I'm quoting myself. Pollard evidently isn't providing the numbers for the mighty cyclone internet webpage network. If anybody really cared they could seek right to information processes to find out. But then again...who cares.
Big 12 expansion
- Thread starter grosie#2
- Start date
Didn't see your post until now. This has been addressed before.
ISU got $23+ million from the Big XII, plus the tier three rights. Those were incorporated into the overall media deals with Learfield and Mediacom, so as far as I know, there isn't a specific line-item (unlike Texas, which gets $15 for its tier three rights from ESPN via the LHN). If there is, I haven't found it.
Based on what I've read and seen from other schools, I think a good guess for ISU would be somewhere between $2 million and $5 million. The numbers I've seen show West Virginia at $9 million, Kansas at $6 million and Kansas State at a little under $4 million.
You think???? Who cares what you think. Provide facts and not what "you think" because your thoughts are often lies and a bunch of made up bs
If the numbers were so impressive, Pollard would share them; but, hey, we get to hear what Lonely Clown thinks, instead......
23m+2m<32m 23m+5m<32m. With the numbers that have been listed in these articles we have Texas 15m, West Virginia 9m, Kansas 6m and K State 4m(I read 3 elsewhere but to allow for rounding), total 34m, leaves 41m left to get to that 75m 3rd tier rights. That leaves Baylor, Iowa State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU and Texas Tech to reach that. Is that pretty close?
$75,283,516. Good enough for 6th to last among P5 schools.
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
IF the $75 million is correct, yes. But in looking over this stuff, that number appears to have come from Bowlsby, and I don't know if it's based on actual numbers or if it's just something he pulled out of his butt for the purposes of discussion.
We're straying a bit here, anyway. The point is that the third tier rights are a significant factor that can't be ignored when comparing revenues schools get from media contracts; in other words, we can't look at the specific payouts from conferences and think we're looking at the same thing, because we aren't.
There are other factors, as well; while it could be argued that Kansas State's third-tier rights would be bringing more than ISU's because of their football program, that might not be the case because (1) basketball, both men's and women's, is significant; and (2) ISU has a better developed network infrastructure for delivery of the product.
And -- as seems always to be the case when we start comparing schools -- different schools arrange their numbers in different ways. For example, I found a Forbes piece listing the revenues from media contracts from a few years ago. This would be coaches' shows, radio, that kind of thing. Exclusive of TV rights. It shows ISU at $2.6 million.....and Iowa at $1.7 million, and Texas at about $500,000. Obviously, not apples to apples, as I'm sure Iowa and Texas bring in more money for those things than does ISU.
If you are pointing out how much bang ISU gets for its buck, you are correct. Revenues are better than only 5 P5 schools, but the Cyclones top 15 P5 schools in the all-sports rankings.....and it wasn't a very good year for ISU sports.
You presented the number here and it was I believe incorrect. Third tier money was a little difficult to track down and accounting is a factor as it showed Oklahoma drawfing Oklahoma in their 3rd tier revenue. While it isn't money to sneeze at the conference deals are where the bigger money will come from in the next round. Did I say your original information may have been pretty inaccurate
Now would be the most appropriate time for... 'fish just gotta swim. birds just gotta fly' and LC just gotta keep on being the largely misinformed, overly obsessed poster on HR.
Well, I used the best sources I could find. What sources are you using to determine mine were inaccurate? If yours are better, I'll gladly use them; the whole point is to get the best information available.
What point are you trying to make? Are you suggesting the third tier rights are insignificant to the discussion we're having?
Of course the conference deals are where the bigger money will come from; it's where the bigger money comes from now. As I've pointed out a couple of times, ISU got a shade over $23 million from the conference this year, which was far more than the third tier rights produced, whatever it was. Which only makes sense, since third tier rights are for events the big nets don't think are worth the bother. And as Bowlsby (and others) have pointed out several times, if the Big XII does nothing, it will fall far behind the BiG and SEC a decade or so down the road.
Thank you. Although unlike previous years, Iowa was not one of the schools that finished behind ISU this year.
I'm sorry LC, you do have a history of spinning these numbers so the gap in revenue doesn't appear as large as it is. You continually throw out the 3rd Tier revenue as being the ultimate revenue stream that keeps the Big 12 in the same arena as the BIG and SEC yet you can't assign a dollar value to it, other than UT and the LHN.
If the 3rd Tier revenue streams were so great and able to make up the difference then OU would be happy and not looking to GTFO of the conference.
If the 3rd Tier revenue streams were so great and able to make up the difference then OU would be happy and not looking to GTFO of the conference.
