Youtube TV and Hulu Live, Fubo and Sling all offer DVR services. Enough to record the games at no extra charge.
Football BIG TEN CONFERENCE ANNOUNCES GROUNDBREAKING MEDIA RIGHTS AGREEMENTS
- Thread starter ChrisNalwasky
- Start date
Youtube TV and Hulu Live, Fubo and Sling all offer DVR services. Enough to record the games at no extra charge.
The lawyer for the California regents (common board for Cal & UCLA) just published his opinion that they have the power to block the UCLA addition is Cal if not included. They met yesterday concerning the UCLA move. Not saying they WOULD block the move, just that in his opinion they have the authority to do so.
Last edited:
Yea I saw that but still think it's low probability they would. One school gets screwed or both schools get screwed? Best hope for them is those reports of Cal as a candidate are true.
The B1G response should be... too bad for UCLA, we'll take Stanford. Good luck to you. And we get 2 media markets instead of 1.
Realistically, we have 2 east coast teams, 3 if you count Penn State. That's probably the target for the west coast without ND.
• $1.2 billion over seven years is in line with the $1.23 billion estimate that former Fox Sports Networks President Bob Thompson floated to me a few weeks ago. He’s been money on this stuff, in part, because he’s negotiated a bunch of these deals himself.
• Thompson crunched the numbers again on Thursday and figured out that the media-rights distribution to Big Ten members caps out at $78.2 million per university in 2029-30.
• The UC Regents are still discussing UCLA’s departure to the Big Ten. After seeing the Big Ten’s media rights deal, I’m less optimistic that the system will effectively block the Bruins’ exit. UCLA signed on with the Big Ten as the conference was negotiating this rights package. I’m not a lawyer, but a breach of that contract would most assuredly trigger significant damages. It feels like the face-saving move by the UC Regents might be to try and force UCLA to share some of its new-found loot with Cal.
Kliavkoff’s job got a little more difficult today. He not only needs to out-maneuver the Big 12 for a deal with ESPN, his Big Ten worries aren’t going away, either. Kliavkoff knows that the Big Ten would love to someday add Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal for a potential “west” division that would ease the travel concerns for USC and UCLA.
Lose two teams, and you pull yourself together and scrape by.
Lose six?
You’re cooked.
It’s why Kliavkoff has to be at his absolute best in the next few months. He’ll need to hold together his membership — particularly Oregon — while simultaneously negotiating the conference’s media rights deal. He’ll have to beat out the Big 12, hold off the Big Ten, make ESPN happy, find a streaming option, decide if adding San Diego State (or others) makes sense, and land a distribution number that doesn’t leave the door open for further raiding.
• Thompson crunched the numbers again on Thursday and figured out that the media-rights distribution to Big Ten members caps out at $78.2 million per university in 2029-30.
• The UC Regents are still discussing UCLA’s departure to the Big Ten. After seeing the Big Ten’s media rights deal, I’m less optimistic that the system will effectively block the Bruins’ exit. UCLA signed on with the Big Ten as the conference was negotiating this rights package. I’m not a lawyer, but a breach of that contract would most assuredly trigger significant damages. It feels like the face-saving move by the UC Regents might be to try and force UCLA to share some of its new-found loot with Cal.
Kliavkoff’s job got a little more difficult today. He not only needs to out-maneuver the Big 12 for a deal with ESPN, his Big Ten worries aren’t going away, either. Kliavkoff knows that the Big Ten would love to someday add Washington, Oregon, Stanford and Cal for a potential “west” division that would ease the travel concerns for USC and UCLA.
Lose two teams, and you pull yourself together and scrape by.
Lose six?
You’re cooked.
It’s why Kliavkoff has to be at his absolute best in the next few months. He’ll need to hold together his membership — particularly Oregon — while simultaneously negotiating the conference’s media rights deal. He’ll have to beat out the Big 12, hold off the Big Ten, make ESPN happy, find a streaming option, decide if adding San Diego State (or others) makes sense, and land a distribution number that doesn’t leave the door open for further raiding.
That's kind of why I always said 1-3 additional teams from the west. The B10 has lived with 3 in the east and has been okay with it so I thought a minimum of 3 in the west. I kind of want to up that to a minimum of 4 now from the west after that McMurphy article this morning, where he mentions western expansion isn't contingent on ND.
Last edited:
The other thing to consider is voting blocks within the conference moving forward. Traditional powers in the conference won’t want to get outvoted by the coastal newbies.
