I can easily believe that the Big 10 would be talking to Oklahoma and Texas and that both should listen. I really think that the Big 12 has to expand to 14 or 16 or go the way of the Dodo bird.

The problem for university’s like OU, Texas and KU is who can you add that adds to you conference value.

Most, if not all the available university’s would decrease the net conference split to existing members.... so it doesn’t do any good to add new Big 12 members.

For university’s like OU, KU and UT the B1G offers a much larger up side particularly when you consider the huge academic implications that are worth big bucks.
The B1G has increased its footprint in some of the big eastern citys, this should help them when they are renegotiating TV contracts.

The problem for university’s like OU, Texas and KU is who can you add that adds to you conference value.

No one. The teams that would come to the B12 would make us a mid-major conference.

BTW, isn't there someting that says a conference can't have fewer than 10 members? Or maybe that's the B12 TV deal that I'm thinking of. Either way, if OU and texas leave, I really don't believe the remaining members could add anyone of substance and that would end the B12 conference.

The 10 is fine mentality is going to bite them. Though I wonder if they are just waiting on how the ACC vs Maryland lawsuit works out first.

FYI----
OU needs to grow the size of its fan base...

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/?_r=1
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/09/19/us/fivethirtyeight-0919-geocolfootball-big12/fivethirtyeight-0919-geocolfootball-big12-blog480.png

FYI----
OU needs to grow the size of its fan base...

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/?_r=1
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/09/19/us/fivethirtyeight-0919-geocolfootball-big12/fivethirtyeight-0919-geocolfootball-big12-blog480.png

That is a very flawed "poll". It says Georgia tech is 11th in fans. Good idea they just need to sort it out

I think it's a fascinating look inside the minds of college football fans.

To put the numbers in perspective from OU48A's post showing the Big 12, here is the Top 10 nationwide:

http://i.imgur.com/2HAnXdw.jpg

The very basic takeaway is it's all about population near the schools.

That is a very flawed "poll". It says Georgia tech is 11th in fans. Good idea they just need to sort it out

I agree that it isn't totally accurate but it's still a decent picture in many cases of a fan base size.

I think it's a fascinating look inside the minds of college football fans.

To put the numbers in perspective from OU48A's post showing the Big 12, here is the Top 10 nationwide:

http://i.imgur.com/2HAnXdw.jpg

The takeaway is it's all about population near the schools.

There is no way that Auburn has more fans than Alabama?

There is no way that Auburn has more fans than Alabama?

It's always been said to be pretty evenly divided in the region and that's what this shows.

I think it's a fascinating look inside the minds of college football fans.

To put the numbers in perspective from OU48A's post showing the Big 12, here is the Top 10 nationwide:

http://i.imgur.com/2HAnXdw.jpg

The very basic takeaway is it's all about population near the schools.

It has been rare in the last several years for OU to not be at capacity or somehow over. Texas, A&M and probably most on this list have larger stadium capacities.

It has been rare in the last several years for OU to not be at capacity or somehow over. Texas, A&M and probably most on this list have larger stadium capacities.

Does this list have anything to do with stadium size or capacity? I don't want to go back and read it again, but isn't it just pointing that out that's a coincidence.

Does this list have anything to do with stadium size or capacity? I don't want to go back and read it again, but isn't it just pointing that out that's a coincidence.

It is mention in what I quoted,that popular teams tend to have the largest game attendance, my point was that game attendance numbers has some limits on usefulness when practicality no stadium has the same capacity so directly comparing them can be disingenuous.

In regards to the AAU thinking, isn't some of their criteria a bit suspect? Seems like much of it is antiquated and does not really apply to the current formation of schools and campuses. I think one of the things that dinged Nebraska the hardest was their agriculture research was funded in large part by the FDA which is not counted by the AAU and the fact their medical school was not on campus, it was in Omaha instead.

The research funding was part of it. The other part was UN's Medical School has it's own Chancellor and was seen as not being part of the University in terms of funding and research. Seems kind of stuipd for the AAU to look at it that way but that's mho.

Still waiting. When are we moving to the B1G? Or did Boren turn them down because they wouldn't take tejas?

Still waiting. When are we moving to the B1G? Or did Boren turn them down because they wouldn't take tejas?The rumor is to not expect any major news until this spring..... Spring is usually when we have heard about most of these conference changes. If OU moves, the B1G still seems to be the mostly likely place, but the move could be years away too.

