Big 10 Network is 10 cents with no Big 10 team in the state and $1.10 when a big 10 team is in the state. Big 10 teams get 55 cents or 50% of it from Fox. All you have to do to figure out expansion is find the states with the largest number of households that currently do not have a Big 10 team. The 4 states they are missing are:

Florida
Georgia
Texas
North Carolina

There is your answer for future expansion.

(08-07-2022 12:11 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:06 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 11:38 AM)ruinrochester Wrote:  If you want to know how the B10 thinks when a team is added look here at WHY Rutgers was added. This article from back then.. "Big Ten Network hits the NYC jackpot worth tens of millions of dollars".

My memory was pretty good, as I said it was about .90 per household back in 2014 and it actually was $1.00 per Household and now it's up to $1.50 per household as told in the USC/UCLA expansion. From the article......

"Let’s do a little quick “back of the napkin math” on this massive victory for BTN. At last check, the channel charges a $1.00 fee per subscriber per month for those customers within the conference footprint, which NY/NJ now falls into thanks to Rutgers."

and this...

"Back in 2012, Sports Illustrated prophetically estimated that the Big Ten could make $200 million annually from television money on the east coast. And that number may now be on the low end of the spectrum."

http://amp.awfulannouncing.com/2014/big-...llars.html

So I would believe.. Rutgers isn't going anywhere for all those that desire the B10 "remove" Rutgers.. ha ha. We feel for the "left behinds", but to hear here and on Youtube all of the prognosticators hoping for a Rutgers removal so they can get a seat at the Big Table! Sorry.

The commissioner Warren said you "MUST ADD VALUE".. meaning if we ADD YOUR School the pie can NOT get smaller for the other remaining Schools.. Rutgers adds value, maybe now they are nothing but a "schedule filer" for BTN Content. (which I can explain how valuable Content Filler is) But understand the NYC DMA which Rutgers Footprint resides in has over 7,000,000 Households that the B10 used to expand into the North East. and NO Syracuse, AND Boston College do NOT fall into that DMA, which only Rutgers as the only P5 School. Army & Connecticut are not even P5.. So removing Rutgers.. not happening.

And the NYT article did say Rutgers accounts for 20% of the NYC market who root for Rutgers, while 9% root for Notre Dame in the NYC DMA.. What people fail to understand is just how big Rutgers is with almost 70,000 students , and each year adding about 10,000 graduates joining the local area, which is why we have the top ten largest alumni count in the country. AND Rutgers is OLD...very OLD.. Remember... the Birthplace of College Football 150 Years ago was at Rutgers.. and now deeply entrenched into NJ.

Do they need Rutgers in the future to be in those markets?

A 24 school P2, particularly one with ND and FOX (Big East) behind it, doesn't need the "local" school as much to have leverage imo.

No one is ever going to 24. Ever.

Barring governmental legal action, I would take that bet.

(08-07-2022 02:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  It is rather suspicious how schools like Washington and Oregon supposedly would negative value for the Big 10, but Rutgers and Maryland are supposed to have positive value. The math to that really doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.


Even if you look at things purely from a “market size” perspective, Washington has 10 US House seats, Maryland has 8 US House seats and New Jersey has 13 US House seats. Washington state is actually bigger than Maryland, and not that much smaller than NJ.


I know that half the rationale is the Washington DC and NYC tv markets, but it almost seems embarrassing to claim they bring these markets when they barely bring the markets of their home states. Washington DC is not really that big of a city, anyway. (If DC was a state, it would be the second least populated state, just barely ahead of Wyoming.)


Piscataway isn’t even as close to NYC as Rutgers fans would have you believe. It’s 40 miles outside NYC, which is 74 minutes with current traffic.

Let me help you explain our area. It's not "just" NJ this is the Tri-State area, and Rutgers is the largest State School, and that includes parts of PA, CT and NYC.

For example.. at Rutgers if you want the networks NBC CBS FOX ABC, the news you get every day is METRO NYC news. That is our LOCAL news. Because we are 38 miles from NYC or so and over the air THIS is our market. That is the NYC DMA. So you have add those into your numbers

Also, in New Jersey, you have to understand the train system. Where Rutgers is, along the New Brunswick Edison stations, thousands and thousand commute to NYC daily. We are all entrenched together. Oh, and Staten Island (NYC Borough) is just 20 miles via 440 into NY. That's close either way...

And regardless the alumni count for both Rutgers, AND all the B10 schools makes this market mandatory.

(08-07-2022 02:49 PM)Fanofreason Wrote:  Big 10 Network is 10 cents with no Big 10 team in the state and $1.10 when a big 10 team is in the state. Big 10 teams get 55 cents or 50% of it from Fox. All you have to do to figure out expansion is find the states with the largest number of households that currently do not have a Big 10 team. The 4 states they are missing are:

Florida
Georgia
Texas
North Carolina

There is your answer for future expansion.

