Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
College and University Discussion
Reply to "College Football--Big Ten Expansion"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This could spell trouble for the B1G https://www.si.com/fannation/college/cfb-hq/ncaa-football/college-football-expansion-big-ten-problems-money-schedule-report[/quote] A one-time obligation of $5 million per team (current 14 teams) should not pose a problem as the average payout to each team from the Big Ten Conference was $58.8 million last year & expected to rise substantially this year. Scheduling issues were to be expected under new TV/media rights contracts--especially so when expanding the number of member teams. Look for more teams to be added to the Big Ten next year in addition to USC & UCLA as the Pac-12 TV contract expires in 2025 and no new agreement has been reached.[/quote] If you read the source article that SI summarized (anyone remember when SI was a real news source), it seems like a bigger complication. Fox owns 61% of the Big10 network which owns the rights to big10 games. "In 2016, when the Big Ten announced its long-term television deal with Fox and ESPN, the announcement didn't include all the details. One of the things that didn't get disclosed at the time, nor as the new deal was being discussed in recent months, was that the Big Ten Network had acquired all of the league's programming rights back in 2016 through an undisclosed date. The length of that deal with the Big Ten Network from 2016 is carried at least through the current deal, which has been announced through the 2029-30 season. This relationship was known by athletic directors, television executives at rival networks and officials in other leagues, even if it wasn't announced publicly. It flashed out into the public at various times, including Sports Business Journal reporting in April 2022 that two Fox senior executives were in the room when various media companies -- ESPN, Amazon, NBC and others -- met with the league about their television packages. [b]What this also essentially meant was the latest round of Big Ten television deals were effectively sub-license arrangements, in which both the Big Ten Network and Fox essentially controlled the rights and worked with the Big Ten to sub-license them off. That meant a majority of the value of the deal had already been sold[/b]. "It was a joint negotiation with the conference and FOX working together and doing deals with these other networks," said an industry source. "They both needed each other to do the deals." That factor is key to understanding the issues Petitti faces. There are two new partners -- NBC and CBS -- attempting to work out their longform deals. There's a familiar partner, Fox, that's riding shotgun on this bumpy ride, including being upset Warren promised a title game Fox controlled without permission." https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/37693310/big-ten-new-commissioner-television-deal-coaches-uncertainty[/quote] Well stated, this is a much larger issue than some want to admit. [/quote] Please back-up your claim: Why is it a much larger issue than some want to admit ? I disagree with your assertion, but want to learn the basis of your position.[/quote] The commissioner included a game in the deal that he didn't have rights to. Fox owns the majority of the big 10 network which owns the big10 grant of rights. Most of the increased money is going to get siphoned off by Fox. NBC and CBS are paying a ton of money and they want marquee games and it seems like that might not happen unless Fox gets paid off which negates to point of bringing in NBC and CBS [/quote] Exactly correct. [/quote] Only the first two sentences of the quoted post are "exactly correct". The last two sentences are misleading at best.[/quote] Well then offer your rebuttal to that poster. [/quote] The division of money is stated in the contract. "unless Fox gets paid off" = there is a contract in place with specific details. NBC & CBS are big enough to protect their interests through contractual terms. The contract controls the relationships with the parties to the contract.[/quote] The contract that the previous commissioner didn't have fully approved. [/quote] Please stop trying to derail the thread with misinformation. [b]The contract has been fully approved by all parties to the contract. [/b][/quote] "Nearly three months before the season kicks off and those TV deals begin, the Big Ten does not have completed [b]longform[/b] contracts, which include the [b]fine print details[/b]." https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/37693310/big-ten-new-commissioner-television-deal-coaches-uncertainty[/quote] The contracts are signed. The longform just clarifies details remaining to be worked out.[/quote] "These deals aren't done, and they aren't what they were represented to be from the standpoint of the NBC deal and the availability of all members to participate in November games in primetime," said an industry source. Interviews with nearly a dozen sources in and around the Big Ten and the college sports industry paint a picture of Petitti sprinting to navigate details left unresolved from his predecessor. As a result, there's a trail of unhappy athletic directors seeing money disappearing from their bottom line, frustrated television executives and big-name coaches irked about the lack of transparency in details that weren't communicated to them. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/37693310/big-ten-new-commissioner-television-deal-coaches-uncertainty[/quote] Fair enough--now that I know the basis for your thought. The contracts are signed, the deal is done, but some details need to be worked out. Short of fraud, nothing is going to be changed. [/quote] That’s not what the article says. [/quote] The article is not the contract. All the article says in concrete terms is that some details need to be worked out. When details need to be worked out, bickering among parties is likely to occur. No party has alleged fraud and no party to the contract has expressed a desire to pull out of the agreement. And there is an agreement.[/quote] That’s not what the article says. [/quote] Again, a sports article is not the contract. You are just trying to derail this thread. If you have specific points that you would like to make,then do so, but a sports article seeking readers is not a contract and, certainly, is not the contract in this case.[/quote] Accusing others of derailing the thread when your premise is found to be invalid is not useful. [/quote] My premise is that there is a signed contract in force. Of course, there are details to be worked out, but my premise is correct.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
