Perspective from the Big Ten and some much needed clarifications

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
5,630
6,092
113
37
Regarding your point 3. ESPN and FOX definitely care about the CURRENT Big12 and Pac12 media rights dollars.

In 2025 between FOX and ESPN, the Big12 media rights will be $450. The Pac12 rights are somewhere around $300M. Those are monies that both networks can use to fund SEC and Big12 media rights. That's why OU and Texas is such a big move for the SEC. ESPN can keep it's overall investment in college sports in line with it's current investment, but keep it's money makers (Bama, OU, Georgia, Texas, etc.) happy with incremental year-over-year growth
Umm there is nothing saying that fox or espn needs to reup the rights to the big 12 or pac 12. They can just as easily say the big 12 is only worth 200mil now with the big dogs gone and still move the money over to the big ten. Also you never know if an amazon is going to come calling with even more money. Also the rights of one conference have little bearing on the rights of another. Media companies will just have to determine what value live sports holds which considering its the main source of ad revenue and the ratings go up each year will be alot for the big ten and sec.
 

cyatheart

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 18, 2008
8,095
5,228
113
47
I just read a depressing article from Yahoo Sports citing an Austin-based writer whose Big 10 source said that KU and ISU's efforts to get some traction with the Big 10 probably are not going anywhere. Blurbs:

Iowa State and Kansas were attempting to get ahead of the rest by reportedly reaching out to the Big Ten. While neither school may be the most marketable on the football field, the Cyclones are an up-and-coming program under Matt Campbell, while the Jayhawks can sell basketball.

Both seemingly fit into the Big Ten’s culture well but have reportedly been shot down by the conference.

According to Kirk Bohls of the Austin American-Statesman, Iowa State and Kansas “made a run at the Big Ten” but his source was not sure if they would get any place. While none of the talks seemed serious enough for the Big 12 to shrink to six schools, there was at least an attempt.

Link: https://sports.yahoo.com/report-big-ten-may-not-233758725.html

I have to say, I'm not optimistic about ISU getting an invite to the Big 10. My most likely scenario is a watered-down Big 12 with maybe Cincinnati and Houston joining. And a LOT of budget cuts in Ames.

kirk bohls has no idea, he might be right by accident, but he has no idea
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
10,992
16,729
113
I would be shocked if they regretted the numbers in their bank account that came from little old grandmas in suburban NYC and DC who paid for BTN cable and never once watched it or cared about Maryland or Rutgers athletics in the slightest. Nebraska... maybe a different story there.
Yeah, the Big 10 is to Maryland and Rutgers what a company paying an annuity is to someone that simply won’t die.

Other Big 10 members got a cash infusion from them early knowing that their value was shrinking fast. It was a question if with the cash and profile of the Big 10 could boost these programs to the point that when that initial cash infusion dried up they could start pulling their weight. It was a bet that to an extent they were sleeping giants, or at least dormant programs with good potential to start drawing eyeballs. But 7 years later and these programs have zero interest. They are absolute anchors with terrible attendance and TV viewership.

Barring a miracle, it is clear the Maryland and Rutgers pickups were big mistakes. Bottom line is you gotta have eyeballs on your product moving forward.
 

cyatheart

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 18, 2008
8,095
5,228
113
47
I actually proposed this a few days ago. Big 12 stays together, adds Houston and BYU, and OU-Texas leaving means Iowa State is the top dog in the conference now. Cambpell wins multiple conference titles and clears a way for an easier playoff berth. I would be completely ok with that.

The feedback I got though is that's not a real Power 5 conference, so we lose tons of revenue, recruiting drops, and Campbell moves on because we can't pay him enough.
Thoughts on that scenario?

Also, as someone who is more into basketball, this would make an elite basktball league even better adding two schools like Houston and BYU.

