Here's another way to look at it: there were 13 weeks last season, so if Fox pays $250M/year for 1st choice and (let's say) ESPN pays $100M/year for 2nd choice, that works out to $250M/13 = $19M/week for Fox and $100/13 = $7.7M/week for ESPN...

Let's take Saturday, October 17, 2015, and assume a $250/$100 million Fox/ESPN split.

Fox, for $19M gets
1. #7 Michigan vs #12 Michigan State - Fox
2. #1 Ohio State vs Penn State (5-2) - FS/1
_______________________________
ESPN, for $7.7M gets
3. #17 Iowa vs #20 Northwestern. - ABC
4. Nebraska (3-4) vs Minnesota (4-3) - ESPN

Now, does anyone think Fox agrees to let ESPN has 1. or 2.?

(04-25-2016 08:36 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Here's another way to look at it: there were 13 weeks last season, so if Fox pays $250M/year for 1st choice and (let's say) ESPN pays $100M/year for 2nd choice, that works out to $250M/13 = $19M/week for Fox and $100/13 = $7.7M/week for ESPN...

Let's take Saturday, October 17, 2015, and assume a $250/$100 million Fox/ESPN split.

Fox, for $19M gets
1. #7 Michigan vs #12 Michigan State - Fox
2. #1 Ohio State vs Penn State (5-2) - FS/1
_______________________________
ESPN, for $7.7M gets
3. #17 Iowa vs #20 Northwestern. - ABC
4. Nebraska (3-4) vs Minnesota (4-3) - ESPN

Now, does anyone think Fox agrees to let ESPN has 1. or 2.?

Not if Fox is paying $250M and ESPN is paying $100M.
But if the money split is closer to even, the game split is closer to even. Say Fox is paying $200 and ESPN $150, then Fox #1 and #3 or even #1 and #4 could be on the table.

(04-25-2016 08:40 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-25-2016 08:36 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Here's another way to look at it: there were 13 weeks last season, so if Fox pays $250M/year for 1st choice and (let's say) ESPN pays $100M/year for 2nd choice, that works out to $250M/13 = $19M/week for Fox and $100/13 = $7.7M/week for ESPN...

Let's take Saturday, October 17, 2015, and assume a $250/$100 million Fox/ESPN split.

Fox, for $19M gets
1. #7 Michigan vs #12 Michigan State - Fox
2. #1 Ohio State vs Penn State (5-2) - FS/1
_______________________________
ESPN, for $7.7M gets
3. #17 Iowa vs #20 Northwestern. - ABC
4. Nebraska (3-4) vs Minnesota (4-3) - ESPN

Now, does anyone think Fox agrees to let ESPN has 1. or 2.?

Not if Fox is paying $250M and ESPN is paying $100M.
But if the money split is closer to even, the game split is closer to even. Say Fox is paying $200 and ESPN $150, then Fox #1 and #3 or even #1 and #4 could be on the table.

Right. Now the current average price of a tier 1 or 2 P5 game is somewhere between $4.5 and $5 million - basically everything but the tier 3 scraps. Fox has offered to pay up to TWICE that amount (presumably for the tier 1 cream). Why in the world would ESPN match that when they can continue to load up on games from the other 4 conferences at the going rate? That's why I'm convinced that ESPN will offer a competitive tier 2 rate (e.g. the $3.85M average shown above) and pass on tier 1 at that price.

you as a ACC fanboy are HOPING that ESPN passes. totally understand that.

(04-26-2016 07:19 AM)stever20 Wrote:  you as a ACC fanboy are HOPING that ESPN passes. totally understand that.

If they don't pass it will end up being good for everybody, because it will mean that the market rate has increased.

(04-26-2016 07:19 AM)stever20 Wrote:  you as a ACC fanboy are HOPING that ESPN passes. totally understand that.

It amazes me how Big Ten fans can come on here and brag about how their favorite conference is going to make a BAZILLION DOLLARS more than everybody else and how they are going to TAKE whatever teams they want... yet it's the "ACC Fan Boys" who are delusional?

