Conference Realignment

[GTflyer0116]

Back to TV markets - I see us like Rutgers was a decade+ or so ago when the Big 10 was looking for new markets. Rutgers was pitched as this gateway to NYC / Jersey area to expand the footprint of the conference.

We are just like Rutgers, a small city school in a huge city metropolis but a small fan base and low support for athletics.

Do you think pulling in Rutgers was beneficial in the long run and ‘expanded the pie’ for the Big 10? I doubt it and that’s why I really don’t see the Big 10 coming after us…. It’s Big 12 or G5 or some version of an academic league for Tech and again I’ll be there to support the Jackets but I really don’t see this playing out BIG10 for Tech.

 

[orientalnc]

Back to TV markets - I see us like Rutgers was a decade+ or so ago when the Big 10 was looking for new markets. Rutgers was pitched as this gateway to NYC / Jersey area to expand the footprint of the conference.

We are just like Rutgers, a small city school in a huge city metropolis but a small fan base and low support for athletics.

Do you think pulling in Rutgers was beneficial in the long run and ‘expanded the pie’ for the Big 10? I doubt it and that’s why I really don’t see the Big 10 coming after us…. It’s Big 12 or G5 or some version of an academic league for Tech and again I’ll be there to support the Jackets but I really don’t see this playing out BIG10 for Tech.

You need to spend more time with Google. Rutgers has over 70K students! Small city school??? OK, so New Brunswick is a small city and Rutgers is located there. It is also the land grant university in NJ and NJ is not called the Garden State as sarcasm.

I don't know if Rutgers has helped the B1G with TV exposure in NYC (or that enormous market) but that is their problem if it didn't. Atlanta is a VERY different market and the questions about B1G expansion into the Southeast are not close to the ones about NY.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

Back to TV markets - I see us like Rutgers was a decade+ or so ago when the Big 10 was looking for new markets. Rutgers was pitched as this gateway to NYC / Jersey area to expand the footprint of the conference.

We are just like Rutgers, a small city school in a huge city metropolis but a small fan base and low support for athletics.

Do you think pulling in Rutgers was beneficial in the long run and ‘expanded the pie’ for the Big 10? I doubt it and that’s why I really don’t see the Big 10 coming after us…. It’s Big 12 or G5 or some version of an academic league for Tech and again I’ll be there to support the Jackets but I really don’t see this playing out BIG10 for Tech.

you seem to be having some false confirmation biases issues. Rutgers is huge. Concerning the market, the big10 is getting a lot of extra money from that market due to adding them. I would need to see actual facts to disprove that in order to say it is NOT all about the market. otherwise, it is mostly about the markets.

Please provide facts that it is not all about the market

 

[Vespidae]

you seem to be having some false confirmation biases issues. Rutgers is huge. Concerning the market, the big10 is getting a lot of extra money from that market due to adding them. I would need to see actual facts to disprove that in order to say it is NOT all about the market. otherwise, it is mostly about the markets.

Please provide facts that it is not all about the market

FWIW, Rutgers is spread over multiple campuses, not just New Brunswick. NB is about 60% of the total enrollment.

In 2023, Rutgers was watched by 1.15M viewers, according to Nielsen. The number 32 team was Mississippi State at 5M. Rutgers average attendance (2018-2022) was 32,255, a fill rate of 62.25%. Tech, by comparison, was 34,608 and a fill rate of 62.93%.

One could argue that GT is outperforming Rutgers given a significantly smaller fanbase but posting numbers in the same range.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

FWIW, Rutgers is spread over multiple campuses, not just New Brunswick. NB is about 60% of the total enrollment.

In 2023, Rutgers was watched by 1.15M viewers, according to Nielsen. The number 32 team was Mississippi State at 5M. Rutgers average attendance (2018-2022) was 32,255, a fill rate of 62.25%. Tech, by comparison, was 34,608 and a fill rate of 62.93%.

One could argue that GT is outperforming Rutgers given a significantly smaller fanbase but posting numbers in the same range.

my main argument is the big is generating more revenue from their channel per subscriber because Rutgers is there than without them. Not the viewership. There are a lot of BIG alumni in the area watching the channel that dont care about Rutgers.

 

[bobongo]

my main argument is the big is generating more revenue from their channel per subscriber because Rutgers is there than without them. Not the viewership. There are a lot of BIG alumni in the area watching the channel that dont care about Rutgers.

This is going to be a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyway. If B1G alumni are going to watch the channel with or without Rutgers, what does it matter if Rutgers is part of the B1G?

 

[orientalnc]

This is going to be a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyway. If B1G alumni are going to watch the channel with or without Rutgers, what does it matter if Rutgers is part of the B1G?

IIRC, the B1G contract with Fox pays the conference more is there is a conference member in the market. So, having Rutgers in the NYC market is important. That is, if my memory is correct.

 

[Vespidae]

my main argument is the big is generating more revenue from their channel per subscriber because Rutgers is there than without them. Not the viewership. There are a lot of BIG alumni in the area watching the channel that dont care about Rutgers.

Perhaps. Three games, OSU, Michigan, and Northwestern were decently watched games. No other cracked 1M and many not even half that. I would argue that Rutgers has received far more benefit from joining B1G than B1G did by adding them, but you might as well ask "How many angels dance on the head of a pin?"

 

[RonJohn]

IIRC, the B1G contract with Fox pays the conference more is there is a conference member in the market. So, having Rutgers in the NYC market is important. That is, if my memory is correct.