Campbell wouldn’t win that conference because we couldn’t pay him enough to coach in that conf. Our payout would go from 38 to about 10, which means we don’t have money to pay him
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Jeffreyisu

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
7,748
6,291
113
Dubuque
The first land grant school is open to question. Iowa State lays its claim to the fact that the State of Iowa was the first to accept the terms of the Morrill Act, and so, in ISU's eyes, ISU is first. But MSU also claims to be first because it enrolled students before ISU, and even Penn State claims to be first. I'd suggest you that you do some investigating into these institutions because they all lay claim to being first and actually Kansas State also lays claim to being first.

Here's a little known fact----after states accepted the terms of the act, they could lay claim to 30,000 acres of federal land for each member of Congress. The land did not have to be in the state of the institution, and a number of states claimed land in Iowa since the land was so rich.
I am aware of all
Umm there is nothing saying that fox or espn needs to reup the rights to the big 12 or pac 12. They can just as easily say the big 12 is only worth 200mil now with the big dogs gone and still move the money over to the big ten. Also you never know if an amazon is going to come calling with even more money. Also the rights of one conference have little bearing on the rights of another. Media companies will just have to determine what value live sports holds which considering its the main source of ad revenue and the ratings go up each year will be alot for the big ten and sec.
That's my point. There is zero reason for ESPN and FOX to re-up the BIG12 contract now that OU & Texas are gone. ESPN now has $450 to spread around the SEC, ACC and Big10 to keep them happy in the next round of renewals. I'm am sure ESPN is using a lot of the Big12 $450 to make the SEC deal a win for OU/Texas and the 14 existing SEC schools.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Rods79

Rods79

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2006
3,536
1,220
113
Des Moines
5. The big tens 2023 deal will put each school at 70-80mil per year, its just them vs the sec and as long as the playoff format is the same they wont fall behind in dollars even if they dont win the natty very often.

6. This is the biggest, the big ten schools are insanely wealthy. The sec is an aboslute joke in terms of wealthy doners compared to the big ten so when the NIL money starts flowing expect alot of those sec 5 stars to find their way to other schools in the big ten besides osu.

What if…and I mean this is a B1G hypotheticaaaallll…

1627442368550.jpeg

…it is more $$ than that, exclusively from FOX, where they lock out ESPN for two 16 team leagues, effectively buying brands like USC, Oregon, tOSU, and Michigan (…I guess), with little effect on geography (a strategy currently being employed in SEC expansion…you know, “for the love of the game” since apparently that only exists in the SEC), only adding AAUs to the B1G to keep that tradition alive outside of sports (we aren’t going to embarrass you there in the future)…do you take it?

I keep reading this thread and coming back thinking that everyone is still talking way too much about the conferences, and not the media entities that are paying the bills. FOX has the opportunity to buy the brands out there now and fill in with good fodder (that’s where we fit in). It really isn’t even about adding teams. They shut out EPSN from tOSU…that’s gotta sting, right?
 

cyIclSoneU

Well-Known Member
Apr 7, 2016
3,231
4,400
113
In my opinion now that ESPN owns the SEC, FOX is going to try to own as many B1G rights as it can when their deal comes up and simultaneously try to get the B1G to poach from the Pac-12. This will help them go head to head with ESPN one behemoth vs. another.

I don't think FOX can actually own all the B1G rights since they only have FOX and FS1 vs. ESPN having ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU. But they can own the ones that matter and leave Northwestern vs. Rutgers to the Mouse.

Meanwhile like I said ESPN owns the ACC but they are going to let those wither on the vine just like Big 12 and will try to shift the valuable brands there to the SEC.

I think the Syracuses and Iowa States and Colorados are going to find themselves in a second tier within a couple decades. Whether formal (another FBS/FCS type split) or informal (a Power Five/Group of Five type distinction) it will happen because American capitalism means wealth consolidation, and major college sports is as American as apple pie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: criticalobserver

IceCyIce

Well-Known Member
Aug 17, 2009
2,475
1,473
113
Grimes
I get the alure of Stanford, USC, UCLA, etc. But for the BIG10, wow thats alot of travel, I don't need to hear the "it's just a plain ride away". Thats hard on students and the your not going to get the fans traveling on a regular basis. Add geography into decisions, and you get high level rivalries that will get watched and great games.
 

