Big Ten Expansion: It's The Ratings, Stupid
by Adam Jacobi on Apr 20, 2010 5:00 PM CDT
in Iowa Hawkeyes News
Email
PrintOne of the things that most people--ourselves most certainly included--assumed about the Big Ten strategy for expansion is that the ultimate goal was the largest carriage footprint possible (by population, we mean, not area). We didn't understand why Nebraska was in the discussions, then, because while they were certainly a traditional power, it didn't seem like they'd add much to the subscriber base except for Omaha, the rest of Nebraska, the Dakotas, and maybe Wyoming. Pitt and Notre Dame, meanwhile, were in already saturated markets, so they seemed to make even less immediate sense.
Then we read this epic post from Frank The Tank, who has become an absolute must-read during conference expansion talk, and for the first time, we have some numbers to work off of, plus one very surprising fact:
The majority of the BTN's revenue does not come from subscription fees.
Here's more on the subject from FTT's post, written by a veteran of the business:
By the Big Ten’s own admission they are clearing about $0.36 per subscriber per month for the states inside it’s footprint. They also tell us that there are 26,000,000 subscribers and it is AVAILABLE to 75,000,000 people. The BTN wants to increase the available number but even more important is to increase the subscriber numbers, and there is an opportunity to do that within the current footprint. Regardless, at $0.36 per month for 26,000,000 households over 12 months I only came up with $112,320,000 for a cable carry rate. Well short of the $272,000,000 that the network likely made last year. The other $160,000,000 is advertising revenue!
Now, what you're probably thinking (since we thought it at first too) is "where in the shit did Ro-Tel and Barbasol get $160 million?" But think of how many times you actually saw the Close Shave America commercial during an Iowa basketball game. Usually about once a game, twice on rare occasions. There were scads of other companies advertising, it's just that they blended into the background because they were the same commercials you'd see elsewhere, unlike that infernal Ro-Tel song.
SO. From a BTN standpoint, the objective here must be ratings, ratings, ratings. You know what gets ratings and advertising dollars? Live events. You know how you get lots of people to watch those live events? Theoretically, by putting the channel on as many peoples' cable plans as possible (see: New York), but if nobody there actually watches the BTN, then it's far less beneficial to the conference as a whole.
Thus, Patrick (FTT's source on the discussion) crunched the numbers and came up with this list of projected added revenue per school. He says the numbers are conservative, specifically to added revenue for live events, but in any case, here's his list:
CANDIDATES
TOTAL ADDED REVENUE ESTIMATE
Texas
$101,369,004
Rutgers WITH NYC
$67,798,609
Nebraska
$54,487,990
Maryland
$50,818,889
Boston College
$48,382,692
Notre Dame
$47,629,255
Kansas
$46,320,092
Missouri
$45,901,459
Syracuse
$43,504,813
Connecticut
$38,080,271
Pittsburgh
$34,365,175
Iowa State
$31,831,077
Syracuse WITH NYC
$65,874,573
Full numbers here on Google Docs.
He also projects the total revenue necessary to break everything even at nearly $50 million, which is somewhat sobering, but includes this caveat:
With the talk and discussions that were flying around Sunday about the AAU meetings and the accelerated time table, I firmly believe that my estimates are probably too low. The fact that they want to move this quickly with an expansion means that the potential revenue is HUGE and the decision isn’t even a tough or close one.
What would have been nice is if he'd included Texas A&M, because the Aggies are near mortal locks to be a package deal with Texas if the Longhorns go anywhere. That's just the way that state works. And if so, FINE, GREAT, IS THAT ALL, LET'S DO IT.
That's because if we assume that the Big Ten would need to add both Rutgers and Syracuse to get onto NYC cable/satellite packages across the board, they'd be looking at roughly $130 million and change. Not bad. If Texas A&M raises $31 million in addition to Texas, that's a better deal. Even Iowa State can raise $31 million, and Iowa State isn't in Dallas' backyard.
It's also clear to see that there's significant benefit to getting into the NYC market. Duh, really, but it's nice to see some numbers to go along with it. But as Patrick notes, Syracuse is not a research institution; we're not certain the Big Ten actually, y'know, wants them. Moreover, both Syracuse and Rutgers, for their proximity to New York, have absolutely wretched national television ratings, especially compared to Nebraska (duh) and Pitt (!!!).
Thus--and we realize some of this is some Central Time Zone bias, but bear with us--here's what we'd like to see the Big Ten accomplish in each scenario:
1 team: Nebraska
3 teams: Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska
5 teams: Texas, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Kansas, either Mizzou, Pitt, or Notre Dame
Frankly, we'd like to have Notre Dame higher, but Jack Swarbrick's comments seem to indicate, at best, a reactive stance for that athletic department. If Notre Dame's ever going to join a conference, it's dependent on the Big Ten making that first move. That pretty much excludes them from this discussion unless the conference involves them closely in expansion proceedings. That doesn't seem terribly likely.
As for Texas and Texas A&M, they are absolute no-brainers, financially. Further, they're both already decent schools, though A&M isn't in the AAU (yet). As for Nebraska and Kansas, the deal is simple. KU is one of the five most popular programs in college basketball. Nebraska is (still) similarly elite in terms of prominence and media attention. There is nobody even close to that standing in either sport to the east. They further soften Texas' transition into the Big 10, plus bring their own rivalry (if they want to include Mizzou to complete the triumverate of hate, that's fine).
