SNY ratings up

[Ldandy]

Big Ten needs more schools like Oklahoma to send to Rutgers to light up those cable boxes in NYC/NJ. It's more about justifying Rutgers, not Oklahoma. Of course, someone else we know of also would have a very positive impact on NYC... (just thought I would throw that out there)

Personally I would love to see Oklahoma and Texas both join The B1G just to balance out the divisions a little better. As of right now there are realistically only 3 schools that carry enough weight to be considered full share members, and they are all in The East Division. Unfortunately unless the network partners are willing to grow the Tier 1/2 Deals based on brand value alone it is hard to justify a small population add like OU under the current financial structure of cable subscriptions. Now if the model dramatically changes with the new deal to include more direct sales of programming then a school like OU with a passionate fan base becomes more attractive. The same can be said for UConn.

 

[Ldandy]

I wouldn't watch Rutroh do anything at the point of a gun...

I'd enjoy watching them move all of their **** teams out of this conference. They finished in last place in football and M/W Basketball. Their excuse is wait until we get more money we'll be really competitive then. Remind me again how much money does UConn make?

 

[Seaa Blue]

The basketball team has been playing better than their record might indicate.

 

[huskyrob1]

Personally I would love to see Oklahoma and Texas both join The B1G just to balance out the divisions a little better. As of right now there are realistically only 3 schools that carry enough weight to be considered full share members, and they are all in The East Division. Unfortunately unless the network partners are willing to grow the Tier 1/2 Deals based on brand value alone it is hard to justify a small population add like OU under the current financial structure of cable subscriptions. Now if the model dramatically changes with the new deal to include more direct sales of programming then a school like OU with a passionate fan base becomes more attractive. The same can be said for UConn.

If Michigan, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Ohio State can't light up the cable boxes when they play in Rutgers in New Jersey, what makes you think Oklahoma or Texas could? I mean who wants to see Rutgers, which has a fan base that's way way overated in NYC anyway, get blown out by 60-0 at home?

 

[Seaa Blue]

If Michigan, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Ohio State can't light up the cable boxes when they play in Rutgers in New Jersey, what makes you think Oklahoma or Texas could? I mean who wants to see Rutgers, which has a fan base that's way way overated in NYC anyway, get blown out by 60-0 at home?

I think Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan State are all together in the Eastern division at least in part to help market the Big Ten to the new markets. Oklahoma would help shore up the current Western division while adding flexibility for future division realignment with the new markets in mind. Texas would do the same.

I think Delany and company think very hard about the scheduling of teams at Rutgers and Maryland. For TV, and for the thousands of alumni in those markets. Those alumni don't mind seeing Rutgers get blown out.

 

[Stinger92860]

Reread my post. The ability to fill stadiums has value.

Stadium Capacity
Michigan 107,601
Penn State 106,572
Ohio State 104,944
Nebraska 86,047
Wisconsin 80,321
Michigan State 75,005
Iowa 70,585
Illinois 60,670
Purdue 57,236
Indiana 52,929
Rutgers 52,454
Maryland 51,802
Minnesota 50,805
Northwestern 47,330

Oklahoma will only play 5 b10 road games in a given year. Those stadiums are not empty before Oklahoma comes to town. Ohio St, psu, mst, etc. sell out regardless. I don't see the incrental value adding up to something more than what the b10 teams already receive. IMO Only Texas or FLorida could deliver with cable boxes.

 

[Ldandy]

If Michigan, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Ohio State can't light up the cable boxes when they play in Rutgers in New Jersey, what makes you think Oklahoma or Texas could? I mean who wants to see Rutgers, which has a fan base that's way way overated in NYC anyway, get blown out by 60-0 at home?

I wasn't really commenting on whether or not UT or OU could bring ratings against Rutgers. I was commenting on what teams carry the water for the conference financially, and who if any could potentially add to that. Texas would immediately be in the group with PSU, OSU, and UM that deliver full share value. All four are major brands, have huge fan bases, are TV draws, and constitute large population states.

