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

[Hards Alumni]

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?

You'd be wrong.  Here in the Madison area, I get B1G without paying extra for it in a sports package.  This means I'm being charged for it.  I'm a subscriber without having to pay extra (or so it seems, of course that isn't true), so the B1G gets my money.  Sure this isn't the same for every location, but it isn't the opposite either.  I'm guessing that as popular the B1G is, they will lobby to be included on every package like ESPN. 

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I just switched to Uverse in March and the BTN is included.  I previously had Optimum/Cablevision and in order to get the BTN you had to order a separate sports package that included stuff like the Tennis Network & out-of-market regional sports networks like MASN & FSN-area.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

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. 

Well, I don't think UCONN is going to get added right now.

BUT, yes, I think the Big10 would continue to target schools that they think could bring in significant revenue. That's it.

#1 It used to be about a school's profile and location. Tradition!!!

#2 Then it became about a school's profile and ability to make $. (Rutgers, Neb., Maryland, etc.)

#3 Soon enough, it's really just going to be about the $. Location doesn't mean anything. "profile" will be overlooked if the school adds significant revenue to the conference.

Business' evolve. They grow. They look for new markets. It's the only way to stay profitable.

Here is a wild idea:
B10 grabs a handful of ACC/SEC schools and creates a "new" B10 East (some combo of 12 eastern teams).

Then the B10 grabs all 12 schools from the Pac12, and calls it B10 West.

36 teams total in a new super conference.

Now they have enough content to open another channel or 2. In the fall, they would have football games starting at 11am, and going until midnight every Saturday.

In the winter, they would have live sports from 6pm-12am every night of the week. (6pm, 8pm, 10pm games)

Again, I'm not expecting this to happen, but if you look at what has happened in the past 10 years, I don't think anything is off of the table. This is BIG business. LOTS of money on the line.

Live content is king right now. If the B10 can maximize their content, and leverage their efficiency, they are going to push and grow, and make a LOT of money.

In all honestly, it's better than any professional sports league could ever be. The fan loyalty is already built in. The players play for "free", and you have year round content and variety. It's could be the most successful sports network ever created.

[keefe]

UConn will be knocking on that door and ringing the doorbell all night.  They may have to play the "Fairfield County" Connecticut is in the New York City television market card.

With all due respect, Nutmeg, if/when the B1G expands it's looking to take a couple crown jewels from the ACC. Fact is, the Big Ten is the preeminent conference and they compel rather than merely inquire. Any school that says no to the B1G values tradition and rivalry more than dollars.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

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?

Others may be able to explain it better than I can but I remember something about the YES network. Somehow they and the B1G network were linked and by adding Rutgers and Maryland, they were now able to force their way onto every cable and dish receiver in the NYC and DC metro areas. It doesn't matter that no one cares about Rutgers, every New York will still get charged for BTN.

That is NOT true of UConn and Boston, IIRC.

[Lennys Tap]

With all due respect, Nutmeg, if/when the B1G expands it's looking to take a couple crown jewels from the ACC. Fact is, the Big Ten is the preeminent conference and they compel rather than merely inquire. Any school that says no to the B1G values tradition and rivalry more than dollars.

Texas and Notre Dame weren't compelled.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Mizzou would be the only school to maybe defect from the SEC. The SEC network (launching in the fall) will rival the BTN for the amount of $$$ it rakes in. There will no longer be a monetary incentive to join the B1G. Mizzou might just because they could get the same amount of money plus restore traditional rivalries with Nebraska and Illinois. But I doubt it. I think the SEC Network has more potential to grow than the BTN. SEC will eventually make more than the B1G I believe.

Conference expansion will slow for now. There simply aren't quality schools that are available for poaching:

B1G/SEC: Too powerful to poach from
ACC: Grant of Rights until 2027
PAC 12: Geographically Insulated
Big 12: Grant of Rights until 2025
BEast: No football.

If you are going to poach, it has to be from the AAC, CUSA, MWC, etc. And there simply aren't that many quality programs left in those conferences. As was said before, expanding just to expand doesn't work. The added slices of pie aren't worth the extra mouths to feed.

