Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
Author Message
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,110
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 499
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #21
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
cuseroc Wrote:
goodknightfl Wrote:The big 10 is taking it to a whole new level.. Any BE people who think Penn state is moving to BE are just nuts. they are raking in the $$$$ where they are..I kind of imagine this will lead the SEC to move sooner rather than later on a SEC network.


You are absolutely right. But then again, the Big 10 was able to get this deal done without expanding. They were able to get the type of money that they wanted. They did not need a Syracuse or Rutgers or Nebraska or Mizzu. Looks like the BE maybe safe for now.

I tend to agree about BE being safe.. big 10 will stand pat or wait for ND.. only way they take CUSE or RUTGERS is if they are positive TV goes up enough to rake in more $$$ per school. I tend to think the conf are all pretty stable till at least 2013.
06-16-2008 02:55 PM
Find all posts by this user
E-zone Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 584
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 5
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #22
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
bitcruncher Wrote:All this still doesn't rule out a possible BEast association with Penn State. Who knows what the future holds.

I don't expect them to come back. But it doesn't stop me from wishing.

Sound like wishful thinking... The Big East contract in for $200 million (over 7 years I think, but will say 6 year to be on the safe side). Just for the Big Ten Network the Big 10 schools were projecting to make $10 million per year, that's $110 million per year, in like terms ESPN pays the Big East around $15 million per year for the football side of the contract.
Good heck Penn St made around $6 million last year just from the Big 10 Network part of the contract and then you play another $7 million or $8 million on top of that for the Big 10's ABC/ESPN contract.
I don't think Penn St is having a hard time debate about making around $2 million a year in the Big East or making $13 million to $18 million a year in the Big 10 from TV monies. That does not include extra BC$ Bowls or their Bowl tie-in and playing much larger stadium than can be found in the Big East.
Attendance;
#1 Michigan- 110,264
#2 Penn St- 108,917
#3 Ohio St- 105,110
#15 Wisconsin- 81,747
#21 Iowa- 70,585
#22 Michigan St- 70,540
#30 West Virginia- 60,400
#33 Purdue- 59,326
#37 Illinois- 54,872
#38 South Florida- 53,170
#41 Minnesota- 51,791
#51 Rutgers- 43,663
#59 Louisville- 39,881
#61 Connecticut- 38,205
#63 Indiana- 37,004
#66 Syracuse- 35,009
#70 Pittsburgh- 33,315
#75 Cincinnati- 30,246
#85 Northwestern- 24,589

05-stirthepot
06-16-2008 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user
CatsClaw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,170
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: The land of Winning
Post: #23
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
cuseroc Wrote:
goodknightfl Wrote:The big 10 is taking it to a whole new level.. Any BE people who think Penn state is moving to BE are just nuts. they are raking in the $$$$ where they are..I kind of imagine this will lead the SEC to move sooner rather than later on a SEC network.


You are absolutely right. But then again, the Big 10 was able to get this deal done without expanding. They were able to get the type of money that they wanted. They did not need a Syracuse or Rutgers or Nebraska or Mizzu. Looks like the BE maybe safe for now.

Exactly. The first thing people think is "Ha ha, the Big East isn't getting Penn State"! The first thing I thought is "There is no reason for the Big Ten to expand", which I prefer more anyway. The Big East is fine, and hopefully we'll expand soon. The only reason the Big Ten considered expanding was as a bargaining chip for negotiations.
06-16-2008 04:32 PM
Find all posts by this user
CatsClaw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,170
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: The land of Winning
Post: #24
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
bluesox Wrote:I don't think the big ten Network would get a champ game but the big ten would probably favor whoever cuts the best deal with the BTN to get the rights to broadcast such a game. I do suspect a 12th member will happen now, probably pretty soon and that member will either be missori or a big east team...ND,Rutgers,cuse and possibly pitt or even uconn would be in the pool.

Actually this lessens the chance of the Big Ten expanding. The Big Ten never expanded in the past because they were making a ton of money without putting their schools through a championship game. Now they're going to get a boatload of money from the Big Ten Network while still having a chance to have two teams in the BCS, and you think they're going to blow that by expanding?
06-16-2008 04:34 PM
Find all posts by this user
CatsClaw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,170
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: The land of Winning
Post: #25
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
E-zone Wrote:
bitcruncher Wrote:All this still doesn't rule out a possible BEast association with Penn State. Who knows what the future holds.

I don't expect them to come back. But it doesn't stop me from wishing.