This is interesting speculation

Frank the Tank Mailbag: Part I ? I?m Not in the Realignment Business. I?m in the Empire Business. | FRANK THE TANK'S SLANT (http://frankthetank.me/2013/09/11/frank-the-tank-mailbag-part-i-im-not-in-the-realignment-business-im-in-the-empire-business/)

Let’s start with my previous post, where I point out how difficult and unlikely it is to break a grant of rights arrangement over the next decade or so. As a result, the likelihood of Big Ten expansion in the near future is extremely low, as I don’t believe that the conference is interested in anyone that isn’t already in one of the 5 power conferences (meaning no one in the AAC or any other Group of 5 conference is compelling enough).
Now, whenever the Big Ten expansion does kick up again, Kansas is certainly high up there on the list. The Jayhawks are to future Big Ten expansion in the way that Pharrell Williams ended up singing on the two largest Billboard hits of the summer (“Blurred Lines” and “Get Lucky”) despite not headlining either of them: it’s hard to see KU not involved as a contiguous AAU school with an elite basketball program, but they also can’t be the biggest athletic name in that expansion, either. One thing that I’ve loved about writing this blog is that I hope that I’ve helped to elevate the discussion of conference realignment to take into account factors that many fans didn’t consider previously (i.e. academics, TV markets, branding, etc.), yet we sometimes do need to take a step back and realize that the product on the field (or court) is still what makes all of the off-the-field money possible, so expansion has to serve those needs. Thus, a hypothetical Kansas/Virginia or Kansas/Missouri (not that I think the Big Ten is ever going to poach the SEC and vice versa) expansion combo for the Big Ten might serve some TV market and AAU status purposes, but that doesn’t have the requisite athletic (and more specifically, football) impact that is required for what could conceivably be the last two spots in the Big Ten. (For all of those that would counter, “Rutgers and Maryland weren’t added for sports!”, I would say that (a) there was a football goal achieved since New Jersey and Maryland were the two top non-Sun Belt states for football recruits that weren’t already in the Big Ten footprint and (b) pure TV market additions were acceptable when looking that them in conjunction with the elite football addition of Nebraska.)
Putting aside the obvious no-brainer additions like Texas, I’m firmly in camp of supporting the addition Oklahoma to the Big Ten and I don’t believe that it’s a purely fan-focused football move. The main detraction for Oklahoma that I often see is that it isn’t an AAU member, but its academic metrics aren’t really far off at all from now-non-AAU member Nebraska and its neighboring old Big 8 AAU schools (Missouri, Kansas and Iowa State). There isn’t the wide academic gap between OU and Nebraska that there was in the case of Louisville compared to the rest of the ACC. Some Big Ten observers believe that the non-AAU status of Oklahoma is a non-starter, but I doubt that the conference would have engaged performing due diligence on the Sooners unless there was some legit interest involved. More importantly, the lack of AAU status for other expansion candidates was simply another reason on top of a number of other factors that made the target school undesirable (i.e. geography, lack of a fan base, lack of a football brand name, not a new TV market, etc.). It’s easy for the Big Ten to ignore a merely “good” football program based on academics (i.e. West Virginia or Louisville), but Oklahoma is a top level king school that would bring a ton of national TV dollars. Even Oklahoma’s smaller home state population on paper is mitigated by the fact that its fan base crosses over into North Texas and the Dallas-Fort Worth area (and Kansas, by the same token, can’t just be looked at by its home state population alone since it’s the top college team in the Kansas City market that takes a large chunk of Missouri).

The upshot is that if the Big Ten goes to 16 schools, then the last 2 additions actually need to make markets irrelevant. What are the 2 additions that can truly transform the BTN from a regional network to a legit national network? Sure, if the Big Ten has the choice, they’d want Texas and Notre Dame (or some other unattainable major market prize like North Carolina or Florida). However, if we’re talking about the top brand names that are willing to reciprocate the Big Ten’s overtures, Oklahoma and Kansas are sitting right there to supercharge the conferences’ football and basketball lineups, respectively. Penetrating a diverse market like New York City has as much to do with the national interest in various teams as it does with local interest, which aids the cases of OU and KU.

Frankly, the biggest factor working the Big Ten going after either OU and KU (much more than academic concerns) is the political pressure of those schools’ respective in-state brothers (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I believe the Big Ten would expand with an OU/KU combo, but the conference won’t be willing to take either Oklahoma State and Kansas State in the process. Those “little brother” schools might be non-negotiable from a political perspective even if Jayhawk and Sooner fans don’t want to believe that to be the case, so that could stop Big Ten expansion regardless of any Big 12 grant of rights concerns. So, that brings me back to my initial point that Big Ten expansion isn’t likely, albeit it’s still fun to talk about after all of this time.

I’ll be back with Part II of the mailbag going over issues such as EA Sports NCAA ’14, Big East expansion and pro sports realignment shortly. Talk to you again soon!