If conferences do expand, it won't be the B1G. It will be a school who doesn't put as much value on AAU status. Because if AAU does matter, here is the list B1G gets to choose from:

University of Arizona (too far)
Buffalo
UC Berkeley (too far)
UCLA (too far)
Colorado (a stretch...but maybe possible)
Florida (won't leave the SEC)
Georgia Tech (GoR)
Iowa State(GoR/terrible media market)
Kansas (GoR)
Missouri (Maybe, but probably won't leave SEC)
North Carolina (GoR)
Oregon (too far)
Pittsburgh (GoR)
Texas (GoR)
Texas A&M (won't leave SEC)
Virginia (GoR)
Washington (too far)
Duke (GoR)
Rice
USC (too far)
Stanford (too far)
Tulane
Vanderbilt (won't leave SEC)

So to expand the B1G must either:
1. Drop the AAU requirement
2. Find a way to break Grant of Rights
3. Poach from an almost equally powerful SEC
4. Not care about geography...at all
5. Expand with a pair out of: Buffalo, Colorado, Missouri, Rice, or Tulane. All of which are either a stretch or suck at football.

Personally, I think the sit tight at 14 for now.

[mu03eng]

Well, I don't think UCONN is going to get added right now.

BUT, yes, I think the Big10 would continue to target schools that they think could bring in significant revenue. That's it.

#1 It used to be about a school's profile and location. Tradition!!!

#2 Then it became about a school's profile and ability to make $. (Rutgers, Neb., Maryland, etc.)

#3 Soon enough, it's really just going to be about the $. Location doesn't mean anything. "profile" will be overlooked if the school adds significant revenue to the conference.

Business' evolve. They grow. They look for new markets. It's the only way to stay profitable.

Here is a wild idea:
B10 grabs a handful of ACC/SEC schools and creates a "new" B10 East (some combo of 12 eastern teams).

Then the B10 grabs all 12 schools from the Pac12, and calls it B10 West.

36 teams total in a new super conference.

Now they have enough content to open another channel or 2. In the fall, they would have football games starting at 11am, and going until midnight every Saturday.

In the winter, they would have live sports from 6pm-12am every night of the week. (6pm, 8pm, 10pm games)

Again, I'm not expecting this to happen, but if you look at what has happened in the past 10 years, I don't think anything is off of the table. This is BIG business. LOTS of money on the line.

Live content is king right now. If the B10 can maximize their content, and leverage their efficiency, they are going to push and grow, and make a LOT of money.

In all honestly, it's better than any professional sports league could ever be. The fan loyalty is already built in. The players play for "free", and you have year round content and variety. It's could be the most successful sports network ever created.

One thing to keep in mind....the B10 will not add unless the school appears on this list https://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5476.

Nebraska and Minnesota are the only two that don't....Minnesota is grandfathered and Nebraska's admittance is predicated on application for AAU status.  I have it on good authority that Nebraska's lack of AAU status nearly scuttled the whole thing.

[mu03eng]

Mizzou would be the only school to maybe defect from the SEC. The SEC network (launching in the fall) will rival the BTN for the amount of $$$ it rakes in. There will no longer be a monetary incentive to join the B1G. Mizzou might just because they could get the same amount of money plus restore traditional rivalries with Nebraska and Illinois. But I doubt it. I think the SEC Network has more potential to grow than the BTN. SEC will eventually make more than the B1G I believe.

Conference expansion will slow for now. There simply aren't quality schools that are available for poaching:

B1G/SEC: Too powerful to poach from
ACC: Grant of Rights until 2027
PAC 12: Geographically Insulated
Big 12: Grant of Rights until 2025
BEast: No football.

If you are going to poach, it has to be from the AAC, CUSA, MWC, etc. And there simply aren't that many quality programs left in those conferences. As was said before, expanding just to expand doesn't work. The added slices of pie aren't worth the extra mouths to feed.

