(02-01-2011 10:33 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Frank has been on the money at times. But he's also missed his predictions by a mile a few times too. The thing about speculating on the future is that it's merely an educated guess, and guessing doesn't always turn out the way you'd like...

Frank's info is by far the most reliable of anyone on the board. Well Matt's is reliable too, but different subjects. Anyway, that said, no one is 100% accurate. But without other info on the subject, I would take his estimates as a base number to go by until otherwise noted.

I think cuse is much closer to being right on this one than Frank. But we'll have to wait and see to find out for sure...

The following article that I posted in a new thread on the BE Board shows the incredible reach that the BE bb has accross the country and it tells me how severely underpaid the BE is at this time and the potential that the BE has in its next tv deal.





Big East Talking Smack To SEC, ACC over Men's Basketball Syndication Base?
Monday, January 4, 2010 , Posted by Christopher Byrne at 12:50 PM, under 2009-2010 Men's College Basketball, Big East, Big East Network, College Basketball, ESPN Regional Television, Jason Dachman, Sports Video Group

Last week we published information on the BIG EAST Network men's basketball syndication package. It was noted, with a head scratch, that the syndication package included Los Angeles for the first time. It looks like the addition of LA allows the BIG EAST to talk smack over the reach of their TV package.
Over on the Sports Video Group web site, assistant editor Jason Dachman includes this in his blog post on the reach of the package:

The 2009-10 Big East Network Game of the Week basketball package is currently available to nearly 50 television markets throughout 24 states, according to ESPN Regional Television and the Big East Conference. The package represents the most widespread coverage of any regionally syndicated college basketball network, covering nearly 50 million households (41% of the U.S.)...

...“With a reach that includes more than one-third of the nation’s households – and still growing – no regional syndicated television package provides more exposure than ESPN Regional’s Big East Network Game of the Week,” says Big East Commissioner John Marinatto. “Fans in markets that stretch across the country can continue to count on seeing the best of Big East basketball at the same time each week during the season.”


Those numbers are indeed staggering as a percentage of TV housholds. But underneath those "eye candy" numbers, what does it really mean? Let's look at the top four TV Markets that the BIG EAST games will be going to:





Rank
Designated Market Area (DMA)
TV Households
% of US




1
New York, NY
7,493,530
6.524
2
Los Angeles, CA
5,659,170
4.927
3
Chicago, IL
3,501,010
3.048
4
Philadelphia, PA
2,955,190
2.573





Total
19,608,900
17




The BIG EAST has first and foremost always been a conference made for television. The teams were strategically located around major television markets in the northeast corridor. And then expansion came, and more strategic cities/markets were added to the picture. Just looking at the numbers above, three of the top four markets with BIG EAST teams make up a considerable chunk of the numbers being touted by the BIG EAST and ESPN Regional.

As discussed last week, the totals of what ESPN Regional and the BIG EAST announced came to about only 45 million households. So these 4 markets alone contribute 43% of the television households being touted by the BIG EAST.

With this potential audience, they are talking about a package of 12 weekly syndicated games. This pales in comparison to the SEC Syndication package that will broadcast every game to targeted markets. And with the games being aired live in the noon time frame on the East Coast, one has to wonder just how much impact the addition of the Los Angeles-based west coast audience will contribute to the final numbers.

From top to bottom, the BIG EAST has a much more solid and compelling package to offer viewers than the SEC. And the games they have selected for broadcast in the package a good, if not great match-ups. But should games like this past weekend's Syracuse- Pitt game be relegated to syndication instead of a national broadcast? (Editor's Note: As a loyal BIG EAST fan, I would much rather watch that game than any other hoops game that may have been on at the same time).

So is the BIG EAST hype around this package more about their ability to reach fans, or reach recruits in the bigger cities? Clearly they have a much more national recruiting base than most teams in either the ACC or SEC. The expansion of the package may give them a recruiting advantage in some respects.

But as far as advertising dollars and ratings? The jury will have to stay out on that for the rest of the season. Then people can take a look at which conference's syndication model was more successful.

Meanwhile, the conferences can just continue to talk smack.

I agree cuse, Frank has good info but to take it as the gospel would be silly. To take it as a reference point would be more like it. We're going to get a strong TV deal, much better than what people think.

