Expansion => B10 TV Revenues Could Double by 2015-2016

Submitted by psychomatt on

Another unnecessary article on expansion (Tribune / Teddy Greenstein), except one item I have not seen before:

"If the Big Ten expands and chooses the right schools, conference officials have seen estimates of television revenues doubling by 2015-16."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-100514-big-ten-expansi…

This would put TV revenues in the $32-$34 million range.  Add in bowl revenue and basketball tourney revenue and total would be close to $40 million ... PER SCHOOL!!!

dakotapalm

May 13th, 2010 at 11:32 PM ^

He mentions something else that I had not considered: if the Big Ten expands, leaving the Big East emaciated at best, ESPN/ABC will be wanting to fill the slots in which the Big East games (at least the football ones) would have aired, giving more opportunity for the Big Ten games to gain viewerships.

MI Expat NY

May 14th, 2010 at 1:19 PM ^

Does the Big East really have any ESPN/ABC timeslots on Saturday?  Other than the occasional hosting of Notre Dame and periodic regional coverage, I think their ESPN/ABC time slots tend to be Thursday and Friday nights.  Think any of the Big 10 schools want to go for that?

Basketball, on the other hand, would present a lot more prime time slots.

psychomatt

May 13th, 2010 at 11:49 PM ^

The best result (assuming we cannot get Texas, which we probably cannot), would be 3 high quality teams that would pull high ratings.  ESPN would want Nebraska v. Michigan/PSU/OSU/ND a lot more than Rutgers/Syracuse v. Michigan/PSU/OSU/ND. And then we could stay at 14 teams instead of 16.

And, f%ck geography -- I bet adding ND and Nebraska would do more to get BTN on basic cable in NY/NJ/Philly than adding Rutgers and Syracuse.

M2NASA

May 14th, 2010 at 9:17 AM ^

Syracuse and Rutgers are a couple.  You can't take one without the other and block off the New York market.

UConn is a non-starter, Mary Sue laid this out yesterday.

If the Big Ten takes only one of those two, the ACC takes the remaining Syracuse or Rutgers and UConn, and with BC, asserts itself as a northeastern conference.

The Big Ten isn't going to let this happen.

MI Expat NY

May 14th, 2010 at 1:16 PM ^

Who cares about asserting yourself as a northeastern conference?  It hasn't done anything for the Big East as a football conference, why should it help either the Big 10 or the ACC? 

It's no longer the first half of the 20th Century.  The northeast care's about pro football, not the college game. 

M2NASA

May 14th, 2010 at 1:39 PM ^

1)  Basketball means much more than most people are giving credence to.  SU basketball has been shown in surveys to have a larger fanbase and ratings in NYC than any college football team.  Additionally, it's more dates to fill during the week for the BTN from November to March.  Football is king, but this is about more than Saturdays when you can deliver 30 games/year.

2) It's not just about adding northeast teams, it's about providing access to alumni bases like Michigan's in New York.  Michigan-Rutgers will deliver the New Jersey market itself.  Michigan-Syracuse will deliver the Upstate NY market, and both combined will deliver NYC.

SU is a smaller private school.  No one gives a shit about Rutgers.  They're not Michigan, we know this.  But together, they deliver the market the Big Ten wants the most.

MI Expat NY

May 14th, 2010 at 3:46 PM ^

I understand that basketball is more important in NYC than football.  But, the point remains, if the northeast tv markets were so important, then the one conference that holds a monopoly over those markets wouldn't face such a huge threat.  They would be doing very well in their TV deal.  The fact that the Big East gets shit for TV revenue should demonstrate to everyone that the market isn't that great. 

Now, if taking ND and a couple Big East schools guarantees that BTN goes to basic cable in the whole tri-state area, it might still be worth it, but relying on specific matchups to "deliver" the NYC market is foolish.