UT's Addition(assuming LHN was not involved) would immediately grow both Tier 1/2 and Tier 3 revenue more than enough to give everyone in the conference a bump. OU, while like the other four in the majority of ways, brings a very small state population. The ability to monetize OK Cable Subscribers might not be enough to cover an increase for the then 15 other members. An extended buy in period might alleviate some of this, but would have to be weighed by The Sooners against whatever they are making elsewhere to determine if it would be worth pursuing.

 

[Ldandy]

I think Michigan, Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan State are all together in the Eastern division at least in part to help market the Big Ten to the new markets. Oklahoma would help shore up the current Western division while adding flexibility for future division realignment with the new markets in mind. Texas would do the same.

I think Delany and company think very hard about the scheduling of teams at Rutgers and Maryland. For TV, and for the thousands of alumni in those markets. Those alumni don't mind seeing Rutgers get blown out.

There was definitely some of that thinking at play here, but ultimately PSU/OSU/UM/MSU are all in the East because they're in the East. People were complaining about the whole Legends and Leaders thing before they expanded with UM/RU. Personally I was OK with it, because at least the conference tried to create competitive balance. People wanted geographic divisions, well now they got them. They also have a wildly unbalanced conference to go along with them.

Unlike The SEC where East v. West can work long term when UF, UT, and UGA return to some incarnation of their historic form, there is no one outside of a diminished Nebraska and over achieving Wisconsin to balance out the three headed monster of PSU/OSU/UM in The East. Sadly The B1G is much more like the old Big 12. All of the power is on one side of the conference with zero hope of it ever changing. Adding Texas and OU would instantly balance the scale and make the conference championship game beyond must see TV. Any combination of UT/OU/UNL v. PSU/OSU/UM for a shot at the playoff would be ratings gold.

 

[huskyrob1]

I wasn't really commenting on whether or not UT or OU could bring ratings against Rutgers. I was commenting on what teams carry the water for the conference financially, and who if any could potentially add to that. Texas would immediately be in the group with PSU, OSU, and UM that deliver full share value. All four are major brands, have huge fan bases, are TV draws, and constitute large population states.

UT's Addition(assuming LHN was not involved) would immediately grow both Tier 1/2 and Tier 3 revenue more than enough to give everyone in the conference a bump. OU, while like the other four in the majority of ways, brings a very small state population. The ability to monetize OK Cable Subscribers might not be enough to cover an increase for the then 15 other members. An extended buy in period might alleviate some of this, but would have to be weighed by The Sooners against whatever they are making elsewhere to determine if it would be worth pursuing.

The Big Ten has always been an upper Midwest and Northeastern conference, and my belief is they intend to keep it that way. Nebraska joining was a surprise for that very reason. I don't think Jim Delaney would go for adding Texas and OK, for several reasons, and I don't think the Big Ten's members would be unanimous in approving it, far from it actually. If the Big Ten adds two more schools I could see UCONN and West Virginia being added.

 

[Seaa Blue]

If Texas and Oklahoma made themselves available I can't see the Big Ten turning them down. There would no doubt be some discussion about venturing into Texas, but if their terms (think LHN) are reasonable, they would get the invite.

Nebraska was a front-runner back when MSU was admitted, so I don't think the Big Ten has a problem with venturing out into the Plains a little further.

UConn would be a great addition for solidifying the Northeastern presence. West Virginia hasn't been in the discussion since this all started.

 

[buddy]

If the Big Ten added WVU, then all talk of academics and AAU would be thrown out the window. It would almost like the ACC adding Louisville and still claim that academics matter.

 

[dayooper]

The Big Ten has always been an upper Midwest and Northeastern conference, and my belief is they intend to keep it that way. Nebraska joining was a surprise for that very reason. I don't think Jim Delaney would go for adding Texas and OK, for several reasons, and I don't think the Big Ten's members would be unanimous in approving it, far from it actually. If the Big Ten adds two more schools I could see UCONN and West Virginia being added.

WVU is very unlikely due to the fact that their mission is very different than the Big10 schools. The Big10 considers themselves as a group of elite, research based schools with a priority on bringing in the top students from anywhere. WVU's mission is to educate the as many residents of West Virginia as possible. Two great but very different missions.

