Not neccessarily, as the new TV contract and the expanded Playoff will earn much more revenue for the B1G. ( according to the article.)
Those operating expenses for travel are incurred at the school level, not the conference level .
If you're Pro SEC then you should include the playoff money since since that is where the SEC will make more per school due to less mouths.
Not Pro SEC at all. Big Ten added teams that doesn't have a tremendous following on TV nationwide and on the West Coast. The PAC12 folded as they couldn't get a decent TV contract simply because they can't draw eyes to the TV. USC, UCLA and Oregon top watched games in 2023 all involved the circus that Colorado brought to the media. The Big Ten media deal was struck before Washington and Oregon was added. Haven't seen how much TV money was added to the contract if any.
Again prove it. Show the math. We are all guessing that the media deal was increased when Washington and Oregon were added. But there is no factual confirmation of that.
The PAC12 media issues were well before USC and UCLA left, years before. Nobody was watching.
Well you are off to a bad start. I wasn't talking about USC and UCLA, the two schools I was referring to were Washington and Oregon who were added after the Big Ten media deal. Secondly USC and UCLA alone were not bringing $75 million a piece to cover their share. Ratings for them have been bad for them for awhile.
Remember UCLA too. They came as a pair, in the same market. Best matchup with who? Rutgers? I think so. Even their basketball program isn't all that good.
You're right they were awesome last year, 15-16.
Next time answer the original question. I started with where is the extra media money for Washington and Oregon? That would be a better look. You are like Paul Finebaum when a caller asks a good question about the Big Ten over the SEC on something. Change the narrative but don't answer the question.
But they haven't paid for Washington or Oregon even at a reduced rate. They weren't part of the media deal that is still the same amount after they were added. $1 billion a year is just under $72 million for 14 teams. Now it's 16 teams so it's $62.5 for each team. That's my point. There are other income sources but each school is taking a cut from the TV deal. Unless there is some secret deal which nobody has announced.
It was reported back then by mainstream CFB media that Fox did ante up more money (reduced rate) for Oregon and Washington. It was new money, not related to the original deal.
At least someone found something. Congratulations but is it true? No Big Ten announcement, no Fox, CBS or NBC statements Sorry if I'm not buying into a post from a source called Eleven Warriors but at least somebody thinks so!It was reported back then by mainstream CFB media that Fox did ante up more money (reduced rate) for Oregon and Washington. It was new money, not related to the original deal.
A quick google and I found some comments from Gene Smith on it as well.
“The original dollar figures that we had prior to Oregon and Washington coming in stayed the same for those institutions that were already in. Fox brought new money to the table for Oregon and for Washington that they provided,” Smith said during his press conference on Wednesday. “It wasn't diluted to us. The long-term play is that, hopefully, when we negotiate the next deal, that's valuable inventory. So year five or six, whenever assuming it’s Tony goes to negotiate a new deal, you have Oregon and Washington in your portfolio.”
Gene Smith Saw Additions of Oregon and Washington As “Obvious” Move After Big Ten Received “New Money” from Fox
Gene Smith said adding Oregon and Washington “became pretty obvious as something we should do” after Fox “brought new money to the table” to fund them joining the Big Ten.www.elevenwarriors.com
$60 million for each team or total? That's $120 million my friend. ESPN and SEC did announce that BTW as they had to cover the costs of 2024 that neither of those two teams media rights this coming season belong to the SEC. Big 12 still has that. They made the deal to get them in a year early. Of course the start of the new playoff deal.
It kind of is. The BIG and SEC are guaranteed a much larger % of playoff revenue reguardless of
Are actually arguing that the conference took in teams to make less money?
Ask Pete Hamel
It’s an OSU site but who cares about the site, it’s the quote from Gene Smith that’s important.
For this if I recall Penn State and one of the Michigans agreed to to something... and I think there was something elseAsk Pete Hamel
This is nearly a year after the deal was announcedHow an unfinished TV deal led to an unexpectedly hectic first month for the new Big Ten commissioner
New Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti has been sprinting to finish his league's massive TV deal -- and key athletic directors and coaches aren't happy with the details.www.espn.com
"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."
I gave 2 links for that.
I dunno.. does it really cost that much more to travel to California rather than Minnesota? We'll play the same number of road games either way.. mostly.. maybe 1 more.