Am I advocating that the conference turn their back on the NYC plan? Yes. Promixity alone does not guarantee success in a New York market that is utterly dominated by professional sports. The NYC plan is the only one being seriously considered that is contingent on a divergence in viewer behavior. That's a level of risk that the Big Ten doesn't exactly need to undertake.
On the other hand, the Big Ten can lock up every single media market in the Central (except for, like, New Orleans and maybe Oklahoma City) and add consistently premier programs in both sports. Moreover, they're in markets that demonstrably, you know, CARE about college sports already.
Plus, the Big XII would turn back into the Big 8, except they'd have replaced Nebraska and KU with Baylor and Texas Tech. That might not be, how you say, viable. And then it's off to the MAC for Iowa State and okay you caught us that's all we really wanted to accomplish with this post.
99 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Even if the BigTen misses on Texas,
The Longhorns can’t possibly be expected to hold onto the BigXII once the conference pillaging from the SEC & PAC-10 begins. Someone’s bound to hit the jackpot. Of course, the best part is still Iowa State to the MAC. Jamie Pollard’s inconsolable-ness will know no end.
Great article
I just don’t think Texas will bite. I also don’t think any other conferences will even consider expanding if the Big Ten ends up not expanding.
Tigers love pepper... they hate cinnamon.
by White Lightning on Apr 20, 2010 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions
If the Big Ten expands
via destroying the Big East, UConn and West Virginia are in the ACC tomorrow.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 20, 2010 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions
A 100% increase in fan interest...
Graphs ‘n’ Charts, don’t fail me now!
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 21, 2010 4:40 AM CDT up reply actions
This ia a great article.
The thing that resonates with me after reading it is; If, we decide to take the Big 12 conference teams, why not go after the 5 best. I see in the 5 team model- Texas, A&M, Nebraska, Kansas and either ND, Mizzou or Pitt. I think if they were to go after the Big 12 why not ask Oklahoma? Pitt doesn’t seem to help the B10 in any way, If ND says no, then why not Rutgers? Look back at the tv ratings the year Rutgers was flirting with a BCS bowl. 2006-2007. One game in particular, Rutgers was #7 vs. #3 Louisville. The game was on ESPN Thursday night. The rating did an 8.1, this was equal to all the BCS games that year. So, this is a prime example of Rutgers carrying the NYC and New Jersey tv markets.
If Russia attacked Turkey from the rear, Do you think Greece would help?
There is something magical
about the phrase “Iowa State to the MAC”.
"I will go to Germany and then play in a couple of AAU Tournaments like Peach Jam and Boo Williams." - Junior Lomomba
by Ornery Woody on Apr 20, 2010 5:51 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
It just feels so right.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
The MAC just called
and said “no thanks.”
by Black and Gold on Apr 20, 2010 9:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Iowa State had a 21 year run in the Missouri Valley.
Who says you can’t go home again?
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 20, 2010 10:19 PM CDT up reply actions
They would have a decent shot
Of making the playoffs about every 3-4 years I figure. Of course they would need to avoid scheduling UNI, no reason to take a loss early in the season if it can be avoided.
Adrian Clayborn is strong enough to pull the ears off a Gundark
by The Bacon Explosion on Apr 21, 2010 7:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Iowa State
We’d probably open every season against Iowa State. They would take over the Montana/Tulsa cupcake spot.
East Coast Expansion
I’m an Iowan who has relocated to upstate NY and the assumption that adding schools in the densely populated NYC area will add tons of revenue is questionable. College football is not nearly as big here as it is in the Midwest (outside Penn State). It just doesn’t get the same amount of coverage due to the dominance of Pro Teams and just the general lack of interest in college football. I think the Big Ten would end up making a lot more money if they expanded in the Midwest or in Texas.
As part of a sports cable package i am able to get Big Ten Net for about 2 dollars along with about 15 other eclectic sports channels (fox soccer and others) so there is already some access out here.
Also, how would this expansion effect other sports? if Texas joined the Big Ten would they be required to start a wrestling program? I was under the impression that there were mandatory sports required for big ten membership.
by The Effecient Secret on Apr 20, 2010 6:00 PM CDT reply actions
Texas used to have wrestling...
about 10 or 12 years ago.
If I had to guess, I bet the Big Ten would not make the Texas schools join wrestling. If you look at the Pac-10 in wrestling, they have cut several of the bigger programs (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Berkeley, Washington, Wash State ) and have several smaller schools in for wrestling (Cal Poly, Boise St, Fullerton, Bakersfield, UC Davis).
I would guess the Big Ten would stay with what we have, unless the Texas schools (and/or Kansas) want to start up wrestling again (I doubt they would). Mizzou and Nebraska added to Big Ten wrestling would be interesting, though.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Apr 20, 2010 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think there are any mandatory sports.
Not all Big Ten schools offer all the same sports after all. Wisco doesn’t have a baseball team. Barely half the league has varsity hockey teams, I think.
