https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ncertainty

Some interesting tidbits:

"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.

Trouble in paradise.

(05-21-2023 05:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ncertainty

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.

I think it is the latter as the article states: "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."

Petitti and various constituents are trying to throw Warren under the bus for whatever reason. Warren had a reputation of being a poor communicator with the ADs and coaches (starting with the COVID fiascos) and it is likely that they were not consulted much during the process. However, that fault lies mostly with the University Presidents and their internal administration.

This is just comical. The admins probably did know about it but are so out of touch with athletics they didn’t think anything of it.

Quote:In 2016, ....the Big Ten Network had acquired all of the league's programming rights back in 2016 through an undisclosed date. The length of that deal with the Big Ten Network from 2016 is carried at least through the current deal, which has been announced through the 2029-30 season.
...
What this also essentially meant was the latest round of Big Ten television deals were effectively sub-license arrangements, in which both the Big Ten Network and Fox essentially controlled the rights and worked with the Big Ten to sub-license them off. That meant a majority of the value of the deal had already been sold.

"It was a joint negotiation with the conference and FOX working together and doing deals with these other networks," said an industry source. "They both needed each other to do the deals."

Does....does that mean that Fox is getting 60% of the revenue from the NBC and CBS contracts? Because they own 60% of BTN?

That would explain to me why Fox was willing to share the premier Big Ten games (even if they didn't expect to hand over the 2026 CCG).

But it would mean a radically different picture than the one we've been given of what Big Ten schools will be making from the new TV deals.

Gotta make compromises when chasing every dollar, I guess.

USC/UCLA could alleviate the night game issue in November but the question will be what teams are you sending out there?

NBC didn’t read the old contracts? B1G lawyers didn’t read the new contracts? Both are highly doubtful. Perhaps NBC regrets agreeing to pay so much and is looking for ways to reduce their expense?

If this was really the big issue, it’s too bad that there aren’t any warm weather B1G schools with a nationwide following. Wait, USCLA could do the trick! How did I think of that in 3 seconds, yet nobody involved did?

1st and 3rd weekend: UCLA vs tOSU and Nebraska
2nd and 4th: USC vs Michigan and ?

You’re welcome, NBC and B1G.

Would be even more fun if one of those USC games was ND.

(05-21-2023 06:11 PM)Glenn360 Wrote:  Gotta make compromises when chasing every dollar, I guess.

USC/UCLA could alleviate the night game issue in November but the question will be what teams are you sending out there?

USC/UCLA is an obvious November night game every year. It doesn't make much sense at 9am in Los Angeles when the Big Three would rather play at noon (especially Rivalry Week when it will obviously be UM/OSU), the only argument will be if CBS wants the game. Then in the years Notre Dame plays at USC they can have that game in prime time (again CBS could want it but it could be vs. the Iron Bowl on ABC, assuming the Iron Bowl stays in the middle slot and doesn't move to prime time).

Jeez maybe 1 later November night game, what's so bad about that. In the NFL every team wants primetime games, weird.

They have to be playing dumb.

No one looked at that deal and said, "oh look, we're doing 3 national TV broadcasts in three different windows pretty much every week, I bet they never pick our school for those time slots...hehe."

It's far too obvious to have been overlooked.

I suppose it's possible they are campaigning for the new commissioner to fix something they never really wanted Warren to do, but they're basically throwing Warren under the bus in the process.

(05-21-2023 05:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ncertainty

Some interesting tidbits:

"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.

(05-21-2023 06:35 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-21-2023 06:11 PM)Glenn360 Wrote:  Gotta make compromises when chasing every dollar, I guess.

USC/UCLA could alleviate the night game issue in November but the question will be what teams are you sending out there?

USC/UCLA is an obvious November night game every year. It doesn't make much sense at 9am in Los Angeles when the Big Three would rather play at noon (especially Rivalry Week when it will obviously be UM/OSU), the only argument will be if CBS wants the game. Then in the years Notre Dame plays at USC they can have that game in prime time (again CBS could want it but it could be vs. the Iron Bowl on ABC, assuming the Iron Bowl stays in the middle slot and doesn't move to prime time).