NewCoke

Member
Jan 20, 2009
151
16
18
My concern is if this takes more than one season to settle out, how does it impact recruiting? Just feels like ISU needs to find a home now or risk seeing the on the field quality drop, and make us less marketable in the process. Hope I am wrong, but I have a bad feeling about this.

*Editing to add that if ISU's future is uncertain and someone backs up a brinks truck to CMC at a high profile job... I'll just say, if I were in his shoes, it would be hard for me and my family to turn down.
 
Last edited:

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
5,630
6,092
113
37
I am aware of all

That's my point. There is zero reason for ESPN and FOX to re-up the BIG12 contract now that OU & Texas are gone. ESPN now has $450 to spread around the SEC, ACC and Big10 to keep them happy in the next round of renewals. I'm am sure ESPN is using a lot of the Big12 $450 to make the SEC deal a win for OU/Texas and the 14 existing SEC schools.
Ahh i got ya, completely misunderstood what you were trying to say there.
 

BCClone

Well Seen Member.
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2011
61,414
55,962
113
Not exactly sure.
So I have to disagree with part of this. First if the Big 12 survives for a bit and you continue to win and get some serious buzz it might almost be worth it to just stay in the new Big 12 if you have access to the new playoff. Basically be kings of the conference and rake in the money without competition.

However if the big ten doesn't add anyone now and waits 8 years at that point they will just grab the ACC schools they really want (unless you become that perennial power) and go from there. This is just my thought because alot can change in 6-8 years but I think that the likely hood of you getting into the big ten or SEC now is higher then if you wait 6-8 years.
You think the ACC GoR will be weak enough with 5-6 years left?
 

Rods79

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2006
3,536
1,220
113
Des Moines
In my opinion now that ESPN owns the SEC, FOX is going to try to own as many B1G rights as it can when their deal comes up and simultaneously try to get the B1G to poach from the Pac-12. This will help them go head to head with ESPN one behemoth vs. another.

I don't think FOX can actually own all the B1G rights since they only have FOX and FS1 vs. ESPN having ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU. But they can own the ones that matter and leave Northwestern vs. Rutgers to the Mouse.

Meanwhile like I said ESPN owns the ACC but they are going to let those wither on the vine just like Big 12 and will try to shift the valuable brands there to the SEC.

I think the Syracuses and Iowa States and Colorados are going to find themselves in a second tier within a couple decades. Whether formal (another FBS/FCS type split) or informal (a Power Five/Group of Five type distinction) it will happen because American capitalism means wealth consolidation, and major college sports is as American as apple pie.

FOX has FOX, FS1, FS2 (ESPN took away the “fight club”, so this channel is begging for something), and FCS. Are you saying they don’t have enough channels for the content? Are channels going to even matter in the future? They already have a partnership with Amazon for NFL games.
 

cyIclSoneU

Well-Known Member
Apr 7, 2016
3,231
4,400
113
FOX has FOX, FS1, FS2 (ESPN took away the “fight club”, so this channel is begging for something), and FCS. Are you saying they don’t have enough channels for the content? Are channels going to even matter in the future? They already have a partnership with Amazon for NFL games.

Cord cutting is happening but cable is still dominant. I guess who knows what things will look like in 10 years? But how widely distributed is FS2? The B1G's top games will go on channels that people have in their homes.

That's kind of an aside to my broader point that if FOX wants to play this game with ESPN (and the reports are that they do), their move is going to be to lock up the B1G and try to make it better, which would be by poaching the Pac. And the old "four 16-team superconferences" trope will prove to be wrong, because we will really have two superconferences of something like 20 schools apiece.
 

