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

[GGGG]

BTN can get on a basic cable lineup if they price it low enough.Having Rutgers and Maryland in theory gives new markets.  However lets look at reality. When Rutgers was in the Big East with a whole bunch of other local entities, they could barely get a bid. Basically I think what happened here is Rutgers and Maryland were very shrewd in making their case to the insular guys in Chicago who have become increasingly outflanked by the SEC, PAC 12 and Now ACC. I actually think it was more of a desperation move by the Big Ten than a well thought out thing. I am sure BTN is happy to have more content and maybe someday they will negotiate their way on to the more mainstream cable lineups. In the meantime the Big Ten  has taken what was already a declining product and made it worse. How does a late November game between Indiana and Maryland sound on the sex appeal meter.

I don't think you get what the B10 is doing here.  I have mentioned this before, but the B10's rights deal with ESPN is ending after 2016.  This is the last major conference deal that is expiring this decade.  The conference has methodically expanded into the most populous area of the country, one that has no major college sports presence and has been written off as only interested in pro sports.  The now have teams with presence in New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington DC.

There are estimates that their next deal is going to up their total television revenue per school in excess of $40M annually.  They could double every other conference's take per school, including the SEC's $23M.  They can't do this without expanding to the east.

Yeah the SEC is out-performing the B10 on the football field.  But the B10 has spme of the largest and richest universities located in two of the most populous parts of the country.  And they really have played this about as well as they conceivably could have.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Fox would surely like to get all their channels on the various systems but they don't. Take for example Fox Business. There is only so much room and there are constant debates about the pricing between content providers and distributors. In our market we frequently have disputes that keep the Yankees and other prime product off the market. I have been in business with Media companies my whole career and at the end of the day it is just a dollar ans sense thing.

BTN can get on a basic cable lineup if they price it low enough.Having Rutgers and Maryland in theory gives new markets.  However lets look at reality. When Rutgers was in the Big East with a whole bunch of other local entities, they could barely get a bid. Basically I think what happened here is Rutgers and Maryland were very shrewd in making their case to the insular guys in Chicago who have become increasingly outflanked by the SEC, PAC 12 and Now ACC. I actually think it was more of a desperation move by the Big Ten than a well thought out thing. I am sure BTN is happy to have more content and maybe someday they will negotiate their way on to the more mainstream cable lineups. In the meantime the Big Ten  has taken what was already a declining product and made it worse. How does a late November game between Indiana and Maryland sound on the sex appeal meter.

All that said I think they will add a 15th and 16th team It will come down to the academic athletic fit. The resolution of the Maryland litigation will be a big factor in which direction they go.

If you have been around this a long time, then you know about MFNs and you know they can't just lower the price to get on a distributor without it cascading down to every other deal.  This is exactly the reason why Pac 12 Network is not on DIRECTV and others, the same reason why CSN Houston isn't, etc.  So while dollars and cents always drives the bargain, it isn't that simple any more.  The ability to get an independent deal isn't there as the market is set early on by the first to grab it.  Then all others fall in line, or to get the others to fall in line they have to reset the original deal. 

I don't agree with your take that they have been outflanked, but that's just my personal bias.  You are right, that IU Maryland matchup isn't very sexy.  Then again, neither are a bunch of the SEC or ACC matchups that now exist either.  Or the Big 12.  That's just the nature of expansion.  At the end of the day, the Big Ten got New York, New Jersey and all that goes with it, the nation's capital and surrounding state territories.  Athletically, they didn't make the conference better.  Economically, they made it a lot better.  That's part of my point.  If the desire was to add better schools to make better matchups, other than that  IU vs Maryland example you gave...they could do that in a heartbeat.  They didn't, because they have other standards and they don't need to with the way the money works. 

And yes, if the Maryland case is ruled in such a way that gives schools the right to leave and somehow kills the current media rights provisions for the conferences, it changes things.  I would expect Big Ten to grab North Carolina and Virginia in that case.  Or UNC and someone else (not NC State or Duke).

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I don't think the Maryland litigation can kill the grant of rights. I think the ACC is locked down for now. But I could be wrong.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't think the Maryland litigation can kill the grant of rights. I think the ACC is locked down for now. But I could be wrong.

Many attorneys agree with you, but as you know in this country all it takes is the will of one jurist to say differently.

[DFW HOYA]

The B10 has about as  much interest in Connecticut as the Big East has in the University of Detroit. Not on the radar.

There are four schools on the B10 radar, with a mix of academic chops, athletic spending, and media markets. And it's in accident their efforts east are a frontal assault on the ACC.

In order:

1. North Carolina (Raleigh-Durham, Greeensboro, Charlotte)
2. Georgia Tech (Atlanta)
3. Virginia
4. Duke (only as a quid pro quo to secure UNC)

But don't count out the other side to this equation, the Pac 8/10/12.  The Pac is a trusted partner with the B10 in fotball and it does the B10 no good to see the Pac retreat while B10 hegemony rolls on. The preemptory move is two more for the Pac12, and that's Texas and Oklahoma, which sends the signal that no major conference is safe. Because in the end , it's not the big 5 conferences, it's really the big 3.

