(03-12-2013 02:35 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  Well, the fact that we'd probably send another team to the dance with 12 vs 10 is another incentive.

true, but that's another thing that really doesn't impact the fox aspect of things.

Also say we send 5 teams in 10 team conference to tourney- 1 makes elite 8, 2 more make sweet 16, other 2 are 1 and done. That's 12 units- or 1.20 per school.
We add 2 more teams, 1 more makes tourney and goes 1 and done. That's 13 units/12 schools- or 1.08 per school.

It's a net loss then to do that.

(03-12-2013 01:49 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 01:37 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 01:21 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I get what you are saying. But basically per team its 5 million for 10 teams per year or 5 million for 12 teams per year. The total value increases, but the real per school value doesn't. There's no incentive to expand there.. However if it was 4.5 million for 10 teams per year or 5 million for 12 teams- there would be the incintive to expand. That increases the real value per school.

That might be true for the revenue side, but let's not forget about the expense side of the ledger. I think that if you factor in other costs, then there's still more immediate incentive to expand. For instance, legal fees and the startup expenses for the league are pretty much fixed costs - they're going to be the same whether there are 10 or 12 teams. So, to the extent that those expenses have to come off the top of that new TV contract (which might very well be the case), the fact that the league is getting $50 million total in year 1 instead of under $42 million total (even if the per school average is the same on paper) could be a pretty material difference. (The legal expenses alone for the football schools in the split negotiations were $15 million, so that figure will likely be even more for the C7 because they have those negotiation costs plus all of the fees for starting a new league from scratch.) That fixed cost burden would also be shared over time by 12 schools as opposed to 10.

At the same time, the conference office typically takes a share of the TV contract for administrative expenses (usually equal to the share of a school). So, the per school average for the TV rights is really closer to $50 million divided by 13 shares (12 schools plus the league office) versus $41.67 million divided by 11 shares (10 schools plus the league office). With a 12 team league, that averages to $3,846,154 per school per year, while a 10 team league average would be $3,787,879 per school. It's not a huge amount, but there is a slightly higher payout for a 12 team league assuming that the conference office takes the equivalent of school's full share of the TV contract.

On the balance, the fixed costs would seem to be a much bigger deal. Having 12 teams right away instead of 10 means that the fixed legal and startup costs could be wiped out much more quickly with less impact to each individual school.

True so it ever so slightly makes it worth more to go 12 over 10- by like 60k.

All I'm arguing is that I'd have thought Fox would have given us more incintive to go to 12. I mean 60k isn't much at all. What you are talking about is more on our side of the house than Fox.

(03-12-2013 02:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 02:01 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 01:49 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 01:37 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 01:21 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I get what you are saying. But basically per team its 5 million for 10 teams per year or 5 million for 12 teams per year. The total value increases, but the real per school value doesn't. There's no incentive to expand there.. However if it was 4.5 million for 10 teams per year or 5 million for 12 teams- there would be the incintive to expand. That increases the real value per school.

That might be true for the revenue side, but let's not forget about the expense side of the ledger. I think that if you factor in other costs, then there's still more immediate incentive to expand. For instance, legal fees and the startup expenses for the league are pretty much fixed costs - they're going to be the same whether there are 10 or 12 teams. So, to the extent that those expenses have to come off the top of that new TV contract (which might very well be the case), the fact that the league is getting $50 million total in year 1 instead of under $42 million total (even if the per school average is the same on paper) could be a pretty material difference. (The legal expenses alone for the football schools in the split negotiations were $15 million, so that figure will likely be even more for the C7 because they have those negotiation costs plus all of the fees for starting a new league from scratch.) That fixed cost burden would also be shared over time by 12 schools as opposed to 10.

At the same time, the conference office typically takes a share of the TV contract for administrative expenses (usually equal to the share of a school). So, the per school average for the TV rights is really closer to $50 million divided by 13 shares (12 schools plus the league office) versus $41.67 million divided by 11 shares (10 schools plus the league office). With a 12 team league, that averages to $3,846,154 per school per year, while a 10 team league average would be $3,787,879 per school. It's not a huge amount, but there is a slightly higher payout for a 12 team league assuming that the conference office takes the equivalent of school's full share of the TV contract.

On the balance, the fixed costs would seem to be a much bigger deal. Having 12 teams right away instead of 10 means that the fixed legal and startup costs could be wiped out much more quickly with less impact to each individual school.

True so it ever so slightly makes it worth more to go 12 over 10- by like 60k.

