Discouraging, But you Never Can Tell...

[whaler11]

The number is $25M, what they are making this year. Projections that include a renegotiated TV deal or other escalations aren't comparing apples to apples. UConn, today, can generate $25 in rights fees with a $2/mo cable surcharge. It could be through the BTN or as a direct cable fee. Right or wrong, if it is needed for the B1G, the state will pass it and cable subscribers will pay it.

The number is nowhere near $25 million. They are way past that in their projection, give up equity in the network to additions and aren't adding anyone to break even that isn't named Notre Dame.

 

[bobbyinaz]

The number is $25M, what they are making this year. Projections that include a renegotiated TV deal or other escalations aren't comparing apples to apples. UConn, today, can generate $25 in rights fees with a $2/mo cable surcharge. It could be through the BTN or as a direct cable fee. Right or wrong, if it is needed for the B1G, the state will pass it and cable subscribers will pay it.

Why would the B1G add anyone to generate todays take of $25MM?

We've already seen the projections they gave to MD saying that in 2017 they will make $43MM. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/19/maryland-big-ten-money/

Plus, they would never add someone just to pay for themselves. You would need to pay for yourself plus add at least $3-5MM more to each other school in the conference.

We've had this discussion before but, I believe whaler's number of $75MM is low.

A new school will need to add close to $100MM to make it worth expanding. Only 3 schools have a chance at that, Notre Dame, Texas & MAYBE UNC.

Without 1 of those 3 there is no reason for the B1G to expand

 

[Fishy]

There is no school in existence that can draw $75,000,000 a year to a conference.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

You guys are out of your freaking minds if takes a school to bring $100m to a conference to be invited. There are many entire conferences can't even bring that amount to the table. If $100m per school is what it will take, they might as well disband the NCAA and turn all these schools into pro football franchises. Good luck with that.

FYI, to generate $100m, CT would have to charge average $6.41 per household per month in BTN fees assuming there are 1.3m households. Is it impossible? No. CT just needs to create a BTN tax for cable and satellite subscribers.

 

[whaler11]

There is no school in existence that can draw $75,000,000 a year to a conference.

Sure there are schools. Texas has 4.5 million cable households. At the BTN rates that's $54 million before their impact on the tier 1 contract.

Florida has 5.3 cable households. That math works even better.

 

[Fishy]

No.

Longhorn Network = $15,000,000 (Texas gets $11M, IMG gets $4M)
Big 12 Conference payout = $25,000,000

Total - $40,000,000.

Either they are leaving $35,000,000 on the table or your theory might need work.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Sure there are schools. Texas has 4.5 million cable households. At the BTN rates that's $54 million before their impact on the tier 1 contract.

Florida has 5.3 cable households. That math works even better.

Based on your theory, only the Dallas Cowboys is a true candidate for the B1G.

 

[Fishy]

You could claim that the Longhorns are worth, say, $60,000,000 to the Big 12 conference yearly, but the problem comes in when you look at the Longhorn Network - are you really going to sell the Big Ten Network to every single cable household in Texas when you can't even get the largest cable provider in the state to carry their homegrown network?

No.

Texas is very valuable. Notre Dame is very valuable (NBC - $15-20M a year), but neither are going to drag $75,000,000 along with them.

And that is a ridiculous metric anyway - the Big Ten would expand with UNC and UVa tomorrow. Neither school is in the ballpark of that kind of worth.

 

[BlueHen]

Hilarious to check in and see people pulling numbers out of their ass. Nobody knows for sure what is going to happen regarding CR, please stop making up numbers to support your imaginary arguments.

 

[whaler11]

Yep our numbers are imaginary... And it's a total coincidence that Fox purchased a controlling stake in YES right before the negotitations start for the BTN in NYC.

If I'm wrong that means the Big 10 is going to expand, and with that expansion the Big 10 members are going to make less money per team.

I'd love to be wrong. UConn in the Big 10 would be the best thing that happened to the University since hiring Calhoun.