I doubt Texas (or anyone) would be forced to add any minor sports as a condition of membership.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
And we get rid of our basketball program at the conclusion of every season...
…before reconsidering in the fall.
Too soon?
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Apr 21, 2010 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions
Hold it a minute....
am I still on the PSU board?
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
Yes, too soon.
But hilarious.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Apr 21, 2010 8:40 PM CDT up reply actions
This of course assumes Texas wants to leave
Which I still have yet to see any indication of.
They stand to gain $14 million more in revenue if they do leave.
And the Big Ten suits their academics more than the Big XII does. If they don’t want to leave, they don’t have their best interests in mind.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
That's true as things stand now
But I would guess the Big XII will get a better TV contract next time around, assuming the Big Ten expansion doesn’t destroy the conference, and there’s also rumors of Texas potentially just starting their own network, where they would keep all the profits for themselves. Also there’s a lot of legislative headaches that would come from leaving the Big XII that just bringing A&M with might not solve. They’d still be abandoning Baylor and Tech. I’m just not convinced they’re a realistic option, no matter how many thousands of words Frank The Tank spends on the subject.
The reason Baylor got lumped in there was because the Governor was a Baylor grad. The current Governor is an Aggie, so as long as A&M is going along with Texas there won’t be any legislative holdups from the weaker sisters.
by HawkeyedFrog on Apr 21, 2010 1:44 AM CDT up reply actions
This.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 21, 2010 4:41 AM CDT up reply actions
That's not really accurate
Ann Richards had very little to do with it. It was more Bob Bullock (lieutenant governor) and a variety of Baylor and Tech grads who held positions in the Texas Legislature, according to this article. The governor of Texas actually has less power by the state’s constitution than almost any other state. I’m sure there are still plenty of Texas Tech and Baylor grads among the state’s legislators. Would it be enough that UT and TAMU would pass on a move for fear of legislative repriesal? I don’t know, but I don’t think it can be dismissed out of hand just because Rick Perry is governor.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
by TB on Apr 21, 2010 7:56 PM CDT up reply actions
I want Texas more than any other school
but I can’t agree that they don’t have their best interests in mind. If they rejected the Big Ten in favor of remaining in the Big XII they would be foolish, but methinks something else is afoot. Texas is just coming to realize that in the modern landscape of college athletics, few schools none are in a more advantageous position to explore/exploit independence than UT. They have the size, appeal and power to go it alone and not have to share a penny with anyone. The only thing standing in their way is the Texas State Legislature and I have a feeling that body would be less bothered by Texas going it alone (a very Texas thing to do) than trying to bolt the region without taking their little brother.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 20, 2010 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ah, I like it, Kyle.
the best speculation I’ve yet seen.
"can your nerd powers explain what this dude is doing in the thread above? I think we’re already defeated"
by ReadingRambler on Apr 21, 2010 8:44 AM CDT up reply actions
But is being independant really in their best interests?
They can start their own network, that won’t be on anywhere but TX, OK and NM, and they will struggle to fill it with content. They also get to pay the full startup cost. Football is the king of TV and one team, no matter how good or how storied, can only produce so much content. Plus, there will be those games on ABC that can’t be on TXN live…. and when they go through their next period of 7 – 9 wins, the national networks won’t be flocking to Austin with their checkbooks out . At these times it will be nice to lean on shared conference revenue. (yes, there will always be interest but not like when they are dominant such as now)
Then they get the fun of scheduling. For football they would be OK, but you’ve also got basketball, baseball, rowing, all kinds of stuff. There’s a reason Notre Dame joined the Big East for these sports.
If you’re an independant you can get a national championship, or nothing. Usually you’ll get nothing.
Finally, right now they are the big cheese of the Big 12. That’s kind of like being the mayor of Des Moines. Not a bad gig, but nobody outside Polk county cares. As an independant, even Polk county stops caring.
If anybody can pull it off, it’s Texas but there is a lot of risk and headache involved, too.
Facts sometimes have a strange and bizarre power that makes their inherent truth seem unbelievable. - Werner Herzog
I am unconvinced UT is willing to foot the bill for a network of it’s own. The System has pulled in its horns, year 2 of salary freeze(s), and the big boy school is run by academics. No matter how powerful the athletic program, they listen to their Nobels (4) at UT Southwestern Health System like you wouldn’t believe. How much did it cost the BTN to start up? And that was split 11 ways.
Well done.
I’m kinda burned out on this issue and unwilling to read through all the number crunching, but I enjoyed this.
If we have to expand, I’d prefer it be one team and my favorites are Texas, Nebraska, and Notre Dame in that order. Texas and Nebraska would be nice, Notre Dame doesn’t excite me, everyone else stinks. It’d be better if Syracuse was the Syracuse of 1988, but those days are gone.
"can your nerd powers explain what this dude is doing in the thread above? I think we’re already defeated"
Texas ain't coming
that’s my belief. too much back seat taking for them to bite. Say hello to Rutgers/Syracuse or Pitt/Nebraska. Just a hunch. Then ND in two years with Missouri or Kansas.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
I can't figure this out.
But I’d be shocked if we take Rutgers or the Big 12’s version of Purdue Missouri.
Also, this may be a double post due to my browser’s antics. If so, I apologize.
