How Much Will TV Contract Go Up With UConn?

[Django]

Return to guessing irt increase in contract revenues. $6 million seems an awfully low figure, especially since initially we were talking $5m in 2013.
The Value has jumped substantially with performance and 2 Nat. Championships over the last 6 years. Now we will also have a substantial uptick in
content as well with UConn's addition. Thinking closer to $8 million.

dJango's Billion bucks over 12 years, works out to be $7.58 Million and change per school/per year. (11 schools)

I was sarcastically making fun of Aresco when he announced the new American contract. Sounded good the first blush that billion with a “B” and the news reports ran with it but it ended up being really sucky. It’s why UCONN is coming back.

[gtmoBlue]

Actually Django, the Billion figure is a good measuring stick, milestone, etc., for content worth. Thanks.

We got 1/2 B last go round with little indication of our true value. Fox Sports rolled the dice and got a steal for their new networks. Based on performance, tv eyeballs, NCAA bids, 2 Natl Championships (thanks Nova), increased consumer interest in the BE, brand identification, etc., doubling that initial contract figure shouldn't be difficult. THEN we add UConn cred, content, and uptick from renewed rivalry games. Then we add increased interest in the BET @MSG. Nice.
I can envision a 1 to 1.5 Billion contract over 10-12 years.

1 Billion bucks over 12 years, works out to be $7.58 Million and change per school/per year. (11 schools)*
1 Billion over 10 years = $9 Mill per school/per year. (11 schools)*
1.5B - 12 yrs, $11.36 Mill*
1.5B - 10 yrs, S13.63 Mill*
* rough figures before conferences cut.


Remember just 2 years ago this month Fox ponied up $1.5 Bill/6 years for half of the B1G's content (including football) and with ESPN totalled $2.64 Bill for 6 years.
https://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/2016/4 ... l-contract
https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/c ... story.html


Is a $2 Billion contract out of the question?

Old News from 2016. Anyone have an update on this... https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith ... 249eb46ecf
Old news from 2018, " https://www.forbes.com/sites/jppelzman/ ... 2f915658ac

[adoraz]

$2 billion is definitely out of the question, no way our valuation has quadrupled since 2013. Anything close to $1 billion would be great. As for our contract being undervalued, we are mostly basing that on one Boneyard poster rather than media reports. UConn will increase our payout (overall and per school), but they only make up 9% of the conference.

If our TV contract can get to around AAC levels, without football or online streaming costs, then that'd be fantastic. What matters most is overall profit and ours would be significantly higher given the lower costs.

[SamElliott]

$2 billion is definitely out of the question, no way our valuation has quadrupled since 2013. Anything close to $1 billion would be great.

The major bugaboo with predicting anything close to that number (for a basketball league) is the market is already flooded.

By its nature, basketball has a ton of more inventory floating out there than football does. So, unless there is an abnormal spike in ratings for a specific league, I don't know how realistic it is to predict these outlandish increases.

This is why the original Big East was forced to include football in the first place. The market for basketball content is oversaturated with product, and basketball viewership is largely focused on March.

[Django]

This is dated (3 years) and maybe nowhere near reality but it's a vision put out by what looks like (no byline) an entire sports department. Basically says there will be only 24 super college football teams in 2026, and they will be the 1% of college sports. My question is if this "conglomerate" decoupled from the NCAA would that mean that schools like Nebraska and Alabama must keep their astronomical football revenue away from all NCAA sponsored sports? Or at least the NCAA could regulate that aspect while also giving the athletes (soccer and basketball and other more physical sports) better health and other coverage?

https://www.foxsports.com/college-footb ... ame-051616

[gtmoBlue]

$2 billion is definitely out of the question, no way our valuation has quadrupled since 2013. Anything close to $1 billion would be great. As for our contract being undervalued, we are mostly basing that on one Boneyard poster rather than media reports. UConn will increase our payout (overall and per school), but they only make up 9% of the conference.

If our TV contract can get to around AAC levels, without football or online streaming costs, then that'd be fantastic. What matters most is overall profit and ours would be significantly higher given the lower costs.

Some notable articles at the time also stated the contract was undervalued, given the then recent contracts with the B12 and PAC12. Here's one.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/201 ... 40673e6355

Forbes Article: What's in a Name?... Mar 8, 2013; Patrick Riche  https://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/201 ... 3bbcb56355
In professional sports, sometimes players take less money in order to increase their odds of winning a championship (or) in order to enhance their long-term legacy.  LeBron James for example.