Sound like wishful thinking... The Big East contract in for $200 million (over 7 years I think, but will say 6 year to be on the safe side). Just for the Big Ten Network the Big 10 schools were projecting to make $10 million per year, that's $110 million per year, in like terms ESPN pays the Big East around $15 million per year for the football side of the contract.
Good heck Penn St made around $6 million last year just from the Big 10 Network part of the contract and then you play another $7 million or $8 million on top of that for the Big 10's ABC/ESPN contract.
I don't think Penn St is having a hard time debate about making around $2 million a year in the Big East or making $13 million to $18 million a year in the Big 10 from TV monies. That does not include extra BC$ Bowls or their Bowl tie-in and playing much larger stadium than can be found in the Big East.
Attendance;
#1 Michigan- 110,264
#2 Penn St- 108,917
#3 Ohio St- 105,110
#15 Wisconsin- 81,747
#21 Iowa- 70,585
#22 Michigan St- 70,540
#30 West Virginia- 60,400
#33 Purdue- 59,326
#37 Illinois- 54,872
#38 South Florida- 53,170
#41 Minnesota- 51,791
#51 Rutgers- 43,663
#59 Louisville- 39,881
#61 Connecticut- 38,205
#63 Indiana- 37,004
#66 Syracuse- 35,009
#70 Pittsburgh- 33,315
#75 Cincinnati- 30,246
#85 Northwestern- 24,589

05-stirthepot

While I don't think Penn State would jump to the Big East I'd love to know where you're getting the figures that Penn State, or any other Big East school, is going to make 2 million dollars a year. Heck, the Big East teams are going to make 2 million dollars per year just on the football television package. Example, UC is probably going to make around 6 to 8 million (maybe more), I would assume, counting bowl game , tournament revenue, and television packages, attendance, merchandise, etc. It may not be in the same territory as Penn State and the Big Ten, but it's definitely power money, and legit BCS money.
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2008 04:43 PM by CatsClaw.)
06-16-2008 04:37 PM
Find all posts by this user
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,615
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #26
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
Cat's Claw the B-10 might not expand, but not playing championship game [that pays 10 million ] for better shot at 2nd BCS berth [ that pays 4.5 million ] will not be one of the reasons.
06-16-2008 06:47 PM
Find all posts by this user
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #27
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
templefootballfan Wrote:Cat's Claw the B-10 might not expand, but not playing championship game [that pays 10 million ] for better shot at 2nd BCS berth [ that pays 4.5 million ] will not be one of the reasons.

Agreed. Outgoing Pac-10 commissioner already has stated why the Pac-10 is not interested in a championship game (not to be confused with his objections to an overall playoff) - the league thinks it hurts the regular season champion's chances of making it to the National Championship Game.

The Big Ten thinks like this as well.

Besides, a Championship Game for the Big Ten would generate more revenue than getting an additional BCS team. But getting a chance to play in the BCS Title Game - priceless! 03-wink

Cheers,
Neil
06-16-2008 07:00 PM
Find all posts by this user
CatsClaw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,170
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation: 185
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: The land of Winning
Post: #28
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
What you guys are forgetting is that the Big Ten is getting a team in championship game AND a 2nd BCS team. The Big Ten is one of the few conferences that can have two undefeated teams at the end of the regular season, and it has happened in the past. And the Big Ten would rather have a team compete for a national title and a 2nd BCS team then a conference championship game that could screw up their chances at a national title AND a 2nd BCS team. The reason the ACC expanded was so they could get 2 BCS teams. The reason the SEC talked the BCS into relaxing their rules was so they could get a 2nd BCS team and improve their national title hopes (they complained that the conference beat themselves up). There is a lot of prestige in the Big East or ACC having two teams in the BCS. The Big Ten knows that if they can have two teams make the BCS they would be guaranteed to have a team playing in the Rose Bowl. Don't think that the Rose Bowl doesn't play a huge part in this.
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2008 07:13 PM by CatsClaw.)
06-16-2008 07:12 PM
Find all posts by this user
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #29
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
CatsClaw Wrote:
E-zone Wrote:
bitcruncher Wrote:All this still doesn't rule out a possible BEast association with Penn State. Who knows what the future holds.

I don't expect them to come back. But it doesn't stop me from wishing.
Sound like wishful thinking... The Big East contract in for $200 million (over 7 years I think, but will say 6 year to be on the safe side). Just for the Big Ten Network the Big 10 schools were projecting to make $10 million per year, that's $110 million per year, in like terms ESPN pays the Big East around $15 million per year for the football side of the contract.
Good heck Penn St made around $6 million last year just from the Big 10 Network part of the contract and then you play another $7 million or $8 million on top of that for the Big 10's ABC/ESPN contract.
I don't think Penn St is having a hard time debate about making around $2 million a year in the Big East or making $13 million to $18 million a year in the Big 10 from TV monies. That does not include extra BC$ Bowls or their Bowl tie-in and playing much larger stadium than can be found in the Big East.
Attendance;
#1 Michigan- 110,264
#2 Penn St- 108,917
#3 Ohio St- 105,110
#15 Wisconsin- 81,747
#21 Iowa- 70,585
#22 Michigan St- 70,540
#30 West Virginia- 60,400
#33 Purdue- 59,326
#37 Illinois- 54,872
#38 South Florida- 53,170
#41 Minnesota- 51,791
#51 Rutgers- 43,663
#59 Louisville- 39,881
#61 Connecticut- 38,205
#63 Indiana- 37,004
#66 Syracuse- 35,009
#70 Pittsburgh- 33,315
#75 Cincinnati- 30,246
#85 Northwestern- 24,589