"can your nerd powers explain what this dude is doing in the thread above? I think we’re already defeated"
by ReadingRambler on Apr 20, 2010 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Rutgers is the only school other than Texas that is a no brainer academically
I think everyone is overly focused on the notion of the BTN being about fanbase viewership. I would be very surprised if that is the focus in this case. I would imagine the BTN is going to expand its programming dramatically over the next few years. Live games are important and certainly will drive viewership but I suspect there will be other programming that we have not even thought about, as opposed to the current women’s volleyball onslaught (no offense).
Also, expanding East is planting seeds…for example, there is recruting, there is basketball, there is alumni movement (ever current BT school has tons of alums in NYC, there are timezone considerations, there is access to the other benefits of Rutger’s location…imagine when Iowa plays Rutgers that Ferentz dips over to the media mecca on Broadway and does all kinds of interviews, etc. There is Giants/Jets stadium. The Big Ten has not helped itself with Chicago much…it’s proved to be a soft anchor. They want NYC. There are 27 million people in the tri-state area….more than all the Big Ten School states combined in all likelihood.
Again, the past is irrelevant. Boise proves that. The Big Ten is not trying to just move the chess pieces. I don’t believe. I think they are trying to create a new world order. Understand too…ND will wilt under the pressure of the BIg Ten with NYC locked up. The Big Ten is essentially going to bring ND crawling to the Big Ten.
And I love it.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
Ferentz giving post-game thoughts to the NYC media.
Is like placing a dairy cow in a pen of wolves.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Apr 20, 2010 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Maybe not the best example...
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
Ferentz would be fine
NYC press would eventually understand that all they are going to get is that he is proud of his kids, they made some good and bad plays, they have a lot to work on and if they keep playing hard everything will take care of itself. The man has studied JoePa’s skill at the press conference like no other. The only thing that KF can’t get away with is being bat-shit crazy every now and again like we expect from an 80+ year old JoePa.
Adrian Clayborn is strong enough to pull the ears off a Gundark
by The Bacon Explosion on Apr 21, 2010 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions
I totally agree, but
I’m a nerd so I had to do a fact check on you. I don’t think it undermines your argument though.
New York Metro pop. – 19.1Mill
Big Ten State – 66.9Mill.
Not even close.
If we get the whole states CT+NJ+NY=31.5Mill (But I doubt Rutgers gives us much upstate or in CT, and Syracuse doesn’t give much boost outside of the NY Metro).
I totally agree with your conclusions though.
I still feel the best way to get NYC in a 16 team scenario
is to forget Rutgers. Assuming Notre Dame continues on their path of independent self-destruction (as Jack Swarbrick seems to have indicated this week), New Yorkers will care no more about college football tomorrow as they did the day before. In Penn State and Michigan, the Big Ten already possesses the two biggest NYC football draws outside of the Irish. UConn, Syracuse and Kansas (along with two others; hopefully Nebraska and Pitt) bring a basketball rep that New Yorkers may just care enough about to get the BTN on basic cable (and throw tons of Orange Julius ad revenue at them). Just my feeling.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 20, 2010 10:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Do we have any data on number of Big Ten alumni in New York?
It’s possible (?) that the combined alumni bases could provide enough viewership to overcome the general college sports apathy of the natives. It could be a niche channel that wouldn’t be a total ratings disaster.
The general college sports apathy
was never a problem for all the games played at the Meadowlands. I watched Iowa in the Kickoff Classic play NC State in the early 1990s and it was miserable weather (as I recall) and there were almost 50K there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kickoff_Classic
Besides, live audiences and TV audiences are different animals.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
My hyperbole is unmasked!
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
Sorry, I had just gotten back from teaching undergrads
and was consequently not very attuned to anything other than “correct misperceptions and misrepresentations.”
I disagree, for one reason:
I don’t think the Big Ten will take a team with no history in any sport. Television be damned.
"can your nerd powers explain what this dude is doing in the thread above? I think we’re already defeated"
by ReadingRambler on Apr 20, 2010 9:38 PM CDT up reply actions
By history you don't mean playing in the first ever college football game...
http://www.scarletknights.com/football/history/first-game.asp
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
But, man, they haven't, like, won a game since!
"can your nerd powers explain what this dude is doing in the thread above? I think we’re already defeated"
by ReadingRambler on Apr 21, 2010 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions
As important as the East is
more people moved to Texas last year than any other state. Large cities continue to grow, but Texas is growing rapidly. I, too, believe UT is not coming but if Delaney doesn’t do everything in his power to try and lure them then he has failed on an epic level. My number one hope (even before this article) is Nebraska.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 20, 2010 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions
They might come...
but I am betting their faculty and alums shoot it down. Texas, as a university and state, are not in the business of riding coattails.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
I'm not exactly sure how they
would be riding coattails. They look like the game changer to me. They hold the power of breaking up the Big 12, reviving the Big Ten and fueling the SEC & Pac 10 to jump on the weakened herd. They could springboard the BTN to the big time. They decision might also be enough to entice ND to suck it (up).
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
I need my Barbasol!
