Realignment and the balance of power

Discuss the MVC hoops season here.

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby uniftw » June 12th, 2013, 10:18 pm

rlh04d wrote:On the other hand, the majority of football money goes to football. Even the ACC's commissioner recently (if I remember correctly) stated that more than 75% of the conference's TV contract was from football.

Each school in the B1G gets about 25 million dollars a year from the BTN....and with the addition of hockey to the conference next year, each school with hockey is going to get 2 million more. LAX is also going to be a B1G sport next year (or the year after) don't be shocked if that adds a million or two to their athletic department. I know you said ACC, but if 75% of that goes to football, that still leaves roughly 6.75 million dollars for the rest of the athletic department

Cold is right on the money here...pause to see if I bust into flames for saying that..........The big time players from the Big East are now heading elsewhere, though stuck in limbo in the AAC for a year or two.

1. Louisville is gone to the ACC next year. I know Casey spent thousands of words saying with L'ville sucks in all aspects of the university a couple months ago...but look at what their athletic department has accomplished in the last 12 months, and look where it is going. 10 years ago they were no different than Houston...they are currently the hottest university there is athletically.

2. UCONN - will be gone as soon as they figure out what they are doing with football. That seems to be the hold up with them.

3. Cinci - will be gone to the B12 sooner rather than later.

4. Rutgers - B10 next year.

That leaves the AAC with CUSA from 3 years ago.



The NBE has litterally all mid-majors (though more widely known mid-majors) and 3 teams from the old Big East that are only really known because of what they accomplished before most of the current recruits were walking. Not just that, a lot of the Big East basketball revenue came from Syracuse, Louisville, UCONN, and Cinci...oh and now there is no BCS money to be used (even if it was only 25% of the money). The Big East got 24 million dollars for Louisville just stepping foot on the Superdome floor for warm ups last year.


It may not be evident right up front, but the money that the PAC12, B12, B10, ACC, and SEC are going to get from this new football set up is going to start to put a big gap between them and the non football/non power conference football schools/conferences. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... s/1762709/





More fun reading

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2012/05/09/did-acc-teams-get-ripped-off-with-new-espn-tv-contract/
USA Today‘s report says that the rights fees are expected to pay $17 million to each of the 14 conference schools. That means the total deal is worth about $238 million per year, an annual increase of more than $80 million from the previous contract, and $3.6 billion over the contract’s 15 year life. The new deal was expected, given the conference’s recent expansion.

The Big 12 has reportedly agreed to a new deal with ESPN and Fox, said to be worth a combined $2.6 million over 13 years, or about $200 million annually. It’s a smaller annual value than the ACC’s deal, though when split among the Big 12′s ten teams it is worth $20 million per conference member, a cool $3 million more than each ACC school will take home. The Pac-12′s $2.7 billion TV deal takes effect next season and pays $225 million annually, or about $19 million per team. So why did the ACC agree to less per school, especially after offering ESPN a host of expanded rights?


Yeah, that new contract gives each school 17 MILLION MORE DOLLARS PER YEAR yet "experts" don't think it will work and they'll end up like the Big East did.

The B12 is now pulling in 20 million per team
Pac 12 19 million per team
B10 is about 25 million per team


What about the SEC? Surely they won't see a surge in revenue for non-football sports to separate themselves from others in every other sport?

WRONG.

They are about to get the highest pay day yet...by far

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/sec-hits-bigtime-paydirt-with-network-deal-pc9qf24-206126081.html
So on August 6, 2014, the SEC Network will go to air.

What does that mean for the 14 schools in the Southeastern Conference?

It means money. Lots of money.

According to one report, the new television and digital rights deal between ESPN and the SEC, which runs from 2014-'34, will bring each school in the conference as much as $35 million each fiscal year. Another report estimated about $29 million each year.

Last year, each school received about $20 million under its current rights deal.

Compare that with the Big Ten Conference revenue from its television rights deals, including the Big Ten Network.

Last summer, according to the Big Ten, each team in the league received at least $23.7 million for TV rights and NCAA tournament revenue in fiscal year 2011-'12. A Forbes magazine report listed the conference's TV rights revenue alone at $250 million, 80.6% of its total revenue.


Even if football takes 75 percent of that, the lowest any member of the power 5 conferences is walking away with for the rest of their athletic department is about 5 million...with most being closer to 6 or 7 million. good bye spending any money on womens sports and low level mens sports. The network payout covers that. Lets dump the rest of the resources in football and basketball!








It's not going to be long before those 5 are their own division and the rest of us are left to pick up the pieces and figure out what to do next.
uniftw
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: January 20th, 2011, 9:01 pm

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby rlh04d » June 12th, 2013, 11:06 pm

uniftw wrote:
rlh04d wrote:On the other hand, the majority of football money goes to football. Even the ACC's commissioner recently (if I remember correctly) stated that more than 75% of the conference's TV contract was from football.

