Are Gen X and the newer generations going to support college athletics like the Boomers?

I am not saying those are not big numbers or that the Big 10 is not cashing in, but the Big 10 is not totally blowing everyone out of the water as bad as people think especially the teams that people think are most in play

if you run the numbers here is what you can compare to

the 13 year Big 12 contract started in 2012-13 and ends in 2024-25 and averages $20 million per year per team and scales

the "average" year will be 2018-19 when he Big 12 will be getting about $20 million in TV money

when you work that backwards you get a starting point of $14 million and an ending point of $26 million

the Big 12 in May announced a distribution of $30.4 million per team.....we are in the fiscal year 2016-17 NOW, but that distribution was based on the income from the fiscal year 2015-16 income when the Big 12 would have received $17 million in TV money

so to get to $30.4 million the Big 12 would need $13.4 million more in non-TV revenue (the part that the "pro-rata" expansion buffoons always forget about)

that comes from $5 million per team in football playoff money, $4 million in Sugar Bowl money and about $3.5 in other NCAA distributions per team plus a couple of the other bowl games that pay a million here and there over and above the cost of sending a team there (Vs the ones that barely cover cost or lose a couple of hundred thousand for sending a team) and some Big 12 basketball tournament sponsorship ect

that $13.4 million outside of TV money stays pretty consistent for the most part and with the addition of a CCG the Big 12 could look to add as much as $3 million more per team plus any deals from the host stajium and advertisers and KC wants in on the bidding so it is not just going to go to Jerry Stajium automatically

so you could be looking at a consistent $16.4 million or so above TV money

if you add that to the "average" TV money year of 2018-19 you get the Big 12 earning $36.4 million that year Vs the Big 10 earning $45.1

that is a difference of $8.7 million which is a big difference, but in the case of Texas specifically with the LHN they will earn more than that and with OU even if you place them at $5 million in 3rd tier money directly tied to the rights they sell (not soda sales and all the other crap that people try and toss in as "everybody has that" then OU is within about $4 million

and while $4 million is a lot of money I think that is within an acceptable range of difference especially when you factor in any exit fees and any legal cost (and probably additional losses) for trying to break a GOR

and no matter what others try and claim every Big 12 team out there gets meaningful income from the actual available broadcast rights they have available for the third tier and with the exception of WVU that did a deal all at the same time those TV rights have been marketed apart from the actual deals with Learfield or IMG even if Learfield or IMG did the marketing of those rights

Kansas, KSU, Texas Tech, OkState and others all had existing deals in place with Learfield and or IMG and those deals were paying an amount that then increased with the addition of third tier rights.....only WVU did theirs as a total package

so in the case of Texas they are still financially better off in the Big 12 and OU is very close to Big 10 money in the Big 12

and there is very little chance that a move to the PAC 12 would make up that difference for either of those teams and while people pretend that the Big 10 desperately wants OU there has never been any indication from the Big 10 in regards to OU other than "we will call you....maybe" and they are not looking to make that call anytime soon

even in the 2022-23 range the Big 12 would be at $24 million in TV only money plus the $16.4 or so that should hold steady for a total of $40.4 million which is under the Big 10 number of $50.8 by $10.4, but Texas in particular is still doing better and OU it still within $5 million

and along the lines of "expansion" specifically for the Big 12 these numbers just make the idea that expansion makes the Big 12 more stable long term or financially better off for existing teams all the more laughable

because those new teams and their "pro rata" share of TV money will average out to $22.5 million over the years from 2017-18 to 2024-25 and the financial difference just between the TV money and the total expected Big 12 distributions is bad enough and it just gets more stupid if you are trying to figure out how to make that keep up with the Big 10

unless of course you are just going to take tons of money from those new teams and pretend that the Big 12 becomes more "stable" by adding teams with terrible budgets currently and massive academic side subsidies that are unsustainable and they are going to build up in the Big 12 making a ton less money than Big 12 members and a hell of a lot less than Big 10 and others

and that is just plain stupidity

I will also say there is no guarantee the Big 12 gets $30 million for a CCG hell they could get $25 or $20, but still the end result is that Texas will be better off in the Big 12 and OU will be within $5 million or so of the Big 10 for the foreseeable future based on the numbers provided by the OP and the links

also with the PAC 12 their TV payout is as follows

http://www.pacifictakes.com/pac-12-gener...uts-leaked

so in 2018-19 (first year of the new Big 10 deal and also a mid point for the Big 12 deal) the PAC 12 will have $250,020,000 in TV money outside of the PAC12n