When I say that Tranghese threw the football side under the bus I mean it. He never promoted the football side, he treated it as something to deal with nothing something to build. I remember when the TV contract came out he gushed about the basketball money and when a reporter asked about the football side of it he acted annoyed and basically blew it off. That stuck with me, that showed me he was only willing to do just enough to keep football happy because he was afraid that if he built up football that there might be a split thus football languished behind. He was the same one who came out in the media all panicked saying that the Big Ten was going to destroy the Big East and that was that. Asked if there was something that could be done he curled into a ball and said no. Meanwhile Marinatto was doing everything he could to fortify, improve and expand football and the conference, looking towards the future. When we had a chance to potentially start a network he scrapped it and said that ESPN was our network, which I bought until our football money came out, Marinatto is at least seriously researching a potential network.

(02-01-2011 10:35 AM)Borncoog74 Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 08:29 AM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  If Nova says yes, I will be interested in seeing their attendance numbers. Will they be like a Northwestern or Vandy or will it be more in line with a Duke?

It's nice to say you have that market but who will actually be watching. That's the big question.

With respect to Villanova, the market doesn't matter. They are currently a member of the BE, so if they want to move up in football, then the BE will be open to them.

As for the market, I don't think Villanova will bring much. To the extent that Philly watches college football at all, it's really in support of Penn State. The main value that Villanova brings is a 10th football team without having to split another share of basketball revenue. Since basketball revenue is higher in the BE than football revenue, it could very well be the case that 10/17 membership with Villanova yields more money per school than 10/18 without Villanova and with UCF or Houston. The BE is what it is - BB is more valuable than FB in this conference and it likely always will be. I know a lot of people on this board believe that's a bad thing, but the BE has to work with what it has in terms of assets. Schools like Penn State and Notre Dame aren't walking through that door, and those are really the only types of schools that can truly prop up football revenue that people on this board would like to see. Adding C-USA schools aren't going to move the mark there. There's a lot of fuzzy math going on - if you were to believe UCF, Houston and ECU boosters, they would raise revenue for the BE in a manner that would be in excess of SEVERAL TIMES the value of the ENTIRE new C-USA TV contract. Seriously - that's what would have to happen for the BE to get up to $10 million per team in a 10 or 12 team football league. So, if they were that valuable, then why hasn't C-USA been getting paid like that already? And UCF or Houston or ECU alone in the BE is worth more than all 12 C-USA teams put together that they're a member of now? That's Enron-worthy accounting. Now, that's not to say UCF, Houston and/or ECU can't provide some value to the BE, but people get taken a lot more seriously if you're realistic about what you bring to the table.

Frank,
Your comparison of UH in CUSA vs UH in BE is apples and oranges. Houston and it's market can't bring $10 million contract to CUSA because UH is not bringing the products of WVU, PITT, USF, Georgetown, UCONN, Louisville, etc.
The same goes for UCF and ECU.

UH in a TV contract is equal to the some of it's parts.
It's parts in the BE add up to more than it does in CUSA. You can't argue that.

Good pt.

(02-02-2011 05:03 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  When I say that Tranghese threw the football side under the bus I mean it. He never promoted the football side, he treated it as something to deal with nothing something to build. I remember when the TV contract came out he gushed about the basketball money and when a reporter asked about the football side of it he acted annoyed and basically blew it off. That stuck with me, that showed me he was only willing to do just enough to keep football happy because he was afraid that if he built up football that there might be a split thus football languished behind. He was the same one who came out in the media all panicked saying that the Big Ten was going to destroy the Big East and that was that. Asked if there was something that could be done he curled into a ball and said no. Meanwhile Marinatto was doing everything he could to fortify, improve and expand football and the conference, looking towards the future. When we had a chance to potentially start a network he scrapped it and said that ESPN was our network, which I bought until our football money came out, Marinatto is at least seriously researching a potential network.

One has to remember that Tranghese was a Providence (College) guy...just like the Big East Commish before him and the Big East Commish after him...

Marinatto though is stuck as the other BCS Conferences "cashed in" during most of Tranghese's reign by almost all of them focusing in on FOOTBALL (since thats where the $$$$$ were) while the Providence Big East Commish dudes focused almost solely on their basketball (Catholic) side.

Marinatto is now trying to play catch-up...and with TV $$$$ now reaching in the BILLIONS of $$$$, the football side can't be ignored any longer.

10-15,000,000 a year would be great.....

