I know it's just business but what if ESPN on a point of pride and principle decided not to pay the Big 10 oodles more for taking their property (Maryland) and decided that Rutgers wasn't a content add that they were willing to pay big bucks for?

1. I believe that this next round of realignment will be more about content than markets. Why? The paradigms are shifting already. There are only so many eyes you can theoretically claim and the hedge bet now with streaming becoming a viable option might well be to pay the money in future realignment for providing multipliers of content. How many people nationwide are telling themselves that they just have to watch the next Wisconsin / Rutgers game? How about Maryland / Michigan? Face it the Big 10 gained no marquee match ups with their last round of realignment. So why would any network want to bump them to 40 million for a multiplier of 2 schools that not many want to watch play football?

2. Why does ESPN want to reward the Big 10 for taking Maryland? I mean think about the precedent it might set. Hey if you want to screw us over and possibly demean the value of a conference we own 100% of the rights to we'll be happy to reward you financially for the effort! I don't think so.

3. Why would ESPN who carefully sewed up the best available realignment property by sheltering the best of the Big East in the ACC and some of the semi-key schools of the Big 12 in the SEC, and went to the trouble of creating the LHN to hold Texas in place and paid Kansas a handsome T3 deal to have dibs on them, willingly let their prime investments move to a conference where the network is 51% owned by FOX? I mean really do you use Texas to multiply the value of Big 10 football on behalf of creating better T3 supply for FOX? Do you do the same with Kansas for their T3 basketball cache? I think not. But what you might well do is enhance the value of the SEC or ACC properties and maximize that multiplier by placing those schools where they add the most value to ESPN.

If you ask me, I think the Big 10 has painted itself into the corner. If the Big 12 survives the ACC survives and there is nobody left for Delany outside of Connecticut, except maybe Buffalo. If the Big 12 goes Kansas and Texas might be more inclined to go to the hand that feeds them the best. Oklahoma has to deal with the issue of being isolated in the Big 10 should they opt for that route. Just look at once mighty Nebraska. It cut itself off from traditional recruiting grounds and has become a solid mid tier program who constantly plays second fiddle to Ohio State and Wisconsin. Does Oklahoma dance to the same tune? No. Frankly I just don't see it happening because their big money donors won't let it happen.

No sir, ESPN has played this hand very well. If they get Big 10 T1 rights again they won't have to pay $40 million to get it. I say more like $32-35. I'd say if Delany wants to expand to coastal markets he better start eyeing California, Washington, Oregon, U.C.L.A., Stanford, Colorado, and U.S.C., especially if FOX wants to help them out. The price of staying independent for the PAC may be that they place themselves on the menu of a hungry predator who is locked out of the buffet on the East Coast.

M-I-C (C because you can't always get what you want.) K-E-Y (Y because you pissed us off with Maryland) M-O-U-S-E (E-Enjoy the West Coast) See you next contract renewal Boys and Girls in the Big 10!

(06-15-2015 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I know it's just business but what if ESPN on a point of pride and principle decided not to pay the Big 10 oodles more for taking their property (Maryland) and decided that Rutgers wasn't a content add that they were willing to pay big bucks for?

1. I believe that this next round of realignment will be more about content than markets. Why? The paradigms are shifting already. There are only so many eyes you can theoretically claim and the hedge bet now with streaming becoming a viable option might well be to pay the money in future realignment for providing multipliers of content. How many people nationwide are telling themselves that they just have to watch the next Wisconsin / Rutgers game? How about Maryland / Michigan? Face it the Big 10 gained no marquee match ups with their last round of realignment. So why would any network want to bump them to 40 million for a multiplier of 2 schools that not many want to watch play football?

2. Why does ESPN want to reward the Big 10 for taking Maryland? I mean think about the precedent it might set. Hey if you want to screw us over and possibly demean the value of a conference we own 100% of the rights to we'll be happy to reward you financially for the effort! I don't think so.

3. Why would ESPN who carefully sewed up the best available realignment property by sheltering the best of the Big East in the ACC and some of the semi-key schools of the Big 12 in the SEC, and went to the trouble of creating the LHN to hold Texas in place and paid Kansas a handsome T3 deal to have dibs on them, willingly let their prime investments move to a conference where the network is 51% owned by FOX? I mean really do you use Texas to multiply the value of Big 10 football on behalf of creating better T3 supply for FOX? Do you do the same with Kansas for their T3 basketball cache? I think not. But what you might well do is enhance the value of the SEC or ACC properties and maximize that multiplier by placing those schools where they add the most value to ESPN.