It's the ACC fans who think that ESPN is going to bail their sorry asses out and protect them from the big bad ole Big Ten.

No offense to the last two posters (and fans of B10 and ACC schools) but the amount of money being tossed around to schools in the P5 vs. the scraps the G5 schools receive sickens me. Frankly I fail to see how this all lives up to the mission statement of the NCAA:

"Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount".

I have basically had to give up any dream of my alma mater competing in the two revenue sports. Seriously... I don't watch college athletics anymore... the WWE is more on the up and up in my eyes.

(04-26-2016 07:49 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 07:19 AM)stever20 Wrote:  you as a ACC fanboy are HOPING that ESPN passes. totally understand that.

It amazes me how Big Ten fans can come on here and brag about how their favorite conference is going to make a BAZILLION DOLLARS more than everybody else and how they are going to TAKE whatever teams they want... yet it's the "ACC Fan Boys" who are delusional?

If the B1G offered VT a deal that included $20 million more a year than what you are making in the ACC, I have little doubt that VT would jump at the offer to join the B1G. Do you?

(04-26-2016 08:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 07:49 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 07:19 AM)stever20 Wrote:  you as a ACC fanboy are HOPING that ESPN passes. totally understand that.

It amazes me how Big Ten fans can come on here and brag about how their favorite conference is going to make a BAZILLION DOLLARS more than everybody else and how they are going to TAKE whatever teams they want... yet it's the "ACC Fan Boys" who are delusional?

If the B1G offered VT a deal that included $20 million more a year than what you are making in the ACC, I have little doubt that VT would jump at the offer to join the B1G. Do you?

They'd be foolish not to consider it, but I don't think it would be automatic. I'd like to think there are other motivations than just greed. Apparently for some, money is all that matters...?

(04-26-2016 08:26 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  No offense to the last two posters (and fans of B10 and ACC schools) but the amount of money being tossed around to schools in the P5 vs. the scraps the G5 schools receive sickens me. Frankly I fail to see how this all lives up to the mission statement of the NCAA:

"Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount".

I have basically had to give up any dream of my alma mater competing in the two revenue sports. Seriously... I don't watch college athletics anymore... the WWE is more on the up and up in my eyes.

I feel for fans of schools like Cincinnati which have been held down by another in state school for decades. Georgia Tech is somewhat in the same boat now. It isn't fair to the students... but I guess satellite camps are a more important issue?

Trying to get the discussion back on track to the value of the second half of the "Tier 1/2" rights of the B1G, I thought it would be useful to see what games would be available in 2016. I looked at each week and selected the Top 4 or 5 games available to Fox and/or ESPN/NBC/CBS. The entire schedule can be found here.

For purposes of discussion, I am assuming that ESPN is selected for the second package and Fox and ESPN alternate every week but you can substitute another network. I have also included 58 games, which is approximately the size of the current ESPN package. One can argue about the selections but the bottom line is that, after the first three weeks, there are plenty of quality games each week for the second half. It is also easier to see why Fox paid what they did as the quality and quantity of games for Fox and FS1 increases dramatically compared to the last two seasons.

September 1-3:

Fox: LSU vs. Wisconsin
ABC: Oregon State vs. Minnesota
FS1: Bowling Green vs. Ohio State
ESPN: Western Michigan vs. Northwestern

September 10:

ABC: Iowa State vs. Iowa
Fox: North Carolina vs. Illinois
ESPN: Tulsa vs. Ohio State
FS1: Central Florida vs. Michigan

September 17:

Fox: Oregon vs. Nebraska
ABC: Colorado vs. Michigan
FS1: Temple vs. Penn State
ESPN: Duke vs. Northwestern

September 24:

ABC: Wisconsin vs. Michigan State
Fox: Penn State vs. Michigan
ESPN: Nebraska vs. Northwestern
FS1: Iowa vs. Rutgers

October 1:

Fox: Wisconsin vs. Michigan
ABC: Rutgers vs. Ohio State
FS1: Northwestern vs. Iowa
ESPN: Michigan State vs. Indiana
ESPN2: Illinois vs. Nebraska

