dollar deficit? Not happening, we are not Rutgers. Like I said, Suck it.

BTW maybe an advertising expert can tell us what the dollar value of dual basketball championships is in terms of school branding. It's has to be 8 figures. Not to mention the extra donations and merchandise revenue the championships bring. You ever hear of the Flutie effect? If an athletic department loss ever did occur it could easily be justified as a valuable marketing expense.

 

[dayooper]

That'll be the day.

Find but the article said "more inventory" not better inventory. It hints he hasn't thought it through. 14 teams playing an extra game against each other transformed 14 buy games into 7.

1. Then why the vitriol? Why the silly names (BUG, Meatchicken, ect.)? Why not, in the immortal words of Paul McCartney, Live and Let Die?

2. Because there are massive amounts of Big10 alumni all over the country. Guess who makes the most unwavering fans? Hopefully, you guessed correctly, alumni. When two Big10 teams play each other, their alumni watch. Their alumni's kids watch. When the cyclic nature of football (or basketball) comes around and Alabama isn't the dominant team (read when Saban is no longer coach), they won't have the T-Shirt fans across the country. They will have their T-Shirt fans from Alabama and their alumni. Before Saban, Alabama was an afterthought nation wide. Michigan, going through it's worst period since the 60's, are still one of the most watched teams in college football (3rd, not including any BTN games). Why do you think that The Big10 and The SEC went after flagship schools (or in Texas A&M, what amounts to a flagship school). Alumni.

 

[uconndogs]

20 million dollar deficit? Not happening, we are not Rutgers. Like I said, Suck it.

BTW maybe an advertising expert can tell us what the dollar value of dual basketball championships is in terms of school branding. It's has to be 8 figures. Not to mention the extra donations and merchandise revenue the championships bring. You ever hear of the Flutie effect? If an athletic department loss ever did occur it could easily be justified as a valuable marketing expense.

Well, what can you say to the flawless logic in your argument? Plus, you are obviously an internet tough guy.....

 

[B1GALUM]

JMO but all future B1G Expansion will be eastward looking. It will continue to be driven by markets not brands. With this said I don't see a "football revenue generator" among the potential options in the east.

Delany's original vision was likely to try to shake UNC and UVA loose from the ACC by grabbing UMD. The ACC Lawsuit against UMD and subsequent GOR obviously complicated this plan.

IMO UNC is a lost cause, and is further South than The B1G should ever go. They favor The ACC first and The SEC second. It is a bad marriage. Their T-shirt fan base is too obsessed with the idea of Southern Identity, and would likely see a B1G Invite as some sort of capitulation to a yankee carpetbagger.

UVA is a completely different animal. They are Mid Atlantic as opposed to Southern Leaning. They are an exact match for every academic metric the conference covets. They sit in the shadow of an important and wealthy media market, that when combined with UMD and PSU is handed to Delany on a silver platter.

Delany knows that greater exposure and resources through B1G Membership can improve UVA's pedestrian AD. There is no excuse for why they have been so average for so long. They are blessed with tremendous homegrown talent and have quality athletic facilities.

UCONN and UVA should be the play. UCONN would jump right now, while UVA would take some convincing. The B1G would have the following markets under its control. Chicago, Indy, Milwaukee/Madison, Omaha/Lincoln, IC/Des Moines, Minny/St Paul, Detroit/AA, Cbus/Cincy/Cleveland, Pitt/Philly/SWB/ Hburg, Newark, Hartford, Baltimore, DC/Nova, and a reasonable percentage of NYC.

The crux of this discussion is that a school from the ACC becomes available despite the exit fee and GOR. This seems highly unlikely; however, for the sake of this discussion let's say this is the case as I agree with you that the Big Ten is still looking toward the East for further expansion.

The Big Ten may have interest in UVA and the conventional wisdom is that UVA would be the next target for Big Ten expansion. However, it is my impression that UVA is content in the ACC, values being a conference partner with UNC and has no interest in the Big Ten.

There is another ACC school that is rarely mentioned as a Big Ten expansion candidate but could be a better fit for the conference than most would think: Virginia Tech. Please everyone put away the slings and arrows for a moment. I realize this is a UConn board but you need a partner for the Big Ten so let me explain my rationale.