05-stirthepot
While I don't think Penn State would jump to the Big East I'd love to know where you're getting the figures that Penn State, or any other Big East school, is going to make 2 million dollars a year. Heck, the Big East teams are going to make 2 million dollars per year just on the football television package. Example, UC is probably going to make around 6 to 8 million (maybe more), I would assume, counting bowl game , tournament revenue, and television packages, attendance, merchandise, etc. It may not be in the same territory as Penn State and the Big Ten, but it's definitely power money, and legit BCS money.
And if Rutgers and UConn continue to be successful, the audience factor for The BEast will increase dramatically. The New York audience can support several schools, but those 2 can dominate it.

On a side note, if Syracuse isn't careful they could end up being shut out of the NYC market for some time in the future.
06-16-2008 07:53 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,262
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 546
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #30
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
bitcruncher Wrote:
CatsClaw Wrote:
E-zone Wrote:
bitcruncher Wrote:All this still doesn't rule out a possible BEast association with Penn State. Who knows what the future holds.

I don't expect them to come back. But it doesn't stop me from wishing.
Sound like wishful thinking... The Big East contract in for $200 million (over 7 years I think, but will say 6 year to be on the safe side). Just for the Big Ten Network the Big 10 schools were projecting to make $10 million per year, that's $110 million per year, in like terms ESPN pays the Big East around $15 million per year for the football side of the contract.
Good heck Penn St made around $6 million last year just from the Big 10 Network part of the contract and then you play another $7 million or $8 million on top of that for the Big 10's ABC/ESPN contract.
I don't think Penn St is having a hard time debate about making around $2 million a year in the Big East or making $13 million to $18 million a year in the Big 10 from TV monies. That does not include extra BC$ Bowls or their Bowl tie-in and playing much larger stadium than can be found in the Big East.
Attendance;
#1 Michigan- 110,264
#2 Penn St- 108,917
#3 Ohio St- 105,110
#15 Wisconsin- 81,747
#21 Iowa- 70,585
#22 Michigan St- 70,540
#30 West Virginia- 60,400
#33 Purdue- 59,326
#37 Illinois- 54,872
#38 South Florida- 53,170
#41 Minnesota- 51,791
#51 Rutgers- 43,663
#59 Louisville- 39,881
#61 Connecticut- 38,205
#63 Indiana- 37,004
#66 Syracuse- 35,009
#70 Pittsburgh- 33,315
#75 Cincinnati- 30,246
#85 Northwestern- 24,589

05-stirthepot
While I don't think Penn State would jump to the Big East I'd love to know where you're getting the figures that Penn State, or any other Big East school, is going to make 2 million dollars a year. Heck, the Big East teams are going to make 2 million dollars per year just on the football television package. Example, UC is probably going to make around 6 to 8 million (maybe more), I would assume, counting bowl game , tournament revenue, and television packages, attendance, merchandise, etc. It may not be in the same territory as Penn State and the Big Ten, but it's definitely power money, and legit BCS money.
And if Rutgers and UConn continue to be successful, the audience factor for The BEast will increase dramatically. The New York audience can support several schools, but those 2 can dominate it.

On a side note, if Syracuse isn't careful they could end up being shut out of the NYC market for some time in the future.


Syracuse has in the past proven that it can capture and dominate the NY market for fb. It has and it will again. How many 2 win teams do you know that keeps getting at least one game on abc every single year? I think their being able to attract the NYC market has something to do with that. Its just a matter of getting a real fb coach. As long as Syracuse plays in a bcs league, it will never be shut out of the NY market. Too many alumni and other folks of interest there.
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2008 08:08 PM by cuseroc.)
06-16-2008 08:03 PM
Find all posts by this user
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #31
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
CatsClaw Wrote:What you guys are forgetting is that the Big Ten is getting a team in championship game AND a 2nd BCS team. The Big Ten is one of the few conferences that can have two undefeated teams at the end of the regular season, and it has happened in the past. And the Big Ten would rather have a team compete for a national title and a 2nd BCS team then a conference championship game that could screw up their chances at a national title AND a 2nd BCS team. The reason the ACC expanded was so they could get 2 BCS teams. The reason the SEC talked the BCS into relaxing their rules was so they could get a 2nd BCS team and improve their national title hopes (they complained that the conference beat themselves up). There is a lot of prestige in the Big East or ACC having two teams in the BCS. The Big Ten knows that if they can have two teams make the BCS they would be guaranteed to have a team playing in the Rose Bowl. Don't think that the Rose Bowl doesn't play a huge part in this.