Each school in the B1G gets about 25 million dollars a year from the BTN....and with the addition of hockey to the conference next year, each school with hockey is going to get 2 million more. LAX is also going to be a B1G sport next year (or the year after) don't be shocked if that adds a million or two to their athletic department. I know you said ACC, but if 75% of that goes to football, that still leaves roughly 6.75 million dollars for the rest of the athletic department

I mean that at least 75% of what TV networks are paying for is from football, and so the ACC's basketball product is much less valuable than the football. Not that they're actually only putting 75% of the TV deal back into football. I'm not sure how much the ACC teams spend on basketball ... but I know for a fact that Florida State does not take $6.75 from the TV contract to spend on the rest of the athletic department.

2. UCONN - will be gone as soon as they figure out what they are doing with football. That seems to be the hold up with them.

3. Cinci - will be gone to the B12 sooner rather than later.

It'll be interesting to see what UCONN does with basketball. I'm not sure Cinci goes to the B12 any time soon, though. The big boys (Texas, Oklahoma) seem to be very happy with the status quo and don't seem to want to expand.
User avatar
rlh04d
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2442
Joined: February 24th, 2012, 9:15 pm

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby Lakesbison » June 13th, 2013, 7:19 am

Is there an effort like football to become just the big 5 conf. And squeeze out the rest in basketball. ?
Lakesbison
MVC starter
MVC starter
 
Posts: 229
Joined: August 18th, 2010, 7:40 am

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby Wufan » June 13th, 2013, 10:45 am

Lakesbison wrote:Is there an effort like football to become just the big 5 conf. And squeeze out the rest in basketball. ?


Not while there is so much FBS money up for grabs; however, I believe there are some BCS schools that would like to break away from the NCAA and pay players. If that is the case, they will create their own association and NCAA will be a second tier shadow of itself.
Wufan
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 4106
Joined: October 19th, 2010, 8:14 pm

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby squirrel » June 13th, 2013, 3:55 pm

Wufan wrote:
Lakesbison wrote:Is there an effort like football to become just the big 5 conf. And squeeze out the rest in basketball. ?


Not while there is so much FBS money up for grabs; however, I believe there are some BCS schools that would like to break away from the NCAA and pay players. If that is the case, they will create their own association and NCAA will be a second tier shadow of itself.


Basketball is irrelevant. There will be 4 16-20 team "superleagues" that will likely walk and separate from the NCAA. They will take their basketball, baseball, hockey, volleyball and soccer with them because they will still likely be subject to Title IX.
squirrel
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 876
Joined: August 4th, 2010, 11:49 am

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby TheAsianSensation » June 14th, 2013, 8:51 am

RIght now there's a LOT of money in the basketball tournament as is. I have to think the Big 5 conferences look at that and see they'd lose money on that exchange with a breakaway. Of course the football money would make up for that, and then some. But I think the mindset for those 5 conferences will be to first claim superiority through at-large bids and tourney performance, so that a breakaway is cleaner when it happens.

UConn's in a weird position. I'm not sure they get invited with the big boys anymore. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped footbal a level and joined the Big East, if they get a sniff that a split will happen and that it would include the Big East for non-football sports too.

I'm convinced Cincy winds up in the Big 12 eventually. They absolutely cannot leave West Virginia on an island for much longer.
http://bracketball.blogspot.com/ A national version of the world-famous TAS Bracketology. Spread the word
TheAsianSensation
MVCfans.com
MVCfans.com
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: April 6th, 2012, 7:23 am

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby frankthetank » June 14th, 2013, 2:17 pm

TheAsianSensation wrote:RIght now there's a LOT of money in the basketball tournament as is. I have to think the Big 5 conferences look at that and see they'd lose money on that exchange with a breakaway. Of course the football money would make up for that, and then some. But I think the mindset for those 5 conferences will be to first claim superiority through at-large bids and tourney performance, so that a breakaway is cleaner when it happens.

UConn's in a weird position. I'm not sure they get invited with the big boys anymore. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped footbal a level and joined the Big East, if they get a sniff that a split will happen and that it would include the Big East for non-football sports too.

I'm convinced Cincy winds up in the Big 12 eventually. They absolutely cannot leave West Virginia on an island for much longer.


