"Big East may look into its own TV beast"

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I came across this article from yesterday.
http://wvgazette.com/Sports/todayssportscolumn/201005060933
------------------------------------------------------------------

May 6, 2010
Big East may look into its own TV beast

By Mitch Vingle
Sports Editor


It had a tradition, a recognizability.

Some 83 years later, the Big Ten Network hit the airwaves. It is a network that learned to cash in on tradition and recognizability - to the point that it may cause a big bang in college sports.

Headquartered in Chicago, the BTN is the first internationally distributed network dedicated to a college conference. It beams approximately 350 live sports events a year - mostly in high definition. It operates 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

And, milking the ghosts of Woody Hayes and Bo Schembechler, it became a beast. One that apparently has an increased appetite.

Thus, talk of Big Ten expansion.

As those in these parts certainly understand, Big Ten expansion would set all of college sports on its ear, but perhaps especially West Virginia's league, the Big East, and, subsequently, Marshall's league, Conference USA.

Sure, expansion is all about money. But most of the money the Big Ten could reap - aside from a football championship game - would come via BTN. The reach of the successful network would widen, and a wider net would mean increased revenue.

Those involved in the possible Big Ten expansion and those potentially affected by it understand what's driving the study. It also has them thinking.

"Why couldn't we do more with television, and have a Big East television network?'' Big East commissioner John Marinatto has asked.

Good question. And it's a question those in the Big East office on Thursday said probably would be studied.

"John Marinatto and Paul Tagliabue have both said it's something they are starting to explore to see what's involved,'' Mike Parsons, WVU's deputy director of athletics, said. Tagliabue, the former NFL commissioner, has been hired by the Big East as a special adviser for strategic planning.

It's a topic the other large conferences across the country will also be exploring. The Pac-10 is discussing the idea. Surely, all will in short order.

Big Ten officials were simply shrewd enough to put their network in play early. Advantage, that league.

WHEN ONE LOOKS back on the history of television, there will always be the logo of CBS, aka the Big Eye.
It had a tradition, a recognizability.

Some 83 years later, the Big Ten Network hit the airwaves. It is a network that learned to cash in on tradition and recognizability - to the point that it may cause a big bang in college sports.

Headquartered in Chicago, the BTN is the first internationally distributed network dedicated to a college conference. It beams approximately 350 live sports events a year - mostly in high definition. It operates 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

And, milking the ghosts of Woody Hayes and Bo Schembechler, it became a beast. One that apparently has an increased appetite.

Thus, talk of Big Ten expansion.

As those in these parts certainly understand, Big Ten expansion would set all of college sports on its ear, but perhaps especially West Virginia's league, the Big East, and, subsequently, Marshall's league, Conference USA.

Sure, expansion is all about money. But most of the money the Big Ten could reap - aside from a football championship game - would come via BTN. The reach of the successful network would widen, and a wider net would mean increased revenue.

Those involved in the possible Big Ten expansion and those potentially affected by it understand what's driving the study. It also has them thinking.

"Why couldn't we do more with television, and have a Big East television network?'' Big East commissioner John Marinatto has asked.

Good question. And it's a question those in the Big East office on Thursday said probably would be studied.

"John Marinatto and Paul Tagliabue have both said it's something they are starting to explore to see what's involved,'' Mike Parsons, WVU's deputy director of athletics, said. Tagliabue, the former NFL commissioner, has been hired by the Big East as a special adviser for strategic planning.

It's a topic the other large conferences across the country will also be exploring. The Pac-10 is discussing the idea. Surely, all will in short order.

Big Ten officials were simply shrewd enough to put their network in play early. Advantage, that league.

"The Big Ten was a natural [to start its own network] because of its history,'' Parsons said. "It has much more history in all sports than others. Plus, its members are spread out. It has a strong fan base and population.''

The question is, can the Big East pull off a similar move? Can it put together its own network?

"Can it be done? Absolutely,'' Parsons said. "Remember, the Big East was one of the innovators in college basketball television. It had its own network before eventually folding in with ESPN.''

Establishing such a network, however, is a tough gig. The Big East has premier basketball, but setting up a network is anything but a slam-dunk.

