2015: Big 12 1st Teir Rights

[jaretac]

Right, and I think that's more fair than people give credit for. The teams that people want to see draw viewers, get on more, and ought to make more. There's a big incentive there to become one of those teams as opposed to staying at mediocre and collecting the same amount of money.

I like where we're sitting now. This really worked out nicely so far, with the big windfall yet to come.

I agree to an extent. One could make the argument though that the more balanced the sharing among the schools the more competitive the conference and the more money the conference will bring in.

Let's be honest. Who really watched USC steam roll the Pac 10 year after year last decade? There is one reason why they have one of the crappiest TV deals in the BCS. Last year with Oregon and Stanford both doing well and the USC down, there was a lot more talk about the Pac 10.

Even with Oklahoma and Texas taking every conference title for the past (how many years), at least the Big 12 has been competitive. That is one of my concerns about the new Big 12. With no title game the conference champion could be decided weeks before everyone else.

However, you can only stay on top for so long before coming down for a breath (look at Texas last year and USC now). There is hope.

[CycloneErik]

I agree to an extent. One could make the argument though that the more balanced the sharing among the schools the more competitive the conference and the more money the conference will bring in.

Let's be honest. Who really watched USC steam roll the Pac 10 year after year last decade? There is one reason why they have one of the crappiest TV deals in the BCS. Last year with Oregon and Stanford both doing well and the USC down, there was a lot more talk about the Pac 10.

Even with Oklahoma and Texas taking every conference title for the past (how many years), at least the Big 12 has been competitive. That is one of my concerns about the new Big 12. With no title game the conference champion could be decided weeks before everyone else.

However, you can only stay on top for so long before coming down for a breath (look at Texas last year and USC now). There is hope.

But how creative are the TV people? A team has to prove themselves in order to start seeing the TV time.

I'm not saying it's perfect, either, but think the incentive is not a bad way to go. It bothers us because we haven't benefited yet, by and large. But there's hope.

[AllIowaTeams]

At this point it seems that 2 things are safe to say. The new Big 12 deal will be much better than the current deal. No question. I think it's also safe to say that it is overly optimistic (to put it mildly) to think that a new Big 12 deal would exceed the deals of the SEC and Big 10. Both are 12 team conferences, and have larger footprints in terms of both population and teams that draw national interest. If the Big 12 is still a 10 team conference come 2015 I simply can't see how it will land a deal within $30 million of the SEC or Big 10.

[jaretac]

But how creative are the TV people? A team has to prove themselves in order to start seeing the TV time.

I'm not saying it's perfect, either, but think the incentive is not a bad way to go. It bothers us because we haven't benefited yet, by and large. But there's hope.

What we do know is that the payout is based on viewership. Supply and Demand. So what can the Big 12 do to increase their demand?

My point is that ratings help determine how much a network wants to pay when a conference is up for re-negotiation. When one team dominates the rest of the conference and there isn't any competition then the ratings will go down and so will the payout (comparatively) the next time negotiations come up.

This is hypothetical and we will see next time around how true it actually is with the Big 12 removing the championship game and the Pac 10 and Big 10 adding one.

[CycloneErik]

What we do know is that the payout is based on viewership. Supply and Demand. So what can the Big 12 do to increase their demand?

My point is that ratings help determine how much a network wants to pay when a conference is up for re-negotiation. When one team dominates the rest of the conference and there isn't any competition then the ratings will go down and so will the payout (comparatively) the next time negotiations come up.

This is hypothetical and we will see next time around how true it actually is with the Big 12 removing the championship game and the Pac 10 and Big 10 adding one.

That's a good question as to what the Big 12 can do to increase demand to see member schools. Something, but I'm not sure how to do it. I'd agree that something ought to be done.

I guess I'm just focusing on our end, since that's my simpler answer. We have a huge role to play in making sure that we're worth watching (but I don't think we're arguing that).