[GGGG]

It will be politically very difficult for North Carolina to leave NC State behind...for Oklahoma to leave Oklahoma State behind...and for Texas to leave Texas Tech behind.  A&M was able to do it because their alumni controlled the state government at the time.  But these types of moves are difficult when you have two state universities in the same conference.

[ChicosBailBonds]

The B10 has about as  much interest in Connecticut as the Big East has in the University of Detroit. Not on the radar.

There are four schools on the B10 radar, with a mix of academic chops, athletic spending, and media markets. And it's in accident their efforts east are a frontal assault on the ACC.

In order:

1. North Carolina (Raleigh-Durham, Greeensboro, Charlotte)
2. Georgia Tech (Atlanta)
3. Virginia
4. Duke (only as a quid pro quo to secure UNC)

But don't count out the other side to this equation, the Pac 8/10/12.  The Pac is a trusted partner with the B10 in fotball and it does the B10 no good to see the Pac retreat while B10 hegemony rolls on. The preemptory move is two more for the Pac12, and that's Texas and Oklahoma, which sends the signal that no major conference is safe. Because in the end , it's not the big 5 conferences, it's really the big 3.

Yup, at least on 3 of them....that's been the list I have been told about for some time.  KU is another. 

Notice anything about the 4 listed plus KU?

AAU
AAU
AAU
AAU
AAU

[Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup]

It will be politically very difficult for North Carolina to leave NC State behind...for Oklahoma to leave Oklahoma State behind...and for Texas to leave Texas Tech behind.  A&M was able to do it because their alumni controlled the state government at the time.  But these types of moves are difficult when you have two state universities in the same conference.

Texas gubernatorial candidates:
Wendy Davis (D): Tarrant County College/TCU
Greg Abbott (R): UT-Austin

Yes, current governor Rick Perry went to A&M, but the rest of the state government could hardly be said to be controlled by A&M alumni (unless you're referring to it more in a campaign finance perspective which is arguably a much different inquiry).  I looked up the roster of the 31 Texas state senators (seemed easier than the 150 state reps), and it listed the following alma maters. 7 of the 30 incumbents have some sort of UT connection, either through undergrad, or graduate school (one seat is open following a resignation, with a special election pending).


Texas Statehouse (current makeup)

State Senate alma maters:
UT-Austin
George Mason
Lamar
UT-Austin
Texas Woman's University
UMBC
Baylor
Baylor
Tarrant County College/TCU
Baylor
North Texas
Texas Southern (UT-Austin Law School)
Baylor
Houston
UT-Austin
LSU
Texas A&M
St. Mary's
UT-Pan American
UT-Austin
Lamar
UT-Arlington
Angelo State
Central State University (Dr. who did residency at UT Medical Center in Houston)
UT-Austin
UT-Pan American
Texas Tech
UT-Pan American
Oral Roberts
Dartmouth

Then again, this could all change...

Mayor Quimby: Demand? Who are you to demand anything? I run this town. You're just a bunch of low-income nobodies!
Quimby's Assistant: [sotto voce] Uh, election in November. Election in November.
Mayor Quimby: What!?!? Again!?!?!? This stupid country.

[GGGG]

What I was told is that the state legislature was not in session when A&M announced they were leaving, and governor and the heads of one of the two chambers of the assembly (those who had the power to call it back) were A&M alums.

[keefe]

What I was told is that the state legislature was not in session when A&M announced they were leaving, and governor and the heads of one of the two chambers of the assembly (those who had the power to call it back) were A&M alums.

Not sure how that translates into political top cover. If UNC or UVA want to move to the B1G they're going.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Not sure how that translates into political top cover. If UNC or UVA want to move to the B1G they're going.

If they can get past the grant of rights issue

[mu72warrior]

If Notre Dame could get over thinking they're hot crap, they would jump from their part time ACC partnership for the big 10, probably their last chance

[Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup]

What I was told is that the state legislature was not in session when A&M announced they were leaving, and governor and the heads of one of the two chambers of the assembly (those who had the power to call it back) were A&M alums.

You heard incorrectly.

The Speaker of the Texas House in 2011 was a Vanderbilt alum and has held that position since 2009.
The Lieutenant Governor (President of the Texas Senate) is an Arizona alumnus and has held that position since 2003.
The Presidents pro tempore of the Texas Senate at the time the decision was made were Texas Tech and Angelo State grads, respectively.

[GGGG]

You heard incorrectly.

The Speaker of the Texas House in 2011 was a Vanderbilt alum and has held that position since 2009.
The Lieutenant Governor (President of the Texas Senate) is an Arizona alumnus and has held that position since 2003.
The Presidents pro tempore of the Texas Senate at the time the decision was made were Texas Tech and Angelo State grads, respectively.

