I kind of thought we would see some articles about the status of the negotiations by now but I haven't seen anything new.

I'm really interested to see the deal, I think this might have a lot to do with if there is any realignment much before the next 10 years based on the new tv deal money.

Is it just Fox or split between ESPN or some other network and Fox?

Do they get the $45M per team? Is there anyway ACC schools can turn down a $20M difference in revenues?

Later today I saw an interesting post on a Michigan board.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/.../79869742/

“Starting in 2017, all the television broadcasts of a Michigan game at home or any time we play a Big Ten team are sold by the Big Ten Network. Now, the Big Ten network doesn’t televise all of them. ESPN will televise, Fox will televise, but in 2017 this contract starts to deliver our content. For example, in 2017 we play Florida in Texas at Jerry Jones Stadium down there, (and) we wouldn’t be able to see that in the future under this agreement. We could still go down there probably if we worked something out. In ’17 you could have NBC a player in both of our camps but we don’t know because the contracts aren’t settled.”


it leaves them a lot of flexibility with respect to the number of networks that can broadcast their game, getting current market value for their games(upside and downside) and they would be guaranteed to reap the benefits immediately of any expansion they want.

It will be interesting to see how Delany and co. do this deal. I like the idea of selling all the rights to the Big Ten Network and then letting them sub-license to ESPN/ABC, Fox/FS1/FS2, NBC/NBCSN, CBS (well for men's hoops anyway), etc. As was stated it maximizes value if you ever expand as the inventory increases will increase the amount of sub-licensing done. I also posted on the CS&CR board topic on this, but I think it would also allow BTN to control the streaming rights itself which as the move towards streaming and away from traditional cable/satellite happens keeps people having to subscribe to BTN (be it directly or through a cable subscription as is done now) to stream Big Ten sports. It'd even allow for tiered packages like basic gets you the mainline BTN feed plus your school's football and men's basketball. A plus package that gets you that plus streaming events in other sports for your school not being shown on the mainline feed. An everything package that gets you everything BTN is producing/controls the streaming rights for for all schools. I have a strong feeling that's what they're trying to setup for.

I don't know how good of an idea this is. Do the networks buy the games before the season? What if they buy, say, Michigan - Michigan State expecting a "sexy" match up of top teams but one underwhelms and the other had a rash of injuries and both are barely .500? Or what if this is the last opportunity for the Big Ten to sell their TV package before cable crumbles and they missed out on a huge offer.

(02-09-2016 05:43 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I don't know how good of an idea this is. Do the networks buy the games before the season? What if they buy, say, Michigan - Michigan State expecting a "sexy" match up of top teams but one underwhelms and the other had a rash of injuries and both are barely .500? Or what if this is the last opportunity for the Big Ten to sell their TV package before cable crumbles and they missed out on a huge offer.

This article quoting the Michigan AD is the only thing I have seen on it and it would seem the details are sketchy but we speculate on the overall concept. Who knows, do they sell the whole season in advance or only sell he games out a few weeks in advance?

Is this a interesting or brilliant idea on the B1G's part or does it signal they couldn't get the type of long term deal they wanted so they are keeping it short term hoping to renegotiate at better timing?

I believe "NBC a player in both of our camps" refers back to Notre Dame, which is the topic of that segment of the conversation.

I think what Hackett is getting at is that ND and Michigan both commit games to their conference and networks well in advance. This includes keeping a date open in case the TV people want Michigan to play in the Dallas game. Only after the TV people decide that they don't want Michigan in that game for a given year does Michigan then get the chance to find someone else to play OOC.

Complicating matters is Michigan's upcoming 9 game conference schedule and Notre Dame's alternating 2/3 home away ACC schedule. They've used the word "impossible" in describing the scheduling situation.

On the other hand... What if the Big Ten made Ohio State and/or Michigan available on a certain early-season date to BTN. BTN could then broker a bowl-like deal (perhaps 6 months in advance) with another network or arrange for a match-up on BTN or Fox. BTN or Fox could guarantee a minimum payout, with another network potentially arranging for a marquee match-up that would bring in millions of viewers.

The "other network" is critical because they may own the rights to the other half of the match-up. This early-season "bowl" game could be lucrative enough to buy out the school that had previously been scheduled to play on that date. If NBC were to purchase the rights on a certain date for Michigan, it could then facilitate pairing up Notre Dame and Michigan.

I'm just speculating that this could be the "surprise" that Hackett also hinted at... some sort of flexible scheduling. All made possible by BTN retaining the right to broker a deal.

f the B1G is really taking all rights and then sub-licensing them, there are a few interesting aspects that I don't think have been touched on yet.

1. Dividing up broadcasting rights on a game by game or season by season basis addresses one of the issues facing the networks now. There's been speculation that the B1G may not get as big a contract because ESPN and Fox are both cutting costs. The new B1G approach doesn't require the networks to take on a 10 year, $3 billion (or whatever) contract. Instead they can bid on a season by season basis. For the B1G, that maximizes the number of bidders because any network, including the old broadcast stations, can bid on individual games or packages of games. That approach should result in higher overall fees to the B1G.

