Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Future of TV contracts for FBS
Author Message
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #1
Future of TV contracts for FBS
There is real evidence out the past couple of years that networks are skittish about committing themselves to big contracts in light of declining subscribers.

Most of that evidence is centered on mid major contracts which have been out. CUSA absorbed a major paycut while conferences like the CAA are having to pick up production costs to be on TV.

Where could things be headed for bigger conferences? Some guesses below.

B1G: Clubhouse leader. Will make things work by shifting 2nd/3rd tier rights around so the conference is making what they were before.

SEC: Performance has dipped from when they signed their TV deal, not withstanding the NC game this year. They might have to add FSU and Clemson to regain interest.

PAC: USC could be paid more if it controlled its 3rd tier rights. I could see more of a B12 TV model here in the future and an attempt to attract Texas. 1st and 2nd tier payout might be limited to 20 million per school, with USC/Texas going 40/50 million with private networks.

ACC: They may allow 3rd tier rights to be bid with a base distribution of 10-15 million dollars. That way FSU, UNC can cash in instead of having to subsidize Wake Forest.

B12: Whether they survive intact or not they'll be looking at per school hit in first and second tier rights which may drop to 10 million per school or less. That is why a combo with the PAC is a real possibility here.

AAC: Interesting to see with a deal up soon. There are two ways I could see their TV deal going. One way is if they were able to get BE money for all of their rights to the tune of 5 million per school by NBC. Another way is they get a 1st/2nd tier deal with ESPN for about the same money per school but are allowed to sell 3rd tier rights. 3rd tier rights are worth a lot to some of the school in the conference (UConn).

MWC: It doesn't seem like these guys are worth anything on a national platform outside of Boise State. They might be willing to accept a national deal for little or no cash BUT sell the third tier rights which is some cases can be lucrative (Hawaii).

MAC: These guys pimped out their football with ESPN for Tuesday/Wednesday games to the tune of almost 1 million per school. Nobody else is willing to do that so they should be good.

CUSA/SBC: Left to mess around with alternative distribution models like Facebook and Stadium for no cash.
02-04-2018 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
The days of USC, Texas, Florida St subsidizing the Oregon St's, Texas Tech's and Wake Forest's of their conference is coming to a close.

07-coffee3
02-04-2018 01:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,291
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 595
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
Big ratings product is getting big $$s. Filler is dropping to nothing.

Just like the rest of the economy. You have to be really big or small and specialized. The middle is getting crushed.

P5 likely to continue to do well. CUSA and Sun Belt get next to nothing. MAC only gets money because they are specialized on T/W nights.

We'll see what MWC and AAC do.
02-04-2018 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
A repost from the CUSA board that talks about the conference having to up the game in video production capabilities to keep up with "smaller conferences".

Conference offices always respond by saying we are focused on exposure not money but when has any of these conferences with big money linear TV deals received less exposure than one with small money?

http://csnbbs.com/thread-841856.html

Quote:I posted this around 5 PM today on another thread titled 'Thoughts'....

Today I got a response to an e-mail that I sent to the league office a few weeks ago regarding the poor availability of TV access to the conference Basketball and Football games. I have copied the response below for all to see. I would recommend that instead of beefing about the lack of decent TV coverage here on the forum that you take 5 minutes to send a cordial, direct, and factual e-mail about your own displeasure regarding the lack of coverage compared to other G5 conferences.

Personally I would like to see the conference develop it's own CUSA page on ROKU and the schools be obligated to cover their home events live. My second choice would be for the schools to reach an agreement to cover the home events and the league to have an agreement to get it on ESPN3.

Lastly I respect her for sending me an e-mail that addressed my concerns. I'm hoping that many others on here will follow suit. Remember that the squeaking wheel is the one that gets the grease.

E-MAIL RESPONSE

*****,

Hello and how are you? Your emails below have made their way to me and I wanted to be responsive to you. I do apologize for the delay. We certainly agree with your frustrations and want to get as many of our schools’ events covered by our current multimedia partners as well as future partners. We currently offer fans a mix between linear TV and digital for cord cutters. The smaller conferences who have not had linear TV options are ahead of us at producing their own content that is airing on digital providers like Roku and ESPN3. Those schools have been forced to produce their own content. Getting all of our C-USA schools’ video production capabilities ESPN3 compliant is a priority for Conference USA. We want all of our schools to be able to produce events at the highest level.