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
5,630
6,092
113
37
What if…and I mean this is a B1G hypotheticaaaallll…

View attachment 87529

…it is more $$ than that, exclusively from FOX, where they lock out ESPN for two 16 team leagues, effectively buying brands like USC, Oregon, tOSU, and Michigan (…I guess), with little effect on geography (a strategy currently being employed in SEC expansion…you know, “for the love of the game” since apparently that only exists in the SEC), only adding AAUs to the B1G to keep that tradition alive outside of sports (we aren’t going to embarrass you there in the future)…do you take it?

I keep reading this thread and coming back thinking that everyone is still talking way too much about the conferences, and not the media entities that are paying the bills. FOX has the opportunity to buy the brands out there now and fill in with good fodder (that’s where we fit in). It really isn’t even about adding teams. They shut out EPSN from tOSU…that’s gotta sting, right?
I think that could possibly happen but im not 100% sure how valuable the pac 12 is at the moment.

One thing that people keep missing is how massively wealthy the big ten schools are and by proxy the donors. Yeah the media money is great but its still just a drop in the bucket for these schools. Michigan state aka the farm school in Michigan still has over a 3 billion dollar endowment and several billionaire donors that drop insane money on a regular basis and we are one of the poorer schools in the big ten. That's larger then Alabama, Tenn, and kentucky endowments combined. So yeah the SEC needs the money to pay the bills but for most big ten schools that's just the cherry on top.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: CY21 and cyputz

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
10,992
16,729
113
In my opinion now that ESPN owns the SEC, FOX is going to try to own as many B1G rights as it can when their deal comes up and simultaneously try to get the B1G to poach from the Pac-12. This will help them go head to head with ESPN one behemoth vs. another.

I don't think FOX can actually own all the B1G rights since they only have FOX and FS1 vs. ESPN having ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU. But they can own the ones that matter and leave Northwestern vs. Rutgers to the Mouse.

Meanwhile like I said ESPN owns the ACC but they are going to let those wither on the vine just like Big 12 and will try to shift the valuable brands there to the SEC.

I think the Syracuses and Iowa States and Colorados are going to find themselves in a second tier within a couple decades. Whether formal (another FBS/FCS type split) or informal (a Power Five/Group of Five type distinction) it will happen because American capitalism means wealth consolidation, and major college sports is as American as apple pie.
I think you are making three very important incorrect assumptions:
1. That the fans of the CUs, ISUs, and others relegated to a lower division/group will watch a higher league of 30-40 teams. They will, but it will be the NFL, not an NFL-lite college league. A simple look at ratings and it is clear viewer of blue blood games is dependent on fans from non-blue blood teams. Fans of teams relegated to a lower division are probably going to lose interest in their own team as well as the NFL lite league, as they no longer are in the same leagues and on the same level.

2. That the networks care whatsoever about per team revenue. They aren’t in the business of maximizing per team revenue. They care zero about that. Related to that…

3. That the networks need all games to have high viewership. They have a ton of channels and a ton of airtime to fill. And even a game that draws poorly compared to other CFB games, it still beats the hell out of any other content they can put on.

The networks absolutely can’t afford to have a huge hit in interest from a good chunk of the current power conferences. The relegation split you talk about would do that and it kills the golden goose.
 

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
5,630
6,092
113
37
Cord cutting is happening but cable is still dominant. I guess who knows what things will look like in 10 years? But how widely distributed is FS2? The B1G's top games will go on channels that people have in their homes.

That's kind of an aside to my broader point that if FOX wants to play this game with ESPN (and the reports are that they do), their move is going to be to lock up the B1G and try to make it better, which would be by poaching the Pac. And the old "four 16-team superconferences" trope will prove to be wrong, because we will really have two superconferences of something like 20 schools apiece.
You are missing the point, fox has zero say in the big ten adding schools. The big ten has too much money and doesn't listen to anyone. If the big ten wants some pac 12 schools that is a different story but they aren't adding schools they don't want for meaningless tv dollars.
 

cyIclSoneU

Well-Known Member
Apr 7, 2016
3,231
4,400
113
You are missing the point, fox has zero say in the big ten adding schools. The big ten has too much money and doesn't listen to anyone. If the big ten wants some pac 12 schools that is a different story but they aren't adding schools they don't want for meaningless tv dollars.