What is the ACC getting a year per team?

(02-04-2011 06:23 PM)Fear The Frog Wrote:  10-15,000,000 a year would be great.....

What is the ACC getting a year per team?

Of their deal they got 12.9 million for each school however this is misleading. Of that 12.9 they had to sell their tier 3 content (the stuff conference networks are made of)

A smaller company (Raycom) purchased the tier 3 rights from ESPN for what amounts to 4.2 per school. So we can estimate that the rights they had that are roughly equal to what is in the current BE tv deal would be equal to the difference (8.7 million each). The 4.2 is essentially what they are getting from a de facto ACC network and is very much what you would expect compared to the 6 million the B10 gets from their network when you consider the brands & football ratings.

I expect to see the BE get 9-12 overall with 15 the absolute max if the ACC is any indication. I don't see a BE network getting basic tier in NYC when you look at the struggles the Yankees had doing it. Without that its probably better to go through existing networks like the ACC has de facto done with Raycom via ESPN.

(02-01-2011 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 08:29 AM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  If Nova says yes, I will be interested in seeing their attendance numbers. Will they be like a Northwestern or Vandy or will it be more in line with a Duke?

It's nice to say you have that market but who will actually be watching. That's the big question.

With respect to Villanova, the market doesn't matter. They are currently a member of the BE, so if they want to move up in football, then the BE will be open to them.

As for the market, I don't think Villanova will bring much. To the extent that Philly watches college football at all, it's really in support of Penn State. The main value that Villanova brings is a 10th football team without having to split another share of basketball revenue. Since basketball revenue is higher in the BE than football revenue, it could very well be the case that 10/17 membership with Villanova yields more money per school than 10/18 without Villanova and with UCF or Houston. The BE is what it is - BB is more valuable than FB in this conference and it likely always will be. I know a lot of people on this board believe that's a bad thing, but the BE has to work with what it has in terms of assets. Schools like Penn State and Notre Dame aren't walking through that door, and those are really the only types of schools that can truly prop up football revenue that people on this board would like to see. Adding C-USA schools aren't going to move the mark there. There's a lot of fuzzy math going on - if you were to believe UCF, Houston and ECU boosters, they would raise revenue for the BE in a manner that would be in excess of SEVERAL TIMES the value of the ENTIRE new C-USA TV contract. Seriously - that's what would have to happen for the BE to get up to $10 million per team in a 10 or 12 team football league. So, if they were that valuable, then why hasn't C-USA been getting paid like that already? And UCF or Houston or ECU alone in the BE is worth more than all 12 C-USA teams put together that they're a member of now? That's Enron-worthy accounting. Now, that's not to say UCF, Houston and/or ECU can't provide some value to the BE, but people get taken a lot more seriously if you're realistic about what you bring to the table.

this has been my point the whole time, will adding a ucf or houston bring enough money to the conference to justify their admission, hell no. until someone can give numbers that disproves this, all of this talk about expansion outside of nova or usf blocking whomever is just bs

(02-01-2011 04:17 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There's a lot of fuzzy math going on - if you were to believe UCF, Houston and ECU boosters, they would raise revenue for the BE in a manner that would be in excess of SEVERAL TIMES the value of the ENTIRE new C-USA TV contract. Seriously - that's what would have to happen for the BE to get up to $10 million per team in a 10 or 12 team football league. So, if they were that valuable, then why hasn't C-USA been getting paid like that already?

The above poster has a point. Nebraska has been worth about has as much to the Big Ten as the entire current Big XII contract. Rutgers could have been worth about $20 million a year plus just in Big Ten Network subscriber fees (payable to the Big Ten), not including extra revenue from a championship game, not including any expectation of basic cable access in NYC, not including an increase in B10N advertising revenue (with 4 million more household clearances), not including additional TV inventory to sell, and not including the risdual exposure in the northeast, it woudl bring, yet it would still be worth more than the ENTIRE Big East football contract is today. So yes, what conference you are in, does affect how valuable a team can be, especially if you are talking a about a team that resides in a big market.

