College Football--Big Ten Expansion

[Anonymous]

https://azcentral.com/story/sports/college/asu/2023/08/02/it-looks-like-its-time-for-arizona-state-to-leave-pac-12-for-big-12/70517634007/

Time for ASU to join U Arizona in the Big 12 Conference.

[Anonymous]

https://theathletic.com/4744579/2023/08/02/college-football-realignment-sec/

A couple of interesting viewpoints. Asserts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia are the most coveted ACC schools--not FSU & Clemson.

Also notes that disgruntled ACC member FSU's football record is just 29 wins and 30 losses over the past 5 years.

[Anonymous]

The best scenario would be Florida State exiting the ACC and getting stuck in litigation over rights to broadcast its games. The Big10 wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole and ESPN isn't paying $60 million for something they already have rights to at $20 million. That would leave FSU as an independent unable to sell rights to broadcast home games. That could be a death blow for their athletic department

[Anonymous]

Litigation is highly unlikely unless 7 or 8 of the current 14 members of the ACC band together against ESPN/Disney.

FSU is making a lot of noise--especially for a team with a losing 5 year record of 29-30-- because the school recognizes that it will fall far behind almost all SEC & Big Ten Conference member schools due largely to the huge difference in conference payouts.

[Anonymous]

Concern about the ACC's Clemson University is that Coach Dabo Sweeney is the primary reason for Clemson's success and that once he retires Clemson will revert to a standard ACC football program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Litigation is highly unlikely unless 7 or 8 of the current 14 members of the ACC band together against ESPN/Disney.

FSU is making a lot of noise--especially for a team with a losing 5 year record of 29-30-- because the school recognizes that it will fall far behind almost all SEC & Big Ten Conference member schools due largely to the huge difference in conference payouts.

The FSU strategy has been to fume and then demand more money. It's gotten comical. If they could get out of the GoR, they would already be out. The rest of the ACC watched Texas bolt the Big 12 even with unequal revenue distribution. Giving FSU more money just ensures that FSU will be more attractive 12 years from now when the GoR expires. I'm sure FSU is terrified that by the time the GoR expires they will no longer be an attractive candidate for any league. They don't win now and haven't won for a long time. Another decade of mediocrity could drop them behind Florida (SEC) and UCF (Big12) in their own backyard, and that's assuming that USF doesn't find a bigger conference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very recent article--published about an hour ago--states that the Big Ten contract does not have an escalator clause in their media rights agreement in the event U Washington, U Oregon, Stanford, and/or UCal-Berkeley is added to the conference. (There is--according to reports--an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame however.) Without an escalator clause, the Big Ten's network partners will have significant input into any decision regarding the addition of new members to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big 12 Conference media rights contract does have an escalator clause so the Big 12 can, presumably, move faster than the Big Ten regarding expansion since their is one less hurdle to address.

If true that is very interesting. The whole subject is fascinating to me. That Oregon and Washington would substantially lower the payout per member is a pretty big deal.

I think that you may misunderstand. Any of the 4 Pac-12 teams invited to join the Big Ten Conference would receive a lower payout for about 6 years--until the current contract expires. The current Big Ten Conference member schools would receive full payouts or possibly more if U Washington & U Oregon join.

There is no step up in the big ten media deal for adding Washington or Oregon. All members will have to give up their money for whatever those two schools get paid. Why make less?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very recent article--published about an hour ago--states that the Big Ten contract does not have an escalator clause in their media rights agreement in the event U Washington, U Oregon, Stanford, and/or UCal-Berkeley is added to the conference. (There is--according to reports--an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame however.) Without an escalator clause, the Big Ten's network partners will have significant input into any decision regarding the addition of new members to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big 12 Conference media rights contract does have an escalator clause so the Big 12 can, presumably, move faster than the Big Ten regarding expansion since their is one less hurdle to address.

If true that is very interesting. The whole subject is fascinating to me. That Oregon and Washington would substantially lower the payout per member is a pretty big deal.

I think that you may misunderstand. Any of the 4 Pac-12 teams invited to join the Big Ten Conference would receive a lower payout for about 6 years--until the current contract expires. The current Big Ten Conference member schools would receive full payouts or possibly more if U Washington & U Oregon join.

There is no step up in the big ten media deal for adding Washington or Oregon. All members will have to give up their money for whatever those two schools get paid. Why make less?

Sure there will be additional TV/media money for adding highly popular U Oregon and adding solid Big Ten material U Washington.

