*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

[cyman05]

Disagree all you want - 1.5 million people caring in a metro area of 15 million people isn't going to convince the cable operators to put the BTN on first tier, which is where the $$$ is made.

By the way, Big 10 Conference football is on in NYC quite a bit already anyway.

Totally agree with you. I don't think Rutgers being in the Big 10 would force the cable companies to add the BTN. I think that is a major issue with Rutgers.

However, I read a couple months ago that slightly more than half of the revenue comes from advertising, not cable company subscriptions. Even if people that live in NYC don't have the BTN, a greater fraction of them are going to be watching the games on it somewhere if Rutgers has a tie to the Big Ten...which means more viewers.

 

[Istate]

Well, I guess its time for the dominoes to start falling. Hopefully this doesn't spook Oklahoma and Texas into making moves that we'll regret.

I think the real question is whether we're better off watching OU and Texas leave this year or a year or two from now. I think a reasonable debate can be made that ISU may be better off being a free agent right now when multiple conferences need additional pieces to complete their grouping versus next summer when the SEC or PAC or B1G only need 2, maybe 3, teams to finalize things. I think most people agree the Big 12 is not a long-term solution if we end up with the 64 team superconferences. Now if the superconferences don't come to fruition, then heck yes we're better off in the Big 12 since it will mean the money will be even more evenly distributed in the future. That's a longshot to hope to see a Big 12 three years from now.

 

[digZ]

Which is why Nebraska got the nod over Rutgers. Nebraska is a bigger add on a national scale and can bring more TV sets to the table because of their tradition. Does that mean Rutgers is worthless because they're bad at football? Not at all.

Does Rutgers add enough value to split the pie an extra way? I would say probably not. Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

 

[hurdleisu24]

That would make the most sense for the ACC as the apparently it starting to sound like wants to have all teams in the eastern time zone

 

[cyman05]

If they were desirable, wouldn't someone have taken them?

Someone will real soon if this expansion stuff continues. So far all people have confirmed are that 2 teams from the Big East are moving...Rutgers will come someday before this game of musical chairs stops.

 

[cyman05]

Does Rutgers add enough value to split the pie an extra way? I would say probably not. Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

That's what conferences have to ask. I don't know. Probably depends which conference you're talking about. If the Big 10 is making $25-30 million/yr before Rutgers, then Rutgers would have to deliver at least that amount. Do they? I don't know.

But if you're the ACC and making $17 million a year, does Rutgers provide at least that? Probably.

 

[jdoggivjc]

Totally agree with you. I don't think Rutgers being in the Big 10 would force the cable companies to add the BTN. I think that is a major issue with Rutgers.

However, I read a couple months ago that slightly more than half of the revenue comes from advertising, not cable company subscriptions. Even if people that live in NYC don't have the BTN, a greater fraction of them are going to be watching the games on it somewhere if Rutgers has a tie to the Big Ten...which means more viewers.

Actually, the cable providers already offer the BTN network in New Jersey and New York - the difference being is you have to buy the sports pack in order to get it. What the BTN wants is to get the BTN onto the first tier where it's pumped into everyone's homes regardless of whether they want it or not. Rutgers does not have the power to do that. In other words, Rutgers doesn't give the B1G anything in the NYC market that they don't already have.

 

[Judoka]

I think the real question is whether we're better off watching OU and Texas leave this year or a year or two from now. I think a reasonable debate can be made that ISU may be better off being a free agent right now when multiple conferences need additional pieces to complete their grouping versus next summer when the SEC or PAC or B1G only need 2, maybe 3, teams to finalize things. I think most people agree the Big 12 is not a long-term solution if we end up with the 64 team superconferences. Now if the superconferences don't come to fruition, then heck yes we're better off in the Big 12 since it will mean the money will be even more evenly distributed in the future. That's a longshot to hope to see a Big 12 three years from now.

I think if we survive this year we'll be around for a while. It isn't going to stay together without some pretty tough exit penalties actually put in place.

 

[jdoggivjc]

By the way, at this point I'm rooting for the ACC to add all four Big East teams - Syracuse, UConn, Rutgers, and Pittsburgh - do that, and if the B1G wants/has to go to 16 teams, they have just about no choice but to add ISU at that point. Or, alternatively, if the Big 12 survives and goes back to 12, Louisville and Cincinnati have just about nowhere else to go (they're not getting a B1G, SEC, or ACC invite anytime soon)

 

[cyman05]

Actually, the cable providers already offer the BTN network in New Jersey and New York - the difference being is you have to buy the sports pack in order to get it. What the BTN wants is to get the BTN onto the first tier where it's pumped into everyone's homes regardless of whether they want it or not. Rutgers does not have the power to do that. In other words, Rutgers doesn't give the B1G anything in the NYC market that they don't already have.

Except more eyes on their games for advertising revenue. BTN makes their money 2 ways like I said...

1. Subscriptions
2. Advertising

I don't think Rutgers gets you any more of #1, but they will get you more of #2. Enough to cause the Big 10 to add them without losing money like someone else just asked? I don't know. Enough to make Rutgers a very valuable school? Yes.

