According to a former Fox Sports executive. Courtesy of John Canzano:

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pa...comes-with

Impact on Pac 12:

"Prior to the desertion, Thompson anticipated the Pac-12 would land a deal in the neighborhood of $500 million per-year average over the course of the contract. That assumed an offering of games similar to what the Pac-12 sold Fox and ESPN in their current agreement.

“I guess you could take a run at adding San Diego State, UNLV, Air Force, Boise State, San Jose State or Fresno State to the Pac-12,” he said, “but none of those markets really move the meter from a television standpoint.”

The new estimated valuation: ~$300 million per year."

Value of USC and UCLA:

"Thompson said the Big Ten’s decision to add two Los Angeles-based universities was rooted in a simple math equation. The 14 existing conference members know they’ll receive approximately $71.4 million per university under the new Fox deal. Adding two more partners only made sense if they could generate a minimum of $143 million in additional distributable revenue.

“To get there you could assume that the bulk of the 5.2 million pay TV homes in LA, San Diego, Palm Springs and Santa Barbara become inner-market Big Ten Network subscribers,” he said. “That will add significant affiliate revenue for the network.”

Adding Southern California to the portfolio increases the Big Ten’s core TV households by 25 percent. The result is additional advertising revenue for the Big Ten Network, Fox Broadcast Network and FS1 as well.

Said Thompson: “That should all be enough to convince Fox that the additional rights fees are worthwhile.”"

Value of Oregon and Washington:

"The Big Ten appears focused on trying to lure Notre Dame into the fold right now. After that, Oregon and Washington may be of interest to the Big Ten. However, Thompson estimated that those two Pac-12 universities, along with the Eugene and Seattle television markets, would only generate an additional $60 million in combined additional revenues.

It’s good money, but well shy of the $143 million breakeven for the Big Ten.

It doesn’t kill the possibility of Oregon and Washington following USC and UCLA into the conference. It just means that the Big Ten members have two options if they’re going to do it: A) Be OK with about $6 million less annually to have UO and UW in the house; or B) Welcome Oregon and Washington, but inform the newcomers that they won’t get full distributions for a while."

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pa...comes-with

I don't think 20 teams with the six P6 is likely for the stated reasons and for scheduling purposes. If they take six teams out west, it doesn't break cleanly into 5/5/5/5. They'd have to come up with some weird 6/4/3/4/3 scheduling rotation. Stanford ND is the only thing that breaks cleanly scheduling wise.

Overall, it's tough for me to see WU and UO turning the B1G down if offered a slightly reduced share, but they can still make good money in a 10 team PAC10.

I doubt even Norte Dame brings enough to warrant the B1G to go to 17 schools. They would for the ACC.
So with PAC schools added the breakeven point raised the bar higher. ND would have to bring over $150 million/year maybe more. I very doubt they bring that much to the table. Especially how much the TV contract is worth for NBC

This suggest to me that 18 might be the magic number including Notre Dame. The question is who are they paired with. Oregon? Washington? Stanford?

(07-03-2022 11:14 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  This suggest to me that 18 might be the magic number including Notre Dame. The question is who are they paired with. Oregon? Washington? Stanford?

Not enough value to push past the breakeven point.

...no doubt that Oregon is 'new money', in terms of their success, which is generally a 21st-Century phenomenon... I WOULD think they would garner a BIT more $$$, as I think of them as a 'national brand'... heck, I walked into a bookstore just yesterday here in B'ham, AL., and a dude had an Oregon shirt on (I own one as well, since the Quack are my 'PAC' team - been rooting for them even before they were a power).

But I guess their locale IS sparsely populated in a relative sense... of course, NOTHING west of the Rockies is going to compare population-wise to L.A., so might be a bit of a skewed comparison there... I still have a feeling that UO and Udub will get into the BIG10, but maybe not as much of a 'slam dunk' as first thought...

You have to wonder with the SEC as well, I mean, aside from ND/UNC, it's not gonna justify 18 schools. The ACC appears to be stable beyond just the GoR (aside from ND leaving).

(07-03-2022 11:17 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:14 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  This suggest to me that 18 might be the magic number including Notre Dame. The question is who are they paired with. Oregon? Washington? Stanford?

Not enough value to push past the breakeven point.

They would still take ND off the board. Every school would take a slight pay cut to do so.

(07-03-2022 11:19 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:17 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:14 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  This suggest to me that 18 might be the magic number including Notre Dame. The question is who are they paired with. Oregon? Washington? Stanford?

Not enough value to push past the breakeven point.

They would still take ND off the board. Every school would take a slight pay cut to do so.

I doubt that they would take pay cut just for ND

(07-03-2022 11:21 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:19 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:17 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:14 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  This suggest to me that 18 might be the magic number including Notre Dame. The question is who are they paired with. Oregon? Washington? Stanford?