Now, what you’re probably thinking (since we thought it at first too) is “where in the shit did Ro-Tel and Barbasol get $160 million?” But think of how many times you actually saw the Close Shave America commercial during an Iowa basketball game. Usually about once a game, twice on rare occasions.
Oh, I know. There were far too many games in the basketball season where the Barbasol ad was the biggest highlight of the night and it only came around about once a half. >sigh<
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
It's nice to be appreciated.
…Pancake?
America, you're looking good: handsome, free and tall.
by Close Shave America on Apr 20, 2010 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions
I know where Barbasol gets their mad $$$
From a recently clean-shaven Clayborn. Obviously, many cases were needed to achieve that.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
I am one of the
poor, the hungry, the left behind. Yes, it is true, my cable company does not offer the BTN in any capacity. For that I have been on the outside of the joke for the last 6 months. Shaving and rich foamy lather left me scratching my head.
Thank you BHGP for giving me a reason to go on. I now know why Barbasol is such a big deal.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
Texas, A & M and Kansas
Those are my three. I want them all, and I want them now.
I don’t want Notre Dame, because fuck them if they aren’t interested, but the remaining three would bring so much to the table. If the B10 adds 5, I’ll take those three, plus Mizzou and Nebraska. Really lock down that Midwest…
Notre Dame
Can’t help but thinking they’re going the big loser in all this conference re-alignment. Basically, they are going to remian independent just long enough to realize that the HAVE to join a conference (read: when this NBC contract is up and Comcast/NBC comes calling with an offer 1/10th the value) and end up settling for whoever will have them at that point. In other words, they end up joining the discarded runt of the Big East. Bonus for Notre Dame? They’ll still be able to play a “national schedule” since intra-conference play will only involve 5 games, and will still include their favorite juggernauts of Navy and UConn.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
The Notre Dame expansion target
which is unwisely ignored just because of geography but would be in line with their “national” scheduling philosophy is…the Pac 10. Don’t laugh too hard, it’s not that strange a concept.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 21, 2010 4:43 AM CDT up reply actions
Texas, A&M, Nebraska, Mizzou, and KU
Those teams would really expand a key advertising demographic for the BTN. Seed, Fertilizer, and other Ag companies. It’s kinda cliche, but how many Monsanto and Cargill commercials do you see during a Big Televen game, even on ESPN or ABC?
"An out of context quote to support my world view." -Some Dead Guy
Careful
not every ad is national. Those Cargill aren’t on in Chicagoland, we get Bob Rohrman’s Ford.
You do make a good point though.
Facts sometimes have a strange and bizarre power that makes their inherent truth seem unbelievable. - Werner Herzog
There's only one!
Bob Roooooooohrman!
By the way, this is tragic/hilarious.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 20, 2010 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Technicality
But as Patrick notes, Syracuse is not a research institution; we’re not certain the Big Ten actually, y’know, wants them.
I read through the links here and on FTT’s site and couldn’t find it. I did find the Carnegie Foundation’s website and while it’s not on the same level as the rest of the Big Ten, it is still a “research university” and on par with Mostly semantics, but I think it could boost its research profile by joining the Big Twhatever. Also, it already has AAU membership, so at least it’s a member of the club in that sense.
oops
I forgot to finish a thought there – “on par with… the rest of the institutions in terms of overall academic quality”
Apparently I'm the fact police tonight
. Further, they’re both already decent schools, though A&M isn’t in the AAU (yet).
A&M is in the AAU. Handy Reference Page of AAU Members
Fuck, thanks.
It’s Miami that I thought was in the AAU but actually isn’t. I knew I should have double-checked.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
Texas Baseball
would love to win the Big [fill in the blank] every year.
Scattered Thoughts
As far as the money, I get it. 16 teams could mean a big, big increase. I didn’t realize it could be THAT big though.I just think it’s too many teams. I think they add three. They can always add two more later. If ND is not part of this, they will only add three in hopes of grabbing them a few years down the line.
Anybody who missed this graphic needs to check it out.
Didn’t Nebraska’s AD say if the BXI called, he would listen? I just want to say I think they will make a fine addition. Welcome, Huskers.
That leaves two spots for either Texas and A&M or Rutgers and somebody else. Probably the latter. Texas will use the departure of Nebraska as an excuse to join the PAC-10. There will be buyers remorse over Rutgers.
Notre Dame can still go fuck itself.
Facts sometimes have a strange and bizarre power that makes their inherent truth seem unbelievable. - Werner Herzog
Hold on hoss. Stanford doesn’t want Texas, and I’m not sure Cal does either. Pac Ten gives one school veto rights, which Stanford exercised the last time UT went down this path.
That's true.
But it’s not a guarantee that a decision made twenty years ago is the same decision they’d make now. The economic realities are certainly different.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Stanford
didn’t want UT 20 years ago. We don’t know what their position is today. I suspect it has changed.
However, if Stanford still objects, UT could get into the Pac10 the same way Arizona and Arizona State did in the 1970s. USC and UCLA simply told everyone if they didn’t take them, they were leaving.
Wouldn’t those two be great Big 10 additions?
I never travel far without a little Big Star. R.I.P Alex
by Josh Timmers on Apr 21, 2010 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Great Comment
If all goes as planned I foresee a goofy and potentially pathetic 10/11 BE season for both players and fans.
