Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wesley 
So, total revenue = $69.9 million + $31.7 million + $28.9 million + $11.7 million = $142.2 million.
The lowest share was $8.4 million: 8.4 * 12 = $100.8 million.
100.8 / 142.2 = 71% of the revenue equally shared. I think that's down about 10% from previous year.
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
and THAT is why they are REALLY leaving
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Looks like TV sets is six times bigger than ticket sales. Maybe TV sets do count.
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
So. If we do drop to a 9 game round robin schedule, wouldn't most games be picked up on TV making revenue sharing a little bit closer?
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MookInLincoln and THAT is why they are REALLY leaving
Maybe, but I think this is the real reason.
1996 - Texas
1997 - Nebraska
1998 - A&M
1999 - Nebraska
2000 - Oklahoma
2001 - Colorado
2002 - Oklahoma
2003 - K State
2004 - Oklahoma
2005 - Texas
2006 - Oklahoma
2007 - Oklahoma
2008 - Oklahoma
2009 - Texas
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
LutherClone So. If we do drop to a 9 game round robin schedule, wouldn't most games be picked up on TV making revenue sharing a little bit closer?
It all depends on what kind of deal those 10 ADs are negotiating right now. There's no doubt that there will be a big gap, but I don't care. Even $14 million per year makes life better for ISU.
I like the 9 game schedule and playing everyone, every year. That means likely 5 (including Iowa game) huge home games every year. Let's play ball!
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
becrisgreg Maybe, but I think this is the real reason.
1996 - Texas
1997 - Nebraska
1998 - A&M
1999 - Nebraska
2000 - Oklahoma
2001 - Colorado
2002 - Oklahoma
2003 - K State
2004 - Oklahoma
2005 - Texas
2006 - Oklahoma
2007 - Oklahoma
2008 - Oklahoma
2009 - Texas
Nebraska is coming across as running for their terrified lives. I love it!
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
becrisgreg Maybe, but I think this is the real reason.
1996 - Texas
1997 - Nebraska
1998 - A&M
1999 - Nebraska
2000 - Oklahoma
2001 - Colorado
2002 - Oklahoma
2003 - K State
2004 - Oklahoma
2005 - Texas
2006 - Oklahoma
2007 - Oklahoma
2008 - Oklahoma
2009 - Texas
Yes. Because they really think that it is the $3 million per year less they are getting that is keeping them down. LOL
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
becrisgreg Maybe, but I think this is the real reason.
1996 - Texas
1997 - Nebraska
1998 - A&M
1999 - Nebraska
2000 - Oklahoma
2001 - Colorado
2002 - Oklahoma
2003 - K State
2004 - Oklahoma
2005 - Texas
2006 - Oklahoma
2007 - Oklahoma
2008 - Oklahoma
2009 - Texas
Nebraska will compete immediately upon entrance into the Big 10, but they're not supplanting Ohio State at the top of the conference. Short of Texas, no one is for the foreseeable future.
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdoggivjc Nebraska will compete immediately upon entrance into the Big 10, but they're not supplanting Ohio State at the top of the conference. Short of Texas, no one is for the foreseeable future.
They will win a lot of football games in the BigTen, but I will be shocked if they win more championships in the BigTen than they did in the Big12. Two titles in the next 14 years? That sounds about right.
Also, if they think the BigTen is gonna let them exist in a division with Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota and Wisconsin ... let's just say I think they are in for a BIG shock.
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SC Cy Nebraska is coming across as running for their terrified lives. I love it!
I don't think that at all.
They come across as having the opportunity and stones to leave the Texas directed league. Good for them.
Also, they are going to receive way more than $3MM more in the B10 as I think someone mentioned. The TV package alone nets each team in the B10 $22MM. Not including all the other sources.
What did the article say was NU's income? Not $3MM less than $22MM. And I think that was total revenue, not just TV revenue.
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MookInLincoln They will win a lot of football games in the BigTen, but I will be shocked if they win more championships in the BigTen than they did in the Big12. Two titles in the next 14 years? That sounds about right.
Also, if they think the BigTen is gonna let them exist in a division with Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota and Wisconsin ... let's just say I think they are in for a BIG shock.
That division you just said w/ Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin and N'western is currently tougher than the big12 north. They would still play a couple games from the other division. I do not think Nebraska is any better off than when they were in the big12. Iowa and Wisconsin are going to be tough for them....tougher than Missouri, Colorado and ISU have been for them.
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jbhtexas So, total revenue = $69.9 million + $31.7 million + $28.9 million + $11.7 million = $142.2 million.
The lowest share was $8.4 million: 8.4 * 12 = $100.8 million.
100.8 / 142.2 = 71% of the revenue equally shared. I think that's down about 10% from previous year.
I don't know how the previous years numbers were calculated, but if you add up the numbers to each school mentioned in the article, the sharing wasn't as bad as you say.
Here are the numbers for each school reported in the article:
1) Oklahoma: $12.2 million
2) Texas: $11.8 million
3) Kansas: $11.5 million
4) Missouri: $10.4 million
5) ???
6) Nebraska: 9.73 million
7) ???
8) ???
9) ???
10) ???
11) ISU: $8.9 million
12) Baylor: $8.4 million
So the total amount given to all 12 schools was somewhere between 118.26 and 122.25. Apparently around $20 million of the $142.2 million revenue is not disbursed to the schools at all.
So that would mean 100.8/120 = 84% of the revenue disbursed to the universities was equally shared.
Re: Current Big 12 Revenues
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nileo That division you just said w/ Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin and N'western is currently tougher than the big12 north. They would still play a couple games from the other division. I do not think Nebraska is any better off than when they were in the big12. Iowa and Wisconsin are going to be tough for them....tougher than Missouri, Colorado and ISU have been for them.
My initial reaction is that the move to the Big 10 is great financially for Nebraska, but I don't think it will be good athletically.
