How will an 18-team conference tournament work?

[krup]

That's completely separate from why Rutgers/UMD/Nebraska/UW/OU are taking reduced shares.

They were all buying an equity stake in the BTN.
It was 1/11 then went to 1/12 per school when Nebraska joined.
Neb needed to pay for that dilution - money going to the other equity holders.
Even if Nebraska joined at a new media deal - they still needed to pay the other schools to buy their share.

USC and UCLA are paying nothing for their equity share.
Rutgers is going from 1/14th to 1/16th with it appears no compensation.
Yes, the media deal accounts for USC and UCLA.
But did they each add so much to the media deal to pay for a 1/16th share of BTN?
Or did they just add to the media deal so everyone broke even?
They need to add above and beyond even to pay for their equity share.
If USC/UCLA are receiving the same full payout as everyone else then they are paying zero for their 1/14th equity shares.

As you correctly pointed out - the payment for that equity share was awful and arbitrary.
Rutgers and UMD bought in at the same time but paid different prices for their 1/14th share.


Note - I know it's not actually 1/14th share because Fox owns 60% of the BTN and the schools own 40% but it’s the same point. Rutgers will own 1/18th of 40% of the BTN.

Given how the B1G was able to monetize the Rutgers addition with carriage fees, I have no doubt that the package of USC and UCLA is more than paying for itself (even with the current level of cord cutting) including the equity portion of the BTN.

The complaints should be in two areas, and are directly conference related (nothing to do with individual schools).

-bringing in Rutgers at such a small partial share, because they were desperate and coming from AAC levels of revenue, was shortsighted. RU was an add that was questioned from the beginning, and the immediate value RU brought was not on the field but on the ledger. RU was set up to fail from the beginning and that was stupid.

-after the B1G successfully monetized RU, they’d should have ramped RU’s revenue up even quicker to remove the disadvantage they had. I was looking for some info yesterday and saw that 3-4 years into being a conference member, RU was still only getting about 1/4 of what incumbent schools were as their share.

 

[scarletnewyorker2006]

The B1G features 2 tournaments: One with the top 8, and an NIT type tournament with the next 8. 2 teams get left out.

I cannot envision this ever happening but it would make the regular season more exciting for the middle of the pack and the B1G-NIT would be a way for bubble teams to make their cases.

 

[nj24]

Remember, Peacock has the rights to "opening day" of the B1G tourney. You need to pay. This starts this season in March2024.
With 2 more teams, i would guess Peacock may get more games.

 

[knightfan7]

Tue
15-18, 16-17

Game #

Wed
#1 1- winner 16-17
#2 2 - winner 15-18
#3 3- 14
#4 4- 13

Thu
#5 5-11
#6 6-12
#7 7-10
#8 8-9

Fri
#9 winner #1-winner #8
#10 #2-#7
#11 #3-#6
#12 #4-#5

Sat
#13 Semi
#14 Semi

Sun
#15 Final

Top 8 all get a day off, no one gets a bye just like the dance

 

[Local Shill]

Tue
15-18, 16-17

Game #

Wed
#1 1- winner 16-17
#2 2 - winner 15-18
#3 3- 14
#4 4- 13

Thu
#5 5-11
#6 6-12
#7 7-10
#8 8-9

Fri
#9 winner #1-winner #8
#10 #2-#7
#11 #3-#6
#12 #4-#5

Sat
#13 Semi
#14 Semi

Sun
#15 Final

Top 8 all get a day off, no one gets a bye just like the dance

Who will be the first team to win 6 games in 6 days?!

 

[knightfan7]

Who will be the first team to win 6 games in 6 days?!

Unless I missed something , only 15-18 would have to play 5 times in 6 days.

1-14 would only play 4.

 

[rucoe89]

Stewart Mandel is probably very close to where things are ultimately headed.

View embedded media

This. Remember - tradition and academics mean nothing. Its only about the money and this is where money is moving things. Willing to put odds that this is ultimately where we end up in the early part of 2030s. As Rutgers fans, don't crow too loud at the demise of others already affected or soon to be affected. It could be us too in the not too far future.

 

[Russ Wood]

Given how the B1G was able to monetize the Rutgers addition with carriage fees, I have no doubt that the package of USC and UCLA is more than paying for itself (even with the current level of cord cutting) including the equity portion of the BTN.

