Blauds expects BE deal closer to 100 mil than 60 | The Boneyard

Blauds expects BE deal closer to 100 mil than 60

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,499
Reaction Score
9,589
http://ajerseyguy.com/

He thinks Boise will "stay" and then writes this:

"If Aresco can get Boise to stay, he will have a 12-team, two division football conference locked up. He can then settle the television deal which will have all sorts of escape and “look in”" clauses to it. It will be a combination ESPN-NBC/Comcast deal in football and basketball which could be closer to $100 million per year than $60 million per year as has been speculated."

I guess if it sounds OK then the opposite will happen given all the bad news lately.
 

UConnDan97

predicting undefeated seasons since 1983
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
12,029
Reaction Score
42,367
If this works out anywhere close to 100 million for the 14 schools, then Boise is certainly staying and we will be in as good shape as we could hope for in the NBE. That number breaks down to approximately 7 million per year (likely around 6 million for football-only's), but you will likely be able to add a BCS bowl revenue (since I don't think anyone else will take it), the NCAA bball credits that we are still due, and exit fees that we are still due. Tier III rights are still in play as well for everyone, so it would get even better than that.

If Blauds is right at the end of the day, then this would be a decent outcome for UConn and the Big East...
 

junglehusky

Molotov Cocktail of Ugliness
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
7,183
Reaction Score
15,535
Georgia Tech turned down the BigTen??? It sounds like there wasn't an offer but they were being evaluated as a partner for Md. This amuses me since Snooki is sloppy seconds (not that they mind).

Anyway, I'd bet that Blauds's sources are in Aresco's office or a BE athletic department rather than a TV network but... we'll see.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
20,537
Reaction Score
44,602
I wouldn't mind being sloppy fifths. Lets be serious about that. If we're ever picked by any other conference what would that make us sloppy sevenths?

All kidding aside, if Aresco pulls that off, he will have done a more than adequate job in with the clusterfluck that has become of this conference.
 

SubbaBub

Your stupidity is ruining my country.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
32,156
Reaction Score
24,780
Any discussion of an unbalanced split like the Big 12? I think it would be appropriate for this deal. What about bowl reimbursements?
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
1,406
Reaction Score
637
Any discussion of an unbalanced split like the Big 12? I think it would be appropriate for this deal.

The money probably couldn't be enough to entice Boise, UConn or Cincinnati (the three most likely beneficiaries) to stay if a better offer came along, and there just isn't enough total money in the pool to do anything but either a marginal increase or, at an attempt to bring in seriously competitive numbers for the top-tier teams, an egregious split.

Just some quick back of the envelope math: If we give Boise, UConn, Cincinnati, and USF a double share of a $100M split (ordinarily valued at about 7.69 million for 13 totally equal share), thus netting those four $15.4M a piece (competitive with the "Power 5", if lower than the smallest current per-team output of the ACC), the others in the new alignment would have to receive what is just slightly above a half-share, valued at 4.27M.

If we bump the Big 4 share to a competitive level with the ACC (at $17.3 M), it requires giving those a double plus a quarter share; that dumps the other members down to a 44.5% share, for 3.423M.

3.5-4M isn't what Houston or the rest really signed on for.
 

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
32,010
Reaction Score
82,304
The money probably couldn't be enough to entice Boise, UConn or Cincinnati (the three most likely beneficiaries) to stay if a better offer came along, and there just isn't enough total money in the pool to do anything but either a marginal increase or, at an attempt to bring in seriously competitive numbers for the top-tier teams, an egregious split.

Just some quick back of the envelope math: If we give Boise, UConn, Cincinnati, and USF a double share of a $100M split (ordinarily valued at about 7.69 million for 13 totally equal share), thus netting those four $15.4M a piece (competitive with the "Power 5", if lower than the smallest current per-team output of the ACC), the others in the new alignment would have to receive what is just slightly above a half-share, valued at 4.27M.

