I don't disagree with any of this. This baloney 7x10 and the govt swooping in to inact some radical change isn't going to happen and shouldnt.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Fox nor ESPN can afford to double their B10 and SEC deals with 16/18 schools and they got both conferences by the balls with their respective conference network deals, especially Fox with their majority stake in BTN which is the entity that owns all B10 rights. And as you are well aware, that is why Fox and ESPN are using their puppet boys to lobby against Cruz-Cantwell.
Last edited:
Doubling is optimistic for any setup
But pooling is proven
Think of it this way, whatever the upcoming independent deals of P2 (plus M2) add up to collectively, it would be more in a single seller market. Particularly if the single seller market was in conjunction with less scheduling constraints (conferences) that currently limit flexibility to create premium matchups.
The postseason is also more easily coupled to regular season bidding, which provides further leverage
If the P2 pooled their rights as single seller, and removed the scheduling constraints inherent to two separate conferences, they’d absolutely get more than the current setup. P2 fans get hung up on being pooled with M2, but it’s even more true with all three, with unequal revenue sharing means the collective increase mostly goes to the biggest brands
There is an incentive for the networks and conference HQs to be against complete pooling- they do not benefit from single seller leverage
Last edited:
We’re on opposite sides of the unequal rec share being baked into the media deal so I won’t rehash that.
But with sports rights being one of the only aspects of live TV left we have seen those media deal and advertising deals skyrocket. I don’t see that slowing down and would be rather shocked if the next media deal wasn’t 75-100% increase for the P2. Just the talk of adding additional conference games or other aspects is enough to drive that forward.
Granted we are still 4years out and things can change but I’d still be suprised if that’s where people ended up. There is zero need for the P2 to pool rights unless they did it with each other somehow and even then we wouldn’t want to see the schedule cross over too much
You think pooling of all P4 rights means equal revenue sharing? Where are you getting that? Or is this just your fear that the P2 eventually don’t share equally?
Doesn’t matter if one thinks tv rights skyrocket or not. That’s not important. Whatever the collective market is for 4 conferences selling inventory, it will be more in a single seller environment.
Think of if the P2 were pooled, and the scheduling largely dictated by creating 3+ big brand matchups every week out of the combined 34 schools. The networks would fight to outbid to get a piece
need? There is just as much need as there was for OUT. Betting against greed is an odd stance
Arguably it’s better for M2 not to pool with P2, given it would be unequal sharing. It’s better for them to team with PE to create best of rest, and offer insane money to some near elite P2. Just the offer alone would pressure unequal revenue sharing within P2, which is the main objective
I don’t think we are talking about the same thing or we are missing each others points.
My point is that in my opinion the P2 will have their media dollar revenue increase by 75-100% during the next media deal in a few years. This is without pooling, or any other weird idea.
That’s part of the reason there is zero incentive to do any kinds of pooling. The revenue is gonna go up without it.
Another example of how Fox’s deal with the B10 is way overrated relative to delivering premium matchups:
It’s all unsustainable
Without revenue equalization and NIL hard caps…it’s going to devastate college sports.
Without revenue equalization and NIL hard caps…it’s going to devastate college sports.
The players we brought in are getting paid squat. There are 2-3 incoming wrestlers being paid more than any football recruit or transfer coming in. There are a ton of recruits that need a place to land. Running a lean football program is needed for most of the bottom 60 schools.
doubtful it devastates college football
There’s nothing unsustainable about schools sharing some of their revenue with athletes, or people willingly spending money on players
Parity is unsustainable without a cap, but college football has never had any semblance of parity. The most parity has come in last decade
I didn’t know you were an advocate for BIG expansion and removing G6 games from schedule
Delivering premium matchups is even more difficult in 7x10.
Last edited:
B10 expansion doesn't really improve the "premium matchup" issue as stated in my prior post. If the goal is truly more premium matchups for Fox on a weekly basis, the B10 should downsize to 10 with the top ten existing brands.
