You think the lesser schools are going to take less than what they are getting now? If Michigan leaves then the whole thing breaks apart, then it will be every team for themselves. Why would any of the schools agree to unequal revenue if it means they will be getting less in the future than what they are getting now? They might give up future revenue, but there is no way they are going to go back with lower payouts.
This is depressing... :(
- Thread starter CySmurf
- Start date
"A fool and his money are soon parted."
Hawkeye Athletics sets another revenue record while ISU, UNI struggle
For the fourth straight year, University of Iowa Athletics in 2025 set a new revenue record of $153.2 million — while athletics revenue at Iowa State University and University of Northern Iowa declined, leaving UNI with a nearly $3 million deficit.www.thegazette.com
They don't get much bang for their buck, but that does not take away the fact that they are in line to make some serious money from their media deal going forward. Not sure the Learfield rankings mean that much because the more sports you have, the better chance you have to get a higher finish and get more points. Even though they limit the number used, it easier to get a higher score if you are Stanford with a lot of sports than a school like the squawks.
Haven't chimed in on this, but I love how it's always 'record' levels, yet they're never adjusted for inflation, write-off benefits, sustained costs, per capita, etc. Everyone is guilty of the 'hype' we're flooded with every day.
Lesser schools aren’t going to have a choice. Ohio State and Michigan will decide the next payouts for everyone.
You know that sounds really nice, but they will have to vote and get 11 schools to OK the change, which is going to be an uphill battle. It's easy for Ohio State and few others to say either vote for this or else, but if you make that threat you better have someplace to go. Fox is going to have a lot of say here also, since they own biggest share of BTN, and they are not going to give that up to ESPN or some other network. ESPN is in bed with the SEC, so they are not going to give that up without a fight either. For a super league to form, it's going to require most of the teams in those two leagues to be willing to go along with it, and payouts are going to be a major sticking point.
The idea that Ohio State and Michigan are going to accept the same money Rutgers, Iowa, Maryland and Northwestern will get is crazy to me. It’s just not realistic.
You mean the way they have for over 100 years? And just did a few years back with the new media deal?
Yeah you’re right nothing at all has changed in the last 100 years or the last 3+ years.
Do Michigan and Ohio State and the others have 11 votes to change the agreement? The money makers may not like the agreement, but it without the votes to change it, it really does not matter.
The B10 was smart unlike the B12, and stated equal revenue from the beginning, how many times did ISU, KSU and KU bend over backwards to Oklahoma and Texas and how did that end up? If you are the lesser schools, you have to call their bluff to form a super league.
Iowa currently trails ISU 9-2 in the Cy-Hawk series. This year is gonna be a Cyclone state once again (3 of the last 4 years).
I think we can all agree that the game has not changed a bit for 120 years when the forward pass became legal.
Texas and Oklahoma didn’t need votes. Ohio State and Michigan run that conference they will get what they want or go somewhere that will give it to them. The idea they won’t be greedy right now is silly to me.
We are not talking about leaving the conference, but about going to unequal revenue sharing. But you know that. It took 9 votes and UT, OU, Nebraska and aTm voted against it every time. For the B10 to go to unequal revenue sharing they need more votes than what they are going to get. Ohio State, Michigan, Oregon, USC and Penn State would be all for it, what other four schools are going to vote for it, Nebraska, and then who?
