Apparently the Rich get richer....from the article:

Industry experts have predicted Fox will be a major player in bidding on the Big Ten. It is a partner with the conference in the Big Ten Network. Fox also has deals with the Big 12 and Pac-12 but has no postseason (bowl) presence now with the loss of the Cotton Bowl to the College Football Playoff. With the launch of Fox Sports 1, Fox also would be in need of content to drive viewership.

The $44.5 million figure would far outstrip any other conference's revenue at present. However, such deals are historically backloaded. The largest part of the payout comes at the end of the contract. For example, the Big 12 currently averages $20 million annually in revenue per school. The Pac-12 is still projecting an average of $30 million per school despite problems with carriage on its Pac-12 Network.

The Big Ten's bargaining position will be enhanced by the addition of a ninth conference game in 2016. That extra game means more inventory to sell to potential rightsholders as well as more content for that wildly successful Big Ten Network.

Commissioner Jim Delany began exploring the idea of a network about a decade ago when he perceived the conference being undervalued by ESPN.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ew-tv-deal

Read the article before you post, based on headlines -- it says the 44.5 million is TV money and other distributions (likely NCAA units, Bowl money, etc).

if they do a big deal with Fox, and nothing with ESPN....that opens up a ton of room on ESPN for other conference games to get broadcast.

cable and sat are losing customers at an alarming rate. i live in alabama and pay, through my cable bill, for the btn. I have never watched nor do i ever intend on watching the btn. there will come a point where the tv money bubble is going to burst. we are very close to the point where broadband speeds are fast enough that for many comsumers they will cut the tv cord altogether. the reason smart tvs and internet ready tvs are taking the market is anticipation of this very fact.

the interwebs has already killed print newspapers. the next will be cable and satellite tv that makes you pay for shite you dont want because you can get it on the internet.

the day is already here, the market just lags behind due to barriers of exit that have time limits on enforcablilty, like the new trend of no contract cable.

(04-26-2014 01:02 PM)shere khan Wrote:  cable and sat are losing customers at an alarming rate. i live in alabama and pay, through my cable bill, for the btn. I have never watched nor do i ever intend on watching the btn. there will come a point where the tv money bubble is going to burst. we are very close to the point where broadband speeds are fast enough that for many comsumers they will cut the tv cord altogether. the reason smart tvs and internet ready tvs are taking the market is anticipation of this very fact.

the interwebs has already killed print newspapers. the next will be cable and satellite tv that makes you pay for shite you dont want because you can get it on the internet.

the day is already here, the market just lags behind due to barriers of exit that have time limits on enforcablilty, like the new trend of no contract cable.

How do you think decisions on "net neutrality" will affect all this?

(04-26-2014 12:40 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  Read the article before you post, based on headlines -- it says the 44.5 million is TV money and other distributions (likely NCAA units, Bowl money, etc).

Yeah....changed the title...still amazing $$$ for a league that product on the Field/Court isn't that great...

(04-26-2014 01:11 PM)fresnofanatic Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 01:02 PM)shere khan Wrote:  cable and sat are losing customers at an alarming rate. i live in alabama and pay, through my cable bill, for the btn. I have never watched nor do i ever intend on watching the btn. there will come a point where the tv money bubble is going to burst. we are very close to the point where broadband speeds are fast enough that for many comsumers they will cut the tv cord altogether. the reason smart tvs and internet ready tvs are taking the market is anticipation of this very fact.

the interwebs has already killed print newspapers. the next will be cable and satellite tv that makes you pay for shite you dont want because you can get it on the internet.

the day is already here, the market just lags behind due to barriers of exit that have time limits on enforcablilty, like the new trend of no contract cable.

How do you think decisions on "net neutrality" will affect all this?

i think the horses are out of the barn on the whole issue. legislators that vote for it will be replaced. companies that enforce it will fail due market forces, much like cable and cell phone contracts are becoming a thing of the past.

(04-26-2014 01:11 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 12:40 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  Read the article before you post, based on headlines -- it says the 44.5 million is TV money and other distributions (likely NCAA units, Bowl money, etc).

Yeah....changed the title...still amazing $$$ for a league that product on the Field/Court isn't that great...

Has nothing to do with the product on the field/court...

When Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, Michigan State play football a crap load of people watch the games.

When Michigan State, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio State play basketball another crap load of people watch the games.

It is the fortune of these schools of having a couple hundred thousand living alumni and having their whole state worship the ground they walk on.

(04-26-2014 01:02 PM)shere khan Wrote:  cable and sat are losing customers at an alarming rate. i live in alabama and pay, through my cable bill, for the btn. I have never watched nor do i ever intend on watching the btn. there will come a point where the tv money bubble is going to burst. we are very close to the point where broadband speeds are fast enough that for many comsumers they will cut the tv cord altogether. the reason smart tvs and internet ready tvs are taking the market is anticipation of this very fact.

the interwebs has already killed print newspapers. the next will be cable and satellite tv that makes you pay for shite you dont want because you can get it on the internet.

the day is already here, the market just lags behind due to barriers of exit that have time limits on enforcablilty, like the new trend of no contract cable.