Hail CatsClaw!

I respect you as a poster, but, to me, either you or I (or perhaps both of us) just have a mental block on this issue.

Let me first state that I understand the point about a conference championship game possibly hurting the chances of a team from a particular conference making the National Championship Game. I am only disputing the notion that a conference championship game also significantly impacts getting a second conference team a BCS Bowl berth.

First, the esteem factor for the ACC and the Big East is because neither conference has accomplished it yet. The Big Ten, SEC, and Big 12 have routinely. I think that is comparing apples and oranges.

Second, I agree that the Rose Bowl enhances the chances of the Big Ten getting a second team in when they have a NC game contender because they will likely pick another Big Ten team for their game - if eligible. But this would be true regardless of whether or not the Big Ten holds a conference championship game, wouldn't it?

Third, mostly, a second BCS Bowl game basically gets a conference $4.5 million. It's not as though people remember the at-large entries each and every year and how many from each of the power conferences got in, the way they might the National Champion. And if its mostly about money, a Big Ten Championship game will make more than twice the amount of money the second BCS Bowl team brings in.

Lastly, can you cite any evidence having a Championship Game precludes getting an additional BCS Bowl team? Is there a year that sports reporters and fans can point to where they can say because so-and-so played and lost in their conference championship game they got passed over as an at-large BCS Bowl entry and as a result no other entry from that league got in?

I think the only time I can recall that even being an issue was back in 1998 when Kansas State was #3 and lost to Texas A&M #8 and didn't make it to a BCS Bowl game. But then K-State was getting criticized for their lack of schedule strength that year. So that factor plus not being an elite program gave the BCS Bowl Committee a reason not to choose them.

Of course, had there been no Big 12 Championship Game then K-State would have gone and A&M would have been left out, so the Big 12 still would have only gotten one team in that year anyway.

Now there have certainly been times when the loser of a championship game got overlooked for another team from that conference - last year with Kansas being chosen of Missouri being a prime example. But that's an entirely different story.

Again, the conference championship game hurting the possibility of getting to the national championship game I understand. But I am just not seeing how it's such a significant threat to getting a second conference team a BCS Bowl berth, especially now when ten teams instead of eight make it to BCS Bowls.

Cheers,
Neil
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2008 09:40 PM by omniorange.)
06-16-2008 09:39 PM
Find all posts by this user
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #32
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
omnicarrier Wrote:
CatsClaw Wrote:What you guys are forgetting is that the Big Ten is getting a team in championship game AND a 2nd BCS team. The Big Ten is one of the few conferences that can have two undefeated teams at the end of the regular season, and it has happened in the past. And the Big Ten would rather have a team compete for a national title and a 2nd BCS team then a conference championship game that could screw up their chances at a national title AND a 2nd BCS team. The reason the ACC expanded was so they could get 2 BCS teams. The reason the SEC talked the BCS into relaxing their rules was so they could get a 2nd BCS team and improve their national title hopes (they complained that the conference beat themselves up). There is a lot of prestige in the Big East or ACC having two teams in the BCS. The Big Ten knows that if they can have two teams make the BCS they would be guaranteed to have a team playing in the Rose Bowl. Don't think that the Rose Bowl doesn't play a huge part in this.

Hail CatsClaw!

I respect you as a poster, but, to me, either you or I (or perhaps both of us) just have a mental block on this issue.

Let me first state that I understand the point about a conference championship game possibly hurting the chances of a team from a particular conference making the National Championship Game. I am only disputing the notion that a conference championship game also significantly impacts getting a second conference team a BCS Bowl berth.

First, the esteem factor for the ACC and the Big East is because neither conference has accomplished it yet. The Big Ten, SEC, and Big 12 have routinely. I think that is comparing apples and oranges.

Second, I agree that the Rose Bowl enhances the chances of the Big Ten getting a second team in when they have a NC game contender because they will likely pick another Big Ten team for their game - if eligible. But this would be true regardless of whether or not the Big Ten holds a conference championship game, wouldn't it?

Third, mostly, a second BCS Bowl game basically gets a conference $4.5 million. It's not as though people remember the at-large entries each and every year and how many from each of the power conferences got in, the way they might the National Champion. And if its mostly about money, a Big Ten Championship game will make more than twice the amount of money the second BCS Bowl team brings in.

