Chicago Sun Times: Big Ten's "next move will be adding the 15th & 16th schools"

[ChicosBailBonds]

Rutgers delivers the NYC television market and Maryland delivers Baltimore/DC.  That's why those schools were picked - not because of great football tradition.

Don't think of DMA (NYC or Baltimore or DC), think of territories.  DMAs is more applicable to advertising benefits and market ratings.  Though you are correct those DMAs are added, it goes well beyond just the DMAs, but to territorial carve outs that extend well beyond the DMAs.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

But Texas is an AAU school, that's the point.  Better example for you would be Florida State, national champions in football, fertile recruiting grounds in the state.  If FSU wanted to join for an equal share, do you think the Big Ten would say yes?  How about Oklahoma?  LSU?  There are many big schools that can bring dollars to bear, but they aren't invited for considered for a number of reasons.

You are saying the AAU isn't as important based on your beliefs.  To this date, zero schools ever accepting an invitation to the Big Ten were not AAU members.  Their people have said continuously how important it is, at the top of their list of criteria.  When talking to them about where their footprint might go in expansion to determine if you want to sign a contract to carry their network, these are the kinds of due diligence questions that are asked.  Are you expanding?  If you were, who are candidates, what is the criteria?  Etc, etc, because a television broadcaster has to consider the what if's since they are on the hook for future dollars potentially to be paid.

Fair enough.

Let me put it another way:

10-15 years ago, the thought of adding Nebraska, Maryland and/or Rutgers seemed INSANE, right?

If you asked any of the Presidents back then, they would have laughed at the idea, and said something about B10 "traditional rivalries" and whatnot.

Flash forward to today, and look at what is happening. They have expanded eastward, and they continue to do so.

So, in the end, they can "say" a lot of things, but large sums of $ tend to change an organization's "belief". AND, organizations that don't evolve, get left by the wayside.

The Big10 Network will say they want AAU schools, and honestly, I think they do. That's fine.

But, a school like ND (which isn't AAU) would be accepted with an "exception".

How long before they take somebody like Oklahoma/Alabama/LSU/FSU? You can say "never", that that's fine, but I think the horse if out of the barn, and the television network is calling the shots now.

"Hey U presidents, we can make $50 million more per year (each) if we admit these schools. How does that sound?"

"Let's make an exception."

It might not happen today. It might not happen tomorrow. It might not happen for 5 years. But, AAU isn't necessarily a deciding factor. It's $.

Notre Dame proved that, right?

[muwarrior69]

So will the Big 12 go under? Only 10 schools right now.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Guns, anything is possible.  I'm going on the data thus far and what has been the approach thus far.  Things can always change, like the climate..it always changes.


To be clear, the BTN isn't picking the schools.  The Presidents decide.  The importance of the BTN comes into what rates they receive.  What I have gathered over the years is the presidents, ultimately, are academics first.  They certainly understand the importance of athletics and money, but they love their club and they want like minded members in the club.  Elitism is important to them.  They want to swing that member and say we are in the same club as Stanford, Yale, Harvard and there are only 60 of us in the country.  There are exceptions in life, ND would be one of them, though plenty in the Big Ten on the academic side want no part of them (religious, private, not a great research university).  That being said, they would be the first exception to receive an invite without that status.  I doubt anytime in the near future the Big Ten needs to surrender that elitist approach and lower their standards for some of the schools out there.  The upside isn't there.

[Tugg Speedman]

Started to broadcast Hartford Whalers NHL Hockey.

That is correct too.  From the ESPN Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ESPN

ESPN was founded by Bill Rasmussen, his son Scott Rasmussen and Aetna insurance agent Ed Eagan.[1] Bill, who had an affinity with sports for much of his life, was fired from his position as the communications manager for the New England Whalers in 1978.[1] During his tenure with the Whalers, Rasmussen had met Eagan who displayed an interest in building a career in television. Eagan approached Bill with the idea of creating a monthly cable show covering Connecticut sports and was curious to see if the Whalers would be interested in being the main feature on the show.[1]

Though discouraged by his firing, Rasmussen and Eagan began to discuss a new course; Rasmussen's original idea was to create a cable television network that focused on covering all sporting events in the state of Connecticut (for example, the Whalers, Bristol Red Sox and the Connecticut Huskies), rather than just one team as Eagan proposed.[1] Rasmussen knew little about cable television at the time and with under 20 percent of homes receiving cable, the task to create such a network was tedious.[2]

