http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2012/may/31...firm-says/

Hey, look at me, I'm optimistic!

(05-31-2012 04:37 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Hey, look at me, I'm optimistic!

$11M per all sport school is not what I call optimistic.

Should BYU join and ND agree to play 4 games a year against Big East schools, my optimistic number is $17M per all sport school with $13-15M being "reasonable" numbers.

(05-31-2012 04:48 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 04:37 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Hey, look at me, I'm optimistic!

$11M per all sport school is not what I call optimistic.

Should BYU join and ND agree to play 4 games a year against Big East schools, my optimistic number is $17M per all sport school with $13-15M being "reasonable" numbers.

Do you remember my previous estimates? They were a lot lower than $7-8M for Big East football.

Navigate is a very credible source to me. They're not cronies of one school or another, they're not in the business of selling sports media rights (like Pilson), they're not guys who date back to the 1980s and might or might not really understand today's sports media market(like Pilson). (I'm not trying to dog Pilson that much, he's just the last example so he's the guy I remember.) They're also not recently deposed commissioners of the Big East.

So, as I said on the Big East board,

This is the same company that projected the Pac-12 Networks will soon generate $12-15 million per school per year in addition to the ESPN/Fox money. So now both Pac ADs and BE ADs can hope these guys' estimates are on target.

(05-31-2012 04:56 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Do you remember my previous estimates? They were a lot lower than $7-8M for Big East football.

No, I don't. Should I? Are you in the business of evaluating the worth of sports TV inventory? Do you negotiate TV contracts for a living? What do you do for work?

I pass along what I hear. I don't claim to be an expert.

I wonder what their estimate would be for a Big East without Louisville, UConn and Rutgers. They seem to have a model that allows them to adjust for the presence or absence of specific schools, and if I were BSU and SDSU, I would want to know the answer so I could factor it into my risk assessment.

(05-31-2012 07:02 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I wonder what their estimate would be for a Big East without Louisville, UConn and Rutgers. They seem to have a model that allows them to adjust for the presence or absence of specific schools, and if I were BSU and SDSU, I would want to know the answer so I could factor it into my risk assessment.

Where are Louisville, UConn and Rutgers going? You need an invite if you want to go to the ball, and none of those teams have an invite or a fairy godmother.

(05-31-2012 04:48 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 04:37 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Hey, look at me, I'm optimistic!

$11M per all sport school is not what I call optimistic.

Should BYU join and ND agree to play 4 games a year against Big East schools, my optimistic number is $17M per all sport school with $13-15M being "reasonable" numbers.

That's not going to happen in the near future, and I don't think it will ever happen. ND wouldn't consistently commit to playing 4 BE schools a year in FB even when Pitt and Syracuse were part of the BE - 2 schools that ND has more history with than anyone else in the BE currently - by a lot. If BYU joins, then perhaps they become the one regular BE game. But going through the schedules ND has right now:

2012: (BYU)
2013: Temple, (BYU)
2014: Temple
2015: None
2016: None, but only 11 games scheduled so far. Maybe 1 BE school gets scheduled?

I highly doubt that ND will stomach playing 4 BE schools a year from 2017 and beyond. Typically, ND plays USC, Stanford, Purdue, Mich, Mich St, Navy, Pitt every year (or almost every year), plus they are on record for wanting to play ACC and Big 12 schools on a regular basis - like Syracuse, BC, Texas and Oklahoma. I don't think ND will want to make room for 4 BE schools. Not being mean, I just don't think they'll do it.

(05-31-2012 07:02 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I wonder what their estimate would be for a Big East without Louisville, UConn and Rutgers.

Probably much higher. The Big East apparently improved after WVU, Pitt and Syracuse left, so using this logic (which I gleaned off a CSNBBS board) it stands to reason that the Big East would be even more desireable than it is now if those teams left.

(05-31-2012 08:52 PM)General Mike Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 07:02 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I wonder what their estimate would be for a Big East without Louisville, UConn and Rutgers. They seem to have a model that allows them to adjust for the presence or absence of specific schools, and if I were BSU and SDSU, I would want to know the answer so I could factor it into my risk assessment.

Where are Louisville, UConn and Rutgers going? You need an invite if you want to go to the ball, and none of those teams have an invite or a fairy godmother.