While the Big Ten might be a nice goal, I think his story did highlight a lot of things working against it. One that wasn't mentioned was the OU/TX game. Donors and Alum aren't going to want to give it up. Yes I know we lost Nebraska, and TX lost A&M...but those still aren't OU/TX. That would be like asking OSU/Mich to stop playing...it wouldn't happen. So then you are looking at giving up an OOC game every year to keep the RRR going.

The whole thing is going to come down to what the magic number for the conferences will be. Is it 14...16...18...20? Theoretically you could go to 20 team super-conferences where there would be no cross divisional play with a championship game. If 20 is the goal, then that opens the door on a lot of scenarios. The biggest issue on anything going forward is the Big 12 being too passive when it comes to securing a future. We could/should go to at least 14, if not 16, to secure things...especially after we see the outcome of Maryland v. ACC. If they are able to buy out or break the GoR, then there is no reason we shouldn't immediately move to poach the ACC.

If we go to 14...take Louisville, Clemson, Florida State, and Virginia Tech.

If we go to 16...Miami, Pitt, and/or Cincinnati.

From 1921 to 1995 the OU-Texas game was a non-conference game.

From 1921 to 1995 the OU-Texas game was a non-conference game.

But were conferences as large as they are trending? You only have so many OOC games to play as the conference schedule gets more and more. They probably would still be able to make it work, but issues will probably come up on having it during the state fair and such. Just something that needs to be considered.

There are more games now than way back when, 12 games instead of 7 as it used to be and increased every so often by a game to the current 12. The larger the conferences get they will have to go to the divisions and split scheduling like the old Big 12 had (5 division, 3 rotating out of division games), there is no way around it with a 16 team conference.

dup

There are more games now than way back when, 12 games instead of 7 as it used to be and increased every so often by a game to the current 12. The larger the conferences get they will have to go to the divisions and split scheduling like the old Big 12 had (5 division, 3 rotating out of division games), there is no way around it with a 16 team conference.

Right but you aren't taking into account the larger sizes. 5 division would imply 6 team divisions. That only works in either 12 or 24 team conferences...not the 14 or 16 we'll have (possibly up to 18 or 20). Now I guess you could go with a 4 team division breakdown...but then you are looking at needing to have a 4 team playoff in your own league.

So if you want to keep the 3 OOC...

14 Team League = 3 OOC, 6 Division, 3 Conference plus 1 Conference Championship

16 Team League = 3 OOC, 3 Division, 6 Conference plus 1 Conference Playoff, 1 Conf Champ *or* 3 OOC, 7 Division, 2 Conference plus 1 Conf Champ.

18 Team League = 3 OOC, 8 Division, 1 Conference plus 1 Conf Champ

20 Team League = 2 OOC, 9 Division plus 1 Conference Championship *or* 3 OOC, 4 Division, 5 Conference plus 1 Conf Playoff, 1 Conf Champ.

Bottom line is if we want to ensure teams can still have 3 OOC games a season, its going to require limiting conference play...mostly to the point of keeping it in division with little cross division play. We also get to the point where a couple teams could end up playing 16 games a season.

I stress this is my personal speculation...but...you know, the general assumption is that Texas is the one blocking an expansion of the Big 12 back to 12 teams...but I think there's at least the non-zero possibility that D. Boren et al have some insight that suggests the only paths to expanding to 12 would force some sort of unpalatable change to OU-Texas, eg out of state fair, out of Dallas, not every year, who knows.. I think Boren knows that losing OU-Nebbish was one thing, but losing the other would be a much bigger bucket of stinkfish to tip over.

In all honesty, and call me an old-school curmudgeon if you must, but I preferred OU-Texas when it wasn't a conference game. It was pure cross-state hatred then. It was in the pre-PC police era such that it was legal to call it the Red River Riot. These days, the conference business just puts a somewhat artificial layer of slop atop it.

I remember something in all the talk about 16 team conferences going to 4 pod system, not sure how all the rotations worked though.

I remember when it was the Red River Shootout.

Even if OU and UT are in different conferences there is not much danger of the series ending.
The Dallas location makes this a huge driver of donations for both university’s.
I believe its best though if OU and Texas stay in the same conference.
As the flagship university in their respective states they usually have a way of making each other better. If the Big 12 dies OU, KU and Texas should stick together and move to the B1G.

NC court up held the ACC's lawsuit against Maryland, requiring them to pay the $52 million exit fee. This probably makes it too expensive now for the Big 12 to attempt a raid on the ACC.

North Carolina courts uphold ACC's $52M lawsuit against Maryland - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/24249116/north-carolina-courts-uphold-accs-52m-lawsuit-against-maryland)

BYU wants a Big 12 invite...

BYU's Mendenhall: Cougars would 'love to be' invited to Big 12 - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/24582046/byus-mendenhall-cougars-would-love-to-be-invited-to-big-12)

Tough cookies?