If the SEC downsized to their Legacy 10 with a 9 game round robin, their % of weekly premium game inventory would increase as well. Did you know that Bama-UGA have played each other only 7 times in the regular season since 2000? Ridiculous.
Our friend from Michigan, like many other B10 fans are afraid of equal revenue for all P-4 schools, because it that should ever happen, the one huge advantage they have over every B12 and ACC school would be gone. The advantage being able to tap into the ever increasing media funds the networks are providing. No-one knows if the market is going to keep expanding dollar wise, I would say its very wishful thinking saying the next media deal their rights will increase 75% to 100%. For that to occur one of the large streaming company would have to jump onboard, and since Fox owns over 55% of BTN, that is not going to happen to the B10.
Talk is cheap right now about the B10 and SEC should break away and form their own league, the NCAA and the other conferences should take up their offer and let them leave, with the understanding if you leave, its in all sports, not just football. It's all talk, they are going nowhere and even they understand it.
Talk is cheap right now about the B10 and SEC should break away and form their own league, the NCAA and the other conferences should take up their offer and let them leave, with the understanding if you leave, its in all sports, not just football. It's all talk, they are going nowhere and even they understand it.
That’s logical though. I mean, we’re not looking to boost the G6 up to M2 pay level
Things will never be like they were when all P5 were fairly close in media revenue, before tv rights exploded….unless PE or a company like Amazon buy all long term rights for P4, and implement spending cap as to leave room for profit. There isn’t enough political capital to mandate schools make equal
It doesn’t need to be close between conferences. The M2 only needs to force unequal revenue sharing in P2 and maintain CFP access. If Minnesota is getting $50 million in P2, it doesn’t matter they’re a P2
Fox ownership of BTN does not preclude streaming from being a big part of the package, although it may require BIG expansion
You have it backwards. It’s unfathomable you still don’t understand the fundamentals at play. It’s as though you think the networks behind P2 are donating money
Adding more football brands and going to 10 conference games absolutely helps the networks make more big matchups
Going to old BIG 10 means more Iowa-Purdue
I understand the fundamentals at play but the end result is not that significant as pointed out previously with my 2026 Penn St schedule example. Since you're now moving the goalposts, I do agree that 10 conference games will make some difference.
And your Iowa-Purdue example is foolish given all of the existing non-regional matchups that include Rutgers, Maryland, etc. You actually now have more undesirable matchups than what you would have with Legacy B10. At least the so called undesirable matchups in Legacy B10 would have more regional and fan appeal.
Additionally, there are very few, if any, marquee matchups in about half of those divisions. Significant reduction in total.
The B10 is already streaming one game a week on Peacock, but to get a 75% to 100% increase, would require a large majority of the games only be available to streaming services. Look at the NFL Season Ticket with YouTube, it's going to take something like that to see a large jump in media revenue for the B10.
Both the B10 and SEC have reached the point where adding new teams unless its ND is going to not increase the payout more than the extra share is going to cost for each team currently in the league. You also have Washington and Oregon currently not getting a full share, but will after the next media deal, again eating up new money from the media deal.
No one is saying the B10 teams are poor, but to think that media payouts to each team are going to up from $85 million or more up to $140 to $150 million per school is not going to happen. Unless one of the major streaming services bids the price up, I would say the league like all others will be lucky to get an increase much at all over their current deal.
There is certainly enough political capital and that is evidenced by Cruz-Cantwell which clearly suggests the existing revenue gaps between B10/SEC and ACC/B12/ACC cannot widen with additional brand consolidation by ESPN/SEC and Fox/B10. The goal is to decrease that gap while everyone at least doubles their existing media revenues with pooling and if everyone played ball, that would happen.
Campbell has acknowledged that an element of unequal revenue sharing should exist in a pooled scenario and that would likely be addressed with a portion of total pie allocated based on TV ratings. Intra-conference revenue sharing would be determined on a conference by conference basis.