Lastly, can you cite any evidence having a Championship Game precludes getting an additional BCS Bowl team? Is there a year that sports reporters and fans can point to where they can say because so-and-so played and lost in their conference championship game they got passed over as an at-large BCS Bowl entry and as a result no other entry from that league got in?

I think the only time I can recall that even being an issue was back in 1998 when Kansas State was #3 and lost to Texas A&M #8 and didn't make it to a BCS Bowl game. But then K-State was getting criticized for their lack of schedule strength that year. So that factor plus not being an elite program gave the BCS Bowl Committee a reason not to choose them.

Of course, had there been no Big 12 Championship Game then K-State would have gone and A&M would have been left out, so the Big 12 still would have only gotten one team in that year anyway.

Now there have certainly been times when the loser of a championship game got overlooked for another team from that conference - last year with Kansas being chosen of Missouri being a prime example. But that's an entirely different story.

Again, the conference championship game hurting the possibility of getting to the national championship game I understand. But I am just not seeing how it's such a significant threat to getting a second conference team a BCS Bowl berth, especially now when ten teams instead of eight make it to BCS Bowls.

Cheers,
Neil

You bring up some great points. I didn’t realize how much more money a championship game brought than a 2nd BCS game.

Part of the issue money wise is dividing up the pot more ways. A championship game might bring in more money than a 2nd BCS game, but 12 teams also means that the total pot is divided 12 ways instead of 11. If you add a championship game and divide into 2 divisions there is also the fact that several teams will probably play Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State less often. That is probably a pretty big issue to some of the schools that have a harder time filling their stadiums and charge more for bigger games (although this might not be too big a problem if the new team was someone like Nebraska).

As for not getting a 2nd team, I'm not sure. You bring up some good points. Still it seems to me that often a championship game would have to either remove a team from the BCS championship or from a 2nd BCS game. It impossible to look back at the past for a complete guide since there were only 11 teams and no divisions, but we can get a pretty good idea still I think.

2007-Given results, a B10 Championship game likely would have been between Ohio State and Michigan or Ohio State and Illinois. If OSU won, they would go to the BCS championship game. If they lost they won't have. If Illinois lost they wouldn't have gone to the Rose (if they had the same record from the season). If Michigan lost nothing would have been different.

2006-Probably would have had Ohio State vs. Michigan again or Ohio State vs. Wisconsin. Either way, B10 probably has 2 BCS teams.

2005-Penn State vs. somebody. A lot of teams were 5-3. Ohio State was 7-1, so they could have played Ohio State again and that would have cost the B10 a BCS slot in all likelihood, but I think OSU and Penn State would probably be in the same division and thus not play a championship against each other. ???

2004-B10 only got 1 team into BCS and probably would have done no differently with a championship game.

2003-Michigan vs. Ohio State or Purdue. Any result except Michigan beating Purdue likely would have cost B10 a BCS slot (both Michigan and Ohio State went to the BCS)

2002- Ohio State vs. Iowa. A loss would have cost OSU championship game. A loss probably would have cost Iowa a bid, although not necessarily.

Conclusion: Really difficult to say for sure, but if I'm B10 commissioner, I don't want to upset the balance, particularly given how much opposition there already is to a championship game from many, likely including leadership at Michigan and Ohio State
06-17-2008 12:19 AM
Find all posts by this user
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,110
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 499
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #33
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
1317

I think you are right about the splitting the pie more ways.. that is why the Big 10 will not pick misouri.. they would likely grab cuse, or possibly rutgers. then they gain a lock on NYC market. Big 10 network will expand, ESPN/abc will go up, and they gain a 8 to 10 mil champ game. that will more than pay for the extra mouth. I also agree champ game will rarely cost them a 2nd spot in bcs.. what it could cost them is a national title shot.. then again it could gain them one too.
06-17-2008 07:20 AM
Find all posts by this user
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #34
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
cuseroc Wrote:
bitcruncher Wrote:
CatsClaw Wrote:
E-zone Wrote:
bitcruncher Wrote:All this still doesn't rule out a possible BEast association with Penn State. Who knows what the future holds.

