Around the Big Ten

[Hannibal]

IIRC the Big 12 was structured so that Tejas got a massive portion of the payout, which was a big source of strife in the Big 12. I seem to remember that their number was the one number that I saw which was bigger than the average of the Big Ten. They are the only expansion candidate that has the potential to be more of a provider than a taker. I know that the Big 12 restructured their TV deals, so maybe Texas doesn't make out as well as they used to, but they are probably the most financially lucrative program in the country. Even Michigan and OSU probably don't generate as much.

[Hannibal]

quantity > quality

Not when you have to divide the pie by an increased number of pieces. That's the little problem that people keep forgetting.

What's better for you -- one twelfth of $300 Million, or one fourteenth of $325 Million?

Remember -- Fox's share is half the BTN pot no matter what. They have every incentive in the world to exaggerate the value of expansion. The first scenario is better for the Big Ten members. The second scenario is better for Jim Delaney and Fox.

[Wild Hoss]

UNC>Misery>Maryland>Rutgers

Hoss>Talent>entropy>Wiz

[iam416]

Not when you have to divide the pie by an increased number of pieces. That's the little problem that people keep forgetting.

But with live games, EVERY Rutgers/Maryland/UNC/etc game can be viewed as added BTN Inventory. ABC and ESPN slots are maxed out. So, during conference season, you go from 4 ABC/ESPN slots (assuming a night game) and 2 BTN games to 4/3 (with just the teams in now). Those two new teams increase live BTN by 50%. If it were 3 ABC/ESPN games, then it goes from 3 to 4 -- 33%. The pie has only increased 16.7%

If you add 4 teams, it doubles the inventory on the BTN on days where ABC/ESPN has 4 games. That's huge.

[iam416]

Hoss>Talent>entropy>Wiz

I can live with that.

[Hannibal]

But with live games, EVERY Rutgers/Maryland/UNC/etc game can be viewed as added BTN Inventory. ABC and ESPN slots are maxed out. So, during conference season, you go from 4 ABC/ESPN slots (assuming a night game) and 2 BTN games to 4/3 (with just the teams in now). Those two new teams increase live BTN by 50%. If it were 3 ABC/ESPN games, then it goes from 3 to 4 -- 33%. The pie has only increased 16.7%

If you add 4 teams, it doubles the inventory on the BTN on days where ABC/ESPN has 4 games. That's huge.

Whatever value you are adding with that inventory is already reflected in the crappy revenues that those teams generate for the ACC. Unless, of course, you increase the strength of schedules, which I wouldn't count on. Even if we go to 9 conference games, you'll probably see most teams calibrate their SOS to a manageable level that includes three tomato can home games. And if we wanted to go to 9 games or increase SOS (like with the failed PAC-12 deal), we could have already done that anyways.

Your BTN pie increases, but your overall pie including Disney, bowl games, and NCAA tournament doesn't increase by 16.7%. That is, unless you believe the "Midas Touch" theory about the Big Ten turning these programs into gold. This Midas Touch will work despite the fact that these moves are universally hated by the base of paying customers, and only grudgingly accepted by people who think that they are good financial moves). And it's not a theory according to the powers that be. It's an established fact. So established that we are moving forward with full steam, completely destroying a century old entity in college football in the process.

We know beyond the shadow of a doubt that the average revenue per team of the ACC is significantly less than the average of the Big Ten. I think that we can safely speculate that Maryland and UNC are maybe average to above average for their conference, but still way lower than the average of the Big Ten. Thus, the finances of expansion are entirely dependent upon massively increasing the amount of revenue that these program generate for their respective conferences. If you take UNC, you are taking away a minimum of 1 Duke-UNC basketball game per year and severely damaging what is probably the ACC's most premiere event -- their basketball tournament. You might be taking away an annual game with their in-state rival in football. If you ask me, a very strong argument can be made that UNC is worth less financially in the Big Ten than in the ACC, not more.

[THE_WIZARD_]

I can live with that.

I will kill you all.

[iam416]

Whatever value you are adding with that inventory is already reflected in the crappy revenues that those teams generate for the ACC.

We were talking about advertising dollars. I haven't a clue if the ACC has its own network and reaps its own advertising dollars. But, in terms of advertising dollars, as I said, quantiy > quality.

You could be right about Rutgers and Maryland not bringing their pro rata value (roughly $50M). The BTN is something that is easy to measure and follow so we'll see what they bring in that regard. The network deal, though, is tough to assess. The 10yr/$1B agreement won't be renegotiated instantly to reflect the change in value. All we'll get is a negotiation in 2016ish which will certainly provide the B10 a bigger deal. But it's impossible to accurately attribute that increase to UNL or Maryland or Rutgers.

So, I guess we wait and see how the BTN does. We have a baseline pro rata share.

[Wild Hoss]

I will kill you all.

Hoss>Talent>Wiz>entropy

[entropy]

But with live games, EVERY Rutgers/Maryland/UNC/etc game can be viewed as added BTN Inventory. ABC and ESPN slots are maxed out. So, during conference season, you go from 4 ABC/ESPN slots (assuming a night game) and 2 BTN games to 4/3 (with just the teams in now). Those two new teams increase live BTN by 50%. If it were 3 ABC/ESPN games, then it goes from 3 to 4 -- 33%. The pie has only increased 16.7%

If you add 4 teams, it doubles the inventory on the BTN on days where ABC/ESPN has 4 games. That's huge.

don't disagree, but the will those 2 schools generate at least the equal amount being shared today? That is the real question. otherwise, why not add ohio or western michigan.

[entropy]

Hoss>Talent>Wiz>entropy

[iam416]

don't disagree, but the will those 2 schools generate at least the equal amount being shared today? That is the real question. otherwise, why not add ohio or western michigan.

Don't know and Ohio and WMU don't otherwise fit the profile.

[Wild Hoss]

don't disagree, but the will those 2 schools generate at least the equal amount being shared today? That is the real question. otherwise, why not add ohio or western michigan.

Agree...I don't see how its possible for them to do so. Even with NYC subs, assuming that happens, its attributable to FOX, not these two numbnuts.

Also, nobody wants to unleash Frank Solich on this league.

[Wild Hoss]

[iam416]

Jim Delaney+Rupert Murdoch=Apocalypse