quick thought - along the same lines as the MWC and PAC 12 possibly partnering in scheduling and resources, could the MAC and Big Ten do the same? Does BTN have all the inventory they need 24/7 365? Could the MAC sell live sports games or reruns on the BTN as a way of adding value to BTN so it isn't so many reruns of old Big Ten games as filler material? If the Big Ten is getting $35 million per team from BTN, can the MAC somehow add more value to the network and then they kick us some peanuts of like $2 million per team if it also increases the value of the network to the point that their $35 million increases to $40 million?

We are in the same footprint and are likely of interest to a huge subset of the same crowd. Why not provide live midweek MAC games to BTN when their are no Big Ten games scheduled?

Thoughts?

^the question is why would they do that?

(05-06-2013 12:31 PM)mj4life Wrote:  ^the question is why would they do that?

I think he's proposing a deal whereby the MAC games add, say, $56 million per year in revenues, and the 2 conferences agree to split that money 50/50. It would mean an extra $2M per team for both B1G and MAC teams. So B1G's motivation would be $2M more per team.

If the B1G would go for it, then I don't see any reason why the MAC shouldn't do it. Seems like it'd give the MAC more games on TV, and more TV dollars.

If the MAC added $28M/yr in value to a network, they would have been paid accordingly. As of now, they only get about $2M/yr total from ESPN. Not $2M/school. $2M total. It's a neat idea, but reruns of MAC games are not worth more than live MAC games. I don't think the BTN is going to pay the MAC more per school than they currently get in total from ESPN.

(05-06-2013 12:55 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  If the MAC added $28M/yr in value to a network, they would have been paid accordingly. As of now, they only get about $2M/yr total from ESPN. Not $2M/school. $2M total. It's a neat idea, but reruns of MAC games are not worth more than live MAC games. I don't think the BTN is going to pay the MAC more per school than they currently get in total from ESPN.

TRUE. Well, perhaps you'd be interested in my perpetual motion machine? or my anti-gravity device? They both work every bit as good as this scheme!

I can envision all the alums of MAC schools calling the BTN to complain that they are showing the Miami/BG game instead of the OSU-Penn State game from 2006.

(05-06-2013 12:25 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  quick thought - along the same lines as the MWC and PAC 12 possibly partnering in scheduling and resources, could the MAC and Big Ten do the same? Does BTN have all the inventory they need 24/7 365? Could the MAC sell live sports games or reruns on the BTN as a way of adding value to BTN so it isn't so many reruns of old Big Ten games as filler material? If the Big Ten is getting $35 million per team from BTN, can the MAC somehow add more value to the network and then they kick us some peanuts of like $2 million per team if it also increases the value of the network to the point that their $35 million increases to $40 million?

We are in the same footprint and are likely of interest to a huge subset of the same crowd. Why not provide live midweek MAC games to BTN when their are no Big Ten games scheduled?
Thoughts?

I don't think the Big 10 is currently getting $35 million per team from the BTN. I thik they currently get about $7 - $10 million per team but I could be wrong.

(05-06-2013 12:55 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  If the MAC added $28M/yr in value to a network, they would have been paid accordingly. As of now, they only get about $2M/yr total from ESPN. Not $2M/school. $2M total. It's a neat idea, but reruns of MAC games are not worth more than live MAC games. I don't think the BTN is going to pay the MAC more per school than they currently get in total from ESPN.

Live games when the Big Ten doesnt have anything else to show. A live MAC game would draw more interest from their target audience than a rerun B1G game. Illinois fans would still have a minor interest in NIU games. Indiana and Purdue fans would have an interest in Ball State games. Most Michigan fans would watch a Western Michigan game when they had nothinh else to do on a Wednesday night when GoBlue isnt playing. Same with Rutgers/Penn state and Buffalo/Umass.

The value is more live programming for the Big Ten Network and targeted advertising as the footprints are the same. More local cable companies would pick up the channel if they knew 2 fan bases in the same area were interested. This adds more value to that targeted BTN than it would to ESPN.

Same reason advertisers want to know where you are located so they can target what you are interested in. MAC would still have ESPN as tier 1 of course.

(05-06-2013 01:05 PM)IberianPanther Wrote:  

(05-06-2013 12:25 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  quick thought - along the same lines as the MWC and PAC 12 possibly partnering in scheduling and resources, could the MAC and Big Ten do the same? Does BTN have all the inventory they need 24/7 365? Could the MAC sell live sports games or reruns on the BTN as a way of adding value to BTN so it isn't so many reruns of old Big Ten games as filler material? If the Big Ten is getting $35 million per team from BTN, can the MAC somehow add more value to the network and then they kick us some peanuts of like $2 million per team if it also increases the value of the network to the point that their $35 million increases to $40 million?

We are in the same footprint and are likely of interest to a huge subset of the same crowd. Why not provide live midweek MAC games to BTN when their are no Big Ten games scheduled?
Thoughts?

I don't think the Big 10 is currently getting $35 million per team from the BTN. I thik they currently get about $7 - $10 million per team but I could be wrong.

You are right, I mistakenly put their entire media value, but the concept still holds.