Texas already is AAU and is an elite, research based institution. UConn may not be at the level of Texas, Michigan or any of the Public Ivies, but are getting better and would be a mid to upper middle Big10 school. Oklahoma doesn't have the elite status that other Big10 schools/UConn has and would be at the bottom a along with Nebraska and Indiana in rankings. Interestingly enough, they are an Carnegie tier 1 research institution just like the other schools. Is it enough for an invite alone? Nope, not in my opinion. As a partner with Texas? Absolutely! Do I think anything will happen soon? Nope. When it fires up again in a few years, you will see some different moves and conferences working together on their media packages. You may even see a conference going it alone without ESPN or any other media corp.

 

[Ldandy]

The Big Ten has always been an upper Midwest and Northeastern conference, and my belief is they intend to keep it that way. Nebraska joining was a surprise for that very reason. I don't think Jim Delaney would go for adding Texas and OK, for several reasons, and I don't think the Big Ten's members would be unanimous in approving it, far from it actually. If the Big Ten adds two more schools I could see UCONN and West Virginia being added.

Nebraska was a surprise to me only in that I viewed them as a bell cow of another conference who wouldn't look to move elsewhere. When decisions were made to move to 12 teams and add a championship game in The Big 10 I believed that Missouri would finally be added. When UNL showed real interest as well, the conference had to go in that direction. Too big of a name to pass up, and still Midwestern enough that it was like adding another Iowa.

I disagree that Delany wouldn't add Texas. They meet the academic/athletic profile the conference wants, and would be a potential goldmine for BTN Subscriptions and advertising. OU is definitely more of a reach, as I think they would have a tough time getting in on their own. I believe that they would need to be UT's designated +1. WVU is a non starter for many reasons. Good school, but lacks the research rating the conference is looking for, and the state is too small to make a WVU addition ever pay off.

 

[huskyrob1]

Nebraska was a surprise to me only in that I viewed them as a bell cow of another conference who wouldn't look to move elsewhere. When decisions were made to move to 12 teams and add a championship game in The Big 10 I believed that Missouri would finally be added. When UNL showed real interest as well, the conference had to go in that direction. Too big of a name to pass up, and still Midwestern enough that it was like adding another Iowa.

I disagree that Delany wouldn't add Texas. They meet the academic/athletic profile the conference wants, and would be a potential goldmine for BTN Subscriptions and advertising. OU is definitely more of a reach, as I think they would have a tough time getting in on their own. I believe that they would need to be UT's designated +1. WVU is a non starter for many reasons. Good school, but lacks the research rating the conference is looking for, and the state is too small to make a WVU addition ever pay off.

I hear what you're saying, but if they're going to take Rutgers or Maryland, I can see them taking West Virginia. On taking Texas I say no, but JMO. The Baylor sex and recruiting scandal hasn't just damaged Baylor but the entire football culture in the state of Texas. I think Delaney would pass on Texas. Other negatives of course are the geographics for all sports, what to do with Longhorn TV, it's just too risky a move for the Big Ten at a time when they don't have to make a risky move.

 

[dayooper]

I hear what you're saying, but if they're going to take Rutgers or Maryland, I can see them taking West Virginia. On taking Texas I say no, but JMO. The Baylor sex and recruiting scandal hasn't just damaged Baylor but the entire football culture in the state of Texas. I think Delaney would pass on Texas. Other negatives of course are the geographics for all sports, what to do with Longhorn TV, it's just too risky a move for the Big Ten at a time when they don't have to make a risky move.

What does taking Rutgers and Maryland have to do with WVU? Both Rutgers and Maryland are very good academic schools with producing a huge amount of research and bringing in their fair share of grant money. WVU doesn't. Their reputation as academic institutions are much higher than that of WVU.

As far as citing Baylor and the football crazed culture as reasons why the Big10 would pass on UT-Austin, that's just crazy talk. What has UT done to earn that line of thinking? If the Big10 can get Texas, with or without Oklahoma, they will. There is very little I am sure of in CR. The Big10 accepting Texas under normal conditions is one of them.

 

[huskyrob1]

What does taking Rutgers and Maryland have to do with WVU? Both Rutgers and Maryland are very good academic schools with producing a huge amount of research and bringing in their fair share of grant money. WVU doesn't. Their reputation as academic institutions are much higher than that of WVU.