Not enough value to push past the breakeven point.

They would still take ND off the board. Every school would take a slight pay cut to do so.

I doubt that they would take pay cut just for ND

ND would not be a pay cut.

(07-03-2022 10:59 AM)MadisonHawk Wrote:  "The Big Ten appears focused on trying to lure Notre Dame into the fold right now. After that, Oregon and Washington may be of interest to the Big Ten. However, Thompson estimated that those two Pac-12 universities, along with the Eugene and Seattle television markets, would only generate an additional $60 million in combined additional revenues.

It’s good money, but well shy of the $143 million breakeven for the Big Ten.

It doesn’t kill the possibility of Oregon and Washington following USC and UCLA into the conference. It just means that the Big Ten members have two options if they’re going to do it: A) Be OK with about $6 million less annually to have UO and UW in the house; or B) "Welcome Oregon and Washington, but inform the newcomers that they won’t get full distributions for a while."[/b]

Nothing wrong with this whatsoever.

1. Pay the new members that aren't vested an amount equal to their valuation or the full share of the existing 14 members — whichever is less.

2. Let the new members (perhaps for a set amount of years) not receiving a full share work their way up the "100% percent club" of established members.

Fairest way to go for all parties involved: TV folks, the conference office, existing members and new members.

Also shoots a(nother) hole in the "SEC or B1G can't invite so and so because their current value isn't equal to the $xx(x) million the existing schools will receive."

This massive realignment is gonna go down whether any of us do or don't want it to happen.

(07-03-2022 11:24 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:21 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:19 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:17 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:14 AM)shizzle787 Wrote:  This suggest to me that 18 might be the magic number including Notre Dame. The question is who are they paired with. Oregon? Washington? Stanford?

Not enough value to push past the breakeven point.

They would still take ND off the board. Every school would take a slight pay cut to do so.

I doubt that they would take pay cut just for ND

ND would not be a pay cut.

They have to bring $150 million and maybe more each year to not have a pay cut from the schools. They are not that valuable.

AAC value, now.

(07-03-2022 11:25 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 10:59 AM)MadisonHawk Wrote:  "The Big Ten appears focused on trying to lure Notre Dame into the fold right now. After that, Oregon and Washington may be of interest to the Big Ten. However, Thompson estimated that those two Pac-12 universities, along with the Eugene and Seattle television markets, would only generate an additional $60 million in combined additional revenues.

It’s good money, but well shy of the $143 million breakeven for the Big Ten.

It doesn’t kill the possibility of Oregon and Washington following USC and UCLA into the conference. It just means that the Big Ten members have two options if they’re going to do it: A) Be OK with about $6 million less annually to have UO and UW in the house; or B) "Welcome Oregon and Washington, but inform the newcomers that they won’t get full distributions for a while."[/b]

Nothing wrong with this whatsoever.

1. Pay the new members that aren't vested an amount equal to their valuation or the full share of the existing 14 members — whichever is less.

2. Let the new members (perhaps for a set amount of years) not receiving a full share work their way up the "100% percent club" of established members.

Fairest way to go for all parties involved: TV folks, the conference office, existing members and new members.

Also shoots a(nother) hole in the "SEC or B1G can't invite so and so because their current value isn't equal to the $xx(x) million the existing schools will receive."

This massive realignment is gonna go down whether any of us do or don't want it to happen.

Hopefully sooner than later

...but is the money number crunching even an issue? (wait, don't answer that... )

MEANING, what if the 'B1G picture endgame' is to truly collect all of the 'programs of ANY value' and then the network(s) have a 'revised lump sum' already set, no matter the makeup (within reason, of course)? Someone noted that part of this 'grab' MAY be to dwindle the PAC down to 'non-Px' status, thus allowing a 're-evaluation' of their media deal, which FOX, CBS, ESPN, and/or whoever else could use to 'offset' any shortcomings with a given set of B1G/SEC expansion teams...

(07-03-2022 11:10 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I don't think 20 teams with the six P6 is likely for the stated reasons and for scheduling purposes. If they take six teams out west, it doesn't break cleanly into 5/5/5/5. They'd have to come up with some weird 6/4/3/4/3 scheduling rotation. Stanford ND is the only thing that breaks cleanly scheduling wise.

Overall, it's tough for me to see WU and UO turning the B1G down if offered a slightly reduced share, but they can still make good money in a 10 team PAC10.

It also increases travel for the 14 existing schools without a 5 team pod that minimizes that.

(07-03-2022 10:59 AM)MadisonHawk Wrote:  According to a former Fox Sports executive. Courtesy of John Canzano:

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pa...comes-with

Impact on Pac 12:

"Prior to the desertion, Thompson anticipated the Pac-12 would land a deal in the neighborhood of $500 million per-year average over the course of the contract. That assumed an offering of games similar to what the Pac-12 sold Fox and ESPN in their current agreement.