If we bump the Big 4 share to a competitive level with the ACC (at $17.3 M), it requires giving those a double plus a quarter share; that dumps the other members down to a 44.5% share, for 3.423M.

3.5-4M isn't what Houston or the rest really signed on for.

On what basis would this happen? UConn doesn't bring any more for football than UCF or SDSU. Meanwhile if you consider ncaa tournament shares Boise and the FL schools are moochers. There is no justification for unequal treatment.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
824
Reaction Score
1,654
On what basis would this happen? UConn doesn't bring any more for football than UCF or SDSU. Meanwhile if you consider ncaa tournament shares Boise and the FL schools are moochers. There is no justification for unequal treatment.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2[/quote

I don't think he was saying that we brought more, just that we are one of the schools likely to leave and if the league basically bought the schools off that were most probable to take off then maybe they wouldn't. Personally I don't think that would be solid footing to start a new league on.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
1,406
Reaction Score
637
On what basis would this happen? UConn doesn't bring any more for football than UCF or SDSU. Meanwhile if you consider ncaa tournament shares Boise and the FL schools are moochers. There is no justification for unequal treatment.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

The primary justification for an unequal distribution would be as an incentive to stay aligned with the league, rather than a reflection of the team's value to the league.
 

SubbaBub

Your stupidity is ruining my country.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
32,156
Reaction Score
24,780
Unequal distribution means based on performance not team X gets more. In the BIG 12 each team gets a base amount and the rest is distributed based on TV appearances and keeping a percentage of your bowl game payout.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,321
Reaction Score
46,506
On what basis would this happen? UConn doesn't bring any more for football than UCF or SDSU. Meanwhile if you consider ncaa tournament shares Boise and the FL schools are moochers. There is no justification for unequal treatment.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

How do you figure this?

In looking at the last numbers from 2010, UConn made $20m+ from all ticket sales and contributions (for all sports) while San Diego St made $6 million for tickets and contributions from all sports.
 

HuskyHawk

The triumphant return of the Blues Brothers.
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
32,010
Reaction Score
82,304
How do you figure this?

In looking at the last numbers from 2010, UConn made $20m+ from all ticket sales and contributions (for all sports) while San Diego St made $6 million for tickets and contributions from all sports.

Contributions are never shared. Do you think UConn draws a much bigger TV audience than SDSU? I doubt it. We're talking about shared revenues. Sharing as the B12 does it is fair, since it fluctuates based on actual money brought in. But you can't just announce that program A is worth more than program B, since it changes year to year.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,321
Reaction Score
46,506
Contributions are never shared. Do you think UConn draws a much bigger TV audience than SDSU? I doubt it. We're talking about shared revenues. Sharing as the B12 does it is fair, since it fluctuates based on actual money brought in. But you can't just announce that program A is worth more than program B, since it changes year to year.

Tickets aren't shared either.

You're talking television? Yes, UConn has a much wider audience than UCF and SD St.

UConn's rating on all of SNY (New York state included) for the Louisville game was 3.9.

The highest rated San Diego game in the San Diego market was against Air Force, a 1.2. When you realize the San Diego market only has 1 million TV households, while the SNY reach is much much bigger, and the rating 3x as large, the eyeballs are not in any way equal.
 

SubbaBub

Your stupidity is ruining my country.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
32,156
Reaction Score
24,780
It wouldn't be ratings based. More like a fixed amount per TV appearance. In the B12 Texas is on national TV every week so they get more than Kansas who isn't.

Bottom line is that Uss Connecticut needs X amount of revenue to stay afloat at the BCS level while we wait for our exit. An I am assuming X is greater than what UConn takes in now. Figure our what each schools X is and you can.keep the league together.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
455
Guests online
3,677
Total visitors
4,132

Forum statistics

Threads
156,975
Messages
4,075,040
Members
9,965
Latest member
deltaop99


Top Bottom