This is completely at odds with what the B1G Presidents did literally less than a decade ago. They added schools they didn’t want for “meaningless tv dollars.” It’s word for word what they did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rods79

cyIclSoneU

Well-Known Member
Apr 7, 2016
3,231
4,400
113
I think you are making three very important incorrect assumptions:
1. That the fans of the CUs, ISUs, and others relegated to a lower division/group will watch a higher league of 30-40 teams. They will, but it will be the NFL, not an NFL-lite college league. A simple look at ratings and it is clear viewer of blue blood games is dependent on fans from non-blue blood teams. Fans of teams relegated to a lower division are probably going to lose interest in their own team as well as the NFL lite league, as they no longer are in the same leagues and on the same level.

2. That the networks care whatsoever about per team revenue. They aren’t in the business of maximizing per team revenue. They care zero about that. Related to that…

3. That the networks need all games to have high viewership. They have a ton of channels and a ton of airtime to fill. And even a game that draws poorly compared to other CFB games, it still beats the hell out of any other content they can put on.

The networks absolutely can’t afford to have a huge hit in interest from a good chunk of the current power conferences. The relegation split you talk about would do that and it kills the golden goose.

1 is not my assumption but it clearly is ESPN’s and I assume FOX because they are both TV networks. See the UT/OU moves. I’m sure everyone on this board has watched UT or OU before against a team not called ISU. They expect us to keep doing that. Time will tell if that’s true.

2 is not my assumption whatsoever.

3 is also not an assumption but I think itself is a naive misunderstanding. The networks obviously WANT their games to have the highest viewership possible. That’s how they make their money. So they will do what it takes to achieve that higher viewership. Hence ESPN consolidating heavily watched brands in the SEC. And I expect FOX doing the same in the B1G.
 

Rods79

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2006
3,536
1,220
113
Des Moines
I think that could possibly happen but im not 100% sure how valuable the pac 12 is at the moment.

One thing that people keep missing is how massively wealthy the big ten schools are and by proxy the donors. Yeah the media money is great but its still just a drop in the bucket for these schools. Michigan state aka the farm school in Michigan still has over a 3 billion dollar endowment and several billionaire donors that drop insane money on a regular basis and we are one of the poorer schools in the big ten. That's larger then Alabama, Tenn, and kentucky endowments combined. So yeah the SEC needs the money to pay the bills but for most big ten schools that's just the cherry on top.

You aren’t going to throw away known content in established media markets like AZ and CO even if everything goes streaming, and then those brands are still valuable. Not everyone is going to be up or down at any one time.

I fail to understand how adding AAU teams to your conference is going to have a negative effect on your individual donor base. Is this still not the cherry on top? No one is telling them to start accepting WVU so they can burn a couch at your donor meeting.
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
10,992
16,729
113
1 is not my assumption but it clearly is ESPN’s and I assume FOX because they are both TV networks. See the UT/OU moves. I’m sure everyone on this board has watched UT or OU before against a team not called ISU. They expect us to keep doing that. Time will tell if that’s true.

2 is not my assumption whatsoever.

3 is also not an assumption but I think itself is a naive misunderstanding. The networks obviously WANT their games to have the highest viewership possible. That’s how they make their money. So they will do what it takes to achieve that higher viewership. Hence ESPN consolidating heavily watched brands in the SEC. And I expect FOX doing the same in the B1G.

I might have misunderstood your post due to too many beers, but I would say that these assumptions would all be present IF in fact the networks want to push toward a smaller elite league of 30-40 teams with the rest of P5 relegated to a lesser league. Otherwise they would not do it. It if you are saying the networks don’t necessarily want this but it may be something of a consequence due to concentration of brands, then I would agree.