Virginia Tech is a public land grant university and of their 25 peer institutions 10 are or will be Big Ten universities. Virginia Tech has a larger enrollment than UVA. Virginia Tech has larger total research & development expenditures than UVA as well as Iowa, Rutgers and Nebraska. Virginia Tech is not AAU but has a strategic plan in which the university anticipates " that approximately three to five years would be required to approach the impacts necessary to make us more American Association of Universities (AAU) competitive."

Virginia Tech does not have historic ties to the ACC conference since it joined the ACC in 2004. The conventional wisdom is that Virginia Tech would just be a candidate for SEC expansion. However, Virginia Tech, through prior membership in the Big East, has a history of competing in a northeastern conference and their OOC football schedule features upcoming games against Ohio State, Purdue, Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State which indicates at least an interest in competition against Big Ten teams.

It is a concern that future Big Ten expansion must include a football addition. Although not on the level of historic success achieved by Penn State and Nebraska, with 6 BCS bowl appearances including 1 BCS national championship appearance Virginia Tech would provide this football addition. The addition of Virginia Tech as a football addition coupled with UConn as a basketball addition is another consideration for the Big Ten if the ACC exit fee and GOR could be overcome as well as any political resistance to a Virginia Tech and UVA separation.

Since I have taken up space on a UConn board touting the idea of Virginia Tech to the Big Ten, please feel free now to fire away at me and my idea with your slings and arrows.

 

[SAMCRO]

Since I have taken up space on a UConn board touting the idea of Virginia Tech to the Big Ten, please feel free now to fire away at me and my idea with your slings and arrows.

I don't think any UConn fans (or should I say most, b/c we will always have our complainers) give a s#it who the B1G invites as long as UConn is invited. VT, great...UC, UMass, UB, BC, SU, SIU sweet.

 

[Seaa Blue]

The crux of this discussion is that a school from the ACC becomes available despite the exit fee and GOR. This seems highly unlikely; however, for the sake of this discussion let's say this is the case as I agree with you that the Big Ten is still looking toward the East for further expansion.

The Big Ten may have interest in UVA and the conventional wisdom is that UVA would be the next target for Big Ten expansion. However, it is my impression that UVA is content in the ACC, values being a conference partner with UNC and has no interest in the Big Ten.

A while back I thought UVA and VT would/could be the next pair. Given that UVA is business/undergrad heavy, I agree with you.

 

[Seaa Blue]

If they were considering expansion they would know the marginal revenue generated. No one is leaving money on the table just because the number is higher than it was before.

I'll disagree with you there. If fast money was the first and second factor, Oklahoma might currently be a member of the Big Ten instead or Rutgers or Maryland.

As long as the payout doesn't come up less than the previous year (that would be the big no-no for budgets), when the pie is divided 14 or more ways it doesn't make a huge difference if the pie is +- a small percentage different in size. If a good expansion case can be made (for academia or athletics), money can be left on the table.

 

[kyleslamb]

The reason it said "more inventory" is because technically, the non-conference games are not part of the league package. Non-conference games are sold separately with right of first refusal (typically) going to the network that owns the league rights.

Usually, those games wind up on the same network(s) but they're not actually included in the league package that is negotiated. So adding a ninth league game for each team does actually increase the package.

 

[upstater]

20 million dollar deficit? Not happening, we are not Rutgers. Like I said, Suck it.

BTW maybe an advertising expert can tell us what the dollar value of dual basketball championships is in terms of school branding. It's has to be 8 figures. Not to mention the extra donations and merchandise revenue the championships bring. You ever hear of the Flutie effect? If an athletic department loss ever did occur it could easily be justified as a valuable marketing expense.

UConn's AD is $18m in the hole already: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/

Add $2m in stipends to that + a loss of $5m in exit fees in 5 years and you're at an annual loss of $25m.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I am getting really sick of the B1G poster concern trolling on this board.

 

[whaler11]

I'll disagree with you there. If fast money was the first and second factor, Oklahoma might currently be a member of the Big Ten instead or Rutgers or Maryland.

As long as the payout doesn't come up less than the previous year (that would be the big no-no for budgets), when the pie is divided 14 or more ways it doesn't make a huge difference if the pie is +- a small percentage different in size. If a good expansion case can be made (for academia or athletics), money can be left on the table.

There is no way Oklahoma is worth more in the Big Ten model than RU or MD.

This is fairly simple and they have stated it clearly. If you don't raise the Big Ten's boat - don't bother calling them. This is only about what you do for the league, not what the league does for you.