[ChicosBailBonds]

That is correct too.  From the ESPN Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ESPN

ESPN was founded by Bill Rasmussen, his son Scott Rasmussen and Aetna insurance agent Ed Eagan.[1] Bill, who had an affinity with sports for much of his life, was fired from his position as the communications manager for the New England Whalers in 1978.[1] During his tenure with the Whalers, Rasmussen had met Eagan who displayed an interest in building a career in television. Eagan approached Bill with the idea of creating a monthly cable show covering Connecticut sports and was curious to see if the Whalers would be interested in being the main feature on the show.[1]

Though discouraged by his firing, Rasmussen and Eagan began to discuss a new course; Rasmussen's original idea was to create a cable television network that focused on covering all sporting events in the state of Connecticut (for example, the Whalers, Bristol Red Sox and the Connecticut Huskies), rather than just one team as Eagan proposed.[1] Rasmussen knew little about cable television at the time and with under 20 percent of homes receiving cable, the task to create such a network was tedious.[2]

Maybe I misread your original post as I inferred that you were saying it became a network with one of the purposes to broadcast UConn stuff.  There were a number of ideas for the network, as you mention above.  A few more are discussed in one of ESPN history books that came out.  Many of the original ideas were snuffed out for obvious reasons.  ESPN did, in fact, use UConn sports as part of a test program back in 1978 to show they could pull this idea off.  Their first actual broadcast was in Sept 1979, however, and by the time the got rolling many of those original ideas were put to rest in actual execution.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Guns, anything is possible.  I'm going on the data thus far and what has been the approach thus far.  Things can always change, like the climate..it always changes.


To be clear, the BTN isn't picking the schools.  The Presidents decide.  The importance of the BTN comes into what rates they receive.  What I have gathered over the years is the presidents, ultimately, are academics first.  They certainly understand the importance of athletics and money, but they love their club and they want like minded members in the club.  Elitism is important to them.  They want to swing that member and say we are in the same club as Stanford, Yale, Harvard and there are only 60 of us in the country.  There are exceptions in life, ND would be one of them, though plenty in the Big Ten on the academic side want no part of them (religious, private, not a great research university).  That being said, they would be the first exception to receive an invite without that status.  I doubt anytime in the near future the Big Ten needs to surrender that elitist approach and lower their standards for some of the schools out there.  The upside isn't there.

I get it. Honest. I know they want it to be an exclusive club, but even 10 yrs ago, the current evolution was unimaginable.

Why the relatively quick and sudden change to how the B10 operates?

Cha-Ching Baby!

Why did apple get in the phone business? To make money. Why does Cadillac make an electric car? To make money. Why does phillip morris make smokeless tobacco? To make money. The Big 10 never cared about hockey. Now they have it.

Companies evolve. They don't do something one day, and the next day, their doing it. That's how it works.

The Big 10 is no longer a "conference". It's a business. BIG BUSINESS. They are going to keep trying to find more revenue. At some point, the idea of non-AAU schools will come up. I don't think that rule is written in stone. Again, ND is proof of that. 

As far as the presidents calling the shots, you're right.

But, here's where I'm going with this:

The schools REALLY LIKE making a lot of $. And eventually, when BTN says "Hey, we should change our football schedule to all spring games because we could make 500 billion dollars on a new TV deal", you can bet your ass the school presidents will sign off. So who is really calling the shots at that point? The Presidents, or the Network?

$. $. $.

[Dawson Rental]

Herb Gould wrote that.  Gould is the typical cranky old journalist who really can't figure out how and why things change.  This article is a typical example.  He talks about how dumb Delany is for moving the tournament for one year to Washington because "students from Madison or Champaign" won't be able to get there...but then talks about all the great moves he has made.

Look, the B10 might add two more members.  But I would guess not anytime soon.  Mostly because the good members are tied so legally and financially into other conferences.  

But this sounds like an old, cranky guy article more than anything.

[Class71]

Clearly.

But maybe we are all the idiots and just do not understand you are right.

[Aughnanure]

Television markets.  Forget ratings, I'm talking pay tv subscribers.  When BTN went and grabbed Rutgers, it trips a clause in the Big Ten Network deals that the rates MSOs have to pay for the right to carry that network is different for a state \ territory that has a Big Ten school.  So when they add Maryland and Rutgers, instantly means more money per subscriber from DISH, AT&T, DIRECTV, Comcast, etc, etc because the states of New Jersey, New York, Maryland and District of Columbia change the rates.   Adding UConn is peanuts in comparison.