There is a very valid argument that the sum of the parts can be worth a lot more than the parts themselves. I agree with you completely and that's actually exactly how I feel about the basketball schools in the conference. With that said, I wanted to comment a little on Nebraska and Rutgers. Nebraska themselves didn't bring $20 million. They added to the that extra total, but that money is for the Big Ten Championship Game and likely would have been in that range even in Youngstown State was the 12th team. Not saying it wouldn't have been less, but a larger part of the value of the championship game comes from teams that are already in the conference. Meanwhile, the Big Ten must have concluded that Rutgers couldn't bring in something like $20 million by themselves to the Big Ten Network (meaning getting on basic cable would have been too difficult) or they definitely would have been invited.

Now on to the next contract. Let's look at this from a network perspective and think about what the Big East offers. This all my own opinion of course.

Basketball:
Positives: Best basketball conference, lots of high ranked teams playing each other, northeastern market cornered.
Negatives: Basketball regular season is small potatoes compared to football and this has to be divided at least 17 ways.
Likely outcome: The basketball portion of the contract will be very good for a basketball contract, but unable to make up the gap to the other 5 BCS conferences if football leaves a hole.

Football:
Positives: Nine (or more) football teams in a very competitive conference. Unlike in other conferences, there isn't a single team you look at and say they have close to zero chance to win. The league is also more flexible to playing off Saturdays (or at least was last time).
Negatives: There are no huge names. This is a big deal as the huge names earn a very disproportionate part of the contract in most other conferences. If you take Florida State and Miami out of the ACC or USC out of the PAC-10, the conference money declines a lot. This shows the huge power of their names. The Big East is largely lacking a superpower which brings in a huge amount of the conference dollars (West Virginia is currently closest to the status, but there yet). Also, even if incorrectly, the conference is viewed as the weakest by a large segment of the nation. That is going to hurt with a TV contract.
Likely outcomes: A big increase is coming, but the conference still hasn't fully developed what TV stations are looking for. The football side will bring less than what most on here are hoping for and the basketball side won't be enough to make up the difference. It will be a big leap forward all the same though.

(02-04-2011 07:07 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 04:17 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There's a lot of fuzzy math going on - if you were to believe UCF, Houston and ECU boosters, they would raise revenue for the BE in a manner that would be in excess of SEVERAL TIMES the value of the ENTIRE new C-USA TV contract. Seriously - that's what would have to happen for the BE to get up to $10 million per team in a 10 or 12 team football league. So, if they were that valuable, then why hasn't C-USA been getting paid like that already?

The above poster has a point. Nebraska has been worth about has as much to the Big Ten as the entire current Big XII contract. Rutgers could have been worth about $20 million a year plus just in Big Ten Network subscriber fees (payable to the Big Ten), not including extra revenue from a championship game, not including any expectation of basic cable access in NYC, not including an increase in B10N advertising revenue (with 4 million more household clearances), not including additional TV inventory to sell, and not including the risdual exposure in the northeast, it woudl bring, yet it would still be worth more than the ENTIRE Big East football contract is today. So yes, what conference you are in, does affect how valuable a team can be, especially if you are talking a about a team that resides in a big market.

There is a very valid argument that the sum of the parts can be worth a lot more than the parts themselves. I agree with you completely and that's actually exactly how I feel about the basketball schools in the conference. With that said, I wanted to comment a little on Nebraska and Rutgers. Nebraska themselves didn't bring $20 million. They added to the that extra total, but that money is for the Big Ten Championship Game and likely would have been in that range even in Youngstown State was the 12th team. Not saying it wouldn't have been less, but a larger part of the value of the championship game comes from teams that are already in the conference. Meanwhile, the Big Ten must have concluded that Rutgers couldn't bring in something like $20 million by themselves to the Big Ten Network (meaning getting on basic cable would have been too difficult) or they definitely would have been invited.

Now on to the next contract. Let's look at this from a network perspective and think about what the Big East offers. This all my own opinion of course.

Basketball:
Positives: Best basketball conference, lots of high ranked teams playing each other, northeastern market cornered.
Negatives: Basketball regular season is small potatoes compared to football and this has to be divided at least 17 ways.
Likely outcome: The basketball portion of the contract will be very good for a basketball contract, but unable to make up the gap to the other 5 BCS conferences if football leaves a hole.