If anyone is bored and wants to read more on this google Interim Report on the Impact of UCLA Joining the Big Ten. Pages 14 on describe the prospect that the regents could walk back the authority of the UCLA president (or chancellor) to change athletic leagues. The UCOP general counsel is quoted elsewhere as saying "...The regents could say 'We want to act and therefore we don't want the president or chancellor to act in this area..."
The BT has 'evaluated' Cal anyway so it may not matter. Or they could take Stanford, Washington, Oregon and either Kansas/Colorado/AZ/ASU.
I hope we get rid of divisions. As long as Rutgers plays Maryland and Penn State every year, the rest of the schedule needs to be more diverse. Rutgers, of all schools doesn't need to play the HARDEST RANKED SCHEDULE IN THE WHOLE NCAA every year. That is not fair at all.
A
anon_ivydyf0amkzay
Guest
Why does it need to be fair? What if the B1G was strongest out west…would it be fair for us to play an easier schedule? There was a time the sec east was stronger than then west…now it isn’t…maybe one day it changes back…
I'm convinced that the Big is going to eventually get shut out on the most coveted ACC schools---NC. VA, FSU, Clemson when all is said and done. Culture is huge with these southern schools, as is football dominance. You can talk all you want about the Presidents at schools like UNC and VA, but in the end they won't want to buck their big donors.
So imo, if the leagues go to 24, the BT will have a large helping of current PAC schools....in addition to Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford...possibly some combo of AZ/ASU/Colorado/Kansas (Big 12). Maybe a stray school like VA Tech or GA Tech would also be considered.
Here's a point about Stanford that fans are not considering.....presently Stanford does not keep scholarships for 5th year football players or accept grad football transfers. I know as an IU fan, that IU has taken several grad transfers that were Stanford part or full time starters the year before. If they don't change those policies I don't see how they continue their decree of recent football success.
Last edited:
A
anon_ivydyf0amkzay
Guest
The way the CFP is now.. it is ten U presidents from 10 different conferences plus an Independent.. this time Notre Dame.
If these expansions consolidate the P2-3-4 and eliminates a 5th.. or even a 4th... that severely tips the scales in the makeup of the CFP board. Therefore.. I predict 2024 will see a band new BCS/CFP type organization with a brand new makeup of its controlling structure... OR.. ELSE?
So you are saying the Big Ten alone was worth only worth $800 million when everyone was quoting $1B. Please provide those quotes to all of us.
I'd call his bluff and let slip out of btn offices that if ucla is not allowed to come to big then another candidate and/or multiple candidates are will be invited. the regents will screw both schools
Remember when McGreevy (and his buddy Zoffinger on the Rutgers board) wanted to creaet a chancellorship over New Jersey public universities and colleges... I can imagine such an office kiiling us in similar ways, time and again.
kid you not, first thing I thought of when the regents starting squawking on ucla. ridiculous
I've heard the former UNC Chancellor say they've explored both the SEC and B10 in the past so I wouldn't say which way they go, even though many here think they would lean to the B10.
UVA I think would lean to the B10. I think their profile athletics wise (including Olympic sports) and academics wise fits the B10 better but they're a southern school so never know.
Clemson, I don't think the B10 wants and I wouldn't be so sure the SEC wants them either. Because of recent very high level results the answer seems like an easy yes for the SEC but we don't know how Dabo will do when for the first time in his great run he's been without both coordinators that helped start it. We can't assume everyone is Saban and just keeps humming along when they lose staff. If they're not performing at that high level are they as attractive since the SEC already has South Carolina in the conference.
FSU, everyone assumes they want the SEC because they seem like a SEC school but you know would they want to be one of 2 Florida schools in the SEC or the only Florida school in the B10. If the B10 goes with Miami too would they prefer being partnered in a conference with Miami vs UF? Don't know.
GT has been talked about with the B10 in the past because of Atlanta but don't know how serious or that is as an option.
Last edited:
I can't see clemson and fsu, just piss poor academics and very southern in approach to things. That isn't a bad thing but could lead to culture class. UNC I can see, UVA I'm against.
I mean fk it, we're in the drivers seat so why not go Texas, UF and whoever we think adds the most value. spitballing and talking out loud but we're in the driver's seat so why not explore big fish
I mean fk it, we're in the drivers seat so why not go Texas, UF and whoever we think adds the most value. spitballing and talking out loud but we're in the driver's seat so why not explore big fish
Sure if you could just grab whomever those are great catches and no harm in trying but realistically probably wouldn't happen. Texas/ND and the B10 would be way out in front but it's not likely...at least not the Texas part. The option was there for them if they wanted but they still chose the SEC.