If we had to pick up anyone, and all the majors were locked in an unable to move, then I would say Cincinnati to pair with WVU and also get into a larger media market.

BYU wants a Big 12 invite...

BYU's Mendenhall: Cougars would 'love to be' invited to Big 12 - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/24582046/byus-mendenhall-cougars-would-love-to-be-invited-to-big-12)

Tough cookies?

If we had to pick up anyone, and all the majors were locked in an unable to move, then I would say Cincinnati to pair with WVU and also get into a larger media market.

Don't think there are any teams that could enhance the Big 12 that are attainable at this time. It's all about TV markets. It would be better if some of the Big 12 teams simply found new conferences to go to. Some of these Big 12 teams need to be in a Mountain West type conference IMO. The Big 12 just doesn't have the juice it once had and it seems it's losing more and more by the year. I just can not see this conference surviving long term as is.

Don't think there are any teams that could enhance the Big 12 that are attainable at this time. It's all about TV markets. It would be better if some of the Big 12 teams simply found new conferences to go to. Some of these Big 12 teams need to be in a Mountain West type conference IMO. The Big 12 just doesn't have the juice it once had and it seems it's losing more and more by the year. I just can not see this conference surviving long term as is.

Big 12 schools made over $23M apiece last year, highest in all of collegiate sports. It's valuable because network execs find it more valuable together than apart. Why would OU move to the Big 10, for example, and lose value? That conference's network makes it less valuable to ESPN/Fox/ABC. The only future that makes sense is keeping the conferences without a dedicated network together and forming strategic alliances (Big 12, SEC, ACC).

Despite all the revenue football produces, do you know how many universities have a self-funded athletic department? The answer is, only 7. That means the 223 other Universities still require taxpayer money to make ends meet in their athletic departments.

Who are the 7?
Texas
Ohio State
Oklahoma
LSU
Penn State
Nebraska
Purdue

USA Today | Sports | COLLEGE (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/)

Green Country sent this to me directly but it goes with the discussion here...


Larger media market?

Salt Lake City is 33rd.

Cincinnati is 34th.

I am thinking more so Fox Sports Ohio is going to allow the Big 12 to tap into that entire area/state some, even though it will still be second to the Big Ten.

Big 12 schools made over $23M apiece last year, highest in all of collegiate sports. It's valuable because network execs find it more valuable together than apart. Why would OU move to the Big 10, for example, and lose value? That conference's network makes it less valuable to ESPN/Fox/ABC. The only future that makes sense is keeping the conferences without a dedicated network together and forming strategic alliances (Big 12, SEC, ACC).

SEC schools are set to make aprox. 35 mil.+ per with the upcoming sec network set to begin. Plus their CBS deal is expiring soon and will add even more. Big 10 will also be adding revenues from the teams they have just added in Rutgers and Maryland. That will let them tap into then huge New York and Balt./DC markets.

Now the Big 12 revenues will be going down per school because TCU and WVU were only getting a small share. They will be fully vested soon and per team basis will be right around 20 mil. So in a few years these other conferences will be making much much more per school than the Big 12 will be. This is the reason why some are predicting the Big 12 breaking up in the not so distant future. The Big 12 really doesn't have any good options to expand that will enhance the revenue.

SEC schools are set to make aprox. 35 mil.+ per with the upcoming sec network set to begin. Plus their CBS deal is expiring soon and will add even more. Big 10 will also be adding revenues from the teams they have just added in Rutgers and Maryland. That will let them tap into then huge New York and Balt./DC markets.

Now the Big 12 revenues will be going down per school because TCU and WVU were only getting a small share. They will be fully vested soon and per team basis will be right around 20 mil. So in a few years these other conferences will be making much much more per school than the Big 12 will be. This is the reason why some are predicting the Big 12 breaking up in the not so distant future. The Big 12 really doesn't have any good options to expand that will enhance the revenue.

Rutgers does not bring the New York market. It only delivers central New Jersey. Notre Dame, more than any other institution, would do that. Syracuse and Connecticut are about as popular as Rutgers in New York. But that's not our main point of disagreement. We disagree about the relative value of the Big 12 at ten teams compared to other leagues.

First, the Big 12's revenue per member would have still been higher than any other league's this year even if all ten members were fully vested. Second, you're assuming that the other conferences will see a windfall from their new television deals. That is true, but even the Big 10, which expects to see the most dough per institution, projects $45 million/year per school. The Big 12's deal with ESPN and Fox are backloaded, and members are projected to receive $40 million/year per school. Because third tier rights are free to be sold by Big 12 schools individually, some schools (Texas, Oklahoma, Tech) will earn more than Big 10 schools, and the rest will earn close to the same.