The article I saw, is that the latest amount is $1.50 PER household now, at least what they are gaining from LA with USC and UCLA

But you are correct. When they enter a state, is a key... I'm thinking Miami (large Metro NYC alumni base), North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and Virginia, with PAC12 markets of Oregon, and Washington. With one Wild Card Texas A & M, because of the hatred of Texas joining the SEC. All depends on how the ACC GOR falls apart or is negotiated to split... we will see

(08-07-2022 02:16 PM)Strut Wrote:  Think about this, Rutgers has more opportunity to move the needle for B1G than even Alabama for SEC. As much as Alabama has won they've probably plateaued in interest overall even if it's a high plateau and maybe even jaded fans that have become somewhat bored with same ole thing every year. If Rutgers were to win on a similar level or even slightly less than Northwestern has over last 10 years or so the NY/NJ DMA would have ratings moonshot they'd be so popular! NYC loves winning of any kind and Rutgers band wagon would be full.

The potential is there in theory. But, in reality?

Population is one thing, but culture is another. And I don't disagree about the potential ceiling Rutgers has. It's the same as any big school in/near a major metropolitan area. Maybe more comparable for Rutgers, or Maryland, is USC/UCLA?

Then again, why is UCLA moving? Same thing that is plaguing Berkeley? And what was prompting Maryland's move?

I think, simply put: popularity be darned, the location both serves for potentially huge fanbases but still poses massive (maybe insurmountable) budgetary/operational challenges. It's maybe even harder for the public schools. And it doesn't seem like any of these metro schools are going yard with respect to their markets. Especially in the northeast. They're said to be "pro towns," where the NFL/NBA/MLB teams dominate the coverage/press.

It's different in the rural areas. And it seems totally different down in the South. It's not to say schools can't try to flex their muscles in athletics. But, if it isn't working, and there's a tax base picking up the bill, or conferences are simply exploiting the general public through cable carriage rates? I've got a problem with that. Or, I feel like I'm owed a due date when a school or conference wants to carry out some of these silly experiments.

(08-07-2022 02:45 PM)ruinrochester Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:31 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:06 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  We know - the Big 10 is screwing the cable subscribers of New Jersey and the Big 10 diluted the product to get the money. We also believe this source of money is falling every year as folks drop cable. Cable was in decline when Rutgers was added. If the Big 10 is stuck with Rutgers forever, and the "extra" money (taken from NJ residents) lasts for 15 years, this is a terrible deal.

Rutgers is a cash cow being milked by the Big 10. They are terrible at sports and now Oh State, Michigan, Penn St, Michigan St fans are stuck seeing their teams play a MAC level game every year. If you have vision for more than 5 years, Rutgers is a terrible addition to the Big 10. Everybody knows why the Big 10 added Rutgers - we just think it was terrible.

Yeah. At least in theory, conference expansions are supposed to be 100 year decisions. Even if Rutgers added money to the Big 10 when they were first added, that doesn’t mean that Rutgers will add money to the Big 10 over the long run.
The cable model is already in decline. I notice that the OP’s articles are from 2014, which was before cord cutting began. I’m not even sure that Rutgers has net positive value for the Big Ten by now. (Let alone by the end of this decade.)

First.. have you watched or even noticed Rutgers SUCCESS in all B10 sports recently and with the exception of Football, is on par with ANY other B10 school. So you wrong there.

But lets talk about Football. Rutgers has beaten, Indiana, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and that's off the top of my head in Football since joining the conference So if they have beaten those teams, then how can they be the worst? Can we say the same or similar to the Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, and Maryland... yes.. So. where is the kick out Rutgers thought, even on the field.

Also please do some research of how much money currently B10 loses without Rutgers...

Obviously they have better council than me and you on how to keep.. I'll go by what I see.

Others can dream of not being left behind. We are trying to figure out how to continue to get better in the B10

Rutgers has had as much success as any Big Ten team in any sport except for football recently? Well, congrats on making the basketball NCAA tournament for the first time in something like 30 years last year, and making it again this year. (Although TBH that really shows how bad Rutgers basketball usually is.) I don’t know how good Rutger’s soccer team or Olympic sports are, but frankly nobody cares about those sports.


Like it or not, a lot of people are skeptical that a school like Rutgers really has positive value for the Big Ten. To the extent that Rutgers even had positive value for the Big Ten to begin with, it was probably just a temporary 2010s fluke where you could gorge cable viewers that theoretically live in your TV market. The Rutgers invite really does beg the question of how unpopular a football team can be in a big metro area and still have positive value for a conference. I mean, if the Big 10 had invited a Division III team that’s actually located 40 miles from NYC, would that have positive value for the conference?

To be honest, the people who defend the Rutgers add usually just seem to use the rationale that since the Big 10 added Rutgers, it must have been a good business decision. Since we all know that businesses never make bad decisions.


Anyway, the Big Ten added Rutgers, and isn’t going to kick Rutgers out at this point. The Big Ten made its bed and now has to lie in it. I don’t think that the people who talk about the Big 10 kicking out Rutgers seriously think it is going to happen.

I guess the idea that Rutgers combined with all the other Big 10 teams in NYC could deliver NYC is more plausible than the idea that Rutgers itself would deliver NYC. But the Big 10 basketball tournament in Madison Square Garden is not supposed to have worked out well at all, so who knows.

(08-07-2022 02:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  It is rather suspicious how schools like Washington and Oregon supposedly would negative value for the Big 10, but Rutgers and Maryland are supposed to have positive value. The math to that really doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.


