To have a network, you need a population to sell it to and to sell to advertisers. The Big 12 would get far less advertising revenue because of their smaller tv footprint. I mean if having a TV network = $$$ then why don't all conferences do it? Because you have to be able to sell tv sets.
How does a conference like the Big 10
- Thread starter Clones85'
- Start date
This just in:
In a unexpected turn of events, the Big 10 announced that the Network made a profit of $66 Million Bucks. As part of the TV agreement, All 11 schools will share the profits equally, which comes out to $6 Million apiece. So, overall, in 2009, the Big 10 TV contract, per school, was $28 million dollars.
Here's the Big 12 in 2007-08 (latest I could find and should have grown from there but won't hold a candle to $28 million)
1. Texas: $10.2 million
2. Oklahoma: $9.8 million
3. Kansas: $9.24 million
4. Texas A&M: $9.22 million
5. Nebraska: $9.1 million
6. Missouri: $8.4 million
7. Texas Tech: $8.23 million
8. Kansas State: $8.21 million
9. Oklahoma State: $8.1 million
10. Colorado: $8.0 million
11. Iowa State: $7.4 million
12. Baylor: $7.1 million
In a unexpected turn of events, the Big 10 announced that the Network made a profit of $66 Million Bucks. As part of the TV agreement, All 11 schools will share the profits equally, which comes out to $6 Million apiece. So, overall, in 2009, the Big 10 TV contract, per school, was $28 million dollars.
Here's the Big 12 in 2007-08 (latest I could find and should have grown from there but won't hold a candle to $28 million)
1. Texas: $10.2 million
2. Oklahoma: $9.8 million
3. Kansas: $9.24 million
4. Texas A&M: $9.22 million
5. Nebraska: $9.1 million
6. Missouri: $8.4 million
7. Texas Tech: $8.23 million
8. Kansas State: $8.21 million
9. Oklahoma State: $8.1 million
10. Colorado: $8.0 million
11. Iowa State: $7.4 million
12. Baylor: $7.1 million
Come on now. The Big 12 doesn't have the population of the Big 10 but it still could have it's own network and be successful. And, how many people watch the Big 10 network that aren't fans of the Big 10? I am guessing a decent amount. The same would be true for the Big 12.
I think you just answered your own question. A Big 12 Network will never make as much money as the Big Ten Network because of population as others have stated. Most of the revenue is generated from advertisement, so the more people you have in your footprint the more $ you can charge.
Now using that why would a school stay in the Big 12 and receive LESS money but be closer to what a school in the Big Ten receives?
It would be like you having another job offer for a lot more money but deciding not to take that job because you do something different at your current job to get a raise and that would get you closer to the amount you turned down. You wouldn't do that and neither will any schools (other than ND) that would get an invite to the Big Ten.
I think a team like Missouri would stay in the Big 12 where they have a tradition of playing against the Big 8 schools if there was revenue sharing. Sure they could make more money in the Big 10 but if they are doing well financially and are on a FAIR playing field, I would think they would stay. But nobody is going to stay when there is an unfair advantage to Texas and they just keep getting richer.
Whoever said that is an idiot. Bowl games are a measure of nothing due to the selection process. This is a big reason why the big ten has poor bowl performances. Take the Texas Bowl next year. big 10 #6 vs Big 12 #5. Lets say the big 10 gets two in the BCS and Big 12 only one. Then it becomes Big 10 #7 vs Big 12 #5. Holiday Bowl is the same. Big 10 #5 vs Pac 10 #3. The big 10 has been a victim of their tv/bowl deals. That will change going forward with the realignment of some bowls but when a conference gets two teams in the BCS it throws everything. The BCS bowls kinda take that away but even then you get matchups like Iowa vs Georgia Tech of last year. Where a conference is extremely weak and has to play someone. I don't think anyone would argue the Pac 10 and the ACC were the two weakest conferences in football last year. Yet they have BCS slots and the big 10 played them and whooped up on them.
Seriously, is the Big 12 weak because Texas lost to Alabama with a back up QB in the Championship game? No. But the SEC is better than the Big 12 because they beat them in more head to head match ups.
Personally I like to look at regular season and bowl records.
Fine, go back the last 5 years and compare Big 10 to Big 12 head to head match ups. Even compare the Big 12 north VS the entire Big 10 if you want. Get back to me.