The Big 12 survives not because of any warm and fuzzy feelings between Ames and Waco -- it's all about dollars and they are better off together than apart.

Despite all the revenue football produces, do you know how many universities have a self-funded athletic department? The answer is, only 7. That means the 223 other Universities still require taxpayer money to make ends meet in their athletic departments.

Who are the 7?
Texas
Ohio State
Oklahoma
LSU
Penn State
Nebraska
Purdue

USA Today | Sports | COLLEGE (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/)

It's usually not taxpayer money, it's student activity fees.

on May 20, 2014 at 1:03 PM, updated May 20, 2014 at 1:05 PM



0
Reddit
Email
rutgers football stock
Blake Camper, highly recruited offensive tackle, explains why he chose Rutgers
Rutgers rookies get immediate taste of the business side of the NFL
Blake Camper, 3-star Virginia offensive tackle, commits to Rutgers
Early signing period up for discussion at CCA meeting this month
Rutgers AD Julie Hermann must overcome financial hurdles to compete in Big Ten
All Stories |

NEW YORK -- Big Ten Network president Mark Silverman said his goal is to cover each of the conference's 14 schools equally. But in Rutgers' debut season, the Scarlet Knights should get more than their share of coverage.

Rutgers and Maryland are set to join the Big Ten on July 1 and Silverman intends to put a spotlight on the new conference members.

July 2 will be "Rutgers Day" on the Big Ten Network, with 24 hours of coverage devoted to the Scarlet Knights. The day of programming will be highlighted by a one-hour special that will feature interviews with Rutgers' coaches about joining the Big Ten and the network's analysts breaking down how the school will perform in the league.

Silverman is also in the process of securing the broadcasting rights to classic football games. He has a list of 10-15 games he's targeting, including some from the 2006 season and past bowl games.

"There will be more coverage of their programs than Rutgers has ever imagined," Silverman said in an interview with NJ.com on Monday. "I think it's going to really incentivize the alums and the fan base to become even further interested in the program. That's how it's worked so far with the other schools."

Silverman already has taken a major step to bring the BTN to Rutgers fans, as he said he has reached deals with Time Warner Cable and Cablevision to broadly distribute the network in the New York metropolitan area. Silverman is confident the network will soon reach a similar deal with Comcast, which is the cable provider for a large portion of New Jersey.

The BTN is currently available through those providers on sports tier packages. These deals will move the network to expanded basic cable, which is in line with how the BTN is carried in other Big Ten states.

"I would say our goal is to have the network broadly distributed throughout the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions prior to kickoff," Silverman said. "We feel pretty good about being able to achieve that. So far it's been successful and we don't see any reason that won't continue."

With the distribution process going smoothly, Silverman said the pressure is on to produce programming that people will want to watch. Silverman said expectations are especially high in this market, which has him determined to provide Rutgers fans high-quality content.

That begins with Rutgers' first football game on the network, the Sept. 13 primetime clash with Penn State at High Point Solutions Stadium.

Silverman is working out the logistics of having a smaller-scale version of ESPN's wildly popular College GameDay show on location.

BTN's game day show is studio-based and has never done a pregame broadcast from outside of a stadium. But Silverman is determined to broadcast on-site to capture what he expects to be an electric atmosphere for the 8 p.m. kickoff.

"I think the Penn State-Rutgers rivalry is going to be something that is really going to takeoff," Silverman said. "We're really excited about that game. I think it's going to be a great game. I think there will be a lot emotion, a sold-out stadium, a lot of buzz. It's kind of what we want to be. Those are the games we want the network to be a part of."

Silverman plans to add an analyst with Rutgers ties to broadcasts of the team's games this season to further bolster the viewing experience for Scarlet Knights fans.

"We're still kind of finalizing who that's going to be and how that's going to work," Silverman said. "I want to be able to be credible and knowledgeable."

Silverman said Rutgers fans can expect daily coverage of their teams, which includes sports that typically get minimal attention on other networks. The network currently reaches 52 million homes across America, and Silverman expects Rutgers' teams to experience a recruiting boost that accompanies that exposure.

There are also the significant financial benefits the network provides, as the member schools are projected to receive $44.5 million each in 2017-18 from the conference's next television contract. Rutgers won't be eligible for a full share until the 2020-21 school year, but Silverman expects the school to reap the rewards of the new conference and the BTN sooner than that.

"It's an opportunity Rutgers has never had, which is to play the teams we're playing, having a network that we're having and having the financial benefits," Silverman said. "It's never existed. So I think any kind of look at the history as an indicator of what's going to happen in the future doesn't necessarily apply here because there's never been these kinds of key building blocks that are now in existence."