Even if you look at things purely from a “market size” perspective, Washington has 10 US House seats, Maryland has 8 US House seats and New Jersey has 13 US House seats. Washington state is actually bigger than Maryland, and not that much smaller than NJ.


I know that half the rationale is the Washington DC and NYC tv markets, but it almost seems embarrassing to claim they bring these markets when they barely bring the markets of their home states. Washington DC is not really that big of a city, anyway. (If DC was a state, it would be the second least populated state, just barely ahead of Wyoming.)


Piscataway isn’t even as close to NYC as Rutgers fans would have you believe. It’s 40 miles outside NYC, which is 74 minutes with current traffic.

Agreed! I am shocked that when this went down; Washington wasn't added too. I would have to believe that they already know they will be in the BIG soon? Stanford too, but I'm not 100% sure about Oregon and Cal?

I do understand the Rutgers and Maryland scenario, as someone responded to you about that in a previous post.

Great post, I too have wondered this.

(08-07-2022 02:16 PM)Strut Wrote:  There's a few points I'll make based on posts above.

Just my opinion I believe B1G has a better trajectory for trending upwards longer term vs SEC for overall popularity, given SEC already has rabid fan base in dedicated regional footprint but doesn't really have as much upside as most potential fans are already fully engaged. Also all-time bell cow coach Saban will probably leave before long and cause drop off in clear cut SEC #1 like prior to his arrival; leaving parity in his wake.

Think about this, Rutgers has more opportunity to move the needle for B1G than even Alabama for SEC. As much as Alabama has won they've probably plateaued in interest overall even if it's a high plateau and maybe even jaded fans that have become somewhat bored with same ole thing every year. If Rutgers were to win on a similar level or even slightly less than Northwestern has over last 10 years or so the NY/NJ DMA would have ratings moonshot they'd be so popular! NYC loves winning of any kind and Rutgers band wagon would be full.

That is the point I've been trying make exactly. That's way too much potential to let go of. Yes, I'm a fan. But I'm also not crazy. Those ASH years can never happen again. Couple that with LA... OMG. It's a plan. We will see.

(08-07-2022 03:03 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:16 PM)Strut Wrote:  Think about this, Rutgers has more opportunity to move the needle for B1G than even Alabama for SEC. As much as Alabama has won they've probably plateaued in interest overall even if it's a high plateau and maybe even jaded fans that have become somewhat bored with same ole thing every year. If Rutgers were to win on a similar level or even slightly less than Northwestern has over last 10 years or so the NY/NJ DMA would have ratings moonshot they'd be so popular! NYC loves winning of any kind and Rutgers band wagon would be full.

The potential is there in theory. But, in reality?

Population is one thing, but culture is another. And I don't disagree about the potential ceiling Rutgers has. It's the same as any big school in/near a major metropolitan area. Maybe more comparable for Rutgers, or Maryland, is USC/UCLA?

Then again, why is UCLA moving? Same thing that is plaguing Berkeley? And what was prompting Maryland's move?

I think, simply put: popularity be darned, the location both serves for potentially huge fanbases but still poses massive (maybe insurmountable) budgetary/operational challenges. It's maybe even harder for the public schools. And it doesn't seem like any of these metro schools are going yard with respect to their markets. Especially in the northeast. They're said to be "pro towns," where the NFL/NBA/MLB teams dominate the coverage/press.

It's different in the rural areas. And it seems totally different down in the South. It's not to say schools can't try to flex their muscles in athletics. But, if it isn't working, and there's a tax base picking up the bill, or conferences are simply exploiting the general public through cable carriage rates? I've got a problem with that. Or, I feel like I'm owed a due date when a school or conference wants to carry out some of these silly experiments.

Yeah, Rutgers being more valuable for the Big 10 than Alabama is for the SEC? Seriously, WTF?


For starters, Rutgers is a historically bad football program. Maybe Schiano will lead them to some 7-6 type seasons, but Rutgers will probably be back to being a 3-9 type program once he retires. How much of a following Rutgers could gain if they were good is basically a completely irrelevant question. Because there’s no reason to think Rutgers ever will be good. (Let alone as good as Alabama.)

Plus NYC is mostly about pro sports, and a lot of people who live in NYC are actually transplants from another part of the country.

(08-07-2022 03:05 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:45 PM)ruinrochester Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:31 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:06 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  We know - the Big 10 is screwing the cable subscribers of New Jersey and the Big 10 diluted the product to get the money. We also believe this source of money is falling every year as folks drop cable. Cable was in decline when Rutgers was added. If the Big 10 is stuck with Rutgers forever, and the "extra" money (taken from NJ residents) lasts for 15 years, this is a terrible deal.

Rutgers is a cash cow being milked by the Big 10. They are terrible at sports and now Oh State, Michigan, Penn St, Michigan St fans are stuck seeing their teams play a MAC level game every year. If you have vision for more than 5 years, Rutgers is a terrible addition to the Big 10. Everybody knows why the Big 10 added Rutgers - we just think it was terrible.

Yeah. At least in theory, conference expansions are supposed to be 100 year decisions. Even if Rutgers added money to the Big 10 when they were first added, that doesn’t mean that Rutgers will add money to the Big 10 over the long run.
The cable model is already in decline. I notice that the OP’s articles are from 2014, which was before cord cutting began. I’m not even sure that Rutgers has net positive value for the Big Ten by now. (Let alone by the end of this decade.)

