The Rose Bowl Network

Putting together a few ideas from the past few weeks (including Stew Mandel’s mailbag comments about online-only network subscriptions), I’d like to propose the future of the Big Ten/Pac-12 when it comes to expansion.

With the Big 12 on shaky ground—or at the very least “the shakiest ground among P5s”—and the Pac-12 needing viable expansion targets to shore up it’s own network/footing among P5s, I propose the Texlahoma expansion finally happens. The Big Ten quickly snatches up Kansas from the chaos, and then surprisingly poaches rival Missouri from the SEC.

The two conferences—both at 16 teams—merge their networks into the Rose Bowl Network, which now spans coast to coast and includes about half of the best college sports properties in the country. Both conferences have a 49% ownership in the new network, which becomes an immediate rival for a channel like ESPN2 or FS1. The RBN gets a higher coverage fee in member states (which includes Texas, California, and New York) and is carried (more popularly than previously) nationally on sports tiers.

Now, here’s where the proposal gets good. Fans of individual teams (I’ll use PSU since that’s my team) will desire more coverage of their own team. The BTN offered a moderate amount of PSU coverage, but adding 18 teams to the channel (RBN) would dilute individual team coverage immensely. So, the RBN would offer an online-only subscription for each individual team. Profits for each individual team can be rolled into one big profit pool (which is the current model for Tier 3 in the Pac-12 and Big Ten) or given to the particular school’s coffers. (I could see this going either way, and it’s not a detail that makes-or-breaks this idea. An obvious carrot for a school like Texas is that they could still make more money than the rest of the Pac-16 if each school kept its online revenue; a school like Washington State would like to share USC and UCLA’s online revenue evenly.)

How would content be split among the RBN and RBN online channels? Tier 1 and tier 2 would still be negotiated individually by each separate league. This is not a total partnership. So, if the Big Ten can command $500 million per year (actually more, with addition of KU/MU) and the Pac-12 can just garner $400 per year, the Big Ten member schools get that windfall without sharing it with their western brethren.

The Tier 3 content—which has jumped from 14 schools worth to 32 schools worth—would overflow the boundaries of the RBN alone. If the BTN currently offers 2 to 3 games each Saturday, that number wouldn’t be able to double, even with over double the amount of schools. There simply aren’t that many TV slots on one channel. I bet they’d want 3 to 4 live games spanning from noon to 1am. This would allow for at least 2 games each week to be “online only,” and over the course of a 13-week season, that means every team would have at least one football game not televised (FOX, ESPN, ABC, RBN) without a subscription to the RBN online channel of each team.

With the infrastructure of the P12N and BTN already in place, adding new content specific to each school would not be terribly difficult. Plus, any shows on the main channel (RBN) which were relevant to a particular school could be funneled to the RBN online school-specific channels.

As a PSU fan living overseas, I’ve made use of the BTN International package. For those of you unaware, you can subscribe to the BTN online if you are living overseas for $120 per year, $20 per month, and $15 per day. Not only does this allow me to watch the 2 PSU football games each season which are aired live on BTN, but it also allows me to watch all of PSU’s past games (after 12 hours have elapsed from the original airing on ESPN/ABC—which works well for my Sunday afternoon relaxation as I am 7 hours ahead of East Coast time). I could watch other PSU sports content on-demand as well if I had the time and interest to do so.

I think the RBN conglomerate could charge more to individual schools’ fans in this set up, simply because the content would be exclusively for that school. Nine times out of ten when I skim the BTN cable channel, I flip past because there’s a show about Illinois or Rutgers airing. With a PSU channel available, I know—even if it’s not football—that I’m going to at least see a school I care about.

Granted, not all alums and fans will feel compelled to order the channel, but I believe that this niche will hit a major consumer sweet spot—making money for the schools and providing many alums/fans a viewing option that they would clamor for.

RBN would be available on cable only, for as long as the cable subscription model held out. The only way to get the majority of your Pac-12/Big Ten content would be to have the RBN and the channels like ESPN and FOX. The major vehicle for the big dollars is still the network TV deals.

To anticipate the “next big thing,” you have to be willing to think big and think differently. A “bigger” channel (the Rose Bowl Network) and more popular, school-centric channels are a way to maximize revenue and provide coverage for fans.

