Anonymous wrote:Grrrrrr. All of this makes me so mad. NONE of these schools deserve to be in the Big 10. They are not Big 10. Only the original schools are Big 10. All the loser wannabes need to take their schtick and shove it. Just sayin'.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Big Ten wants other conferences to be healthy. Washington and Oregon to the big 12.

Only ND, Texas and one of Florida / Florida state fit the B1G profile and increase the payout. If they could get 3 then they might add Washington to balance the numbers of members and help scheduling. It will take some years to get there. Until then they need to integrate UCLA / USC and enjoy their 100 million per school while figuring out NIL.

I could see administrators pushing for Cal. Stanford and Washington to boost the academic stature of the Big Ten club into the stratosphere but it would cost athletic dollars.

Anonymous wrote:The Big Ten wants other conferences to be healthy. Washington and Oregon to the big 12.

Only ND, Texas and one of Florida / Florida state fit the B1G profile and increase the payout. If they could get 3 then they might add Washington to balance the numbers of members and help scheduling. It will take some years to get there. Until then they need to integrate UCLA / USC and enjoy their 100 million per school while figuring out NIL.

Anonymous wrote:The Big Ten wants other conferences to be healthy. Washington and Oregon to the big 12.

Only ND, Texas and one of Florida / Florida state fit the B1G profile and increase the payout. If they could get 3 then they might add Washington to balance the numbers of members and help scheduling. It will take some years to get there. Until then they need to integrate UCLA / USC and enjoy their 100 million per school while figuring out NIL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

PP you quoted- that makes sense. There is the precedent you cite, and even the lower amount will be more than the proposed PAC deal (which will obviously disintegrate). Even if comparable to the Big 12 deal, the full-share guarantee with the next B1G contract will be much, much more. Perhaps Amazon as an additional broadcast partner?

The Cal/Stanford ecstasy will be matched by the FSU/Clemson meltdown. That ACC GOR won’t be able to spend two nights in the same place.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

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.