"The ACC, all the other conferences, are in the same boat [as the Big East],'' Parsons said. "We have the content, but you also have to have distribution. That was an uphill battle even for the Big Ten.

"You have to have demand, subscriber demand. Then there are other factors that come into play. There are existing [television] contracts. There are a lot of variables.''

The Big East contracts with ESPN and ABC in football and ESPN and CBS in basketball extend through 2013-14.

Of course, in all likelihood, such contracts would remain in place with modifications. The Big Ten still gives CBS and ESPN first dibs in football and basketball. After that, however, is where the BTN steps in, creating a large footprint - with the now very real possibility of shaking the ground of college sports.

The existing network is already a big success. According to the Sports Business Journal, BTN paid out $22 million to member schools in 2008. Big East schools are making around $4.5 million from TV.

"I'd be naïve to sit here and spout off what could be made [via a Big East network],'' Parsons said. "We have to find out if it can be done, if it does make sense. It's certainly intriguing, though.''

Indeed, something to keep an eye on.

Reach Mitch Vingle at 304-348-4827, mitchvin...@wvgazette.com or follow him at http://twitter.com/MitchVingle.

 

[GGGG]

Why does this article insist that there is some sort of "first mover advantage" with the Big Ten Network?

The BTN isn't a success because they were the first to do so.  The BTN doesn't exist in BE country...or SEC country....or Pac Ten country...  Their audience is limited to Big Ten states.  The reason that the BE might not be able to start a similar network has nothing to do with the BTN...it would have to be because the size of BE markets don't make such a network feasible.

[Cooby Snacks]

Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for this, but I don't see it working as well as the BTN.  The reason for the BTN's success comes down to the size of the targeted demographic.  In addition to huge alumni bases, the midwest state schools also attract the hayseed crowd in large numbers.  Cletus from Nowheresville, Ohio isn't packing up the back of his pickup truck with his buddies Trey, Scooter, and Geech for Cincinnati hoops games like he is for tOSU football Saturdays.

[goodgreatgrand]

Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for this, but I don't see it working as well as the BTN.  The reason for the BTN's success comes down to the size of the targeted demographic.  In addition to huge alumni bases, the midwest state schools also attract the hayseed crowd in large numbers.  Cletus from Nowheresville, Ohio isn't packing up the back of his pickup truck with his buddies Trey, Scooter, and Geech for Cincinnati hoops games like he is for tOSU football Saturdays.

Agreed. Not a bad idea but I dont think this will work simply because no one cares about BE football (and because no BE school generates 20k alums per year like OSU does who are likely to pay for it). BBall has potential, though...and the B10 knows it: (from the Chicago Tribune)

"Syracuse's chancellor, Nancy Cantor, is said to be pushing to join the Big Ten. She previously served as chancellor for the University of Illinois and provost at Michigan. And if Delany, a basketball guy at his core (he played for Dean Smith at North Carolina), also wants to make the Big Ten a hoops megapower, Syracuse is the way to go.

At the BCS meetings, Delany gently chided a Boston reporter by saying of the Big East: "Don't they have the most powerful basketball conference? I hear that on ESPN and the Boston papers."

[Clarence]

The only way a Big East Network is competitve is if they get ND football.  The Cable distributors would kill it otherwise.   

[duanewade]

Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for this, but I don't see it working as well as the BTN.  The reason for the BTN's success comes down to the size of the targeted demographic.  In addition to huge alumni bases, the midwest state schools also attract the hayseed crowd in large numbers.  Cletus from Nowheresville, Ohio isn't packing up the back of his pickup truck with his buddies Trey, Scooter, and Geech for Cincinnati hoops games like he is for tOSU football Saturdays.

Good point.....the Big Ten markets are soooo dynamic.  I used to be a lender and states like Michigan, Ohio and Indiana were taboo to lend in as they have not only lost jobs but have lost population too as the economy is so dire in these old rust belt states that haven't adjusted to the new economy.  The only city in the Midwest that is growing and it's barely growing at that is Chicago. 

Yes the Big Ten markets are so much more lucrative than MSA's like NYC, Pilly, DC, Conn, Chicago, NJ and Florida (maybe add Boston again) that continue to grow as the population continues to gravitate toward both coasts.