[jaretac]

At this point it seems that 2 things are safe to say. The new Big 12 deal will be much better than the current deal. No question. I think it's also safe to say that it is overly optimistic (to put it mildly) to think that a new Big 12 deal would exceed the deals of the SEC and Big 10. Both are 12 team conferences, and have larger footprints in terms of both population and teams that draw national interest. If the Big 12 is still a 10 team conference come 2015 I simply can't see how it will land a deal within $30 million of the SEC or Big 10.

You have to realize that these contracts are over a long period (what 10 years?). I know the Big 10 just re-negotiated not to long ago and I believe the SEC did too. Yes, in 2018 or whenever the Big 10 or SEC negotiates they will likely have a better deal then the Big 12 again, but for a few years the Big 12 could easily have the best deal in the land because the Big 10 and SEC payouts are not going to increase very much until the next negotiation.

[Clark]

You have to realize that these contracts are over a long period (what 10 years?). I know the Big 10 just re-negotiated not to long ago and I believe the SEC did too. Yes, in 2018 or whenever the Big 10 or SEC negotiates they will likely have a better deal then the Big 12 again, but for a few years the Big 12 could easily have the best deal in the land because the Big 10 and SEC payouts are not going to increase very much until the next negotiation.

Big 10's ABC deal is up same time the Big 12's is (2015).

[jaretac]

Current

SEC
• ESPN: 15 years, $2.25 billion (150 million a year)
• CBS: 15 years, $825 million (55 million a year)
(Both deals run through 2023-2024.)
Currently at 205 million a year and locked into that though 2023

Big 10
• Big Ten Network: 25 years, $2.8 billion* through 2031-32 (112 million a year)
• ABC/ESPN: 10 years, $1 billion through 2016 (100 million a year)
• CBS: 10 years, $20 million for basketball through 2018-19 (2 million a year)
Currently at 214 million a year and locked into that though 2016

Big 12
• ABC/ESPN: Eight years, $480 million through 2015-16
• Fox Sports Net: Four years, $78 million through 2011-12


Future

Big 12's secondary rights are changing next year to
• Fox Sports Net: Thirteen years, $1.17 billion through 2025-26
• Next to change is the Big 12 first tier rights

• If it follows suit to the percentage difference between the SEC's 1st and 2nd tier rights, we should be looking at around 245 million a year for 1st tier rights.

• If you figure it based on the percentage increase in the Big 12's 2nd tier rights, we will be looking at around 210 million a year for 1st tier rights

• The Big 10 will re-negotiant in 2016 and may be looking at 500 million a year payout with a new deal.

Last notes,
• The Big 12 will be looking at least at 300 million a year for 1st and 2nd tier rights with the possibility for up to 335 million (not taking into account inflation or increase or decrease in demand)
• If the Big 12 schools start their own network, we will be looking at even more.
• At 335 million, ISU would be guaranteed at least 29.31 million a year.

[Clark]

Current

SEC
• ESPN: 15 years, $2.25 billion (150 million a year)
• CBS: 15 years, $825 million (55 million a year)
(Both deals run through 2023-2024.)
Currently at 205 million a year and locked into that though 2023

Big 10
• Big Ten Network: 25 years, $2.8 billion* through 2031-32 (112 million a year)
• ABC/ESPN: 10 years, $1 billion through 2016 (100 million a year)
• CBS: 10 years, $20 million for basketball through 2018-19 (2 million a year)
Currently at 214 million a year and locked into that though 2016

Big 12
• ABC/ESPN: Eight years, $480 million through 2015-16
• Fox Sports Net: Four years, $78 million through 2011-12


Future

Big 12's secondary rights are changing next year to
• Fox Sports Net: Thirteen years, $1.17 billion through 2025-26
• Next to change is the Big 12 first tier rights

• If it follows suit to the percentage difference between the SEC's 1st and 2nd tier rights, we should be looking at around 245 million a year for 1st tier rights.

• If you figure it based on the percentage increase in the Big 12's 2nd tier rights, we will be looking at around 210 million a year for 1st tier rights

• The Big 10 will re-negotiant in 2016 and may be looking at 500 million a year payout with a new deal.

