- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: B1G expansion rumors are surfacing
Posted on 1/6/16 at 2:11 pm to AbuTheMonkey
Posted on 1/6/16 at 2:11 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
Conference cohesion, brand, and competence (read: athletic prowess) will be what matters, not television markets.
It doesn't surprise me that this post is coming from an ND fan, though they've been making good money from NBC for years now.
1
Posted on 1/6/16 at 2:15 pm to MikeyFL
quote:
Decision-makers in higher education care about AAU status and global rankings that focus on research. One example would be the Shanghai-Jiaotong rankings
Just to point out, Baylor ranks the same as UVA (101-150 worldwide), who certainly would meet Big 10 standards. Kansas is an AAU member, which matters a lot.
I've always heard OU and Okie St. are a package deal, and OU won't abandon their fellow state school. This throws a major monkey wrench into the works.
I'd view this was skepticism, but the "most likely" schools would be Kansas and Notre Dame, if they could get them. Otherwise, Kansas and either Texas, TCU, or Baylor (they want entry to the TX market, and Baylor has risen through profile in all sports considerably recently)
Posted on 1/6/16 at 2:27 pm to Baloo
quote:
Just to point out, Baylor ranks the same as UVA (101-150 worldwide), who certainly would meet Big 10 standards
That's why I added the disclaimer about the Shanghai-Jiaotong rankings being overly focused on research in the hard sciences. No serious person in higher education would consider UVA to be anything less than a Top 30 international university. However, their strengths are in the humanities and social sciences, so they don't fare as well in the Shanghai rankings.
Also notice that the Shanghai people chose to rank Baylor's College of Medicine, not the university as a whole. Outside of the admirable research produced by the medical school, the majority of Baylor's PhD programs are not considered to be on par with the doctoral programs in the B1G. Unfortunately, it takes decades for such perceptions to change (and there is likely a bias against its Baptist orientation).
This post was edited on 1/6/16 at 2:29 pm
Posted on 1/6/16 at 2:27 pm to Baloo
quote:
Kansas is an AAU member,
which says a lot about the AAU
Posted on 1/6/16 at 2:30 pm to AbuTheMonkey
This is correct - during the next round of negotiations, conferences and college athletic programs are going to be hit with reality.
Those TV contracts will not be as lucrative as they have historically been. It will be interesting to see how this impacts foundation cash flows for expansions, improvements, etc.
The SEC, PAC12 and Big10 should be fine - Notre Dame and Texas as well. The real impact will be on the ACC, Sunbelt, MAC, CUSA and MWC - those schools need every cent of TV money ( although the contracts are immaterial compared to P5 tv contracts).
The Big12 just sucks - it will be interesting to see what happens to some of the schools there.
Those TV contracts will not be as lucrative as they have historically been. It will be interesting to see how this impacts foundation cash flows for expansions, improvements, etc.
The SEC, PAC12 and Big10 should be fine - Notre Dame and Texas as well. The real impact will be on the ACC, Sunbelt, MAC, CUSA and MWC - those schools need every cent of TV money ( although the contracts are immaterial compared to P5 tv contracts).
The Big12 just sucks - it will be interesting to see what happens to some of the schools there.
quote:
ESPN and Disney are just hemorrhaging money right now. The model is not sustainable
Posted on 1/6/16 at 3:24 pm to MontyFranklyn
quote:
OU, Kansas, GT, Baylor and a few others all may be targets.
OU tied to OSU
KU tied to KSU
State politics will kill that sort of expansion talk, unless there is a nice safe spot for the other to land.
I dont know how many times this sort of thing has to be stated.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 3:30 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:
OU tied to OSU KU tied to KSU
I mean 5 years ago wouldn't 80% of the people here say that Texas/A&M were tied in the same way?
Posted on 1/6/16 at 3:39 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:The SECN is one of the few things ESPN has that is making money. They are losing on the LHN, but the SECN is making money.
This is exactly what I've been saying for about a while now.
It's strategically stupid. The future of the industry is going to undercut these conference television networks something fierce at some point. It's a matter of when, not if.
ESPN and Disney are just hemorrhaging money right now. The model is not sustainable.
Conference cohesion, brand, and competence (read: athletic prowess) will be what matters, not television markets.
SI
Posted on 1/6/16 at 3:41 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
It doesn't surprise me that this post is coming from an ND fan, though they've been making good money from NBC for years now.
I'm talking about it from a business perspective, not from a school perspective. If Delaney were a CEO and I were on the board, I'd accuse him of looking too much at QoQ and not enough at the long-term, strategic path. I think standing pat at 12 from Nebraska to Penn State would have been smart, although the Maryland addition wasn't a bad one.
