will Maryland and Rutgers earn a full conference share? Seems like with a new contract they would since they were included in the negotiations. I think Nebraska and Penn St waited 6 years. Will Maryland and Rutgers still only get a partial share and if so, is it partial on everything? Partial Tier I and II money as well as the B1GN?
2017 Nebraska gets full league share. Rutgers and Maryland receive full shares until the 2020-21 season.
The new TV deal doesn't change those terms. Those are the payout terms. The value of Rutgers and Maryland for population/TV sets will be shown in the new TV deal.
While New York isn't the biggest percentage of total TV watchers for college sports, they do bring in the most viewers in total. I'm not a TV expert so I don't know how many millions a year that would add to the TV deal.
(02-28-2016 06:46 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote: [ -> ]2017 Nebraska gets full league share. Rutgers and Maryland receive full shares until the 2020-21 season.
The new TV deal doesn't change those terms. Those are the payout terms. The value of Rutgers and Maryland for population/TV sets will be shown in the new TV deal.
While New York isn't the biggest percentage of total TV watchers for college sports, they do bring in the most viewers in total. I'm not a TV expert so I don't know how many millions a year that would add to the TV deal.
Have the terms for the new TV contract been announced yet?
(02-28-2016 06:46 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote: [ -> ]2017 Nebraska gets full league share. Rutgers and Maryland receive full shares until the 2020-21 season.
The new TV deal doesn't change those terms. Those are the payout terms. The value of Rutgers and Maryland for population/TV sets will be shown in the new TV deal.
While New York isn't the biggest percentage of total TV watchers for college sports, they do bring in the most viewers in total. I'm not a TV expert so I don't know how many millions a year that would add to the TV deal.
Seems like New York would only matter to B1GN not Tier I or II content?
(02-28-2016 06:13 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]will Maryland and Rutgers earn a full conference share? Seems like with a new contract they would since they were included in the negotiations. I think Nebraska and Penn St waited 6 years. Will Maryland and Rutgers still only get a partial share and if so, is it partial on everything? Partial Tier I and II money as well as the B1GN?
Why did Penn State have to wait 6 years? There wasn't a conference network in 1994.
(02-28-2016 07:32 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2016 06:13 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]will Maryland and Rutgers earn a full conference share? Seems like with a new contract they would since they were included in the negotiations. I think Nebraska and Penn St waited 6 years. Will Maryland and Rutgers still only get a partial share and if so, is it partial on everything? Partial Tier I and II money as well as the B1GN?
Why did Penn State have to wait 6 years? There wasn't a conference network in 1994.
True. So anybody joining the B1G has a 6 year buy in as opposed to the SEC, in which additions earn a full share immediately. Wonder why?
(02-28-2016 07:32 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2016 06:13 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]will Maryland and Rutgers earn a full conference share? Seems like with a new contract they would since they were included in the negotiations. I think Nebraska and Penn St waited 6 years. Will Maryland and Rutgers still only get a partial share and if so, is it partial on everything? Partial Tier I and II money as well as the B1GN?
Why did Penn State have to wait 6 years? There wasn't a conference network in 1994.
Money was peanuts back then anyways.
(02-28-2016 08:26 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2016 07:32 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2016 06:13 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]will Maryland and Rutgers earn a full conference share? Seems like with a new contract they would since they were included in the negotiations. I think Nebraska and Penn St waited 6 years. Will Maryland and Rutgers still only get a partial share and if so, is it partial on everything? Partial Tier I and II money as well as the B1GN?
Why did Penn State have to wait 6 years? There wasn't a conference network in 1994.
True. So anybody joining the B1G has a 6 year buy in as opposed to the SEC, in which additions earn a full share immediately. Wonder why?
In today's world, it is about buying into BTN for a few years first. Then as time passes each school is building equity in BTN shares.
The BTN is what the buy-in is about. Think about it like this, the SEC does not own the SEC Network. It's just a contract between the SEC and ESPN same as the rest of their rights. The Big Ten is a little different.
For the Big Ten, money from the BTN comes in two ways.
1. It comes from rights agreements. The BTN (owned 49% by the Big Ten and 51% by FOX) pays for the right to broadcast Big Ten games and get other content. I imagine this is shared equally by all including new members.
2. It comes from profit from the network. After the network pays all expenses, it is making a profit. That money goes back to its owners (FOX and the Big Ten). Each school owns a portion of the network. By adding schools, the portion each school owns shrinks if you give partial ownership to a new member. The buy-in those schools are paying is buying their stake of the Big Ten Network from the existing schools.
Put another way, imagine both the Big Ten and SEC Networks were sold entirely to Comcast tomorrow.