(I haven’t discussed the SEC, ACC, or their networks in this. I do feel like they would be forced to expand as well. I do not feel like they would have bargaining power over the Big Ten or the Pac-12 in this expansion scenario; the money of this semi-merger would simply be too large (and the academic respect would also be appealing). The ACC Network might already be pioneering an online-only model itself, and ESPN wouldn’t struggle to patch together decent school-focused online offerings for the SEC if the model succeeded for RBN. I'm not suggesting abject failure and collapse for those conferences; they'll adapt and do just fine. I just think the Big Ten/Pac-12 could get ahead of them with this approach.)

i like it

I also like it. Would I be able to buy a customized mini-pack of individual teams?

Sounds good. And then merge the SEC/ACC conferences into a Mega network with streaming and Multiple channels to rival the Rose bowl network with 16 schools for each conference including ND.

Won't happen. The conferences will prefer to fend for themselves than work together. If you REALLY want something to knock the socks off of the viewing public, you would scuttle all conferences as they currently stand, invite the top 40, 50, 60 or whatever number makes sense to a new league, set up new divisions along geographic and competitive balances and roll them all into one comprehensive TV package.

Then...the whole league loses tax exempt status plus you have this slew of mostly nonprofits participating in a venture that is for profit. Weird.

I don't see why Minnesota should subsidize the likes of Washington St, Oregon St and Utah.

Also, what happens to Iowa St, KS St, Baylor, TCU and WV, in this scenario? Since I assume you mean for the PAC to take Texas, Tech, OU and OK St.

And what happens to the LHN? Is Texas going to get $15M off the top, plus a full share (what everyone else gets) from the primary media rights??? I can't live with that. No thank you.


Something like this may actually happen, one day. But I think there's a lot of work to do, yet.

(06-10-2016 08:04 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I don't see why Minnesota should subsidize the likes of Washington St, Oregon St and Utah.

Also, what happens to Iowa St, KS St, Baylor, TCU and WV, in this scenario? Since I assume you mean for the PAC to take Texas, Tech, OU and OK St.

And what happens to the LHN? Is Texas going to get $15M off the top, plus a full share (what everyone else gets) from the primary media rights??? I can't live with that. No thank you.


Something like this may actually happen, one day. But I think there's a lot of work to do, yet.

I can reframe that argument if you want me to within the scope of the B1G conference itself, but would be mean spirited...

(06-10-2016 07:57 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Then...the whole league loses tax exempt status plus you have this slew of mostly nonprofits participating in a venture that is for profit. Weird.

I really hope that happens. It's pretty obvious that the top schools are buying out their competition, which is a predatory for profit (and quite honestly anti-trust) action. At a minimum, they need to lose that status.

I say that as a Vol fan - likely one of the schools to survive.

I wonder how losing that status impacts the attractiveness of their desired endgame?

I would pay an online subscription fee to watch all of Iowa's games if the games are streamed live without any commercial interruptions. Otherwise I ain't paying for it.

Goof,

Would you pay $50/game for that service? Because that's what it might cost, without commercial support. (ie, PPV boxing/MMA cards ...)

Commercials are a necessary evil -- even in pay-TV.

(06-10-2016 08:52 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Goof,

Would you pay $50/game for that service? Because that's what it might cost, without commercial support. (ie, PPV boxing/MMA cards ...)

Commercials are a necessary evil -- even in pay-TV.

No, because the games on BTN are the Crappy 3rd tier games. Any game really worth watching is already on another network. If that was the price I would be content to just listen on the radio in the background while I do something else. If the game is important enough, I might sneak off to Buffalo Wild Wings, watch the 2nd half, and get some wings and a couple of drinks all for $25.

But I might pay $50/year for an all encompassing Iowa-centric subscription with all games included, if that was the price.

To each their own. I am not saying I speak for all fans, but I know paying for a service and then having to still watch commercials is one of my pet peeves. Especially after getting used to streaming services like Netflix, HBO or radio channels like NPR. I am spoiled now.

I hate commercials too. But they keep costs down.

My $50/game proposal was to have access to live streaming of every Iowa game, with Iowa guys doing the play-by-play and color. It'd be like the Iowa radio broadcasts, but with video. Rather than network guys, who are "impartial" or "generic".

Or, yes, I'll give you $50 for the whole season -- if you accept commercials.

(06-10-2016 08:04 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  I don't see why Minnesota should subsidize the likes of Washington St, Oregon St and Utah.