I took a look and noticed Eugene and Seattle average high temps between 48-60*F in November and 7:30 PM ET games are 4:30 PM PT. Lows temps also rarely drop before 30*F in November. Playing games on the west coast definitely could help alleviate issues if current B1G teams have issues (shouldn't be). You could also have the 4 PAC teams play each other the final 3-5 weeks of the season playing on NBC, but regardless, this issue shouldn't be as big of an issue shouldn't be this big of an issue. Also,, I'm pretty sure the B1G teams will have the money to winterize stadiums now (looking at you OSU, PSU, and TTUN).

(05-21-2023 07:00 PM)Buckeye22 Wrote:  

(05-21-2023 05:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ncertainty

Some interesting tidbits:

"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.

What was bad about that 3:30 game in 06'?

(05-21-2023 07:00 PM)Buckeye22 Wrote:  

(05-21-2023 05:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ncertainty

Some interesting tidbits:

"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.

FOX ain't giving up that game so we should be good.

(05-21-2023 05:50 PM)MadisonHawk Wrote:  

(05-21-2023 05:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ncertainty

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.

I think it is the latter as the article states: "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."

Petitti and various constituents are trying to throw Warren under the bus for whatever reason. Warren had a reputation of being a poor communicator with the ADs and coaches (starting with the COVID fiascos) and it is likely that they were not consulted much during the process. However, that fault lies mostly with the University Presidents and their internal administration.

First rule when you take a new job: Blame as much as possible, for as long as possible, on the previous occupant of your chair.

That this wasn't figured in kind of is weird. The selection criteria given you had 3 different networks involved should have been spelled out fully. I guess maybe left some wiggle room but with financial penalties for reductions in options. That means CBS and Fox possibly underpaid though since if NBC has less options, they get more.

(05-21-2023 06:35 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-21-2023 06:11 PM)Glenn360 Wrote:  Gotta make compromises when chasing every dollar, I guess.

USC/UCLA could alleviate the night game issue in November but the question will be what teams are you sending out there?

USC/UCLA is an obvious November night game every year. It doesn't make much sense at 9am in Los Angeles when the Big Three would rather play at noon (especially Rivalry Week when it will obviously be UM/OSU), the only argument will be if CBS wants the game. Then in the years Notre Dame plays at USC they can have that game in prime time (again CBS could want it but it could be vs. the Iron Bowl on ABC, assuming the Iron Bowl stays in the middle slot and doesn't move to prime time).

As I think about this, you don't want 4 November night games set every year for SoCal. What if USCLA are both bad for 5 years in a row? Realistically, you could plan for one NW game with their awesome new stadium once it's completed, one Nebraska game (first weekend), then 1 each for USCLA as a better solution until 2030.

(05-21-2023 07:00 PM)Buckeye22 Wrote:  

(05-21-2023 05:42 PM)schmolik Wrote:  https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...ncertainty

Some interesting tidbits:

"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.

That's not an entitled attitude at all. Some people would just be happy to be so relevant year after year that they get the best time slot. Eventually, you guys will falter, or some other B1G schools will rise up to actually challenge the SEC's best. Perhaps you'll get 4 straight November night games in a row.

(05-21-2023 07:09 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  That this wasn't figured in kind of is weird. The selection criteria given you had 3 different networks involved should have been spelled out fully. I guess maybe left some wiggle room but with financial penalties for reductions in options. That means CBS and Fox possibly underpaid though since if NBC has less options, they get more.

More likely it means that the rumored B1G payouts won't be quite as large as originally reported. I wonder how much lower they could go? The ACC could be going through all this turmoil for no reason.

The details in the ESPN article that go beyond November night games add up IMO to probelms for the B1G and an embarrassment.

Looks like the money wasn't all it was cracked up to be.

SEC is laughing, lol.