> Schools potentially in the Big 10: Pitt, RU, Syracuse
> Schools potentially scurrying for a new conference: UCONN, WVU, SFU, L’ville, Cincy
> School in NeverNeverland: ND
> Schools in St. NeverNeverland: Seton Hall, G’town, etc.
And The Championship game of the BE hoops tourney will feature Judy Collins singing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHpye0M34JQ
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
If the Big Ten expands via destroying the Big East
the football-playing schools will find new homes and in most cases (except Cincy) good ones. The basketball-only members will be more than happy to continue life as a hoops-centric league. Hell, Seton Hall, Providence, St. John’s and DePaul will consider it the greatest day in their conference lives.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 20, 2010 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah Probably
But I think you’d see serious lamenting from the big basketball powers, and the good basketball only schools.
Hence Judy.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Apr 20, 2010 10:52 PM CDT up reply actions
OMG
You mean that this could somehow piss off Marquette? I’m soooo in with destroying the Big East. There are few schools I hate more than Marquette.
Hello, renegotiated contract with ESPN.
I can’t imagine they’d be thrilled at leading off Big Monday with a thrilling Providence-DePaul game.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
The Big East started
as a hoops-centric league, and will probably die as one. In the end, the Big East may end up going back to its roots (small, exclusive, largely Catholic East Coast basketball schools)
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
I think a lot of people see this coming.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Apr 21, 2010 4:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Other possible outcomes
IF the BigXI expands east and takes whomever it destroys the Big East but the rest of the conferences stay basically the same – not a major shake up nationally.
IF the XI goes into the BigXII but doesn’t get Texas, just grabbing Nebraska to expand to 12 or if we go to 14 with two eastern schools, the SEC is going to make a huge push for Texas. If Texas and A&M join the SEC they would solidify themselves as the football power conference, strengthen their basketball slate (which doesn’t suck) and establish a very strong baseball conference. It would be very interesting to see how that would shake out.
This is of course if Texas academics wants to take this hit. If they didn’t win in football they could just set up a couple of opposing coaches and send them to the electric chair – doesn’t take much in Texas to get the death penalty.
Adrian Clayborn is strong enough to pull the ears off a Gundark
by The Bacon Explosion on Apr 21, 2010 8:18 AM CDT reply actions
I think Texas would rather go independent than join the SEC.
Aside from the lack of an academic fit, why would Texas want to join a viciously competitive league with several established, competitive powers that care as much (or possibly more) about college football than Texans? I mean, sure, money but they could likely get that without the headaches by pursuing other options. If they leave the Big 12, either the Big Ten or Pac 10 make a lot more sense. From a pure competition standpoint, the Pac 10 would be great for them; the only powers out there are USC and Oregon (and maybe UCLA in sleeping giant form). They’d be in a better basketball league and a good baseball league. The biggest hang-up is the money, but adding Texas may enable the Pac 10 to renegotiate much better TV deals.
Or Texas may just decide to create its own little fiefdom and rule that, although I remain slightly unconvinced that a Texas sports network would be as lucrative as the BTN or a potential Pac 10 channel. Never mind the headaches in getting clearance for that outside of Texas…
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
BINGO!
why would Texas want to join a viciously competitive league with several established, competitive powers that care as much (or possibly more) about college football than Texans?
Exactly.
And a PAC-12 network would have a population footprint on par with the Big 10, plus the interest to draw in some border states like Nevada and New Mexico. That will give them the muscle to get a good partnership with an existing broadcaster, if they want one, like BTN has with FOX.
Facts sometimes have a strange and bizarre power that makes their inherent truth seem unbelievable. - Werner Herzog
Everything's big in Texas, including egos
I would imagine the thought of being in a highly competitive league (and thinking they would dominate) would appeal to a lot of Texas-sized egos.
Becoming in independent is interesting but I don’t know about the plausibility of it in our current college athletic environment. Using the example of ND I don’t foresee a major network pulling the trigger on a comparable TV deal even with a powerhouse like Texas. Definitely not a long term deal; NBC continues to do OK with its ND contract but as many people tune in to watch ND loose as for any other reason – Texas isn’t that polarizing. A couple of down years around the end of the contract would hurt them badly and Texas will have down years. I believe this would concern UT’s brass enough to consider this but ultimately decide against it.
Adrian Clayborn is strong enough to pull the ears off a Gundark
by The Bacon Explosion on Apr 21, 2010 10:01 AM CDT up reply actions
The academics will never, and I mean never, go for the SEC affiliation. I’m biased, but the academic reputation of every SEC school outside Vanderbilt sucks balls compared to either the Big XI or Pac-10, and, as I said above, I don’t think UT to the Pac 10 stands a chance with the single school veto rights.
This is true.
Texas looked at the SEC before the Big 8 when the SWC folded. Then they looked at the SEC’s academics and vowed to never set foot in that conference. It would be such a step down for them. Seriously, not happening.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
by Adam Jacobi on Apr 21, 2010 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Adding to texas being the better market...
stumbled over from EDSBS…
To add to your point about texeas/texas A&M being better than the NYC market, I think there’s a little double dipping in getting syracuse and rutgers to = $130M. You can’t add their “With NYC” numbers together since they both include the $30M cable carry increase revenue for NYC that you can only count once. So you’re really looking at $100M, or the added value of Texas alone.