Missouri has two rivalries. Kansas and Illinois. If the Big 12 had revenue sharing and the Big 10 could offer $10 million a year more, they would go in a heartbeat.. new rivalries would be built and they could play Kansas out of conference
Does it matter if it was universally accepted as truth? There were a lot of people saying that.
i am not saying the big 10 is better. I am just saying bowl match ups are a ridiculous way to compare conferences because you could get matchuos between the 3rd best team in a conference and the 5th/6th best team in the conference. Look at next years chic-fil-a Bowl. It pairs ACC #2 vs SEC #3,4,or 5. If the SEC gest two inthe BCS the #2 ACC team could play the #6 SEC.
Same with the Outback Bowl #3 big Ten vs #3,4,or 5 SEC. An 11-2 team like Iowa could play a 7-5 team like Tennessee or SC.
Heck look at ISU vs Minnesota. We were picked over Missouri a team that beat us. If Missouri would have played Minny it would have been big 12 #5 vs big 10 #8. Is that a fair comparison? Turn the tables. Big 10 #5 vs Big 12 #8 wisconsin vs ISU?
Just saying, there are so many variables. is
Well then they should do. I imagine people smarter than you and I have done the math and figured it wouldn't work. We just don't have the population base. And if you think people will watch, go to the Houston/Texas Bowl. You will notice that even thought there is a Big 12 team playing in a Bowl game in Houston, most of the town doesn't know and doesn't care
Do you think if Indiana was playing against Nevada in a bowl game. And that bowl game was played at the Horseshoe in Columbus....that there would be a lot of people there? I don't.
Actually, I think more people would watch than if ISU was in the Texas bowl against Miami of Ohio. Larger population base. More people form Indiana would travel to Ohio.
Nevermind. You are right, the Big 12 network would make everyone in the Big 12 rich and the conference is stupid for not doing it. You know far more than the people that run the conference. Even though you don't understand how a conference with a huge population base can make more money than a conference with a small population base. A conference that has 5 of the largest universities can make more money than a conference that has 2 schools in the top ten and those two schools share a state. Silly me for trying to point that out.
Or they have researched it, penciled it out, and it doesn't work.
You asked a question, people gave you the answers. Population, school size/alumni, and tv sets. That is why it doesn't work for the Big 12
Taz-
Take a breath fella. Where did I say that the Big 12 would be rich? Please post it.
Where did I say that I don't understand how the Big 10 makes more money than the Big 12? Please post it
I'll save you the time. Never said it. Never implied it. Your post above is ridiculous to say the least.
READ THESE WORDS! The Big 12 won't have the same money as the Big 10 BUT they can be successful if they follow the same business model. They HAVE TO GET ON TV MORE! I don't know how you can argue against that. The population in the 7 states for the Big 12 is 45 million. That is plenty of audience for a TV station. Hell you can even charge 10 bucks a month for the station. I would pay it. Share the revenue the same way that the Big 10 does. Sure it would hurt Texas a little but they would still have way more money than anyone else and the conference would be more competitive which in the end would help them more anyway.
I understand your question.
The point is in the possiblity that the Big 12 doesn't follow the lead is because they may not have the numbers to make it work.
Also Texas would likely do better with their own TV network than a Big 12 Network.....then you run into the problem that is current in the big 12, THAT IS Texas holds a Significant portion of the fan base in the Big 12 in their line of thinking since the success of any TV network would be due to their influence they would want a bigger piece of the pie.... JUST LIKE NOW.
The reason why the Big 10 network works is because of a HUGE population base (not true in the big 12) and that fan base is spread over many many more teams unlike the Texas Stranglehold in the Big 12.
Big Ten was better than the Big 12 last year in both football and basketball, and has been better than the Big 12 in basketball more often than not.
We were #1 in RPI last year and I think the Big 10 was 6th.......
And let's just agree to disagree on football
So why not sell to something everyone has? I think if Dan Beebe wants the Big 12 to be a powerhouse he should go for broke and have the Big 12 network as an internet channel. Netflix, XBox Live, Pandora, and now The Big 12 Network. You become the first BCS conference to offer every football game streaming on your XBox, your WiFi enabled blu-ray player, your internet ready HDTV, your PC or even your cell phone. Hell, why not even work with Netflix and charge people an extra $5 a month to provide streaming Big 12 games? Work with XBox Live and charge $70.00 a year instead of $50.00. All signs are pointing that TV is slowly going the way that newspapers are - web-based. People want information at their finger tips, so why not be the first to corner the market and reach a GLOBAL audience at the same time. Too bad this won't happen....