The complaints should be in two areas, and are directly conference related (nothing to do with individual schools).

-bringing in Rutgers at such a small partial share, because they were desperate and coming from AAC levels of revenue, was shortsighted. RU was an add that was questioned from the beginning, and the immediate value RU brought was not on the field but on the ledger. RU was set up to fail from the beginning and that was stupid.

-after the B1G successfully monetized RU, they’d should have ramped RU’s revenue up even quicker to remove the disadvantage they had. I was looking for some info yesterday and saw that 3-4 years into being a conference member, RU was still only getting about 1/4 of what incumbent schools were as their share.

Didn't Rutgers borrow money from the B1G which further delayed it receiving a full share?

 

[AreYouNUTS]

Competition breeds improvement and the requirements to keep up. All of these things bring RU to the next level. Hopefully some of the fans understand this will shed some past rivals or opponents, which is a good thing.

This sucks.

 

[RUDave_01]

Didn't Rutgers borrow money from the B1G which further delayed it receiving a full share?

Yes, it was supposed to start in 2020, but the advance on the future earnings to help catch up (or maybe fall behind a little less) pushed that back until 2027.

 

[chiphi80]

Stewart Mandel is probably very close to where things are ultimately headed.

View embedded media

Do you really need West Virginia in there, and I would say VT?? What kind of viewership do they bring. WV may bring the 8K in Morgantown. VT sucked last worse than we did. And they're in the mountains.

Why wouldn't they include metropolitan teams like RU and Maryland? Seems smarter to me.

It's not like WV or VT are football juggernauts.

 

[Russ Wood]

Do you really need West Virginia in there, and I would say VT?? What kind of viewership do they bring. WV may bring the 8K in Morgantown. VT sucked last worse than we did. And they're in the mountains.

Why wouldn't they include metropolitan teams like RU and Maryland? Seems smarter to me.

It's not like WV or VT are football juggernauts.

I'm not saying I agree 100% with the schools he listed. I'm just saying that he is probably very close to where things are ultimately headed.

What are the TV ratings like for metropolitan teams like RU & Maryland?

 

[Scarlet Jerry]

This whole thing ends in one giant disaster.

If it gets to that, I hope that Rutgers goes back to playing eastern rivals. That table looks like the NFL. No thanks.

 

[RUtrumpet92]

If college sports ever boiled down to a 28 team premiere league like the one on that chart, I think in the long run they'd hurt themselves. Step one, you would lose interest/eyeballs from any fans that aren't linked to those programs. Step two, if those teams are only playing each other, someone's going to be at the bottom every year. How will their alumni feel about things if they are perpetually struggling in their divisions?

That list has zero teams based in New Jersey, New York, and New England. Seems like a short-sighted long term approach if the goal is to maximize $$.

I found a list of 2022 average viewers per game. Highest viewership for teams not on that 28 team list were #16 Nebraska at 1.98M and #19 Maryland at 1.864M. Rutgers was a weak #58 at 618K, although we edged out Miami at 608K. The metric says games with no viewership listed are given a zero. Not sure if that affected us, or if it was that bad because we were that bad in multiple games. Virginia Tech is a sad #76 at 264K per game.

 

[Virginiarufan]

There's no way Md gets 1.864M and we only get 618k. Md's stadium is empty for most of their games. If we start winning our viewership will increase by a lot. The statistics happen to catch us at the lowest levels since the early 2000's.

 

[RUtrumpet92]

Yeah, the line about games with no viewership available being logged as a zero is a poor approach. They should be dropped from the calculations. I wonder if that's part of our problem as the Temple game was only on ESPN+. I'm not sure if there is a rating for the BC game, either. If those were booked as zeroes, that alone pushes our average in the other ten games to 741.6k.

Wagner's rating is lumped in with three other games in that BTN window. Total was 1.47M, but let's be real. That game is not going to draw any casual fan interest.

We had 739K listed for the Iowa game
1.79M for Ohio State
1.15M for Nebraska
only 238K for the Indiana game (there's an average killer...)
302K for Minnesota
1.29M for Michigan
591K for Michigan State
856K for Penn State
97K for Maryland. ???? WOW. This was opposite Michigan-Ohio State, the most-watched game of the year with over 17M.

Average for these games = 784K, puts us at #51, just before WVU. Average before the Maryland debacle = 869.5K, basically tied with #44 Purdue at 870K.