All I'm arguing is that I'd have thought Fox would have given us more incintive to go to 12. I mean 60k isn't much at all. What you are talking about is more on our side of the house than Fox.

You talk a lot about perception Stever, what makes both Fox and the Big East look like they are both invested in being in the big time? 600 mil sure says that about both sides. More than 500 thats for sure.

Right but anyone who is anything with math knows 500 for 10 and 600 for 12 is the exact same. I'd say the perception there would be nearly the same. All I'm saying is I would have thought Fox would have given us more of an incintive to go 12- because of just how much it benefits them. On our side it makes sense. That's all...

(03-12-2013 02:35 PM)JPSchmack Wrote:  Well, the fact that we'd probably send another team to the dance with 12 vs 10 is another incentive.

Exactly. Less costs associated with starting up and running the league + much more potential for NCAA credits. $60K is so far off base.

You guys aren't getting what I'm trying to say..

I agree 100% with you about the 10 vs 12 on our end.

All I'm trying to say is I would have thought fox would have given us more of an increase to ensure that we go 12. The money for us right now despite what all of you say is close enough at 10 vs 12 that it's nearly meaningless. I'd have thought that Fox would be making absolutely for sure that we're going to 12. Right now, it seems like that's just not the case at all....

(03-12-2013 03:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  You guys aren't getting what I'm trying to say..

I agree 100% with you about the 10 vs 12 on our end.

All I'm trying to say is I would have thought fox would have given us more of an increase to ensure that we go 12. The money for us right now despite what all of you say is close enough at 10 vs 12 that it's nearly meaningless. I'd have thought that Fox would be making absolutely for sure that we're going to 12. Right now, it seems like that's just not the case at all....

Im saying that it was prob part of an agreement to get out early and get the name. It was 500 mil for 12 if we started in '14. Now we start a year earlier helping them out so we now get 600 mil for 12 in '13. Gives us incentive to do or give up whatever we can to get out right away.

(03-12-2013 03:09 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 03:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  You guys aren't getting what I'm trying to say..

I agree 100% with you about the 10 vs 12 on our end.

All I'm trying to say is I would have thought fox would have given us more of an increase to ensure that we go 12. The money for us right now despite what all of you say is close enough at 10 vs 12 that it's nearly meaningless. I'd have thought that Fox would be making absolutely for sure that we're going to 12. Right now, it seems like that's just not the case at all....

Im saying that it was prob part of an agreement to get out early and get the name. It was 500 mil for 12 if we started in '14. Now we start a year earlier helping them out so we now get 600 mil for 12 in '13. Gives us incentive to do or give up whatever we can to get out right away.

look at the article:
Fox won them over with a 12-year deal worth about $500 million, according to reports. But the contract could spike to $600 million if the conference grows to a dozen teams, according to two people briefed on the contract but not authorized to speak publicly about its terms.

So it's 500 million for 10 teams it seems like now, but could go to 600 mil for 12 teams. It seems as if Fox bumped up BOTH numbers for 10 and 12.

(03-11-2013 08:42 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  what? no mention of the school that shall not be named?

You so bad. LoL

(03-12-2013 03:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 03:09 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 03:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  You guys aren't getting what I'm trying to say..

I agree 100% with you about the 10 vs 12 on our end.

All I'm trying to say is I would have thought fox would have given us more of an increase to ensure that we go 12. The money for us right now despite what all of you say is close enough at 10 vs 12 that it's nearly meaningless. I'd have thought that Fox would be making absolutely for sure that we're going to 12. Right now, it seems like that's just not the case at all....

Im saying that it was prob part of an agreement to get out early and get the name. It was 500 mil for 12 if we started in '14. Now we start a year earlier helping them out so we now get 600 mil for 12 in '13. Gives us incentive to do or give up whatever we can to get out right away.

look at the article:
Fox won them over with a 12-year deal worth about $500 million, according to reports. But the contract could spike to $600 million if the conference grows to a dozen teams, according to two people briefed on the contract but not authorized to speak publicly about its terms.

So it's 500 million for 10 teams it seems like now, but could go to 600 mil for 12 teams. It seems as if Fox bumped up BOTH numbers for 10 and 12.

Yes, because we got out early AND got the name. What was it, 400 for 10 and 500 for 12 which was reported before? So they say if you can get out for '13 AND get the name we will bump it up by 100 mil. Now that it's looking like we will have both the Fox deal now looks like 500 for 10 and 600 for 12. Thats what was Fox's incentive to increase the deal and our incentive to leave almost all the money behind.

