The all-inclusive Rutgers dumpster fire thread...

[Arizona Knight]

Too bad you aren't enjoying the benefit of your teams not sucking in either revenue generating sport.

I can assure you I am enjoying the benefits of the B1G. It will be a fun ride for the next decade as we build out our athletics' infrastructure. It has already started with the indoor training center for baseball and softball. Ground is soon breaking on the basketball practice facility which has been long overdue. Then we'll see soccer and lax. The Hale Center weight room just got new equipment across the board this month. And so on...

This is going to be a very fun ride and it is not lost on me how fortunate we are to have been given a seat at this wonderful table. While other conferences are scrambling to secure new Networks and/or sign extensions to GOR's, we are about to hit stride in every way.

It's pretty awesome.

 

[longtimefan]

What scares the WWL is we actually are ready to cut the cord from ESPN. Pun intended. The B1G is pushing for OTA. It is looking like you may be seeing a steady stream nationally of Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Michigan etc before and after ND telecasts on NBC. You will also see a heavy dose of B1G football on Fox along with the BigXII and Pac12. All over the air, live sports programming. The BTN already streams with BTN2Go. Bye bye DirectTV and ESPN in 2017 for me and the massive population that watches the B1G religiously.

All while receiving what is estimated to be $57,000,000.00 (full payout) annually in 2017.

So, you're saying that the legions of Big Ten (14) fans will forego all of the other sporting events that ESPN carries once the split occurs? And that the not-so-fanatic will search around for FS1, FS2 to watch Indiana-Maryland football?

 

[RF2044]

I can assure you I am enjoying the benefits of the B1G. It will be a fun ride for the next decade as we build out our athletics' infrastructure. It has already started with the indoor training center for baseball and softball. Ground is soon breaking on the basketball practice facility which has been long overdue. Then we'll see soccer and lax. The Hale Center weight room just got new equipment across the board this month. And so on...

This is going to be a very fun ride and it is not lost on me how fortunate we are to have been given a seat at this wonderful table. While other conferences are scrambling to secure new Networks and/or sign extensions to GOR's, we are about to hit stride in every way.

It's pretty awesome.

Whatever gets you through the night.

 

[Arizona Knight]

So, you're saying that the legions of Big Ten (14) fans will forego all of the other sporting events that ESPN carries once the split occurs? And that the not-so-fanatic will search around for FS1, FS2 to watch Indiana-Maryland football?

For me, yes. My profile is 43, employed, and a father of 3. I don't watch the NBA, MLB or NHL anymore. I used to when I was single, with copious amounts of free time, but now I just don't have the bandwidth. So my passion is College Football, then a big drop off the the NFL and College Hoops. I have been a DirecTV subscriber for probably 15 years and pay about $160/month.

I have three boxes in my house (well one outside) and a TV in the man cave hooked up to a laptop. I have Amazon, HBO2Go, Apple TV and God knows what else but it suits me fine. The only thing stopping me is sports and what I care about will now be available OTA and on BTN2Go.

Saves me about $2k a year. Only thing that might stop me would be DVR'ing OTA capabilities but my guess is that is either covered already or will be by the time 2017 arrives.

I can assure you, as ESPN is losing subscribers to cord-cutting and overall sh!tty content, this will be part of their calculus.

 

[orangefog]

For me, yes. My profile is 43, employed, and a father of 3. I don't watch the NBA, MLB or NHL anymore. I used to when I was single, with copious amounts of free time, but now I just don't have the bandwidth. So my passion is College Football, then a big drop off the the NFL and College Hoops. I have been a DirecTV subscriber for probably 15 years and pay about $160/month.

I have three boxes in my house (well one outside) and a TV in the man cave hooked up to a laptop. I have Amazon, HBO2Go, Apple TV and God knows what else but it suits me fine. The only thing stopping me is sports and what I care about will now be available OTA and on BTN2Go.

Saves me about $2k a year. Only thing that might stop me would be DVR'ing OTA capabilities but my guess is that is either covered already or will be by the time 2017 arrives.

I can assure you, as ESPN is losing subscribers to cord-cutting and overall sh!tty content, this will be part of their calculus.

Is cable not Rutgers lifeline to the B1G? That is the part that I don't get. Aren't you worried at all that technology is burning Rutgers only value to any major conference. The advantage that Rutgers had over schools like UConn, was that it was in a state with higher population. It was about cable subscribers. If I am the commissioner of the B1G and I am looking at the future, I would have to look at Rutgers and wonder what it is that they are adding to my conference. I am trying to be objective, but it is difficult, because just as I see things in a positive light with SU, I can't stand Rutgers, so I am not sure if my reasoning is objective.

