quo vadis
Legend
Posts: 50,235
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2443
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans |
RE: No early renegotiation for Big 12
(07-10-2021 05:40 AM)schmolik Wrote: (07-09-2021 10:13 PM)quo vadis Wrote: (07-09-2021 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote: (07-09-2021 09:26 PM)quo vadis Wrote: (07-09-2021 08:05 PM)schmolik Wrote: Which is why I said the SEC was the big winner beating the Coronavirus in starting their negotiations early. I'll believe the Big 10 wasn't hurt by COVID-19 when I hear our media deal matches or is somewhere in the ballpark to the SEC.
I'm not so sure about that. I think the B1G is in the driver's seat. Despite the huge raise the SEC got over its CBS deal, it may very well have gotten an even better deal had it waited a couple more years.
I actually think pressure from the B1G is why the SEC didn't wait and signed those 2023 rights with ESPN early. Thanks to wiser decisions made in the late 2000s, the B1G schools are now getting at around $10 million more a year in media money than are SEC schools, and I think the SEC schools were getting very restless for a new "show me the money" deal to assure them that this gap would close. Imagine what schools like Alabama and LSU and Florida must think about Purdue, Rutgers and Maryland getting more media money than them? Signing with ESPN last year did that.
However, IMO you can rest easy: I have little doubt the B1G will get a very nice bump over its current deal in 2024, a bump that will once again vault it past the SEC, even with the SEC getting that new Game of the Week money. B1G football is very valuable and there is always high demand for it so I do not believe you have any reason to fear a soft market. The PAC and B12 might, but not the B1G.
In a perfect world, the SEC would be making slightly more media money than the B1G, because SEC football is slightly more popular and watched. But in 2007-2008, the B1G made the smart move to keep half its rights in reserve via the BTN deal with FOX while the SEC foolishly signed a far more comprehensive, and long term deal, with ESPN that turned out to be very low-ball as rights fees exploded afterwards. Really, the only thing that has saved the SEC and allowed it to be even ballpark with the B1G was the wise decision to have that separate GOTW deal with CBS. Sans that, ESPN would have gotten everything in 2008 and the SEC would probably be making $25m less per school by 2023 than B1G schools.
But make no mistake, after the B1G signs its 2023 deal, it will once again be #1.
Doubtful, very doubtful. Market footprint helped the B1G previously. It won't help as much next time around. They are a solid #2 in actual viewers so they'll be fine. But like all conferences they are running out of time. The college sports bonanza is all down hill after 2035. All demographics take a dip when Boomers are gone and they will be statistically insignificant in 2036. Viewership, donations, attendance, and finances in general all trend down as X'ers can't sustain it by themselves and subsequent generations don't love it in near the numbers or even percentages as Boomers.
And Quo neither you nor I nor the B1G actually knows what the SEC's numbers are. We know it is only over 300 million and that Disney's Ad Company President Thompson said he expected the final numbers to be closer to 400 million than to 300 and we are just talking T1. So he's likely suggesting a total over 350. At the cited 18 million per school increase minimum we are talking 317 and CBS was said to have offered 307.
And you know what? For all of that corporate media money advantage the Big 10 averaged 5 million less per school in total revenue than the average SEC school. So I don't think any SEC school is too concerned about it.
The only conference getting roasted alive by a crappy contract is on the East Coast! They won't renew until negative demographics are upon them.
I agree that the ACC seems to be in the worst media money position. They aren't making any more than the PAC or Big 12 are now, and unlike them they don't have an opportunity to boost their pay via a new deal until well in to the 2030s.
On the other hand, if Oklahoma and/or Texas leave, the Big 12 will wish they were the ACC. The Pac 12 at least is somewhat geographically protected and they've got two big California public schools, USC, and Nike U to keep them relevant. As long as the Pac 12 is the dominant (or at least has a huge) presence in California, they'll still be relevant. Take USC? They still have Cal, UCLA, and Stanford. You would have to take three of the California schools for the Pac 12 to be second fiddle in Cali. Take the University of Texas away from the Big 12 and the Big 12 will be the third conference in the state of Texas (or a distant second if UT goes to the SEC).
Now if the Big 12 and Pac 12 survive this round of recruitment intact and get raises, the ACC will be in the worst shape. But you assume that to be the case and the SEC has also moved to ABC/ESPN, taking potential TV slots away from other conferences and someone is going to lose them. The bad news is the ACC is locked in but the good news is the ACC is locked in. For all we know, the Big 12 and Pac 12 (or you never know, maybe even the Big 10) could get screwed. At least the ACC has something for the next decade.
Yes, I was talking about the media money situation, not the I guess we might call it the "overall conference stability" situation. If that's the issue, I don't the PAC is unstable at all. Despite their struggles of the past several years, I think they remain as fundamentally sound as the B1G or SEC, in other words as anyone. Heck, the PAC has been managing to distribute $33m or so a year to its teams despite all the failures of the past several years. IMO that speaks to its underlying strength, and it has great cultural and geographic stability.
The Big 12 OTOH does have the instability of having two real blue-bloods who are ravenous to keep up with the Jones money-wise, meaning the SEC and B1G. So the 2024 media deal could create instability with them if it doesn't come through. A failure there could throw Oklahoma and Texas on to the free agent market, which would (a) kill the Big 12 and (b) create an opportunity for another "P" conference, including the ACC, to improve itself by adding one or the other.
OTOH, if the Big 12 does stay together after the 2024 deal thanks to a nice raise, then the ACC's tail-end money position could start to wear thin with its ravenous football programs, like FSU and Clemson, creating instability there, despite the GOR.
Heck, I think I'm talking myself in to a position of where maybe the main glue keeping the top football members from getting restless in the ACC is the prospect of greater revenues in the form of (a) a 12 team playoff and/or (b) the Big 12 falling apart and the ACC picking up some valuable pieces. Because the last chamber in the media gun, the ACCN, hasn't seemed to do it.
FWIW, I'm well aware of the GOR, but IMO a GOR like most anything else can be litigated away. At a cost, for sure, but still. Though I admit I am not a lawyer.
(This post was last modified: 07-10-2021 07:33 AM by quo vadis.)
|
|
/
No early renegotiation for Big 12