M2NASA

May 14th, 2010 at 4:00 PM ^

From what I understand, and I don't have numbers, the Big East does very well for basketball and SU is the most televised team in the conference. Football is king, but the truth of the matter on that front is, no one in the city gives a shit about Rutgers anything. Look at the Times, Post, and Daily News' articles about the Big Ten expansion. Most to almost all are about Syracuse. And I understand we can't deliver the NY/ NJ market as a whole. You need both.

MI Expat NY

May 14th, 2010 at 4:13 PM ^

Your bias makes this conversation pretty pointless, but here goes one last shot.  The Big East does do very well for basketball, but that's a relative comparison.  The Big East does not do well in basksetball compared to what every other BCS conference does in football, it's not even remotely close.  Basketball tv revenues will not make up the extra $20 mil per school of revenues necessary to make each current Big 10 team whole, even if you cherry picked the biggest basketball teams in the country.  Big football ratings are necessary to add revenue and I don't care who you pull out of the big east, it's not going to do it in the NYC market.

Sac Fly

May 13th, 2010 at 11:52 PM ^

... because i read an article saying that if mizzo leaves the big 12 they are under contract or something like that and would face a penalty if they left, which could be around an 80% revenue forfeit from the previous year, but big ten revenue that is this much won't stop them from leaving

MGoShoe

May 14th, 2010 at 8:25 AM ^

...random thoughts:

  • Increased BTN viewership = increased ad rates/revenue = fewer Rotel ads. Net gain or loss? Gain, but there will be Rotel nostalgia when they're gone.
  • Increaded viewership = increased applications for admission, especially from out-of-staters. This is huge in this era of declining state support for public higher education.
  • Increased revenue = shorter time before we get Crisler renovations and Super Wham-o-dyne hugemongous HD Big House scoreboards and sound system and maybe -- stadium expansion to end zone upper tier.
  • Increased revenue = increased likelihood that Men's LAX and an appropriate women's team are approved for Varsity status.

I am in favor of all these things.

restive neb

May 14th, 2010 at 7:02 AM ^

You stated that the TV revenue would go to the $32-$34 million range per school.  I don't think that's right.  According to Brian's recent explanation of Big Ten revenue, the $22 million per school was not confirmed, but would include all revenue, including bowl payouts.  If we assume the TV portion of revenue is $18 million per school, that equals nearly $200 million for the conference (18 x 11).  Doubling that gets us to $400 million total, but if the Big Ten has 5 new members, that revenue would be split between 16 teams, so each school would pull in $25 million.

tl,dr:  Doubling the conference revenue does not translate to double the revenue for each school, because the dough would have to be split between more schools.

bigmc6000

May 14th, 2010 at 8:19 AM ^

He wasn't saying it would double the revenue for each school as we each currently get 22 million 32-34 million isn't double.  If you look at 14 schools, double the income to 400 million and then take the bowl and other money (44 million if you're saying 18 million is BTN) and multiply by 14/11 you end up with 456 million divided by 14 teams = 32.5 million.

restive neb

May 14th, 2010 at 5:05 PM ^

but the way I read it, the OP was saying the TV revenue would go to $32-34 million, and total revenue could push $40 million.  You've gotten to his $32 million figure by adding in bowl revenues, and by assuming that the expansion is only to 14 teams.  From my perspective, claiming that schools would go from $18M TV / $22 million total to $34M TV / $40M total is nearly doubling, and the most likely path to such extreme growth is by the more aggressive expansion (16 teams vs. 14).

Hannibal.

May 14th, 2010 at 8:50 AM ^

If the BTN network revenues double, it certainly won't be because of expansion.  If you believe that making the conference 45% bigger (by adding five teams who currently generate significantly less revenue than the average Big Ten team) is going to make revenues 100% bigger, I've got a bridge to sell you.

M2NASA

May 14th, 2010 at 9:20 AM ^

The only way you can possibly rationalize this math is by taking the entire New York state/city/tri-state market.

There are three times as many TV sets in Upstate New York alone than there are in the entire state of Nebraska.

New York is the jewel, that's what this expansion is all about.