Our current partner Stadium just became available on Roku. We have been working for months with our web provider to get CUSA.tv on Roku. Roku has changed their terms and this has caused us problems as CUSA.tv is currently a subscription product and we don’t want fans to have to buy multiple subscriptions. We have had initial conversations with our members about offering CUSA.tv content for free. Ultimately it is their decision since it is their revenue stream. Either way, getting our content on Roku is a priority and we hope to offer this option to fans when football starts next fall.
02-04-2018 02:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
I'd say as rule of thumb we are seeing or will see this model.

P5: Decent 1st/2nd tier deals ($10 million), Big 3rd tier for the giant properites.
G5: Smaller linear TV deal (<$1 million), significant 3rd tier in some cases.
Mid Majors: streaming with little cash attached.

For the G5 the lionshare of their TV money is going to be from the CFP and in most cases is already.

Mid Major basketball conferences are getting their revenue from the NCAA tournament.

ESPN the clubhouse leader has bought Fox Sports net with the intent I believe to turn those channels into 3rd tier networks.

In just a few cases like the AAC or the Big East will they be at a price point in which having 1st/2nd/3rd tier rights all controlled by one network is going to make sense over taking a smaller deal with 3rd tier freedom.
02-04-2018 03:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,480
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 111
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
ACC will not be doing Third Tier anytime soon. The third tier was Raycom which is now moving over to the ACC Network in 2019 with the linear network.
02-04-2018 04:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,002
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1023
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 04:26 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  ACC will not be doing Third Tier anytime soon. The third tier was Raycom which is now moving over to the ACC Network in 2019 with the linear network.

Exactly. Every P5 has a network that owns all the 3rd tier rights. The Big12 and G5 are the only FBS leagues with third tier rights still not married to a dedicated conference network.
(This post was last modified: 02-04-2018 05:59 PM by Attackcoog.)
02-04-2018 05:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 05:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-04-2018 04:26 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  ACC will not be doing Third Tier anytime soon. The third tier was Raycom which is now moving over to the ACC Network in 2019 with the linear network.

Exactly. Every P5 has a network that owns all the 3rd tier rights. The Big12 and G5 are the only FBS leagues with third tier rights still not married to a dedicated conference network.

Then how will the PAC and B12 handle the lack of national value their conference will have in the cord cutting age? Combine to a 16-18 team conference?

UNC and FSU will have to exit the ACC for the SEC quickly to prevent falling further behind.

We could see a desperate scramble happen.
02-04-2018 06:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,480
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 111
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
First, I am not saying the ACC Network will be as successful but that is the reason for the 2019 linear deal with ESPN. If it is half or 3/4 as successful as B10 and SEC. The money goal will be solving itself. 2024/2025 will probably know if it is the ACC or B12 that survives.
02-04-2018 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,002
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1023
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 06:38 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(02-04-2018 05:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-04-2018 04:26 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  ACC will not be doing Third Tier anytime soon. The third tier was Raycom which is now moving over to the ACC Network in 2019 with the linear network.

Exactly. Every P5 has a network that owns all the 3rd tier rights. The Big12 and G5 are the only FBS leagues with third tier rights still not married to a dedicated conference network.

Then how will the PAC and B12 handle the lack of national value their conference will have in the cord cutting age? Combine to a 16-18 team conference?

UNC and FSU will have to exit the ACC for the SEC quickly to prevent falling further behind.

We could see a desperate scramble happen.

Well—I wouldn’t read anything into the CUSA contract. That was thier first renewal after being completely picked to death in realignment. The WAC got thier contract cut drastically after the MW was formed. That was not in any way a harbinger of lower tV deals to come.