The decision whether to add just these two schools or all 4 schools will be made jointly by the Big Ten member schools AND their media partners.

This fire sale is a great deal for the Big Ten Conference. The Pac-12 schools will receive a much lower payout for the remainder of the current TV/media contract (about 6 or 7 years) while the current full members--including USC & UCLA--will receive higher payouts than if Washington & Oregon remained in the Pac-12. The University of Oregon is a great catch for the Big Ten.

There is no issue regarding the addition of Washington & Oregon; the concern is about adding Stanford & UCal-Berkeley. Since adding Stanford & Cal can be done at a discount & because USC has no vote in the matter, now is the time to expand by 4 teams and lock-up the West Coast.

Stanford & Cal add academic prestige to the conference while Stanford also serves as additional bait to lure Notre Dame into the Big Ten Conference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very recent article--published about an hour ago--states that the Big Ten contract does not have an escalator clause in their media rights agreement in the event U Washington, U Oregon, Stanford, and/or UCal-Berkeley is added to the conference. (There is--according to reports--an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame however.) Without an escalator clause, the Big Ten's network partners will have significant input into any decision regarding the addition of new members to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big 12 Conference media rights contract does have an escalator clause so the Big 12 can, presumably, move faster than the Big Ten regarding expansion since their is one less hurdle to address.

If true that is very interesting. The whole subject is fascinating to me. That Oregon and Washington would substantially lower the payout per member is a pretty big deal.

I think that you may misunderstand. Any of the 4 Pac-12 teams invited to join the Big Ten Conference would receive a lower payout for about 6 years--until the current contract expires. The current Big Ten Conference member schools would receive full payouts or possibly more if U Washington & U Oregon join.

There is no step up in the big ten media deal for adding Washington or Oregon. All members will have to give up their money for whatever those two schools get paid. Why make less?

Sure there will be additional TV/media money for adding highly popular U Oregon and adding solid Big Ten material U Washington.

The decision whether to add just these two schools or all 4 schools will be made jointly by the Big Ten member schools AND their media partners.

This fire sale is a great deal for the Big Ten Conference. The Pac-12 schools will receive a much lower payout for the remainder of the current TV/media contract (about 6 or 7 years) while the current full members--including USC & UCLA--will receive higher payouts than if Washington & Oregon remained in the Pac-12. The University of Oregon is a great catch for the Big Ten.

There is no issue regarding the addition of Washington & Oregon; the concern is about adding Stanford & UCal-Berkeley. Since adding Stanford & Cal can be done at a discount & because USC has no vote in the matter, now is the time to expand by 4 teams and lock-up the West Coast.

Stanford & Cal add academic prestige to the conference while Stanford also serves as additional bait to lure Notre Dame into the Big Ten Conference.

The contracts are already signed- where is this additional tv money coming from?

[Anonymous]

The Big Ten Conference's current broadcast rights deal includes 4 media partners (Fox, NBC, CBS, and the Big Ten Network--BTN). The issue is that if all 4 Pac-12 universities (Washington, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford) are added will the Big Ten Conference need an additional media broadcast partner to handle the additional games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very recent article--published about an hour ago--states that the Big Ten contract does not have an escalator clause in their media rights agreement in the event U Washington, U Oregon, Stanford, and/or UCal-Berkeley is added to the conference. (There is--according to reports--an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame however.) Without an escalator clause, the Big Ten's network partners will have significant input into any decision regarding the addition of new members to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big 12 Conference media rights contract does have an escalator clause so the Big 12 can, presumably, move faster than the Big Ten regarding expansion since their is one less hurdle to address.

If true that is very interesting. The whole subject is fascinating to me. That Oregon and Washington would substantially lower the payout per member is a pretty big deal.

I think that you may misunderstand. Any of the 4 Pac-12 teams invited to join the Big Ten Conference would receive a lower payout for about 6 years--until the current contract expires. The current Big Ten Conference member schools would receive full payouts or possibly more if U Washington & U Oregon join.

There is no step up in the big ten media deal for adding Washington or Oregon. All members will have to give up their money for whatever those two schools get paid. Why make less?

Sure there will be additional TV/media money for adding highly popular U Oregon and adding solid Big Ten material U Washington.

The decision whether to add just these two schools or all 4 schools will be made jointly by the Big Ten member schools AND their media partners.