They also claim that the numbers are conservative, but I really doubt that adding even Rutgers & Syracuse is going to get BTN on basic cable for everyone in NYC. There are already at least four local sports networks on basic cable (YES, SNY, MSG, FoxSports, I’m unsure if MSG+ is on basic cable), I can’t see a fifth (or sixth) being added for college sports.
Everyone ignoring UConn?
Doesn’t seem to be too much talk about them here, but I’ve heard some (including blowhard Cowherd) say Uconn is most likely in, maybe as the only school taken. Are we thinking too big on this, and the Big Televen might only be looking at one team? UConn has an up and coming football program with a good, young coach, and a great basketball tradition. Seems like a decent fit.
'They are who we thought they were!'
It won't be only UConn.
And Delaney has backed off the accelerated timetable, meaning this notion that UConn’s already been told they’re in is patently false.
I can’t see UConn being added unless they’re part of a 5-team package. They’re not members of the AAU, their research budget’s only decent, their athletic revenue is meh, and their football team—while presently solid—is in a small stadium. They won’t move the needle very much on ratings, and they certainly wouldn’t be enough to bring the NYC market by itself. Not nearly enough upside there.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
by Adam Jacobi on Apr 21, 2010 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions
another shinny example
of never, ever taking what whatever Cowherd says as even resembling the truth. I guess he has a job and that is to talk, but not necessarily about reality.
Adrian Clayborn is strong enough to pull the ears off a Gundark
by The Bacon Explosion on Apr 21, 2010 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Small football program
Doesn’t have much of a football tradition. Stadium only seats 40k. Not an AAU member.
People are talking UConn, but they seem like a longshot. Cowherd is just pulling stuff out of his rear. He’s probably just talking to UConn boosters in Bristol.
I never travel far without a little Big Star. R.I.P Alex
by Josh Timmers on Apr 21, 2010 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions
It's an ESPN bylaw
If you work for the network you MUST talk all things eastcoast and that includes UCONN. And Cowherd is a BLOWHARD.
Who's leg do I have to hump to get a drink around here?-Brian
The ad revenue from aTm would be TREMENDOUS
Much more than $31 mill…
College Station is less than a 100 miles from Houston and only 175 from San Antonio. Throw in the DFW metroplex (180 miles), and you’re drawing in 3 of the top 10 markets in the country (Houston 4, Dallas 8, San Antonio 7).
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on Apr 21, 2010 2:37 PM CDT reply actions
welllll
Get Texas and you pretty much get the state of Texas and really good ratings throughout. Throw in A&M and you just solidify your hold, there’s a lot of overlap involved.
A&M would be a solid addition on it’s own but I don’t know that they get invited unless they have to be part of a package deal.
Facts sometimes have a strange and bizarre power that makes their inherent truth seem unbelievable. - Werner Herzog
They're a package deal...always have been...
and, since the good ole’ boys from the State control the Big 12, I don’t see them up-and-leaving their fief, do you? Especially not for a conference with more pluralism and a strong commissioner. The B12 is a Banana Republic, and Texas has the dark sunglasses, khaki uniform, and half-gnawed cigar riding in the jeep named “El Presidente”.
"Hush now, let it go now. I know it's time to go. Time to let this fall from my hands" VNV Nation, "From My Hands"
by Stuck in the Plains on Apr 21, 2010 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions
True, but that doesn’t make the revenue UT earns from the Big XII affiliation => potential from Big XI. If UT were to go to the Big XI, it’d be about money and academic affiliation. Not saying it will happen, just saying they are not enamored with the profile of the schools in their current conference.
Screw the east coast and its fantasy ‘media market.’ Yeah, New York has 20 million people: 20 million people who don’t give a shit about college sports, especially college football. The only benefit of adding Syracuse or Rutgers is that Northwestern will finally have a serious rival for last place in Big 10 home attendance.
Texas, Texas, Texas. It’s the 10,000 ton gorilla.
In Case You Had Any Doubts
This is what Notre Dame thinks of the Big 10.
Which is just one more reason to not want the cheating, suck ass, fainting irish anywhere near Kinnick.
Facts sometimes have a strange and bizarre power that makes their inherent truth seem unbelievable. - Werner Herzog
So Notre Dame fans don't understand proper use of the word "literally"
And we’re supposed to believe they’ve got the smarts to make it in the BigTen?
by The Mexican't on Apr 21, 2010 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions
As a Kansas fan...
I welcome this life preserver from our Midwestern brethren. As a symbol of our goodwill, I present my Iowan brothers with a basket of Barbasol and Ro-Tel. May it leave your face soft and your queso zesty.
In all seriousness, here’s my perspective on this:
I’m 110% for the five team scenario Adam Jacobi put forward.
I think that if all five of those teams left together, the fans would learn to accept it. As long as some rivalries could continue out of conference (NU vs. OU, UT vs. OU, KU vs. KSU and maybe aTm vs. Baylor and MU vs. KSU), it’d be pretty seamless. KU would only lose KSU, which it considers a little brother. MU really joins it’s second rival (Illinois). NU loses Colorado (which hasn’t been a rivalry as of late), but could now play OU every year out of conference. Texas would have to play OU every year (believe me, this would be a deal breaker at the State legislative level). A&M loses Baylor and Tech, which are more of an annoyance than actual rivals.