2. One of the criticisms I've heard about the BTN is that teams lost the exposure that came with local networks. Teams like Purdue or Minnesota don't always get on BTN but in the past a local network, like Raycom, might have televised a package of games. The B1G approach also allows local networks to bid on games or packages of games and let local networks back into the mix.

3. Longer term contracts like the 10 year deal the B1G signed in 2007 tend to be front loaded in the sense that the pricing for the last 2 or so years is well below market - at least as evidenced by the new contracts signed by the conferences recently. The kind of dynamic pricing that the B1G might use solves that problem because the last year of the contract isn't priced until near the last year.

There's clearly risk to the B1G. If college football generally or the B1G brand of it fall in popularity as the years go by, or the networks become less able to pay the kind of money they throw around now, the B1G will wish it had locked up a long term price. If recent history is a predictor, though, the popularity of college football will continue and that means higher revenues for the future. The new approach could be an even bigger win for the B1G than a 10 year deal with ESPN/Fox.

Denaly's #1 priroity for TV deals is max exposure. So I assume NBC OTA and FOX OTA go along with ESPN, FS1 and ESPN.

How many games can Delany get on FOX and NBC? I don't know. I could see fitting two games around Notre Dame games when they play at home and three when Notre Dame isn't on NBC.

(02-12-2016 01:02 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  f the B1G is really taking all rights and then sub-licensing them, there are a few interesting aspects that I don't think have been touched on yet.

1. Dividing up broadcasting rights on a game by game or season by season basis addresses one of the issues facing the networks now. There's been speculation that the B1G may not get as big a contract because ESPN and Fox are both cutting costs. The new B1G approach doesn't require the networks to take on a 10 year, $3 billion (or whatever) contract. Instead they can bid on a season by season basis. For the B1G, that maximizes the number of bidders because any network, including the old broadcast stations, can bid on individual games or packages of games. That approach should result in higher overall fees to the B1G.

2. One of the criticisms I've heard about the BTN is that teams lost the exposure that came with local networks. Teams like Purdue or Minnesota don't always get on BTN but in the past a local network, like Raycom, might have televised a package of games. The B1G approach also allows local networks to bid on games or packages of games and let local networks back into the mix.

3. Longer term contracts like the 10 year deal the B1G signed in 2007 tend to be front loaded in the sense that the pricing for the last 2 or so years is well below market - at least as evidenced by the new contracts signed by the conferences recently. The kind of dynamic pricing that the B1G might use solves that problem because the last year of the contract isn't priced until near the last year.

There's clearly risk to the B1G. If college football generally or the B1G brand of it fall in popularity as the years go by, or the networks become less able to pay the kind of money they throw around now, the B1G will wish it had locked up a long term price. If recent history is a predictor, though, the popularity of college football will continue and that means higher revenues for the future. The new approach could be an even bigger win for the B1G than a 10 year deal with ESPN/Fox.

Any bids by networks other than Fox or ESPN removes the ability of those two to collude on price. They were probably hoping to submit similar lowball bids and share the content.
If this process makes ESPN and/or Fox uncomfortable, they might just make a generous offer to buy the entire T1/T2 package under the previous long-term format. Maybe this was Delany's intention: to introduce more bidders and stimulate the usual suspects to try harder.

http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/big-ten-...ights.html

Quote:BIG TEN CONFERENCE IS NOW TAKING BIDS FROM THE NETWORKS FOR ITS RIGHTS

It’s the one of the last major sports property that will be up for bid to the sports networks this decade. ESPN which currently holds the rights will now be up against CBS, Fox, NBC and Turner in bidding for the Big Ten.

As the current contract ends after the 2016-17 season, the Big Ten hopes that it can get a higher rights fee by getting the networks to bid against each other. The conventional wisdom is that ESPN and Fox will split the main contract. ESPN has been airing football and basketball games, Fox has the Big Ten Football Championship and runs the Big Ten Network, an agreement that runs into the 2030’s.

But as Sports Business Journal reports, both ESPN and Fox have been undergoing cost cuts due to cord cutting and increased sports rights fees so their bids may not be as high as the Big Ten would like.

Jon Nyatawa ‏@JonNyatawa 10m10 minutes ago
Jim Delany confirmed negotiations have started in regard to the Big Ten's new media rights deal. He said nothing more on the topic.

Sources: Fox, Big Ten Closing In On Media Rights Agreement

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily...g-Ten.aspx

Quote:Fox is close to signing a deal that gives it half of the Big Ten’s available media rights package, according to several sources. Deal terms still are flexible – both in terms of money and rights. However, the two sides have agreed on basic terms that will give Fox the rights to around 25 football games and 50 basketball games that it will carry on both the broadcast channel and FS1 starting in the fall of '17. The deal runs six years and could cost Fox as much as $250M per year, depending on the amount of rights the Big Ten conference puts in its second package.