First.. have you watched or even noticed Rutgers SUCCESS in all B10 sports recently and with the exception of Football, is on par with ANY other B10 school. So you wrong there.

But lets talk about Football. Rutgers has beaten, Indiana, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, and that's off the top of my head in Football since joining the conference So if they have beaten those teams, then how can they be the worst? Can we say the same or similar to the Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, and Maryland... yes.. So. where is the kick out Rutgers thought, even on the field.

Also please do some research of how much money currently B10 loses without Rutgers...

Obviously they have better council than me and you on how to keep.. I'll go by what I see.

Others can dream of not being left behind. We are trying to figure out how to continue to get better in the B10

Rutgers has had as much success as any Big Ten team in any sport except for football recently? Well, congrats on making the basketball NCAA tournament for the first time in something like 30 years last year, and making it again this year. (Although TBH that really shows how bad Rutgers basketball usually is.) I don’t know how good Rutger’s soccer team or Olympic sports are, but frankly nobody cares about those sports.


Like it or not, a lot of people are skeptical that a school like Rutgers really has positive value for the Big Ten. To the extent that Rutgers even had positive value for the Big Ten to begin with, it was probably just a temporary 2010s fluke where you could gorge cable viewers that theoretically live in your TV market. The Rutgers invite really does beg the question of how unpopular a football team can be in a big metro area and still have positive value for a conference. I mean, if the Big 10 had invited a Division III team that’s actually located 40 miles from NYC, would that have positive value for the conference?

To be honest, the people who defend the Rutgers add usually just seem to use the rationale that since the Big 10 added Rutgers, it must have been a good business decision. Since we all know that businesses never make bad decisions.


Anyway, the Big Ten added Rutgers, and isn’t going to kick Rutgers out at this point. The Big Ten made its bed and now has to lie in it. I don’t think that the people who talk about the Big 10 kicking out Rutgers seriously think it is going to happen.

I guess the idea that Rutgers combined with all the other Big 10 teams in NYC could deliver NYC is more plausible than the idea that Rutgers itself would deliver NYC. But the Big 10 basketball tournament in Madison Square Garden is not supposed to have worked out well at all, so who knows.

Hey. I really appreciate the discussion.. I understand your statement of Olympic Sports, (although my daughter played tennis on a full scholarship- so many do care).

And don't forget Mens basketball was also a lock the prior year when Covid shut it down.

Also, you'd have to remember when the B10, ACC, SEC, B12, and P12 were close in revenue from TV contracts. Since then, the addition of Rutgers/Maryland, and the exponential increase in revenue JUST from TV would choke you. And that's also why B10 and the SEC have separated from the pack. So it's kind of hard to not say they have something figured out...

Imagine being the others

(08-07-2022 02:31 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:06 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  We know - the Big 10 is screwing the cable subscribers of New Jersey and the Big 10 diluted the product to get the money. We also believe this source of money is falling every year as folks drop cable. Cable was in decline when Rutgers was added. If the Big 10 is stuck with Rutgers forever, and the "extra" money (taken from NJ residents) lasts for 15 years, this is a terrible deal.

Rutgers is a cash cow being milked by the Big 10. They are terrible at sports and now Oh State, Michigan, Penn St, Michigan St fans are stuck seeing their teams play a MAC level game every year. If you have vision for more than 5 years, Rutgers is a terrible addition to the Big 10. Everybody knows why the Big 10 added Rutgers - we just think it was terrible.

Yeah. At least in theory, conference expansions are supposed to be 100 year decisions. Even if Rutgers added money to the Big 10 when they were first added, that doesn’t mean that Rutgers will add money to the Big 10 over the long run.


The cable model is already in decline. I notice that the OP’s articles are from 2014, which was before cord cutting began. I’m not even sure that Rutgers has net positive value for the Big Ten by now. (Let alone by the end of this decade.)

I'm sorry if I posted 2014 article. It was because of all of the comments asking WHY Rutgers was asked to join the B10. It clearly answers that question.

And yes the Cable model is in decline.... But Shazam! Guess what? TV revenue is a booming with Cable/Steaming. I love cord cutting.. and yet I still pay more.. ha ha!! Different model SAME result.. LIVE TV Sports pays!!!

You may not be sure what value they bring today or end of this decade, but I'm sure they are banking on more than your opinion.. ha ha ha

(08-07-2022 03:21 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 03:03 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:16 PM)Strut Wrote:  Think about this, Rutgers has more opportunity to move the needle for B1G than even Alabama for SEC. As much as Alabama has won they've probably plateaued in interest overall even if it's a high plateau and maybe even jaded fans that have become somewhat bored with same ole thing every year. If Rutgers were to win on a similar level or even slightly less than Northwestern has over last 10 years or so the NY/NJ DMA would have ratings moonshot they'd be so popular! NYC loves winning of any kind and Rutgers band wagon would be full.

The potential is there in theory. But, in reality?

Population is one thing, but culture is another. And I don't disagree about the potential ceiling Rutgers has. It's the same as any big school in/near a major metropolitan area. Maybe more comparable for Rutgers, or Maryland, is USC/UCLA?