If conferences do expand, it won't be the B1G. It will be a school who doesn't put as much value on AAU status. Because if AAU does matter, here is the list B1G gets to choose from:

University of Arizona (too far)
Buffalo
UC Berkeley (too far)
UCLA (too far)
Colorado (a stretch...but maybe possible)
Florida (won't leave the SEC)
Georgia Tech (GoR)
Iowa State(GoR/terrible media market)
Kansas (GoR)
Missouri (Maybe, but probably won't leave SEC)
North Carolina (GoR)
Oregon (too far)
Pittsburgh (GoR)
Texas (GoR)
Texas A&M (won't leave SEC)
Virginia (GoR)
Washington (too far)
Duke (GoR)
Rice
USC (too far)
Stanford (too far)
Tulane
Vanderbilt (won't leave SEC)

So to expand the B1G must either:
1. Drop the AAU requirement
2. Find a way to break Grant of Rights
3. Poach from an almost equally powerful SEC
4. Not care about geography...at all
5. Expand with a pair out of: Buffalo, Colorado, Missouri, Rice, or Tulane. All of which are either a stretch or suck at football.

Personally, I think the sit tight at 14 for now.

I agree with everything you wrote, but I do wonder if the Grant of Rights won't be broken from the inside.  I think SEC and B1G are the dominate players and even with a good ACC they'll be sitting 3rd in the pecking order.  There are going to some schools that will eventually hate the deal in the ACC when they compare to B1G and SEC

[mu03eng]

NM

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Others may be able to explain it better than I can but I remember something about the YES network. Somehow they and the B1G network were linked and by adding Rutgers and Maryland, they were now able to force their way onto every cable and dish receiver in the NYC and DC metro areas. It doesn't matter that no one cares about Rutgers, every New York will still get charged for BTN.

That is NOT true of UConn and Boston, IIRC.

In January FOX increased its stake to 80% ownership of YES, up from the 49% interest it bought in December 2012.  Is that the link between the two with FOX being a partner with the BTN?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

One thing to keep in mind....the B10 will not add unless the school appears on this list https://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5476.

Nebraska and Minnesota are the only two that don't....Minnesota is grandfathered and Nebraska's admittance is predicated on application for AAU status.  I have it on good authority that Nebraska's lack of AAU status nearly scuttled the whole thing.

Ya, I just don't believe that. I mean, I know they SAY that, but I don't think that rule will hold forever.

10 years ago, they never would have added Maryland or Rutgers, and look where we are now?

If/when the money is good enough, the B10 will take a non-aau school.

It's just a matter of time and $.

[Aughnanure]

One thing to keep in mind....the B10 will not add unless the school appears on this list https://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5476.

Nebraska and Minnesota are the only two that don't....Minnesota is grandfathered and Nebraska's admittance is predicated on application for AAU status.  I have it on good authority that Nebraska's lack of AAU status nearly scuttled the whole thing.

[/b]

Which is dumb.

[ChicosBailBonds]

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?

It absolutely does in many instances because Big Ten Network is part of a base package, not a sports tier.  So the rate a MSO has to pay for that exact same subscriber in the exact same programming package goes up a lot because now New York is part of the core territory and no longer considered out of territory at the lower rate.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I just switched to Uverse in March and the BTN is included.  I previously had Optimum/Cablevision and in order to get the BTN you had to order a separate sports package that included stuff like the Tennis Network & out-of-market regional sports networks like MASN & FSN-area.

Different deals out there, but typically if you live in a Big Ten market or territory, the network has to be in a base package and the rate is high.  Outside the Big Ten market areas, some providers can distribute in a sports pack as long as the BTN is still getting their $$$.  That's a way for a MSO not to overdistribute, but it usually costs them more on a per sub basis because the programmer is missing out on the ad revenue so they'll demand to be made whole.

[ChicosBailBonds]

One thing to keep in mind....the B10 will not add unless the school appears on this list https://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5476.

Nebraska and Minnesota are the only two that don't....Minnesota is grandfathered and Nebraska's admittance is predicated on application for AAU status.  I have it on good authority that Nebraska's lack of AAU status nearly scuttled the whole thing.

Minnesota is an AAU member.  Only Nebraska isn't, and they were when the accepted the invitation.  They were kicked out.  Two of schools that voted them out were Wisconsin and Michigan.

[ChicosBailBonds]

[/b]

Which is dumb.

In your opinion, but the presidents of the Big Ten may not agree.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-06-13/sports/ct-spt-0614-aau-big-ten-expansion--20100613_1_aau-nebraska-chancellor-harvey-perlman-big-ten-members

[ChicosBailBonds]

Others may be able to explain it better than I can but I remember something about the YES network. Somehow they and the B1G network were linked and by adding Rutgers and Maryland, they were now able to force their way onto every cable and dish receiver in the NYC and DC metro areas. It doesn't matter that no one cares about Rutgers, every New York will still get charged for BTN.