(05-06-2013 01:06 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(05-06-2013 12:55 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  If the MAC added $28M/yr in value to a network, they would have been paid accordingly. As of now, they only get about $2M/yr total from ESPN. Not $2M/school. $2M total. It's a neat idea, but reruns of MAC games are not worth more than live MAC games. I don't think the BTN is going to pay the MAC more per school than they currently get in total from ESPN.

Live games when the Big Ten doesnt have anything else to show. A live MAC game would draw more interest from their target audience than a rerun B1G game. Illinois fans would still have a minor interest in NIU games. Indiana and Purdue fans would have an interest in Ball State games. Most Michigan fans would watch a Western Michigan game when they had nothinh else to do on a Wednesday night when GoBlue isnt playing. Same with Rutgers/Penn state and Buffalo/Umass.

The value is more live programming for the Big Ten Network and targeted advertising as the footprints are the same. More local cable companies would pick up the channel if they knew 2 fan bases in the same area were interested. This adds more value to that targeted BTN than it would to ESPN.

Same reason advertisers want to know where you are located so they can target what you are interested in. MAC would still have ESPN as tier 1 of course.

OK, even if they got some additional midweek games from the MAC, the BTN is still not going to pay out that much to get them.

That, and the business model for the BTN really doesn't care. They make most of their money from subcriber fees, and very little from advertising. They could show infomercials and get paid better than showing the MAC. The network almost solely exists to show Saturday football and other assorted live B1G events throughout the season. Filler from another conference mixes the message of the network. I'm not saying the idea is DOA, but it's a very hard sell.

What does the MAC offer the BTN?
More subscribers? No. The BTN already covers the MAC footprint.
More viewers? Maybe, but probably not enough to justify the level of revenue suggested.
More ad dollars? Likely not.

So where does the bump in revenue for MAC games come from?

(05-06-2013 12:25 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  quick thought - along the same lines as the MWC and PAC 12 possibly partnering in scheduling and resources, could the MAC and Big Ten do the same? Does BTN have all the inventory they need 24/7 365? Could the MAC sell live sports games or reruns on the BTN as a way of adding value to BTN so it isn't so many reruns of old Big Ten games as filler material? If the Big Ten is getting $35 million per team from BTN, can the MAC somehow add more value to the network and then they kick us some peanuts of like $2 million per team if it also increases the value of the network to the point that their $35 million increases to $40 million?

We are in the same footprint and are likely of interest to a huge subset of the same crowd. Why not provide live midweek MAC games to BTN when their are no Big Ten games scheduled?

Thoughts?

Sounds like a great idea but doesn't ESPN own the MAC's content? If the BTN can't get those weekly MAC football games, there's not enough value in the MAC's other sports. The B1G has 14 teams, so there won't be a shortage of non-revenue material to fill the programming up.

The second B1G didn't get a recruit "from" the MAC because Mom and Pop could watch their kid on BTN, it would be scrapped.

It would make more sense for a BTN/Pac 12 Network partnership-BTN gets more night programming, Pac 12 gets more early programming.

More #MACtion? Mid-American Conference, ESPN open to renegotiation four years into eight year deal. lwww.cbssports.com/collegefootbal…
4:31pm - 6 May 13

@JFowlerCBS

(05-06-2013 04:35 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  More #MACtion? Mid-American Conference, ESPN open to renegotiation four years into eight year deal. lwww.cbssports.com/collegefootbal…
4:31pm - 6 May 13

@JFowlerCBS

45 SEC games that used to be on ESPN are moving to the SEC Network. The ACC is reportingly accellerating negotiations with ESPN to establish the ACC Network. Additionally, in 2016 it will be time to renegotiate the Big-10 contract. More Big-10 games could be moving to the BTN (or the B1G might even be the next big property for the Fox/Fox Sports-1/Fox Sports-2 family--leaving ESPN all together). There could be alot game windows opening up on ABC/ESPN family of networks.

(05-06-2013 04:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-06-2013 04:35 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  More #MACtion? Mid-American Conference, ESPN open to renegotiation four years into eight year deal. lwww.cbssports.com/collegefootbal…
4:31pm - 6 May 13

@JFowlerCBS

45 SEC games that used to be on ESPN are moving to the SEC Network. The ACC is reportingly accellerating negotiations with ESPN to establish the ACC Network. Additionally, in 2016 it will be time to renegotiate the Big-10 contract. More Big-10 games could be moving to the BTN (or the B1G might even be the next big property for the Fox/Fox Sports-1/Fox Sports-2 family--leaving ESPN all together). There could be alot game windows opening up on ABC/ESPN family of networks.

Yep

There will also be an extensive network of broadcast TV stations and RSNs left behind by the SEC that has its roots to the 1970s. The ACC may create a similar void if it starts a network. The AAC, MAC, and Sun Belt should be prime beneficiaries.

I could see it, but think both sides would be a little hesitant. For the MAC, this means weeknight games and to the extent they are going to have those, they'd prefer them on ESPN. For the Big Ten, they want it to be highlighting their schools and care about that in addition to profit. I'd still say go for it (they can pick up what ESPN doesn't), but I doubt it would happen.

Problem with BTN is that way fewer people have that, AND their goal is to make the Big 14 teams look good. That attitude would come through in broadcasts, at the expense of the MAC.