+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: AAC Conference Talk (/forum-409.html)
+---- Thread: How Does the BE Divide Revenue? (/thread-51700.html)
- cardtopper - 07-27-2005 02:34 PM
Revenue from Bowls, NCAA B-ball tournaments, TV contracts, etc....how is it split up? Do the teams in the bowls, tournaments, televised games get more? How much does the conference office get? Does the conference split football contract/bowl revenue only among football playing schools? How does this all work out?
- Bearcats#1 - 07-27-2005 02:50 PM
CardTopper:
From what I understand...UC get's 51% of all revenues produced from all revenue streams because that was what UC demanded as the price needed to grace the Big East with their membership..
Kidding of course.
Go Bearcats!!!!!!! :)
- GunnerFan - 07-27-2005 03:34 PM
What I know:
- Football $ is split only among football members
- Basketball $ is split among all members
What I think:
TV money is split evenly, but postseason $ divided slightly in favor of the programs that earned it. It's not a cut as lopsided as it was before, but still is an incentive based layout that provides a minimum to every member. The rewards for # of TV appearances is the coinciding level of exposure, that's all.
Someone help me out if I'm wrong or if you've more details.
- Jackson1011 - 07-27-2005 03:44 PM
BCS money is not split evenly....the conference Champ will get a larger share then the #8 school, the #2 will get more then the #7 and so one
Jackson
- omniorange - 07-27-2005 04:21 PM
Quote:Jackson1011 Posted on Jul 27 2005, 03:50 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BCS money is not split evenly....the conference Champ will get a larger share then the #8 school, the #2 will get more then the #7 and so one
Not quite as I understand it. A certain amount of $$$ is taken off the top of the BCS and the top 3 non-BCS Bowls and doled out to the Top 4 BE teams. That portion is considerably less than when Miami was in the league. Last year, since it was a 4-way tie for the BE lead, this 'off the top' money was divided equally. However, if there were a clear #1 and a clear #2, #1 would get more than #2 and #2 would get more than #3 and #4. I believe #3 and #4 get the same amount. If there were two tied for first, then they combine the amounts for #1 and #2 and divide that equally between the two teams.
The rest, not taken off the top, is then divided equally amongst all 8 teams. So, in essence, #1-#4 get a little extra plus an even share of the remaining monies while #5-8 just get the even share of the remaining monies.
Cheers,
Neil
- CyberBull - 07-27-2005 04:39 PM
Why not just divide the money up equally among the 8 football playing members, with perhaps the only conference champion getting more money b/c of performance?
- omniorange - 07-27-2005 04:42 PM
Quote:CyberBull Posted on Jul 27 2005, 04:45 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not just divide the money up equally among the 8 football playing members, with perhaps the only conference champion getting more money b/c of performance?
Big East has always believed in the capitalist point of view - that those who earn the money should get a little bit more. When Miami was aboard it went to the extreme (something like 4 million simply for finishing first). Now its a lot less, but still an incentive and helps defray the traveling expenses of going to a bowl game.
Cheers,
Neil
- Murph1 - 07-27-2005 05:01 PM
omnicarrier Wrote:And Miami was still complaining about losing money. Imagine if there was a more evenly distributed revenue stream? Miami would be out of business by their logic.Quote:CyberBull Posted on Jul 27 2005, 04:45 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not just divide the money up equally among the 8 football playing members, with perhaps the only conference champion getting more money b/c of performance?
Big East has always believed in the capitalist point of view - that those who earn the money should get a little bit more. When Miami was aboard it went to the extreme (something like 4 million simply for finishing first). Now its a lot less, but still an incentive and helps defray the traveling expenses of going to a bowl game.
Cheers,
Neil
- TexanMark - 07-27-2005 06:17 PM
CyberBull Wrote:Why not just divide the money up equally among the 8 football playing members, with perhaps the only conference champion getting more money b/c of performance?Temple was the last team to ask that question. :laugh:
- usffan - 07-27-2005 06:54 PM
Murph1 Wrote:I am pretty certain that Miami used the finances as an excuse, but that it wasn't legitimate. They screamed from the rafters that this change was going to greatly reduce their travel costs, but that's definitely a bunch of crap.omnicarrier Wrote:And Miami was still complaining about losing money. Imagine if there was a more evenly distributed revenue stream? Miami would be out of business by their logic.Quote:CyberBull Posted on Jul 27 2005, 04:45 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not just divide the money up equally among the 8 football playing members, with perhaps the only conference champion getting more money b/c of performance?
Big East has always believed in the capitalist point of view - that those who earn the money should get a little bit more. When Miami was aboard it went to the extreme (something like 4 million simply for finishing first). Now its a lot less, but still an incentive and helps defray the traveling expenses of going to a bowl game.