 

[HouWarrior]

This is very interesting, and to have the gravitas of Tags on the task is great. Today, Espn tv ,reviewed the super regional conferences and the possibilities--resulting in 4-5 major regional conferences, each with all the big schools in the area....noting that each could support a cable network, of its own.
The east is the most populated, and easily has the largest tv markets. It could work.

PS has anyone ever noticed Milwaukee is not big, nor in the east--lol?
 

[MarquetteDano]

One thing that could kibosh other conferences from going the same route is the potential for cable operators to go a la carte pricing.  I was talking to a Nielsen exec a few months ago and he said it is definitely in the cards since consistent price increases from new channels are causing companies to lose customers.

If a la carte becomes the norm one would have to think something like the Big East Network would not work.  How many people would be willing to shell out another $1 per month for a network like that?  I think it would hurt the Big Ten Network as well.   I wonder how much TV revenue would go down for the Big Ten if a la carte goes widespread?

[jficke13]

ala carte won't hurt conference tv channels, it will help. I'd gladly pay for the BE Network, because I'm not paying for Lifetime, shopping networks, mtv, bet, 90% of the channels really. Because I could only pick the ones I wanted, I'd be happy to sub in sports networks to replace all the crap I wouldn't be buying.

[martyconlonontherun]

As a MU fan, am I the only one against it? I feel we get great exposure on ESPN that reaches nationally. As a private school, we don't have the generic state fan base like the big ten schools. If we go to a big east network, we lost the publicity as a school in states like Missouri, California and other places where a lot of MU Students come from.

[wadefan#1]

As a MU fan, am I the only one against it? I feel we get great exposure on ESPN that reaches nationally. As a private school, we don't have the generic state fan base like the big ten schools. If we go to a big east network, we lost the publicity as a school in states like Missouri, California and other places where a lot of MU Students come from.

I agree. I don't like this idea.

[GGGG]

A BE Network would not replace an ESPN contract.  It would allow the lower level games to be shown on television v. ESPN 360.  The BTN basically takes the football games that ABC, ESPN and ESPN2 do not want.

[Mr. Nielsen]

BTN can lock up some football games away from ESPN and ESPN2 as their 2nd pick. Example- Iowa at Michigan State in primetime.

[brewcity77]

Good point.....the Big Ten markets are soooo dynamic.  I used to be a lender and states like Michigan, Ohio and Indiana were taboo to lend in as they have not only lost jobs but have lost population too as the economy is so dire in these old rust belt states that haven't adjusted to the new economy.  The only city in the Midwest that is growing and it's barely growing at that is Chicago. 

Yes the Big Ten markets are so much more lucrative than MSA's like NYC, Pilly, DC, Conn, Chicago, NJ and Florida (maybe add Boston again) that continue to grow as the population continues to gravitate toward both coasts.

But it's what they watch. Bigger markets have value, without a doubt, but just think of Wisconsin. Milwaukee may be the biggest market, but I would bet that if a Wisconsin and Marquette game are on, there are more viewers across the state tuned in to UW than there are to Marquette. I hate to say it, but despite being the Milwaukee school, the Big Ten Network would likely get more viewers statewide for a weekend Badger game than a BEN would get for a Marquette game at the same time. And when advertisers are buying, that's the most important thing they look at. Schools like Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, etc may not be huge national draws but they do pull in a lot of viewers in the statewide market, certainly more than St. Johns would draw in New York or DePaul in Chicago. I still say go forward and see how it does, but it's not a foregone conclusion that the larger Big East markets would result in better ratings.

[Mr. Nielsen]

But it's what they watch. Bigger markets have value, without a doubt, but just think of Wisconsin. Milwaukee may be the biggest market, but I would bet that if a Wisconsin and Marquette game are on, there are more viewers across the state tuned in to UW than there are to Marquette. I hate to say it, but despite being the Milwaukee school, the Big Ten Network would likely get more viewers statewide for a weekend Badger game than a BEN would get for a Marquette game at the same time. And when advertisers are buying, that's the most important thing they look at. Schools like Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, etc may not be huge national draws but they do pull in a lot of viewers in the statewide market, certainly more than St. Johns would draw in New York or DePaul in Chicago. I still say go forward and see how it does, but it's not a foregone conclusion that the larger Big East markets would result in better ratings.

