How Big XII expansion could royally screw the Big Ten

[Alsacs]

From CBS Sports
Big 12 could earn an additional $1 billion through expansion

So this article points out perfectly how the Big XII could really the Big Ten. For some stupid reason ESPN and FOX in writing agreed to pay 250 million dollars each for as many 4 schools being added to the Big XII.

So if the Big XII decided to add Cincinnati, UConn, UCF, USF then ESPN/FOX would each be required to pay the Big XII 500 million more dollars a year. Now this additional 1 billion dollars wouldn't increase the Big XII payout because all it would be doing is funding the yearly share for these new 4 schools would get from the Big XII.

However, how it screws the Big Ten is that ESPN doesn't want to pay a lot of money for the Big Ten and they are trying to save a little to get some of the Big Ten package with FOX but if ESPN has to spend another 500 million a year to the Big XII for crap expansion it takes money from the Big Ten that ESPN could pay them.

The Big XII contract could also be forced to be renegotiated as well by ESPN/FOX and that could cost ESPN even more money or they could lose more rights to FOX.

So basically the Big XII could really F the Big Ten over and piss off ESPN if they are forced to pay 250 or 500 million for Big XII expansion of crap American teams. This expansion wouldn't even guarantee an uptick if annual payouts to the Big XII as the conference title game can happen with 10 teams.

 

[orange79]

So if the Big XII decided to add Cincinnati, UConn, UCF, USF then ESPN/FOX would each be required to pay the Big XII 500 million more dollars a year.

It's $500M for the length of the contract, not per year, no?

 

[SyracuseMiami]

Contract commits to increase the pro rata payout of any new additions. Essentially commits to keep the per school payout the same.

Big XII would be committing suicide if they added a bunch of garbage schools that their media partners would have to pay up for. ESPN and Fox would make sure the league got carved up at the end of the GOR.

 

[Alsacs]

The only thing ESPN could do is once the Big XII contract expired not renew it for as much money. That could the Big XII if FOX or another partner wouldn't satisfy their price but ESPN couldn't carve up the Big XII.

While I doubt the Big XII would want to add 4 teams the fact that their contract would cover the yearly payout for any additions means the conference could expand without losing money. They would be watering own their product not costing themselves money.

Even if ESPN has to pay additional 250 million dollars if the Big XII expanded by 2 teams that is 250 million dollars the network can't use to spend on the Big Ten rights if I were FOX I would want the Big XII to expand just for that reason so they could get the entire Big Ten rights cheaper.

 

[HtownOrange]

The Big 12 is becoming irrelevant in that UT and OU are the driving force and neither has enough of a national following to draw like ND. Sure, people will watch the UT/OU game some will watch a few other high profile games, but with 80% of the conference purely regional teams, there is no justification for paying them more than already agreed to.

UT and OU could seriously be looking into their options once this agreement is over. Either can write their own ticket (OU will have a harder time with the PAC but the PAC will have fewer and fewer choices).

ESPN and FAX may want a few more teams in the top tier (presently P5) but unless the group decides to share all Tier 1 and probably Tier 2 rights, splitting the take evenly across the board, there is no incentive for the eastern three (SEC, ACC and B1G) P5 conferences to add anyone other than ND, UT and OU. No other teams move the needle (obviously, if a conference landed one of the three aforementioned schools, they would allow a tag-along). Especially when one considers that the market based approach is now on it long slow decline. With the bundle/streaming options forthcoming it is now all about the laying the ground work and building fan bases.

NOTE: The shift from the cable to the bundle/online future could shift hoops back into a stronger position as there is far more to offer in live programming simply due to the number of games and number of quality teams. Also, the non-revenue sports could generate new revenue from advertising, even with a basic TV production (as opposed to the excellent produtions for football and hoops).