That is NOT true of UConn and Boston, IIRC.

The leverage you are talking about is with FOX.  This is why big media companies buy a bunch of channels, because it provides them with great leverage.  Now they can go to NYC distributors when the YES contract is up and say if you want the Yankees, you must carry Big Ten Network, so on and so forth.  As an example, DISH doesn't carry YES, but they do carry Big Ten Network.  Fox can demand that in the next contract that DISH carries YES if they wish to keep Big Ten, or pay Fox handsomely for not carrying it (basically over pay for BTN).

Media companies drive the cost of  your television bill, and this is a big way that they do it.  They force distributors to carry channels they don't want to carry and in turn, they have to pass the cost down to customers. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Like I said....


The Big Ten is "one big step closer to putting its flag in the New York/New Jersey television market," as the conference's cable network has "reached deals with Time Warner Cable and Cablevision to broadly distribute its channel to the millions of homes in the market," according to Steve Politi of the Newark STAR-LEDGER. Terms of the deal were not disclosed. Big Ten Network President Mark Silverman yesterday said that he is "optimistic that a deal will be reached with the third cable giant -- Comcast -- before the football season." Rutgers' first two Big Ten games -- its opener against Penn State and then against Michigan -- are "slated for primetime" on BTN. The net already is "available on FiOS and DirecTV" (NJ.com, 5/19). Politi writes this "might be the best news Rutgers has gotten in a while." Gone would be the "threat of a protracted dispute, which many TV experts believed to be inevitable, over cable fees that would have dampened the excitement over the Big Ten introduction and kept thousands of fans from being able to watch at home." Silverman would "not discuss the terms of the agreements with Time Warner or Cablevision, except to say that they would likely go into effect in late August." But yesterday he "made it clear that Rutgers and fellow newcomer Maryland would have an increased presence on the network during their inaugural season." Silverman: "It's our number one priority this year to integrate Rutgers and Maryland into the Big Ten Network and make high-quality programming for both schools" (Newark STAR-LEDGER, 5/20).

[Litehouse]

It would be interesting to know what the rates are.  The BTN might be willing to take a slightly lower rate in the NYC market than in some of the other traditional Big 10 markets in order to gain exposure, and avoid a public fight with the providers.

[ChicosBailBonds]

It would be interesting to know what the rates are.  The BTN might be willing to take a slightly lower rate in the NYC market than in some of the other traditional Big 10 markets in order to gain exposure, and avoid a public fight with the providers.

It's been a long long long time since I've seen rates go down or lower in this industry.  For sports, I haven't seen it in 10+ years.

[Texas Western]

Like I said....


The Big Ten is "one big step closer to putting its flag in the New York/New Jersey television market," as the conference's cable network has "reached deals with Time Warner Cable and Cablevision to broadly distribute its channel to the millions of homes in the market," according to Steve Politi of the Newark STAR-LEDGER. Terms of the deal were not disclosed. Big Ten Network President Mark Silverman yesterday said that he is "optimistic that a deal will be reached with the third cable giant -- Comcast -- before the football season." Rutgers' first two Big Ten games -- its opener against Penn State and then against Michigan -- are "slated for primetime" on BTN. The net already is "available on FiOS and DirecTV" (NJ.com, 5/19). Politi writes this "might be the best news Rutgers has gotten in a while." Gone would be the "threat of a protracted dispute, which many TV experts believed to be inevitable, over cable fees that would have dampened the excitement over the Big Ten introduction and kept thousands of fans from being able to watch at home." Silverman would "not discuss the terms of the agreements with Time Warner or Cablevision, except to say that they would likely go into effect in late August." But yesterday he "made it clear that Rutgers and fellow newcomer Maryland would have an increased presence on the network during their inaugural season." Silverman: "It's our number one priority this year to integrate Rutgers and Maryland into the Big Ten Network and make high-quality programming for both schools" (Newark STAR-LEDGER, 5/20).