This fire sale is a great deal for the Big Ten Conference. The Pac-12 schools will receive a much lower payout for the remainder of the current TV/media contract (about 6 or 7 years) while the current full members--including USC & UCLA--will receive higher payouts than if Washington & Oregon remained in the Pac-12. The University of Oregon is a great catch for the Big Ten.

There is no issue regarding the addition of Washington & Oregon; the concern is about adding Stanford & UCal-Berkeley. Since adding Stanford & Cal can be done at a discount & because USC has no vote in the matter, now is the time to expand by 4 teams and lock-up the West Coast.

Stanford & Cal add academic prestige to the conference while Stanford also serves as additional bait to lure Notre Dame into the Big Ten Conference.

The contracts are already signed- where is this additional tv money coming from?

Contracts can be flexible when needed. The broadcast partners and the Big Ten Conference will just renegotiate the contract as necessary.

The Big 12 Conference has an escalator clause that increases the money if any new schools are added. My understanding is that the current Big Ten Conference contract only contained an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame. This is why the Big Ten Conference decision will include input from the media broadcast partners. Expansion won't happen unless all parties to the current contract agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very recent article--published about an hour ago--states that the Big Ten contract does not have an escalator clause in their media rights agreement in the event U Washington, U Oregon, Stanford, and/or UCal-Berkeley is added to the conference. (There is--according to reports--an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame however.) Without an escalator clause, the Big Ten's network partners will have significant input into any decision regarding the addition of new members to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big 12 Conference media rights contract does have an escalator clause so the Big 12 can, presumably, move faster than the Big Ten regarding expansion since their is one less hurdle to address.

If true that is very interesting. The whole subject is fascinating to me. That Oregon and Washington would substantially lower the payout per member is a pretty big deal.

I think that you may misunderstand. Any of the 4 Pac-12 teams invited to join the Big Ten Conference would receive a lower payout for about 6 years--until the current contract expires. The current Big Ten Conference member schools would receive full payouts or possibly more if U Washington & U Oregon join.

There is no step up in the big ten media deal for adding Washington or Oregon. All members will have to give up their money for whatever those two schools get paid. Why make less?

Sure there will be additional TV/media money for adding highly popular U Oregon and adding solid Big Ten material U Washington.

The decision whether to add just these two schools or all 4 schools will be made jointly by the Big Ten member schools AND their media partners.

This fire sale is a great deal for the Big Ten Conference. The Pac-12 schools will receive a much lower payout for the remainder of the current TV/media contract (about 6 or 7 years) while the current full members--including USC & UCLA--will receive higher payouts than if Washington & Oregon remained in the Pac-12. The University of Oregon is a great catch for the Big Ten.

There is no issue regarding the addition of Washington & Oregon; the concern is about adding Stanford & UCal-Berkeley. Since adding Stanford & Cal can be done at a discount & because USC has no vote in the matter, now is the time to expand by 4 teams and lock-up the West Coast.

Stanford & Cal add academic prestige to the conference while Stanford also serves as additional bait to lure Notre Dame into the Big Ten Conference.

The contracts are already signed- where is this additional tv money coming from?

Existing (16 schools with USC/UCLA) B1G schools will get ~60M/year.

Assuming an equal distribution (an assumption, to be sure), the existing media rights deal would have to be *increased* 240M/year for those B1G schools to not lose money.

I can’t fathom that Fox/CBS/NBC see an additional quarter billion per year for those teams as anything resembling a good deal.

Even if it’s an unequal distribution, it’s hard to make the math work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very recent article--published about an hour ago--states that the Big Ten contract does not have an escalator clause in their media rights agreement in the event U Washington, U Oregon, Stanford, and/or UCal-Berkeley is added to the conference. (There is--according to reports--an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame however.) Without an escalator clause, the Big Ten's network partners will have significant input into any decision regarding the addition of new members to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big 12 Conference media rights contract does have an escalator clause so the Big 12 can, presumably, move faster than the Big Ten regarding expansion since their is one less hurdle to address.

If true that is very interesting. The whole subject is fascinating to me. That Oregon and Washington would substantially lower the payout per member is a pretty big deal.

I think that you may misunderstand. Any of the 4 Pac-12 teams invited to join the Big Ten Conference would receive a lower payout for about 6 years--until the current contract expires. The current Big Ten Conference member schools would receive full payouts or possibly more if U Washington & U Oregon join.

There is no step up in the big ten media deal for adding Washington or Oregon. All members will have to give up their money for whatever those two schools get paid. Why make less?