Some excerpts from an Athletic article: (paywall)
Delany believed changes in technology would cause live sports to only increase in value over time, so he bet on the possibility that the Big Ten’s best games would be worth even more. And then he made sure the league would be able to sell them again before the SEC, Pac-12 and Big 12 deals expired.
How much money are we talking about? In February, the SEC announced an annual revenue distribution of about $55 million per school. This year, Iowa received $57 million from the Big Ten. Those figures include television revenue, bowl revenue, College Football Playoff revenue and NCAA men’s basketball tournament revenue, and both figures will only rise thanks to new TV deals.
In May, Florida football coach Billy Napier said SEC projections shown to schools suggest the payout per school will increase to somewhere between the high $60 millions and the low $70 millions when the league’s new $300 million-a-year deal with Disney for the games CBS was broadcasting kicks in. Big Ten revenue distributions will top those numbers once these new deals begin next year. The gap between the Big Ten and SEC won’t be as wide as it is between the SEC and whichever league winds up No. 3, but it should be larger than it was before.
For 2034, the SEC can put its entire rights package on the market.
That deal likely will reset the market, but that is a long time from now. How long? Because the Big Ten did seven-year deals with Fox, CBS and NBC, it will have sold its rights again before the SEC gets another crack.
Delany believed changes in technology would cause live sports to only increase in value over time, so he bet on the possibility that the Big Ten’s best games would be worth even more. And then he made sure the league would be able to sell them again before the SEC, Pac-12 and Big 12 deals expired.
How much money are we talking about? In February, the SEC announced an annual revenue distribution of about $55 million per school. This year, Iowa received $57 million from the Big Ten. Those figures include television revenue, bowl revenue, College Football Playoff revenue and NCAA men’s basketball tournament revenue, and both figures will only rise thanks to new TV deals.
In May, Florida football coach Billy Napier said SEC projections shown to schools suggest the payout per school will increase to somewhere between the high $60 millions and the low $70 millions when the league’s new $300 million-a-year deal with Disney for the games CBS was broadcasting kicks in. Big Ten revenue distributions will top those numbers once these new deals begin next year. The gap between the Big Ten and SEC won’t be as wide as it is between the SEC and whichever league winds up No. 3, but it should be larger than it was before.
For 2034, the SEC can put its entire rights package on the market.
That deal likely will reset the market, but that is a long time from now. How long? Because the Big Ten did seven-year deals with Fox, CBS and NBC, it will have sold its rights again before the SEC gets another crack.
As @rutgersguy1 points out - best part of deal ----- it is up for renewal after 2030 season, while the ACC still has 6 more years to go before renewal and the SEC 4 more. I feel bad for them .....
Last edited:
It's of no benefit to the UC Regents if UCLA makes a whole lot of money and Cal loses even more. Remember, it's one system. But yes, the best hope for the Regents and for Cal is for Cal to be invited. I understand that Cal's best recruits are de-committing.
When the SEC does get a chance, I think they will follow the B10 (essentially NFL model) in using multiple partners. Same for the ACC or whatever 3rd conference mashup comes into being. Short deals and multiple media partners.As @rutgersguy1 points out - best part of deal ----- it is up for renewal after 2030 season, while the ACC still has 6 more years to go before renewal and the SEC 4 more. I feel back for them .....
Further reducing ESPN. Thank goodness BIG didn’t follows those fools and allow for complete ESPN control.
I cant believe I'm doing this, but Clemson has excellent academics
Edit: My bad on initial post.
Last edited:
So much for getting out of debt. Bet we still have to pay back the loans while USC/UCLA get their full share. Another two years of Bergen Record and NJ.com articles to look forward to.
Either the conservative estimates before expansion were grossly overrated or USC/UCLA really didn't bring what we thought they would.
I think it's a better benefit for them that one makes out rather than both losing out. Sometimes we can't have it all. Frankly, I agree with this tweet yesterday from an Arizona writer. Some of those comments from the regents were just ridiculous. They just have to hope Cal sneaks in, not stand in the way of UCLA getting in.
Agreed, but BIG will have another chance to negotiate and in turn may tie the hands of the other two leagues in terms of how high bidders can go.
I'm in agreement. This new deal will not get Rutgers out of debt for at least two years probably more. USC/UCLA really didn't bring what we thought they would and they'll be getting a full share while Rutgers is still paying back loans on their buy in.
In the end I still think Cal has a good shot to get in with Stanford. One of the problems that BIG wants to address is travel partners/lineups. Cal and Stanford give two locally and in very close proximity to LA to give non-revenue sports a big breather.
Clemson isn't AAU unless they just got in.