If you ask me, I think the Big 10 has painted itself in the corner. If the Big 12 survives the ACC survives and there is nobody left for Delany outside of Connecticut, except may Buffalo. If the Big 12 goes Kansas and Texas might be more inclined to go to the hand that feeds them the best. Oklahoma has to deal with the issue of being isolated in the Big 10 should they opt for that route. Frankly I just don't see it happening.

No sir, ESPN has played this hand very well. If they get Big 10 T1 rights again they won't have to pay $40 million to get it. I say more like $32-35. I'd say if Delany wants to expand to coastal markets he better start eyeing California, Washington, Oregon, U.C.L.A., Stanford, Colorado, and U.S.C., especially if FOX wants to help them out. The price of staying independent for the PAC may be that they place themselves on the menu of a hungry predator who is locked out of the buffet on the East Coast.

M-I-C (C because you can't always get what you want.) K-E-Y (Y because you pissed us off with Maryland) M-O-U-S-E (E-Enjoy the West Coast) See you next contract renewal Boys and Girls in the Big 10!

If they don't pay for Maryland, then Fox or NBC has a new high end TV sports property. ESPN isn't going to risk that. This isn't like the AAC where ESPN can dictate. Last time ESPN tried that, Delany told them to FO and selected Fox as the Big10 Network partner.

(06-15-2015 08:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 08:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I know it's just business but what if ESPN on a point of pride and principle decided not to pay the Big 10 oodles more for taking their property (Maryland) and decided that Rutgers wasn't a content add that they were willing to pay big bucks for?

1. I believe that this next round of realignment will be more about content than markets. Why? The paradigms are shifting already. There are only so many eyes you can theoretically claim and the hedge bet now with streaming becoming a viable option might well be to pay the money in future realignment for providing multipliers of content. How many people nationwide are telling themselves that they just have to watch the next Wisconsin / Rutgers game? How about Maryland / Michigan? Face it the Big 10 gained no marquee match ups with their last round of realignment. So why would any network want to bump them to 40 million for a multiplier of 2 schools that not many want to watch play football?

2. Why does ESPN want to reward the Big 10 for taking Maryland? I mean think about the precedent it might set. Hey if you want to screw us over and possibly demean the value of a conference we own 100% of the rights to we'll be happy to reward you financially for the effort! I don't think so.

3. Why would ESPN who carefully sewed up the best available realignment property by sheltering the best of the Big East in the ACC and some of the semi-key schools of the Big 12 in the SEC, and went to the trouble of creating the LHN to hold Texas in place and paid Kansas a handsome T3 deal to have dibs on them, willingly let their prime investments move to a conference where the network is 51% owned by FOX? I mean really do you use Texas to multiply the value of Big 10 football on behalf of creating better T3 supply for FOX? Do you do the same with Kansas for their T3 basketball cache? I think not. But what you might well do is enhance the value of the SEC or ACC properties and maximize that multiplier by placing those schools where they add the most value to ESPN.

If you ask me, I think the Big 10 has painted itself in the corner. If the Big 12 survives the ACC survives and there is nobody left for Delany outside of Connecticut, except may Buffalo. If the Big 12 goes Kansas and Texas might be more inclined to go to the hand that feeds them the best. Oklahoma has to deal with the issue of being isolated in the Big 10 should they opt for that route. Frankly I just don't see it happening.

No sir, ESPN has played this hand very well. If they get Big 10 T1 rights again they won't have to pay $40 million to get it. I say more like $32-35. I'd say if Delany wants to expand to coastal markets he better start eyeing California, Washington, Oregon, U.C.L.A., Stanford, Colorado, and U.S.C., especially if FOX wants to help them out. The price of staying independent for the PAC may be that they place themselves on the menu of a hungry predator who is locked out of the buffet on the East Coast.

M-I-C (C because you can't always get what you want.) K-E-Y (Y because you pissed us off with Maryland) M-O-U-S-E (E-Enjoy the West Coast) See you next contract renewal Boys and Girls in the Big 10!

If they don't pay for Maryland, then Fox or NBC has a new high end TV sports property. ESPN isn't going to risk that. This isn't like the AAC where ESPN can dictate. Last time ESPN tried that, Delany told them to FO and selected Fox as the Big10 Network partner.

Add up the viable properties and the content multipliers and see who has the upper hand. I don't think ESPN has to do anything here. If NBC goes for them it will take them a few years to approximate what CBS does with the SEC already. Time slots will be a tough competition with what the Mouse has between the ACC / SEC / and key Big 12 schools. Plus ESPN will still have 50% of the leased PAC games.

