RE: ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
(05-23-2023 07:58 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:
(05-23-2023 10:53 AM)jrj84105 Wrote: I don’t blame Warren as entirely responsible in this. He had a plan, and the B1G presidents pulled the plug as soon as they got USCLA then dumped making it work on the TV partners and Warren.
He should have waited to see the media numbers before pushing a plan like that. Unless ND was the linchpin for the last 6, and when they wouldn't agree he had to pull the plug on all the rest.
I don’t think Warren anticipated that USCLA would budge without additional travel partners.
RE: ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
(05-23-2023 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:
(05-23-2023 11:08 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:
(05-23-2023 12:37 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: Williams’ B1G source is saying expansion just became less likely, although he’s quoting them through caps lock rather than quotation marks for some reason.
You can interpret the news both ways... if the deal is not dotted and crossed with NBC, it can still be addended. They can throw in more dollars for certain teams. Especially if they get a hard pass from midwest teams in November as far as night games. They need to fill that window one way or another with warmer weather locations. Seattle is as good as you are going to get.
Expansion is definitely on the table. We just have a source here downplaying it to cover Pettiti's tail.
Expansion is never not on the table. For any conference.
What we have here is a case of expansionistas ignoring the Big Ten commish saying his priority is taking the time to properly integrate USC and UCLA—arguably the biggest move in realignment history considering the distance. We have people ignoring the Ohio State and Iowa reps who are both cold on further expansion. But for some reason the Nebraska president’s word is more powerful? Of course they want a California presence, and he thinks they’ll get that guaranteed if there are more west coast schools for others to be partnered with.
People are hearing what they want to hear. And look, I was one of the first—if not the first—on the board to predict Oregon and Washington by the end of the month last summer! One must take into account ALL the statements, not just the ones that fit their preferred outcome.
There is a stalemate until the Big Ten comes out and says “we are not expanding for the remainder of the decade.” The SEC used to do this every ten years to shut up FSU and Memphis.
The Nebraska PRESIDENT actually has a vote. The Iowa and tOSU AD's can only give advice. So, yeah, I'd give his statements more credence.
RE: ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
(05-23-2023 12:16 PM)Alanda Wrote: Bob Thompson makes it sound like this isn't that big of an issue. Talks about it in the beginning of the video.
Interesting that he said partway through the interview that this current mess is "1% of the total deal, $7b dollars". He didn't say $7.5b. He didn't say $8.4b. He said $7b dollars.
It's starting to look like they'll come in under $70m a year now.
"Nearly three months before the season kicks off and those TV deals begin, the Big Ten does not have completed longform contracts, which include the fine print details. Instead, Petitti is engaged in significant "horse trading," according to multiple sources, to get the NBC primetime deal finished and figure out what the network calls "outstanding issues" in order to uphold as much value as possible.
"These deals aren't done, and they aren't what they were represented to be from the standpoint of the NBC deal and the availability of all members to participate in November games in primetime," said an industry source.
Interviews with nearly a dozen sources in and around the Big Ten and the college sports industry paint a picture of Petitti sprinting to navigate details left unresolved from his predecessor."
"There's tens of millions of dollars of value of the NBC primetime deal in flux, as Petitti has been racing to ensure it keeps as much of its original value as possible. Historically in the Big Ten, after the first weekend in November, schools were not required to play night games for myriad reasons -- health, recovery and campus logistics among them. These were known in league circles as "tolerances," and prior television contracts accounted for them.
Multiple sources told ESPN there's been pushback from a number of schools, including Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State, to play those late-November night games under the new contract. That leaves Petitti to figure out how to uphold a deal for hundreds of millions of dollars for primetime games without cooperation from some of the league's marquee teams for part of the regular season's most important month.
Athletic departments and coaches around the Big Ten say they were surprised November night games would be part of the deal. They weren't asked for permission to play them prior to the deal or informed of the change ahead of the deal, according to sources. At the same time, NBC wasn't aware until well after the initial contract was signed this summer that these big-brand schools had historic tolerances that were part of the prior television arrangements and would resist being available.
"NBC was surprised, and I was surprised," said Michigan athletic director Warde Manuel. "We had not discussed, and I had not discussed with anyone in the league to change the tolerances we had agreed upon years ago."
Within the industry, though, there was an expectation that, considering the scope of the deal, all schools would play in prime time.
"The fault here is with the administrators on campus," said another industry source. "How did the presidents, chancellors and athletic directors not know this? The universities all signed off on the deal."
It's long been understood that the Big Ten doesn't like to play November night games, how in the world could Michigan's AD act surprised that things were going to change? Either Kevin Warren went completely rogue or Michigan's AD is playing dumb here.
Nah, Michigan knew. They're just stuck up enough to think they'd always get their way and are surprised someone is actually pushing back.