Trust me on this: the power conferences HATE the way that the NCAA Tournament revenue system is structured. HATE IT. That's why they have fought tooth and nail against anything close to resembling the same type of tournament for football. Even though the power conferences receive the lion's share of NCAA Tournament money and at-large bids, it still "only" amounts to around 60% of that revenue. They legitimately believe that they should be getting close to 90% of it (similar to football) with the argument that the "Cinderella" aspect of the tourney means nothing if they're not playing the Goliath power programs that are bringing in the TV viewers and money. (This isn't an entirely unfair argument, as there would be little casual fan appetite if March Madness consisted only of Bracket Buster-type matchups.)

So, the power conferences would form their own basketball tournament if they were to split off and not think twice about it. Now, those power conferences may find reasons why the current NCAA structure still works for them in football, but make no mistake about it, the ability to keep all of the postseason basketball revenue for themselves is actually a major positive (in their eyes) to splitting off from the non-power conferences.
frankthetank
MVC Bench Warmer
MVC Bench Warmer
 
Posts: 25
Joined: April 16th, 2013, 7:50 am

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby mvcfan » June 14th, 2013, 8:56 pm

frankthetank wrote:Trust me on this: the power conferences HATE the way that the NCAA Tournament revenue system is structured. HATE IT. That's why they have fought tooth and nail against anything close to resembling the same type of tournament for football. Even though the power conferences receive the lion's share of NCAA Tournament money and at-large bids, it still "only" amounts to around 60% of that revenue. They legitimately believe that they should be getting close to 90% of it (similar to football) with the argument that the "Cinderella" aspect of the tourney means nothing if they're not playing the Goliath power programs that are bringing in the TV viewers and money. (This isn't an entirely unfair argument, as there would be little casual fan appetite if March Madness consisted only of Bracket Buster-type matchups.)

So, the power conferences would form their own basketball tournament if they were to split off and not think twice about it. Now, those power conferences may find reasons why the current NCAA structure still works for them in football, but make no mistake about it, the ability to keep all of the postseason basketball revenue for themselves is actually a major positive (in their eyes) to splitting off from the non-power conferences.


I read an article that said that you are wrong. Some don't like the present system and others feel that if the NCAA tournament (which is now a successful venture) is carelessly altered, they could ruin it. I don't doubt that the tournament will be changed (it's inevitable). However, with over 300 current Div. I teams, the BCS dropping all teams will not likely happen (that would bring it down to 80 teams). Who would they play games with? They are more likely to cut it in half or maybe a little more and take away all of the automatic bids that are given to the bottom seeds. I hope that the MVC continues to be respected enough to not be in the bottom half. There are too many teams/schools in our conference who consider themselves mid majorish, are not willing to make a strong commitment to basketball, and don't care if they are respected on a national scale for basketball.
mvcfan
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 634
Joined: July 31st, 2012, 10:57 pm

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby TheAsianSensation » June 17th, 2013, 9:53 am

frankthetank wrote:Trust me on this: the power conferences HATE the way that the NCAA Tournament revenue system is structured. HATE IT. That's why they have fought tooth and nail against anything close to resembling the same type of tournament for football. Even though the power conferences receive the lion's share of NCAA Tournament money and at-large bids, it still "only" amounts to around 60% of that revenue. They legitimately believe that they should be getting close to 90% of it (similar to football) with the argument that the "Cinderella" aspect of the tourney means nothing if they're not playing the Goliath power programs that are bringing in the TV viewers and money. (This isn't an entirely unfair argument, as there would be little casual fan appetite if March Madness consisted only of Bracket Buster-type matchups.)

So, the power conferences would form their own basketball tournament if they were to split off and not think twice about it. Now, those power conferences may find reasons why the current NCAA structure still works for them in football, but make no mistake about it, the ability to keep all of the postseason basketball revenue for themselves is actually a major positive (in their eyes) to splitting off from the non-power conferences.

There's no question they hate it, sure. But if they do break away, a 64 team tournament would include some awful teams. The product they would offer would be drastically worse, and the money would worsen as a result, I think. You may enhance the product for the 2nd week, but the product takes a big, big hit in week 1. Now, it's not enough of a penalty to stop the breakaway from happening anyway, but I think they lose a bit if they split off and try and get their own deal.

I think the big boys would prefer to play this out a few years. With expanded numbers, maybe they dominate the at-large bids moreso and scoop up more money. If the little guys keep making inrows, it's just another incentive to take the risk in breaking away.
http://bracketball.blogspot.com/ A national version of the world-famous TAS Bracketology. Spread the word
TheAsianSensation
MVCfans.com
MVCfans.com
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: April 6th, 2012, 7:23 am

Re: Realignment and the balance of power

Postby Red » June 18th, 2013, 12:07 pm

If the big boys can control the tournament or start their own and get more money, I am sure it is being discussed.
Red
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 958
Joined: August 4th, 2010, 3:37 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Missouri Valley Conference Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BigMacAttack and 87 guests