Your right. I hate to say it too. MU and UW fan base for TV viewing in the Milwaukee market is about 50/50.

[GGGG]

Your right. I hate to say it too. MU and UW fan base for TV viewing in the Milwaukee market is about 50/50.

It's not even 50/50.  UW is more popular than MU in Milwaukee.  (Actually, I think most "non-alumni" fans root for both teams but if they had to choose, they'd choose UW.)

[ChicosBailBonds]

One thing that could kibosh other conferences from going the same route is the potential for cable operators to go a la carte pricing.  I was talking to a Nielsen exec a few months ago and he said it is definitely in the cards since consistent price increases from new channels are causing companies to lose customers.

If a la carte becomes the norm one would have to think something like the Big East Network would not work.  How many people would be willing to shell out another $1 per month for a network like that?  I think it would hurt the Big Ten Network as well.   I wonder how much TV revenue would go down for the Big Ten if a la carte goes widespread?

Cable companies are losing customers for many reasons, meanwhile Telco and satellite television continues to add customers like crazy with similar (sometimes more expensive pricing). 

A la carte will essentially destroy television as we know it.  The days of choices and 200+ channels will be gone.  About 60% of the channels out there are supported by the 40% that most people want.  Now, many people will say "that's great, I don't want those other 60% anyway", the problem with that is there are still a lot of people that do want those other channels and they could not survive on their own in an a la carte fashion. 

So if people want to go back to just basic channels, that's what a la carte will deliver, otherwise folks that really want things like Food Network (fill in any one of 100+ channels here) will pay about $5.00 a month just for that channel, not the pennies they are paying now for that channel.

[ChicosBailBonds]

My biggest concern about this entire idea is the lack of distribution. It took the Big Ten 2 years to get distribution and they clearly have the largest alumni base in the USA.  It's great for the Big East to say they are in the largest markets and have all these eyeballs, but that's a marketing twist and nothing more.

Loyola Marymount is located in the 2nd largest DMA in the country, are people flocking to see them?  Fordham is in the largest, same question.  St. John's....DePaul....same question.

At the end of the day, you have to have INTERESTED EYEBALLS.  Unless the Big East Network is willing to take a much lower payment to get national distribution, this one seems like a stretch for me.  I know we were having heart palps on what to do if the SEC went with their own network, whether it was worth carrying nationally.  And that conference has real football and much larger institutions. 

Here's a list of the major MSO's in the country.  It's hard to see many of them going for something like this UNLESS a Big East Network is willing to take a small share in the revenues.  If that's the case, what's the point in doing it other than reach?

http://www.ncta.com/Stats/TopMSOs.aspx

[MarquetteDano]

Cable companies are losing customers for many reasons, meanwhile Telco and satellite television continues to add customers like crazy with similar (sometimes more expensive pricing). 

A la carte will essentially destroy television as we know it.  The days of choices and 200+ channels will be gone.  About 60% of the channels out there are supported by the 40% that most people want.  Now, many people will say "that's great, I don't want those other 60% anyway", the problem with that is there are still a lot of people that do want those other channels and they could not survive on their own in an a la carte fashion. 

Chicos,

  You didn't answer my most fundamental question regarding a la carte pricing as it relates to this thread.  Would not a la carte pricing hurt something like the Big Ten Network?  And wouldn't it pretty much kill any chance for a Big East Network channel?

[duanewade]

But it's what they watch. Bigger markets have value, without a doubt, but just think of Wisconsin. Milwaukee may be the biggest market, but I would bet that if a Wisconsin and Marquette game are on, there are more viewers across the state tuned in to UW than there are to Marquette. I hate to say it, but despite being the Milwaukee school, the Big Ten Network would likely get more viewers statewide for a weekend Badger game than a BEN would get for a Marquette game at the same time. And when advertisers are buying, that's the most important thing they look at. Schools like Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, etc may not be huge national draws but they do pull in a lot of viewers in the statewide market, certainly more than St. Johns would draw in New York or DePaul in Chicago. I still say go forward and see how it does, but it's not a foregone conclusion that the larger Big East markets would result in better ratings.