I don't expect them to come back. But it doesn't stop me from wishing.
Sound like wishful thinking... The Big East contract in for $200 million (over 7 years I think, but will say 6 year to be on the safe side). Just for the Big Ten Network the Big 10 schools were projecting to make $10 million per year, that's $110 million per year, in like terms ESPN pays the Big East around $15 million per year for the football side of the contract.
Good heck Penn St made around $6 million last year just from the Big 10 Network part of the contract and then you play another $7 million or $8 million on top of that for the Big 10's ABC/ESPN contract.
I don't think Penn St is having a hard time debate about making around $2 million a year in the Big East or making $13 million to $18 million a year in the Big 10 from TV monies. That does not include extra BC$ Bowls or their Bowl tie-in and playing much larger stadium than can be found in the Big East.
Attendance;
#1 Michigan- 110,264
#2 Penn St- 108,917
#3 Ohio St- 105,110
#15 Wisconsin- 81,747
#21 Iowa- 70,585
#22 Michigan St- 70,540
#30 West Virginia- 60,400
#33 Purdue- 59,326
#37 Illinois- 54,872
#38 South Florida- 53,170
#41 Minnesota- 51,791
#51 Rutgers- 43,663
#59 Louisville- 39,881
#61 Connecticut- 38,205
#63 Indiana- 37,004
#66 Syracuse- 35,009
#70 Pittsburgh- 33,315
#75 Cincinnati- 30,246
#85 Northwestern- 24,589

05-stirthepot
While I don't think Penn State would jump to the Big East I'd love to know where you're getting the figures that Penn State, or any other Big East school, is going to make 2 million dollars a year. Heck, the Big East teams are going to make 2 million dollars per year just on the football television package. Example, UC is probably going to make around 6 to 8 million (maybe more), I would assume, counting bowl game , tournament revenue, and television packages, attendance, merchandise, etc. It may not be in the same territory as Penn State and the Big Ten, but it's definitely power money, and legit BCS money.
And if Rutgers and UConn continue to be successful, the audience factor for The BEast will increase dramatically. The New York audience can support several schools, but those 2 can dominate it.

On a side note, if Syracuse isn't careful they could end up being shut out of the NYC market for some time in the future.
Syracuse has in the past proven that it can capture and dominate the NY market for fb. It has and it will again. How many 2 win teams do you know that keeps getting at least one game on abc every single year? I think their being able to attract the NYC market has something to do with that. Its just a matter of getting a real fb coach. As long as Syracuse plays in a bcs league, it will never be shut out of the NY market. Too many alumni and other folks of interest there.
Syracuse captured that market when there was absolutely no competition. Army was better than Rutgers or UConn back then, and that ain't saying much. If Rutgers and UConn start competing for The BEast championship every year while the Orange remain mired in GRob's mediocrity, they could lose a big share of that market forever. They need to start winning now.

The TV games for the Orange are on their opponents' merits - not Syracuse's.
(This post was last modified: 06-17-2008 07:33 AM by bitcruncher.)
06-17-2008 07:30 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
cuseroc Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,262
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 546
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: Rochester/Sarasota

Donators
Post: #35
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
bitcruncher Wrote:
cuseroc Wrote:
bitcruncher Wrote:
CatsClaw Wrote:
E-zone Wrote:
bitcruncher Wrote:All this still doesn't rule out a possible BEast association with Penn State. Who knows what the future holds.

I don't expect them to come back. But it doesn't stop me from wishing.
Sound like wishful thinking... The Big East contract in for $200 million (over 7 years I think, but will say 6 year to be on the safe side). Just for the Big Ten Network the Big 10 schools were projecting to make $10 million per year, that's $110 million per year, in like terms ESPN pays the Big East around $15 million per year for the football side of the contract.
Good heck Penn St made around $6 million last year just from the Big 10 Network part of the contract and then you play another $7 million or $8 million on top of that for the Big 10's ABC/ESPN contract.
I don't think Penn St is having a hard time debate about making around $2 million a year in the Big East or making $13 million to $18 million a year in the Big 10 from TV monies. That does not include extra BC$ Bowls or their Bowl tie-in and playing much larger stadium than can be found in the Big East.
Attendance;
#1 Michigan- 110,264
#2 Penn St- 108,917
#3 Ohio St- 105,110
#15 Wisconsin- 81,747
#21 Iowa- 70,585
#22 Michigan St- 70,540
#30 West Virginia- 60,400
#33 Purdue- 59,326
#37 Illinois- 54,872
#38 South Florida- 53,170
#41 Minnesota- 51,791
#51 Rutgers- 43,663
#59 Louisville- 39,881
#61 Connecticut- 38,205
#63 Indiana- 37,004
#66 Syracuse- 35,009
#70 Pittsburgh- 33,315
#75 Cincinnati- 30,246
#85 Northwestern- 24,589

05-stirthepot
While I don't think Penn State would jump to the Big East I'd love to know where you're getting the figures that Penn State, or any other Big East school, is going to make 2 million dollars a year. Heck, the Big East teams are going to make 2 million dollars per year just on the football television package. Example, UC is probably going to make around 6 to 8 million (maybe more), I would assume, counting bowl game , tournament revenue, and television packages, attendance, merchandise, etc. It may not be in the same territory as Penn State and the Big Ten, but it's definitely power money, and legit BCS money.
And if Rutgers and UConn continue to be successful, the audience factor for The BEast will increase dramatically. The New York audience can support several schools, but those 2 can dominate it.