Granted the only people left who think this has anything to do with academics are associated with the Big Ten - but where this is all headed, money will rule and the ridiculous notion that the academic profile of your athletic conference mates matters will finally disappear into history.

When the SEC is putting two teams in the playoff and the Big 10 is sitting home because no one is impressed by Ohio State beating up on Purdue, Indiana, Northwestern and Maryland... Big 10 folks will get a little more pragmatic about who they are willing to call a conference partner.

 

[UConnDan97]

UConn's AD is $18m in the hole already: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/

Add $2m in stipends to that + a loss of $5m in exit fees in 5 years and you're at an annual loss of $25m.

That was my original point when I started the talk about state support!

I don't think that people realize how much the state has ponied up for us over the years in terms of athletic department spending. But I also don't believe that the state has lost its taste for that financial assistance, as evidenced by over 200,000 people at the parade in the capital recently.

I'll be the first one to say that the extra revenue from a decent contract (i.e., P5 contract) would help us greatly, but I also take some comfort in the fact that we are not Temple. We will not be closing the doors on athletic programs any time soon, and we will still be competing for championships in the foreseeable future...

 

[Dizzy21]

UConn's AD is $18m in the hole already: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/

Add $2m in stipends to that + a loss of $5m in exit fees in 5 years and you're at an annual loss of $25m.

If you look into the revenues the USA Today article may be off, the athletic department claims that it is self sufficient and even pays for student activities, which doesn't happen at other schools. I know this article is from 3 years ago, but the revenue and expenses are relatively the same... http://articles.courant.com/2011-12...1215_1_fbs-football-programs-eada-fiesta-bowl

 

[metsfan2323]

If you look into the revenues the USA Today article may be off, the athletic department claims that it is self sufficient and even pays for student activities, which doesn't happen at other schools. I know this article is from 3 years ago, but the revenue and expenses are relatively the same... http://articles.courant.com/2011-12...1215_1_fbs-football-programs-eada-fiesta-bowl

From the courant article:

"At UConn, the 21 other varsity teams, not including football and the two basketball teams, had expenses of $13.6 million and revenue of $1.4 million".

There is no question that the non revenue producing sports will come under greater scrutiny unless we change conferences, I would not be surprised to see even the baseball team put under the microscope, that will be unfortunate. The other sports will need to be creative and find ways to support themselves.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

From the courant article:

"At UConn, the 21 other varsity teams, not including football and the two basketball teams, had expenses of $13.6 million and revenue of $1.4 million".

There is no question that the non revenue producing sports will come under greater scrutiny unless we change conferences, I would not be surprised to see even the baseball team put under the microscope, that will be unfortunate. The other sports will need to be creative and find ways to support themselves.

The baseball team must go independent!

 

[B1GALUM]

I am getting really sick of the B1G poster concern trolling on this board.

Alright. Message received.

 

[Sportsman5]

Alright. Message received.

i'm sure your response is sarcastic, but just to clarify I (and I think most people) enjoy getting an outsiders perspective and you have made good posts.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Alright. Message received.

Oh, good... I thought he was talking to me.

 

[SAMCRO]

Alright. Message received.

Don't take your cues from Nelson. You're more than welcome to post here.

 

[dayooper]

Nah, it was me. right after I bantered a bit with The ND poster.

 

[upstater]

If you look into the revenues the USA Today article may be off, the athletic department claims that it is self sufficient and even pays for student activities, which doesn't happen at other schools. I know this article is from 3 years ago, but the revenue and expenses are relatively the same... http://articles.courant.com/2011-12...1215_1_fbs-football-programs-eada-fiesta-bowl

The USA Today article uses the numbers that UConn itself reported to the Department of Education. The articles you guys are quoting don't breakdown where the revenue is coming from. No mention of student fees and direct institutional support.

 

[Dizzy21]

The USA Today article uses the numbers that UConn itself reported to the Department of Education. The articles you guys are quoting don't breakdown where the revenue is coming from. No mention of student fees and direct institutional support.

The USA Today article does not use the numbers UConn itself reported to the Department of Education. They used public records requests to 225 individual Universities who can report basically whatever numbers they want to USA Today. According to the Department of Education, UConn athletics made a profit and according to the University Athletic Department Spokesperson, Mike Enright they made a profit. I'm gonna go with them over USA Today on this one.