As far as citing Baylor and the football crazed culture as reasons why the Big10 would pass on UT-Austin, that's just crazy talk. What has UT done to earn that line of thinking? If the Big10 can get Texas, with or without Oklahoma, they will. There is very little I am sure of in CR. The Big10 accepting Texas under normal conditions is one of them.

Of course I understand your thinking, but I just think you are missing some things about Texas. I'm telling you the Big Ten is not going to take a school on our southern border. It's too far south, geography means a lot to the Big Ten, much more so than the other P5 conferences. If Texas is going anywhere it's to the SEC. If the Big Ten wants to expand, I think it's UCONN, WVU, or Missouri. I also think you are way way overestimating what Texas brings to the Big Ten financially.

 

[CL82]

Oklahoma will only play 5 b10 road games in a given year. Those stadiums are not empty before Oklahoma comes to town. Ohio St, psu, mst, etc. sell out regardless. I don't see the incrental value adding up to something more than what the b10 teams already receive. IMO Only Texas or FLorida could deliver with cable boxes.

It's a big game and big games have value, in attendance, in ad buys, in future cable deals. Is it enough value? I can't say for sure but it is definitely there.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Of course I understand your thinking, but I just think you are missing some things about Texas. I'm telling you the Big Ten is not going to take a school on our southern border. It's too far south, geography means a lot to the Big Ten, much more so than the other P5 conferences. If Texas is going anywhere it's to the SEC. If the Big Ten wants to expand, I think it's UCONN, WVU, or Missouri. I also think you are way way overestimating what Texas brings to the Big Ten financially.

Well, it's not WVU, and Texas will land wherever Texas wants to land. They'll just buy themselves a big RV park and set up shop.

 

[dayooper]

Of course I understand your thinking, but I just think you are missing some things about Texas. I'm telling you the Big Ten is not going to take a school on our southern border. It's too far south, geography means a lot to the Big Ten, much more so than the other P5 conferences. If Texas is going anywhere it's to the SEC. If the Big Ten wants to expand, I think it's UCONN, WVU, or Missouri. I also think you are way way overestimating what Texas brings to the Big Ten financially.

I guess I'm not quite understanding where you are coming from about why Texas will never be allowed to join the Big10. I'm also not sure you completely understand the culture of the Big10 and what the purpose of their athletic teams are. The Big10 wants to brand their universities more than anything else. They want the Big10 brands in front of as many prospective students as they can. Schools like Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois and Northwestern are very selective and want to become even more selective, as do the other Big10 schools. They do that by bringing the best students they can from as many different places as they can. Why compete for the same regional students when you expand your footprint and have a larger pool of students to recruit from? Two ways you do that: bring in schools in areas you want students from and have nationally televised games. Regional games don't do that. Notice how they are expanding into new regions? PSU and Rutgers are Northeast/NYC schools. Maryland is Mid-Atlantic and Nebraska is in the Great Plains (Nebraska was more about being a national program than getting into the state of Nebraska).

The Big10 has already tried to get into Texas. Back in 2010, they had talks with Texas, but those hit a snag with the "Tech problem." (I think the Tech that whole scenario was a way of leveraging the LHN out of ESPN.) They also were in preliminary talks with Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa State. The precedent has been sent.

Texas provides eyeballs for branding their schools. They would put almost 27 million eyeballs on their schools. Texas would provide a new, very large region and provide national games. Texas playing OSU, Michigan or PSU would be a national game.

I am curious on why you think WVU is more likely to be invited than Texas. It's a premise I have never heard before and I would like to know the reasoning behind the idea.

 

[huskyrob1]

I guess I'm not quite understanding where you are coming from about why Texas will never be allowed to join the Big10. I'm also not sure you completely understand the culture of the Big10 and what the purpose of their athletic teams are. The Big10 wants to brand their universities more than anything else. They want the Big10 brands in front of as many prospective students as they can. Schools like Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois and Northwestern are very selective and want to become even more selective, as do the other Big10 schools. They do that by bringing the best students they can from as many different places as they can. Why compete for the same regional students when you expand your footprint and have a larger pool of students to recruit from? Two ways you do that: bring in schools in areas you want students from and have nationally televised games. Regional games don't do that. Notice how they are expanding into new regions? PSU and Rutgers are Northeast/NYC schools. Maryland is Mid-Atlantic and Nebraska is in the Great Plains (Nebraska was more about being a national program than getting into the state of Nebraska).