It makes total sense to me for both sides.

(03-12-2013 09:14 AM)Title Wrote:  SLU, for example, is a team of all juniors and seniors who haven't (and aren't) recruiting at a level to sustain the level: they are on the typical great mid major arc. They never have done anything in the past to suggest its repeatable.

You don't think that being a part of the new Big East, and playing a conference tournament in MSG, will instantly help with recruiting, thus helping make them a better program? I think Fox wants SLU in.

(03-12-2013 03:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  You guys aren't getting what I'm trying to say..

I agree 100% with you about the 10 vs 12 on our end.

All I'm trying to say is I would have thought fox would have given us more of an increase to ensure that we go 12.

I actually get what you are saying, but I don't think you are getting what we are saying. Fox is essentially paying the same value for teams 11 and 12, which by all accounts probably don't carry the same value as teams 1-7 or even teams 8-10 otherwise they'd already have be added, to expand. That is a big deal. Essentially that's an extra $8.3 million a year for your fourth and fifth expansion choices. By contrast the entire A12 is getting $20 million for 10 teams, and only $3 million a year for two additional teams, plus a CCG for football. That is a big bonus, and that is certainly a "premium" to go to 12 teams. One reason the Big XII won't expand now is precisely becuase they cannot get that deal (expand and have the money be the same per school) with teams available to them. So that is a big deal.

Add in the additional NCAA credit possibilities, the additional NCAA tournament revenue not tied to NCAA performance - (in addition to NCAA credits, conferences earn an addiitonal $1.5-2.0 million per team from the NCAA through the Acadademic Enhancement Fund ($67k per team), the Grant In Aid (varies but larger number of grant in aid members increases payout), Sports Sponsorship Fund (more teams and more sports sponsorerd, the higher the payout), and the Student Assistance Fund work (like the Grant in Aid, the more teams and more students athletes, the more money for the conference) - and you have even more money for the conference.

(03-12-2013 03:50 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 03:04 PM)stever20 Wrote:  You guys aren't getting what I'm trying to say..

I agree 100% with you about the 10 vs 12 on our end.

All I'm trying to say is I would have thought fox would have given us more of an increase to ensure that we go 12.

I actually get what you are saying, bu tI don't think you are getting what we are saying. Fox is essentially paying the same value for teams 11 and 12, whcih by all accounts probably don't carry the same value as teams 1-7 or 8-10 otherwise they'd already be added, to expand. One reasont he Big XII won't expand now is precisely becuase they cannot get that deal (expand and have the money be the same per school) with teams available to them. So that is a big deal.

Add in the additional NCAA credit possibilities, the additional NCAA tournament revenue not tied to NCAA performance - (in addition to NCAA credits, conferences earn an addiitonal $1.5-2.0 million per team from the NCAA through the Acadademic Enhancement Fund ($67k per team), the Grant In Aid (varies but larger number of grant in aid members increases payout), Sports Sponsorship Fund (more teams and more sports sponsorerd, the higher the payout), and the Student Assistance Fund work (like the Grant in Aid, the more teams and more students athletes, the more money for the conference) - and you have even more money for the conference.

Stever is asking what is in it for Fox to bump up the contract and i am trying to explain it must have to do with us getting out for '13 AND getting the name so we get a bump in the deal.

(03-12-2013 03:52 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Stever is asking what is in it for Fox to bump up the contract and i am trying to explain it must have to do with us getting out for '13 AND getting the name so we get a bump in the deal.

No, that was addressed earlier. What he then said was he thought Fox would pay above and beyond the initial contract (per team) to entice the Big East to expand, and since they are not paying more per team, there is no incentive to go beyond ten teams. That is what we were explaining is not quite accurate. There is a benefit to the conference for that deal, and a benefit to expand. TV money is not the only revenue source.

The thing is, the more teams you have in the conference is the more games available to fox. I get what you are saying about teams 11&12 being worth less than 8-10. I do wonder and said so earlier if the money for 11 & 12 is contingent on it being specific schools.

One thing to keep in mind. Say our other revenue outside the TV deal is 50 million for 10 teams(naming rights for BET, hoops money, etc). 5 million per school. For us to break even, we'd have to make 10 million more. Even if the team made tourney each year and made sweet 16 each year- 3 per year- 18 total- that's only 4.5 million dollars. I mean- VCU(not pushing it, but just using as example because I think they would have the most units)- right now this year would have 10 units, worth 2.5 million dollars. That's with 4 NCAA spots and a final 4. The most of any of the new additions for this year are Butler and Xavier with 16 units each. So if they were teams 11 and 12- they would bring 8 million more. The only other revenue that I see them bringing would be the fact we'd get an extra session in the BET.