 

[TheCusian]

The Big 12 is becoming irrelevant in that UT and OU are the driving force and neither has enough of a national following to draw like ND. Sure, people will watch the UT/OU game some will watch a few other high profile games, but with 80% of the conference purely regional teams, there is no justification for paying them more than already agreed to. UT and OU could seriously be looking into their options once this agreement is over. Either can write their own ticket (OU will have a harder time with the PAC but the PAC will have fewer and fewer choices). ESPN and FAX may want a few more teams in the top tier (presently P5) but unless the group decides to share all Tier 1 and probably Tier 2 rights, splitting the take evenly across the board, there is no incentive for the eastern three (SEC, ACC and B1G) P5 conferences to add anyone other than ND, UT and OU. No other teams move the needle (obviously, if a conference landed one of the three aforementioned schools, they would allow a tag-along). Especially when one considers that the market based approach is now on it long slow decline. With the bundle/streaming options forthcoming it is now all about the laying the ground work and building fan bases. NOTE: The shift from the cable to the bundle/online future could shift hoops back into a stronger position as there is far more to offer in live programming simply due to the number of games and number of quality teams. Also, the non-revenue sports could generate new revenue from advertising, even with a basic TV production (as opposed to the excellent produtions for football and hoops).

Agree on a lot of the points here - but college basketball not played in March doesn't move the needle like football does. It's one of the reasons ESPN's coverage has shifted so much to NFL, CFB, NBA - then everything else.

 

[Conrad13]

Contract commits to increase the pro rata payout of any new additions. Essentially commits to keep the per school payout the same.

Big XII would be committing suicide if they added a bunch of garbage schools that their media partners would have to pay up for. ESPN and Fox would make sure the league got carved up at the end of the GOR.

For this kind of money, could the 4 teams be Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and BYU? I remember not too long ago that some Clemson and Florida State fans thought that a move to the Big 12 wasn't a bad idea.

 

[Alsacs]

For this kind of money, could the 4 teams be Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and BYU? I remember not too long ago that some Clemson and Florida State fans thought that a move to the Big 12 wasn't a bad idea.

What money? The ACC for 2014-15 gave out great money. They aren't going to leave the ACC for 2-3 million more per year with the additional travel costs.

 

[Resonator]

For this kind of money, could the 4 teams be Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and BYU? I remember not too long ago that some Clemson and Florida State fans thought that a move to the Big 12 wasn't a bad idea.

The idea of Clemson leaving the ACC was laid waste to by their FB HC Dabo Swinney. He basically said that it'd be foolish for CU to leave their historic rivals, and recruiting grounds, for a conference with which it had no historical ties to, based halfway across the country. That CU football could accomplish everything that they desired right where they were. They came thisclose to doing it in January.

Teel Time: Clemson coach Dabo Swinney says leaving ACC for Big 12 "would be the worst thing"

 

[SyracuseMiami]

The only thing ESPN could do is once the Big XII contract expired not renew it for as much money. That could the Big XII if FOX or another partner wouldn't satisfy their price but ESPN couldn't carve up the Big XII.

While I doubt the Big XII would want to add 4 teams the fact that their contract would cover the yearly payout for any additions means the conference could expand without losing money. They would be watering own their product not costing themselves money.

Even if ESPN has to pay additional 250 million dollars if the Big XII expanded by 2 teams that is 250 million dollars the network can't use to spend on the Big Ten rights if I were FOX I would want the Big XII to expand just for that reason so they could get the entire Big Ten rights cheaper.

I don't think you understood what I said. Of course it would have to come at the end of the contract. That said, they will have made both Fox and ESPN pay up additional cash for something of zero value to their media partners. You really don't think ESPN would be working with the SEC and ACC to pluck away a few teams when the GOR expires? It's probably the exact reason the B12 hasn't pulled the trigger.

ESPN can pull a conference apart. Just ask the Big East and UCONN.

 

[Hoo's That]

For this kind of money, could the 4 teams be Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and BYU? I remember not too long ago that some Clemson and Florida State fans thought that a move to the Big 12 wasn't a bad idea.

Ga Tech isn't going anywhere. They take great pride (and use up a LOT of electrons) in constantly ridiculing the Big XII bloggers, especially the Dud of WV. Besides, the B1G covets them per "the conventional stupidity."

 

[HtownOrange]

For this kind of money, could the 4 teams be Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and BYU? I remember not too long ago that some Clemson and Florida State fans thought that a move to the Big 12 wasn't a bad idea.