Sometimes watching the BTN it seems like OSU and Michigan have their own network.
Third tier rights are a giant bucket of various items. The B12 is not the only conference whose schools are paid for these rights.
See this link on WVU's contract, which pays them an average of ~$6.7M per year:
http://wvmetronews.com/2013/07/11/img-earns-tier-3-deal-for-80-million/
"The contract covers television rights for one nonconference football game and several men’s and women’s basketball games not selected by national networks, radio broadcast rights and coaches’ shows. It also includes online rights and various advertising opportunities including signage and sponsorships at all WVU athletics facilities."
The only thing in that list of rights that B10/SEC/P12 schools don't retain the rights on is one non-conference game per year. The coaches shows, radio shows, in-stadium signage, etc., are all being sold by B10 and SEC schools at similar (or higher) rates as B12.
Iowa was paid $5.8M by Learfield in 2013-14, and will be making over $8M by 2025.
http://www.thegazette.com/2011/09/0...ts-athletics-department-more-than-5-8-million
Ohio State receives over $10M a year from IMG, which also notes that Florida and Alabama get $9.4M:
http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2009/03/30/daily4.html
Note that the OSU article says: "Most of IMG’s other deals include some level of TV rights that can be worth another $1 million to $2 million a year."
Which is consistent with the value of a single college football game, i.e., the single non-conference game that B12 teams retain the rights to. So, the B12 additional TV rights boils down to a single non-conference game, generally the absolute worst game on the schedule. What do you think the value of this year's WVU-Youngstown State game is on the open market?
Last year, WVU had a game against Liberty televised on Root Sports Pittsburgh, a regional affiliate of FSN. How much do you think Root Sports Pittsburgh paid for that game? I would be absolutely astonished if they received $1M for it, something like $300k sounds more likely.
The UNI/ISU game was televised on Cyclones.tv and available to pay to watch on the Cyclones web site. How much actual dollars did that game net for ISU?
Bottom line: B12's third tier TELEVISION rights are worth roughly $1M per year over the other conferences.
And their other third tier rights are generally worth less since they are low-population areas.
See this link on WVU's contract, which pays them an average of ~$6.7M per year:
http://wvmetronews.com/2013/07/11/img-earns-tier-3-deal-for-80-million/
"The contract covers television rights for one nonconference football game and several men’s and women’s basketball games not selected by national networks, radio broadcast rights and coaches’ shows. It also includes online rights and various advertising opportunities including signage and sponsorships at all WVU athletics facilities."
The only thing in that list of rights that B10/SEC/P12 schools don't retain the rights on is one non-conference game per year. The coaches shows, radio shows, in-stadium signage, etc., are all being sold by B10 and SEC schools at similar (or higher) rates as B12.
Iowa was paid $5.8M by Learfield in 2013-14, and will be making over $8M by 2025.
http://www.thegazette.com/2011/09/0...ts-athletics-department-more-than-5-8-million
Ohio State receives over $10M a year from IMG, which also notes that Florida and Alabama get $9.4M:
http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2009/03/30/daily4.html
Note that the OSU article says: "Most of IMG’s other deals include some level of TV rights that can be worth another $1 million to $2 million a year."
Which is consistent with the value of a single college football game, i.e., the single non-conference game that B12 teams retain the rights to. So, the B12 additional TV rights boils down to a single non-conference game, generally the absolute worst game on the schedule. What do you think the value of this year's WVU-Youngstown State game is on the open market?
Last year, WVU had a game against Liberty televised on Root Sports Pittsburgh, a regional affiliate of FSN. How much do you think Root Sports Pittsburgh paid for that game? I would be absolutely astonished if they received $1M for it, something like $300k sounds more likely.
The UNI/ISU game was televised on Cyclones.tv and available to pay to watch on the Cyclones web site. How much actual dollars did that game net for ISU?
Bottom line: B12's third tier TELEVISION rights are worth roughly $1M per year over the other conferences.
And their other third tier rights are generally worth less since they are low-population areas.
15 seconds on google finds news on the ISU-Learfield contract:
http://www.thegazette.com/2011/09/12/iowa-state-would-pay-big-penalty-if-marketing-contract-appealed
13 year/$53M, or a shade over $4M a year. It is early in the contract, so they're probably pulling in about $3M from Learfield right now. Iowa is near $6M right now.