I hope your right on that one. It's sickening to see what the BTN and other sports networks are doing to raise the price of cable.

(04-26-2014 01:16 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 01:11 PM)fresnofanatic Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 01:02 PM)shere khan Wrote:  cable and sat are losing customers at an alarming rate. i live in alabama and pay, through my cable bill, for the btn. I have never watched nor do i ever intend on watching the btn. there will come a point where the tv money bubble is going to burst. we are very close to the point where broadband speeds are fast enough that for many comsumers they will cut the tv cord altogether. the reason smart tvs and internet ready tvs are taking the market is anticipation of this very fact.

the interwebs has already killed print newspapers. the next will be cable and satellite tv that makes you pay for shite you dont want because you can get it on the internet.

the day is already here, the market just lags behind due to barriers of exit that have time limits on enforcablilty, like the new trend of no contract cable.

How do you think decisions on "net neutrality" will affect all this?

i think the horses are out of the barn on the whole issue. legislators that vote for it will be replaced. companies that enforce it will fail due market forces, much like cable and cell phone contracts are becoming a thing of the past.

Two things we know are true. The content producers will get paid and whoever owns the last mile of cable/pipe to the home always gets compensated. The cable companies may disappear, morph into internet companies, become content producers, or both. The reality is your cable bill will still exist---you will simply be paying it to different people and you will have more control over what you buy. There wont be a basic tier that everyone has to buy. Without having everyone "subsidizing" the "basic" channels---they will become more expensive and the networks that were niche players (Food Network, Travel Channel, etc) will have to charge much more to cover their costs with a much smaller subscriber base.

The bottom line---you will enjoy much more control over your cable bill and will be able to have a very small cable bill if you wish. The trade off is each network you do buy will likely cost you much more than it does now.

(04-26-2014 11:06 AM)Maize Wrote:  Apparently the Rich get richer....from the article:

Industry experts have predicted Fox will be a major player in bidding on the Big Ten. It is a partner with the conference in the Big Ten Network. Fox also has deals with the Big 12 and Pac-12 but has no postseason (bowl) presence now with the loss of the Cotton Bowl to the College Football Playoff. With the launch of Fox Sports 1, Fox also would be in need of content to drive viewership.

The $44.5 million figure would far outstrip any other conference's revenue at present. However, such deals are historically backloaded. The largest part of the payout comes at the end of the contract. For example, the Big 12 currently averages $20 million annually in revenue per school. The Pac-12 is still projecting an average of $30 million per school despite problems with carriage on its Pac-12 Network.

The Big Ten's bargaining position will be enhanced by the addition of a ninth conference game in 2016. That extra game means more inventory to sell to potential rightsholders as well as more content for that wildly successful Big Ten Network.

Commissioner Jim Delany began exploring the idea of a network about a decade ago when he perceived the conference being undervalued by ESPN.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ew-tv-deal

yup....and now we see why we can't compete in the long haul. All you dreamers who think winning a BCS bowl or making a run in the ncaa somehow makes the AAC a "power conference" while we get chicken feed for payouts need to wake the f up.

(04-26-2014 05:31 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:06 AM)Maize Wrote:  Apparently the Rich get richer....from the article:

Industry experts have predicted Fox will be a major player in bidding on the Big Ten. It is a partner with the conference in the Big Ten Network. Fox also has deals with the Big 12 and Pac-12 but has no postseason (bowl) presence now with the loss of the Cotton Bowl to the College Football Playoff. With the launch of Fox Sports 1, Fox also would be in need of content to drive viewership.

The $44.5 million figure would far outstrip any other conference's revenue at present. However, such deals are historically backloaded. The largest part of the payout comes at the end of the contract. For example, the Big 12 currently averages $20 million annually in revenue per school. The Pac-12 is still projecting an average of $30 million per school despite problems with carriage on its Pac-12 Network.

The Big Ten's bargaining position will be enhanced by the addition of a ninth conference game in 2016. That extra game means more inventory to sell to potential rightsholders as well as more content for that wildly successful Big Ten Network.

Commissioner Jim Delany began exploring the idea of a network about a decade ago when he perceived the conference being undervalued by ESPN.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ew-tv-deal

yup....and now we see why we can't compete in the long haul. All you dreamers who think winning a BCS bowl or making a run in the ncaa somehow makes the AAC a "power conference" while we get chicken feed for payouts need to wake the f up.

greasing me to subsidize the big ten wussie football conference will end too.

it will all work out. college football is owned by mike slive, he is the king.

believe whatever you want to. no one gives a shitr about 80 percent of the team in the so called major conferences.

it will all shuffle out in the long run

(04-26-2014 07:50 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 05:31 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:06 AM)Maize Wrote:  Apparently the Rich get richer....from the article:

Industry experts have predicted Fox will be a major player in bidding on the Big Ten. It is a partner with the conference in the Big Ten Network. Fox also has deals with the Big 12 and Pac-12 but has no postseason (bowl) presence now with the loss of the Cotton Bowl to the College Football Playoff. With the launch of Fox Sports 1, Fox also would be in need of content to drive viewership.

