Non-Key Tweets

[whaler11]

2026 is so far away. Facebook will displace cable operators. Apple will be building cars. Concussions will end the sport. The threat is there, difficult to predict if follow through will be real. Live sports is special and all.

Nobody has a model to monetize sports better than the cable bundle. This is why Netflix and Amazon and everyone else keeps telling their investors they aren't interested in live sports.

It's not a headfake - there is no way to generate enough revenue to pay leagues billions without cable affiliate fees.

 

[whaler11]

Not saying your wrong, but wouldn't ESPN rather pay more if forced to by the Big 12 for UConn content that'll actually make them money vs Memphis and UH content which is a joke.

Well if we believe what we read - it doesn't matter who the Big 12 adds and ESPN/Fox have no say in the additiona.

 

[whaler11]

Markets will always matter. That's why ESPN jumped in today and told the Big 12 to take their heads out of their arses.

Their message wasn't about markets. It was about expanding at all.

 

[upstater]

Nebraska got into the Big Ten when the math was completely different.

This could not be any more obvious. Everything they have done since the Big Ten contracts were announced has made it clear they get this.

This was 5 years ago.

What maths?

They took Nebraska for one reason only. Great football.

 

[superjohn]

Not saying your wrong, but wouldn't ESPN rather pay more if forced to by the Big 12 for UConn content that'll actually make them money vs Memphis and UH content which is a joke.

This.

 

[dayooper]

If you think recruting is down the list - it's no wonder why you don't ever get what is happening.

Recruiting areas are important, but not as much so to those who are making the decisions. Sure the recruiting was important to the Big10 when they took Rutgers (NJ has some very good talent). It wan't number one, though. The money made from the NJ/NYC area, along with Baltimore and DC were a goldmine. They also get exposure in an area that has some of the highest density high quality students. Getting the likes of Michigan and OSU to go along with a higher exposure for PSU was a boon. Now, maybe the Big12 looks at recruiting areas first, but that's why they have the smallest footprint and no network.

 

[4in16]

Well if we believe what we read - it doesn't matter who the Big 12 adds and ESPN/Fox have no say in the additiona.

I think the hissy fit by ESPN/FOX may change that tune and hopefully for us that's a good thing. Also if I'm the Big 12 I'm still adding 4 to take advantage of the deal the networks signed and agreed to to make the most money possible til 2026. I'd be willing to take a chance on them holding a grudge for 8 years especially if the content ends up proving them wrong. Compromise with ESPN and FOX by expanding with who they want but still take 4 because there is nothing they can do about that.

 

[whaler11]

This was 5 years ago.

What maths?

They took Nebraska for one reason only. Great football.

For the love of God.

When they added Nebraska the bar to raise the revenues for the rest of the league was much lower.

When the per team rake goes up 20 million over 5 years - the amount any new schools need to generate to keep the current schools whole is a huge number than a school like Oklahoma can't reach.

If you want to put a school in a league you need to show the math that makes it worth the other schools already in the league.

This is why Rutgers and Maryland are in the Big Ten. Because the math shows how everyone else has higher revenues after adding them.

 

[dayooper]

This was 5 years ago.

What maths?

They took Nebraska for one reason only. Great football.

The next additions for the Big10, if there are any, will be national brands. They need to prepare for skinny bundles and streaming. The days of Rutgers being added for cable boxes are long over with.

BTW - There are those within the Big10 that question the longevity of football. It's not the prevailing thought, but it's there. Schools like UConn will become a higher priority then.

 

[whaler11]

Recruiting areas are important, but not as much so to those who are making the decisions. Sure the recruiting was important to the Big10 when they took Rutgers (NJ has some very good talent). It wan't number one, though. The money made from the NJ/NYC area, along with Baltimore and DC were a goldmine. They also get exposure in an area that has some of the highest density high quality students. Getting the likes of Michigan and OSU to go along with a higher exposure for PSU was a boon. Now, maybe the Big12 looks at recruiting areas first, but that's why they have the smallest footprint and no network.

The criteria for the Big Ten adding schools and the Big 12 adding schools is not the same.

The decision making process the Big Ten uses is completely different because they monetize their league differently and beyond that they value completely different criteria.

 

[Fishy]

It's business.

ESPN has been forced to make large investments in the ACC and the Big Ten that they certainly did not want to have to make.

They're not afraid of expansion diluting the Big 12 - they're afraid of having to write a check.

They created the environment that spurred the Big 12 to move. They'll have to deal with it.

 

[Exit 4]

Nobody has a model to monetize sports better than the cable bundle. This is why Netflix and Amazon and everyone else keeps telling their investors they aren't interested in live sports.

It's not a headfake - there is no way to generate enough revenue to pay leagues billions without cable affiliate fees.

<--my hunch is that fox will pay 1% more on whatever market is in 2026 on the renewal/extension if the B12 plays nice and doesn't expand. in other words, you can't expect any real honor here in 2026...unless they get an extension now on the current deal in exchange for not expanding...which is not happening because their footprint sucks and tv is changing.

 

[whaler11]

This.

You need to let go of what you want to be true and deal with reality.

ESPN & Fox may be on the hook for the money no matter who the Big 12 adds.

If the Big 12 decides to burn the bridge they aren't going to do it halfway they are going to add whoever they want for whatever reason they want.

 

[whaler11]

<--my hunch is that fox will pay 1% more on whatever market is in 2026 on the renewal/extension if the B12 plays nice and doesn't expand. in other words, you can't expect any real honor here in 2026...unless they get an extension now on the current deal in exchange for not expanding...which is not happening because their footprint sucks and tv is changing.