ISU does have the Mediacom deal for Cyclones.tv. The only articles I've found about that agreement, from when it was initially signed ~4 years ago, say the financial payout was minimal to provide maximum flexibility to ISU.
http://www.thegazette.com/2011/09/12/iowa-state-would-pay-big-penalty-if-marketing-contract-appealed
13 year/$53M, or a shade over $4M a year. It is early in the contract, so they're probably pulling in about $3M from Learfield right now. Iowa is near $6M right now.
ISU does have the Mediacom deal for Cyclones.tv. The only articles I've found about that agreement, from when it was initially signed ~4 years ago, say the financial payout was minimal to provide maximum flexibility to ISU.
Good grief. I have cited numbers from the Big XII commissioner and from articles on various objective media, and you're in denial.....and I can't even imagine why you are in denial. I have made it clear I'm talking about the situation right now, and that it will change dramatically when the SEC and BiG sign new contracts.
I haven't said the third tier rights are "the ultimate revenue stream" or anything remotely like it. I have said, quite simply and accurately, that they are significant and can't be ignored if you are trying to make a valid comparison between conferences. The SEC and the BiG (and the others) take the third-tier rights from the schools, market them, and return the money to the schools. The Big XII lets the schools market their own third-tier rights. Ergo, you have to count the latter if you're going to make a comparison that means anything.
As for your hypotheticals: If third-tier rights are negligible, why do all the other conferences insist of having them, instead of allowing the individual schools to market them as they please?
I have no idea what's driving the Oklahoma president's hobby horse. I know his board of regents has slapped him down, and so has the league office.
I dont' see much point in spending more time on this particular subject. You can probably Google as well as the next person; I'd advise giving it a try if you're interested in the subject.
Lone Clone, any response to what I posted? The B12 third tier rights doesn't come anywhere close to making up the difference between the conferences. The B12 is a huge laggard. I'll hang up and listen, but I don't think you'll have anything to say.
Enough of the nonsense. Anyone that cares to further waste their time/energy can reread your posts on the matter. Your initial sentiment/assertion was that the big xii was receiving as much (or very nearly as much) as the SEC and/or Big Ten because of these tier three 'rights'. Now that that has been shown to be mostly just another 'hope nobody bothers to actually check' from LC, the story changes from you. How so very typical.
Or, maybe you can show where you cited so clearly all of your sources on the tier-three issue (s).
In the context of your argument, either the tier-three monies compensate for any difference resulting from league receipts for television/media distribution or they do not. Simple question - which is it? Most reliable sources (many which have been duly noted here in this very thread) indicate that a significant difference in revenues to schools exists regardless of inclusion of the tier-three rights.
Time will tell what is to happen, but do you truly think that what you are saying about the OU President will have any actual bearing should they opt to leave the big xii?
Take your own advice and research before coming here with your 'expertise' which is always followed by your rants about how you were misquoted, not understood, dealing with someone less capable of arriving at conclusions that may be different than your own. The act is way past old and worn out. It now borders on pathetic. Take a break from HR and allow yourself to truly see what a fool you have become.
I found West Virginia, Kansas, KState and Texas on line, never saw Bowlsbys comment about 75m so I used your numbers, figured out the other schools would need to average 7m to get to those numbers to make it work and knew you were hoping nobody would even question your post. The really bad part was you stating that it was essentially even when you knew it wasn't. You don't miss details that badly that often. Your attempt to steer away after the damage was done is admirable but doesn't change the erroneous posts.
and you are a clown fan who posts on a Hawkeye site, where I have OFTEN seen other posters say that you don't let the facts get in the way when it comes to the crap you type up and post
so, yeah, Lonely Clown, you have a reputation here for making up things/numbers without supplying any supporting links; and we are supposed to just take your word for it, especially with your reputation on here? Not a chance.
Lonely CLOWN ignores the truth; thanks for your post btw
Thank you; i am glad i am not the only one sick and tired of his crap
I wonder if there is a Lone Hawk posting on CyCLOWN fanatic? Doubt it. LOL
Oh, bullshit.
Based on the $75 million figure, it does indeed come out essentially even. I have been extremely careful not to overstate the argument, and extremely careful to stress that I was talking averages. Texas brings in a lot more than any school in the BiG or SEC ($15 million for third-tier rights plus $23+ million from the conference, total $38 million+). Iowa State brings in less.
I haven't "steered away" from anything. I said from the outset that I hadn't been able to find specific numbers for most of the schools, including ISU.
My original point remains the only point I'm trying to make in this discussion, which is twofold: First, that any comparison MUST include revenues from third-tier rights in the Big XII; Second, that when this is done, the average difference between the BiG, SEC and Big XII is negligible NOW.
