(07-04-2019 05:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 05:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 01:15 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 06:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  Wrong.

Big 12 has an average $20 million in media but distributed $35 million. Big 10 has a similar $15 million or so separate from media ($440 million Fox/ESPN/CBS + $110 million or more from BTN-which comes to about $40 million per school).

You say I'm "wrong", and then admit the B1G gets about $40m per school in media money?

The BTN is media money, right?

Try this....

The Big10 reported record revenues of $759 for 2017-2018 year, distributing roughly $54 million per member institution.
This dwarfed other "P5" conferences like the BIgXII, which announcedd it will distribute $38.8 million to each of its ten member institutions.

Obviously, there is a gap between $759 million and $388 million. CFP payments for 2017-2018 were roughly equal, in fact favoring the BigXII $69.84 million to $68.87 million. The Big Ten Network is a large chunk of the difference, with csnbbs posters estimating $110 million from that.
The biggest difference between the two conferences - and the biggest single chunk of each conference's revenue - is in primary media rights contracts. Big10 primary media rights are under ESPN and Fox deals adding up to 6 years $2.64 Billion - $440 million per year. The BigXII's primary media rights contracts were worth $200 million per year (prior to the April 2019 expansion of ESPN buying the three CCGs dropped by Fox and expanding BigXII coverage on ESPN+).

Why is the Big10 primary media rights contract worth 2.2 times what the BigXII contract is worth?
In 2017, the Big10's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 150,425,000 million viewers and the BigXII's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 72,583,000 viewers - 2.07 times as many viewers for 2.2 times the dollars.
Big10 had 307,104,000 viewers aggregated 2017-2018, compared to BigXII's 173,464,000, down to 1.77 times as many viewers getting 2.2 times the money.

The primary media rights contracts are proportional value to viewers across all the FBS conferences.

Now you've had to limit yourself to talk of "primary media rights" contracts, and to a comparison of P5 vs P5, a comparison I didn't make. It wouldn't surprise me if P5 conferences are paid based roughly proportional to ratings, because P5 conferences are categorically similar in terms of overall brand value. The intangibles wash out, so what is left are the hard numbers.

What started this was my contention that the AAC and ESPN will settle the UConn issue in a revenue-neutral manner, the left-behinds will get the same $7m they would have got had UConn remained.

In contrast, AAC fanboys who want to think they will get a bump are insisting that if you parse UConn's football ratings, they were really only worth $3m a year or something, whatever it was you came up with a few posts ago. As stated above, my belief is that ratings alone don't determine TV rights, there are intangible "brand" factors that matter as well, and UConn is the most well-known and biggest brand among all full-member AAC schools. That in my view will cancel out the poor ratings for their poor football team and so the money will be a wash.

We will probably find out soon enough, and if the AAC fanboys are right, and if ESPN agrees to let the AAC keep a good portion of what UConn was going to get, heck any portion, I will be the first to admit I was wrong.

As for the AAC vs B1G, the bottom line is, the AAC is currently making $2m in media money, and beginning in late 2020, more than a year from now, will begin making a little over $6m, rising incrementally to just shy of $8m over the next 12 years.

The B1G is, right now, probably making about $43m in media money. And whereas the AAC number will never rise higher than the piddly $8m it caps at over the next 12 years, the B1G has seen its numbers rise each year, and they get a new contract in 2023, just 2.5 years after the AAC deal kicks in. Again, unless you think that deal will be stagnant or go down, things will just get worse.

So the AAC isn't making a ratings-percentage of B1G media money now, they won't be in 2021, and I will bet you they won't be in 2023 and beyond.

But hey .... we shall see.

The funny thing is---after thinking about it---it may end up working out just as the AAC "fanboys" insist, regardless of how it turns out. The "fanboys" (as you call them) say ESPN wont cut the AAC TV deal because most of the value was in football and UConn football had little value. Maybe that happens. I it does, the rest of the teams then can split the UConn share and get a slight raise for a couple of years until the decide on a 12th member.

Now---lets say, the "fanboys" are wrong. ESPN says UConn was a loss---but if you replace the inventory with someone off our list, we will leave the payout the same. I think that's actually a fairly likely outcome. What will happen is the new team will enter the league----getting a partial pay out for a couple of years and pay an entry fee---so the 11 AAC teams could still end up seeing a small short term raise for a couple of years until the new team gets a full share.

In other words, its fairly likely the 11 remaining AAC teams will see a short term bump in pay either way.

FWIW, I hope I am wrong, as USF can use all the money we can get. Our top administration has done an amazing job the past 20 years, when I return to campus these days, I can tangibly see how much the facilities in every area have improved since I matriculated there in the 1980s and into the 1990s. Some areas of campus are basically unrecognizable, in a very good way. If there was a national award for "best run public university since circa 2000", I think USF would be a finalist for it. But in athletics, we like all G5 are falling further behind every year.

And yes, I haven't addressed the issue of if the AAC backfills and gets a 12th full member. I expect that in that case, the AAC won't select anyone unless ESPN guarantees that this new member will not reduce the payout of $7m guaranteed to the other 11 under the original deal.

The only possible exception is if the reduction is small, and a 12th member adds value in some other important way, such as solving a CCG problem with the NCAA or internal conference scheduling problem and the like. Ideally, the new member would actually boost our value a bit, but I think that given what's out there, that's very unlikely.