 

[dahliaclone]

This USA Today "exclusive" cites an ACC official saying if the ACC goes to 16 teams, UConn and Rutgers are next in line. Let's hope so, that closes off at least one and maybe two potential candidates for the Big 10. Or maybe it hurts us because it's two more Big East teams gone. Hell, I don't know anymore.

I think it helps

 

[im4cyclones]

This USA Today "exclusive" cites an ACC official saying if the ACC goes to 16 teams, UConn and Rutgers are next in line. Let's hope so, that closes off at least one and maybe two potential candidates for the Big 10. Or maybe it hurts us because it's two more Big East teams gone. Hell, I don't know anymore.

Pitt is a great add. Very good school. Good tradition. Solid in revenue sports. Good recruiting ground.

The Cuse is good for bball. Could be interchangeable with uconn. Average fb teams, great bball teams.

Rutgers is forgettable. Don't see any positive other than academics.

Adding uconn and rutgers would be a panic move in my opinion. There is no way those two add enough to increase tv revenue so payouts don't decrease.

 

[Istate]

I think if we survive this year we'll be around for a while. It isn't going to stay together without some pretty tough exit penalties actually put in place.

Here's the problem with exit fees. If OU and aTm leaves, it's unlikely that any fees will be paid as the conference is no longer viable. So making those fees larger doesn't accomplish as much as we would like. I am still hopeful that the Big 12 survives and super conferences don't happen. If that isn't in the cards, I am really hoping OU is told by the PAC that they can come with ISU not OSU. That's second best option. Third best is the B1G tells Iowa to stick it and invites us.

 

[hurdleisu24]

I think UCONN makes sense im not sure Rutgers does but remember the ACC has long been a basketball conference UCONN helps that

 

[dahliaclone]

Pitt is a great add. Very good school. Good tradition. Solid in revenue sports. Good recruiting ground.

The Cuse is good for bball. Could be interchangeable with uconn. Average fb teams, great bball teams.

Rutgers is forgettable. Don't see any positive other than academics.

Adding uconn and rutgers would be a panic move in my opinion. There is no way those two add enough to increase tv revenue so payouts don't decrease.

Wouldn't be a panic move if the ACC wants to remain one of the four superconferences. Makes perfect sense to get to 16 and stabilize it. I give the ACC a ton of props for being proactive right now.

 

[jdoggivjc]

Except more eyes on their games for advertising revenue. BTN makes their money 2 ways like I said...

1. Subscriptions
2. Advertising

I don't think Rutgers gets you any more of #1, but they will get you more of #2. Enough to cause the Big 10 to add them without losing money like someone else just asked? I don't know. Enough to make Rutgers a very valuable school? Yes.

If nobody's watching, nobody's going to advertise, regardless of whether the "local" team is on a channel or not. And I would just about guarantee you there aren't 1.5 million people in the greater New York metro area that give a rat's arse about Rutgers football. I highly doubt that many people will even turn to the half a page blurb that will be in the paper of their choice tomorrow morning...

 

[Judoka]

Here's the problem with exit fees. If OU and aTm leaves, it's unlikely that any fees will be paid as the conference is no longer viable. So making those fees larger doesn't accomplish as much as we would like. I am still hopeful that the Big 12 survives and super conferences don't happen. If that isn't in the cards, I am really hoping OU is told by the PAC that they can come with ISU not OSU. That's second best option. Third best is the B1G tells Iowa to stick it and invites us.

Doesn't matter if it is viable, only matters if it is solvent. Viability matters for future TV revenues. Solvency matters for exit penalties.

 

[jdoggivjc]

And Rutgers does make a hell of a lot of sense in the ACC with Pitt, Syracuse, UConn, and BC - BC has been on an island for the better part of a decade, and now they have their very own pod.

 

[cyman05]

Wouldn't be a panic move if the ACC wants to remain one of the four superconferences. Makes perfect sense to get to 16 and stabilize it. I give the ACC a ton of props for being proactive right now.

If I was the ACC commish I wouldn't stop at increasing exit fees from $13 to $20 million, but I'd up them to $100 million. Those exit fees get halved in the end anyways. And $10 million is petty cash considering the size of these TV deals.

If indeed the ACC goes to 16 though, and all school do indeed stay put. The SEC will almost surely stop expansion at 14 teams if the Big 12 lives on when they add West Virginia. If the Big 12 dies, SEC makes a play for Mizzou, but I don't know if Mizzou would hold out for a Big 10 invite or not. Even if Mizzou went for the SEC, they SEC is up a creek for school #16.

 

[im4cyclones]

That's what conferences have to ask. I don't know. Probably depends which conference you're talking about. If the Big 10 is making $25-30 million/yr before Rutgers, then Rutgers would have to deliver at least that amount. Do they? I don't know.

But if you're the ACC and making $17 million a year, does Rutgers provide at least that? Probably.

Maybe you're right. I don't see it and would hate to stake millions on "probably" but I think we all agree logic went out the window on this a long time ago.

I do think rutgers will end up somewhere. The state university of new jersey is too big for New Jersey politics to be quiet.