The math is simple. It's $40+ million for the schools to break even. If you think Iowa or Nebraska or Wisconsin is going to take a net loss to add UConn... I hope you are awfully stubborn because you are
going to need some serious intestional fortitiude to get through a decade in the AAC.

 

[whaler11]

No.

Longhorn Network = $15,000,000 (Texas gets $11M, IMG gets $4M)
Big 12 Conference payout = $25,000,000

Total - $40,000,000.

Either they are leaving $35,000,000 on the table or your theory might need work.

I don't know if you've ever posted something this ridiculous. That it got likes speaks pretty well to the amount of logic that exists here.

To follow the logic in your post, one could argue that UConn gets $2 million and Seton Hall gets $5 million therefore Seton Hall is 250% more valuable than UConn as a television property.

If any given school is only worth what they get today you should probably just delete the CR board, because it means UConn is worth $2 million, Xavier is worth $5 million, Wake Forest is worth just less than 10 times more than UConn and in a couple of years Northwestern will make $21 in TV money for every dollar UConn gets.

 

[SubbaBub]

Why would the B1G add anyone to generate todays take of $25MM?

We've already seen the projections they gave to MD saying that in 2017 they will make $43MM. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/pete_thamel/11/19/maryland-big-ten-money/

Plus, they would never add someone just to pay for themselves. You would need to pay for yourself plus add at least $3-5MM more to each other school in the conference.

We've had this discussion before but, I believe whaler's number of $75MM is low.

A new school will need to add close to $100MM to make it worth expanding. Only 3 schools have a chance at that, Notre Dame, Texas & MAYBE UNC.

Without 1 of those 3 there is no reason for the B1G to expand

2017....it assumes the new BTN deal which may or may not factor in the value of a certain former ag college from New England.

CT is unique in a sense that TV households can be forced to pay a fee in excess of the $0.90/month or whatever the BTN gets in its footprint without resistance to full carriage on basic cable.

NJ, NY, MA, TX, NC, VA, MD, PA or any other state considered for B1G expansion can say that.

 

[NickyNewark]

I think its obvious why UConn would be attractive to the B1G. Blocking the ACC out of the NY/NE area and boosting their hoop's attractiveness mens and WBB not to mention (hockey strength?) and the obvious potential of the FB program. The fact that UConn is contigueness to the NY/NJ market, AAU bound and the wealth of Connecticut makes it a nobrainer not to mention Conn's 3.7 M population is about the size of Los Angeles I'm pretty sure? Theres more(politics) to CR than simple numbers !! I think the problem for now is a partner ?

 

[NickyNewark]

I wonder if a ND type of deal would be available for UCONN on a probationary basis. Obviously, football isn't on par with Notre Dame's. But if UCONN put all of their sports except football in the B1G, then had contractually agreed to play 5 football games against B1G opponents (home, away or neutral site on rotation) to help fill schedules, then it could benefit both parties:

Benefits to B1G - full time membership for two power basketball programs to help B1G Network programing and possibly open the door for a NYC conference tourney; access to fertile recruiting grounds for hockey conference to compete against Hockey East; keeps a balanced football conference to retain CCG; possibility to give B1G northeast alumni another chance to see their team locally; don't give full share of revenue during probation; allow UCONN to build up football using B1G brand to justify full membership invite in 5+ years.

Benefits to UCONN - tiny/partial B1G revenue share would still be more than full share of AAC revenue; can build football using games against B1G schools; better basketball conference top to bottom; helps recruiting in all sports; travel expenses are about the same as AAC; gives UCONN a few years to build towards AAU and increase endowment for full invite.

If we're going to make peanuts in conference revenue to begin with, I'd rather make peanuts in a partial B1G membership than full AAC membership. I know it's highly unlikely, but if the biggest deterrent to UCONN getting a B1G invite is a willing and available partner to keep a football championship in tact, then I wonder if a partial membership would be discussed/considered. UCONN could escape AAC purgatory and B1G gains more entry into NYC/northeast. I know from a football season ticket holder perspective, I'd be MUCH more excited to have a home slate of 2-3 B1G teams (even if I have to travel to MetLife or Gillette) and a bunch of fillers than 5 AAC teams and fillers.