With that said.....we better NEVER see Ohio State-Michigan at night. 3:30 in 2006 was bad enough.
Why not??? It would make Ohio State- Michigan bigger than what it is right now, IMO. I remember a few at night Iron Bowls, and those games were classics, IMO!!!
Ohio State - Michigan is a must at noon. I love having the Iron Bowl to watch after it as well.
It probably wouldn’t be that big of a deal to move it to 3:30 or night game and people would get use to it but the vast majority of people at both schools have their tradition set for that day/game every year and love it at noon.
Nothing like it snowing and bars/campus hopping at 5:30 AM for those that attend!
(This post was last modified: 05-23-2023 08:08 PM by natibeast2.0.)
RE: ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
(05-23-2023 08:02 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:
(05-23-2023 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:
(05-23-2023 11:08 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:
(05-23-2023 12:37 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: Williams’ B1G source is saying expansion just became less likely, although he’s quoting them through caps lock rather than quotation marks for some reason.
You can interpret the news both ways... if the deal is not dotted and crossed with NBC, it can still be addended. They can throw in more dollars for certain teams. Especially if they get a hard pass from midwest teams in November as far as night games. They need to fill that window one way or another with warmer weather locations. Seattle is as good as you are going to get.
Expansion is definitely on the table. We just have a source here downplaying it to cover Pettiti's tail.
Expansion is never not on the table. For any conference.
What we have here is a case of expansionistas ignoring the Big Ten commish saying his priority is taking the time to properly integrate USC and UCLA—arguably the biggest move in realignment history considering the distance. We have people ignoring the Ohio State and Iowa reps who are both cold on further expansion. But for some reason the Nebraska president’s word is more powerful? Of course they want a California presence, and he thinks they’ll get that guaranteed if there are more west coast schools for others to be partnered with.
People are hearing what they want to hear. And look, I was one of the first—if not the first—on the board to predict Oregon and Washington by the end of the month last summer! One must take into account ALL the statements, not just the ones that fit their preferred outcome.
There is a stalemate until the Big Ten comes out and says “we are not expanding for the remainder of the decade.” The SEC used to do this every ten years to shut up FSU and Memphis.
The Nebraska PRESIDENT actually has a vote. The Iowa and tOSU AD's can only give advice. So, yeah, I'd give his statements more credence.
Pretty sure they're on the same page and Oregon and Washington are still Pac schools. There isn't a mystery here, Scoob.
"Nearly three months before the season kicks off and those TV deals begin, the Big Ten does not have completed longform contracts, which include the fine print details. Instead, Petitti is engaged in significant "horse trading," according to multiple sources, to get the NBC primetime deal finished and figure out what the network calls "outstanding issues" in order to uphold as much value as possible.
"These deals aren't done, and they aren't what they were represented to be from the standpoint of the NBC deal and the availability of all members to participate in November games in primetime," said an industry source.
Interviews with nearly a dozen sources in and around the Big Ten and the college sports industry paint a picture of Petitti sprinting to navigate details left unresolved from his predecessor."
"There's tens of millions of dollars of value of the NBC primetime deal in flux, as Petitti has been racing to ensure it keeps as much of its original value as possible. Historically in the Big Ten, after the first weekend in November, schools were not required to play night games for myriad reasons -- health, recovery and campus logistics among them. These were known in league circles as "tolerances," and prior television contracts accounted for them.
Multiple sources told ESPN there's been pushback from a number of schools, including Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State, to play those late-November night games under the new contract. That leaves Petitti to figure out how to uphold a deal for hundreds of millions of dollars for primetime games without cooperation from some of the league's marquee teams for part of the regular season's most important month.
Athletic departments and coaches around the Big Ten say they were surprised November night games would be part of the deal. They weren't asked for permission to play them prior to the deal or informed of the change ahead of the deal, according to sources. At the same time, NBC wasn't aware until well after the initial contract was signed this summer that these big-brand schools had historic tolerances that were part of the prior television arrangements and would resist being available.
"NBC was surprised, and I was surprised," said Michigan athletic director Warde Manuel. "We had not discussed, and I had not discussed with anyone in the league to change the tolerances we had agreed upon years ago."
Within the industry, though, there was an expectation that, considering the scope of the deal, all schools would play in prime time.
"The fault here is with the administrators on campus," said another industry source. "How did the presidents, chancellors and athletic directors not know this? The universities all signed off on the deal."
It's long been understood that the Big Ten doesn't like to play November night games, how in the world could Michigan's AD act surprised that things were going to change? Either Kevin Warren went completely rogue or Michigan's AD is playing dumb here.
Nah, Michigan knew. They're just stuck up enough to think they'd always get their way and are surprised someone is actually pushing back.
With that said.....we better NEVER see Ohio State-Michigan at night. 3:30 in 2006 was bad enough.
