I've read where the Big East has hired the same media consultant as the Pac 12. Today, Lenn Robbins of the Post wrote that he expected the new Big East deal to be structured like the Pac 12 deal.
So here's an article on what the Pac 12 deal looks like.
In summary, the Pac 12:
1. Sold 44 football games to ESPN & Fox;
2. Retained 36 football games for the Pac 12 network;
3. Bargained that the Pac 12 network would have 1st or 2nd pick of games during certain weeks of the season;
4. Sold 68 men's basketball games to ESPN & Fox;
5. Retained the rights to the rest (over 100);
6. Established a 100% owned Pac 12 Network (vs Big 10's 51% owned) to show these football and basketball games, along with women's hoops, baseball and Olympic sports;
7. Established a companion Pac 12 digital network (similar to EPSN3) that's available for fans in markets that don't have the Pac 12 Network.
The Pac 10 was paid $225M per year for the 44 football games + 68 basketball games. Assuming that 70% of the $225M was allocated to football, that means each footbll telecast is worth $3.6M and each basketball telecast is worth $1M.
With 13-14 teams instead of 12 in football, and 18 teams instead of 12 in basketball, the Big East has more inventory to sell than the Pac 12 did.
Should be interesting. If I had to guess, I would think NBC/Comcast would be involved in both the football and basketball sides, with ESPN as a basketball partner and either Fox/FSN or CBS/CBSSports as the other football partner.
As for a Big East network, the Big East may need to partner up (like the Big 10 did).
With the way the PAC12 did this.. They have set a Blue print For others to follow.
PAC12 have lots of inventory for their own network and are still getting 225 million a year.. cleaning up...
I believe Big East need to grab FRESNO before They start talking TO The TV people before Sept..
I think Big East going be alright..
I See NBC Sports all over these moves because they need lots of inventory and Big East has it..
The PAC-12 has one thing that the BE doesn't have going for it: The PAC-12 schools have very little - almost no - competition.
We have markets, but there is a ton of overlap between ours and the B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 leagues.
(03-10-2012 05:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC-12 has one thing that the BE doesn't have going for it: The PAC-12 schools have very little - almost no - competition.
We have markets, but there is a ton of overlap between ours and the B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 leagues.
The PAC 12 certainly doesn't have much of a basketball league though. Football is so-so. Their last 2 additions, Colorado and Utah, have underwhelmed.
It would be great to see a Big East network.
Going to be an interesting run up to November. Because we already know nothing is going to get done with ESPN and there is that stupid exclusive negotiating window.
(03-10-2012 05:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC-12 has one thing that the BE doesn't have going for it: The PAC-12 schools have very little - almost no - competition.
We have markets, but there is a ton of overlap between ours and the B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 leagues.
Thats true, and i dont think we'll get Pac-12 type money. BUT we can get a good deal that pays us (per team) the same level that the ACC and Big XII are getting (per team).
Im not saying that getting that kind of deal is a definite but it is possible.
(03-10-2012 06:14 PM)Wooglin157 Wrote: [ -> ]Going to be an interesting run up to November. Because we already know nothing is going to get done with ESPN and there is that stupid exclusive negotiating window.
Highly unlikely Big East wouldn't at least listen to other offers after BE turned down ESPN's initial offer and what has happened since then. Big East probably learned their lesson from CUSA and actually comply with ESPN's contract everything should be fine.
Im just worried about pulling in all the new schools over a short period of time. Basically we are starting fresh and new, kinda unproven. The timing of the TV deal sucks, really the conference shufflings fault....But our basketball is just as good and we have conformed to having football divisions which is what they want along with actually picking up way more market areas. I hope the Big East is rewarded.
(03-10-2012 06:23 PM)NJRedMan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 05:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC-12 has one thing that the BE doesn't have going for it: The PAC-12 schools have very little - almost no - competition.
We have markets, but there is a ton of overlap between ours and the B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 leagues.
Thats true, and i dont think we'll get Pac-12 type money. BUT we can get a good deal that pays us (per team) the same level that the ACC and Big XII are getting (per team).
The Big12 teams are getting clearly more than ACC teams are getting.
That said, with the difference in media-brand value between ACC and Big East teams, i'd be very surprised if we could get ACC money. Pleasantly surprised, but surprised.
(03-10-2012 08:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 06:23 PM)NJRedMan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 05:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC-12 has one thing that the BE doesn't have going for it: The PAC-12 schools have very little - almost no - competition.
We have markets, but there is a ton of overlap between ours and the B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 leagues.
Thats true, and i dont think we'll get Pac-12 type money. BUT we can get a good deal that pays us (per team) the same level that the ACC and Big XII are getting (per team).
The Big12 teams are getting clearly more than ACC teams are getting.
That said, with the difference in media-brand value between ACC and Big East teams, i'd be very surprised if we could get ACC money. Pleasantly surprised, but surprised.