Then again, why is UCLA moving? Same thing that is plaguing Berkeley? And what was prompting Maryland's move?

I think, simply put: popularity be darned, the location both serves for potentially huge fanbases but still poses massive (maybe insurmountable) budgetary/operational challenges. It's maybe even harder for the public schools. And it doesn't seem like any of these metro schools are going yard with respect to their markets. Especially in the northeast. They're said to be "pro towns," where the NFL/NBA/MLB teams dominate the coverage/press.

It's different in the rural areas. And it seems totally different down in the South. It's not to say schools can't try to flex their muscles in athletics. But, if it isn't working, and there's a tax base picking up the bill, or conferences are simply exploiting the general public through cable carriage rates? I've got a problem with that. Or, I feel like I'm owed a due date when a school or conference wants to carry out some of these silly experiments.

Yeah, Rutgers being more valuable for the Big 10 than Alabama is for the SEC? Seriously, WTF?


For starters, Rutgers is a historically bad football program. Maybe Schiano will lead them to some 7-6 type seasons, but Rutgers will probably be back to being a 3-9 type program once he retires. How much of a following Rutgers could gain if they were good is basically a completely irrelevant question. Because there’s no reason to think Rutgers ever will be good. (Let alone as good as Alabama.)

Plus NYC is mostly about pro sports, and a lot of people who live in NYC are actually transplants from another part of the country.

Hey - I'm out of any Rutgers-Alabama discussions... That wasn't me.

For starters.. We currently HOPE Schiano gets us back to 7-6 6-7, 8-5... etc. That's a goal from where we are digging out of. That's fine with most Rutgers fans.

Do you know there are TWO Big 10 Corporate Offices. One in Rosemont near Chicago, and guess what.. the NYC Office, at 900 Third Ave. They want and believe a presence is vital to the B10.

You have to think radically different when you look at NYC.. its the numbers... the B10 literally have more alumni here than you can imagine. They broke it down when we entered.

So, I'll give you the Pro Sports, no doubt... but you really don't understand how many people here with either a B10 or Rutgers connection. Don't forget 250 years of graduates,( Rutgers is OLD, very OLD) pumping 10,000 per year. So because we only have one set of Networks here, and this is the corporate office for ALL of them. Then the local sports are dominated by the Pro Sports, since only a certain amount of time to talk sports, but the amount of college sports followers is still HUGE compared to many, many, many other markets.

When Rutgers wins.. you do hear about it here.. and winning just means relevance, and not embarrassment.. which I can only hope Schiano is working on.!! ha ha ha!

(08-07-2022 03:21 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 03:03 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:16 PM)Strut Wrote:  Think about this, Rutgers has more opportunity to move the needle for B1G than even Alabama for SEC. As much as Alabama has won they've probably plateaued in interest overall even if it's a high plateau and maybe even jaded fans that have become somewhat bored with same ole thing every year. If Rutgers were to win on a similar level or even slightly less than Northwestern has over last 10 years or so the NY/NJ DMA would have ratings moonshot they'd be so popular! NYC loves winning of any kind and Rutgers band wagon would be full.

The potential is there in theory. But, in reality?

Population is one thing, but culture is another. And I don't disagree about the potential ceiling Rutgers has. It's the same as any big school in/near a major metropolitan area. Maybe more comparable for Rutgers, or Maryland, is USC/UCLA?

Then again, why is UCLA moving? Same thing that is plaguing Berkeley? And what was prompting Maryland's move?

I think, simply put: popularity be darned, the location both serves for potentially huge fanbases but still poses massive (maybe insurmountable) budgetary/operational challenges. It's maybe even harder for the public schools. And it doesn't seem like any of these metro schools are going yard with respect to their markets. Especially in the northeast. They're said to be "pro towns," where the NFL/NBA/MLB teams dominate the coverage/press.

It's different in the rural areas. And it seems totally different down in the South. It's not to say schools can't try to flex their muscles in athletics. But, if it isn't working, and there's a tax base picking up the bill, or conferences are simply exploiting the general public through cable carriage rates? I've got a problem with that. Or, I feel like I'm owed a due date when a school or conference wants to carry out some of these silly experiments.

Yeah, Rutgers being more valuable for the Big 10 than Alabama is for the SEC? Seriously, WTF?


For starters, Rutgers is a historically bad football program. Maybe Schiano will lead them to some 7-6 type seasons, but Rutgers will probably be back to being a 3-9 type program once he retires. How much of a following Rutgers could gain if they were good is basically a completely irrelevant question. Because there’s no reason to think Rutgers ever will be good. (Let alone as good as Alabama.)

Plus NYC is mostly about pro sports, and a lot of people who live in NYC are actually transplants from another part of the country.

As you mentioned, I was for a time one of those transplants living and working in NY/NJ DMA for several years and saw first hand the potential for Rutgers (Piscataway and Meadowlands stadiums) based on very large alumni base that just needed a reason to be energized.

I've also for many years worked and lived in Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama DMA's. The key point is that Alabama (SEC's media engine) is MAXED out with little room to grow, so any media deals will factor that it's much easier for Alabama to actually go backwards as soon as Saban leaves than to grow. NIL is giving Saban major headaches already, so different sport but he will soon be following Coach K another bell cow coach to greener pastures.