Not sure if any of this is right until we see the numbers.  The tri-state NYC market (NY, Conn & NJ) is a monster (I think Brooklyn alone has 7 MM people which is the equivalent of the entire Chicago MSA) and unlike the Midwest New Yorker’s are not that into college football and I know many of the casual NYC fans cheer for ND in football as they view them as the Yankees of college football with a long storied past and a love em or hate em fan base.  NY'ers are extremely into baseball with everyone taking sides as either die hard Yankees or Mets fan.  I also know they are into basketball and they tend to be general fans of the Big East basketball and support the hot teams each year as there isn't the intense alumni loyalties like in the Big Ten.  So if Marquette is playing well they will make up the for the lack of Wisconsin support by grabbing overall higher ratings through their affiliation with the NYC market.  In addition I know Marquette is pretty popular in Chicago too and would bet their ratings would outdraw Wisconsin if they were both on TV at the same time on two different Chicago channels.   I would even go so far as we might outdraw Illinois in a head to head game in Chicago as many of Illinois’ players over the years have been from downstate Illinois high school like Peoria & Springfield and under Lon Krueger completely blew off Chicago’s public league basketball players.  Meanwhile Marquette has had a storied past of always having a couple Chicago players on their roster. 

In summary yes the Wisconsin and Illinois alumni greatly outnumber Marquette’s but another 50% of the viewers never went to college and what they view decides the ratings of these games as they are like the independent voter that decides every presidential election as we know who avid republicans and democrats will support but where the independents lean decides the election…….I think Marquette sits very well with most national basketball viewing independents if we continue to play in a strong conference and put out a great exciting product on the floor.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chicos,

  You didn't answer my most fundamental question regarding a la carte pricing as it relates to this thread.  Would not a la carte pricing hurt something like the Big Ten Network?  And wouldn't it pretty much kill any chance for a Big East Network channel?

A la carte pricing would hurt just about everyone, and that does include the BTN.  Yes, you are correct.

Even channels like ESPN, which are on every basic tier out there, a lot of folks don't want ESPN because they don't care about sports.  The price people pay for ESPN (more than $3.00 each month on your bill) would go up because the cost right now is spread out across a base package that includes people that want it and people that don't. 

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

In regards to Regional Networks, one example here is the NHL New York Islanders.  They need a new arena badly, the have other issues, but there are no concerns with them relocating because they have a great TV deal by being in Metro-NYC that keeps them valuable.  TV money they would not get near as much anywhere else.  The New York TV market is bigger than LA & Chicago combined.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

The New York TV market is bigger than LA & Chicago combined.  

Actually, that is not true.  Yes, the NY DMA is the largest, but it is not bigger than Chicago and LA combined.

The New York DMA is about 7.5 million

L.A. is about 5.6 million.

Chicago is 3.5 million

DMA is what is used to measure television households.

LA + Chicago is 9.1 million, clearly larger than the NY DMA.


http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/2009-2010-dma-ranks.pdf

[dennycrane]

Without viable football progamming a BEN does not get very far.

[brewcity77]

Without viable football progamming a BEN does not get very far.

Agreed, which is why the league needs to not only retain football schools, but needs to expand. I think that the Big East needs to get up to 12 football schools. It starts with Notre Dame. Give them the ultimatum. Either join the conference full-bore or you're out. I would hate to lose the MU/ND rivalry, but we could set up a home-and-home annual series with them most likely without too much trouble. Either way, the addition of ND football or the loss of ND and the addition of a team that plays both (say UCF) brings us to 9 football schools and 18 basketball schools.

So then we need to add three more football schools, which equates to a 21-team basketball league. Certainly a bit unwieldy, but we already all play an 18-game schedule. Change that to 20, everyone plays each other once a year, with the home and aways switching on an annual basis. Two more games crammed in per team is an extra 20 games to put on the air, which only enhances our marketing ability. If they would follow up UCF with Boston College and Maryland (assuming the SEC would start the ACC cannibalization) and another school like East Carolina, Memphis, Central Michigan, hell, even Navy would be a consideration, anything to get to 21 basketball/12 football programs.