Last notes,
• The Big 12 will be looking at least at 300 million a year for 1st and 2nd tier rights with the possibility for up to 335 million (not taking into account inflation or increase or decrease in demand)
• If the Big 12 schools start their own network, we will be looking at even more.
• At 335 million, ISU would be guaranteed at least 29.31 million a year.

I think your estimates are pretty accurate and it just blows my mind how high some of these tv payouts are going to be.

[canker2323]

I think your estimates are pretty accurate and it just blows my mind how high some of these tv payouts are going to be.

I agree. I love college football as much as the next guy here, but these numbers, to essentially watch 18-22 year olds play a sport, are getting ridiculous.

These are getting towards NFL numbers. I think they may need to, at some point in the near future, re-evaluate what "non-profit" means in relation to major college athletics.

[ricochet]

I think your estimates are pretty accurate and it just blows my mind how high some of these tv payouts are going to be.

This is the next Internet/Housing type bubble. At some point people are going to start dropping cable/satellite TV due to the expense (already happening to some extent) and some of these companies are going to start losing money big time. I just hope the Big 12 gets their next Tier 1 contract done before the bubble bursts.

[Sammy11]

How did it fail? He was hoping they stayed but the Big 12 is better off with them gone, and quite honestly, Nebraska might be looking at the new TV deal and wishing they stayed

You don't win when you scare off one of your 3 biggest football properties. Had he taken another approach he may have prevented any departure. By scaring the B10 into moving quickly he prevented NU from potentially being swayed by ESPN/Fox into staying as stability was their #1 reason for going. This gave CU the impression of the B12 imploding and they got the cajones to motivate an early move because of it as they thought the other 5 were leaving the league as well.

Just my opinion but the tv complaints against Beebe are misinformed if not downright stupid. He's done an ok job.

[jbhtexas]

You don't win when you scare off one of your 3 biggest football properties. Had he taken another approach he may have prevented any departure. By scaring the B10 into moving quickly he prevented NU from potentially being swayed by ESPN/Fox into staying as stability was their #1 reason for going.

Osborne had wanted out of the Big 12 for several years, and it had very little to do with the "stability" of the Big 12, unless you define "stability" as NU football falling behind UT, OU, and even MU and KU at times. There was nothing Beebe was going to do to change this.

The question now is whether Osborne passes on before he gets fed up with being pimped by tOSU and friends...

[cykadelic2]

You don't win when you scare off one of your 3 biggest football properties. Had he taken another approach he may have prevented any departure. By scaring the B10 into moving quickly he prevented NU from potentially being swayed by ESPN/Fox into staying as stability was their #1 reason for going. This gave CU the impression of the B12 imploding and they got the cajones to motivate an early move because of it as they thought the other 5 were leaving the league as well.

Just my opinion but the tv complaints against Beebe are misinformed if not downright stupid. He's done an ok job.

Beebe personally had little to do with the departures of NU and CU. Their departures had been brewing for years, especially in the case of NU which was the long-time personal crusade of Tom Osborne. When the B12 was formed, new academic qualifiers rules were implemented which started the downturn of NU's football fortunes in the late 90s. Those rules and Osborne's jealously of Texas put the wheels in motion for NU's eventual departure. Osborne and NU caused 90% of the divisivness within the B12. Osborne lucked out that ND turned down the B10 and Osborne got his wish. I do agree for the most part that CU's departure was tied to NU's departure but without NU, the B12 is much better off without CU. CU had been pining for the Pac-10 for several years.

[Al_4_State]

Agreed on Nebraska being the catalyst for Big 12 unrest.

This one thing says it all: they left for the Big 10 to get higher profits from equal revenue sharing, yet whenever it came up in the Big 12, they voted it down. It was all about their jealousy towards Texas. Texas just leveraged the situation to get what they want. It wouldn't shock if they were never actually serious about the Pac-16 thing, and just exploited it to get a better deal for themselves.