Well the ACC got a bad deal before all the other conferences started really raking in the money. If we can get ESPN and NBC bidding against each other we can get a good but not great deal. We should shoot to be the 5th highest paid conference.
(03-10-2012 08:59 PM)NJRedMan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 08:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 06:23 PM)NJRedMan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 05:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC-12 has one thing that the BE doesn't have going for it: The PAC-12 schools have very little - almost no - competition.
We have markets, but there is a ton of overlap between ours and the B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 leagues.
Thats true, and i dont think we'll get Pac-12 type money. BUT we can get a good deal that pays us (per team) the same level that the ACC and Big XII are getting (per team).
By all means, we should try to get as much as we can.
The Big12 teams are getting clearly more than ACC teams are getting.
That said, with the difference in media-brand value between ACC and Big East teams, i'd be very surprised if we could get ACC money. Pleasantly surprised, but surprised.
Well the ACC got a bad deal before all the other conferences started really raking in the money. If we can get ESPN and NBC bidding against each other we can get a good but not great deal. We should shoot to be the 5th highest paid conference.
By all means, we should try to get as much as we can.
I think the ACC money is very doable. I see a lot of people saying that NBC/Comcast needs inventory. I agree, but I think they need solid inventory. I could see them riding Boise St. I can see them also creating great "American Gladiator" type commercials to hype UCF/USF and SMU/Houston. I think Temple will get a solid welcome back kinda promo for the first couple of games. The only way the BE can really sell it self is by stacking up the OOC. Rutgers has a good home and home with Arkansas. Aside from that I dont no much of the deals in place for OOC. I hope UCONN, Louisville and Cincinnati catch fire but I worry about San Diego being left on an Island with Memphis. I have started to really come around to the Idea of Fresno. Lesson the Island affect for SDSU. Aside from the stigma of little league that the other networks will be using as propaganda, The BE needs to really find a partner that can help build the FB side while reaping the rewards of the BB side. I know losing Syracuse is a tough loss, but the adding of Memphis and Temple adds to much better markets IMO. I think the strategy the BE has employed is one that could actually work out well. The number one priority is keeping the current schools schools together. By that I mean not losing Louisville.
Main thing for BE, is to stay in the ball game. If We walk away with 10 to 12 mil each for all sports we do that. I would love to see a 15 mil deal, but doubt it is coming our way. Alliance likely will get 1 to at most 3 mil per school, If we get 10 the line of demarcation is clear. We are part of the big 6, maybe the weakest link, but still part of it.
(03-10-2012 09:31 PM)goodknightfl Wrote: [ -> ]Main thing for BE, is to stay in the ball game. If We walk away with 10 to 12 mil each for all sports we do that. I would love to see a 15 mil deal, but doubt it is coming our way. Alliance likely will get 1 to at most 3 mil per school, If we get 10 the line of demarcation is clear. We are part of the big 6, maybe the weakest link, but still part of it.
I still believe it will be 12-15 million per school with a portion of the games held back for a Big East network that will be partially owned by one of the cable companies, say Comcast. If the cable company has a minority ownership stake (say 20-25%) in the network--that pretty much guarantees that the Big East Network will get a slot on the Comcast cable systems nationwide. We dont want to be like the Longhorn Network where its not available most places. Over time, the Big East Network could increase the conference visability and eventually become a very large part of the earnings picture for each conference school.
The pac getting fox and espn to work together in the way they did was so different than everyone else's deals, namely the ACC selling everything; then, they took what BTN did and did it a lot better. We likely can't do what they did with their network, but, perhaps we can ape what they did with being able to use different networks.
I think a Big East network a must...
(03-10-2012 08:23 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 06:23 PM)NJRedMan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-10-2012 05:59 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC-12 has one thing that the BE doesn't have going for it: The PAC-12 schools have very little - almost no - competition.
We have markets, but there is a ton of overlap between ours and the B1G/SEC/ACC/B12 leagues.
Thats true, and i dont think we'll get Pac-12 type money. BUT we can get a good deal that pays us (per team) the same level that the ACC and Big XII are getting (per team).
The Big12 teams are getting clearly more than ACC teams are getting.
That said, with the difference in media-brand value between ACC and Big East teams, i'd be very surprised if we could get ACC money. Pleasantly surprised, but surprised.
I think this here is the least pessimistic remark i've ever seen out of Quo ever. There is hope yet!
Do we have a link to a Robbins article, or was it a tweet or something? Didn't see anything on the Post sports page.
I do see this:
"Philadelphia is the home of Comcast, which recently purchased NBC and is in desperate need of quality sports TV programming. Look for the Big East to structure its TV package much like the Pac-12, selling tiers and local cable rights to other carriers. CBS-Turner, ESPN and Fox could be players in some fashion."
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/college/b...jAsQHH95HO