Reply to College Football--Big Ten Expansion

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "College Football--Big Ten Expansion"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: 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]I think UNC is the school that is the most coveted by both the SEC and BIG10.

As an ACC fan I hope they make a play to bring in Notre Dame (as full time member) and two of its traditional rivals (Stanford and Navy) at the same time as a package deal.

Fingers crossed.

[/quote]

Not sure whether the above quoted post was intended as a joke.

UNC is definitely NOT coveted by either the SEC or the Big Ten.

Stanford would never join the ACC as the constant cross country travel would exhaust their athletes.[/quote]

I predict the BIG10 will add Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal.  Under an agreement with the UC Board of Regents, UCLA will be obligated to pay Cal millions each year to offset the harm caused by the diminished value of the existing tv deal with the Pac12.  Bringing in these 4 west coast schools will allow USC and UCLA for better travel for their athletes.  As for Stanford joining the ACC, that makes no sense since the ACC is on the ropes as well.  Should Stanford join the BIG10 it will have to travel to the east coast for games against Rutgers and Maryland.  [/quote]

The problem with these (or any) additions is that, under the B1G’s equal revenue sharing model, the existing teams *lose* money with the additions. Any marginal increase in tv money is more than offset by dividing the pie by x additional members. ND is the only real exception that would be viewed as ultimately worth it.

When Rutgers, Maryland, and Nebraska joined they had to wait 6 years to get their full shares, so maybe something similar happens here, even though USC/UCLA got full shares right away.[/quote]

+1 Aside from ND, no team adds enough revenue for either Big 10 or SEC to expand. Therefore expansion is probably over. [/quote]

The world of big time college football has changed. Streaming revenue & CFP revenue are the primary focus of the SEC & of the Big Ten.

Expansion has just begun. Over the next two years there will be at least a dozen D-1 football schools switching conferences.[/quote]

I don’t get the several references in this thread to everything being about streaming now. The conferences are still trying to avoid streaming and want traditional over-the-air networks.   The Big Ten just signed the most lucrative media deal in the history of CFB and it is primarily Fox, CBS and NBC.  There are a handful of games on Peacock.   The BigTen reported turned down more $ from Amazon in favor of NBC for better exposure.  The PAC 12/10 is desperately trying to avoid more than half of their games on a streamer.   No way the SEC wants to be on ESPN+ over ABC.   The highest viewed games are on the traditional networks.  Even ESPN doesn’t draw the viewers on ABC.

This more than just money, it is marketing for the schools.  They will take slightly less money for more viewers.  Maybe in 10 years they will do a subscription model through a streamer, but we are nowhere near that point.[/quote]

Well said.[/quote]

Disagree.

The Big Ten Conference is very interested in streaming numbers and revenue from streaming It is a current and future growing source of revenue.

Do Big Ten Conference schools really need to market themselves ?[/quote]

Then why did they just sign a 6-year contract with Fox, CBS and NBC with almost no streaming?

Are you seriously asking why universities need to market themselves?[/quote]

Cord-cutting is real and these schools with the exception of Notre Dame will more or less do what tv execs tell them to do.  With that said, we will see how long Notre Dame holds out.  If NBC Sports does not provide the money they are hoping for they will be joining another conference sooner than alter.  [/quote]

+1 live streaming is increasing on platforms like YouTube too. [/quote]

It’s emerging, but doesn’t have near the revenue generation of OTA broadcasting.

It will be important to introduce to the next generation of fans who will come to see it as normal, and it can eventually be like ESPN.

But it’s not there yet.
[/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