 

[jr4750]

Is cable not Rutgers lifeline to the B1G? That is the part that I don't get. Aren't you worried at all that technology is burning Rutgers only value to any major conference. The advantage that Rutgers had over schools like UConn, was that it was in a state with higher population. It was about cable subscribers. If I am the commissioner of the B1G and I am looking at the future, I would have to look at Rutgers and wonder what it is that they are adding to my conference. I am trying to be objective, but it is difficult, because just as I see things in a positive light with SU, I can't stand Rutgers, so I am not sure if my reasoning is objective.

I also am not trying to be combative, and if Rutgers (B10) is truly in line to receive upwards of 57 million a year, (which baffles me a bit, as why would any network pay twice the price for a product just because) you/they are still competing against teams with the same financial backing. Rutgers, despite all the in state talent, has forever struggled to compete in leagues where the playing field is effectively level economically, while they possess great local talent to thrive with. 57 million a year to have a good women's soccer team, but not be able to reach the higher levels of B10 league play in football and basketball gives me a whats the point feeling. All that money, all those fancy facilities and all that really matters is winning. (Outside of graduating players, etc.) Just seems like a vicious cycle of mediocrity, that will eventually turn fans away. Banking on competing teams fans to be interested is also gonna wane. How many people are gonna tune into a Rutgers/Nebraska basketball game? Being relevant matters, and money certainly helps, but won't re-work hierarchy, given equal funds across the board.

I just think the number 2 purpose and definition of success within any AD should be to win. Number 1 is produce solid students, citizens.

Feel the same way about SU, so don't despair. Anytime someone says something about how much money we generate a year, I am more concerned with did we win. This year has been amazing across the board, expect for football. If we turn the corner there, I could care less that Rutgers is making 30 million more a year.

 

[Arizona Knight]

Is cable not Rutgers lifeline to the B1G? That is the part that I don't get. Aren't you worried at all that technology is burning Rutgers only value to any major conference. The advantage that Rutgers had over schools like UConn, was that it was in a state with higher population. It was about cable subscribers. If I am the commissioner of the B1G and I am looking at the future, I would have to look at Rutgers and wonder what it is that they are adding to my conference. I am trying to be objective, but it is difficult, because just as I see things in a positive light with SU, I can't stand Rutgers, so I am not sure if my reasoning is objective.

I'm going to treat this as a sincere question and give it a response. The B1G just sold half of its rights to Fox for $250mm/annually. That's a staggering number but one that is in perfect alignment with what Delaney was projecting post aquisition of Rutgers and Maryland. That solidified eastern PA, New Jersey, New York City, Maryland, and Washington DC. It was a land grab for cable boxes, eyeballs, students, and recruits. It has been massively successful by any objective metric.

The chances of the B1G reversing course, a league that makes calculated moves at the speed of a glacier, is somewhere between zero and impossible.

 

[orangefog]

I also am not trying to be combative, and if Rutgers (B10) is truly in line to receive upwards of 57 million a year, (which baffles me a bit, as why would any network pay twice the price for a product just because) you/they are still competing against teams with the same financial backing. Rutgers, despite all the in state talent, has forever struggled to compete in leagues where the playing field is effectively level economically, while they possess great local talent to thrive with. 57 million a year to have a good women's soccer team, but not be able to reach the higher levels of B10 league play in football and basketball gives me a whats the point feeling. All that money, all those fancy facilities and all that really matters is winning. (Outside of graduating players, etc.) Just seems like a vicious cycle to me. I just think the number 2 purpose and definition of success within any AD should be to win. Number 1 is produce solid students, citizens.

That is what I am trying to say as well. In order to demand that type of money from networks, the product has to be worth it. They have to realize that there is some dead weight, and that for $57 million per year, they could draw in a few teams, hopefully not from the ACC, that would add to the quality of the product.

 

[jr4750]

I'm going to treat this as a sincere question and give it a response. The B1G just sold half of its rights to Fox for $250mm/annually. That's a staggering number but one that is in perfect alignment with what Delaney was projecting post aquisition of Rutgers and Maryland. That solidified eastern PA, New Jersey, New York City, Maryland, and Washington DC. It was a land grab for cable boxes, eyeballs, students, and recruits. It has been massively successful by any objective metric.

The chances of the B1G reversing course, a league that makes calculated moves at the speed of a glacier, is somewhere between zero and impossible.

Yes, I agree given the current makeup of conferences, Rutgers is safe and sitting pretty. You will get your checks, and be able to pay top dollar to coaches, have great facilities, etc. You still must win, and who knows what conferences will look like in 10 years. Did you read the Stuart Mandel article this week about super conferences. Both of our teams are no where close to being included. If that's the future, we both may want to hold back on generating too much debt in the athletics arena.