Sure there will be additional TV/media money for adding highly popular U Oregon and adding solid Big Ten material U Washington.

The decision whether to add just these two schools or all 4 schools will be made jointly by the Big Ten member schools AND their media partners.

This fire sale is a great deal for the Big Ten Conference. The Pac-12 schools will receive a much lower payout for the remainder of the current TV/media contract (about 6 or 7 years) while the current full members--including USC & UCLA--will receive higher payouts than if Washington & Oregon remained in the Pac-12. The University of Oregon is a great catch for the Big Ten.

There is no issue regarding the addition of Washington & Oregon; the concern is about adding Stanford & UCal-Berkeley. Since adding Stanford & Cal can be done at a discount & because USC has no vote in the matter, now is the time to expand by 4 teams and lock-up the West Coast.

Stanford & Cal add academic prestige to the conference while Stanford also serves as additional bait to lure Notre Dame into the Big Ten Conference.

The contracts are already signed- where is this additional tv money coming from?

Existing (16 schools with USC/UCLA) B1G schools will get ~60M/year.

Assuming an equal distribution (an assumption, to be sure), the existing media rights deal would have to be *increased* 240M/year for those B1G schools to not lose money.

I can’t fathom that Fox/CBS/NBC see an additional quarter billion per year for those teams as anything resembling a good deal.

Even if it’s an unequal distribution, it’s hard to make the math work.

An incorrect assumption.

The new schools will get about $33-$36 million per year for the duration of the current contract. The current members will see a slight increase in their payout amounts (which is expected to be about $80 million when USC & UCLA come on board next year).

The Big Ten Conference had lower payouts for new members Penn State, Rutgers, and Maryland and, if I recall correctly, Nebraska. Phase in period was & will be about 6 years to full membership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A very recent article--published about an hour ago--states that the Big Ten contract does not have an escalator clause in their media rights agreement in the event U Washington, U Oregon, Stanford, and/or UCal-Berkeley is added to the conference. (There is--according to reports--an escalator clause for the addition of Notre Dame however.) Without an escalator clause, the Big Ten's network partners will have significant input into any decision regarding the addition of new members to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big 12 Conference media rights contract does have an escalator clause so the Big 12 can, presumably, move faster than the Big Ten regarding expansion since their is one less hurdle to address.

If true that is very interesting. The whole subject is fascinating to me. That Oregon and Washington would substantially lower the payout per member is a pretty big deal.

I think that you may misunderstand. Any of the 4 Pac-12 teams invited to join the Big Ten Conference would receive a lower payout for about 6 years--until the current contract expires. The current Big Ten Conference member schools would receive full payouts or possibly more if U Washington & U Oregon join.

There is no step up in the big ten media deal for adding Washington or Oregon. All members will have to give up their money for whatever those two schools get paid. Why make less?

Sure there will be additional TV/media money for adding highly popular U Oregon and adding solid Big Ten material U Washington.

The decision whether to add just these two schools or all 4 schools will be made jointly by the Big Ten member schools AND their media partners.

This fire sale is a great deal for the Big Ten Conference. The Pac-12 schools will receive a much lower payout for the remainder of the current TV/media contract (about 6 or 7 years) while the current full members--including USC & UCLA--will receive higher payouts than if Washington & Oregon remained in the Pac-12. The University of Oregon is a great catch for the Big Ten.

There is no issue regarding the addition of Washington & Oregon; the concern is about adding Stanford & UCal-Berkeley. Since adding Stanford & Cal can be done at a discount & because USC has no vote in the matter, now is the time to expand by 4 teams and lock-up the West Coast.

Stanford & Cal add academic prestige to the conference while Stanford also serves as additional bait to lure Notre Dame into the Big Ten Conference.

The contracts are already signed- where is this additional tv money coming from?

Existing (16 schools with USC/UCLA) B1G schools will get ~60M/year.

Assuming an equal distribution (an assumption, to be sure), the existing media rights deal would have to be *increased* 240M/year for those B1G schools to not lose money.

I can’t fathom that Fox/CBS/NBC see an additional quarter billion per year for those teams as anything resembling a good deal.

Even if it’s an unequal distribution, it’s hard to make the math work.

The deal only calls for a step up if Notre Dame joins. The media was cold to Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal.

[Anonymous]

Among currently available schools, only Notre Dame would receive a full share from the first year as a new Big Ten Conference member school.