(03-12-2013 04:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing is, the more teams you have in the conference is the more games available to fox. I get what you are saying about teams 11&12 being worth less than 8-10. I do wonder and said so earlier if the money for 11 & 12 is contingent on it being specific schools.

One thing to keep in mind. Say our other revenue outside the TV deal is 50 million for 10 teams(naming rights for BET, hoops money, etc). 5 million per school. For us to break even, we'd have to make 10 million more. Even if the team made tourney each year and made sweet 16 each year- 3 per year- 18 total- that's only 4.5 million dollars. I mean- VCU(not pushing it, but just using as example because I think they would have the most units)- right now this year would have 10 units, worth 2.5 million dollars. That's with 4 NCAA spots and a final 4. The most of any of the new additions for this year are Butler and Xavier with 16 units each. So if they were teams 11 and 12- they would bring 8 million more. The only other revenue that I see them bringing would be the fact we'd get an extra session in the BET.

Since Fox will pay us the same per team for 10 or 12 I don't think they care what specific schools we bring in. I think they know about the Thamel 5 from the get go and probably this was all hashed out prior to us initiating the split when they pitched us the idea. "Hey the 7 of you guys with these 5 similar schools are worth this much to us. If you can get out by '13 and get the name we'll bump it up this much."

(03-12-2013 04:33 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 04:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing is, the more teams you have in the conference is the more games available to fox. I get what you are saying about teams 11&12 being worth less than 8-10. I do wonder and said so earlier if the money for 11 & 12 is contingent on it being specific schools.

One thing to keep in mind. Say our other revenue outside the TV deal is 50 million for 10 teams(naming rights for BET, hoops money, etc). 5 million per school. For us to break even, we'd have to make 10 million more. Even if the team made tourney each year and made sweet 16 each year- 3 per year- 18 total- that's only 4.5 million dollars. I mean- VCU(not pushing it, but just using as example because I think they would have the most units)- right now this year would have 10 units, worth 2.5 million dollars. That's with 4 NCAA spots and a final 4. The most of any of the new additions for this year are Butler and Xavier with 16 units each. So if they were teams 11 and 12- they would bring 8 million more. The only other revenue that I see them bringing would be the fact we'd get an extra session in the BET.

Since Fox will pay us the same per team for 10 or 12 I don't think they care what specific schools we bring in. I think they know about the Thamel 5 from the get go and probably this was all hashed out prior to us initiating the split when they pitched us the idea. "Hey the 7 of you guys with these 5 similar schools are worth this much to us. If you can get out by '13 and get the name we'll bump it up this much."

I think you are naïve if you think Fox doesn't care which specific schools we bring in. Of course they care. We'll see when push comes to shove what exactly happens.

What you have to realize is beyond what the actual schools bring in themselves, it is easier to get 5 teams in the NCAA in a 12 team league than a 10 team league. There is a bias against teams with losing conference records as it is. Even adding two teams keeps you even in TV money, and allows you one additional NCAA team per year, even if that team never wins a game, it earns the conference an additional $2 million over the life of they payout, which means after it has accumlated a few years, you will see a $2 million a year increase in NCAA payouts from the basketball fund (not to mention the other payout increases I mentioned above). While it is not much, that is an average of $167k per team per year additional. If you assume that last team in, wins one game every two years, then you're talking an average of $3 million extra per year for the conference, plus an additional $4 million per year from other NCAA tournament payouts not tied to performance.

And, more importantly, 12 teams helps protect you from down years. One problem the o.BE had from football is with only 8 teams, if your usual top teams had a bad year, the entire league went down with it. Two extra teams gives you two more shots to have a good team or two. And if they have bad years, well it gives the top teams two more victories to add to their resume. After being in the Big East I actually think 16 is a good number for a basketball conference if you can find enough horses. There aren't that many out there. 12 is good. 14 woudl be good if you went a bit outside of the footprint (Gonxaga) but otherwise 12 is good. It allows you to play every team once, two set teams twice every year, then half of the rest of the teams twice one year, and the other half twice the next year. It's a beautiful set up.

(03-12-2013 04:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think you are naïve if you think Fox doesn't care which specific schools we bring in. Of course they care. We'll see when push comes to shove what exactly happens.