Im sure I've said it b4 but I like the way you think!! To start as a partial FB member means as soon as a "partner" became available UConn would become a full member following you're line of thinking. Its a win win situation and would rejuvenate UConn's base and FB program plus get a competitive influx of cash to insure UConn stay's that way esp perception-wise in the meantime!

 

[TerryD]

With all due respect ... that's crazy.

You have no firm ground to stand on that leads one to believe that the status quo remains for the next 13 years. That's just not the nature of what's going on here.

Yes, I do. Grants of Rights and the fact that members of the P5 are where they want to be.

If the ACC were to be poached further, it would have happened before the GOR, not afterwards.

 

[TerryD]

True. But this particular Notre Dame Athletic Director wasn't interested in a Big Ten membership either fully or partial. Notre Dame views itself as an eastern oriented school wanting to play athletic competition as often as possible in eastern markets. The last thing they want to be is the midwestern catholic school in the midwestern conference. He wants the football team to play in markets all over the country and especially outside of the Midwest. Would one of the former ND athletic directors been interested in partial Big Ten membership? Possibly. They've considered it before. But not this one. They like the current arrangement, and so far so does the ACC. Down the road we'll have to see.

Not just this AD, but everyone since Rockne. ND despises the Big Ten. It turned that conference down in a very public fashion in 1999 and all of ND's moves (NBC contract, Big East and ACC membership) have been to stay out of the clutches of Jim Delany and the Big Ten.

To ND, membership in the Big Ten would amount to the worst possible outcome of CR for the Irish, despite the most TV money, less travel costs, geographic proximity, etc...

Other programs may run towards Big Ten membership. ND has always run away from it.

It would have been the easiest thing in the world for ND to join the Big Ten in 2010 or 2011. The most TV dollars due to the BTN, local rivalries, less travel costs for all sports, etc...

It all sure made sense to most non-ND folks.

What did ND do? It joined the ACC.

 

[NickyNewark]

Not just this AD, but everyone since Rockne. ND despises the Big Ten. It turned that conference down in a very public fashion in 1999 and all of ND's moves (NBC contract, Big East and ACC membership) have been to stay out of the clutches of Jim Delany and the Big Ten.

To ND, membership in the Big Ten would amount to the worst possible outcome of CR of it, despite the most TV money, less travel costs, geographic proximity, etc...

Didnt this feud/hate start because the B1G(Mich) once turned ND down for membership back in the day?I hear from alum's the boosters will never allow NDFB join ANY conference? Are the boosters as powerful as they say?

 

[btstimpy]

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/95904/del any-big-ten-mind-set-must-be-national

After the Big Ten approved Maryland and Rutgers as future members in November 2012, league commissioner Jim Delany described the additions as "an Eastern initiative with a Penn State bridge."

When I read this I reinforces just how the new eastern additions of Maryland and Rutgers are viewed and will be viewed by the Big Ten. They are a couple of additions across a bridge that will help make the Big Ten Money. Nothing more. And Penn State is nothing but a bridge. The core of the team is together on the other side of this bridge enjoying its cut and living like it always has.

It might just be me, but this is about as non-inclusive of a statement as one can get. I wouldn't want to be the island on the other side of that bridge. I wouldn't want to be the bridge either. I wonder if Penn State likes being a bridge for its league. It probably is just me, and I could be wrong, but the mental image of his words is what I actually did think he was doing. It also forecasts how I think the new additions will be treated, money or no money.

It's just an observation not intended to flame because there are a lot of Big Ten fans here, but I just read that and had the image. As an ACC fan one thing I don't want my conference to do is create any bridges. I don't want any fly overs like West Virginia is to the Big XII either BTW. I won't be calling Louisville any bridge to the midwest. I do know that if UConn is added to the ACC we won't need a bridge.

 

[TerryD]

Didnt this feud/hate start because the B1G(Mich) once turned ND down for membership back in the day?I hear from alum's the boosters will never allow NDFB join ANY conference? Are the boosters as powerful as they say?