The sec and Big10 will be the big dogs from here on out. I fully expect the Big 12 to disband and peel off to other conferences. The Big Dogs will have the money and that is what controls college football and just about everything else in life I am sorry to say. There is no way that the current Big 12 will ever compete with the revenue these conferences will be bringing in. Sad but true. The sec is projected to top 45 mil. per team in the next 5 years. The Big 12 doesn't have the tv sets to pull in that kind of money. It's just the way it is. So we will see Big 10 and Sec teams bringing in 45 mil per and Big 12 teams bringing in 20 mil. per after TCU and WVU are fully vested. TCU and WVU only made around 12 mil. each this year while the other teams took more but when it's all even it will be right around 20 mil per year per team.


A&M and Mizzou were smart to leave when they did and they were both 100% vested the day they joined. Like I said,it's all about the tv sets.

And yes,Rutgers did in fact get the Big 10 in to the NY market. This is the sole reason the Big 10 added Rutgers


I don’t exactly have a perfect record of predictions on this blog (as evidenced by the regular stream of friendly visitors from TexAgs that still remind me of what I wrote about Texas A&M and SEC expansion a few years ago), but one big picture issue that I understood from day one (meaning literally right when it was announced in 2006) was that the Big Ten Network would be a massive game changer for the conference and college sports overall. What others saw as vanity project destined to fail compared to the SEC’s then-traditional TV deal with ESPN, with the harshest criticism coming from Big Ten country itself, I looked at as the platform to turn the Big Ten into the New York Yankees of college sports financially. Many sports fans look at the BTN as shooting fish in a barrel money-wise now, but a lot of them have collective amnesia about how much criticism the network took in its first year of existence (including Tom Izzo publicly calling it a “PR nightmare”) and beyond when the SEC signed what was a then-large guaranteed deal with ESPN in 2008. Even when the Big Ten initially announced that it was looking to expand in 2009, many commentators didn’t bother taking into account how much the BTN would drive the process. If it wasn’t clear with the addition of Nebraska (which, despite its small market, could effectively have the BTN charge whatever it wanted to games and Husker fans would pay up), it was blatantly obvious with the expansion with Rutgers (New York/New Jersey market) and Maryland (Washington, DC/Baltimore market).

So, I can imagine how satisfied Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and the rest of the conference officials must feel with the BTN on the precipice of capturing the great white whale of college sports: the New York City market. According to the Star-Ledger, BTN has entered into deals with Time Warner Cable and Cablevision for basic cable carriage of the channel in the NYC area (with discussions with Comcast moving along well). That means every the BTN (and by, extension, every Big Ten school) is going to receive a significant chunk of change from each Time Warner Cable and Cablevision basic subscriber covered under the deal. (Awful Announcing had a back-of-the-napkin calculation of at least $48 million per year for the Big Ten just from this single carriage deal, although that likely overstates the immediate impact since it doesn’t take into account Fox’s 51% ownership interest in the network and various expenses. Still, this market represents tens of millions of dollars per year for the Big Ten solely based on the BTN.) The skeptics of whether Rutgers would pay off for the Big Ten (myself included) are about to eat crow. This was the financial end game for the Big Ten when the expansion process began nearly 5 years ago: the addition of a massive market the size of either Texas or New York for the BTN. The Texas Longhorns weren’t willing partners on the former, so the Big Ten moved onto the latter.

Frankly, the fact that the BTN was able to negotiate a deal this quickly (several months before football season starts) in any part of the New York DMA was surprising (and bodes very well for the Washington and Baltimore markets where Maryland has a stronger sports presence compared to Rutgers in the New York area). Cable and satellite industry consolidation (the ongoing regulatory approval process of the Comcast acquisition of Time Warner Cable and AT&T’s newly announced deal to acquire DirecTV) is likely in the backdrop, while BTN co-owner Fox has the ability to leverage its cross-ownership of YES (and there isn’t much more powerful programming in the NYC market than Yankees games).

Now, no one should be naive enough to believe that this cable TV money train will run into perpetuity. Cord cutting is on the rise and that will likely continue to accelerate among non-sports fans that can get their programming fixes from online sources such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu. However, sports are still the killer app when it comes to live TV, which is why NBC/Comcast signed yet another expensive long-term extension of its Olympics rights that will last until I’m close to retirement age in 2032. Meanwhile, the Big Ten itself is gearing up to go to market with its first tier sports rights (with the new contract starting for the 2016 2017 football season) and will almost assuredly sign what will be the largest TV deal in college sports history without even including BTN money in the equation.*

(* For what it’s worth and this is strictly my semi-educated guess, but I believe that the Big Ten will end up with a split of rights between ESPN and Fox similar to how the Pac-12 and Big 12 deals are structured. It makes sense from the exposure and financial perspectives, while ESPN and Fox have clearly shown a willingness to partner with each other on large deals. The latest example of this is the recently-announced MLS/US Soccer deal with ESPN and Fox splitting the rights.)