Here is what I think. A set of eyeballs is a set of eye balls. It doesn’t matter if they are ice skating eyeballs, college football eyeballs, or Friends rerun eyeballs. If you skew toward a target demo or toward a high disposable income demo—then that might be a factor in value. But, there is going to be less and less reason to pay 5x as much for a P5 eyeball as you do for a G5 eyeball. Future value is going to be based on the size of the audience delivered.
02-04-2018 08:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
How is "eyeball" viewership going to work in the future?

Will everyone have internet set top boxes and order games a la carte? Will consumers subscribe to individual property streams (teams or conferences)? Will it subscriptions be regional with options to add subscriptions from different regions?

That may be the way ESPN maintains a high subscriber price by offering little streaming subscriptions that will add up. They'll be part of a base cable package of $25 buck a month but if you are a Houston fan living in New Orleans you'll have to pay another $5 dollars a month to get Houston regional sports. There will still be "national" ESPN games that everyone gets in the base package.

ESPN
ESPN2
ESPN-R
ESPN-R2

Content industry has been in transition for about a decade. By 2025 it will be clearer how this new model is going to work. NBA, NFL, P5 conference networks could be extra networks that you can pick up for 5 dollars a piece with G5 type content picking up on ESPN-R to go along with MLB, MLS ect. That could be a windfall to G5 showing up on regionals.

ESPN is combining streaming numbers into its nielsen ratings. That to me sounds like the eventual plan is to integrate the content for delivery back out to set top companies.

http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-comb...ers-2017-9
02-04-2018 09:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
It something like this will could show up on the set top of the future.

ESPN
ESPN2
FS1
FS2
NBCSN
CBS-SN
ESPN-R
NBCSN-R

ESPN with the regional nets would compete against Comcast/NBCs regional nets for MLB, MLS, NHL with G5 content filling in because P5 will try to push fans into networks.

G5 content because they'll have linear deals like the AAC, MWC, MAC do today with networks for a limited number of national broadcast windows. The regionals won't be able to put P5 on Saturday afternoon so they'll have to double header AAC games in some markets. This could really help CUSA get back in the TV game with all the markets they've picked up. These regional channels would replace ESPN News level content of today.

WCC, MVC, A10 would have a limited linear deal for a couple of national games but would get to dip in on the regionals in major markets not too different than they are now.
02-04-2018 09:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,002
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1023
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 09:08 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  How is "eyeball" viewership going to work in the future?

Will everyone have internet set top boxes and order games a la carte? Will consumers subscribe to individual property streams (teams or conferences)? Will it subscriptions be regional with options to add subscriptions from different regions?

That may be the way ESPN maintains a high subscriber price by offering little streaming subscriptions that will add up. They'll be part of a base cable package of $25 buck a month but if you are a Houston fan living in New Orleans you'll have to pay another $5 dollars a month to get Houston regional sports. There will still be "national" ESPN games that everyone gets in the base package.

ESPN
ESPN2
ESPN-R
ESPN-R2

Content industry has been in transition for about a decade. By 2025 it will be clearer how this new model is going to work. NBA, NFL, P5 conference networks could be extra networks that you can pick up for 5 dollars a piece with G5 type content picking up on ESPN-R to go along with MLB, MLS ect. That could be a windfall to G5 showing up on regionals.

ESPN is combining streaming numbers into its nielsen ratings. That to me sounds like the eventual plan is to integrate the content for delivery back out to set top companies.

http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-comb...ers-2017-9

The cable network boxes already have that info. Web streams have always had that info. The only people that have to be statistically measured are the OTA folks.
(This post was last modified: 02-04-2018 09:40 PM by Attackcoog.)
02-04-2018 09:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 09:34 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(02-04-2018 09:08 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  How is "eyeball" viewership going to work in the future?

Will everyone have internet set top boxes and order games a la carte? Will consumers subscribe to individual property streams (teams or conferences)? Will it subscriptions be regional with options to add subscriptions from different regions?

That may be the way ESPN maintains a high subscriber price by offering little streaming subscriptions that will add up. They'll be part of a base cable package of $25 buck a month but if you are a Houston fan living in New Orleans you'll have to pay another $5 dollars a month to get Houston regional sports. There will still be "national" ESPN games that everyone gets in the base package.