Fans are crazy. FSU, Clemson and especially GT have zero interest in leaving the ACC. Even the outspoken BoT member from FSU backtracked when he indicated that FSU might look west.

1) Travel costs would eat up any increase.
2) The ACC pays more per school.
3) FSU, Clemson and GT Fans aren't crazy about traveling to Syracuse, Pitt and BC; they will be completely turned off traveling to Stillwater, Lubbock, Iowa, Kansas (X2), WV (due to fans and the fact that they would travel to Pitt first, then bus to WVU - kinda defeats the argument against playing in Pitt). Baylor and TCU may be acceptable travel sites as they are close enough to Dallas/Fort Worth and Austin. Now add flying to Provo for any sporting event.
4) Academics matters to the presidents/chancellors of universities. See OU, OSU, UH, Lousiville (it worked!), Cincy, and others. Even Texas Blech is trying to improve.
5) Even if the three left the ACC, the three would be at the mercy and whim of Texas, which has not been a stable thing on which to rest these past 20 years or so.
6) The three would lose all influence in conference matters just as they are gaining the influence they have needed and desired.

 

[HtownOrange]

Agree on a lot of the points here - but college basketball not played in March doesn't move the needle like football does. It's one of the reasons ESPN's coverage has shifted so much to NFL, CFB, NBA - then everything else.

I get that the needle does not move as much for a single hoops game, but there is value in the P5, at least 20-25% of the TV value is in hoops. The number is probably higher but the focus has been on football for so long that broadcasters have used it to stymie the conferences - recall that the big money conferences are making is relatively new, everyone was under $10MM a few years ago, the Big East was doing OK (not great) by paying out the TV and Tourney revenues. Also, there are only around 100 football games for the ACC to broadcast (14 teams X 7 home games = 98) while hoops offers many more, triple (15 teams x 20 home games = 300). While the football may offer 300 hours in which to advertise, hoops would offer 600 hours. To match the effectiveness, hoops would only have to draw half the ratings of football (using simple math for advertising dollars/viewer rating) to generate an equivalent amount of advertising dollars which generates the revenues from which broadcasters pay rights from. Granted, FSU-Clemson football will probably draw the highest rating but the ratings must be averaged, even the BC-Wake games.

Under the new bundling ideas and the cord cutting, the option of simply following one team or conference may become more palatable to sports fans. Additionally, lacrosse, baseball, and other sports could be viewed more by conference fans who would now have access to the events they rarely would have access to in the past. ACC lacrosse has most games covered by ESPN, this was not so 5 and 10 years ago. Baseball is getting easier to access.

Recall that a shift from the norm does not have to be much to make money. If it breaks even now, the media gurus will find a way to make profits in the near future. I think a few sports (baseball and lacrosse in particular) can be easily be monetarized, at least at the leading schools/conferences.

I may be wrong, but TV people try to keep costs down like any other business, to enhance profits. Recall just 30 years ago (give or take a few) all of college sports was controlled by a few media outlets that showed only a few games per week. Everything else was either watched in person or listened to on the radio. (For the millennials, radio is the predecessor to I-tunes, Pandora and IheartRadio - NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!) ESPN broke the mold because a few fans in Connecticut wanted to watch their teams, so they produced games cheaply on cable (an ironic quote compared to today).

 

[Moontan]

Recall just 30 years ago (give or take a few) all of college sports was controlled by a few media outlets that showed only a few games per week. Everything else was either watched in person or listened to on the radio. (For the millennials, radio is the predecessor to I-tunes, Pandora and IheartRadio - NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!)

As a rising SU freshman from Rochester, I followed the '79-'80 hoops season on WSTM (great cable device included Syracuse, Buffalo, Toronto stations plus WPIX, WOR and TBS... my father, the baseball & hockey fan, was very happy) and radio on local affiliate WHAM. I remember watching when the Russian (err, Soviet) national team was at Manley.

I was able to follow the '96 final in Amsterdam using a B&W TV with rabbit ears to tune into an American Forces station from across the country... tip-off was at 3:30am local time.