Football:
Positives: Nine (or more) football teams in a very competitive conference. Unlike in other conferences, there isn't a single team you look at and say they have close to zero chance to win. The league is also more flexible to playing off Saturdays (or at least was last time).
Negatives: There are no huge names. This is a big deal as the huge names earn a very disproportionate part of the contract in most other conferences. If you take Florida State and Miami out of the ACC or USC out of the PAC-10, the conference money declines a lot. This shows the huge power of their names. The Big East is largely lacking a superpower which brings in a huge amount of the conference dollars (West Virginia is currently closest to the status, but there yet). Also, even if incorrectly, the conference is viewed as the weakest by a large segment of the nation. That is going to hurt with a TV contract.
Likely outcomes: A big increase is coming, but the conference still hasn't fully developed what TV stations are looking for. The football side will bring less than what most on here are hoping for and the basketball side won't be enough to make up the difference. It will be a big leap forward all the same though.

I like the way you broke this all down. Very well done. The one thing that I have heard from knowledgeable people is that FB is the money maker and bb is the filler, for most leagues. There are several factors that you did not give enough consideration to in your breakdown, imo.

1) Markets- the BE has access to the most markets and the most eyballs of any other conference (41 million households). The BE may not control all of those markets, but the potential is there to reach all of those eyballs. That is huge for tv. No other conference can deliver the northeast, the most heavily populated area of the US, the way the BE as a whole can.

2)Basketball- The largest and by far most entertaining basketball conference has alot of inventory to sell, especially highly ranked games between many traditional powers. No other conference has such a large collection of traditional basketball powers under one roof. These can attract alot of eyeballs and create opportunities for networks to make some extra revenue off of. A single basketball game doesnt create the same ratings as a single fb game does, but the fact that basketball season can have as many as 3 times the amount of games as fb season, collectively, these bb games probably can offer a better total rating than fb does for a league, or network.

2)Networks- This is, in my opinion, the biggest single attraction that the BE has in its hip pocket. By the time next season rolls around, there could be more options for the BE than there were for the Acc last year. Because of a near bidding war is the reason that the Acc got the deal they landed. With even more networks throwing their hats into the ring (announcing their intentions of starting or expanding sports networks and properties) The BE will be in a very good situation come time to negotiate a new tv contract. Marrinato even alluded to this in a recent article. In other words, its time for the BE to get paid.

There will the Three corporations that will be bidding for the BE so prices will most definitely rise Fox, ESPN, and CBS have all stated interest in BE so watch out BE is about to get a large sum. Last contract BE was to early. Now timing seems to be Perfect!!

(02-04-2011 07:07 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 04:17 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(02-01-2011 10:27 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There's a lot of fuzzy math going on - if you were to believe UCF, Houston and ECU boosters, they would raise revenue for the BE in a manner that would be in excess of SEVERAL TIMES the value of the ENTIRE new C-USA TV contract. Seriously - that's what would have to happen for the BE to get up to $10 million per team in a 10 or 12 team football league. So, if they were that valuable, then why hasn't C-USA been getting paid like that already?

The above poster has a point. Nebraska has been worth about has as much to the Big Ten as the entire current Big XII contract. Rutgers could have been worth about $20 million a year plus just in Big Ten Network subscriber fees (payable to the Big Ten), not including extra revenue from a championship game, not including any expectation of basic cable access in NYC, not including an increase in B10N advertising revenue (with 4 million more household clearances), not including additional TV inventory to sell, and not including the risdual exposure in the northeast, it woudl bring, yet it would still be worth more than the ENTIRE Big East football contract is today. So yes, what conference you are in, does affect how valuable a team can be, especially if you are talking a about a team that resides in a big market.

There is a very valid argument that the sum of the parts can be worth a lot more than the parts themselves. I agree with you completely and that's actually exactly how I feel about the basketball schools in the conference. With that said, I wanted to comment a little on Nebraska and Rutgers. Nebraska themselves didn't bring $20 million. They added to the that extra total, but that money is for the Big Ten Championship Game and likely would have been in that range even in Youngstown State was the 12th team. Not saying it wouldn't have been less, but a larger part of the value of the championship game comes from teams that are already in the conference. Meanwhile, the Big Ten must have concluded that Rutgers couldn't bring in something like $20 million by themselves to the Big Ten Network (meaning getting on basic cable would have been too difficult) or they definitely would have been invited.

Now on to the next contract. Let's look at this from a network perspective and think about what the Big East offers. This all my own opinion of course.