1. To get the SEC Network, Comcast would pay ESPN and not the SEC (since ESPN owns 100% of it). The SEC would continue to get paid what they are owed, but wouldn't get anything extra from this unless ESPN is forced to pay something for a transfer (included in the existing contract).
2. The Big Ten Network by contrast is owned partially by FOX and partially by ESPN. If they sold the network, they'd both get quite a bit of money immediately as they would both be selling something they own. This is why the newbies have to buy-in. They aren't just getting rights fees, but an ownership stake that gives them profits now and could eventually be sold.
Edit: This isn't implying the Big Ten method is better. Their are good arguments for both approaches and mostly things come down to do you want a little more risk for a little more reward (not a whole lot more of either though) or prefer guaranteed income.
Doesn't the big 10 have the option to buyout fox for 100% control of the network?
"The Big Ten Network by contrast is owned partially by FOX and partially by ESPN." ---The Big 10 Network is owned by ESPN????
Cheers!
(02-29-2016 11:28 AM)billybobby777 Wrote: [ -> ]"The Big Ten Network by contrast is owned partially by FOX and partially by ESPN." ---The Big 10 Network is owned by ESPN????
Cheers!
only fox
(02-29-2016 11:12 AM)bluesox Wrote: [ -> ]Doesn't the big 10 have the option to buyout fox for 100% control of the network?
I don't think so. Big Ten originally had 51%. Fox had the option to buy 2%. I think it had to do with controlling interest should the network have failed (not a lawyer).
So correct me if I'm wrong here. Any school that has the choice between joining the SEC or B1G, and currently runs a deficit to the SEC in conference revenue, will lock themselves into at least 6 more years of being behind all the SEC teams if they join the B1G? Perhaps as long as 8 years depending on exit criteria from their former conference? Why would any team with a choice, decide to join the B1G over the SEC?
(02-29-2016 03:34 PM)SeaBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (02-29-2016 11:12 AM)bluesox Wrote: [ -> ]Doesn't the big 10 have the option to buyout fox for 100% control of the network?
I don't think so. Big Ten originally had 51%. Fox had the option to buy 2%. I think it had to do with controlling interest should the network have failed (not a lawyer).
Correct. Today the Big Ten owns 49% and Fox owns 51%. Fox guarantees some kind of minimum payout (which has since been exceeded in actual network profits) and the Big Ten gets 49% of the profits on the network. So if Comcast were to buy the BTN, they would be paying Fox 51% of the negotiated valuation. Then they'd either be paying the Big Ten 49% of the valuation plus negotiating a new rights fee structure or just replacing Fox's 51% ownership and operator status in the venture.
(02-29-2016 04:15 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]So correct me if I'm wrong here. Any school that has the choice between joining the SEC or B1G, and currently runs a deficit to the SEC in conference revenue, will lock themselves into at least 6 more years of being behind all the SEC teams if they join the B1G? Perhaps as long as 8 years depending on exit criteria from their former conference? Why would any team with a choice, decide to join the B1G over the SEC?
To be fair the graduated increases in payout are subject to negotiation. Maryland for instance was given a large upfront 1st year payout to handle their ACC buyout. Now this year they earn a graduated share to account for buying into the BTN equity and to contribute towards paying back the part of the 1st year payout that is to be repaid. Rutgers and Nebraska were not given these upfront payouts and thus their graduate payouts are about buying into the BTN equity.
To your point, its why Mizzou ever jumping from the SEC to the Big Ten is pure fantasy.
(02-29-2016 04:21 PM)brista21 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-29-2016 04:15 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]So correct me if I'm wrong here. Any school that has the choice between joining the SEC or B1G, and currently runs a deficit to the SEC in conference revenue, will lock themselves into at least 6 more years of being behind all the SEC teams if they join the B1G? Perhaps as long as 8 years depending on exit criteria from their former conference? Why would any team with a choice, decide to join the B1G over the SEC?
To be fair the graduated increases in payout are subject to negotiation. Maryland for instance was given a large upfront 1st year payout to handle their ACC buyout. Now this year they earn a graduated share to account for buying into the BTN equity and to contribute towards paying back the part of the 1st year payout that is to be repaid. Rutgers and Nebraska were not given these upfront payouts and thus their graduate payouts are about buying into the BTN equity.
To your point, its why Mizzou ever jumping from the SEC to the Big Ten is pure fantasy.
Exactly! And further more, why it makes sense, that for the schools in the ACC with a choice, the SEC would probably be choice #1.
So based on past B1G additions (Penn St, Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers), and the past SEC additions (Tex A&M, Missouri), some teams in the ACC and Big 12 have a choice to make if either conference expands.