 

[orangefog]

I'm going to treat this as a sincere question and give it a response. The B1G just sold half of its rights to Fox for $250mm/annually. That's a staggering number but one that is in perfect alignment with what Delaney was projecting post aquisition of Rutgers and Maryland. That solidified eastern PA, New Jersey, New York City, Maryland, and Washington DC. It was a land grab for cable boxes, eyeballs, students, and recruits. It has been massively successful by any objective metric.

The chances of the B1G reversing course, a league that makes calculated moves at the speed of a glacier, is somewhere between zero and impossible.

Why, why is it not possible? The moves were predicated on the dependency on cable boxes. If technology is moving in a different direction, then why wouldn't the conference? I would say that the B1G is anything but moving at a glacial pace. They have been at the forefront of conference realignment and the whole network thing. I am glad you feel comfortable and confident, but I don't even feel comfortable as a SU fan in the ACC, because with those numbers, the B1G can draw many teams, just like they did Maryland. You have to be a little worried. If Rutgers was just a losing team in the money sports and not have all the off field issues then maybe Rutgers would be a little more stable, but with the constant embarrassment that Rutgers has become to B1G, I don't see how the B1G doesn't at least consider dropping Rutgers.

 

[TexanMark]

I'd love to see the accounting for $57M in 2017. Of course we won't see it as it is Internet speculation right now. Also, these electronic keyboard warriors often forget about overhead and the cost of changes. I love when the B1G offices apparently run on no money as these fictional figures will be cut 14 ways.

 

[TexanMark]

Yes, I agree given the current makeup of conferences, Rutgers is safe and sitting pretty. You will get your checks, and be able to pay top dollar to coaches, have great facilities, etc. You still must win, and who knows what conferences will look like in 10 years. Did you read the Stuart Mandel article this week about super conferences. Both of our teams are no where close to being included. If that's the future, we both may want to hold back on generating too much debt in the athletics arena.

Mandel's scenario will never happen just like Rutgers will never win a Natty......



in anything.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

I know this is all in fun but c'mon. Rutgers and Maryland just made the B1G another $60mm annually. The BTN got on basic in NY without so much as a slap fight and our ratings out of the gate blew away anything they were getting in the NYC DMA prior to our arrival. That's why we were invited. They knew the metrics and we delivered on them.

Now that Kyle Flood is gone, hopefully we get the football house in order. At least on the recruiting trail Coach Ash is lights out so far with a consensus Top 25 class heading into summer. We are also trending very well with many high level prospects. The reality is the B1G East is hot. I think 5 or 6 of the 7 team division have Top 25 classes at the moment. I know it's early.

I know that RU has a different coach this year, but Rutgers traditionally has some decent players decommit as the winter approaches, so I wouldn't get too excited about recruiting rankings 8 months before signing day. To your point about being a "consensus Top 25 class heading into summer", I agree as long as you interpret the word consensus to mean one. Both Ryvals and Skowt have RU as 37 and 31, respectively. They both put them as 10th in the Big 10.

This is in no way touting SU as having a superior recruiting class, quite the contrary. I readily admit that RU is ahead of SU so far in that department.

 

[texascpa]

As an aside, AK, even you got to admit that "Stripe the Birth Place" is a horrible slogan.

 

[orangefog]

If you think about it, Jim Delany may be a genius. He has Rutgers join the conference on the cheap, as they provide many valuable cable boxes. He knows that the industry is changing and he has Rutgers at a reasonable cost until 2021. That gives him a few years to see how technology is going and also to see if maybe Rutgers can get to the point that they are offering anything besides cable boxes, if not, in 2020, he cuts them loose without ever having them as true member of the B1G, at least not a full partner with equal compensation. I predict Rutgers will not be in the B1G in 2021, and they will be doing the walk of shame after being used and kicked to the curb by the B1G back to the AAC.

 

[sutomcat]

That is what I am trying to say as well. In order to demand that type of money from networks, the product has to be worth it. They have to realize that there is some dead weight, and that for $57 million per year, they could draw in a few teams, hopefully not from the ACC, that would add to the quality of the product.

Since 1970, the B1G has had two NCs in football, three if you count a shared NC Michigan claims in 1997.

Since 1990, the B1G has had 1 NC in basketball, MSU in 2000.

Linkage

The quality of the product is poor and got markedly worse when the B1g added two bad athletic programs to its portfolio. I give credit to the fans of the schools, who watch their teams religiously. If the B1G sports programs were half as good as some of their fans are, it would be the top conference in the country.

Too bad for them this is not the case.