ESPN
ESPN2
ESPN-R
ESPN-R2

Content industry has been in transition for about a decade. By 2025 it will be clearer how this new model is going to work. NBA, NFL, P5 conference networks could be extra networks that you can pick up for 5 dollars a piece with G5 type content picking up on ESPN-R to go along with MLB, MLS ect. That could be a windfall to G5 showing up on regionals.

ESPN is combining streaming numbers into its nielsen ratings. That to me sounds like the eventual plan is to integrate the content for delivery back out to set top companies.

http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-comb...ers-2017-9

The cable network boxes already have that info. Web streams have always had that info. The only people we have to statisticaly measure is OTA.

They haven't integrated regional networks into the linear deals of the G5.

That would be better for the G5 financially if they were getting 500k viewership over a regional next to an MLB game instead of 5,000 streamers over ESPN3. Video streaming is usually a 50/50 cut of the distributor vs. the property. If the standard regional rate is 2 dollars per viewer, that means 500k can go to the school.

No need in the future for ESPN News/ESPN U ect with regional networks.
02-04-2018 09:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,172
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 98
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
The ESPN OTT service is supposed to be named ESPN+. Content will be MLS, MLB, NHL, RSN and ESPN3 produced content. Mostly it sounds like a way for ESPN to go Direct 2 consumer with its ESPN3 leveraging more content to increase interest.

The consumer of the future then I guess will have to pay for a set top service which runs anywhere from $20 dollars on the low end for a basic 80-100 channel package to $75 dollars for a 275 channel premium package then on top of that will pay another 10 dollars a month for ESPN+ if they want their regional games.

I guess it may bring the advertisers in and hedge against cord cutting by 18-49 demographic with a revenue stream. ESPN3 has been previously tied to a cable subscription.

Quote:In August 2016, The Walt Disney Company acquired a minority stake in BAMTech, a spin-out of MLB Advanced Media's streaming technology business, for $1 billion, with an option to acquire a majority stake in the future. Disney subsidiary ESPN already used its services for its TV Everywhere platform WatchESPN; it was announced that ESPN planned to develop an over-the-top service based on BAMTech technology as "an exploratory OTT project", drawing primarily from ESPN-owned events not broadcast on television. Disney CEO Bob Iger remarked that despite declines in the pay television industry due to cord cutting, "live sports has really thrived, even in a world where there's so much more for people to do and to watch."[1][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESPN%2B
02-05-2018 01:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 21,851
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 636
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 09:08 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  How is "eyeball" viewership going to work in the future?

Will everyone have internet set top boxes and order games a la carte? Will consumers subscribe to individual property streams (teams or conferences)? Will it subscriptions be regional with options to add subscriptions from different regions?

That may be the way ESPN maintains a high subscriber price by offering little streaming subscriptions that will add up. They'll be part of a base cable package of $25 buck a month but if you are a Houston fan living in New Orleans you'll have to pay another $5 dollars a month to get Houston regional sports. There will still be "national" ESPN games that everyone gets in the base package.

ESPN
ESPN2
ESPN-R
ESPN-R2

Content industry has been in transition for about a decade. By 2025 it will be clearer how this new model is going to work. NBA, NFL, P5 conference networks could be extra networks that you can pick up for 5 dollars a piece with G5 type content picking up on ESPN-R to go along with MLB, MLS ect. That could be a windfall to G5 showing up on regionals.

ESPN is combining streaming numbers into its nielsen ratings. That to me sounds like the eventual plan is to integrate the content for delivery back out to set top companies.

http://www.businessinsider.com/espn-comb...ers-2017-9

My expectation.
1. There will be content that receives premium money for OTA and will purchased as a break even or low profit product vehicle to promote other content.
2. There will be premium money content on broad interest cable/sat/net channels to attract subscribers or insure carriage agreements.
3. There will be subscription bundles of near premium content.
4. There will be content appearing on aggregators like WatchESPN where compensation is based on viewership.

The last model is how some movies (especially documentaries) end up on Netflix. No money or little money laid down upfront and compensation is based on viewership, same way that iTunes Music compensates for music that is streamed.
02-05-2018 02:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,140
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #17
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 01:26 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  There is real evidence out the past couple of years that networks are skittish about committing themselves to big contracts in light of declining subscribers.