Sooooo, New Jersey= NYC (a big stretch), but UConn only = Connecticut? They're the biggest collegiate athletic brand in New England right now, so it cannot be 'peanuts'. Not to mention their proximity to NYC (it's called the Tri-State area and Rutgers certainly doesn't give it to you by yourself - no school does).

There's this weird, not supported in any factual way, bias against UConn because that's what we've been told to believe (I remember the same thing against Rutgers ever being added).

[ChicosBailBonds]

Sooooo, New Jersey= NYC (a big stretch), but UConn only = Connecticut? They're the biggest collegiate athletic brand in New England right now, so it cannot be 'peanuts'. Not to mention their proximity to NYC (it's called the Tri-State area and Rutgers certainly doesn't give it to you by yourself - no school does).

There's this weird, not supported in any factual way, bias against UConn because that's what we've been told to believe (I remember the same thing against Rutgers ever being added).

I'm doing a poor job of explaining it apparently.    Basically, Rutgers already achieves the upside of what Uconn can mostly bring.  The incremental dollars were gained by Rutgers, there isn't much left for Uconn to deliver.  Does Uconn add a little value, sure....but at what cost and what dilution to the other schools?  If you only grow the pie a little bit, but everyone has to take another hit in the splits, that's a problem.  Rutgers adds New Jersey and New York for Big Ten Network dollars.  UConn's addition does not "re-add" New York, you get CT which is ok but pretty small in the grand scheme of things.

Could it happen, sure, but adding them is adding them for the sake of adding them as the incremental $$ are small.

[Hards Alumni]

Sooooo, New Jersey= NYC (a big stretch), but UConn only = Connecticut? They're the biggest collegiate athletic brand in New England right now, so it cannot be 'peanuts'. Not to mention their proximity to NYC (it's called the Tri-State area and Rutgers certainly doesn't give it to you by yourself - no school does).

There's this weird, not supported in any factual way, bias against UConn because that's what we've been told to believe (I remember the same thing against Rutgers ever being added).

Media markets.  NYC is covered by Rutgers.  It doesn't matter if they are any good.  UConn may have a ton of fans in NYC, but they aren't adding the B1G Network to anymore TVs.  It isn't about ratings, its about subscriptions... and NYC is already covered.

[GGGG]

I get it. Honest. I know they want it to be an exclusive club, but even 10 yrs ago, the current evolution was unimaginable.

Why the relatively quick and sudden change to how the B10 operates?

Cha-Ching Baby!

Why did apple get in the phone business? To make money. Why does Cadillac make an electric car? To make money. Why does phillip morris make smokeless tobacco? To make money. The Big 10 never cared about hockey. Now they have it.

Companies evolve. They don't do something one day, and the next day, their doing it. That's how it works.

The Big 10 is no longer a "conference". It's a business. BIG BUSINESS. They are going to keep trying to find more revenue. At some point, the idea of non-AAU schools will come up. I don't think that rule is written in stone. Again, ND is proof of that.  

As far as the presidents calling the shots, you're right.

But, here's where I'm going with this:

The schools REALLY LIKE making a lot of $. And eventually, when BTN says "Hey, we should change our football schedule to all spring games because we could make 500 billion dollars on a new TV deal", you can bet your ass the school presidents will sign off. So who is really calling the shots at that point? The Presidents, or the Network?

$. $. $.

Really Rutgers is the biggest example of that.  Rutgers had been lobbying for membership in the Big Ten for years...from way back when Penn State was admitted.

Priorities changed when the B10 decided to tackle the east coast.  So they picked off Maryland and decided to add Rutgers.  So who knows?  

[GGGG]

I'm doing a poor job of explaining it apparently.    Basically, Rutgers already achieves the upside of what Uconn can mostly bring.  The incremental dollars were gained by Rutgers, there isn't much left for Uconn to deliver.  Does Uconn add a little value, sure....but at what cost and what dilution to the other schools?  If you only grow the pie a little bit, but everyone has to take another hit in the splits, that's a problem.  Rutgers adds New Jersey and New York for Big Ten Network dollars.  UConn's addition does not "re-add" New York, you get CT which is ok but pretty small in the grand scheme of things.