Big Ten schools get their own Tier 1/2 money. RBN money is shared evenly 32 ways. So, Big Ten schools still can pull in more than the Pac-12 by nature of their more rabid fan bases. If Tier 3/RBN online money goes to individual schools, then PSU can make a lot of money, Minnesota can make some, and WSU/OrSt/Utah can make a little. In the end, you might have something like PSU 60 million per year, Minnesota making 55, and the little Pac-12 schools making like 45.

(06-10-2016 08:04 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Also, what happens to Iowa St, KS St, Baylor, TCU and WV, in this scenario? Since I assume you mean for the PAC to take Texas, Tech, OU and OK St.

Not sure. If the SEC expands (and by 3 schools if they lost Mizzou), it's hard to imagine them not snagging WVU/Baylor/TCU/or KState (assuming the ACC schools are locked in with their GOR). If 7 Big 12 schools vote for dissolution, rumor has it that the lawsuits disappear and the GOR is worthless.

(06-10-2016 08:04 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  And what happens to the LHN? Is Texas going to get $15M off the top, plus a full share (what everyone else gets) from the primary media rights??? I can't live with that. No thank you.

Not sure there. It could be worth it for the RBN to pay off Texas's buyout from ESPN in the long-run. Or, perhaps, the league says, "Fine. Texas keeps their 15 million from ESPN for their Tier 3 until 2031. We don't care because we'll be making more than 15 million each off of the RBN and the RBN online subscriptions." When 2032 rolls around, they will be forced to have their own RBN online subscription which would make them far more money anyway.

(06-10-2016 09:02 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(06-10-2016 08:52 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Goof,

Would you pay $50/game for that service? Because that's what it might cost, without commercial support. (ie, PPV boxing/MMA cards ...)

Commercials are a necessary evil -- even in pay-TV.

No, because the games on BTN are the Crappy 3rd tier games. Any game really worth watching is already on another network. If that was the price I would be content to just listen on the radio in the background while I do something else. If the game is important enough, I might sneak off to Buffalo Wild Wings, watch the 2nd half, and get some wings and a couple of drinks all for $25.

But I might pay $50/year for an all encompassing Iowa-centric subscription with all games included, if that was the price.

Easy fix. Game starts at noon. You turn on the game at 12:45. Fast-forward through all your commercials. You finish the game at 3:15 live.

Also, you paid $25 to go watch some of the game at Buffalo Wild Wings and took the time to drive and had to change out of your dirty t-shirt and boxers...one month of your Iowa channel would probably cost that same amount.

Even so, this won't be for everyone. If you can bear to miss a game and don't care at all for other Iowa Olympic sports and discussion, you probably aren't one of the kinds of fans that this would be targeting ultimately.

Another content idea...if the individual channels would "sell" TV slots to 247 Sports, Rivals, or Scout, those companies could "independently" cover recruiting and that's a huge draw for die-hard fans. A daily 30 minute talk show could easily be filled with commentary, highlights, and news about commits and prospects for the school. Rivals, Scout, and 247 sports are already adding more video content to their sites every year. Just another thought...

(06-10-2016 01:13 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(06-10-2016 09:02 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(06-10-2016 08:52 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Goof,

Would you pay $50/game for that service? Because that's what it might cost, without commercial support. (ie, PPV boxing/MMA cards ...)

Commercials are a necessary evil -- even in pay-TV.

No, because the games on BTN are the Crappy 3rd tier games. Any game really worth watching is already on another network. If that was the price I would be content to just listen on the radio in the background while I do something else. If the game is important enough, I might sneak off to Buffalo Wild Wings, watch the 2nd half, and get some wings and a couple of drinks all for $25.

But I might pay $50/year for an all encompassing Iowa-centric subscription with all games included, if that was the price.

Easy fix. Game starts at noon. You turn on the game at 12:45. Fast-forward through all your commercials. You finish the game at 3:15 live.

Also, you paid $25 to go watch some of the game at Buffalo Wild Wings and took the time to drive and had to change out of your dirty t-shirt and boxers...one month of your Iowa channel would probably cost that same amount.

Even so, this won't be for everyone. If you can bear to miss a game and don't care at all for other Iowa Olympic sports and discussion, you probably aren't one of the kinds of fans that this would be targeting ultimately.

Yes if a game is on tv, I can tivo it, wait 1 hour and catch up or watch it all later.

But when it is streamed live, it is tricky sometimes. ESPN3 does not let you play catch up even though ESPN360 originally did.

So if the RBN let's me start 1 hour late and catch up, that would be ok.