(06-03-2014 10:04 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/....html?rh=1

Eventually, Bowlsby said revenues should peak at roughly $43.5 million per school by 2024. Because the Big 12 has only 10 members, administrators envision the league’s per-school revenues remaining comparable to, or ahead of, per-school distributions in larger leagues such as the SEC, ACC and Big Ten, all with 14 members.

“Our conference is doing exceptionally well with our model of 10 [members],” Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione said. “Everybody knows what we expected and it’s more than where we were years ago.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/...rylink=cpy

I read that report. Nice editing. It also goes on to say that long term the ability to maintain pace with the Conferences with networks could become an issue and that the prospects for the next contract don't appear to have another large upside.

I don't see that in the article. Maybe I missed it.

(06-03-2014 10:11 AM)dopeordogfood Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/....html?rh=1

Eventually, Bowlsby said revenues should peak at roughly $43.5 million per school by 2024. Because the Big 12 has only 10 members, administrators envision the league’s per-school revenues remaining comparable to, or ahead of, per-school distributions in larger leagues such as the SEC, ACC and Big Ten, all with 14 members.

“Our conference is doing exceptionally well with our model of 10 [members],” Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione said. “Everybody knows what we expected and it’s more than where we were years ago.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/...rylink=cpy

that is pretty obvious. I believe all conferences will be making substantially more towards the end of the contracts too. The Big 12, in TV alone, is supposed to average $20 million per year over their contract. Right now they aren't getting no where near that now because you are celebrating Distributing a "record $23 million per" for 8 teams and that includes bowl money and NCAA tourney money included with the TV money. If you average in the 10 teams instead of 8, it's still $21 million a team. I'm sure bowl revenue and NCAA tournament money equates to more than $1 million dollars. It's obvious an increase will be coming.

They will get contract bowl money to split with the SEC and will get more by dividing it less(not sure how long the SEC will allow that to go on), they will get Playoff money to split less ways also. Other conferences will too. The problem they they face is that the conferences with networks will continue to go up, up and up in revenue potential. The Big 12 is maxed out. As a whole, the individual tier 3 model doesn't help the conference as a whole. It helps a couple of teams like Texas and Oklahoma but Iowa State having a channel on Mediacom only helps get eyeballs where mediacom is in the home.

The Big 12 don't even have the rating to support their current contract. Not enough casual eyeballs watchand they have the smallest footprint of any other major conference. Not paying WVU and TCU full shares is just greedy IMO. I can see how the Pac12 and B1G delay it due the investment in the PAC 12 network and Big Ten network where there is a buy-in period but the Big 12 treated WVU and TCU like that because they could. It was like "be happy we saved you and shut up".

All the major money conferences make money. No one is getting gobbled up or squeezed out just because of TV sets. Conference distribution helps but it shouldn't be treated like a social security check. The real money is made by the programs themselves and not by a conference check.

Everyone has buy-ins. Utah is making less than half of what the other Pac 12 schools are. Colorado had a buy-in, but not as steep a one as Utah. There was no Pac 12 network until they joined. Nebraska has a 7 year buy-in. They are making $12 million! less than the other Big 10 schools are. Rutgers and Maryland have similar buy-ins. WVU and TCU only have 4 year buy-ins. Even the SEC had a small buy-in for A&M and Missouri. They each got $1.5 million less last year.

(06-03-2014 10:27 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 10:04 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/....html?rh=1

Eventually, Bowlsby said revenues should peak at roughly $43.5 million per school by 2024. Because the Big 12 has only 10 members, administrators envision the league’s per-school revenues remaining comparable to, or ahead of, per-school distributions in larger leagues such as the SEC, ACC and Big Ten, all with 14 members.

“Our conference is doing exceptionally well with our model of 10 [members],” Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione said. “Everybody knows what we expected and it’s more than where we were years ago.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/...rylink=cpy

I read that report. Nice editing. It also goes on to say that long term the ability to maintain pace with the Conferences with networks could become an issue and that the prospects for the next contract don't appear to have another large upside.

I don't see that in the article. Maybe I missed it.

You didn't.

