Two questions for you:
You do not think the Big 12 competes on a national stage?
In what respect do you believe the Big 12 is inferior to the Big 10?
New "Big 12" TV Deal will be Substantial...
- Thread starter brentblum
- Start date
Two questions for you:
You do not think the Big 12 competes on a national stage?
In what respect do you believe the Big 12 is inferior to the Big 10?
I'm not going to defend the Big 12 revenue sharing, I think that it sucks. It's like the MLB vs the NFL. Pretty easy to see which is more successful across the country and why. But, a funny way to look at it is capitalism vs communism. Communism SHOULD be the best answer for everyone. In it's purest form, there's no poverty, no jealousy over possessions. Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that in the real world.
At some point, high performers deserve to get paid more. And at some point, tOSU is going to start asking for concessions. Right now UT makes about $20M more than they do per year. What happens when that is $50M and tOSU is still sharing it's revenue equally with Northwestern? They're going to start throwing their weight around, that's what.
To answer your second question, I think he's saying that while the teams at the top of both conferences are equal in TV revenue, the teams at the bottom are quite unequal (ISU/Baylor/KState vs. Indiana/NW).
But if equal revenue sharing is the answer, then why don't teams like Indiana win as much at tOSU, Texas, OU, etc.?
Actually the NFL does not share everything equally as you assume...do you ever wonder why everyone is doing whatever the can to get a new stadium and then sell seats with PSLs and add luxury boxes...because the team gets to keep their own money from that revenue stream and not share it with anyone else.
And MLB has become more like the NFL with the so-called "luxury tax" on payrolls above a certain amount. Unfortunately, some "welfare" franchises like the Pirates are all to happy to cash those tax receipt checks from MLB and don't give a rats rear end about competing. I would much rather an owner like Steinbrenner than the tools running the Pirates for my teams
This is America man! You are exactly right...you should be paid for performance.
Please note that NFL is currently negotiating a new CBA. I doubt they will get rid of equal TV revenue sharing since has been such a staple in the league, but there are definitely some owners, such as Jerry Jones, who are upset with the extreme egalitarian environment. I doubt it will come to this, but if there is no new CBA next year, there could be a work stoppage. It would not surprise at all if the NFL decides not to share as much revenue.
I think part of the reason ESPN & FOX are paying more is because they see the Big Ten network is working and are afraid all the other conferences will follow suit. The way they keep themselves relavant is to offer enough money to keep these confrences from starting their own network.
I think this is a huge deal that everyone involved needs to know more about. Ok so ISU gains money from TV but loses all this other revenue is ISU really better off? If this is true of course. ISU could end up worse financially because of this depending on the income streams and future income streams from these sources?
ESPN, maybe. But FOX owns 49% of the Big Ten Network. If FOX ends up behind all the conference networks, they'd have nothing to fear.
No, but then the Big Ten doesn't share all revenue equally either. I think the comparison is that the NFL shares their TV money equally (like the Big Ten). MLB teams on the other hand can each have their own network and keep the money. I assume MLB shares the ESPN/Fox money equally but I don't know. Seems like a pretty good rough analogy to me. Now, how much this contributes to the NFL's popularity/health versus MLB is an entirely different debate.
As part of its proposed deal, FSN has asked to take control of the conference's third-tier rights that are currently controlled by rights holders IMG, ISP and Learfield, sources said. These rights include radio, local media, third-tier TV rights, corporate sponsorships, and in-stadium and arena signage. It is not known when these rights will be available.
How much money does ISU get from radio, CTN, ad revenue and signage right now? The way this is worded I would think ISU will lose out on the revenue (or a portion of it) in the future as Fox would get that revenue. This is how Fox would be able pay so much more in the TV package.
I could be reading this wrong and I have no idea how much money ISU takes in from these sources on an annual basis. I would assume these revenues grow over time. If I am reading this correctly, the larger payout from Fox may not be a good thing.
I don't know the exact number, but the increase ISU would get from the new contract would more than make up for the possible loss of revenue from the part in bold. The new FOX deal would be a good thing regardless.
Rumor has it that ISU earns $5 million from signage at all venues. Between the current TV package and this signage $ amount (if true) this would almost equal the new TV package. I have no idea how much ISU makes from radio, radio ads, coach's call in shows and the like. This just does not seem like a good deal if this is all true. Again this is stuff I have heard and again maybe I have read something wrong.
If I am reading this correctly I think this could be a bad deal for ISU.
2 things...
1. We WILL be making much more money.
2. The less you listen to Perrault, the better off you'll be.
We will be getting the lower end of the $14 - $17 Million, you can count on that. If we are getting $8 million now plus $5 million for signage at the venues not to mention everything we get from radio, coaches shows and other advertisements, that is close to $14 million. (If I am understanding all this correctly) Basically what we get is $14 - $17 million from television but we would give up rights for all these other revenue streams. If I am reading and understanding this right, this is a real bad deal.
Iowa State's contract with Learfield includes all of the above mentioned rights (radio, local media, third-tier TV rights, corporate sponsorships, and in-stadium and arena signage.)
So that $5 million number is all-encompassing.
So that $5 million number is all-encompassing.
And what would those rights be worth to Texas and Oklahoma? Sounds like we only got $20 million from Fox for the football games previously. Really bad deal there.
I agree that we need to get a substantial amount for those rights. Learfield has done a decent job IMO. And I am not sure how Fox would do and how much they would try to extort from those wanting to broadcast our games. Bundling all those rights into a conference agreement might not be in our best interests.
I agree that we need to get a substantial amount for those rights. Learfield has done a decent job IMO. And I am not sure how Fox would do and how much they would try to extort from those wanting to broadcast our games. Bundling all those rights into a conference agreement might not be in our best interests.
At WORST it is a push with the opportunity for a bigger upside.
I'm not complaining one iota about that.
I'm not complaining one iota about that.