October 8:

ABC: Michigan vs. Rutgers
Fox: Maryland vs. Penn State
ESPN: Iowa vs. Minnesota
FS1: BYU vs. Michigan State
ESPN2: Indiana vs. Ohio State

October 15:

Fox: Ohio State vs. Wisconsin
ABC: Northwestern vs. Michigan State
FS1: Nebraska vs. Indiana
ESPN: Minnesota vs. Maryland

October 22:

ABC: Ohio State vs. Penn State
Fox: Wisconsin vs. Iowa
ESPN: Michigan State vs. Maryland
FS1: Illinois vs. Michigan

October 29:

Fox: Nebraska vs. Wisconsin
ABC: Michigan vs. Michigan State
FS1: Northwestern vs. Ohio State
ESPN: Minnesota vs. Illinois

November 5:

ABC: Nebraska vs. Ohio State
Fox: Iowa vs. Penn State
ESPN: Wisconsin vs. Northwestern
FS1: Maryland vs. Michigan
ESPN2: Michigan State vs. Illinois

November 12:

Fox: Michigan vs. Iowa
ABC: Ohio State vs. Maryland
FS1: Minnesota vs. Nebraska
ESPN: Rutgers vs. Michigan State
ESPN2: Illinois vs. Wisconsin

November 19:

ABC: Ohio State vs. Michigan State
Fox: Indiana vs. Michigan
ESPN: Iowa vs. Illinois
FS1: Maryland vs. Nebraska
ESPN2: Northwestern vs. Minnesota

November 25/26

Fox: Michigan vs. Ohio State
ABC: Nebraska vs. Iowa
FS1: Michigan State vs. Penn State
ESPN: Minnesota vs. Wisconsin
ESPN2: Illinois vs. Northwestern

Steve20 isn't a B1G fan.......

Steve20 is right on this subject and it is rare that he and I agree on things.

(04-26-2016 09:03 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Steve20 isn't a B1G fan.......

Steve20 is right on this subject and it is rare that he and I agree on things.

So, just to be clear what you and Steve20 are stating:
1. 95% of the best Big Ten games will be on broadcast (free) TV, not on cable (pay) TV.
2. ESPN, after low-balling the initial bid, will now increase their bid to match Fox at $200 million/year (or more) in order to split the top B1G games.

I guess we will all see soon enough.

(04-26-2016 10:22 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 09:03 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Steve20 isn't a B1G fan.......

Steve20 is right on this subject and it is rare that he and I agree on things.

So, just to be clear what you and Steve20 are stating:
1. 95% of the best Big Ten games will be on broadcast (free) TV, not on cable (pay) TV.
2. ESPN, after low-balling the initial bid, will now increase their bid to match Fox at $200 million/year (or more) in order to split the top B1G games.

I guess we will all see soon enough.

I believe this is the most likely scenario also. For comparison, ESPN paid an average of $150 million per year to the SEC in 2008 (when the SEC had 12 teams), and this amount did not include the top games or the CCG which went to CBS. Assuming pro rata adjustments for Texas A&M and Missouri, the annualized value is $175 million. The contract was renegotiated in 2013 for the SEC network and I could not find the value of that agreement. However, given what the SEC paid eight years ago for an SEC package that excluded that top games, I could easily see ESPN paying $200+ million to half of the top B1G games (including the CCG every other year) to keep this package away from CBS or NBC.

It is possible that ESPN's initial "lowball" offer was to avoid getting in a bidding war with Fox, knowing that Fox did not have the appetite for all 58 games. ESPN has used this strategy in the past very successfully. For example, with the AAC package, ESPN had a contractual right of last refusal. ESPN let NBC bid on the package to set the value and then matched NBC's offer. For the B1G agreement, there is likely not a right of last refusal but ESPN was willing to let at least half of the rights go and did not want to engage in an all-out bidding war.

(04-26-2016 10:22 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 09:03 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Steve20 isn't a B1G fan.......

Steve20 is right on this subject and it is rare that he and I agree on things.