With the Midwest having a lower proportion of the US population each year**, the East Coast has become a critical focus for the Big Ten out of necessity. The recent announcements of the Big Ten/Big East basketball challenge and the awarding of the Big Ten Tournament to the Verizon Center in Washington, DC in 2017 are important pieces to the league’s Eastern strategy, but the BTN carriage is definitely the clinching factor in all of the B1G plans.

(** Note that this different than the gross misnomer of the Midwest “losing population” that is often perpetuated in the national media, which simply isn’t true. What’s occurring is that the Midwest’s growth is much slower than other regions of the country. Granted, the legacy populations of places like Illinois, Ohio and Michigan are still extremely large to the point where it would still take many years, if not decades, for smaller faster growing states to catch up to them.)

Rutgers does not bring the New York market. It only delivers central New Jersey. Notre Dame, more than any other institution, would do that. Syracuse and Connecticut are about as popular as Rutgers in New York. But that's not our main point of disagreement. We disagree about the relative value of the Big 12 at ten teams compared to other leagues.

First, the Big 12's revenue per member would have still been higher than any other league's this year even if all ten members were fully vested. Second, you're assuming that the other conferences will see a windfall from their new television deals. That is true, but even the Big 10, which expects to see the most dough per institution, projects $45 million/year per school. The Big 12's deal with ESPN and Fox are backloaded, and members are projected to receive $40 million/year per school. Because third tier rights are free to be sold by Big 12 schools individually, some schools (Texas, Oklahoma, Tech) will earn more than Big 10 schools, and the rest will earn close to the same.

The Big 12 survives not because of any warm and fuzzy feelings between Ames and Waco -- it's all about dollars and they are better off together than apart.

Actually Rutgers does bring the NY market as central Jersey is in the NY market. There is no central Jersey market, per se. Jersey has two markets, NY and Philly. I am referring to the television market.

Actually Rutgers does bring the NY market as central Jersey is in the NY market. There is no central Jersey market, per se. Jersey has two markets, NY and Philly. I am referring to the television market.

Sorry but that is flat out incorrect. NY is a market that does not care about college football in proportion to its size. When it does, it is more about Notre Dame than Rutgers. Even still, Syracuse and UConn carry as much weight as Rutgers. According to the NYTimes, so does Michigan and Penn State. Come on -- if Rutgers were the big NYC draw, they would have been in a major conference long ago. Rutgers brings as many total eyes to televisions as Kentucky, Boston College, or Texas Tech. In the Big 10, they will be the second smallest draw other than Maryland, which brings a fan base comparable to Kansas State or TCU.

Jersey, you might want to believe that Jersey is either this or that, but that is simply untrue. People vote with their viewing habits, and Rutgers is bringing the B10 a Texas Tech and nothing more.

It doesn't really matter if NY cares about college football. Like I said,it's all about the tv sets and there are a bunch of tv sets that pay a monthly subscription. They might be watching something other than football but that football channel is still part of the plan they are paying for. That is how these schools are making so much money. And that is why the Big 12 is falling behind. The Big 12 just doesn't have the tv sets to compete with these other conferences. TV sets = dollars

Sorry but that is flat out incorrect. NY is a market that does not care about college football in proportion to its size. When it does, it is more about Notre Dame than Rutgers. Even still, Syracuse and UConn carry as much weight as Rutgers. According to the NYTimes, so does Michigan and Penn State. Come on -- if Rutgers were the big NYC draw, they would have been in a major conference long ago. Rutgers brings as many total eyes to televisions as Kentucky, Boston College, or Texas Tech. In the Big 10, they will be the second smallest draw other than Maryland, which brings a fan base comparable to Kansas State or TCU.

Jersey, you might want to believe that Jersey is either this or that, but that is simply untrue. People vote with their viewing habits, and Rutgers is bringing the B10 a Texas Tech and nothing more.

It doesn't really matter if NY cares about college football. Like I said,it's all about the tv sets and there are a bunch of tv sets that pay a monthly subscription. They might be watching something other than football but that football channel is still part of the plan they are paying for. That is how these schools are making so much money. And that is why the Big 12 is falling behind. The Big 12 just doesn't have the tv sets to compete with these other conferences. TV sets = dollars

Actually it’s a bit of both……
Rutgers is not a great TV draw on the over the air networks such as ABC and don’t move the TV contract needle on first and second tier contracts in the way that adding a university like Texas, ND or even OU would for the B1G.