Most of that evidence is centered on mid major contracts which have been out. CUSA absorbed a major paycut while conferences like the CAA are having to pick up production costs to be on TV.

Where could things be headed for bigger conferences? Some guesses below.

B1G: Clubhouse leader. Will make things work by shifting 2nd/3rd tier rights around so the conference is making what they were before.

SEC: Performance has dipped from when they signed their TV deal, not withstanding the NC game this year. They might have to add FSU and Clemson to regain interest.

PAC: USC could be paid more if it controlled its 3rd tier rights. I could see more of a B12 TV model here in the future and an attempt to attract Texas. 1st and 2nd tier payout might be limited to 20 million per school, with USC/Texas going 40/50 million with private networks.

ACC: They may allow 3rd tier rights to be bid with a base distribution of 10-15 million dollars. That way FSU, UNC can cash in instead of having to subsidize Wake Forest.

B12: Whether they survive intact or not they'll be looking at per school hit in first and second tier rights which may drop to 10 million per school or less. That is why a combo with the PAC is a real possibility here.

AAC: Interesting to see with a deal up soon. There are two ways I could see their TV deal going. One way is if they were able to get BE money for all of their rights to the tune of 5 million per school by NBC. Another way is they get a 1st/2nd tier deal with ESPN for about the same money per school but are allowed to sell 3rd tier rights. 3rd tier rights are worth a lot to some of the school in the conference (UConn).

MWC: It doesn't seem like these guys are worth anything on a national platform outside of Boise State. They might be willing to accept a national deal for little or no cash BUT sell the third tier rights which is some cases can be lucrative (Hawaii).

MAC: These guys pimped out their football with ESPN for Tuesday/Wednesday games to the tune of almost 1 million per school. Nobody else is willing to do that so they should be good.

CUSA/SBC: Left to mess around with alternative distribution models like Facebook and Stadium for no cash.

LOL. The MAC will be down with CUSA and the Belt. BTW, we're splitting the midweek ESPN coverage.
02-05-2018 03:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

sctvman Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 638
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 17
I Root For: C of Charleston
Location: Charleston, SC
Post: #18
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
What will be interesting is how ESPN3 content goes through this. Last Saturday we had 36 different basketball games on ESPN3. Usually on a full football Saturday there are 15-20 football games.

As was said in a podcast with the CAA Commissioner with a writer from the Wilmington, NC paper, the CAA does have to pay to broadcast on CBSSN for 3 basketball games (the semis and final of the CAA basketball tourney). They do have a free internet platform, CAA.TV. All of their games that don’t air on television and a weekly College Sports Live package are on Roku and other cord-cutting forms.

It is available for free, unlike what C-USA and the A-10 have with many of their games.
02-05-2018 04:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,984
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 195
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #19
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 01:26 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  There is real evidence out the past couple of years that networks are skittish about committing themselves to big contracts in light of declining subscribers.

Most of that evidence is centered on mid major contracts which have been out. CUSA absorbed a major paycut while conferences like the CAA are having to pick up production costs to be on TV.

Where could things be headed for bigger conferences? Some guesses below.

B1G: Clubhouse leader. Will make things work by shifting 2nd/3rd tier rights around so the conference is making what they were before.

SEC: Performance has dipped from when they signed their TV deal, not withstanding the NC game this year. They might have to add FSU and Clemson to regain interest.

PAC: USC could be paid more if it controlled its 3rd tier rights. I could see more of a B12 TV model here in the future and an attempt to attract Texas. 1st and 2nd tier payout might be limited to 20 million per school, with USC/Texas going 40/50 million with private networks.

ACC: They may allow 3rd tier rights to be bid with a base distribution of 10-15 million dollars. That way FSU, UNC can cash in instead of having to subsidize Wake Forest.

B12: Whether they survive intact or not they'll be looking at per school hit in first and second tier rights which may drop to 10 million per school or less. That is why a combo with the PAC is a real possibility here.