Basketball:
Positives: Best basketball conference, lots of high ranked teams playing each other, northeastern market cornered.
Negatives: Basketball regular season is small potatoes compared to football and this has to be divided at least 17 ways.
Likely outcome: The basketball portion of the contract will be very good for a basketball contract, but unable to make up the gap to the other 5 BCS conferences if football leaves a hole.

Football:
Positives: Nine (or more) football teams in a very competitive conference. Unlike in other conferences, there isn't a single team you look at and say they have close to zero chance to win. The league is also more flexible to playing off Saturdays (or at least was last time).
Negatives: There are no huge names. This is a big deal as the huge names earn a very disproportionate part of the contract in most other conferences. If you take Florida State and Miami out of the ACC or USC out of the PAC-10, the conference money declines a lot. This shows the huge power of their names. The Big East is largely lacking a superpower which brings in a huge amount of the conference dollars (West Virginia is currently closest to the status, but there yet). Also, even if incorrectly, the conference is viewed as the weakest by a large segment of the nation. That is going to hurt with a TV contract.
Likely outcomes: A big increase is coming, but the conference still hasn't fully developed what TV stations are looking for. The football side will bring less than what most on here are hoping for and the basketball side won't be enough to make up the difference. It will be a big leap forward all the same though.

You make very good pts...and the only one I would disagree with you on is that Youngstown St would have brought basically just as much $$$ to the Big Ten as did Nebraska.

While any team would have been the 12th team to the conf...landing the winniest (or 2nd) program over the last 50 years...one with a good national following...and one that holds the longest yearly sellout streak (pro or college) of any team in the nation as Nebraska has soldout EVERY football home game since 1962!!

Yes, big $$$ were involved with the Big Ten Championship Game...but since Nebraska has as good of shot at any winning their division (and playing in the title game), plus adding up all their other National TV appearances under the Big Ten banner, the Huskers were obviously chosen because out of all the available teams (all Big East Teams and all Big 12 teams not named Texas), Huskers were viewed most valuable.

(02-04-2011 06:29 PM)Sammy11 Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 06:23 PM)Fear The Frog Wrote:  10-15,000,000 a year would be great.....

What is the ACC getting a year per team?

Of their deal they got 12.9 million for each school however this is misleading. Of that 12.9 they had to sell their tier 3 content (the stuff conference networks are made of)

A smaller company (Raycom) purchased the tier 3 rights from ESPN for what amounts to 4.2 per school. So we can estimate that the rights they had that are roughly equal to what is in the current BE tv deal would be equal to the difference (8.7 million each). The 4.2 is essentially what they are getting from a de facto ACC network and is very much what you would expect compared to the 6 million the B10 gets from their network when you consider the brands & football ratings.

I expect to see the BE get 9-12 overall with 15 the absolute max if the ACC is any indication. I don't see a BE network getting basic tier in NYC when you look at the struggles the Yankees had doing it. Without that its probably better to go through existing networks like the ACC has de facto done with Raycom via ESPN.

Thanks Bear for the info....

Nice breakdown Ohio. Sammy you're completely wrong about the 9 to 12 range. We could be looking at 9 per school, or in that neighborhood, for basketball alone. I'm guessing 12 to 15 million per football school (half that for the basketball schools) at the minum, and revenue from a Big East Network. The Big East has been planning this out for awhile, thats why TCU gleefully jumped on board we're about to get a big payday. I understand that you predict a worse case scenario for the BE because you're afraid we night poach some of your schools but I don't think we will target them. I also don't expect you to get 17 million per year probably 14 to 15 million per year and nothing more under the Texas regime.

(02-07-2011 03:28 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  Nice breakdown Ohio. Sammy you're completely wrong about the 9 to 12 range. We could be looking at 9 per school, or in that neighborhood, for basketball alone. I'm guessing 12 to 15 million per football school (half that for the basketball schools) at the minum, and revenue from a Big East Network. The Big East has been planning this out for awhile, thats why TCU gleefully jumped on board we're about to get a big payday. I understand that you predict a worse case scenario for the BE because you're afraid we night poach some of your schools but I don't think we will target them. I also don't expect you to get 17 million per year probably 14 to 15 million per year and nothing more under the Texas regime.

I got that range from looking at how your old deal compares to your "closest cousin" in terms of the value of league wide football and hoops - the ACC. Their deal was slightly ahead of you and I feel it is normal to expect similar results again. I feel a BE network will have difficulty getting on NYC's basic tier so you will probably go the ACC/SEC route and sell those rights to a known quantity as a de-facto network.