Bottom line, yes - win more games and our ratings will skyrocket.

 

[vic_torre42]

Do you really need West Virginia in there, and I would say VT?? What kind of viewership do they bring. WV may bring the 8K in Morgantown. VT sucked last worse than we did. And they're in the mountains.

Why wouldn't they include metropolitan teams like RU and Maryland? Seems smarter to me.

It's not like WV or VT are football juggernauts.

I hate to admit it but WV probably gets better tv ratings than Rutgers nationally for football.

Both them and VT have larger fanbases and much better game day football crowds and atmospheres than RU.

 

[dconifer]

Conference tournaments have been meaningless and, consequently, sparsely attended, for a long time. They are just content for the too-many sports providers. For stronger teams, they are nothing more than a nuisance.

I'm going to go the opposite direction most people go. Instead of leaving out the weak teams, leave out the strong ones. Let the weaker ones battle it out for attention and resume-padding...

 

[dconifer]

There's no way Md gets 1.864M and we only get 618k. Md's stadium is empty for most of their games. If we start winning our viewership will increase by a lot. The statistics happen to catch us at the lowest levels since the early 2000's.

Many people in Maryland follow the team and watch the broadcasts; they just don't go through the hassle of going to attend games in person...

 

[wheezer]

MY God I hope Hobbs negotiated some kind of deal to forgive our loans when UCLA/USC were given full share right off the bat in 2024. Otherwise, we've still got to pay them back until 2027. Now that would be a kick in the nuts especially with athletics still broke. No loans to pay back you can then divert some of our limited boosters to NIL.

To play devils advocate here,

Why is it a kick in the nuts to have to pay back money you have borrowed?
You borrow, you owe
Its not like you didn't Get the money

Now, I can see attempting to renegotiate based on the new additions, you can always try, but I don't see the other teams agreeing

 

[wheezer]

Stewart Mandel is probably very close to where things are ultimately headed.

View embedded media

Would seriously doubt that all these teams pull out of multiple conferences at the same time to do a this

As the big ten revenue expands each contract, it becomes even less likely

 

[krup]

To play devils advocate here,

Why is it a kick in the nuts to have to pay back money you have borrowed?
You borrow, you owe
Its not like you didn't Get the money

Now, I can see attempting to renegotiate based on the new additions, you can always try, but I don't see the other teams agreeing

I think the big mistake with the B1G was their not revisiting Rutgers’ situation a few years in.

It has hurt the conference that Rutgers has underperformed on the field while few have an understanding of the obstacles they face. Even most cfb fans lump them in as receiving a partial share like MD and NE without understanding that RU’s partial share was much smaller than theirs (and much smaller than Oregon and Washington’s as a % of a full share).

I get the philosophy that the B1G starts with (if you are added within a TV contract you don’t get a full share, you get a partial share that is based on how much you were making in your previous conference, and RU was making much less in the AAC). However, we have anecdotally heard that the B1G did very well in monetizing RU’s addition in BTN terms, and the conference should have reevaluated after that and improved their share.

The conference is continually questioned about the RU addition, and have left RU hung out to dry, as most people don’t realize (for example) that Oregon and Washington are starting at a partial share that is 40-50% of total revenue, while Rutgers didn’t get to that level until 5-6 years after they started playing B1G games. Add in that RU started with lesser facilities due to their BE/AAC membership, and the result they were kind of set up to fail competitively.

 

[wheezer]

I think the big mistake with the B1G was their not revisiting Rutgers’ situation a few years in.

It has hurt the conference that Rutgers has underperformed on the field while few have an understanding of the obstacles they face. Even most cfb fans lump them in as receiving a partial share like MD and NE without understanding that RU’s partial share was much smaller than theirs (and much smaller than Oregon and Washington’s as a % of a full share).

I get the philosophy that the B1G starts with (if you are added within a TV contract you don’t get a full share, you get a partial share that is based on how much you were making in your previous conference, and RU was making much less in the AAC). However, we have anecdotally heard that the B1G did very well in monetizing RU’s addition in BTN terms, and the conference should have reevaluated after that and improved their share.

The conference is continually questioned about the RU addition, and have left RU hung out to dry, as most people don’t realize (for example) that Oregon and Washington are starting at a partial share that is 40-50% of total revenue, while Rutgers didn’t get to that level until 5-6 years after they started playing B1G games. Add in that RU started with lesser facilities due to their BE/AAC membership, and the result they were kind of set up to fail competitively.