The schools in the ACC that I feel have a chance to go to the SEC or B1G are...UNC, NCST, Duke, Virginia, and FSU. Only Texas, IMO, would get an invite from both the SEC and B1G. ND would also get an invite from both.
Of these 7 teams, only FSU, in my opinion, feels they need to keep up with the SEC teams. For the rest, the money and weekly competition doesn't matter.
Based on this scenario, I can't see FSU leaving the ACC to join the B1G only to still be behind the SEC in revenue for the next 6-8 or more years and in week in and week out competition.
Every other team will make a choice about something other than money.
(02-29-2016 04:32 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ] (02-29-2016 04:21 PM)brista21 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-29-2016 04:15 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]So correct me if I'm wrong here. Any school that has the choice between joining the SEC or B1G, and currently runs a deficit to the SEC in conference revenue, will lock themselves into at least 6 more years of being behind all the SEC teams if they join the B1G? Perhaps as long as 8 years depending on exit criteria from their former conference? Why would any team with a choice, decide to join the B1G over the SEC?
To be fair the graduated increases in payout are subject to negotiation. Maryland for instance was given a large upfront 1st year payout to handle their ACC buyout. Now this year they earn a graduated share to account for buying into the BTN equity and to contribute towards paying back the part of the 1st year payout that is to be repaid. Rutgers and Nebraska were not given these upfront payouts and thus their graduate payouts are about buying into the BTN equity.
To your point, its why Mizzou ever jumping from the SEC to the Big Ten is pure fantasy.
Exactly! And further more, why it makes sense, that for the schools in the ACC with a choice, the SEC would probably be choice #1.
Football money is small potatoes. (I know that is politically incorrect on a realignment message board.) It is entirely possible that other factors will be stirred into the decision-making recipe. We are told that academic rankings matter, research funding matters. Maybe cultural kinship matters.
Smart conference presidents will be watching all of the schools that have found new conference homes in recent years. Will there be evidence five years from now that joining the SEC vs B1G vs ACC vs PAC made a measuable difference to any school's academic standing, endowment level? I doubt it. And yet I think those factors will be far more significant than football... stuff. Denizens of Ivory Towers care about those things, and believe that those things are the University's "brand." Football is just the billboard/TV ad for the brand.
Could they be right?
(02-29-2016 04:15 PM)Dasville Wrote: [ -> ]So correct me if I'm wrong here. Any school that has the choice between joining the SEC or B1G, and currently runs a deficit to the SEC in conference revenue, will lock themselves into at least 6 more years of being behind all the SEC teams if they join the B1G? Perhaps as long as 8 years depending on exit criteria from their former conference? Why would any team with a choice, decide to join the B1G over the SEC?
Not necessarily. Since Mizzou is pretty much the only school that could perhaps ever make the jump, the move would be more about the academic prestige and other factors rather than TV money. The new B1G TV contract should dwarf everyone else, including the SEC.
Say mizzou jumps in a few years when the new contract is starting. Even a partial share might equal the full share of the SEC payout, and that is without any ownership. It's something like $35M or so now. Say the new B1G contract has a starting partial share of anywhere over $30M, the ownership and equity becomes much more valuable than an extra $5M.
For Mizzou, the other benefits would be far beyond any TV money. The usual 10-15 spot jump in USNWR rankings that each school typically gets when joining the B1G. Joining the CIC, where academic money is doled out in the BILLIONS. Decreased travel costs. As it stands, Mizzou's travel budget is draining lots of the TV money just for traveling to competitions. Mizzou in the West would significantly decrease travel costs. Average distance between Mizzou and SEC East schools is like 800 miles. B1G west would be 350. Better culture fit. Like minded schools.
As for the B1G, it is all dependent on what they want and can get. Mizzou and kansas would be great additions IMO. Lets Purdue go to the East. Adds roughly 10 million in population to the B1G Network footprint, where you get to charge the premium price. Two AAU schools. KU has a legendary hoops squad, and Mizzou has solid bball history, likely making the B1G the premier basketball conference. Mizzou would also add some solid middle depth to the B1G for football, something it kind of lacks now. Both AAU schools, who are better than Nebraska. KU med is legit, and Mizzou has the best Journalism school in the country. Both emphasize research.
Added value. Getting the Border War would be a boon. Would make the Braggin Rights/Arch Rivalry a conference affair with Mizzou-Illinois. Mizzou-Nebraska (victory bell) and Kansas-Nebraska restart. Adds value not only to Mizzou and Kansas, but also existing members who have history. Rivalry games make money.
Now, all of this is extremely unlikely to happen. It is my hope and dream for it to come to fruition, but I'm also realistic.