Cheers,
Neil
In their final year in the Big East, the mean distance Miami had to travel for football was 1,240 miles, and for basketball was 1,265 miles. While this sounds high, realize that they were flying to games and the bulk of these flights were non-stop, so we're talking about no more than a 3 hour trip to most games.
As a member of the ACC, the mean distance Miami will have to travel is 879 miles. Guess what - they're still going to have to fly!!! Their closest rival (FSU) is still just over 500 miles away, and they're not bussing up to Tallahassee. So at most they're lopping an hour off of their flight times on average. Meanwhile, they've traded mostly urban universities and flights into Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and New York with trips to Clemson and Winston-Salem. In the end, no great savings. Plus, they now have to send their baseball team on the road whereas they were independent in baseball previously. Plus, they don't get to keep the lion's share of their BCS money if they go to a BCS game as a member of the ACC.
USFFan
- usffan - 07-27-2005 06:56 PM
omnicarrier Wrote:I've always thought that the travel costs should come out before any "revenue sharing" occurs, anyway.Quote:CyberBull Posted on Jul 27 2005, 04:45 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not just divide the money up equally among the 8 football playing members, with perhaps the only conference champion getting more money b/c of performance?
Big East has always believed in the capitalist point of view - that those who earn the money should get a little bit more. When Miami was aboard it went to the extreme (something like 4 million simply for finishing first). Now its a lot less, but still an incentive and helps defray the traveling expenses of going to a bowl game.
Cheers,
Neil
I should also say that I like the Pac-10's view, which is that the team going gets 50% of the bowl revenue and the remaining 50% is split evenly between the other conference members as well as the conference office.
USFFan
- SO#1 - 07-27-2005 08:15 PM
1st - $4 million + X
2nd – $1.8 million + X
3rd - $1.65 million + X
4th - $1 million + X
5th - $750,000 + X
X = Number TV appearances
ABC - $250,000 home OOC BCS team
ABC - $150,000 away OOC BCS team
ESPN - $125,000 weeknight
ESPN - $125,000 Saturday
ESPN - $25,000 Regional Saturday
- TexanMark - 07-27-2005 09:08 PM
SO#1 Wrote:1st - $4 million + XYou know what ESPN2 and ESPNU pays?
2nd – $1.8 million + X
3rd - $1.65 million + X
4th - $1 million + X
5th - $750,000 + X
X = Number TV appearances
ABC - $250,000 home OOC BCS team
ABC - $150,000 away OOC BCS team
ESPN - $125,000 weeknight
ESPN - $125,000 Saturday
ESPN - $25,000 Regional Saturday
- GunnerFan - 07-28-2005 09:24 AM
Murph1 Wrote:And Miami was still complaining about losing money. Imagine if there was a more evenly distributed revenue stream? Miami would be out of business by their logic.Miami's fear with the finances was first and foremost a problem of their own budgeting, which created a dependency on claiming that lion's share of the football money. IIRC, they lost $2M the last year they won the BE, which meant at that rate they'd be in real trouble if they ever hit a slump in football. Yet if they pushed for a more stable, balanced distribution they also stood to lose money. In Shalala's world it became a matter of increasing revenue and/or cutting costs, and supposedly there was only so much room for the latter. :rolleyes:
That such a reknowned school could reach such levels of financial folly is beyond me. Then again, my ledger isn't a model I'd recommend to other families, either! :D
- omniorange - 07-28-2005 09:42 AM
Quote:SO#1 Posted on Jul 27 2005, 08:21 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1st - $4 million + X
2nd – $1.8 million + X
3rd - $1.65 million + X
4th - $1 million + X
5th - $750,000 + X
The 4 million figure was close to the old rate, which I believe was 4.5 million. But it's definitely out now. Went searching for the article that I read on it but couldn't find it. As I recall, I believe the new figure is in the $ 2.2 - 2.5 million range. The others #2-#4 look right. The article I read didn't mention anything for a 5th place finisher, but I suppose if they go to a bowl it makes sense.
Cheers,
Neil
- JIM15068 - 07-29-2005 12:02 AM
usffan Wrote:Does the P10 BCS rep really get 50% of that revenue???????????omnicarrier Wrote:I've always thought that the travel costs should come out before any "revenue sharing" occurs, anyway.Quote:CyberBull Posted on Jul 27 2005, 04:45 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not just divide the money up equally among the 8 football playing members, with perhaps the only conference champion getting more money b/c of performance?
Big East has always believed in the capitalist point of view - that those who earn the money should get a little bit more. When Miami was aboard it went to the extreme (something like 4 million simply for finishing first). Now its a lot less, but still an incentive and helps defray the traveling expenses of going to a bowl game.
Cheers,
Neil
I should also say that I like the Pac-10's view, which is that the team going gets 50% of the bowl revenue and the remaining 50% is split evenly between the other conference members as well as the conference office.
USFFan
Jim