On a side note, if Syracuse isn't careful they could end up being shut out of the NYC market for some time in the future.
Syracuse has in the past proven that it can capture and dominate the NY market for fb. It has and it will again. How many 2 win teams do you know that keeps getting at least one game on abc every single year? I think their being able to attract the NYC market has something to do with that. Its just a matter of getting a real fb coach. As long as Syracuse plays in a bcs league, it will never be shut out of the NY market. Too many alumni and other folks of interest there.
Syracuse captured that market when there was absolutely no competition. Army was better than Rutgers or UConn back then, and that ain't saying much. If Rutgers and UConn start competing for The BEast championship every year while the Orange remain mired in GRob's mediocrity, they could lose a big share of that market forever. They need to start winning now.

I would not call what Greg Robinson has done at Syracuse mediocre. Its horrible. But this is his last year. Meanwhile just enjoy WV's reign at the top of the conference while you still have it. College fb runs in cycles. Syracuse had its time at the top and now it has had its time at the bottom. WV will be at the 3 win season again some day. But for now, I am rooting for you guys until our turn comes again.
06-17-2008 07:37 AM
Find all posts by this user
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #36
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
I was being polite. I've heaped enough abuse on you for my frustration with Syracuse's AD for sticking with the moron. Hopefully, the team will totally tank this year and there'll be no hope for a contract extension.

Trust me. I know all about cycles. As a Packer fan since 1959, I've seen a cycle or two. That being said, I don't expect WVU to do less than compete for The BEast's BCS bid for some time. They're starting to get enough talent recruited that they can reload every year, and not have to rebuild every 4 years as the Mountaineers had to do under Nehlen.

WVU's recruiting efforts don't appear to be slowing down one bit since Rodriguez' departure, either. It actually seems to have improved a bit, thanks in large part to Doc Holliday and Chris Beatty. (Beatty might recruit Tahj Boyd's entire HS team - he has 3 so far) If Stewart can keep this staff together, I see the Mountaineers in the national picture for some time to come.
(This post was last modified: 06-17-2008 07:51 AM by bitcruncher.)
06-17-2008 07:48 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Brick City Pirate Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,790
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 42
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #37
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
Follow the money. If the powers that be in the B-10 think adding a 12th school will make that conference more money per member in the short & long term, you can believe a 12th school will be added. I bet the B-12 would love to add a school from a big market in the eastern time zone.
06-17-2008 07:53 AM
Find all posts by this user
templefootballfan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,615
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #38
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
Cuban, As things move forward the B-10 network will adjust. Buy either expanding with schools or expanding sports, I would not doupt That B-10 starts Hockey & Lax league. You might end up with B-10 network2 for minor sports [volleyball, softball, bowling,etc].
With the MAC in same market & if they can get the ratings, B-10 network could sign MAC to a secondary contract.
06-17-2008 08:12 AM
Find all posts by this user
SoCalPanther Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,864
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Pitt RPI
Location: Eurotrash
Post: #39
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
omnicarrier Wrote:
mattsarz Wrote:
Cubanbull Wrote:In my opinion this will work out well for the BE because it will open more slots on ESPN and its network for our teams as well as raising the money we will get from them.
Les be realistic I have seen the BTN and its NOT comparable to ESPN and also a lot of the product is minor sports. I think that eventually it will not draw enough to kep it at its current charges. Unless they move their BIG football games there. They wont do that so you will see the market scale back once they see results over the years. The SEC will stand by and watch.
While ESPN is looked upon as a NATIONAL showcase the BTN will look like a regional network and will provide less attention to their terams. How many are going to tune in to BTN unles they are Big10 fans?

The BTN was never supposed to replace ESPN and it isn't opening up more slots on ESPN for other teams. It was supposed to take the place of the ESPN+ games and its far exceeded that in reach and production values on a national scale.

The Big Ten still has the same 25 games on ESPN/ESPN2 and the same 17 games on ABC that they had pre-BTN.

Not initially, no. But down the road, after they have learned what running a sports network is all about? After they have expanded the number of TV households while having both the safety net of the ABC/ESPN deal and their own BTN?

This deal with Comcast gets the BTN, only 1 year old, into 55 million TV households. ESPN2, which is now in its 13th year is in 92 million TV households, which represents over 80% of the total number of TV households.

I'll bet money that both the BTN (and an SEC Network, assuming it gets launched) will be in more TV households than that after the first 10 years of operation - probably around 88% or between ESPN2's 80% and the 96% of TV households ESPN is in.

If that proves to be correct, there really won't be much incentive to still have the middle-man around anymore. I have to believe ABC/ESPN and CBS/CSTV (or whatever they are calling it now) must be aware of this distinct possibility.