The three north teams (KU, NU, MU) are pretty much hot swappable into a new conference. NU dominates both in football historically, but in the last 4-5 years KU and MU have been competitive with them (thanks, Callahan). KU and MU HATE each other. People talk about the Iron bowl or OSU-MU, and I think the fan bases hate each other mostly because there is so much at stake year in year out. KU & MU legitimately hate each other. Historically, neither team usually is in bowl contention, so the game isn’t for a good bowl bid or pride— it’s because one wants to have the other live in misery. Needless to say, having all three programs together offers some synergies. Locking up Kansas City is pretty much a huge mushroom stamp in the face of the Big 12— it was the old headquarters of the Big 8.
The two Texas teams really don’t care about KU, NU and MU. It’s safe to say that Texas doesn’t care about anyone— A&M included. But to make any transition work, you really need to include A&M and maintain the Red River rivalry with Oklahoma. Tech and Baylor can really screw up the works; especially if they aren’t presented with golden parachutes. They are decent athletically, but their academics make it impossible to add them to either the Pac 10 or the Big 10.
One deal breaker may be the amount of games outside the state of Texas. Every year, Texas gets 4 non-cons (usually all at home), 1.5 North teams at home, 1 Neutral game in Dallas (OU), 2 South teams at home, and 1.5 South teams on the road in the state of Texas. This means that on average, Texas plays 2 games outside the state of Texas per year. In an 8 conference game schedule in the expansion scenario, Texas would play 3 home non-cons, 1 neutral game in Dallas (OU), four home conference games and 0.5 road conference games in Texas per year (assuming they play A&M every year). That’s 3.5 games a year outside of Texas. Assuming this doesn’t bother their local Texas fan base (which it will), or the coaching staff (which it will), it will certainly bother the Texas legislature, which would belly-ache over lost state revenues.
I don’t see the Big 10 presidents voting in a block of five similar schools (all Big 12’ers). It weakens the voting powers of the original institutions. Let me be clear— NU, KU & MU fans don’t consider Texas or aTm to be their buddies; quite the opposite (Osborne HATES Texas). NU and Texas hate each other because the balance of power has shifted from NU to Texas (the Big 8 offices even moved from KC to Dallas). There’s definitely a Big 8+4 sentiment in some of the North schools. But I think they are smart enough to see that sticking together in a new league is advantageous.
What I see happening is a mix of Eastern and Western expansion. It keeps the current member institutions influential and it doesn’t completely destroy any conference (it merely mortally wounds them). What combination they pick, who knows. Texas and aTm are certainly the prize, but Nebraska is nothing to sniff at.
If I was going to go about expanding the conference, I think that you offer NU, KU, and MU as a block first. This cripples the Big 12— who can only add lesser programs (Utah, BYU and NMU or TCU). This move will take place AFTER the Pac 10 renegotiates it’s contract, but BEFORE the Big 12 gets its new one. The Pac 10 won’t have an opportunity to add the Texas teams before getting locked into a new contract and the Big 12 will be stuck with a weak tv contract once they lose three key teams and the KC market. The Texas schools are then at a crossroads— they either have to join the Big 10 (whose TV money is now even better), Pac 10 (whose TV contract is good, but not great), go independent (which is risky and probably not as lucrative) or whither on the vine in a weak Big 12 (whose new TV contract is guaranteed to be terrible compared to the Pac 10 and the Big 10). That’s how you leverage them into the fold.
If that doesn’t work, you can now explore the less lucrative New York market. So instead of getting NU, KU, MU, UT and aTm, you get: NU, KU, MU, Pitt and Rutgers/Syracuse/UConn/etc.
That’s what I’d do, but the question is: are the Presidents willing to give up some of their power to put the best product on the field and increase their individual revenues? Time will tell.
by Gopher86 on Apr 22, 2010 10:10 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Thank you
We shall feast heartily on the Ro-Tel Queso Dip.
Obviously as Iowans, a Western expansion of the Big 10 serves our interests, as well as those of the Badgers and Gophers. The question becomes what JoePa and PSU do as well as OSU and Michigan. They’re pretty set on going East for the same reason we want to go West. And OSU and UM have a heck of a lot of pull in the conference. JoePa wants Rutgers or Pitt, and I don’t think the West has enough votes to get three Big XII schools in without giving PSU at least one Eastern school. So in that case, getting all five Big XII schools would push the Big 10 to at least 18 members, and I don’t think if we’re prepared to do that.
Still, the three Big XII North Schools wouldn’t be a bad addition along with Rutgers and Pitt or Syracuse if the Big10 goes to 16. It would mean writing off ND and UT, but it would also mean a more cohesive conference, geographically, academically and culturally.
I never travel far without a little Big Star. R.I.P Alex
by Josh Timmers on Apr 22, 2010 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions
NU, KU, MSU, Rutgers and Pitt
That combo would be pretty decent, especially since the league would most likely be split in an East/West confrence style anyway. Both sides get what they want.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