What are the must see games of the Big 10?
Ohio State / Michigan
Ohio State / Penn State
Michigan / Michigan State
Wisconsin / Nebraska
and any other combination of those schools.

Ratings killers are Purdue, Indiana, Northwestern, Illinois, Rutgers, and Maryland while they are new.

Iowa is a good mid tier interest program and Minnesota can be.

That's not a lot of prime games considering the top schools don't all play one another.

I believe the opposite is and will continue to happen. We will see markets more emphasized as the pool of competitive schools shrink. The prime P5 school of the future will be a small city with no NFL/large city with NFL and a good university.
If you can get a Louisville/UTAustin/Memphis/etc, then you own the football property in that metropolis and will garner more ad revenue

ESPN might well make a low bid for the Big Ten OTA games, and if they do it won't be because they care about Maryland, but only because they don't need to pay a premium for those games. They can already put the SEC on ESPN every Saturday night and any of the Pac-12, Big 12, or ACC on ABC on Saturday night. It won't bother ESPN if one of the other OTA channels gets a "tier one" Big Ten package similar to the SEC package on CBS.

ESPN will bid enough to get some Big Ten games for ESPN, maybe giving them a game every Saturday at 12 noon ET and some games in other time slots. And ESPN will get enough of what they want. The Big Ten isn't going to shut ESPN out completely in favor of FS1 or NBCSN, because the Big Ten doesn't want to get "the NHL treatment" from ESPN.

Won't the add be for Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers?

(06-15-2015 09:06 PM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  I believe the opposite is and will continue to happen. We will see markets more emphasized as the pool of competitive schools shrink. The prime P5 school of the future will be a small city with no NFL/large city with NFL and a good university.
If you can get a Louisville/UTAustin/Memphis/etc, then you own the football property in that metropolis and will garner more ad revenue

Content is still better to have than niche markets and the whole market model is becoming suspect.

(06-15-2015 09:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ESPN might well make a low bid for the Big Ten OTA games, and if they do it won't be because they care about Maryland, but only because they don't need to pay a premium for those games. They can already put the SEC on ESPN every Saturday night and any of the Pac-12, Big 12, or ACC on ABC on Saturday night. It won't bother ESPN if one of the other OTA channels gets a "tier one" Big Ten package similar to the SEC package on CBS.

ESPN will bid enough to get some Big Ten games for ESPN, maybe giving them a game every Saturday at 12 noon ET and some games in other time slots. And ESPN will get enough of what they want. The Big Ten isn't going to shut ESPN out completely in favor of FS1 or NBCSN, because the Big Ten doesn't want to get "the NHL treatment" from ESPN.

The Big 10 won't get astronomical amounts, but ESPN will pay a fair amount. Remember, they don't get the prime SEC games. CBS gets first choice. The Big 10 and ACC are the only conferences where they get first choice all the time. They share the Pac 12 and Big 12 with Fox. And they sure don't want to let NBC in.

(06-15-2015 09:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 09:06 PM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  I believe the opposite is and will continue to happen. We will see markets more emphasized as the pool of competitive schools shrink. The prime P5 school of the future will be a small city with no NFL/large city with NFL and a good university.
If you can get a Louisville/UTAustin/Memphis/etc, then you own the football property in that metropolis and will garner more ad revenue

Content is still better to have than niche markets and the whole market model is becoming suspect.

Look at the ratings by game. Content is what matters. Even Alabama has dismal ratings in SEC games when they play someone in the bottom of the conference. But when you have a top 10 matchup, the ratings are very good.

The NHL gets the NHL treatment because not enough viewers care about hockey.

(06-15-2015 09:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 09:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 09:06 PM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  I believe the opposite is and will continue to happen. We will see markets more emphasized as the pool of competitive schools shrink. The prime P5 school of the future will be a small city with no NFL/large city with NFL and a good university.
If you can get a Louisville/UTAustin/Memphis/etc, then you own the football property in that metropolis and will garner more ad revenue

Content is still better to have than niche markets and the whole market model is becoming suspect.

Look at the ratings by game. Content is what matters. Even Alabama has dismal ratings in SEC games when they play someone in the bottom of the conference. But when you have a top 10 matchup, the ratings are very good.

Exactly! That is also why when realignment is over then you will see concessions on the number of conference games going up. One bargaining chip at the time please. Right now conferences are willing to expand for the right money. When realignment ends we will see each successive contract negotiation land either another conference or another P5 game. Content, content, and more content will be the new mantra.