The Big10 has already tried to get into Texas. Back in 2010, they had talks with Texas, but those hit a snag with the "Tech problem." (I think the Tech that whole scenario was a way of leveraging the LHN out of ESPN.) They also were in preliminary talks with Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa State. The precedent has been sent.

Texas provides eyeballs for branding their schools. They would put almost 27 million eyeballs on their schools. Texas would provide a new, very large region and provide national games. Texas playing OSU, Michigan or PSU would be a national game.

I am curious on why you think WVU is more likely to be invited than Texas. It's a premise I have never heard before and I would like to know the reasoning behind the idea.

UCONN and Missouri definitely before WVU, but WVU would be considered too. Does Texas have any kind of a historical rivalry with anyone in the Big Ten besides Nebraska? WVU does, with some of those rivalries going back 100 years.

 

[upstater]

UCONN and Missouri definitely before WVU, but WVU would be considered too. Does Texas have any kind of a historical rivalry with anyone in the Big Ten besides Nebraska? WVU does, with some of those rivalries going back 100 years.

WVU doesn't cut it academically--would not be considered.

 

[dayooper]

UCONN and Missouri definitely before WVU, but WVU would be considered too. Does Texas have any kind of a historical rivalry with anyone in the Big Ten besides Nebraska? WVU does, with some of those rivalries going back 100 years.

Not sure any WVU rivalry, except the Backyard brawl, would register on the the Big10's list. Even the Brawl wouldn't be enough to get WVU into the Big10. I'm also confident that the academic differences would rule out WVU from the Big10 too. I know USNWR isn't the best indicator of rating, but the difference between WVU and the next lowest school (Nebraska) is pretty big (WVU is 183 and Nebraska is 110). The population of WVU is pretty small too (1.9 million).

 

[Seaa Blue]

You beat me to it @dayooper. You're also showing much more patience with this. Well done.

Anyone would take Texas (except if "strings attached" is an issue), rivalries, or not.

 

[uconnfan68]

UCONN and Missouri definitely before WVU, but WVU would be considered too. Does Texas have any kind of a historical rivalry with anyone in the Big Ten besides Nebraska? WVU does, with some of those rivalries going back 100 years.

Why on earth would Missouri consider leaving the SEC? What am I missing?

 

[Ldandy]

UCONN and Missouri definitely before WVU, but WVU would be considered too. Does Texas have any kind of a historical rivalry with anyone in the Big Ten besides Nebraska? WVU does, with some of those rivalries going back 100 years.

As a fan I would be in favor of adding WVU to The B1G. They bring good football and basketball to any conference and would have ready made rivalries with PSU, UMD, RU, and OSU. That said fans don't make these decisions, and to those that do they would have no shot. Weak research/academics and far too small of a population to make monetizing cable boxes pay off for The BTN. Both Missouri and Uconn would be way ahead of WVU, but no one would come before UT. Despite all of their baggage they bring an academic pedigree and the population of a smallish country. Simply too much money to ignore.

 

[huskyniner]

Concerning the women's team, but relevant nonetheless.

From SI.com: Who will replace Chris Berman on Sunday Countdown?

2. Along with its otherworldly success on the court—106 consecutive wins as of this writing—the UConn women’s basketball team has found an unexpected audience in New York City. SNY (the home of the New York Mets) aired 17 of UConn’s 29 regular season games this season and the network said that live game viewership set a record in the New York City market. For the season, the UConn women averaged an 0.42 household rating in New York, breaking the previous high by 83% and beating the men’s college basketball teams that air on competitors MSG Network and YES Network. “I think what we saw this year somewhat unexpected is the growth outside of Connecticut,” said SNY president Steve Raab. “Based on the feedback we get, the winning streak has transcended the sports fan in New York.”