Yes to both questions. Not only that, but there has always been lots of bad blood between Michigan and ND. Michigan tried to blackball ND. It refused to play ND from about 1910 until 1941 and from 1943 until 1978.

Michigan tried to convince Purdue and Michigan State to refuse to play ND decades ago, to no avail.

ND boosters are almost 100% in their dislike for all things Big Ten. Most ND alumni and fans are against football conference membership, period, forever.

If, and only if, ND cannot legally compete for national championship contention will the Irish ever join a football conference in full.

It is not based on "greed". Hell, ND could make more money in the Big Ten. It is based upon tradition, identity and status.

ND has never played football in a conference in 127 seasons. It considers itself the national, Catholic university and uses the football team to market the school that way.

With five games against ACC schools (which covers the Southeast for recruiting), ND still has scheduling control over seven games a year to play two West Coast schools (one in California every year for recruiting), a couple of games in the Southwest (Texas, Oklahoma, Shamrock Series games in Dallas and San Antonio), a few games in the Northeast in pro stadiums (Navy, Temple) and still cover the Midwest with six home games.

 

[billybud]

Many folks don't know the extent of the historical feelings between older Notre Dame alumni and the B1G....I was quite amazed, when talking to Notre Dame grads, who were acquaintances, at how history still reverberated some 90 years later. It has been kept alive going from generation to generation.

Notre Dame, in the way back, did attempt to join the Big Ten and was rebuffed. In 1926 Knute Rockne, in his capacity as Irish athletic director, made a strong bid for Big Ten admission.

His effort was rebuffed by a group led by Michigan's Fielding Yost.

Hints of anti Catholicism are still bandied about...

Wiki...

Murray Sperber's book Shake Down the Thunder places principal responsibility for the Big Ten blackballing and boycotting of Notre Dame on Yost, as well as the charge that this was motivated by anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant prejudice common in the early 20th century.

1910 - 24 hours before Notre Dame and Michigan are to play, Yost cancels the game. The two teams do not play again for thirty-two years.

1911 - A general policy of blackballing of Notre Dame by Michigan and Western Conference schools begins. Jesse Harper (Notre Dame) writes to ask Michigan to schedule a game: "I am very sorry you could not think it best to schedule a game for next fall. If at any time you should find that your schedule is not working out to suit you and that you would like to play Notre Dame, I would be very glad to hear from you."

1926 - In a note to the Big Ten Commissioner, noting that Notre Dame had won its last twelve games against Big Ten teams Yost urges all to join Michigan's renewed boycott, "one can readily see how the Conference is helping Notre Dame."

 

[NickyNewark]

Where are the Big Ten institutions in the Southeast, Southwest and West Coast that will make them a "national conference".?

That was just a bit of arrogance and hubris by Delany.

National in scope and alumni I think he meant? Didn't he say 15 percent of geography 30% of Pop?

 

[TerryD]

Many folks don't know the extent of the historical feelings between older Notre Dame alumni and the B1G....I was quite amazed, when talking to Notre Dame grads, who were acquaintances, at how history still reverberated some 90 years later. It has been kept alive going from generation to generation.

Notre Dame, in the way back, did attempt to join the Big Ten and was rebuffed. In 1926 Knute Rockne, in his capacity as Irish athletic director, made a strong bid for Big Ten admission.

His effort was rebuffed by a group led by Michigan's Fielding Yost.

Hints of anti Catholicism are still bandied about...

Wiki...

Murray Sperber's book Shake Down the Thunder places principal responsibility for the Big Ten blackballing and boycotting of Notre Dame on Yost, as well as the charge that this was motivated by anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant prejudice common in the early 20th century.

1910 - 24 hours before Notre Dame and Michigan are to play, Yost cancels the game. The two teams do not play again for thirty-two years.

1911 - A general policy of blackballing of Notre Dame by Michigan and Western Conference schools begins. Jesse Harper (Notre Dame) writes to ask Michigan to schedule a game: "I am very sorry you could not think it best to schedule a game for next fall. If at any time you should find that your schedule is not working out to suit you and that you would like to play Notre Dame, I would be very glad to hear from you."