That way we get two football divisions and a conference title game, and in basketball either one solid league, or three divisions of 7 teams that play each other home-and-home twice a year and three teams from each of the other two divisions on a rotating basis for an 18 game schedule. Then for the Big East Tourney, the top three seeds go to the division winners, and each division gets a minimum of 4 teams in, with the final 4 spots in the tourney being doled out on overall record.

It'd be big, it'd be unwieldy, but considering that the future of college sports is clearly the monster conference, I really think we're better off getting there sooner rather than later.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Without viable football progamming a BEN does not get very far.

Though I don't care for this Badger fan, he is absolutely right.

[GGGG]

Agreed, which is why the league needs to not only retain football schools, but needs to expand. I think that the Big East needs to get up to 12 football schools.

I would rather be in smaller, basketball only conference than in some 20+ team conference.

And anyway, just adding more football schools isn't guaranteed to add more eyeballs to the television sets.  The problem with the BE schools, and any of the prospective schools that they are mentioning, is that they just aren't very popular on a state-wide basis.  (With the exception of West Virginia and possibly UConn.)  I mean, what kind of numbers would Memphis bring in?  Nobody goes to their games now!  Central Florida...South Florida...East Carolina...

[Benny B]

Without viable football progamming a BEN does not get very far.

While I would like to ask you to elaborate on what you mean by "viable football programming," it's irrelevant.  If a BEN can work with football, it can work without football.  The BE has already carved out a niche in college basketball, and if it could take advantage of that, football programming would be a nice complement as opposed to a necessity.

Considering that there are more BE basketball games played just in prime time during the academic year than there are total BT football games, that's a real opportunity for the BE if it plays its cards right.  Further, a BEN wouldn't need to send the BTN's $22M (the legitimacy of which I still question) to its schools to be considered a success... even if the whole thing could break even, the exposure alone would be well worth the time and effort.

Regardless, my guess is that we'll never see a stand-alone BEN... however, I could envision an ESPN-4 or ESPN-BE on my cable line-up in the next few years.  (Getting closer to the Ocho.)

[GGGG]

While I would like to ask you to elaborate on what you mean by "viable football programming," it's irrelevant.  If a BEN can work with football, it can work without football.  The BE has already carved out a niche in college basketball, and if it could take advantage of that, football programming would be a nice complement as opposed to a necessity.

Considering that there are more BE basketball games played just in prime time during the academic year than there are total BT football games, that's a real opportunity for the BE if it plays its cards right.  Further, a BEN wouldn't need to send the BTN's $22M (the legitimacy of which I still question) to its schools to be considered a success... even if the whole thing could break even, the exposure alone would be well worth the time and effort.

Regardless, my guess is that we'll never see a stand-alone BEN... however, I could envision an ESPN-4 or ESPN-BE on my cable line-up in the next few years.  (Getting closer to the Ocho.)

Football is more popular than basketball.  It brings in bigger numbers...always will.  And I have no idea why you question $22M...it is pretty well documented.

[goodgreatgrand]

The BE has already carved out a niche in college basketball, and if it could take advantage of that, football programming would be a nice complement as opposed to a necessity.

There are a couple of asumptions here: 1) That a Big East Network can deliver revenue that is at least close to that of the B10.
2) If not, the most attractive BE fball schools will still stay and that money isnt a driving force to jump conferences.
3) That the BE still has a "nice niche" in basketball when trademark schools like Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers (maybe UConn) leave.

Whiel a network sounds like a good idea, can one really be established and contracts sorted out by December (when the B10 plans to announce the exapansion schools)? I find this hard to believe. Plus, B10 revenue, while not 'guaranteed,' is far more 'established' than anything the BENetwork can promise in its first few years of existence.

[Benny B]

Football is more popular than basketball.  It brings in bigger numbers...always will.  And I have no idea why you question $22M...it is pretty well documented.

There's a difference between "pretty well documented" and "independently audited."  Any accountant will tell you that you can make the books say anything you want (see: Enron).  While I'm not suggesting fraud, I am suggesting that perhaps some expenses and liabilities have been moved around to make the numbers look better than they actually are.

In other words, $22M is great if it stands alone.  If it's paired with a $500M liability or it's offset by $20M in expenses that were allocated elsewhere, not so much.