that is $20,835,000 per team

we will use about the same $13.4 million for them because the Rose Bowl pays the same as the Sugar and the NCAA playoff money is the same for the football playoffs for both conferences

that is actually a slight advantage for the PAC 12 because the Big 12 splits theirs by 10 while the PAC does it by 12 and we will have NCAA championship money at about the same as the Big 12 of $3.5 million per team along with other monies

so the PAC 12 will be making $34.235 million per member in tier 1 and 2 TV money and other conference money

we will also use the full amount of TV money for the PAC 12 and not include a share "for the conference" because we will place that over into the PAC12n expenses.....and the PAC 12 already gets paid for a CCG in their TV money so no new money there like the Big 12 anticipates

so there you have in the year 2018-19 $45.1 for the Big 10, $35.4 for the Big 12 (with a CCG paying $30 million and no stupidity of expansion and zero 3rd tier dollars) and the PAC 12 making $34.235 with no PAC12n money factored in

the PAC12n has been paying out about $1.5 million or so and Jon Wilner (barring some massive new carriage deal) expects it to stay about there so that would get the PAC 12 to $35.735 which is right even with the Big 12 exclusive of any Big 12 3rd tier money which is a known for Texas and pretty well known for OU and KU which are the ones everyone thinks matter and so those three are doing better than the PAC 12 and the PAC 12 is well behind the Big 10 as well and in a long term deal with Fox and ESPN

unfortunately for the Big 12 david boren is the one "playing poker" for them and the pair of twos he has and the 3 "kicker" he is holding is not a good hand and he sucks chode at bluffing so there is less and less chance it appears that the Big 12 could get paid to NOT expand which would be the best of all worlds and probably not much chance the Big 12 could convince the networks to pay more than $30 million for the CCG as a "pay not to expand, but doesn't look like we paid you to not expand" move

and clearly adding G5 teams even with a GOR extension and a new TV deal (neither of which are happening) is not going to catch the Big 12 up at all and would only drop them behind the PAC 12 clearly

To shorten what TD said, the Big 12 has projections too (as do all the others, but I haven't seen them). They are projecting $44 million in distributions at the end of the contract, not counting individual Tier 3 TV. http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/coll...32750.html

Oklahoma State President Burns Hargis, head of the Big 12’s board of directors, liked Bowlsby’s projection that Big 12 schools will receive $44 million per year in distributions for the 2024-25 school year, the last under existing television rights agreements.
“We’re very pleased with the revenue figure. I think we’re in a very good place financially,” Hargis said. “The disparity, I don’t think, is near what that looks like [compared to SEC distributions]. As long as our student-athletes are getting the facilities and the academic support and the full-cost-of-attendance dollars, I think we’ll be able to compete just fine. And I don’t think our fans will question that.”

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/coll...rylink=cpy

(10-12-2016 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 03:24 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:49 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  How are they estimating CFP/bowl money?? I guess by knowing bowl-ties, and assuming one CFP entrant per year.

that's a pretty minimal piece of things. I mean like +/- 10 million for the conference or not even 1 million per school per year.

Each P5 conference gets an average of $52 million per year in base payment from the CFP. The B1G also gets $40 million per year during years when the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal. When the Rose is a semifinal, it gets $3 million for an Access Bowl slot. When the B1G is in the Orange Bowl (guaranteed a minimum of 3 times over 12 years, and up to 5 times) it gets $27.5 million. When a B1G school is in the semifinals or in an at large Access Bowl slot, it gets an additional $3 million. On average, it comes to around $7 million per B1G school per season.

The new TV deal pays an average of $440 million per season. That's an average of $31.4 million per B1G school per season.

In 2017, each B1G school will get $1.9 million from the NCAA Basketball Fund. That amount can be anticipated to escalate annually.

That's $40 million per year per school before any BTN revenues or other sources are added.

Is that 50/50 equal split between Fox and ESPN?

Dasville - the $440 million per year is $240 million from FOX, $190 million from ESPN, and $10 million from CBS (for basketball). For their extra money, FOX gets the Conference Championship Game plus the first pick of weeks in which it gets the number one B1G football game.

(10-12-2016 04:10 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 03:53 PM)shere khan Wrote:  45 million and can't beat western Michigan. Lulz

The fact that schools in certain conferences are getting $50M/yr in TV money and others are getting $100K (Sunbelt) is borderline criminal.