Has any conference ever revisited an agreement of compensation without the threat of that team leaving for greener pastures?

 

[NickRU714]

Has any conference ever revisited an agreement of compensation without the threat of that team leaving for greener pastures?

It's corny but the Big Ten (previosuly) branded itself as the "conference of equals". No Texas making more than others.
No SEC with cheating and lax academic standards.
No ACC working with ESPN to destroy the Big East.

Big Ten was supposed to be the best and noblest conference. Or so people said.

Again, corny and obviously not true.
Treatment of Rutgers and the PAC shows they are just like every other conference - 100% money.
Not saying it's wrong but the conference isn't any different than the SEC.

 

[krup]

Has any conference ever revisited an agreement of compensation without the threat of that team leaving for greener pastures?

They didn’t have to do anything for RU, but hanging RU out to dry financially hasn’t helped the conference.

 

[Russ Wood]

Would seriously doubt that all these teams pull out of multiple conferences at the same time to do a this

As the big ten revenue expands each contract, it becomes even less likely

Again, I do not think that Mandel's precise model happens but I do believe that he is very close to where things are ultimately headed.

We're practically at a P2 right now. If those two conferences jettison schools who are unable to compete and/or don't drive viewership, then you have something very close to Mandel.

Especially with ESPN (SEC) and FOX (B1G) each having a P2 conference.

 

[G- RUnit]

Conference tournaments have been meaningless and, consequently, sparsely attended, for a long time. They are just content for the too-many sports providers. For stronger teams, they are nothing more than a nuisance.

I'm going to go the opposite direction most people go. Instead of leaving out the weak teams, leave out the strong ones. Let the weaker ones battle it out for attention and resume-padding...

I agree and it certainly didn’t help us and we did everything right.

 

[RUBigFrank]

Don't think Mandel's idea works either - too many schools schedule FCS TEAMS- WHICH is a good way to share money with the various tiers.

 

[Arizona Knight]

It's corny but the Big Ten (previosuly) branded itself as the "conference of equals". No Texas making more than others.
No SEC with cheating and lax academic standards.
No ACC working with ESPN to destroy the Big East.

Big Ten was supposed to be the best and noblest conference. Or so people said.

Again, corny and obviously not true.
Treatment of Rutgers and the PAC shows they are just like every other conference - 100% money.
Not saying it's wrong but the conference isn't any different than the SEC.

We had to buy our way into BTN equity. It amazes me the sense of entitlement some Rutgers fans have about this topic. We are one of the very worst P5 football programs of the past 40 years. Let’s be happy where we are today.

 

[Russ Wood]

I agree and it certainly didn’t help us and we did everything right.

Which year was this that Rutgers did everything right?

 

[Russ Wood]

Don't think Mandel's idea works either - too many schools schedule FCS TEAMS- WHICH is a good way to share money with the various tiers.

Based on the 2020 season, several SEC schools were advocating for a nine or ten SEC schedule and no more FCS games.

Elite football programs really shouldn't schedule FCS teams.

 

[koleszar]

We had to buy our way into BTN equity. It amazes me the sense of entitlement some Rutgers fans have about this topic. We are one of the very worst P5 football programs of the past 40 years. Let’s be happy where we are today.

That has absolutely nothing to do with making money for the conference. Nebraska a storied program needed to be the 12th member and add the Championship game to monetarily validate their entrance to the other members. They were not going to vote to take less money, without it they were a no vote.

I owned BTN before Maryland's and Rutgers entrance. It was International Harvester and Menards commercials. After they added NY/NJ and DMV nothing but AT&T and Ford commercials. What happened? Did Michigan and OSU suddenly become good, no, it was the opening of these markets which drew advertisers. The next contract exploded. Rutgers and Maryland got credit for none of that.

It was we were all buying equal equity into BTN not into the B1G. We were to get an equal 1/14th share into BTN. Suddenly the new Commissioner came in and changed everything. He gave UCLA/USC full share without paying a dime into BTN. Is that fair, no, business isn't fair. Rutgers has every right to ask for a forgiveness in loans when conditions were changed to gain equal equity into BTN.

 

[SteveVA2]

VT has a huge following in the DC/Northern Virginia area. Over 91,000 people attended the VT-USC game at FedEx stadium in PG in 2004. We were there rooting for USC where our son was then a second year student. I’m guessing close to 80,000 were Hokie fans. They were very loud.