The Fox deal essentially is half of the package of games that had been with ESPN (as part of a 10-year, $1B deal that expires next spring) and CBS (as part of a 6-year, $72M basketball-only deal that also expires next spring). The Big Ten will return to the market to solicit bids on the second half of the package. The conference has the flexibility to allow for another network or two to pick up that half. ESPN will be one of several TV networks engaged for the second half of the Big Ten’s package, along with the usual suspects of CBS, NBC and Turner.

Show me the money!!!!

That's a little lower than I expected. Rumors were an average of $45 Mill per team per year. Assuming the conference office represents an equal share 15 * 45 Mil = $675 Million per year. Half of that would be $337.5 Million. So Fox needs to pony up about $87.5 More Million per year.

Granted I'm not sure what that $45 Million figure includes. If It includes NCAA Tournament Revenue, Bowl Revenue, B1G Network Revenue, etc... then $250 Million is a solid bid for half of the inventory.

Wait a sec. As far as "Tiers" go. My understanding is that BTN picks up Tier 3. So is this "half" of the deal Tier 2 or tier 1 or both?

(04-19-2016 07:03 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  Wait a sec. As far as "Tiers" go. My understanding is that BTN picks up Tier 3. So is this "half" of the deal Tier 2 or tier 1 or both?

It is half of what ESPN/ ABC had, so Tier 1 and 2 basically.

Last year ABC/ESPN showed the following amount of games:

ABC - 21 games
ESPN - 10 games
ESPN2 - 8 games
ESPNU - 11 games
ESPNews - 8 games

BTN had 37 games with one as an internet exclusive, I believe because it was delayed for bad weather. You also had the CCG on Fox as a seperate contract.

In 2014 ESPN/ABC had the following:

ABC - 20 games
ESPN - 5 games
ESPN2 - 16 games
ESPNU - 9 games
ESPNews - 5 games

BTN had 40 games. plus Fox had the BTN CCG.

As far as the old contracts go:

ABC/ESPN was paying 100M per season on average for their package.
BTN Network pays 112M on average until 2031-32 for their package.
Fox pays 24M per year for the Championship game
CBS pays 12M per year for their basketball package.

Going forward, you are splitting the ABC/ESPN contract in 2 and rolling in the CCG package. So 124M quadruples to 500M. BTN contract is locked in for 15 more years. Not sure how much CBS contract would jump up, but I think $650M is a good estimate for the total value of all deals. Also, there is NCAA revenue unaccounted for.

http://www.thegazette.com/subject/sports...t-20160517

Quote:There was no real news on the Big Ten media rights front during Tuesday’s Big Ten meetings. Whatever front there was it was united.

Conference athletics directors and coaches wholly believe that B1G Commissioner Jim Delany will deliver whatever will be perceived as “victory” on the TV front.

“I think folks thought Jim was way outside of the box with the Big Ten Network back in the day,” Nebraska athletics director Shawn Eichorst said. “I don’t see any hand wringing in the room or any anxious folks in the room about what the platform might look like. I think we all suspect that it will be a very robust platform.”

In April, the Sports Business Journal reported that Fox Sports and the Big Ten Conference are close to a media rights deal covering half the available package. Fox is expected to receive the rights to around 25 football games and 50 basketball games it will air on both Fox and Fox Sports 1 for over $250 million per year for six years.

The Big Ten’s primary media rights deal had been with ESPN for football (a $1 billion, 10-year contract) and CBS for basketball ($72 million over six years). They expire at the end of the 2016-17 season.

Fox owns 51 percent of the Big Ten Network and airs the Big Ten title game in football. Fox Sports needs go-to live programming and a boost for its cable entity, Fox Sports 1.

So, Tuesday, it was a topic, but everyone polled deferred to Delany. Wisconsin athletics director Barry Alvarez has broken from Big Ten party lines in the past, but not Tuesday, not on this topic.

“I leave that up to the commissioner,” Alvarez said. “That’s not in my realm.”

The strongest comments, perhaps, came from Michigan State athletics director Mark Hollis. He acknowledged total confidence in Delany and that the process is ongoing. Hollis said Delany has heard from athletics directors and what’s important to each institution.

Quote:“How important is it?” Hollis asked. “I think ESPN has value, but at the same time that value has to attach to what our value is. That’s what the conversation piece is. The important brand for us is the Big Ten Conference, not any one television entity.”

Very interesting.

Jim Delany keeping Big Ten calm, ahead of the game and rich

http://www.si.com/college-football/2016/...jim-delany


Big Ten Conference revenues rise 33% in one year

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/col.../84553752/

Fox already had just announced a few prime football games during their upfront this week. Delany also admitted that Fox will have Big Ten basketball games this coming contract.

https://www.facebook.com/landof10/videos...908957144/

go to -10:20

"...we'll have three partners in football - BTN, Fox and ESPN - and we will have four partners in basketball - same three plus CBS..."


Could this mean FS1 gets a few basketball games during the week? I figure they might couple up games with Big East games on Saturdays.