It's an entertainment industry, this is currently what the market is willing to bear. Supply and Demand at work.

The borderline criminal part applies to how we as a country value entertainment (including sports) over other sectors of the economy.

(10-13-2016 03:08 AM)chess Wrote:  Are Gen X and the newer generations going to support college athletics like the Boomers?

And, do you want to have invested millions in 50% ownership of a model that may go bust? The jury is still out on this as to whether it is better to let another entity that is much better suited to changing with technology handle that risk or not.

(10-13-2016 08:17 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 03:24 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:49 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  How are they estimating CFP/bowl money?? I guess by knowing bowl-ties, and assuming one CFP entrant per year.

that's a pretty minimal piece of things. I mean like +/- 10 million for the conference or not even 1 million per school per year.

Each P5 conference gets an average of $52 million per year in base payment from the CFP. The B1G also gets $40 million per year during years when the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal. When the Rose is a semifinal, it gets $3 million for an Access Bowl slot. When the B1G is in the Orange Bowl (guaranteed a minimum of 3 times over 12 years, and up to 5 times) it gets $27.5 million. When a B1G school is in the semifinals or in an at large Access Bowl slot, it gets an additional $3 million. On average, it comes to around $7 million per B1G school per season.

The new TV deal pays an average of $440 million per season. That's an average of $31.4 million per B1G school per season.

In 2017, each B1G school will get $1.9 million from the NCAA Basketball Fund. That amount can be anticipated to escalate annually.

That's $40 million per year per school before any BTN revenues or other sources are added.

Is that 50/50 equal split between Fox and ESPN?

Dasville - the $440 million per year is $240 million from FOX, $190 million from ESPN, and $10 million from CBS (for basketball). For their extra money, FOX gets the Conference Championship Game plus the first pick of weeks in which it gets the number one B1G football game.

Thank you! Is it possible, based on the ESPN $500,000 offer to ACC for extra conference game, to determine the difference in value per any random game between the SEC/B1G/ACC?

What we know is that ESPN has placed a value of $500,000 for an extra P5 game for the ACC. What would the SEC command for that same extra game (be it another conference game or P5 exclusive OOC game) from ESPN? What about what Fox and ESPN combined already pays for that extra conference game to the B1G? What I'm trying to figure out, based on the known figures, is what the value of that extra conference game the B1G plays is.

SK,

Right ... and so Iowa is better than half the G5.

chess,

What you're asking boils down to: will people continue to consume video telecasts of college football games? The answer, at least in the short to medium term, in unquestionably yes.

The only question there is: to what degree will it matter, in the sense of revenue generation, that the distribution paradigm is switching from traditional proprietary networks (cable/sat/OTA) to streaming over the internet? In my opinion, it really won't matter that much.

(10-12-2016 04:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 04:10 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 03:53 PM)shere khan Wrote:  45 million and can't beat western Michigan. Lulz

The fact that schools in certain conferences are getting $50M/yr in TV money and others are getting $100K (Sunbelt) is borderline criminal.

Why is it criminal?

If there was a huge demand to see Georgia State play Texas State, they would get paid. But there isn't.

It is also criminal, then that Cincinnati gets more TV Money than Eastern Kentucky. Please share.

about the same demand as purdue vs indiana, but yet those teams get 500X the payout.

so unless those sunbelt teams are bringing 75 people (yes 75 people) to the games, yes it is criminal.

as far as ratings, i would OVERESTIMATE a purdue vs indiana ratings matchup as being 0.4 or less........... so unless the texas state vs georgia state game draws a 0.0008 rating or less............... yes its criminal.

(10-13-2016 09:03 AM)Dasville Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 08:17 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 03:24 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 01:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  that's a pretty minimal piece of things. I mean like +/- 10 million for the conference or not even 1 million per school per year.

Each P5 conference gets an average of $52 million per year in base payment from the CFP. The B1G also gets $40 million per year during years when the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal. When the Rose is a semifinal, it gets $3 million for an Access Bowl slot. When the B1G is in the Orange Bowl (guaranteed a minimum of 3 times over 12 years, and up to 5 times) it gets $27.5 million. When a B1G school is in the semifinals or in an at large Access Bowl slot, it gets an additional $3 million. On average, it comes to around $7 million per B1G school per season.

The new TV deal pays an average of $440 million per season. That's an average of $31.4 million per B1G school per season.

In 2017, each B1G school will get $1.9 million from the NCAA Basketball Fund. That amount can be anticipated to escalate annually.