NIL in regards to Rutgers may just be what the doctor ordered to keep all that NJ talent home, so we are in the infancy of impact which I believe benefits Rutgers especially.

So again Rutgers in the #1 DMA easily has opportunity for bigger leverage impact for B1G than Alabama for SEC over next years forward mainly because as soon as Alabama loses a game a lot of fans lose interest (I see it first hand) and there are no new fans available. If Rutgers sniffs NY6 bowl keep comparing the ratings growth for RU vs ratings growth for Alabama and see what unleashed potential looks like.

Lastly, I must admit that I've been impressed with how dedicated and seriously football/sports is taken in south but it's also the reason why I can share IMO the B1G didn't take it as seriously conference wide until recently and is now building a juggernaut trajectory.

(08-07-2022 02:35 PM)ruinrochester Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:01 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 01:04 PM)ruinrochester Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:28 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  Rutgers and UMCP were added so that the local NY and DC cable companies would carry the BTN. Rutghers and UMCP’s TV rating was and is still not high. In other words, as the more and more cord cutting happens, the value of these schools becomes lower and lower.

The SEC doesn’t add a school soley for the market. This is one of the reasons why I think the SEC’s future is brighter than the BIG’s future. The demographic change also favors the SEC.

See my reply above, but it's not about ratings with carriage fees. It's only needed to be in the DMA footprint whether you watch it or not. And as I said, live sports is the real marketing expansion today, and with gambling, even more so.

Cord cutting and reduction in cable market hasn't slowed down the revenue for live sports, since it's just morphing into streaming services, and apps, which are for the entire B10, and they want it when the Ohio State grad lives in NYC.. Business in Sports Marketing is BOOMING!!!!!

That's what the B10 is capitalizing on. TV markets and dollars. SEC is passion and rivalry driven due to many smaller markets.. ying - yang, either way seems to be working for both of them regardless of you or my feelings

I am not convinced. Yes people still watch sports and slowly migrate to streaming. But why do you think local cable service providers would grow when they are getting a fierce competiton from streaming service providers such as Sling TV, youtube tv, etc?

https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/03/2...streaming/

Let’s say everyone switches to streaming and the local cable companies only provide internet access. Then the only thing matters would be the actual rating. Yes Rutgers may be #5 brand in NYC but if the total rating is well below the BIG average, then obvioulsy the BIG would be better off without Rutgers.

But I think the complete switch to streaming will take a few decades or longer. Until then, the market based approach will stay, particularly for the BIG.

According to the New York Times, Rutgers at 20% is number 1 in the NYC DMA for College team to cheer for. Second Place was Notre Dame at 9%. That's not me talking... So they still carry a large number given the dense population, and 66,000 students with 10,000 graduates being added to the market shows Rutgers with the 9th largest Alumni count in the nation. So "who" thy cheering for?

Then you also missed the other obvious reason the B10 added Rutgers in the NYC market. it's the alumni count of ALL the B10 schools living in the area. They want and need the B10 also...so again, the B10 knew what it was doing...

Also as we approach steaming.. the same carriage fees apply when you are dealing with the streaming accumulators. I stream Direct TV, and they carry certain conference's depending on location and so do the others IF they have a sports package. If you notice, the others follow suit.

I'm sure they looked at the combination of Rutgers, and ALL other B10 alumni living among the 20,000,000 population, so guess who is adding B10 network among those 20,000,000 people in 7,000,000 households. Either way.... it pays... even with a losing Rutgers.

Let's say

I am sure those Big Ten alums watch Rutgers games but let’s see the actual rating numbers.

For 2015-2019, RU was #75
For 2021, RU was #58
For 2017-2021, RU was #69 and the last in the BIG

https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach...c03c689e50
https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach...ef4f315858
https://csnbbs.com/thread-941841.html

I do agree that RU has a potential. It’s just historically RU had never reached to its potential.

One thing that nobody mentioned was that PSU had wanted to have the Eastern companion schools in the BIG. If the candidates were like Temple, WVU, BC, etc., picking RU and UMCP was not a bad move.

(08-07-2022 03:21 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 03:03 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:16 PM)Strut Wrote:  Think about this, Rutgers has more opportunity to move the needle for B1G than even Alabama for SEC. As much as Alabama has won they've probably plateaued in interest overall even if it's a high plateau and maybe even jaded fans that have become somewhat bored with same ole thing every year. If Rutgers were to win on a similar level or even slightly less than Northwestern has over last 10 years or so the NY/NJ DMA would have ratings moonshot they'd be so popular! NYC loves winning of any kind and Rutgers band wagon would be full.

The potential is there in theory. But, in reality?

Population is one thing, but culture is another. And I don't disagree about the potential ceiling Rutgers has. It's the same as any big school in/near a major metropolitan area. Maybe more comparable for Rutgers, or Maryland, is USC/UCLA?

Then again, why is UCLA moving? Same thing that is plaguing Berkeley? And what was prompting Maryland's move?

I think, simply put: popularity be darned, the location both serves for potentially huge fanbases but still poses massive (maybe insurmountable) budgetary/operational challenges. It's maybe even harder for the public schools. And it doesn't seem like any of these metro schools are going yard with respect to their markets. Especially in the northeast. They're said to be "pro towns," where the NFL/NBA/MLB teams dominate the coverage/press.