“I guess you could take a run at adding San Diego State, UNLV, Air Force, Boise State, San Jose State or Fresno State to the Pac-12,” he said, “but none of those markets really move the meter from a television standpoint.”

The new estimated valuation: ~$300 million per year."

Value of USC and UCLA:

"Thompson said the Big Ten’s decision to add two Los Angeles-based universities was rooted in a simple math equation. The 14 existing conference members know they’ll receive approximately $71.4 million per university under the new Fox deal. Adding two more partners only made sense if they could generate a minimum of $143 million in additional distributable revenue.

“To get there you could assume that the bulk of the 5.2 million pay TV homes in LA, San Diego, Palm Springs and Santa Barbara become inner-market Big Ten Network subscribers,” he said. “That will add significant affiliate revenue for the network.”

Adding Southern California to the portfolio increases the Big Ten’s core TV households by 25 percent. The result is additional advertising revenue for the Big Ten Network, Fox Broadcast Network and FS1 as well.

Said Thompson: “That should all be enough to convince Fox that the additional rights fees are worthwhile.”"

Value of Oregon and Washington:

"The Big Ten appears focused on trying to lure Notre Dame into the fold right now. After that, Oregon and Washington may be of interest to the Big Ten. However, Thompson estimated that those two Pac-12 universities, along with the Eugene and Seattle television markets, would only generate an additional $60 million in combined additional revenues.

It’s good money, but well shy of the $143 million breakeven for the Big Ten.

It doesn’t kill the possibility of Oregon and Washington following USC and UCLA into the conference. It just means that the Big Ten members have two options if they’re going to do it: A) Be OK with about $6 million less annually to have UO and UW in the house; or B) Welcome Oregon and Washington, but inform the newcomers that they won’t get full distributions for a while."

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pa...comes-with

Excellent article, thanks for posting!

No question Phil Knight is going to be involved to the benefit of Oregon and perhaps, Washington and Stanford too.

(07-03-2022 11:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...but is the money number crunching even an issue? (wait, don't answer that... )

MEANING, what if the 'B1G picture endgame' is to truly collect all of the 'programs of ANY value' and then the network(s) have a 'revised lump sum' already set, no matter the makeup (within reason, of course)? Someone noted that part of this 'grab' MAY be to dwindle the PAC down to 'non-Px' status, thus allowing a 're-evaluation' of their media deal, which FOX, CBS, ESPN, and/or whoever else could use to 'offset' any shortcomings with a given set of B1G/SEC expansion teams...

B1G and SEC have their endgame: Add the member schools they deem to be worthy fits while making as much money as possible.

ESPN and FOX have their endgame: Having the widest possible reach for their broadcast properties while paying the least amount possible to do so.

IMO, both conferences know which schools they want. Now it's just a matter of the four entities — ESPN, FOX, the SEC and the B1G — settling on how it'll all shake out (IMO, any other media entity will have to settle for whatever crumbs are left when on the B1G's deal).

Wouldn't be surprised if this thing gets done by fall because pretty sure the conferences and media folks don't want to give the politicians time to create any headaches by their next legislative sessions.

I’d take a partial reimbursement deal for a period of time, especially if that means it will be much larger than what a cobbled pac-12 would bring.

(07-03-2022 12:12 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(07-03-2022 11:30 AM)GreenFreakUAB Wrote:  ...but is the money number crunching even an issue? (wait, don't answer that... )

MEANING, what if the 'B1G picture endgame' is to truly collect all of the 'programs of ANY value' and then the network(s) have a 'revised lump sum' already set, no matter the makeup (within reason, of course)? Someone noted that part of this 'grab' MAY be to dwindle the PAC down to 'non-Px' status, thus allowing a 're-evaluation' of their media deal, which FOX, CBS, ESPN, and/or whoever else could use to 'offset' any shortcomings with a given set of B1G/SEC expansion teams...

B1G and SEC have their endgame: Add the member schools they deem to be worthy fits while making as much money as possible.

ESPN and FOX have their endgame: Having the widest possible reach for their broadcast properties while paying the least amount possible to do so.

IMO, both conferences know which schools they want. Now it's just a matter of the four entities — ESPN, FOX, the SEC and the B1G — settling on how it'll all shake out (IMO, any other media entity will have to settle for whatever crumbs are left when on the B1G's deal).

Wouldn't be surprised if this thing gets done by fall because pretty sure the conferences and media folks don't want to give the politicians time to create any headaches by their next legislative sessions.

Yeah though the networks could be making a mistake as the conferences consolidate the negotiation leverage starts to shift.