Access to games has changed quite a bit since then.

Oops, to get back on topic... the Big XII needs to expand to 12, desperately. One would think that Cincy would be an automatic as the natural traveling partner for WVU. Beyond that, which I believe may be the problem, is deciding on #12. I always thought that it would be BYU. Now I'm not so sure. Yukon is just too far from Ames, Lubbock, etc..

 

[Alsacs]

I don't think you understood what I said. Of course it would have to come at the end of the contract. That said, they will have made both Fox and ESPN pay up additional cash for something of zero value to their media partners. You really don't think ESPN would be working with the SEC and ACC to pluck away a few teams when the GOR expires? It's probably the exact reason the B12 hasn't pulled the trigger.

ESPN can pull a conference apart. Just ask the Big East and UCONN.

ESPN could pull a conference apart when the money was cheap and the conference was split between football and non-football members. ESPN can pull apart the ACC more than the Big XIIIF it really wanted too.

ESPN can't split the Big XII up it would take either Oklahoma or Texas deciding to leave the conference.

What programs could the SEC or ACC work with ESPN to pluck? Texas is not joining the SEC and Oklahoma leaving would require the SEC taking Oklahoma State as well.

Fox is cutting spending like ESPN has. FOX probably wouldn't mind paying the additional 250 if ESPN did as well to stop them from spending on the Big Ten or other rights. FS1 is the upstart they know they have to spend and get more content to get the ratings up. ESPN having to spend that money would cut down the money forE it to give the Big Ten for the rights that FOX isn't getting.

The Big XII would get a decent contract from FOX or NBC if ESPN pulled out.

 

[Alsacs]

I get that the needle does not move as much for a single hoops game, but there is value in the P5, at least 20-25% of the TV value is in hoops. The number is probably higher but the focus has been on football for so long that broadcasters have used it to stymie the conferences - recall that the big money conferences are making is relatively new, everyone was under $10MM a few years ago, the Big East was doing OK (not great) by paying out the TV and Tourney revenues. Also, there are only around 100 football games for the ACC to broadcast (14 teams X 7 home games = 98) while hoops offers many more, triple (15 teams x 20 home games = 300). While the football may offer 300 hours in which to advertise, hoops would offer 600 hours. To match the effectiveness, hoops would only have to draw half the ratings of football (using simple math for advertising dollars/viewer rating) to generate an equivalent amount of advertising dollars which generates the revenues from which broadcasters pay rights from. Granted, FSU-Clemson football will probably draw the highest rating but the ratings must be averaged, even the BC-Wake games.

Under the new bundling ideas and the cord cutting, the option of simply following one team or conference may become more palatable to sports fans. Additionally, lacrosse, baseball, and other sports could be viewed more by conference fans who would now have access to the events they rarely would have access to in the past. ACC lacrosse has most games covered by ESPN, this was not so 5 and 10 years ago. Baseball is getting easier to access.

Recall that a shift from the norm does not have to be much to make money. If it breaks even now, the media gurus will find a way to make profits in the near future. I think a few sports (baseball and lacrosse in particular) can be easily be monetarized, at least at the leading schools/conferences.

I may be wrong, but TV people try to keep costs down like any other business, to enhance profits. Recall just 30 years ago (give or take a few) all of college sports was controlled by a few media outlets that showed only a few games per week. Everything else was either watched in person or listened to on the radio. (For the millennials, radio is the predecessor to I-tunes, Pandora and IheartRadio - NOW GET OFF MY LAWN!) ESPN broke the mold because a few fans in Connecticut wanted to watch their teams, so they produced games cheaply on cable (an ironic quote compared to today).

Basketball honestly is irrelevant in expansion of TV contracts.
Fox overpaid the Big East and they are only getting 12 years 500 million for an annual pay out of 41.67 million per year.
41.67/10= 4.167 million per school.

Basketball doesn't generate TV ratings like football. The conference TV deals have 80% of the revenue come from football and 20% for all the rest mainly basketball.