Well clearly I did hear wrong.  Thank you.

[keefe]

Angelo State grad

I have spent time in San Angelo, TX - home of USAF Intel and one of only a few AFBs without an operational runway. We had to land at the local commercial airport. San Angelo isn't the end of the earth but you sure as hell can smell it from there. What a god forsaken place.

[keefe]

If they can get past the grant of rights issue

What are you hearing on that?

[ChicosBailBonds]

What are you hearing on that?

I'm saying if UNC or UVa or Ga Tech, etc wanted to go to the Big Ten, they would have to get past the Grant of Rights they signed with the ACC.

Those are the rumored schools IF the Big Ten were to expand.  They meet all their criteria.  New markets, AAU membership, football, etc.  Doesn't mean these schools want to leave, but these 3 and KU were the 4 I have consistently heard of.  Duke has been thrown around, but distant on the list as the Big Ten isn't wild about taking on a private school.  They'll do it if is ND and of course they have NU, but not high on their list like some of the others.  This is all a big if.

[Texas Western]

I'm saying if UNC or UVa or Ga Tech, etc wanted to go to the Big Ten, they would have to get past the Grant of Rights they signed with the ACC.

Those are the rumored schools IF the Big Ten were to expand.  They meet all their criteria.  New markets, AAU membership, football, etc.  Doesn't mean these schools want to leave, but these 3 and KU were the 4 I have consistently heard of.  Duke has been thrown around, but distant on the list as the Big Ten isn't wild about taking on a private school.  They'll do it if is ND and of course they have NU, but not high on their list like some of the others.  This is all a big if.

I agree these are the 4 of interest to Big Ten. I have ACC ties and my general sense is that most ACC schools are happy with the conference. The only one who would like to jump ship at this point is FSU but they are waiting to see the resolution of Maryland before they even consider it.

[ecc5051]

Follow the money. It is that simple.
http://awfulannouncing.com/2014/big-ten-network-hits-the-nyc-jackpot-worth-tens-of-millions-of-dollars.html

[ChicosBailBonds]

Follow the money. It is that simple.
http://awfulannouncing.com/2014/big-ten-network-hits-the-nyc-jackpot-worth-tens-of-millions-of-dollars.html

You can follow the money AND still achieve their goals....which is what they've done.  Adding Rutgers does next to nothing for them from a competitive standpoint, but it expands their territory and that leads to subscribers

[keefe]

Follow the money. It is that simple.
http://awfulannouncing.com/2014/big-ten-network-hits-the-nyc-jackpot-worth-tens-of-millions-of-dollars.html
[/quote

What's interesting is that these initiatives by the BTN conform to the traditional modes of content and consumption. Unfortunately, technology, adoption rates, and consumption methods, patterns, and behaviors are changing drastically so that the traditional model may no longer be effective or optimal in the future.

[GGGG]

You are correct keefe, but how exactly should the BTN approach this?  I mean, there is a lot of money riding on this to guess wrong if the traditional model *may* no longer be effective.

The BTN itself was a break from the traditional model.

[Dawson Rental]

You can follow the money AND still achieve their goals....which is what they've done.  Adding Rutgers does next to nothing for them from a competitive standpoint, but it expands their territory and that leads to subscribers

Which expands their income which Delaney is betting expands their competitiveness.  Having games broadcast in the eastern markets should also help recruiting which should enhance competitiveness, as well. Utilizing the income advantage that the Big Ten will have over the SEC during the window between the new BTN deal and the next SEC deal is the Big Ten's best chance to close the competitive gap in football with the SEC.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Which expands their income which Delaney is betting expands their competitiveness.  Having games broadcast in the eastern markets should also help recruiting which should enhance competitiveness, as well. Utilizing the income advantage that the Big Ten will have over the SEC during the window between the new BTN deal and the next SEC deal is the Big Ten's best chance to close the competitive gap in football with the SEC.

Correct, though the key here is inside out thinking, not the other way around.  Too many people here target certain schools for expansion because they are "good in basketball"..see UCONN.  The reality is, the Big Ten has expanded with not the greatest athletic schools, taking AAU schools and in new territories.  The theory being that the Big Ten, new exposure, etc will lift those schools athletic prospects, not the other way around.  The money comes regardless of who they add because of the territorial expansion.

This is why I've said so many times that it isn't who, it's WHERE.  If Florida State wanted to join the Big Ten, I highly doubt the Big Ten would take them.  Yet, the Big Ten would take UNC, a school much further down the football pedigree.  Same for UVA or Georgia Tech.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You are correct keefe, but how exactly should the BTN approach this?  I mean, there is a lot of money riding on this to guess wrong if the traditional model *may* no longer be effective.

The BTN itself was a break from the traditional model.

What model are you guys defining as traditional?

The expansion model, the television model?