Big 10 Conference revenues rise 33% in one year
- Thread starter rutgers womens fan
- Start date
Incredible. All before our new contract is fully negotiated. Get ready for blast off.
"The conference reported about $317 million in "Sports Revenue" in fiscal 2014 and almost $397 million in 2015 — an $80 million difference. Based on reports from other conferences that approximate their bowl revenue increases from the CFP, it is likely that $50 million to $60 million of the Big Ten's "Sports Revenue" increase is attributable to the TV rights fee increases that resulted from adding Maryland and Rutgers."
Ummm, yea. Rutgers and Maryland were incredible additions by Maestro Delany. It all just keeps getting better.
"The conference reported about $317 million in "Sports Revenue" in fiscal 2014 and almost $397 million in 2015 — an $80 million difference. Based on reports from other conferences that approximate their bowl revenue increases from the CFP, it is likely that $50 million to $60 million of the Big Ten's "Sports Revenue" increase is attributable to the TV rights fee increases that resulted from adding Maryland and Rutgers."
Ummm, yea. Rutgers and Maryland were incredible additions by Maestro Delany. It all just keeps getting better.
Boom! Anyone who still thinks that adding Maryland and Rutgers was a mistake really need to read that article and it will only get better.
It would really be nice if the conference gave the two schools a bonus. I have to think that this was not expected, at least so soon.
Hello Miami hello Syracuse hello Virginia Tech hello Boston College hello Pitt...... you left us for dead huh?
Last edited:
Agreed. It sucks that Rutgers share was only $10.4m due to the fact that it approximated what it was getting in the AAC. Nevertheless, it puts Rutgers at a significant competitive disadvantage when it comes to coaches salaries , expenses and capital expenditures.
I am really confused now. I thought Syracuse and UConn were New York's college football team - how does this happen?
And to the other Big 10 schools...
you're welcome.
And to the other Big 10 schools...
you're welcome.
Fiscal 2015 represents our initial year in the B1G, correct? Anyone know if and by how much our distribution will increase each year until we are fully vested? I sure hope it increases, since not doing so will actually increase our competitive disadvantage over the next 5-6 years.
Its actually a bit scary how much the other Big Ten schools are making. If they do not increase our revenue, they are going to bury us.
Think about why we sucked so bad in the Big East. Because we moved up, but kept our spending at mid-major levels. As a result, we were wildly uncompetitive, and put ourselves in a hole that took years to dig out. Now we are in the BIg Ten, and we are going to be completely unable to spend at the same level as our conference mates. Could be bad for us. 5 years is a long time in college athletics. They need to start bumping us up sooner so that the earn-in is a handicap, but not a complete impediment to success.
Think about why we sucked so bad in the Big East. Because we moved up, but kept our spending at mid-major levels. As a result, we were wildly uncompetitive, and put ourselves in a hole that took years to dig out. Now we are in the BIg Ten, and we are going to be completely unable to spend at the same level as our conference mates. Could be bad for us. 5 years is a long time in college athletics. They need to start bumping us up sooner so that the earn-in is a handicap, but not a complete impediment to success.
Temporary condition. Shortly we'll be getting more than Maryland for a little while.
Who cares? Our pay day is coming and it is going to be bigger than we hoped.
We are always just near the money. Remember Big East delayed deal to get to opem market... I would like to stop hearing about 2-5 years from now.
And only Big Jim had the intelligence and ability to monetize us correctly. Dude's playing chess while his peers are checkering. What a boon for us and the B1G this has been.
I'm just not sure how much of a negotiation took place. We needed out so desperately that I think we were taking whatever they offered in the early years as a payout.
Really, what negotiating? We were on a sinking ship. The Coasties pull up in a Motor Lifeboat and ask if we want to come aboard. Were were going to say "Mmm... don't know, think I'll hold out for a helicopter lift"?
Last edited:
I'd love the last or 2nd to last game of the year come between Rutgers/MD for B1G East title.
Bingo. None of the self-appointed gurus on conference expansion came up with anywhere near $50-$60 millions before the Tier 1 and 2 TV rights were even on the table for negotiation.
The financial figures made this a complete no-brainer.