That's $40 million per year per school before any BTN revenues or other sources are added.

Is that 50/50 equal split between Fox and ESPN?

Dasville - the $440 million per year is $240 million from FOX, $190 million from ESPN, and $10 million from CBS (for basketball). For their extra money, FOX gets the Conference Championship Game plus the first pick of weeks in which it gets the number one B1G football game.

Thank you! Is it possible, based on the ESPN $500,000 offer to ACC for extra conference game, to determine the difference in value per any random game between the SEC/B1G/ACC?

What we know is that ESPN has placed a value of $500,000 for an extra P5 game for the ACC. What would the SEC command for that same extra game (be it another conference game or P5 exclusive OOC game) from ESPN? What about what Fox and ESPN combined already pays for that extra conference game to the B1G? What I'm trying to figure out, based on the known figures, is what the value of that extra conference game the B1G plays is.

To do it right you have to remember that ESPN already owns all ACC games, so they were not offering $500K for another game, but for the difference between an ACC-vs-G5 or vs-FCS game and another ACC-vs-P5 game. To complicate things even further, Clemson already plays 10 P5 games each year, and on average at least 3 or 4 other ACC teams do the same, so really ESPN was paying for the other 10 teams to upgrade one game per year. When you think of it that way, no wonder the money was so small...

otwon,

Except that, as you fully well understand, the money doesn't come from attendance. It comes from TV ratings!

(10-13-2016 11:12 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 09:03 AM)Dasville Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 08:17 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 04:08 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(10-12-2016 03:24 PM)orangefan Wrote:  Each P5 conference gets an average of $52 million per year in base payment from the CFP. The B1G also gets $40 million per year during years when the Rose Bowl is not a semifinal. When the Rose is a semifinal, it gets $3 million for an Access Bowl slot. When the B1G is in the Orange Bowl (guaranteed a minimum of 3 times over 12 years, and up to 5 times) it gets $27.5 million. When a B1G school is in the semifinals or in an at large Access Bowl slot, it gets an additional $3 million. On average, it comes to around $7 million per B1G school per season.

The new TV deal pays an average of $440 million per season. That's an average of $31.4 million per B1G school per season.

In 2017, each B1G school will get $1.9 million from the NCAA Basketball Fund. That amount can be anticipated to escalate annually.

That's $40 million per year per school before any BTN revenues or other sources are added.

Is that 50/50 equal split between Fox and ESPN?

Dasville - the $440 million per year is $240 million from FOX, $190 million from ESPN, and $10 million from CBS (for basketball). For their extra money, FOX gets the Conference Championship Game plus the first pick of weeks in which it gets the number one B1G football game.

Thank you! Is it possible, based on the ESPN $500,000 offer to ACC for extra conference game, to determine the difference in value per any random game between the SEC/B1G/ACC?

What we know is that ESPN has placed a value of $500,000 for an extra P5 game for the ACC. What would the SEC command for that same extra game (be it another conference game or P5 exclusive OOC game) from ESPN? What about what Fox and ESPN combined already pays for that extra conference game to the B1G? What I'm trying to figure out, based on the known figures, is what the value of that extra conference game the B1G plays is.

To do it right you have to remember that ESPN already owns all ACC games, so they were not offering $500K for another game, but for the difference between an ACC-vs-G5 or vs-FCS game and another ACC-vs-P5 game. To complicate things even further, Clemson already plays 10 P5 games each year, and on average at least 3 or 4 other ACC teams do the same, so really ESPN was paying for the other 10 teams to upgrade one game per year. When you think of it that way, no wonder the money was so small...

Excellent points!

(10-13-2016 11:19 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  otwon,

Except that, as you fully well understand, the money doesn't come from attendance. It comes from TV ratings!

i threw the attendance in there for fun. did you not read the part about the ratings?

using standards from 2014, 1.0 ratings equals 1.156 million viewers
overestimating an indiana purdue matchup, I would say at 0.4 rating, it would be 460,000 viewers

the money equivalent for a 0.0008 rating is 924 people. So if we were to extrapolate the money to the ratings....... for that texas state vs georgia state game would have to have lower than 1000 viewers...... which is safe to assume that they would have much more than that.

yes, its criminal. its also criminal that the bottom dwellers of the P5 conferences are allowed to rob the top half. there is no way that a purdue or vandy desrve tens of millions of dollars.

honestly, the whole thing needs to be blown up. either a complete conference realignment with no more than 30 teams in the top tier..... the ones who earn the money..............or just allow individual schools to create their own contracts for all their sports individually.