(06-03-2014 10:29 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 10:11 AM)dopeordogfood Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/....html?rh=1

Eventually, Bowlsby said revenues should peak at roughly $43.5 million per school by 2024. Because the Big 12 has only 10 members, administrators envision the league’s per-school revenues remaining comparable to, or ahead of, per-school distributions in larger leagues such as the SEC, ACC and Big Ten, all with 14 members.

“Our conference is doing exceptionally well with our model of 10 [members],” Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione said. “Everybody knows what we expected and it’s more than where we were years ago.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/...rylink=cpy

that is pretty obvious. I believe all conferences will be making substantially more towards the end of the contracts too. The Big 12, in TV alone, is supposed to average $20 million per year over their contract. Right now they aren't getting no where near that now because you are celebrating Distributing a "record $23 million per" for 8 teams and that includes bowl money and NCAA tourney money included with the TV money. If you average in the 10 teams instead of 8, it's still $21 million a team. I'm sure bowl revenue and NCAA tournament money equates to more than $1 million dollars. It's obvious an increase will be coming.

They will get contract bowl money to split with the SEC and will get more by dividing it less(not sure how long the SEC will allow that to go on), they will get Playoff money to split less ways also. Other conferences will too. The problem they they face is that the conferences with networks will continue to go up, up and up in revenue potential. The Big 12 is maxed out. As a whole, the individual tier 3 model doesn't help the conference as a whole. It helps a couple of teams like Texas and Oklahoma but Iowa State having a channel on Mediacom only helps get eyeballs where mediacom is in the home.

The Big 12 don't even have the rating to support their current contract. Not enough casual eyeballs watchand they have the smallest footprint of any other major conference. Not paying WVU and TCU full shares is just greedy IMO. I can see how the Pac12 and B1G delay it due the investment in the PAC 12 network and Big Ten network where there is a buy-in period but the Big 12 treated WVU and TCU like that because they could. It was like "be happy we saved you and shut up".

All the major money conferences make money. No one is getting gobbled up or squeezed out just because of TV sets. Conference distribution helps but it shouldn't be treated like a social security check. The real money is made by the programs themselves and not by a conference check.

Everyone has buy-ins. Utah is making less than half of what the other Pac 12 schools are. Colorado had a buy-in, but not as steep a one as Utah. There was no Pac 12 network until they joined. Nebraska has a 7 year buy-in. They are making $12 million! less than the other Big 10 schools are. Rutgers and Maryland have similar buy-ins. WVU and TCU only have 4 year buy-ins. Even the SEC had a small buy-in for A&M and Missouri. They each got $1.5 million less last year.

(06-03-2014 10:04 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:36 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/....html?rh=1

Eventually, Bowlsby said revenues should peak at roughly $43.5 million per school by 2024. Because the Big 12 has only 10 members, administrators envision the league’s per-school revenues remaining comparable to, or ahead of, per-school distributions in larger leagues such as the SEC, ACC and Big Ten, all with 14 members.

“Our conference is doing exceptionally well with our model of 10 [members],” Oklahoma athletic director Joe Castiglione said. “Everybody knows what we expected and it’s more than where we were years ago.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/05/30/...rylink=cpy

I read that report. Nice editing. It also goes on to say that long term the ability to maintain pace with the Conferences with networks could become an issue and that the prospects for the next contract don't appear to have another large upside.

It doesn't say anything close to that.

(06-03-2014 10:29 AM)bullet Wrote:  Everyone has buy-ins. Utah is making less than half of what the other Pac 12 schools are. Colorado had a buy-in, but not as steep a one as Utah.

Utah had a half share in 2012-13. IIRC it's 75% in 2013-14 and 100% after that. CU did not have a buy-in, but they had to pay back the Pac-12 for loaning CU their Big 12 exit payment.

(06-03-2014 11:22 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 10:29 AM)bullet Wrote:  Everyone has buy-ins. Utah is making less than half of what the other Pac 12 schools are. Colorado had a buy-in, but not as steep a one as Utah.

Utah had a half share in 2012-13. IIRC it's 75% in 2013-14 and 100% after that. CU did not have a buy-in, but they had to pay back the Pac-12 for loaning CU their Big 12 exit payment.

So that's why they got significantly less the year before in distributions (but still more than Utah)?