The B1G isn't stupid enough to leave ESPN completely. And the World Wide Leader is too smart not to let the B1G go without retaining a sizeable chunk of rights. What you'll see is ESPN keep OTA rights for ABC and two, maybe three games a week on the "Family" of networks in football; about forty to fifty games, maybe more, mostly in-conference in hoops; and more olympic sports coverage. Whatever is left will likely go up for bid.

(06-15-2015 09:51 PM)Rube Dali Wrote:  The B1G isn't stupid enough to leave ESPN completely. And the World Wide Leader is too smart not to let the B1G go without retaining a sizeable chunk of rights. What you'll see is ESPN keep OTA rights for ABC and two, maybe three games a week on the "Family" of networks in football; about forty to fifty games, maybe more, mostly in-conference in hoops; and more olympic sports coverage. Whatever is left will likely go up for bid.

Rube Dali I don't disagree with your assessment here. My dramatized point is that there is no particular reason to expect a spectacular ESPN deal this time around. I think Bullet is right. It will be fair, but not the irrational sums that many posters predict. That's why I said low to mid thirties after the ESPN money. Then as you say it may bid up a bit from there for the rest of the material.

Large tv markets (3 of the top 4), large alumni bases across the nation, Big Ten will get paid big by either ESPN or FOX. Too valuable of a tv property to let go.

(06-15-2015 10:06 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Large tv markets (3 of the top 4), large alumni bases across the nation, Big Ten will get paid big by either ESPN or FOX. Too valuable of a tv property to let go.

I think they will get paid appropriately, but not big.

I think the B1G gets a monster contract.

The contract term will cover the next 10 years, not the past 10. OSU has Urban Meyer and will likely be a national championship contender as long as he's there. Michigan has Harbaugh, who will vastly improve the program. Penn State will be back to prime time with James Franklin recruiting. Wisconsin and Nebraska have new, promising coaches and their programs should continue to be strong, and now the BIG invades the east coast with Rutgers and Maryland. B1G optimism is high and if the B1G can have a few more on field successes next season, they will be in the drivers' seat for the negotiations.

Success on the field will certainly help, and you can argue that the B1G may not be as successful as Delany will certainly predict, but there's no arguing that the B1G is not full of large state sponsored institutions with huge alumni bases that will tune in to games - and that's the viewership the B1G will sell.

ESPN cares most about it's bottom line. ESPN execs won't let hurt feelings about Maryland, if there are any, sidetrack the business decision to prevent Fox, NBC or CBS from invading their college football dominance and picking off the B1G. Likewise, Delany will play the networks off against each other to raise the stakes. The result will be an enormous contract for the B1G, regardless of which network or networks are the winner.

(06-15-2015 09:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 09:06 PM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  I believe the opposite is and will continue to happen. We will see markets more emphasized as the pool of competitive schools shrink. The prime P5 school of the future will be a small city with no NFL/large city with NFL and a good university.
If you can get a Louisville/UTAustin/Memphis/etc, then you own the football property in that metropolis and will garner more ad revenue

Content is still better to have than niche markets and the whole market model is becoming suspect.

The NBA makes its living in the billions on markets like San Antonio, Memphis, New Orleans, etc where there's little competition. Yes, they have the LAs and NYs but niche markets are causing ballistic growth. Pick out dmas with +1million for college football and more $$$ will flow.

(06-15-2015 10:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 10:06 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Large tv markets (3 of the top 4), large alumni bases across the nation, Big Ten will get paid big by either ESPN or FOX. Too valuable of a tv property to let go.

I think they will get paid appropriately, but not big.

FOX is going to open the checkbook and ESPN will match or go over.

(06-15-2015 10:47 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 10:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 10:06 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Large tv markets (3 of the top 4), large alumni bases across the nation, Big Ten will get paid big by either ESPN or FOX. Too valuable of a tv property to let go.

I think they will get paid appropriately, but not big.

FOX is going to open the checkbook and ESPN will match or go over.

Exactly. As long as CBS has the SEC 3:30 PM time slot sewn up, ESPN needs the B1G to help fill the gap at that time period.

Not sure the Worldwide Leader in Sports wants to have to contend with the SEC on CBS and the B1G on FOX at 3:30 PM slot each and every week.

Cheers,
Neil

The Big Ten is absolutely going to strike it rich. Why? Because it's the ONLY sports property up for grabs in the next 5-6 years that means much. No P5 conferences are up for bids until the mid 20's. NHL, MLB, NFL, and NBA all signed well into the 20's. Olympics thru '32. World Cup thru '26. To think that the Big Ten won't strike it rich is pretty moronic quite frankly. It's a pure fact of timing. Right place, right time.

I think JRsec you are doing more hope than you are reality. Big Ten is in a great place at the absolutely right time. They are going to get paid big time.