(10-13-2016 02:56 PM)otown Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 11:19 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  otwon,

Except that, as you fully well understand, the money doesn't come from attendance. It comes from TV ratings!

i threw the attendance in there for fun. did you not read the part about the ratings?

using standards from 2014, 1.0 ratings equals 1.156 million viewers
overestimating an indiana purdue matchup, I would say at 0.4 rating, it would be 460,000 viewers

the money equivalent for a 0.0008 rating is 924 people. So if we were to extrapolate the money to the ratings....... for that texas state vs georgia state game would have to have lower than 1000 viewers...... which is safe to assume that they would have much more than that.

yes, its criminal. its also criminal that the bottom dwellers of the P5 conferences are allowed to rob the top half. there is no way that a purdue or vandy desrve tens of millions of dollars.

honestly, the whole thing needs to be blown up. either a complete conference realignment with no more than 30 teams in the top tier..... the ones who earn the money..............or just allow individual schools to create their own contracts for all their sports individually.

otown I'm surprised at you. Those 10's of millions are the price for rolling over and taking it every Saturday from the conference brands. Every whore has her price!

What's real funny is when one of them gets the money and still slaps her John around like Duke last year and Wake Forest this year and Northwestern for a few years. Heck even Washington State is having some revenge this year!

otown,

Only equivalent if you're assuming a linear relationship from the TV contract worth to the ratings. Obviously it is not valued that way by ESPN/FOX.

Also obvious: if it were anywhere near as bad as you were making it out to be, they wouldn't all be in bed together (P5 with ESPN/FOX, and each P5 conference "allowing" the non-earners to stick around). There are other ways the non-earners bring value.


No one in a P5 is getting kicked out. And no G5 is ever going to earn P5 money without getting called up to the P5. That's just how the world works, and that's hardly criminal.

(10-13-2016 03:46 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  otown,

Only equivalent if you're assuming a linear relationship from the TV contract worth to the ratings. Obviously it is not valued that way by ESPN/FOX.

Also obvious: if it were anywhere near as bad as you were making it out to be, they wouldn't all be in bed together (P5 with ESPN/FOX, and each P5 conference "allowing" the non-earners to stick around). There are other ways the non-earners bring value.


No one in a P5 is getting kicked out. And no G5 is ever going to earn P5 money without getting called up to the P5. That's just how the world works, and that's hardly criminal.

Its valued that way by ESPN and Fox because they are forced to do that. Its too hard to blow it all up like I said. Too many contracts and too many moving parts. However, I do believe that the networks would much rather pay more to the top tier of the P5 conferences, the ones that draw the eyes and earn the money for the conferences, and cut out the bottom feeders. In the end, the top tier gets paid more money and the networks overall lay out less money on the table.

(10-13-2016 03:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 02:56 PM)otown Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 11:19 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  otwon,

Except that, as you fully well understand, the money doesn't come from attendance. It comes from TV ratings!

i threw the attendance in there for fun. did you not read the part about the ratings?

using standards from 2014, 1.0 ratings equals 1.156 million viewers
overestimating an indiana purdue matchup, I would say at 0.4 rating, it would be 460,000 viewers

the money equivalent for a 0.0008 rating is 924 people. So if we were to extrapolate the money to the ratings....... for that texas state vs georgia state game would have to have lower than 1000 viewers...... which is safe to assume that they would have much more than that.

yes, its criminal. its also criminal that the bottom dwellers of the P5 conferences are allowed to rob the top half. there is no way that a purdue or vandy desrve tens of millions of dollars.

honestly, the whole thing needs to be blown up. either a complete conference realignment with no more than 30 teams in the top tier..... the ones who earn the money..............or just allow individual schools to create their own contracts for all their sports individually.

otown I'm surprised at you. Those 10's of millions are the price for rolling over and taking it every Saturday from the conference brands. Every whore has her price!

What's real funny is when one of them gets the money and still slaps her John around like Duke last year and Wake Forest this year and Northwestern for a few years. Heck even Washington State is having some revenge this year!

There are plenty of G5 whores that would gladly do that service a lot cheaper lol

otown,

I agree with you, actually. And even if you took just the top 32 viewership programs to do a NFL model, there would probably be quite a gradient of viewership even among those programs.

But that's not how it works in college. The Big Ten would never make that deal, excluding half its teams. Nor the SEC.