The Yankees struggled greatly to get on the basic tier in NYC and its the freaking yankees we are talking about. If any sports programming is "In Demand" in that market it is the Yankees, bar none. They also have significant programming from the NJ Nets boosting their cause as well. They eventually did it but thats with a major franchise backing up the #1 most valuable sports property in the New York area.... and it was STILL a tough fight. The BE network may end up happening or not but I would not expect to match the Big 10's 6 mil per team take and frankly I think the 4 mil the ACC got in their de-facto raycom network deal is pretty fair. If you get on NYC's basic tier that revenue can be realized but I just don't see that piece of the puzzle fitting.

I really am not trying to project "my hope" and this is my honest and as unbiased as I can get opinion.

Also with TCU gleefully jumping on board:
MWC- 1.6 mil (now 1.2)
Old BE deal- 3 mil + AQ status
ESPN visibility beats out the Mtn and Versus anyday.

There is enough there to get them to jump before a new deal is struck so I don't see that as an indication of your new deal at all, for good or ill.

As for where each of us see the numbers going... we are each on record setting a prediction and we'll see! Time will tell the tale but unless there is a fierce bidding war I don't see the BE reaching your numbers. The ACC's #s are after a bidding war BTW.

Matt brought up an interesting scenario that would explain why the Big 12 could potentially get 17 million per school but you are SEVERELY underestimating the juice that the Big East has, especially with TCU in the fold for football. The Big East (and Notre Dame) know what they're doing. We know that we have some major power in basketball and will get they payday in the 8 to 9 million per team range expansion is about getting paid in football. The Big East Network is about stability and power.

(02-07-2011 03:56 PM)CatsClaw Wrote:  Matt brought up an interesting scenario that would explain why the Big 12 could potentially get 17 million per school but you are SEVERELY underestimating the juice that the Big East has, especially with TCU in the fold for football. The Big East (and Notre Dame) know what they're doing. We know that we have some major power in basketball and will get they payday in the 8 to 9 million per team range expansion is about getting paid in football. The Big East Network is about stability and power.

I doubt BE will get 8-9 just for BB. I know there is a lot of hype with BE Basketball even when ESPN analyst saying BE will get 11 teams in the tourny this year

At best BB will get 7 a team. right now the contract is for 32.5 for BB /16 teams

Thus 2.03 mil a team

It will be 112 mil a year just to get 7 mil a team with no one else joining.

The BE will get this if not close to it.

For the FB contract that will be a bit more difficult to guess seeing that ZERO numbers or estimations have come out. And Honestly it would be stupid to guess now. It all depends how WVU and UoL do next season

Why those to schools? If you take a look at the number, Both WVU and UoL are in the top 25 schools who sells the most merchandise.

Why is this important? $$$ The two top revenue schools look better the more items will sell the greater the demand, the higher the contract will be.

TCU needs to have another good year but The Ville and WVU are more important to get a higher contract

Not exactly sure how things will pan out, but we should recall that:

- Comcast has cable in NYC
- NBC/Comcast wants to be a player in College Sports
- The Big 12 is up for contract negotiations soon
- Fox wants to be a player in college sports
- The Big East has one thing no other conference has: A team in NYC (St. Johns) with large representation (fans within driving distance) from Rutgers, Syracuse, UConn, Seton Hall, Notre Dame.
- All teams have grads in NYC, much like any other conference
- Notre Dame is well represented in NYC, both by grads and T-shhirt fans
- ESPN does not want the Big East basketball to go anywhere!
- The Big East is in more markets than any other conference
- The Big East has larger markets thananyone else

What does this mean? Not a clue, but my guess is that:

- ESPN has to make a lucrative deal for the prime games, both in football and basketball
- Fox or Comcast/NBC will make either a network or highlight the secondary games of the Big East, possibly both
- Each team will continue to own its own tertiary rights
- If a network is formed, expect other sports to be included, lots of live programing, better advertising dollars
- Lacrosse may become a regularly televised program, especially as lacrosse is big in the north and east (Kudos to ND and OSU for opening up the midwest)

Final result, the Big East will receive a big increase. Most liKely on the order of at least ACC money.

Also, remember, a Big East network need not make tons of dough the first few years, as long as they are getting the name out there! Any increase on that side is still an increase.