AAC: Interesting to see with a deal up soon. There are two ways I could see their TV deal going. One way is if they were able to get BE money for all of their rights to the tune of 5 million per school by NBC. Another way is they get a 1st/2nd tier deal with ESPN for about the same money per school but are allowed to sell 3rd tier rights. 3rd tier rights are worth a lot to some of the school in the conference (UConn).

MWC: It doesn't seem like these guys are worth anything on a national platform outside of Boise State. They might be willing to accept a national deal for little or no cash BUT sell the third tier rights which is some cases can be lucrative (Hawaii).

MAC: These guys pimped out their football with ESPN for Tuesday/Wednesday games to the tune of almost 1 million per school. Nobody else is willing to do that so they should be good.

CUSA/SBC: Left to mess around with alternative distribution models like Facebook and Stadium for no cash.

Where could things be headed for bigger conferences? Some guesses below.

B1G: The B1G is locked into the BTN through 2032. No imminent changes there. Pressure on cable revenues could hurt the profitability of the BTN, though, but it may also be able to boost revenue through distribution on non-traditional media. Its recent deal with ESPN and FOX (and CBS for hoops) runs through the 2022-23 season and will be up for bidding in 2021. The B1G took somewhat of a gamble by not signing a long term deal but is obviously betting that rights fees will continue to climb, possibly because the prices offered for the out years did not reflect the B1G's optimism about those prices. The only schools that would make sense to add would be Notre Dame or an excellent academic flagship/flagship equivalent school in large population states, i.e. Texas, UNC, UVA, Florida State or Georgia Tech. These schools match the profile of the conference AND bring a potentially large number of TVHH to the BTN. Of these, Texas would be available in 2025-26, while no ACC member would be available until 2036-37.

SEC: The SEC's deals with ESPN and the SECN are locked in through 2033-2034, so no changes there anytime soon. Pressure on cable revenues could hurt the profitability of the SECN, but it may also be able to boost revenue through distribution on non-traditional media. The SEC's deal with CBS ends after the 2023-24 season. That deal is vastly undervalued at $55 million per year, and should increase dramatically in any scenario. The attractive expansion candidates for the SEC are UNC, UVA, Va. Tech, Texas and Oklahoma, which are all outside of its current footprint except Texas. Of these, Texas and OU would be available in 2025-26, while no ACC member would be available to 2036-37.

PAC: The P12's current deals with Fox and ESPN expire after the 2023-24 season. The P12 Network has struggled compared to other conference networks. Further, the P12 is far behind the B1G, SEC and ACC in terms of TVHH within its footprint. Look for the P12 to chase Texas, Oklahoma and 2 of 3 from among TTU, Ok.St. and KU to boost the value of its national TV contract and the distribution of the P12 Network. It is also possible that it could seek to sell all or a portion of its interest in the P12 Network to a third party, with FOX, ESPN and Comcast all potential bidders.

ACC: All of the ACC's rights are owned by ESPN through 2035-36. The ACC and ESPN are looking to boost revenues with the launch of the ACC Network in 2019. This is their big strategic move. Stay tuned. Any expansion would probably be directed at expanding or solidifying the ACC Network - obviously Notre Dame for football, but also possible would be Texas with a Notre Dame type deal, UConn to solidify the NY and New England area markets, Navy as a football-only partner for Notre Dame, or Villanova for basketball to chase the Philly market.

B12: The B12's deals with ESPN and FOX run through 2024-25. The conference remains unstable and subject to the whims of Texas in particular, and Oklahoma to a lesser extent. Both become even greater flight risks if the next TV deal doesn't keep pace with other conferences. The B12 itself, therefore, is likely to be in a reactive mode.
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2018 10:55 AM by orangefan.)
02-06-2018 10:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,854
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 594
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #20
RE: Future of TV contracts for FBS
(02-04-2018 01:26 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  SEC: Performance has dipped from when they signed their TV deal, not withstanding the NC game this year. They might have to add FSU and Clemson to regain interest.

03-lmfao


And the Big 12 is going to drop down to maybe less than $10m per school while the AAC is going to rise to $5m per school?

03-lmfao
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2018 07:21 PM by quo vadis.)
02-06-2018 07:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.