Next move probably the Big Ten/FOX

[Buckaineer]

The Big Ten's rights will be renewed next year (current deal ends 2023).

They have Ohio State and Michigan and to a lesser degree PSU and Wisconsin, these schools understand what it means to be in a CONFERENCE, so they can't be as easily manipulated as i.e. the BIG 12 was by only self serving OU/UT. They earn more revenue than the SEC now, and may well get higher contracts than the SEC will be too.

Especially if they EXPAND.

ESPN is trying hard right now to tell the B10 that they shouldn't do anything. Why? Because they don't want any of the product they have under contract--or primarily Notre Dame, moving over to FOX (or CBS) in entirety--also not the ratings drawing Big Ten Conference--they don't want to lose everything from that conference to someone else which they very well will.

That's probably a big reason OU/UT are going to the SEC--ESPN didn't want to lose them to the B10 and FOX and that was and is still a possibility (they also didn't want the BIG 12 going to open market--notice in addition to pulling OU/UT away from FOX in entirety, they are also trying to tell us the only hope for the existing schools is to move into ESPN's AAC conference?). Safe bet after the rejection of early negotiations the BIG 12 was going to go to open market. Big East 2.0.

So what the Big Ten does next will be very significant in what ESPN does next as far as who they direct where. Notre Dame? ACC schools? Some of the BIG 12 schools (does FOX have no interest in any BIG 12 inventory going forward?). Who does ESPN want to keep under their belt and how much will they offer those schools and/or conference they move them to?

One can surmise the attempt to smear the BIG 12 core schools as on the level of G5 schools in value is being directed by the family of networks so as to make them not as desirable to a competitor going forward as much as setting up a lowball to get those rights back under contract (but at a much lower pricetag).

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers_rivals]

Expansion is a double-edged sword. Adding teams means you have to increase revenue enough to increase PER SCHOOL payouts. For example, it you go from 10 to 14 schools then you need to increase total CONFERENCE revenue by 40% just to break even. Keep an eye on that bouncing ball.

 

[Buckaineer]

Looking back to the last realignment, we see that valuations of schools were all over the place, while for some reason now we are told i.e. the remaining members have no value.

Remember when Pitt and SU moved from the BE to the ACC? Not only did their revenues more than DOUBLE, but each and every ACC school got about $5 million more.

The SEC--got a network and then an upgraded revenues for adding then mediocre A&M and very mediocre Missouri. Both schools dramatically improved both their and the conferences revenues.

Rutgers and Maryland similarly dramatically shot up the Big Ten rights as soon as they got to a renegotiation.

Utah was a G5 program and Colorado hasn't been much for decades--yet at the time the PAC's revenues increased to what were the highest payouts of any conference when they got their new deal.

So really the networks determine who has value and who doesn't. BIG 12 ratings don't show no value--the BIG 12 schools consistently rated above the PAC and ACC schools outside of Clemson for years on end--now all of a sudden they are worth a quarter of that because i.e. OK State doesn't play 1 game against OU or UT?