Anecdotally, I know a lot of B1G fans here in Chicago that weren't too happy with the additions. There's just not much in common with those schools, and they don't add much in terms of athletic prowess, especially Rutgers.
The PAC 12 probably did it right, though it remains to be seen if the Colorado addition was really worth it. Probably the best model out there right now is the new Big East. It's tougher to do in football, but that is a cohesive, strategically balanced conference with good name brands in their sport and can come to a consensus on big issues.
FWIW, ND would make a lot more money than we currently do if we ever joined a conference...but again, in my view, it'd be short-term gain taking precedence over a stronger long-term strategic position.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 3:53 pm to MontyFranklyn
quote:
The SECN is one of the few things ESPN has that is making money. They are losing on the LHN, but the SECN is making money.
Yea, if anyone is going to make it, it will obviously be those two. They have huge, dedicated fanbases with successful athletic programs that are willing to pay, not necessarily television markets.
What would be interesting for me is if ESPN started spinning off assets (though I don't think they would with their share of SECN given its probably a core asset at this point), and the SECN had to assume risk on its own.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 3:55 pm to AbuTheMonkey
ESPN would be better off cutting other assets and keeping the one known cash cow you have. If they want to sell a portion of the SECN or all of it I'm sure the network will be fine or someone else will see the potential and hop on it.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 3:58 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
I mean 5 years ago wouldn't 80% of the people here say that Texas/A&M were tied in the same way?
no
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:13 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
I mean 5 years ago wouldn't 80% of the people here say that Texas/A&M were tied in the same way?
Did A&M leave Texas high and dry? Nope. Both were fine.
Besides, in state politics are different depending on the state. 5 years ago, UVA and VT weren't tied together either - but that changed once UVA pulled strings to get VT in the ACC. Try getting VT out of the ACC now without a safe spot for UVA.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:16 pm to Ralph_Wiggum
We don't need anymore teams
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:18 pm to MontyFranklyn
You know that 44 million is projections from all three tiers of TV contracts, right? Not just the Big Ten Network. Just checking...
Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia (and to a lesser extent, Kansas State) are cleaning up on third-tier TV rights.
Everyone knows how much Texas is getting from the Longhorn Network. Oklahoma's about $7 million, I think Kansas is about the same. That's in addition to the $27 million from Tier 1-2.
Big 10 Network payout per team is currently $7.6 million.
So again, what's the big deal? If you read that as "Big 10 Network payouts alone will be $44 million per team, per year" (which is erroneous), I guess you could jump to such a conclusion. You people aren't that stupid, are you?
Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia (and to a lesser extent, Kansas State) are cleaning up on third-tier TV rights.
Everyone knows how much Texas is getting from the Longhorn Network. Oklahoma's about $7 million, I think Kansas is about the same. That's in addition to the $27 million from Tier 1-2.
Big 10 Network payout per team is currently $7.6 million.
So again, what's the big deal? If you read that as "Big 10 Network payouts alone will be $44 million per team, per year" (which is erroneous), I guess you could jump to such a conclusion. You people aren't that stupid, are you?
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:29 pm to MontyFranklyn
quote:
OU, Kansas, GT, Baylor and a few others all may be targets.
Only two of those (Kansas and Georgia Tech) are AAU schools.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:33 pm to Buckeye06
quote:
I mean 5 years ago wouldn't 80% of the people here say that Texas/A&M were tied in the same way?
VERY different.
Oklahoma/Oklahoma State is one university system as is Kansas/Kansas State.
Texas and Texas A&M are two completely separate university systems.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:41 pm to jcole4lsu
quote:Texas can survive on its own. If the Big 12 collapses, Texas can go independent. The rest can't. They could form another conference by poaching Houston, Memphis, Tulane and Rice and calling it the SWC though
Did A&M leave Texas high and dry? Nope. Both were fine.
Besides, in state politics are different depending on the state. 5 years ago, UVA and VT weren't tied together either - but that changed once UVA pulled strings to get VT in the ACC. Try getting VT out of the ACC now without a safe spot for UVA
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:45 pm to Overbrook
quote:
Only UT, Aggies and Rice meet their academic requirements, and no other school in Texas is close.
The ACC brand used to be big on academics too. Then they let Loserville in. The B1G will sell out for the right price.
Posted on 1/6/16 at 4:48 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
The ACC brand used to be big on academics too. Then they let Loserville in. The B1G will sell out for the right price.
They added Pitt and Syracuse first to balance that out
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News