It is the contract for the Big 10 Network with all of the cable/sat/streaming providers. Each subscriber pays for the Big Ten Network. I saw estimates from years ago that the SEC Network received 40 cents per subscriber out of market, and $1.40 for every subscriber in market. I don't exactly remember the estimates for the Big Ten Network, but they were similar. When Rutgers joined the Big10, the revenue for the Big Ten Network increased something like $60-80 million per year. That is solely for Rutgers being an in market team, even if nobody in NY ever watched a single game.

Cable and sat companies are in trouble. Linear streaming providers probably won't be the same in 10-15 years either. However, there is still a ton of money to be made off of linear TV channel subscriptions. Corporations don't kill money makers until they are whithered on the vine.

 

[bobongo]

IIRC, the B1G contract with Fox pays the conference more is there is a conference member in the market. So, having Rutgers in the NYC market is important. That is, if my memory is correct.

Even if not many are watching that conference member. That's what confounds me. So, Rutgers barely moves the needle on bringing in new subscribers but brings in a lot of money for the B1G just because they're in the market area. Okey doke.

 

[orientalnc]

@RonJohn

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

Even if not many are watching that conference member. That's what confounds me. So, Rutgers barely moves the needle on bringing in new subscribers but brings in a lot of money for the B1G just because they're in the market area. Okey doke.

This could very well save us a spot over FSU or Clemson. Location location location. Assuming the ACC does in fact implode. Which I don't believe it will. There are a lot of BIG alumni in the ATL area

 

[orientalnc]

Even if not many are watching that conference member. That's what confounds me. So, Rutgers barely moves the needle on bringing in new subscribers but brings in a lot of money for the B1G just because they're in the market area. Okey doke.

This why Atlanta (and GT) are attractive to the B1G.

 

[UgaBlows]

Even if not many are watching that conference member. That's what confounds me. So, Rutgers barely moves the needle on bringing in new subscribers but brings in a lot of money for the B1G just because they're in the market area. Okey doke.

For every person in the NY/NJ market area who has a cable, satellite, or streaming tv svc with the BIG network as part of their channel package there is somewhere around a dollar increase per month if the BIG has a school in that market.

 

[bobongo]

For every person in the NY/NJ market area who has a cable, satellite, or streaming tv svc with the BIG network as part of their channel package there is somewhere around a dollar increase per month if the BIG has a school in that market.

Even if there isn't a significant increase in viewers or subscribers because of the school in the market, as I would imagine is the case with Rutgers. That's what confounds me. I don't doubt it works that way. I just can't grok why it works that way.

 

[stinger 1957]

Agree.
These young guns belive in court outcomes..

The only thing that makes ESPN happy about acc is with all the squabbling, they have cover to slice and dice - to restore order

"Sorry u college prez couldn't workout a deal. Take or leave it : u top 4 go here in to sec where u gradually get full pay based on performance. The rest of u= your tv money is cut 50% however each year the top 3 teams in conference are paid double. If your tv ratings increase we will escalate a verychealthy portion to you individually .

Lets make the people love acc football
See ya in the fall"

Everybody is happy

I have thought they have been wasting a lot of time back and forth about the legal stuff, what is going to happen is more than likely already worked out, certainly not in all the details and where every school falls but a lot of the schools already know where they will be. Just a matter of getting through it all. Seems to be a lot of academics on here, I remember what a shock it was when I started dealing in the real world.

 

[g0lftime]

Another point about the SEC, if you talk to the fans of the original members- in person or online they will say almost to a man that they did not want, and still don’t want A&M, Mizz, TX, or OK. Well guess what- the powers that be do not care at all what the fans think about or want in expansion, they are just going to ram things thru no matter what we fans want.

Sankey is on a power ego trip.

 

[Randy Carson]

How impactful would it be to the SEC if the Big10 had a team in Atlanta? I can see why that may have been important 30 years ago, but I don't think it carries that much weight anymore. I'm sure it's mentioned during discussions, but not enough to instigate a preemptive move by the SEC.

What I'm saying is not that the SEC needs an Atlanta-based team, but that they don't want the Big to have one.

So, it would be a defensive move for the SEC to add Tech in order to shut the Big out.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

So, we’ve gone around and around for several pages on the same issues. Over and over.

I would like to simplify things if I can.

Over the next ten years which conference do you think will be in a stronger position, the B1G, or the SEC, and why?

 

[RonJohn]

Even if there isn't a significant increase in viewers or subscribers because of the school in the market, as I would imagine is the case with Rutgers. That's what confounds me. I don't doubt it works that way. I just can't grok why it works that way.

It is the old model of channel bundling, which is still in effect. Fox negotiates higher rates for the Big Ten Network in areas with Big 10 teams with the cable/sat/streaming companies. Those companies then build it into the price overall, or like DirecTV, add a regional sports fee to cover the difference. People pay because they want cable TV. Some only watch the local stations, and still pay $150 per month including sports, drama channels, history channels, reality TV channels, etc that they never watch. People don't understand why cable TV rates are so high. The content providers and cable companies don't want people to understand, because it is a cash cow, even to this day. Every subscriber in NY pays more than $1 extra for the Big Ten Network because the contracts are written that way, and none of the consumers understand anything about it. Every subscriber in Atlanta pays more than $1 extra for the SEC Network, even if you are heavily anti-SEC because that is the way the contracts are written, and the consumers do not understand how it works. Even if the consumer understands how it works, the only choice is between having a subscription and not having a subscription. How much the Big Ten Network or SEC Network get from your subscription is totally out of your control.

Everybody is paying for everything, whether they ever watch it or not. It is a dying business model, but it has been dying for 15 years now and is still very profitable. It will likely continue to be profitable until at least the next rounds of conference media contracts.