 

[Hoo's That]

Basketball honestly is irrelevant in expansion of TV contracts.
Fox overpaid the Big East and they are only getting 12 years 500 million for an annual pay out of 41.67 million per year.
41.67/10= 4.167 million per school.

Basketball doesn't generate TV ratings like football. The conference TV deals have 80% of the revenue come from football and 20% for all the rest mainly basketball.

Completely agree. The only basketball that moves the rating needle is the tournament and CBS has that locked up. Look at the comparison of what the other 14 ACC members get as a share (~$18MM to ~$20MM in 2014) and what ND gets as a without-football share (~$5MM).

 

[Moontan]

Completely agree. The only basketball that moves the rating needle is the tournament and CBS has that locked up. Look at the comparison of what the other 14 ACC members get as a share (~$18MM to ~$20MM in 2014) and what ND gets as a without-football share (~$5MM).

Even there, you're giving MHoops to much credit.

The ~$5M figure includes all $ other than football, including WHoops, lax (M&W), baseball, softball, etc..

 

[kirbivore]

Ga Tech isn't going anywhere. They take great pride (and use up a LOT of electrons) in constantly ridiculing the Big XII bloggers, especially the Dud of WV. Besides, the B1G covets them per "the conventional stupidity."

People still read that clown after he admitted to fabricating expansion rumors in a delusional quest to kill that acc?

 

[MaxwellCuse]

People still read that clown after he admitted to fabricating expansion rumors in a delusional quest to kill that acc?

Yes, but they are people who refuse to give up their delusions. I believe the Georgia Tech people call it Butt Hurt In Extremis.

 

[omniorange]

Not sure how much the following data points will add to the discussion, but I did this analysis in January/February over on the Conference Realignment and ACC boards when it came out once again that the ACC was third behind the Greater 2 for the third year in a row in terms of football viewership but the B12 fans challenged that once again.

The data comes from Sports Media Watch and includes only those games that would have aired as part of conference's tv contract, not road out-of-conference games such as the ACC games @ND which were part of the ND NBC contract or ACC/SEC rivalry games that were considered part of the SEC tv contract during this period. The only exceptions to this were the two Louisville home games in 2013 that made the cut, however Maryland home games from 2013 were excluded.

Keep in mind this is only a three year analysis and we have a long way to go before the GORs run out.

Games with 10 million plus viewers:
ACC – 3; B12 – 0

Games with between 9 million and 9.9 million viewers:
ACC – 0; B12 – 0

Games with between 8 million and 8.9 million viewers:
ACC – 3; B12 - 0

Games with between 7 million and 7.9 million viewers:
ACC – 4; B12 - 1

Games with between 6 million and 6.9 million viewers:
ACC – 0; B12 – 2

Games with between 5 million and 5.9 million viewers:
ACC – 6; B12 – 2

Games with between 4 million and 4.9 million viewers:
ACC – 4; B12 – 6

Games with between 3 million and 3.9 million viewers:
ACC – 9; B12 – 13

Games with between 2 million and 2.9 million viewers:
ACC – 16; B12 – 22

Games with between 1 million and 1.9 million viewers:
ACC – 26; B12 - 24

Final Tally of all games with 1 million plus viewers overall:

ACC – 71 games, 250 plus million viewers, average 3.523 million viewers per game.

B12 – 70 games, 189 plus million viewers, average 2.705 million viewers per game.

Also as part of the discussion on the ACC boards posters wanted to know what the data showed in terms of ND's impact. So I thought this could best be demonstrated by showing the actual games which received at least 2 million plus viewers.