 

[koleszar]

Stewart Mandel is probably very close to where things are ultimately headed.

View embedded media

Those schools would eat each other up. A lot of those Schools that now go 10-2, 9-3 would learn how quickly a fanbase becomes disinterested and stops showing up for 6-6, 5-7 campaigns.

 

[Arizona Knight]

That has absolutely nothing to do with making money for the conference. Nebraska a storied program needed to be the 12th member and add the Championship game to monetarily validate their entrance to the other members. They were not going to vote to take less money, without it they were a no vote.

I owned BTN before Maryland's and Rutgers entrance. It was International Harvester and Menards commercials. After they added NY/NJ and DMV nothing but AT&T and Ford commercials. What happened? Did Michigan and OSU suddenly become good, no, it was the opening of these markets which drew advertisers. The next contract exploded. Rutgers and Maryland got credit for none of that.

It was we were all buying equal equity into BTN not into the B1G. We were to get an equal 1/14th share into BTN. Suddenly the new Commissioner came in and changed everything. He gave UCLA/USC full share without paying a dime into BTN. Is that fair, no, business isn't fair. Rutgers has every right to ask for a forgiveness in loans when conditions were changed to gain equal equity into BTN.

I’m not sure what any of this has to do with the fact that Rutgers had to buy into a network worth probably $1,000,000,000+ at the time because the other schools had taken the risk initially and added the value.

 

[NickRU714]

A lot of mentions about "Schools won't want to risk going from 10-2 to 6-6".

But isn't that already happening with conference realignment.
Doesn't adding USC/Oregon or Oklahoma/Texas put OSU/UM and Bama/Georgia at risk of more conference losses?

They don't care because of money.
For the ADs, more and more money papers over any and all other concerns.

How many people have said "I'd rather Rutgers make $100m and go 4-8 in the Big Ten than make $5m and go 10-2 in the AAC"?

I think many are underestimating just how much ADs are willing to endure just so they can get and spend more money.

 

[NickRU714]

I’m not sure what any of this has to do with the fact that Rutgers had to buy into a network worth probably $1,000,000,000+ at the time because the other schools had taken the risk initially and added the value.

No one is saying Rutgers shouldn't have had to buy into BTN.

But as you say "probably".
How much was the BTN worth at the time? Nobody know because there was never a valuation done.
Never an actual price on the 1/14th share that needed to be paid to the schools who took that risk initially.

Why did Rutgers and Maryland buy the same exact equity piece from the same network for different prices?

If we offered less value, then we would have been partial owners. Had less voting rights.
We are equal partners like everyone else.

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

My understanding is that Nebraska got the same crappy deal we got, along with Maryland. Oregon and Washington are in the same boat. There's nothing to do about USC and UCLA. They added a lot of value to the TV deals. Thankfully, that's in the rear-view mirror - except paying back some loans.

 

[Russ Wood]

Those schools would eat each other up. A lot of those Schools that now go 10-2, 9-3 would learn how quickly a fanbase becomes disinterested and stops showing up for 6-6, 5-7 campaigns.

That was my thought too but some SEC programs want to play more SEC games.

Whatever happens, happens. 🤷🏾‍♂️

As long as I get to watch SEC football on Saturday I'm good.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

A lot of mentions about "Schools won't want to risk going from 10-2 to 6-6".

But isn't that already happening with conference realignment.
Doesn't adding USC/Oregon or Oklahoma/Texas put OSU/UM and Bama/Georgia at risk of more conference losses?

They don't care because of money.
For the ADs, more and more money papers over any and all other concerns.

How many people have said "I'd rather Rutgers make $100m and go 4-8 in the Big Ten than make $5m and go 10-2 in the AAC"?

I think many are underestimating just how much ADs are willing to endure just so they can get and spend more money.

It’s very different. The AAC is a crap conference nobody cares about. What
your talking about would be more of a parallel to Nebraska’s decision but even then they had to know the conference they were in was riddled with uncertainty. Regardless, how’s their decision working out for them?

Right now, OSU and Michigan get to play big time hyped football with an easy path to the post season. Combine them with Alabama, Georgia, etc. and they risk becoming the next Nebraska. I’m not sure where the incentive would be. It’s not like the BIG doesn’t have a great following.