In five years, Rutgers is going to be equal to every other member in the most powerful and lucrative conference in conference sports. You don't hesitate to collect when you hit the lottery.
I was not suggesting any negotiations took place. I was responding to another poster who suggested we should have negotiated a better payout.
That article should be read by every naysayer and they should issue an apology. Or least an admission that they don't know wtf they are talking about. Either one.
I understand, I was agreeing with you , sorry if it sounded like I was questioning you. We both don't get the "RU should have got a better deal" line of reasoning.
To further torture the nautical metaphor. Our ship is coming in, and it's the Queen Mary! Yes, for the next few years we'll have to settle for an interior cabin. But soon we get the full run of the place.
Or we could have stayed in the AAC...
Or waited to see if the ACC came calling?
Or we could have stayed in the AAC...
Or waited to see if the ACC came calling?
ESPiN is out if you read Delany, " We are interested in having a great partners that have a great platform, that are interested in marketing and promotion."
Espin does have a great platform and they were the benchmark for 35 years
BUT the kicker >> interested in marketing and promotion Yes Espin interested in the SEC's promotion and marketing.
What this brash bullies did when they ruled the waves, well lets just say Rutgers on ESPN= Beth Mowens our very own special announcer. Jokes aside they bash and beat and denigrate the B1G and they expect us to now come back for more of the same with this scum!
Yea Jim going to take that kind of abuse.
hell it is just a 6 year contract. The experiment is on someone other then ESPiN will have a shot.
And guess what if semi successful it will erode ESPiN power base if wildly successful it could start a slide into future parity of telecasters.
Viewership is a pie the more others get the less ESPiN will have[banana]
this has to be Jim's view as well
Espin does have a great platform and they were the benchmark for 35 years
BUT the kicker >> interested in marketing and promotion Yes Espin interested in the SEC's promotion and marketing.
What this brash bullies did when they ruled the waves, well lets just say Rutgers on ESPN= Beth Mowens our very own special announcer. Jokes aside they bash and beat and denigrate the B1G and they expect us to now come back for more of the same with this scum!
Yea Jim going to take that kind of abuse.
hell it is just a 6 year contract. The experiment is on someone other then ESPiN will have a shot.
And guess what if semi successful it will erode ESPiN power base if wildly successful it could start a slide into future parity of telecasters.
Viewership is a pie the more others get the less ESPiN will have[banana]
this has to be Jim's view as well
Last edited:
ESPN is neither in nor out, if you really pay attention to what Delany says. Depending on how negotiations go, and what ESPN is willing to agree to, it could go either way. But there is certainly no pressure for the Big Ten to concede anything because it feels it needs to keep ESPN as a partner. If ESPN remains a partner, great. If not, also great.
Shout out to Syracuse alums living in the tri state area for help making this happen.
I mostly agree with this but I think there's probably a preference to stay with ESPN versus leaving them completely if contract details can be worked out reasonably. I think there's a comfort with the known vs. the unknown. It doesn't mean you're not willing to pioneer new ground if need be but I think preference is to at least keep one foot on the road well traveled if possible.
Even when the BTN got initiated the preference was to stay with ESPN but they weren't close to what Delany wanted so that was that. I've said before that while the Fox 1/2 of the contract is 6 years it doesn't mean the other half has to be. The other half or quarters could be set for a longer duration. So you have some certainty and you still allow yourself to experiment with the market in 6 years and with other partners. If there was a complete dissolution of a partnership, they both will have the chance to remarry in 6 years after having known what life without the other is. Personally, I think that's a greater risk for ESPN than the B10 cause it allows other players to get a foot in sooner, but we'll see.
Wrong. The Big East did not "delay" a deal. They turned down an ESPN attempt to lock them into an extension before their current contract ended.
So you would be happy to "stop hearing about 2-5 years from now" if it means Rutgers would be locked into $14mm a year instead of getting $30 or 40mm+ later. Genius!
I wonder how Mike "You don't get NYC with Rutgers" Tranghese feels now???
Latest posts
-
-
-
With the portal now open, does Gavin Wimsatt enter after the spring game?
- Latest: Nycrusupporter