1926 - In a note to the Big Ten Commissioner, noting that Notre Dame had won its last twelve games against Big Ten teams Yost urges all to join Michigan's renewed boycott, "one can readily see how the Conference is helping Notre Dame."

Correct. That enmity by ND against the Big Ten is why sportswriters, bloggers and messages board posters were wrong back in 2010 when they thought that Jim Delany had "checkmated" ND into joining the Big Ten because the Big Ten TV money was more than what ND made from NBC at the time.

The trouble is, nobody asked ND folks how they felt about that.

ND would rather make less money outside of the Big Ten than more money as a member of that conference.

That equation existed without even taking into consideration the negative impact of big donations withheld because of alumni anger had ND joined the Big Ten.

There was a wave of such sentiment expressed loudly when the issue of Big Ten membership was ever discussed.

Opposition to Big Ten membership is that strong.

 

[TerryD]

All this talk about the ACC and ND being so happy together, everything is beautiful, makes me sick.

ND did not do a THING to help the BE and it will not do a THING to help the ACC. Just wait. Those stripes are permanent, they don't wash off. The two things that i know to be true are: 1. if ND wants to join any other conference tomorrow it will - they will not be bound by this so called ACC 2027 call option (I'm sure ND has some contract protection up their sleeve most likely called the 4 leaf clover provision, and 2. I hope FSU wins two or three more National Championships in a row - lets see how happy they will be realizing FSU is by far the fb power in the ACC, yet all schools have an equal $ take, save the sweetheart deal ND has ala NBC.

ND made it crystal clear from the beginning to the Big East that football would never be included. The conference voted them in, anyway.

In contrast to the Big East, ND agreed contractually to play five ACC schools per year in football. The ACC is where ND wants to be.

That conference stretches from Boston to Miami, which is where ND's fans and alumni largely reside. Likewise, ND hockey moved to the Hockey East Conference.

Not only geographically, but the ACC also has a number of smaller, private schools. That makes the ACC a better fit than the Big Ten with its large, state land grant universities (except for Northwestern).

Finally, ND has been concentrating its football recruiting in places like the Virginia Tidewater, North Carolina, Georgia and South Carolina. ACC membership helps that effort.

 

[NickyNewark]

When I read this I reinforces just how the new eastern additions of Maryland and Rutgers are viewed and will be viewed by the Big Ten. They are a couple of additions across a bridge that will help make the Big Ten Money. Nothing more. And Penn State is nothing but a bridge. The core of the team is together on the other side of this bridge enjoying its cut and living like it always has.

It might just be me, but this is about as non-inclusive of a statement as one can get. I wouldn't want to be the island on the other side of that bridge. I wouldn't want to be the bridge either. I wonder if Penn State likes being a bridge for its league. It probably is just me, and I could be wrong, but the mental image of his words is what I actually did think he was doing. It also forecasts how I think the new additions will be treated, money or no money.

It's just an observation not intended to flame because there are a lot of Big Ten fans here, but I just read that and had the image. As an ACC fan one thing I don't want my conference to do is create any bridges. I don't want any fly overs like West Virginia is to the Big XII either BTW. I won't be calling Louisville any bridge to the midwest. I do know that if UConn is added to the ACC we won't need a bridge.

The way I understand it is PSU is the bridge to the promised land? Funny how an ACC fan would see it that way!?! L'ville is not a bridge to anything or where but L'ville but thats just MO. As usual though stimp knows just how to conclude smoothly pandering to take a the edge off with a "friendly" pat ? Are you in the Diplomatic corps? No rough edges to bstimp but how much depth? Thanks for not flaming or at least not intentionally.

 

[billybud]

I think that you are right, Nicky.

Louisville was not brought in as a bridge to anywhere...that was not a selling point.

They did fulfill an ACC need...and it didn't hurt that ESPN probably blessed the addition because they are a top metered market for ESPN.