In this case from collegiate sports, (C7/Big East) a collection of schools with like-minded philosophical and academic missions have opted to leave money on the table and receive less media money initially in order to protect the long-term legacy of their brand value of their conference name.

And in the long run, they will profit from this wisdom.

[adoraz]

$2 billion is definitely out of the question, no way our valuation has quadrupled since 2013. Anything close to $1 billion would be great. As for our contract being undervalued, we are mostly basing that on one Boneyard poster rather than media reports. UConn will increase our payout (overall and per school), but they only make up 9% of the conference.

If our TV contract can get to around AAC levels, without football or online streaming costs, then that'd be fantastic. What matters most is overall profit and ours would be significantly higher given the lower costs.

Some notable articles at the time also stated the contract was undervalued, given the then recent contracts with the B12 and PAC12. Here's one.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/201 ... 40673e6355

Forbes Article: What's in a Name?... Mar 8, 2013; Patrick Riche  https://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/201 ... 3bbcb56355
In professional sports, sometimes players take less money in order to increase their odds of winning a championship (or) in order to enhance their long-term legacy.  LeBron James for example.

In this case from collegiate sports, (C7/Big East) a collection of schools with like-minded philosophical and academic missions have opted to leave money on the table and receive less media money initially in order to protect the long-term legacy of their brand value of their conference name.

And in the long run, they will profit from this wisdom.

That was written before we started playing games, back in 2013. So it doesn't take into account ratings or anything. There were also some hot takes at the time that we were being overpaid.

While ratings are tough to compare, it's my understanding that the Big East has outperformed the Pac 12 (on FS1 and maybe Fox). Not sure about the other leagues.

Earlier in this thread, some verified Twitter account stated around $6 million per team (and then deleted the Tweet). That would be close to $1 billion depending on how many years. I think that's most likely.

[gtmoBlue]

We've consistently been one of the top 5 conferences over the last 6 seasons, based on head to head, SOS, RPI, overall wins, and other metrics. The body of work has been impressive. Nova has recently won 2 Nattys under the BE banner. We send multiple teams dancing each year and our conf tourney tops the list. Fox Sport ratings have been predictably rising over this span. The conference is in a great position for contract upgrade, with UConn joining up. We can also add UConn's numbers to our talley to conference games, other sports, and increasing interest at the BET with the new format. With the conferences performance over these last 6 years...we deserve an improved contract.

[SamElliott]

We've consistently been one of the top 5 conferences over the last 6 seasons, based on head to head, SOS, RPI, overall wins, and other metrics. The body of work has been impressive. Nova has recently won 2 Nattys under the BE banner. We send multiple teams dancing each year and our conf tourney tops the list. Fox Sport ratings have been predictably rising over this span. The conference is in a great position for contract upgrade, with UConn joining up. We can also add UConn's numbers to our talley to conference games, other sports, and increasing interest at the BET with the new format. With the conferences performance over these last 6 years...we deserve an improved contract.

To get an improved contract, there would need to be a bidding war.

UConn’s addition can work both ways.

If ESPN were to bid on the content, it’s a given that ESPN+ will be included in the bid. For one, there just aren’t enough available linear windows. For two, ESPN is more aggressive for ESPN+ content right now than it is elsewhere in its programming.

Would ESPN engage in aggressive negotiations considering UConn’s acrimonious exit, in which they publicly opposed ESPN+?

I just don’t know who else would remotely be a player at a level surpassing the current deal.

[adoraz]

We've consistently been one of the top 5 conferences over the last 6 seasons, based on head to head, SOS, RPI, overall wins, and other metrics. The body of work has been impressive. Nova has recently won 2 Nattys under the BE banner. We send multiple teams dancing each year and our conf tourney tops the list. Fox Sport ratings have been predictably rising over this span. The conference is in a great position for contract upgrade, with UConn joining up. We can also add UConn's numbers to our talley to conference games, other sports, and increasing interest at the BET with the new format. With the conferences performance over these last 6 years...we deserve an improved contract.

Ok, I agree we deserve an improved contract. I'm just saying it's going to be around $1 billion and nowhere near $2 billion. Our ratings have consistently gone up, but I'm wondering if that is due to FS1 ratings in general improving (with the addition of the B1G, for instance). Until I see more evidence supporting this (besides the one Boneyard poster), I am going to assume we'll end up either slightly below $1 billion or best case a tiny bit over.