Could it happen, sure, but adding them is adding them for the sake of adding them as the incremental $$ are small.

Economists would call it "diminishing marginal returns."

[Aughnanure]

I'm doing a poor job of explaining it apparently.    Basically, Rutgers already achieves the upside of what Uconn can mostly bring.  The incremental dollars were gained by Rutgers, there isn't much left for Uconn to deliver.  Does Uconn add a little value, sure....but at what cost and what dilution to the other schools?  If you only grow the pie a little bit, but everyone has to take another hit in the splits, that's a problem.  Rutgers adds New Jersey and New York for Big Ten Network dollars.  UConn's addition does not "re-add" New York, you get CT which is ok but pretty small in the grand scheme of things.

Could it happen, sure, but adding them is adding them for the sake of adding them as the incremental $$ are small.

So a school in New Brunswick gets you NYC but UConn can't get you New England or at least Providence and or Boston (along with the entire state of Connecticut). I'm also operating from a position that the B1G wants to challenge the ACC in the Northeast and you need another school farther north to do that with Cuse and BC in the ACC's house.

Look, they're going to 16. No one likes the 14 set up and its oddity with scheduling. So unless the Big 12 blows up (not unlikely), who are they going to be able to grab? I don't think Missouri's coming back after being embarrassed by the Big Ten.

[GGGG]

So a school in New Brunswick gets you NYC but UConn can't get you New England or at least Providence and or Boston (along with the entire state of Connecticut). I'm also operating from a position that the B1G wants to challenge the ACC in the Northeast and you need another school farther north to do that with Cuse and BC in the ACC's house.

Look, they're going to 16. No one likes the 14 set up and its oddity with scheduling. So unless the Big 12 blows up (not unlikely), who are they going to be able to grab? I don't think Missouri's coming back after being embarrassed by the Big Ten.

I think Missouri would still jump at B10 membership.  They are a poor fit in the SEC.   But I don't think this is happening unless they simply want to balance out with an east coast addition.

[Aughnanure]

I think Missouri would still jump at B10 membership.  They are a poor fit in the SEC.   But I don't think this is happening unless they simply want to balance out with an east coast addition.

Not according to many of their fans. There's a big divide between Missouri and Missuourah in the state. Hell, south of KC, St Louis and Columbia, Missouri is just Arkansas. Many of those fans, and oddly the ones closer to St. Louis were overjoyous with the SEC.

They could, definitely not an impossibility, but that state would be up in arms over this (and they've been pissed at Mizzou administration for years). I wouldnt want to be the AD/Prez when that happens.

[Hards Alumni]

Not according to many of their fans. There's a big divide between Missouri and Missuourah in the state. Hell, south of KC, St Louis and Columbia, Missouri is just Arkansas. Many of those fans, and oddly the ones closer to St. Louis were overjoyous with the SEC.

They could, definitely not an impossibility, but that state would be up in arms over this (and they've been pissed at Mizzou administration for years). I wouldnt want to be the AD/Prez when that happens.

Fans don't vote.  It makes more geographical sense to be in the B1G than the SEC.  It isn't about culture or ego.  Its about cash.  The B1G has the most, and when they knock, you answer the door.  If Mizzou gets an invite, IMO KU goes with.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Economists would call it "diminishing marginal returns."

Right, and at some point, adding another team won't really be "worth it". But, that tipping point probably hasn't been reached yet. (although, I don't know if UCONN is really a candidate).

We've seen in pro-sports leagues that the search for revenue is never-ending. NBA Jerseys with sleeves? C'mon. Sponsorships everywhere. Expansion franchises. New stadiums with more REV streams, etc.

The B10 Network isn't going to stop trying to make more money. The school Presidents can say whatever they want, but the Network is operating like a for-profit business, and they will attempt to maximize revenue generation.

If adding (insert school) will add significant revenue, then they will do it. That's it. We don't need to make it more complex than that.

If they thought Mars University would add a 1 billion in profit, they would buy Bo Ryan a space suit and send UW to play against little green men. 

$. $. $.

[Aughnanure]

Fans don't vote.  It makes more geographical sense to be in the B1G than the SEC.  It isn't about culture or ego.  Its about cash.  The B1G has the most, and when they knock, you answer the door.  If Mizzou gets an invite, IMO KU goes with.

Believe me. Missouri has bought into the SEC hard. There's a reason its the only conference without an exit fee or Grant of Rights.