Neither did Pitt or Syracuse until the story broke late one random Friday night last summer. Nothing would surprise me at this point. I could very well see the ACC grabbing UConn and Rutgers for the sole purpose of bumping their TV deal up a little more. That and fixing the divisions might be enough to pacify FSU.

Navigate research seems to be a pretty reliable source for projections. We shall see if they are accurate, as they've also been working with the Pac-12 with their network projections.

Though it is obviously a long shot, the ACC still has its eyes on Notre Dame and - unlike the B12 - ND to the ACC could actually happen if some things fall right. As such, the ACC isn't going to do anything to limit its chances at landing the Irish.

Now, if Florida State and Clemson were to leave for another league (I still think that the SEC is a bigger threat than the B12), that would be very bad news for the ACC but it would be even worse news for the Irish because that almost certainly would mean that the ACC would again be dipping into the BE for two new members - further diluting that league, perhaps fatally.

I sincerely believe that FSU and Clemson defecting to the B12 is a real long shot because it is waaaay too much risk for what would appear to be not nearly enough gain. However, as I have said repeatedly, stranger things have happened. This is a whole new era in college athletics and there have been several bizarre and inexplicable statements throughout this process by people who should otherwise know better.

I still say let's see that B12 contract before making any proclamations either way. Too many people haven't been quite as judicious and most of those people look foolish right now. There is a reason why the B12 hasn't signed it yet and today we're hearing that they may not sign it for several more months. That doesn't make much sense to me unless there is more to this deal than meets the eye. Or maybe they are all waiting on adding FSU and Clemson? I'm sure that's how it will be spun anyway.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see?

Speaking of ACC defections, if that does happen, I think everyone just assumes that the BE would pick Connecticut and Rutgers but I'm not convinced of that at all. I think Louisville would have an outside shot based purely on that school's economic prowess. It's academic profile is problematic but the ACC may have no choice but to accept the Cards. Also, I believe that UCF and USF would be in contention for spots in that league to add more FLA presence to make up for the loss of FSU.

As I said, I do not expect the ACC to lose FSU, and if they do, I believe that it will be to the SEC, not the B12. However, if that does happen, I don't think that is necessarily good news for either UConn or RU.

(05-31-2012 10:17 PM)Big Dub Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 07:02 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  I wonder what their estimate would be for a Big East without Louisville, UConn and Rutgers.

Probably much higher. The Big East apparently improved after WVU, Pitt and Syracuse left, so using this logic (which I gleaned off a CSNBBS board) it stands to reason that the Big East would be even more desireable than it is now if those teams left.

Have you watched Syracuse and Pitt football lately?

FWIW, the president of Navigate told Jon Wilner, about a month before the deal was finalized, that the Pac-12 would get about $220 million a year:

Quote:AJ Maestas of Navigate Marketing, which has done media rights deals for Arizona State and Ohio State, told me that he has revised his estimates for a Pac-12 TV deal to approx $220 million annually, up from $175 million six months ago.

That equates to approx $18.5 million/yr for the schools and would be the equivalent of a walk-off grand slam for Scott.

In the right ballpark, sure, and a helluva lot more than the haters were saying the Pac would get (go back and read some of the old threads on this board for examples) ... but the Pac ended up beating Maestas' estimate by more than $2 million per school per year.

If Navigate's estimates are good but on the conservative side, that's even better news for the Big East.

I'm pleased with this news as no conference has gotten more schitt than the BE. I especially feel for Rutgers as they have been in it from the start.

I never had any doubts that the BE would do better than the deal it turned down. There are just too many variables in the BE's favor right now. Obviously, the BE is not going to get $17 million per team per year (all sports) but I think it could land in the $11-13 million range and if it does, that would be very good news.

(05-31-2012 10:09 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(05-31-2012 04:48 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  ND agree to play 4 games a year against Big East schools,

That's not going to happen in the near future, and I don't think it will ever happen.

Maybe not. But Notre Dame has Temple, BYU and Navy on future schedules. And have played UConn, USF and SDSU in recent years. Plus, they could easily play SMU, Rutgers, etc.

All I know is that the concept was discussed at the recent AD meetings. At the end of the day, Notre Dame may not agree to help. But they might help if we offered them 1/2 a football share of the TV contract (i.e. $3-6M) in exchange for playing half a conference schedule (2 "road" games a year).

Right now, Notre Dame only earns money from about 6-8 football home games a year (not including the bowl). This would allow ND to earn money from 8-10 football games a year.