Which has brought you all the way back to my original point - which I was bashed over.

The Big 12 may choose to play nice understanding they leave themselves with no outs in 2025 if they don't.

 

[superjohn]

You need to let go of what you want to be true and deal with reality.

ESPN & Fox may be on the hook for the money no matter who the Big 12 adds.

If the Big 12 decides to burn the bridge they aren't going to do it halfway they are going to add whoever they want for whatever reason they want.

You seem to have it all figured out. So what happens the next month/couple of months in realignment and what happens longterm?

 

[whaler11]

The next additions for the Big10, if there are any, will be national brands. They need to prepare for skinny bundles and streaming. The days of Rutgers being added for cable boxes are long over with.

BTW - There are those within the Big10 that question the longevity of football. It's not the prevailing thought, but it's there. Schools like UConn will become a higher priority then.

You could have stopped after your if clause. There won't be any.

If football goes away none of it will matter, in that environment there are a hundred schools that could put together a good basketball team if they focused on it.

 

[Exit 4]

Which has brought you all the way back to my original point - which I was bashed over.

The Big 12 may choose to play nice understanding they leave themselves with no outs in 2025 if they don't.

Or they could take the cash now and bet that fox is all talk and no action in 2025. I think its easy for fox to promise to play nice in 2025, but the reality is they will get the same deal in 2025 no matter what they do under the current contract. Fox mgmt in 2025 will have no honor to pay more because the B12 didn't exercise its expansion option. They will say they will, but in a parallel universe you'd find the two deals near identical.

 

[superjohn]

You could have stopped after your if clause. There won't be any.

If football goes away none of it will matter, in that environment there are a hundred schools that could put together a good basketball team if they focused on it.

"Hundreds of schools who could put together a good basketball team if they focused on it." Bwahahahaha.

 

[whaler11]

You seem to have it all figured out. So what happens the next month/couple of months in realignment and what happens longterm?

Well you are welcome to go back and read the posts. Good luck finding anyone who has gotten more right than I have.

Even Waylon will tell you I'm the about the only one who understood the ACC wasn't going anywhere and was never in any danger.

The Big 12 will go one of two ways:

More likely they back down on expansion in exchange for an increase on this deal.

They might choose to play it halfway and add two schools - getting their increase by withholding most of the money from those two schools. I'd venture those two schools are Houston and Cincinnati - with BYU having a shot to displace them.

As stupid as they are I don't see them committing the long-term suicide of adding four teams - fighting the pro-rata in the courts and hoping new bidders arrive by the time their deal ends.

 

[whaler11]

"Hundreds of schools who could put together a good basketball team if they focused on it." Bwahahahaha.

Have you never noticed that very few schools are good at both basketball and football? Have you ever stopped to wonder why?

Also I said a hundred - not hundreds.

 

[upstater]

The next additions for the Big10, if there are any, will be national brands. They need to prepare for skinny bundles and streaming. The days of Rutgers being added for cable boxes are long over with.

BTW - There are those within the Big10 that question the longevity of football. It's not the prevailing thought, but it's there. Schools like UConn will become a higher priority then.

I never said Oklahoma to B1G. Pac12, SEC and even ACC are possibilities.

 

[upstater]

Well you are welcome to go back and read the posts. Good luck finding anyone who has gotten more right than I have.

Even Waylon will tell you I'm the about the only one who understood the ACC wasn't going anywhere and was never in any danger.

The Big 12 will go one of two ways:

More likely they back down on expansion in exchange for an increase on this deal.

They might choose to play it halfway and add two schools - getting their increase by withholding most of the money from those two schools. I'd venture those two schools are Houston and Cincinnati - with BYU having a shot to displace them.

As stupid as they are I don't see them committing the long-term suicide of adding four teams - fighting the pro-rata in the courts and hoping new bidders arrive by the time their deal ends.

That's a bad bet. If they come out of this having added half of Cincy as a market, they will be even bigger laughingstocks. They need to come away with one of BYU or UConn. Maybe UCF.

 

[upstater]

For the love of God.

When they added Nebraska the bar to raise the revenues for the rest of the league was much lower.

When the per team rake goes up 20 million over 5 years - the amount any new schools need to generate to keep the current schools whole is a huge number than a school like Oklahoma can't reach.

If you want to put a school in a league you need to show the math that makes it worth the other schools already in the league.

This is why Rutgers and Maryland are in the Big Ten. Because the math shows how everyone else has higher revenues after adding them.

Wow, you are smarter than Delany...

Like Delany didn't know we'd be here now.

Get out.

On the B1G boards, people talked about these numbers ages ago. It was said inside the B1G offices THEN that they were going to $50m. You act like they're surprised. Get a clue.

 

[whaler11]

That's a bad bet. If they come out of this having added half of Cincy as a market, they will be even bigger laughingstocks. They need to come away with one of BYU or UConn. Maybe UCF.

If you haven't realized the Big 12 doesn't value what you and other posters think is valuable I don't know what to tell you.

 

[superjohn]

Have you never noticed that very few schools are good at both basketball and football? Have you ever stopped to wonder why?

Also I said a hundred - not hundreds.

Sorry I misread hundred, it's late. You ever notice it's almost always the same schools historically who are good at football or basketball. It takes a lot more than just saying we're gonna be a good program and dumping a lot of money into it. There are a bunch of schools that have been dumping a ton of money into these programs without much success on the actual court.