It's different in the rural areas. And it seems totally different down in the South. It's not to say schools can't try to flex their muscles in athletics. But, if it isn't working, and there's a tax base picking up the bill, or conferences are simply exploiting the general public through cable carriage rates? I've got a problem with that. Or, I feel like I'm owed a due date when a school or conference wants to carry out some of these silly experiments.

Yeah, Rutgers being more valuable for the Big 10 than Alabama is for the SEC? Seriously, WTF?


For starters, Rutgers is a historically bad football program. Maybe Schiano will lead them to some 7-6 type seasons, but Rutgers will probably be back to being a 3-9 type program once he retires. How much of a following Rutgers could gain if they were good is basically a completely irrelevant question. Because there’s no reason to think Rutgers ever will be good. (Let alone as good as Alabama.)

Plus NYC is mostly about pro sports, and a lot of people who live in NYC are actually transplants from another part of the country.

Plus, there are strong basketball programs in the city with St. John's and Stony Brook in the mixed which could eat into Rutgers' limelight.

(08-07-2022 02:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  It is rather suspicious how schools like Washington and Oregon supposedly would negative value for the Big 10, but Rutgers and Maryland are supposed to have positive value. The math to that really doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.


Even if you look at things purely from a “market size” perspective, Washington has 10 US House seats, Maryland has 8 US House seats and New Jersey has 13 US House seats. Washington state is actually bigger than Maryland, and not that much smaller than NJ.


I know that half the rationale is the Washington DC and NYC tv markets, but it almost seems embarrassing to claim they bring these markets when they barely bring the markets of their home states. Washington DC is not really that big of a city, anyway. (If DC was a state, it would be the second least populated state, just barely ahead of Wyoming.)


Piscataway isn’t even as close to NYC as Rutgers fans would have you believe. It’s 40 miles outside NYC, which is 74 minutes with current traffic.

These Rutgers fans are a joke Syracuse actually is in NYS and has fanbase and has reach into NYC as well. And Syracuse actually has a winning BB program unlike New Jersey u

(08-07-2022 02:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  It is rather suspicious how schools like Washington and Oregon supposedly would negative value for the Big 10, but Rutgers and Maryland are supposed to have positive value. The math to that really doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.


Even if you look at things purely from a “market size” perspective, Washington has 10 US House seats, Maryland has 8 US House seats and New Jersey has 13 US House seats. Washington state is actually bigger than Maryland, and not that much smaller than NJ.


I know that half the rationale is the Washington DC and NYC tv markets, but it almost seems embarrassing to claim they bring these markets when they barely bring the markets of their home states. Washington DC is not really that big of a city, anyway. (If DC was a state, it would be the second least populated state, just barely ahead of Wyoming.)


Piscataway isn’t even as close to NYC as Rutgers fans would have you believe. It’s 40 miles outside NYC, which is 74 minutes with current traffic.

So I think there's two things going on here. One is the logic behind the expansion. When Rutgers and Maryland were added a decade ago, the landscape was a bit different. For the Big 10, it was largely about markets as it owned its own network. More specifically, the rates the Big 10 could charge cable providers. And the brilliance there is that they were collecting money from everyone who had cable, not just people who actually wanted to watch the Big 10. So the measure wasn't really fan interest, but the overall population. Now fast forward ten years later. While that cable revenue isn't gone by any stretch, the amount of cable subscribers has fallen. And likely will continue to fall. Correspondingly, the revenue the Big 10 gets from cable will also fall. In hindsight, the decision to add Rutgers and Maryland looked fine in the short-term, but were basically that. Short term decisions with more questionable long-term ramifications. Because of all of this, we know the test is somewhat different in 2022 for potentially adding schools like Washington and Oregon than it was for Maryland and Rutgers. You can't really use the old model.

There's also an additional point to this. To use some economics terms, what are the marginal utility and marginal value of adding more schools? Because of the gains from Maryland and Rutgers plus the projected gains from UCLA/USC and the general growth of the conference, the bar to actually add value to the Big 10 has risen significantly. And we also know its not really just about markets anymore. It's more about drawing actual eyeballs to watch your product, which you can monetize into media rights deals. Schools like Washington and Oregon do well, they just don't do THAT well and the bar is incredibly high.

The other thing going on is that you're really underestimating the markets that Rutgers and Maryland brought. Rutgers allows you to add in the New York media market, which is not only #1 in the country, but over twice the size of # 3 (which is Chicago). Washington, DC is #7. Seattle is #14 and Portland is #25. But Baltimore is #26. Maryland brings both Baltimore and DC. If you looked at overall metro areas, the difference is pretty big (here's a ranking - https://www.thoughtco.com/largest-metrop...as-1435135)

New York/NJ is bringing in 19,261,570 people. No one is close to that. Only Los Angeles is even more than half that size. Washington brings in 6,250,309 with Baltimore bringing in another 2,800,427. Seattle brings in 3,928,498 and Portland brings in 2,472,774. Simply put, Rutgers touches so many households, it didn't even really matter if it could compete on the field under the old model. And Maryland still brings in twice the households as Washington would, plus isn't completely inept like Rutgers. We know markets aren't as important these days, but you can see the difference in size.