The $44.5 million figure would far outstrip any other conference's revenue at present. However, such deals are historically backloaded. The largest part of the payout comes at the end of the contract. For example, the Big 12 currently averages $20 million annually in revenue per school. The Pac-12 is still projecting an average of $30 million per school despite problems with carriage on its Pac-12 Network.

The Big Ten's bargaining position will be enhanced by the addition of a ninth conference game in 2016. That extra game means more inventory to sell to potential rightsholders as well as more content for that wildly successful Big Ten Network.

Commissioner Jim Delany began exploring the idea of a network about a decade ago when he perceived the conference being undervalued by ESPN.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ew-tv-deal

yup....and now we see why we can't compete in the long haul. All you dreamers who think winning a BCS bowl or making a run in the ncaa somehow makes the AAC a "power conference" while we get chicken feed for payouts need to wake the f up.

greasing me to subsidize the big ten wussie football conference will end too.

it will all work out. college football is owned by mike slive, he is the king.

believe whatever you want to. no one gives a shitr about 80 percent of the team in the so called major conferences.

it will all shuffle out in the long run

that's all nice dear...but in the end we get total BS for tv contracts and the P5 get a ton of money....so we are on the outside looking in.

(04-26-2014 07:50 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 05:31 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-26-2014 11:06 AM)Maize Wrote:  Apparently the Rich get richer....from the article:

Industry experts have predicted Fox will be a major player in bidding on the Big Ten. It is a partner with the conference in the Big Ten Network. Fox also has deals with the Big 12 and Pac-12 but has no postseason (bowl) presence now with the loss of the Cotton Bowl to the College Football Playoff. With the launch of Fox Sports 1, Fox also would be in need of content to drive viewership.

The $44.5 million figure would far outstrip any other conference's revenue at present. However, such deals are historically backloaded. The largest part of the payout comes at the end of the contract. For example, the Big 12 currently averages $20 million annually in revenue per school. The Pac-12 is still projecting an average of $30 million per school despite problems with carriage on its Pac-12 Network.

The Big Ten's bargaining position will be enhanced by the addition of a ninth conference game in 2016. That extra game means more inventory to sell to potential rightsholders as well as more content for that wildly successful Big Ten Network.

Commissioner Jim Delany began exploring the idea of a network about a decade ago when he perceived the conference being undervalued by ESPN.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ew-tv-deal

yup....and now we see why we can't compete in the long haul. All you dreamers who think winning a BCS bowl or making a run in the ncaa somehow makes the AAC a "power conference" while we get chicken feed for payouts need to wake the f up.

greasing me to subsidize the big ten wussie football conference will end too.

it will all work out. college football is owned by mike slive, he is the king.

Maybe in terms of results, but in terms of money, Slive has been a disaster for the SEC while Delany has been a genius for the B1G, which is why the B1G is likely to make $5m - $10m more per year than the SEC until around 2035 or so.

Nobody has made as much $$$$ with so little results than Delany...and in the end it is always about the $$$$ and that is what it is in the end all about....

Let's put the yearly TV only money into perspective:

- UCF was able to build their entire stadium for about $45-million dollars. Think about being able to pay for a new stadium....cash...every year.

- Even if each AAC schools pooled their TV money together for the "common good" we would still make ~$15 million less than the B1G football powerhouse known as Indiana University. $45-million in resources can quickly 'fix' a football program that has been broken for over a 100 years.....or they can keep with tradition as this is a tradition rich conference ....and keep sucking for another 100 years while making some serious bank. Makes no difference...as someone is needed to finish last.

- The $45-million/year is more than most AAC school's athletic department operating budgets.

I am sure we can come up with several dozen 'fact-lets' trying to describe the staggering enormity of the B1G deal, but my point is hopefully clear. For those that think we will be able to compete with the P5 in providing all the benefits to compete at the highest level...please either show me your university's 3D money printer or realistic plan on how we will be able to afford all the new upcoming costs.

This is not even taking into consideration all the additional revenues raised by ticket and merchandising sales. I don't think it's far fetched to believe that the rest of the P5 will eventually all get deals in the same neighborhood...if not better in the case of the SEC. The bottom line is that at some point money becomes valueless to these school b/c they will be earning so much that they will want for nothing.

The next 4-6 years are going to be a furious, cut-throat competition between a few G5 schools to somehow find a seat on the last lifeboat leaving for the P5. Those who stay behind will be playing a completely different level of football and the sport will be forever changed.