ACC 2015 football games that drew at least 2 million viewers:

01. - Ohio State/VT (rating share 6.0; 10.585 million viewers)
02. - Clemson/UNC - ACC Championship game (rating share 4.1; 7.919 million viewers)
03. - ND/Clemson - (rating share 4.5; 7.647 million viewers)
03. - FSU/Clemson - (rating share 4.7; 7.563 million viewers)
05. - ND/UVa - (rating share 3.7; 5.744 million viewers)
06. - ND/Pitt - (rating share 2.5; 3.844 million viewers)
07. - Miami/FSU - (rating share 2.3; 3.502 million viewers)
08. - LSU/SU - (rating share 2.1; 3.204 million viewers)
09. - FSU/BC - (rating share 2.1; 3.148 million viewers)
10. - L'Ville/FSU - (rating share 1.9; 2.852 million viewers)
11. - Clemson/Miami - (rating share 1.8; 2.634 million viewers)
12. - SU/FSU - (rating share 1.8; 2.588 million viewers)
13. – USF/FSU – (not metered; 2.276 million viewers)
14. – UNC/VT – (rating share 1.4; 2.086 million viewers)

ACC 2014 football games that drew at least 2 million viewers:

01. ND/FSU - (rating share 7.9; 13.25 million viewers)
02. GT/FSU - ACC Champship game - (rating 6.2; 10.15 million viewers)
03. FSU/Miami - (rating share 5.4; 8.74 million viewers)
04. Clemson/FSU - (rating share 4.5; 7.34 million viewers)
05. Florida/FSU - (rating share 3.5; 5.96 million viewers)
06. FSU/L'Ville - (rating share 3.1; 4.97 million viewers)
07. ND/SU - (rating share 2.6; 4.05 million viewers)
08. Miami/L'Ville - (rating share 2.3; 3.61 million viewers)
09. GT/VT - (rating share 2.1; 3.14 million viewers)
10. UCLA/UVa - (rating share 1.9; 2.92 million viewers)
10. UVa/VT - (rating share 1.7; 3.05 million viewers)
12. ECU/VT - (rating share 1.7; 2.56 million viewers)
13. SC/Clemson – (rating share 1.3; 2.12 million viewers)

ACC 2013 football games that drew at least 2 million viewers:

01. Miami/FSU - (rating share 5.1; 8.35 million viewers)
02. Georgia/Clemson - (rating share 4.8; 8.14 million viewers)
03. Miami/Louisville - (rating share 3.5; 5.75 million viewers)*
04. FSU/Clemson - (rating share 3.4; 5.68 million viewers)
05. Duke/FSU - ACC Championship game - (rating share 3.4; 5.66 million viewers)
06. Florida/Miami - (rating share 3.1; 4.60 million viewers)
07. Alabama/VT - (rating share 3.0; 5.17 million viewers)
08. FSU/Pitt - (rating share 2.9; 4.47 million viewers)
09. Georgia/GT - (rating share 2.2; 3.53 million viewers)
10. ND/Pitt - (rating share 2.0; 3.03 million viewers)
11. Clemson/NC State - (rating share 1.7; 2.60 million viewers)
12. UNC/GT - (rating share 1.7; 2.33 million viewers)
13. VT/GT – (rating share 1.5; 2.31 million viewers)
14. MD/FSU – (rating share 1.5; 2.39 million viewers)
15. UCF/Louisville – (rating share 1.5; 2.22 million viewers)
16. Miami/UNC – (rating share 1.4; 2.18 million viewers)
17. Miami/Pitt – (rating share 1.4; 2.12 million viewers)
18. GT/Clemson – (rating share 1.4; 2.06 million viewers)

*Miami/Louisville and UCF/Louisville were not technically ACC games for 2013, but since they were both Louisville home games, I included it in the above.

Again, not sure how relevant the above data is to the overall discussion and any relevance must be tempered by the fact that it is still only three years worth of data. But it does bring into question does the B12 truly deserve a better overall TV contract than the ACC?

Cheers,
Neil

 

[SU68]

I don't think you understood what I said. Of course it would have to come at the end of the contract. That said, they will have made both Fox and ESPN pay up additional cash for something of zero value to their media partners. You really don't think ESPN would be working with the SEC and ACC to pluck away a few teams when the GOR expires? It's probably the exact reason the B12 hasn't pulled the trigger.

ESPN can pull a conference apart. Just ask the Big East and UCONN.

IMHO, the Catholic 7 with their lack of vision -- not ESPN -- pulled the Big East apart.

 

[Hoo's That]

IMHO, the Catholic 7 with their lack of vision and D-1A football -- not ESPN -- pulled the Big East apart.

FIFY.