Can we keep that discussion to the other thread please?

But to note, they likely have their say, but not final say. Meaning they can suggest someone (their suggestion was Gonzaga) but it doesn't mean it will end up being them.

(03-12-2013 04:47 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  What you have to realize is beyond what the actual schools bring in themselves, it is easier to get 5 teams in the NCAA in a 12 team league than a 10 team league. There is a bias against teams with losing conference records as it is. Even adding two teams keeps you even in TV money, and allows you one additional NCAA team per year, even if that team never wins a game, it earns the conference an additional $2 million over the life of they payout, which means after it has accumlated a few years, you will see a $2 million a year increase in NCAA payouts from the basketball fund (not to mention the other payout increases I mentioned above). While it is not much, that is an average of $167k per team per year additional. If you assume that last team in, wins one game every two years, then you're talking an average of $3 million extra per year for the conference, plus an additional $4 million per year from other NCAA tournament payouts not tied to performance.

And, more importantly, 12 teams helps protect you from down years. One problem the o.BE had from football is with only 8 teams, if your usual top teams had a bad year, the entire league went down with it. Two extra teams gives you two more shots to have a good team or two. And if they have bad years, well it gives the top teams two more victories to add to their resume. After being in the Big East I actually think 16 is a good number for a basketball conference if you can find enough horses. There aren't that many out there. 12 is good. 14 woudl be good if you went a bit outside of the footprint (Gonxaga) but otherwise 12 is good. It allows you to play every team once, two set teams twice every year, then half of the rest of the teams twice one year, and the other half twice the next year. It's a beautiful set up.

trust me, I get this. I agree with you 100%.

All I am saying is Fox from a money perspective didn't give us a huge incentive to expand. I mean up until now we had heard that the money for going to 12 would be larger than going to 10- per school- as an incentive to go bigger.. Now that doesn't seem to be the case. at all. I wonder from a fox perspective if maybe they realized they didn't have as many holes on the schedule and don't need 12 teams. I mean, I wasn't expecting to see like a UFC Wednesday night on there at all. Thursday nights will be a big Pac 12 night with how they schedule(typically Thu/Sat).

(03-12-2013 04:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 04:33 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 04:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The thing is, the more teams you have in the conference is the more games available to fox. I get what you are saying about teams 11&12 being worth less than 8-10. I do wonder and said so earlier if the money for 11 & 12 is contingent on it being specific schools.

One thing to keep in mind. Say our other revenue outside the TV deal is 50 million for 10 teams(naming rights for BET, hoops money, etc). 5 million per school. For us to break even, we'd have to make 10 million more. Even if the team made tourney each year and made sweet 16 each year- 3 per year- 18 total- that's only 4.5 million dollars. I mean- VCU(not pushing it, but just using as example because I think they would have the most units)- right now this year would have 10 units, worth 2.5 million dollars. That's with 4 NCAA spots and a final 4. The most of any of the new additions for this year are Butler and Xavier with 16 units each. So if they were teams 11 and 12- they would bring 8 million more. The only other revenue that I see them bringing would be the fact we'd get an extra session in the BET.

Since Fox will pay us the same per team for 10 or 12 I don't think they care what specific schools we bring in. I think they know about the Thamel 5 from the get go and probably this was all hashed out prior to us initiating the split when they pitched us the idea. "Hey the 7 of you guys with these 5 similar schools are worth this much to us. If you can get out by '13 and get the name we'll bump it up this much."

I think you are naïve if you think Fox doesn't care which specific schools we bring in. Of course they care. We'll see when push comes to shove what exactly happens.

We will, and I think one if us will be more upset than the other.

That's the part I don't think you get. Most conferences had had hard time getting equal money for new additions unless they are home runs (Nebraska to Big Ten, Texas A&M to SEC). When you are getting the same value for additional teams you are "moving up" as you do for your current teams, that is a BIG incentive.

(03-12-2013 04:49 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 04:43 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think you are naïve if you think Fox doesn't care which specific schools we bring in. Of course they care. We'll see when push comes to shove what exactly happens.

Can we keep that discussion to the other thread please?

But to note, they likely have their say, but not final say. Meaning they can suggest someone (their suggestion was Gonzaga) but it doesn't mean it will end up being them.

Right, but as I contend they can say 10 teams are worth 500 million, but to get 600 million, you must take x and y teams. If we take teams s and t- we don't get the 600 million. So, while you are right, we ultimately have the final say, from a $$$ perspective, we have to add x and y.