[GGGG]

There's a difference between "pretty well documented" and "independently audited."  Any accountant will tell you that you can make the books say anything you want (see: Enron).  While I'm not suggesting fraud, I am suggesting that perhaps some expenses and liabilities have been moved around to make the numbers look better than they actually are.

In other words, $22M is great if it stands alone.  If it's paired with a $500M liability or it's offset by $20M in expenses that were allocated elsewhere, not so much.

How can television rights be offset with expenses?  I guess you can choose to believe what you want to believe...

[goodgreatgrand]

There's a difference between "pretty well documented" and "independently audited."  Any accountant will tell you that you can make the books say anything you want (see: Enron).  While I'm not suggesting fraud, I am suggesting that perhaps some expenses and liabilities have been moved around to make the numbers look better than they actually are.

In other words, $22M is great if it stands alone.  If it's paired with a $500M liability or it's offset by $20M in expenses that were allocated elsewhere, not so much.

OR:

The 7-8 MM fulltime BE members receive is geat if it stands alone. If it's offset by 5 MM in expenses, it doesnt look so great.

I find it hard to believe BE schools are anxious to jump to the B10 just so they can lose millions of dollars....or generate a very small percentage more at the cost of leaving their rivalries and alienating their fan base.

[Benny B]

How can television rights be offset with expenses?  I guess you can choose to believe what you want to believe...

The BTN is owned by the Big Ten and Fox.  Do you think Fox is paying all the bills while the Big Ten simply collects profits?  Further, this isn't some UHF station that someone won in a poker bet... who do you think put up the money to get the BTN going?

Murdoch isn't an idiot... I'm sure the Big Ten has plenty at risk that isn't being properly reflected in the "$22M a year" figure.

[GGGG]

The BTN is owned by the Big Ten and Fox.  Do you think Fox is paying all the bills while the Big Ten simply collects profits?  Further, this isn't some UHF station that someone won in a poker bet... who do you think put up the money to get the BTN going?

Murdoch isn't an idiot... I'm sure the Big Ten has plenty at risk that isn't being properly reflected in the "$22M a year" figure.

This has been addressed multiple times.  The BTN is a legally seperate entity that generates a portion of the conference's television rights fees.  Those fees are transferred from the BTN to the conference, and from the conference to its individual institutions. 

The $22 M figure includes these transfers out of the BTN.  (As well as the rights that ABC/ESPN pay the conference.)  This is not a revenue figure...but a dividend (or some such).

[Benny B]

This has been addressed multiple times.  The BTN is a legally seperate entity that generates a portion of the conference's television rights fees.  Those fees are transferred from the BTN to the conference, and from the conference to its individual institutions. 

The $22 M figure includes these transfers out of the BTN.  (As well as the rights that ABC/ESPN pay the conference.)  This is not a revenue figure...but a dividend (or some such).

Listen, I'm not trying to turn this into a Sultan vs. Benny bi***fest, but I haven't seen any independent, third-party reports of BTN profits/dividends/etc.  Everything I've seen originates from the same three sources: the Big Ten, the schools, or the Big Ten Network, and those three entities all have an interest in seeing the BTN numbers spun as high as they can go.

It's a lesson I've taken from the financial and investment markets... publicly reported numbers from an interested party aren't always what they appear to be.

[goodgreatgrand]

Wow, such bickering. The $22M was first reported by ESPN Behind the Lines. It stated that the B10's total revenue was $242M. From there, people performed simple division and yelled out "$22M per school!" That number has caught on for some reason. However, the $242 should be divided by 12, not 11 (the conference itself (front office) gets the same amount a school gets). So, based on espn's reporting, it's more like $20.2M

[GOO]

The big east may not touch the B10 network in dollar terms, but anything that can generate more revenue is a plus.  In addition, get the gap down and make it harder for teams to leave, especially two years from now to another conference such as the ACC.  And make it more feasible for the BE to pull in a quality team or two in a couple of years, with the revenue from a network or ESPN-BE network.  It makes sense to try, even if the numbers are 1/3 of the Big 10's.  It may help a team say no to the ACC or SEC in a couple of years.