So, just to be clear what you and Steve20 are stating:
1. 95% of the best Big Ten games will be on broadcast (free) TV, not on cable (pay) TV.
2. ESPN, after low-balling the initial bid, will now increase their bid to match Fox at $200 million/year (or more) in order to split the top B1G games.

I guess we will all see soon enough.

I do not care about a percentage. But the goal is to get as many on OTA as possible.

I see NBC getting some rights. I want to leave ESPN so more games are on OTA instead of ESPNU or ESPN News or ESPN3 only.

I know plenty of people who are afraid of leaving ESPN.

(04-26-2016 11:05 AM)MadisonHawk Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 10:22 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 09:03 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Steve20 isn't a B1G fan.......

Steve20 is right on this subject and it is rare that he and I agree on things.

So, just to be clear what you and Steve20 are stating:
1. 95% of the best Big Ten games will be on broadcast (free) TV, not on cable (pay) TV.
2. ESPN, after low-balling the initial bid, will now increase their bid to match Fox at $200 million/year (or more) in order to split the top B1G games.

I guess we will all see soon enough.

I believe this is the most likely scenario also. For comparison, ESPN paid an average of $150 million per year to the SEC in 2008 (when the SEC had 12 teams), and this amount did not include the top games or the CCG which went to CBS. Assuming pro rata adjustments for Texas A&M and Missouri, the annualized value is $175 million. The contract was renegotiated in 2013 for the SEC network and I could not find the value of that agreement. However, given what the SEC paid eight years ago for an SEC package that excluded that top games, I could easily see ESPN paying $200+ million to half of the top B1G games (including the CCG every other year) to keep this package away from CBS or NBC.

It is possible that ESPN's initial "lowball" offer was to avoid getting in a bidding war with Fox, knowing that Fox did not have the appetite for all 58 games. ESPN has used this strategy in the past very successfully. For example, with the AAC package, ESPN had a contractual right of last refusal. ESPN let NBC bid on the package to set the value and then matched NBC's offer. For the B1G agreement, there is likely not a right of last refusal but ESPN was willing to let at least half of the rights go and did not want to engage in an all-out bidding war.

This is clearly leaked by Big 10 sources. I don't believe for a minute ESPN "low-balled." They want the Big 10 contract. But they want a profitable price. Fox bid (if you double it to include 100% of the games) about 50% more than the SEC reportedly got and the SEC gets far better ratings. And that renegotiation just took place a year and a half ago (although the CBS part of the contract is older).

(04-26-2016 11:33 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 10:22 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-26-2016 09:03 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  Steve20 isn't a B1G fan.......

Steve20 is right on this subject and it is rare that he and I agree on things.

So, just to be clear what you and Steve20 are stating:
1. 95% of the best Big Ten games will be on broadcast (free) TV, not on cable (pay) TV.
2. ESPN, after low-balling the initial bid, will now increase their bid to match Fox at $200 million/year (or more) in order to split the top B1G games.

I guess we will all see soon enough.

I do not care about a percentage. But the goal is to get as many on OTA as possible.

I see NBC getting some rights. I want to leave ESPN so more games are on OTA instead of ESPNU or ESPN News or ESPN3 only.

I know plenty of people who are afraid of leaving ESPN.

I think you are kidding yourself if you really think the games that were on ESPNU or News will be going to OTA.

And don't think any were ESPN3 only.....

(04-26-2016 12:08 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I think you are kidding yourself if you really think the games that were on ESPNU or News will be going to OTA.

stever20 is correct; he and I only disagree on FS/1 (which I see as the same as ESPN, just the Fox version).

Quote:And don't think any were ESPN3 only.....

Also correct, although there was ONE game on BTN2Go only - the Big Ten's version of ESPN3.com

What everyone needs to understand is this: OTA and high payments are inversely proportional. The more games you want on free TV, the less you'll get paid for them.

wow just saw that Brad Nessler may be going to CBS. Initially for NFL, but eventually as the replacement for Uncle Verne on the SEC games.... reunited with Danielson who he worked with on ESPN way back....