SEC Football Is No Longer Untouchable
Once unstoppable, the league now faces tough questions and dwindling confidence as the Big Ten rises to power.
www.si.com
College Sports (Football)
- Status
www.si.com
O$U and scUM had better get on board. No longer Big Two and Little Eight.
I just hope all 18 schools get out of their own way and do what's right for the conference.
www.espn.com
I just hope all 18 schools get out of their own way and do what's right for the conference.
Sources: Big Ten discussing $2 billion private capital deal
The Big Ten is in talks about a private capital deal, which includes a 10-year grant of rights extension through 2046, that would infuse at least $2 billion into the league and its schools, sources told ESPN.
Hmmmm, If you thought your wallet was getting raided now! Actually there may be quite a bit of money being left behind by advertisers/sponsors.O$U and scUM had better get on board. No longer Big Two and Little Eight.
I just hope all 18 schools get out of their own way and do what's right for the conference.
Sources: Big Ten discussing $2 billion private capital deal
The Big Ten is in talks about a private capital deal, which includes a 10-year grant of rights extension through 2046, that would infuse at least $2 billion into the league and its schools, sources told ESPN.
I'm not overly crazy on this part "calls for immediate cash payments to each school, the amount based on a formula that factors in numerous variables including current budgets."
No wonder Whitman said the Illinois budget it approaching 200M.
In reality though, the average IL fan does need to cough up more cashola.
If the big boys just get a much higher total money infusion...I'd have to think long and hard about that.
But, it could provide the needed capital for the renovation.
Private equity ruins every single product it gets a stake in, full stop. There does not exist a single entity that has been acquired by it that has become better for the consumer.
I do believe it’s a matter of when and not if PE gets into college sports. People were afraid of NIL ruining the sport…. This will undoubtedly be worse.
I do believe it’s a matter of when and not if PE gets into college sports. People were afraid of NIL ruining the sport…. This will undoubtedly be worse.
O$U and scUM had better get on board. No longer Big Two and Little Eight.
I just hope all 18 schools get out of their own way and do what's right for the conference.
Sources: Big Ten discussing $2 billion private capital deal
The Big Ten is in talks about a private capital deal, which includes a 10-year grant of rights extension through 2046, that would infuse at least $2 billion into the league and its schools, sources told ESPN.
They do mentioned the deal could be tiered, which is probably why OSU and Michigan are still in discussions, to get a bigger piece of the pie.
Battle89
- Cary-Grove, the better Trojan team
This is exactly why our football resurgence is critical. Maybe this tiered deal will keep the media rights deal spread equally. Regardless, the better we play, the more eyeballs we get, the more $ we can generate.
So much for the innocence of college athletics.
I know what you’re saying , but capital improvements should really be donor funded for the most part .
imo, operational money should be used for all the day to day and year to year stuff across all sports . stadium funding really should come from donations . just gotta work the rolodex a lil harder
The highlighted goes against everything the Big Ten has done to date. It could be someone (O$U) who wants this tiered structure is feeding them info for this story. The only inequalities have been with new members (Rutgers, Maryland, Washington & Oregon) but over time they all get equal shares.
I still can't quite get my arms around why raising PE money is necessary. I can only think a few reasons why you do this as the Big Ten: 1) you feel the market is frothy and raising money now is better than the future media rights cash flow stream, 2) you need money for a large capital intensive project that you hope will add more value than waiting to fund it in a pay-as-you-go situation, or 3) your investor/partner truly brings something to the table you can't do on your own that adds value so it is worth giving up some ownership.
The thing that sucks is that actual professional leagues realized years ago that parity is good for the overall product, and did things to promote it, like revenue sharing and drafting new players based on standings (with worse teams getting higher picks). The Big Ten proposes to move the other way, taking a situation that currently promotes some semblance of parity and making it more uneven so as to amplify the advantages certain programs enjoy.
The big payout is probably going to get this through, but the teams in the lower tiers really need to think about whether it makes sense to further subsidize the already "bigger brands." If by dint of superior resources OSU, Michigan, Oregon and PSU dominate the next 50 years of national championships I suppose that's technically a "win" for the Big Ten, but it's not really a win for the remaining 14 members of the conference.
The big payout is probably going to get this through, but the teams in the lower tiers really need to think about whether it makes sense to further subsidize the already "bigger brands." If by dint of superior resources OSU, Michigan, Oregon and PSU dominate the next 50 years of national championships I suppose that's technically a "win" for the Big Ten, but it's not really a win for the remaining 14 members of the conference.