Why not??? It would make Ohio State- Michigan bigger than what it is right now, IMO. I remember a few at night Iron Bowls, and those games were classics, IMO!!!
Ohio State - Michigan is a must at noon. I love having the Iron Bowl to watch after it as well.
It probably wouldn’t be that big of a deal to move it to 3:30 or night game and people would get use to it but the vast majority of people at both schools have their tradition set for that day/game every year and love it at noon.
Nothing like it snowing and bars/campus hopping at 5:30 AM for those that attend!
RE: ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
(05-23-2023 08:02 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:
(05-23-2023 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:
(05-23-2023 11:08 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:
(05-23-2023 12:37 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: Williams’ B1G source is saying expansion just became less likely, although he’s quoting them through caps lock rather than quotation marks for some reason.
You can interpret the news both ways... if the deal is not dotted and crossed with NBC, it can still be addended. They can throw in more dollars for certain teams. Especially if they get a hard pass from midwest teams in November as far as night games. They need to fill that window one way or another with warmer weather locations. Seattle is as good as you are going to get.
Expansion is definitely on the table. We just have a source here downplaying it to cover Pettiti's tail.
Expansion is never not on the table. For any conference.
What we have here is a case of expansionistas ignoring the Big Ten commish saying his priority is taking the time to properly integrate USC and UCLA—arguably the biggest move in realignment history considering the distance. We have people ignoring the Ohio State and Iowa reps who are both cold on further expansion. But for some reason the Nebraska president’s word is more powerful? Of course they want a California presence, and he thinks they’ll get that guaranteed if there are more west coast schools for others to be partnered with.
People are hearing what they want to hear. And look, I was one of the first—if not the first—on the board to predict Oregon and Washington by the end of the month last summer! One must take into account ALL the statements, not just the ones that fit their preferred outcome.
There is a stalemate until the Big Ten comes out and says “we are not expanding for the remainder of the decade.” The SEC used to do this every ten years to shut up FSU and Memphis.
The Nebraska PRESIDENT actually has a vote. The Iowa and tOSU AD's can only give advice. So, yeah, I'd give his statements more credence.
Eh, I would think that the Iowa and tOSU ADs speak for their presidents, or at least their views are consonant with those of their presidents, otherwise it would be unwise for them to state them publicly. Of course people sometimes do unwise things, LOL.
And IMO Iowa and especially tOSU have more influence in the B1G than Nebraska. So I would give their AD statements more credence.
RE: ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
Agree with Bob Thompson. Adding more schools doesn't fix the problem because you have to split the money more ways. You'd be better off taking a hit on the NBC deal instead or just playing the night games.
(This post was last modified: 05-25-2023 02:58 AM by AztecNation.)
RE: ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
(05-24-2023 07:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:
(05-23-2023 08:02 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:
(05-23-2023 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:
(05-23-2023 11:08 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:
(05-23-2023 12:37 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote: Williams’ B1G source is saying expansion just became less likely, although he’s quoting them through caps lock rather than quotation marks for some reason.
You can interpret the news both ways... if the deal is not dotted and crossed with NBC, it can still be addended. They can throw in more dollars for certain teams. Especially if they get a hard pass from midwest teams in November as far as night games. They need to fill that window one way or another with warmer weather locations. Seattle is as good as you are going to get.
Expansion is definitely on the table. We just have a source here downplaying it to cover Pettiti's tail.
Expansion is never not on the table. For any conference.
What we have here is a case of expansionistas ignoring the Big Ten commish saying his priority is taking the time to properly integrate USC and UCLA—arguably the biggest move in realignment history considering the distance. We have people ignoring the Ohio State and Iowa reps who are both cold on further expansion. But for some reason the Nebraska president’s word is more powerful? Of course they want a California presence, and he thinks they’ll get that guaranteed if there are more west coast schools for others to be partnered with.
People are hearing what they want to hear. And look, I was one of the first—if not the first—on the board to predict Oregon and Washington by the end of the month last summer! One must take into account ALL the statements, not just the ones that fit their preferred outcome.
There is a stalemate until the Big Ten comes out and says “we are not expanding for the remainder of the decade.” The SEC used to do this every ten years to shut up FSU and Memphis.
The Nebraska PRESIDENT actually has a vote. The Iowa and tOSU AD's can only give advice. So, yeah, I'd give his statements more credence.
Eh, I would think that the Iowa and tOSU ADs speak for their presidents, or at least their views are consonant with those of their presidents, otherwise it would be unwise for them to state them publicly. Of course people sometimes do unwise things, LOL.
And IMO Iowa and especially tOSU have more influence in the B1G than Nebraska. So I would give their AD statements more credence.
But I could be wrong.
Ohio State doesn't even have a president currently, so we can be very, very certain that Gene Smith isn't speaking for that person's views.
/
ESPN: Big Ten's Media Contracts, NBC, November Night Games