[Spotcheck Billy]

the B10 will bring in whomever FOX tells them to

[ChicosBailBonds]

Right, and at some point, adding another team won't really be "worth it". But, that tipping point probably hasn't been reached yet. (although, I don't know if UCONN is really a candidate).

We've seen in pro-sports leagues that the search for revenue is never-ending. NBA Jerseys with sleeves? C'mon. Sponsorships everywhere. Expansion franchises. New stadiums with more REV streams, etc.

The B10 Network isn't going to stop trying to make more money. The school Presidents can say whatever they want, but the Network is operating like a for-profit business, and they will attempt to maximize revenue generation.

If adding (insert school) will add significant revenue, then they will do it. That's it. We don't need to make it more complex than that.

If they thought Mars University would add a 1 billion in profit, they would buy Bo Ryan a space suit and send UW to play against little green men. 

$. $. $.

No one is discounting money or possible expansion.  The question is whether UConn is the one and what do they add, especially in $$$.  Not much.  If BTN was solely calling the shots (I know you aren't saying that, but certainly you are giving them a big stick, too big in my view) then I can tell you right now what interests them in terms of expansion

Florida
Carolinas
Virginia
Missouri
Texas
Georgia

From those list of states, which schools are truly viable.  That's where you go hunting. 

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

No one is discounting money or possible expansion.  The question is whether UConn is the one and what do they add, especially in $$$.  Not much.  If BTN was solely calling the shots (I know you aren't saying that, but certainly you are giving them a big stick, too big in my view) then I can tell you right now what interests them in terms of expansion

Florida
Carolinas
Virginia
Missouri
Texas
Georgia

From those list of states, which schools are truly viable.  That's where you go hunting. 

I don't think anyone disagrees with you on your list at all, but as you've pointed out often they all have a GOR except Missouri & Georgia and would either really leave the SEC?  Isn't the SEC starting their own network so with new potential revenue growth there is no immediate incentive to leave.  They would need to see what happens down that road first before even considering the Big10? 

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't think anyone disagrees with you on your list at all, but as you've pointed out often they all have a GOR except Missouri & Georgia and would either really leave the SEC?  Isn't the SEC starting their own network so with new potential revenue growth there is no immediate incentive to leave.  They would need to see what happens down that road first before even considering the Big10? 

Yup

SEC network is run by ESPN and will launch in August.  That's why I am not convinced you expand just to expand.  The schools worth expanding with are unlikely to leave.  If they are, they are much better options than Ucon for example. 

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Sooooo, New Jersey= NYC (a big stretch), but UConn only = Connecticut? They're the biggest collegiate athletic brand in New England right now, so it cannot be 'peanuts'. Not to mention their proximity to NYC (it's called the Tri-State area and Rutgers certainly doesn't give it to you by yourself - no school does).

There's this weird, not supported in any factual way, bias against UConn because that's what we've been told to believe (I remember the same thing against Rutgers ever being added).



I'm doing a poor job of explaining it apparently.    Basically, Rutgers already achieves the upside of what Uconn can mostly bring.  The incremental dollars were gained by Rutgers, there isn't much left for Uconn to deliver.  Does Uconn add a little value, sure....but at what cost and what dilution to the other schools?  If you only grow the pie a little bit, but everyone has to take another hit in the splits, that's a problem.  Rutgers adds New Jersey and New York for Big Ten Network dollars.  UConn's addition does not "re-add" New York, you get CT which is ok but pretty small in the grand scheme of things.

Could it happen, sure, but adding them is adding them for the sake of adding them as the incremental $$ are small.

Chicos, I think the Aughnanure argument and mine is that Rutgers does not get you an increase in subscriber fees from New York (which the Big10 is banking on) with the reason being no one cares about Rutgers in New York.  They definitely get an increase from New Jersey subscribers which is significant in it's own right, but not New York.  UConn has a better chance at landing increased subscibers fee in New York than Rutgers.  And it may just take a Rutgers/UConn sandwich to get the BTN targeted subscriber fee out of New York.  On WFAN radio, there is rarely a caller on Rutgers anything unless they're bashing the Mike Rice situation or revolving door ADs, but UConn calls regularly come in even on football.

Unless the New York & New Jersey subscriber fee question falls under the exact same contract and the two states can't be divided in any deal between the Big10 & XYZ cable operator which may be what you're saying and we're missing?