Battle89
- Cary-Grove, the better Trojan team
I think it is 4) the SEC might so do it first so we'd better keep up / get ahead / get the best deal while we are perceived as the strongest conference.
Concern with private equity is more tail wagging the dog. The dog being universities and college athletics. Also PE creating bubbles and unsustainable spending by universities based on future PE payments.
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
The B1G is the new Red Lobster.
Cheddar bay biscuits. Yum
Enough money for a new Olympic sports/volleyball facility? Maybe even throw in a hockey team? "The amount of those payments is still being discussed, but the basic format, sources told ESPN, is believed to be tiered. All schools in the league are expected to receive at least a nine-figure amount up front." https://www.espn.com/college-sports...ten-discussing-2-billion-private-capital-deal
They're trying to get the deal done --not make a good deal for the sport. There's undoubtedly more money on the table with CFP expansion. They may also be saying they can get congress involved for favorable rules towards the athletes. Give up long term control of your revenue streams for these magic beans, er, to fund the House settlement payment. Yeah, I'm skeptical.
band camp
- STL City
My vote would be to take care of the wrestling team and get Coach Poeta a new facility.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Bigger brands still need wins if their fan bases are going to expect 11-1 records…
The only way I can see a tired deal making sense for all is if it were somehow only tied to apparel or other school-specific items—maybe stadium signage, digital deals related to the school's digital footprint, etc, but even that could cause bigger issues down the road.
If it starts to go into tiering the media rights money, it will be a terrible deal for all. By that, I mean creating even more of a revenue gap between the top 3-4 programs and everyone else, making such a competitive gap that it will ruin the product over time.
As stated, even the NFL, NBA, NASCAR, etc, want a relatively even playing field to ensure competitiveness. If this is structured so that OSU, Michigan, Penn State, and Oregon/USC have such an advantage, they may as well create a 10-12 team league with the top SEC schools and play amongst themselves. I get schools getting more revenue based on certain, select things, but this whole thing falls apart without a relatively level playing field to ensure competitive games at some level.
If it starts to go into tiering the media rights money, it will be a terrible deal for all. By that, I mean creating even more of a revenue gap between the top 3-4 programs and everyone else, making such a competitive gap that it will ruin the product over time.
As stated, even the NFL, NBA, NASCAR, etc, want a relatively even playing field to ensure competitiveness. If this is structured so that OSU, Michigan, Penn State, and Oregon/USC have such an advantage, they may as well create a 10-12 team league with the top SEC schools and play amongst themselves. I get schools getting more revenue based on certain, select things, but this whole thing falls apart without a relatively level playing field to ensure competitive games at some level.
A league of top teams would never make it. Some teams like USC would be at the bottom every year. The SEC has a long history of playing cupcake teams to pad their record and keep their jobs.
This is the key point. Would VC management want to do anything to sabotage their new product?
NFL, NBA, NASCAR, etc insist on strong measures to level the playing field. They do it for business reasons, not out of any sense of fairness. It would be easy to allow or create unbalance and dynasties, but they deliberately work to prevent it. Why would VC see it any differently?
College sports = pro sports and the colleges are franchises.
And if there’s more support for college “franchises” than pro franchises, the collegiate players will end up making more than professionals.
The romanticism of the student athlete living in a dingy dorm and just being a normal student is dead. These guys are pros and the NCAA is now a pro league
And if there’s more support for college “franchises” than pro franchises, the collegiate players will end up making more than professionals.
The romanticism of the student athlete living in a dingy dorm and just being a normal student is dead. These guys are pros and the NCAA is now a pro league
I've been surprised many times by the decisions made for short-term revenue gains while overlooking long-term risks.
In many cases, huge bonuses can be tied to deals, bonuses that do not have clawbacks, so what happens 5-10 years down the road is someone else's problem from the VC's perspective. Why would they care if they locked in 10 years of guaranteed revenue and got paid massive bonuses for signing the deal? I'd bet the people signing these deals won't care if it implodes in 10 years; that's the VC model. VCs only need one or two home runs out of many investments to be successful. This would be a grand slam, even if it blew up after the deal was up.
I hope the ADs and universities aren't looking at a $100M or $200M payout and underplaying what might happen 10 years down the road—and I think they will have this lens on when they evaluate deals. But that kind of money and the immediate benefits can make one downplay downstream risks.
I'd trust the ADs and universities to do what is best, but not the VCs. However, does OSU of Michigan really care if it's a bad deal for UCLA? I have no clue if the ADs truly see the conference parity (or even P5 team competitiveness) as a good thing or if they want to win at all costs, even if it changes the entire landscape.
- Status