Cheers,
Neil

I agree with what you are saying Neil and that is their clear aim - to cut out the 'middleman'. The current arangement with ABC/ESPN will last until 2017. That would be essentially the 10th anniversary of the BTN. If they get up to (or near) 90+ million households at that time, it will be interesting to see their new TV contract going forward including the terms of the deal and the number of games (if any?) on ABC/ESPN.
(This post was last modified: 06-17-2008 09:12 AM by SoCalPanther.)
06-17-2008 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #40
RE: OT - Big Ten, Comcast get BTN deal done
ohio1317 Wrote:You bring up some great points. I didn’t realize how much more money a championship game brought than a 2nd BCS game.

Part of the issue money wise is dividing up the pot more ways. A championship game might bring in more money than a 2nd BCS game, but 12 teams also means that the total pot is divided 12 ways instead of 11. If you add a championship game and divide into 2 divisions there is also the fact that several teams will probably play Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State less often. That is probably a pretty big issue to some of the schools that have a harder time filling their stadiums and charge more for bigger games (although this might not be too big a problem if the new team was someone like Nebraska).

For the Big Ten, with their new BTN, any team that brings a state with a significant number of TV Households will pay for itself even without a championship game.

So expanding to 12 will not cost that league $$$, but rather will likely increase payouts.

Quote:As for not getting a 2nd team, I'm not sure. You bring up some good points. Still it seems to me that often a championship game would have to either remove a team from the BCS championship or from a 2nd BCS game. It impossible to look back at the past for a complete guide since there were only 11 teams and no divisions, but we can get a pretty good idea still I think.

2007-Given results, a B10 Championship game likely would have been between Ohio State and Michigan or Ohio State and Illinois. If OSU won, they would go to the BCS championship game. If they lost they won't have. If Illinois lost they wouldn't have gone to the Rose (if they had the same record from the season). If Michigan lost nothing would have been different.

2007 demonstrates why having the Rose Bowl actually helps the Big Ten get a 2nd team to the BCS. But in this case, assuming divisions along East/West lines, tOSU would have likely played Illinois in the championship game and probably lost again on a neutral field - not being able to handle the speed of the Illlini's offensive weapons. Both would have gone to BCS Bowls, but neither would have gone to the National Championship Game in that scenario.

If tOSU pulled out the victory, Illinois would not have been eligible for the Pac-10 to pick and no second team from that conference would have gone BCS Bowling. In what was a slim pickings year, Oklahoma would probably have played Arizona State at the Fiesta, USC would have played Missouri or Kansas at the Rose, and VT and West Virginia would have played in the Orange.

In reality, that Bowl line-up was probably what should have happened anyway since a very good case could be made that Arizona State was more deserving of a BCS Bowl slot than Illinois. But the Rose Bowl had to have its Big Ten-Pac 10 match-up. 03-wink


Quote:2006-Probably would have had Ohio State vs. Michigan again or Ohio State vs. Wisconsin. Either way, B10 probably has 2 BCS teams.

2005-Penn State vs. somebody. A lot of teams were 5-3. Ohio State was 7-1, so they could have played Ohio State again and that would have cost the B10 a BCS slot in all likelihood, but I think OSU and Penn State would probably be in the same division and thus not play a championship against each other. ???

2004-B10 only got 1 team into BCS and probably would have done no differently with a championship game.

Agree on each of these. No effect on getting an extra team into the BCS.

Quote:2003-Michigan vs. Ohio State or Purdue. Any result except Michigan beating Purdue likely would have cost B10 a BCS slot (both Michigan and Ohio State went to the BCS)

I think this would have been Michigan vs. Iowa. And any result would still have two Big Ten teams making since there would be the automatic berth for the championship game winner and Ohio State as an at-large that year.

Quote:2002- Ohio State vs. Iowa. A loss would have cost OSU championship game. A loss probably would have cost Iowa a bid, although not necessarily.

Agreed. An OSU loss would have cost them the NC title game, but no matter the result, the Big Ten with 4 teams in the Top 12 of the BCS that year was going to get two teams into BCS Bowl berths.

Quote:Conclusion: Really difficult to say for sure, but if I'm B10 commissioner, I don't want to upset the balance, particularly given how much opposition there already is to a championship game from many, likely including leadership at Michigan and Ohio State

The opposition appears to mainly be from Michigan and tOSU because they think it will take away from their end of the year rivalry game. However, some within the conference are starting to believe that ending play two weeks prior to other conferences may be a contributing reason as to why the Big Ten teams have more difficulty in winning BCS Bowl games, particularly the National Championship Game.

Not sure I buy into that hypothesis, but it is intriguing.

Cheers,
Neil
06-17-2008 09:21 AM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.