(08-07-2022 12:06 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  We know - the Big 10 is screwing the cable subscribers of New Jersey and the Big 10 diluted the product to get the money. We also believe this source of money is falling every year as folks drop cable. Cable was in decline when Rutgers was added. If the Big 10 is stuck with Rutgers forever, and the "extra" money (taken from NJ residents) lasts for 15 years, this is a terrible deal.

Rutgers is a cash cow being milked by the Big 10. They are terrible at sports and now Oh State, Michigan, Penn St, Michigan St fans are stuck seeing their teams play a MAC level game every year. If you have vision for more than 5 years, Rutgers is a terrible addition to the Big 10. Everybody knows why the Big 10 added Rutgers - we just think it was terrible.

Section 200, some things never go out of style. Radio used to be huge prior to TV, but fell off some predictably when TV came. However, radio didn't disappear. For safety and practicality purposes, TV didn't make it to cars and other vehicles for years. So, because of the car, and campers, radio still had a purpose. Some celebrities actually prefer/preferred being on the radio as opposed to being on TV. Rush Limbaugh was one of those celebrities, IMO, even though he did have a TV program for awhile.

So, just like the radio, I expect cable to continue to be around for a very long time, just not quite as popular as it was pre-streaming/streaming early days.

(08-07-2022 11:39 PM)PusherT Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 02:41 PM)Poster Wrote:  It is rather suspicious how schools like Washington and Oregon supposedly would negative value for the Big 10, but Rutgers and Maryland are supposed to have positive value. The math to that really doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.


Even if you look at things purely from a “market size” perspective, Washington has 10 US House seats, Maryland has 8 US House seats and New Jersey has 13 US House seats. Washington state is actually bigger than Maryland, and not that much smaller than NJ.


I know that half the rationale is the Washington DC and NYC tv markets, but it almost seems embarrassing to claim they bring these markets when they barely bring the markets of their home states. Washington DC is not really that big of a city, anyway. (If DC was a state, it would be the second least populated state, just barely ahead of Wyoming.)


Piscataway isn’t even as close to NYC as Rutgers fans would have you believe. It’s 40 miles outside NYC, which is 74 minutes with current traffic.

These Rutgers fans are a joke Syracuse actually is in NYS and has fanbase and has reach into NYC as well. And Syracuse actually has a winning BB program unlike New Jersey u

ROFLMAO - Thanks for the morning laugh Sewercuse.....your "Only" 252 miles from NEW YORK CITY.....problem is most of you don't understand economics and markets......so just for you, one more time, Sewercuse is not in the NYC/NJ DMA Market. No matter how bad Rutgers is/was/will be (and most honest RU fans will admit to this), we will be in, and you will be left out. Get used to it.....

(08-07-2022 12:11 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 12:06 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 11:38 AM)ruinrochester Wrote:  If you want to know how the B10 thinks when a team is added look here at WHY Rutgers was added. This article from back then.. "Big Ten Network hits the NYC jackpot worth tens of millions of dollars".

My memory was pretty good, as I said it was about .90 per household back in 2014 and it actually was $1.00 per Household and now it's up to $1.50 per household as told in the USC/UCLA expansion. From the article......

"Let’s do a little quick “back of the napkin math” on this massive victory for BTN. At last check, the channel charges a $1.00 fee per subscriber per month for those customers within the conference footprint, which NY/NJ now falls into thanks to Rutgers."

and this...

"Back in 2012, Sports Illustrated prophetically estimated that the Big Ten could make $200 million annually from television money on the east coast. And that number may now be on the low end of the spectrum."

http://amp.awfulannouncing.com/2014/big-...llars.html

So I would believe.. Rutgers isn't going anywhere for all those that desire the B10 "remove" Rutgers.. ha ha. We feel for the "left behinds", but to hear here and on Youtube all of the prognosticators hoping for a Rutgers removal so they can get a seat at the Big Table! Sorry.

The commissioner Warren said you "MUST ADD VALUE".. meaning if we ADD YOUR School the pie can NOT get smaller for the other remaining Schools.. Rutgers adds value, maybe now they are nothing but a "schedule filer" for BTN Content. (which I can explain how valuable Content Filler is) But understand the NYC DMA which Rutgers Footprint resides in has over 7,000,000 Households that the B10 used to expand into the North East. and NO Syracuse, AND Boston College do NOT fall into that DMA, which only Rutgers as the only P5 School. Army & Connecticut are not even P5.. So removing Rutgers.. not happening.

And the NYT article did say Rutgers accounts for 20% of the NYC market who root for Rutgers, while 9% root for Notre Dame in the NYC DMA.. What people fail to understand is just how big Rutgers is with almost 70,000 students , and each year adding about 10,000 graduates joining the local area, which is why we have the top ten largest alumni count in the country. AND Rutgers is OLD...very OLD.. Remember... the Birthplace of College Football 150 Years ago was at Rutgers.. and now deeply entrenched into NJ.

Do they need Rutgers in the future to be in those markets?

A 24 school P2, particularly one with ND and FOX (Big East) behind it, doesn't need the "local" school as much to have leverage imo.

No one is ever going to 24. Ever.

The SoCon was two short. We've been pretty close before. We're getting pretty close again.