But just as OKCRT indicates the cable TV subscribers pay, rather they want to or not, a certain amount of money on their monthly bill for the B1G TV network….. This money is divided up among all B1G conference members equally........ but since there are so many TV cable subscribers in the Rutgers market it adds up to a lot of money and they are paying money to the B1G rather they care about Rutgers or not. But this is almost irrelevant to the rest of the B1G since they are making so much more money.

The OU FOX third tier TV deal works similarly in that if your subscribing to cable TV in our area some of your monthly bill (a very small amount) is going to OU rather you want it or not.
OU officials are said to be very happy with OU’s 3T, TV deal while the OSU president indicated that the Big 12 should split the 3T money among Big 12 conference members. Splitting the 3T money in the Big 12 or old Big 8 has never been done and is so unrealistic that it would be guaranteed to split up the Big 12 conference. This is extremely short sighted thinking because splitting up the conference would cost the lower revenue Big 12 university’s far more money than they would ever gain though 3T revenue sharing. They would be relegated in most case to a much lower paying (TV contracts/ bowls) conference.

It doesn't really matter if NY cares about college football. Like I said,it's all about the tv sets and there are a bunch of tv sets that pay a monthly subscription. They might be watching something other than football but that football channel is still part of the plan they are paying for. That is how these schools are making so much money. And that is why the Big 12 is falling behind. The Big 12 just doesn't have the tv sets to compete with these other conferences. TV sets = dollars

I hear what you're saying, and you bring up some good points -- but there's really nothing to panic about. Big 12 schools stand to make plenty. If there were an existential threat, UT and OU would be at the lead making moves. Now when the TV contract expires (and at the same time the grant of rights expires), look to see if it still makes sense to keep the band together.

Most of the last realignment had little to do with fan base size and whether people actually watch the games, it had everything to do with potential viewers in a market and what numbers they could sell to advertisers.

Most of the last realignment had little to do with fan base size and whether people actually watch the games, it had everything to do with potential viewers in a market and what numbers they could sell to advertisers.

Absolutely right. And, at bottom, that's what OKCRT is worried about. But those same conditions that created that instability do not exist today. 3 conferences at at 14 with no one to cannabilize because of grant of rights agreements (which expire in about a decade), and all of the Big 5 conferences are getting paid absurd sums of gold. Now in the mid 2020s, we could have another round of fun.

...but do those "grant of rights" agreements survive if NCAA Division I-A dissolves and the top conferences go out on their own? There are a lot of permutations to what may happen by 2020 or later. It is really entering an unknown future. About the only thing that comes close to being comparable is when CART split into IndyCar and CART/ChampCar but even that is a very indirect comparison.

Yes

Grant of rights could easily be negated. If several teams leave the conference there will be no conference and the other teams will flee to wherever they can. Lets just say for example Texas decides to join the Big 10. OU then decides that the sec is the place to be (and it is IMO). KU would also lobby the Big 10 as there have already been whispers about them. These other teams would be searching out for new homes. The grant of rights is not something that binds these teams to some kind of iron clad contract. It can easily be busted up.

Originally Posted by bluedogok
Most of the last realignment had little to do with fan base size and whether people actually watch the games, it had everything to do with potential viewers in a market and what numbers they could sell to advertisers.



Absolutely right. And, at bottom, that's what OKCRT is worried about. But those same conditions that created that instability do not exist today. 3 conferences at at 14 with no one to cannabilize because of grant of rights agreements (which expire in about a decade), and all of the Big 5 conferences are getting paid absurd sums of gold. Now in the mid 2020s, we could have another round of fun.

Thats the point I was trying to make. There are no central NJ television stations, NYC channels cover this area. The southern part of Jersey is the Philly television market.

Grant of rights could easily be negated. If several teams leave the conference there will be no conference and the other teams will flee to wherever they can. Lets just say for example Texas decides to join the Big 10. OU then decides that the sec is the place to be (and it is IMO). KU would also lobby the Big 10 as there have already been whispers about them. These other teams would be searching out for new homes. The grant of rights is not something that binds these teams to some kind of iron clad contract. It can easily be busted up.

Well, Texas would be the one with the problem. They've fashioned a conference where their own network can exist. Neither the Big 10 or the SEC would accept Texas as a member unless they gave up their 3rd tier rights, which they're obviously unwilling to do. So, Texas has huge incentive to keep the conference together, no?

I think after something like 5 years ESPN has the right to terminate the LHN contract. If things stay the way they are I could see that happening or at least ESPN not renewing the contract.

The Longhorn network is espn. The new sec network is also espn. They could easily come together. I would imagine that espn would love nothing more than to dump the longhorn network and band together with the sec network. The longhorn network is a money loser for espn.