SNY officials said SNY has approximately 50 people working on its UConn women’s programming, including season-long shows, and a reporter who will travel with the team during the postseason. That’s an impressive number given ESPN gets UConn’s highest-profile games given its college basketball contracts.​

 

[IMind]

To go back to the $50 million per year B1G number... my thought is that's a ceiling. You're seeing the high water mark for B1G. If ratings and results become more important in a revenue model that isn't based strictly on the raw numbers of cable boxes. If it becomes more important for the content to actually be watched then an AD like UConn becomes more valuable.

This is all fantasy at this point and it's contingent on UConn having winning basketball and football programs.... but that's a world in which UConn may be able to get in to a P5.

If things stay the same then I think the best we can hope for is to join what's left of the Big 12 if Texas and/or Oklahoma are invited to another conference. Actually my semi-plausible pie in the sky scenario is that UConn is the second school that gets into the B1G when they add Texas in 2024.

 

[Ldandy]

To go back to the $50 million per year B1G number... my thought is that's a ceiling. You're seeing the high water mark for B1G. If ratings and results become more important in a revenue model that isn't based strictly on the raw numbers of cable boxes. If it becomes more important for the content to actually be watched then an AD like UConn becomes more valuable.

This is all fantasy at this point and it's contingent on UConn having winning basketball and football programs.... but that's a world in which UConn may be able to get in to a P5.

If things stay the same then I think the best we can hope for is to join what's left of the Big 12 if Texas and/or Oklahoma are invited to another conference. Actually my semi-plausible pie in the sky scenario is that UConn is the second school that gets into the B1G when they add Texas in 2024.

Good post. I agree that The B1G is at its high water mark for revenue generation under the current model. It is unrealistic for conferences to believe that they can continue to land these ridiculously high paying deals beyond the near term. Where is the value to the guy writing the check? If you compare the ROI of the current AAC Deal versus the current Big 12 Deal it is quite eye opening.

I think the turning away from these mega deals will come when both The PAC and Big 12 try to negotiate their next contracts. The value in ratings simply does not back up the dollars being expended by ESPN/Fox for these products. JMO but I think the low balling of bids on the next generation of deals could set off the next wave of realignment/consolidation.

I agree that content and content generators will become more important in the new media future. Those conferences capable of producing and controlling their own content will have a major advantage over their competitors in the next phase. This is where I believe The B1g has positioned itself well ahead of everyone else. Sure The PAC owns its own network, but distribution is spotty, and interest in the product is low. The ACC and SEC have deals, but they are entirely dependent on ESPN. The B1G has distribution, partial ownership, and a product that sells. They have the winning formula.

The idea that they signed a shorter term Tier 1/2 Deal than their competition was quite telling as well. This allows them flexibility to explore all distribution avenues much quicker than their competitors, and to potentially retain more quality programming that they can market direct to consumers via The BTN and their BTN+ streaming service. This is where a school like Uconn with quality content to provide could become highly valuable asset to The B1G IMO. Obviously these are big ifs, but if The Big 12 implodes, it is entirely possible that OU/OSU or OU/KU could end up in The SEC. If that occurred Uconn would make a great partner for UT under this new media model.

 

[businesslawyer]

The real question is whether, when told that Big Ten/Pac Ten/SEC revenues are going to go down with renewals, the Michigans and 'Bamas and USCs say "o.k." Or whether they do the one thing left to drive per team revenues up, which is to either (i) form their own national mega conference, or (ii) threaten to do so to get the Vandys and Northwesterns and Wash States to take less than a pro rata share.

 

[Seaa Blue]

The real question is whether, when told that Big Ten/Pac Ten/SEC revenues are going to go down with renewals, the Michigans and 'Bamas and USCs say "o.k." Or whether they do the one thing left to drive per team revenues up, which is to either (i) form their own national mega conference, or (ii) threaten to do so to get the Vandys and Northwesterns and Wash States to take less than a pro rata share.

Highly unlikely in the Big Ten that the distribution would change. As important as athletics are, it's still just a fraction of the overall budget and the "have's" will also tend to have far greater expenses to go with the revenue. So I think all is well.

If the SEC wants to do a super-mega club deal with Texas and friends, I could see the Big Ten saying "that's not us." on the other hand, if the Big 12 crumbles I'm not so sure that the Big Ten stays on the sideline.