 

[orangefog]

Since 1970, the B1G has had two NCs in football, three if you count a shared NC Michigan claims in 1997.

Since 1990, the B1G has had 1 NC in basketball, MSU in 2000.

Linkage

The quality of the product is poor and got markedly worse when the B1g added two bad athletic programs to its portfolio. I give credit to the fans of the schools, who watch their teams religiously. If the B1G sports programs were half as good as some of their fans are, it would be the top conference in the country.

Too bad for them this is not the case.

Ok, so lets say the B1G decided to drop Rutgers and add Oklahoma, Kansas and another decent B12 program (obviously TX is the dream for them, but maybe OK State?). That would get them to 16 and add two top end football programs and a blue blood basketball program. If cable boxes isn't the name of the game in 2020, wouldn't it make sense to make a move like this to improve the product? I think the actual fans of teams like Oklahoma and Kansas would pay to see their teams.

 

[Arizona Knight]

I'd love to see the accounting for $57M in 2017. Of course we won't see it as it is Internet speculation right now. Also, these electronic keyboard warriors often forget about overhead and the cost of changes. I love when the B1G offices apparently run on no money as these fictional figures will be cut 14 ways.

Revenue for 2015 was up 33%. That is before the new Tier one monies have kicked in. Start up costs for BTN are complete hence the revenue share portion of the payout has already kicked in. That was originally withheld to cover start up costs.

No stealth ninja accounting here. No proposed networks. No hopes of being of balloon payments for network delivery failures.

 

[orange79]

Ok, so lets say the B1G decided to drop Rutgers and add Oklahoma, Kansas and another decent B12 program (obviously TX is the dream for them, but maybe OK State?). That would get them to 16 and add two top end football programs and a blue blood basketball program. If cable boxes isn't the name of the game in 2020, wouldn't it make sense to make a move like this to improve the product? I think the actual fans of teams like Oklahoma and Kansas would pay to see their teams.

The B1G is 'dropping' no one. As much as anyone wishes they would, they will not. in this day and age, it will not happen.

 

[orangefog]

The B1G is 'dropping' no one. As much as anyone wishes they would, they will not. in this day and age, it will not happen.

Ok, but why?

 

[TheCusian]

Revenue for 2015 was up 33%. That is before the new Tier one monies have kicked in. Start up costs for BTN are complete hence the revenue share portion of the payout has already kicked in. That was originally withheld to cover start up costs. No stealth ninja accounting here. No proposed networks. No hopes of being of balloon payments for network delivery failures.

If ESPN is hurting the BTN will feel the pain too. Isn't FS1, 2 a cable product? Cable cutters hurt everyone.

It may be easier to watch ESPN via SlingTV/internet than it is to buy and setup an antenna for over the air broadcasts.

Let's put it this way: in the cable cutting era would the average American buy ESPN or the BTN? How about FS1 vs ESPN?

And finally, ABC is last I checked a over the air broadcast, no?

 

[orange79]

Ok, but why?

Other than the fact that college presidents just don't do things like that, do you have any idea what it would cost, what with buyouts and litigation? Think about it. Athletic departments don't run conferences. College presidents do. If you can't see that, I can't help you.

 

[orangefog]

Other than the fact that college presidents just don't do things like that, do you have any idea what it would cost, what with buyouts and litigation? Think about it. Athletic departments don't run conferences. College presidents do. If you can't see that, I can't help you.

First of all, I didn't ask for your help, I asked for a bit of clarification on your response, because I honestly would like to know why they wouldn't do it. The Big East dumped Temple, so it is not without precedent. And no, I don't know how much it would cost and I don't know what Rutgers contract is for inclusion in the B1G, perhaps there is an out, as Rutgers was desperate to join a P5. Also, I am fully aware of conferences being run by college presidents and that they are about more than just athletics. That being said, the constant embarrassing issues that Rutgers has been having throughout their time in the B1G may rub some of these college presidents the wrong way, no? Bottom line, it is about money and if the B1G thinks that it would be financially beneficial to drop Rutgers and go in another direction, I think they would, and Rutgers has provided ample missteps for the conference to point to and not look like the bad guy.

 

[TexanMark]

Revenue for 2015 was up 33%. That is before the new Tier one monies have kicked in. Start up costs for BTN are complete hence the revenue share portion of the payout has already kicked in. That was originally withheld to cover start up costs.

No stealth ninja accounting here. No proposed networks. No hopes of being of balloon payments for network delivery failures.

And how much was a direct subsidy from student fees?

You also missed the point that the conference office takes a slice each and every year...you can't just do pie in sky projections and divide by 14.

 

[Arizona Knight]

And how much was a direct subsidy from student fees?

I was referring to the B1G revenues.