The Big Ten did not really need to bring in Rutgers and Maryland to gain access  to the New York Metropolitan market. Gaining access is nothing more than a matter of price. There is an enormous embedded alumni base from the existing schools in the region. In fact having an increased presence of Rutgers and Maryland on the BTN network dilutes the overall quality of the product. Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State Nebraska  Michigan State and Wisconsin are the schools that matter. The rest is filler.

[keefe]

Mizzou would be the only school to maybe defect from the SEC. The SEC network (launching in the fall) will rival the BTN for the amount of $$$ it rakes in. There will no longer be a monetary incentive to join the B1G. Mizzou might just because they could get the same amount of money plus restore traditional rivalries with Nebraska and Illinois. But I doubt it. I think the SEC Network has more potential to grow than the BTN. SEC will eventually make more than the B1G I believe.

Conference expansion will slow for now. There simply aren't quality schools that are available for poaching:

B1G/SEC: Too powerful to poach from
ACC: Grant of Rights until 2027
PAC 12: Geographically Insulated
Big 12: Grant of Rights until 2025
BEast: No football.

If you are going to poach, it has to be from the AAC, CUSA, MWC, etc. And there simply aren't that many quality programs left in those conferences. As was said before, expanding just to expand doesn't work. The added slices of pie aren't worth the extra mouths to feed.

If conferences do expand, it won't be the B1G. It will be a school who doesn't put as much value on AAU status. Because if AAU does matter, here is the list B1G gets to choose from:

University of Arizona (too far)
Buffalo
UC Berkeley (too far)
UCLA (too far)
Colorado (a stretch...but maybe possible)
Florida (won't leave the SEC)
Georgia Tech (GoR)
Iowa State(GoR/terrible media market)
Kansas (GoR)
Missouri (Maybe, but probably won't leave SEC)
North Carolina (GoR)
Oregon (too far)
Pittsburgh (GoR)
Texas (GoR)
Texas A&M (won't leave SEC)
Virginia (GoR)
Washington (too far)
Duke (GoR)
Rice
USC (too far)
Stanford (too far)
Tulane
Vanderbilt (won't leave SEC)

So to expand the B1G must either:
1. Drop the AAU requirement
2. Find a way to break Grant of Rights
3. Poach from an almost equally powerful SEC
4. Not care about geography...at all
5. Expand with a pair out of: Buffalo, Colorado, Missouri, Rice, or Tulane. All of which are either a stretch or suck at football.

Personally, I think the sit tight at 14 for now.

I think Mizzou would give their left nut to join the B1G. They would be gone faster than you could say SE What.

[Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup]

I think Mizzou would give their left nut to join the B1G. They would be gone faster than you could say SE What.

Trouble there is that the Big Ten adding Missouri doesn't exactly give you a lot. St. Louis already offers BTN due to its proximity to Illinois and Illini alumni in STL. The only "major" market you'd pick up by adding Mizzou is Kansas City, whose population you have to split three ways with KU and K-State fans.

Not to mention you're saddled with freaking Mizzou, who outside of Illinois, might be the most overrated athletic program in the entire country.

Mizzou football is a four-time Conference championship game loser, and hasn't won an outright conference championship on the field since winning the Big Eight in 1945, and hasn't won a conference title of any kind since 1969.

Mizzou Men's Basketball hasn't won a regular season conference title in 20 years, and has only been to the second weekend of the NCAA Tournament twice in the last 20 years.

But I will testify from personal experience, their fans have just as delusionally high an opinion of themselves as Badger fans. Living in St. Louis during the Chase Daniel era was the fucking worst.

Rutgers at least in theory gave you a foothold in New York. Missouri, at best, gives you a Rutgers-like record of success, and one-third of Kansas City.

[ChicosBailBonds]

The Big Ten did not really need to bring in Rutgers and Maryland to gain access  to the New York Metropolitan market. Gaining access is nothing more than a matter of price. There is an enormous embedded alumni base from the existing schools in the region. In fact having an increased presence of Rutgers and Maryland on the BTN network dilutes the overall quality of the product. Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State Nebraska  Michigan State and Wisconsin are the schools that matter. The rest is filler.

I think you are completely misunderstanding how the BTN works and the MFNs that in place.

Quite frankly, yes, they did need to bring them in to get access to New York, etc....AT THE RATES THEY WANTED.  That's the key, and a HUGE one at that.