If the $75 million figure is wrong, then my numbers are wrong. I've seen no evidence that it's wrong. Nothing would please me more than to find a definitive source giving third-tier revenues for all 10 Big XII schools. But I suspect, based on your comments, that it wouldn't make any difference to you. Which surprises me, because you've always been a pretty reasonable poster.
I hadn't seen your posts, ichawk24. Wasn't ignoring you. Some of the points you raised were, I think, addressed in my response to CID.
The more I look at this, the more confused I get. The $75 million figure is looking more and more dubious. I WAS able to find a reference to it, and it wasn't Bowlsby. It was a column by Dennis Dodd, who frequently knows what he's talking about vis-a-vis the conference. Here's that column:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...o-something-soon-or-else-seven-things-to-know
I also see how I got the idea it was Bowlsby making the remark. I think the first time I saw it was in this column by Christopher Lambert, in which he says Bowlsby told Dodd the $75 million figure.
http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2016/0...l-four-but-expansion-hinges-on-texas-the-acc/
It looks like Lambert screwed up by thinking Dodd was quoting Bowlsby, and I screwed up by accepting what Lambert wrote.
And the question of what rights are involved in what contracts seems to be handled differently in different stories.
For example, I'm linking an article that shows ISU getting $2.6 million from Learfield in 2011 and Iowa getting $1.5 million. That's not in line with the story you linked. I suspect both are correct but they aren't using the same definitions. I'm sure Iowa gets more money when everything is counted than does ISU.
http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/05/06/school-specific-broadcasting-revenue/
Last edited:
This is not true. The CBS sports article and other articles show that the conference distributions are have a $9M difference. I've shared a bunch of links that show the B12 schools are getting about a million in extra third tier value from the one football game they get. I believe the key mistake is believing that B10 schools only receive BTN money, that they don't have their own third tier contracts for coaches shows, signage, radio, etc.
SEC – $32.7M
B10 – $32.4M
P12 – $25.1M
B12 – $23.3M
If I'm wrong -- which is looking more likely -- that isn't the reason, because I never considered things like signage, radio, etc., to be part of the discussion.. I realize all schools have those things independent of their conferences.
But we weren't -- at least I wasn't -- talking about total revenues. That would include a whole bunch of things. The topic was payment from the conferences to the members, and I was talking about things the conference is reimbursing the members for in the other conferences, but which are handled directly by the individual schools in the Big XII. I think "third tier," at least in the way it's commonly used, refers to the football and MBB games that are left over after the networks select the ones they want to carry.
I was under the impression those things -- one football game, some men's basketball games, and a lot of non-revenue sports -- were worth an aggregate $75 million, or $7.5 million per team on the average to the Big XII. So to get an apples-to-apples comparison, that would be added to the $23.3 million league payout.
It is my understanding, for instance, that if an Iowa game is not picked up by the BTN or one of the networks, it cannot be televised. I'm pretty sure there were one or two MBB games and a whole bunch of WBB games that were unavailable. In contrast, all the ISu MBB games, and the WBB games at Hilton, were televised.
Meanwhile, you and CID have convinced me to rethink the $75 million figure, and I think I know where I made my mistake. The sources I cited used that number to signify what those rights could be worth, NOT what the schools are actually getting for them now.
Not a big fan of the profanity aspect of the response. My methodology I thought was pretty clear, for the 75m number you presented as being from Bowlsby, Dodd or whomever I found the following Texas 15m, Kansas 6m, KState 3m, West Virginia 9m, that would mean that ISU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU would need to AVERAGE 7.2m each to get to the 75m number. I don't believe any of those teams even reached 7m. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to resort to profanity I can't stop you but it seems unnecessary, if I haven't sworn at Kilroy, Herby etc for making Hawk fans look bad than I can't imagine the situation that calls for it.
Thank you ; I am glad I am not the only one calling Lonely Clown out.
I feel bad for anyone on this board that takes anything he says as fact; he just posts a ton of nonsense, untruths, and never backs up what he says; he just thinks we will take his word for it
I have seen many times posters say that Lonely Clown never lets facts get in his way; that sums up Lonely Clown perfectly
Now, will he just go away and start annoying those on CyCLOWN Fanatic, instead?
I find it funny that LC has over 83,000 posts and just 1,644 "likes"
what dies that say about the crap contained in every one of his 83,000 posts?
what dies that say about the crap contained in every one of his 83,000 posts?
Technically, it was vulgarity, not profanityNot a big fan of the profanity aspect of the response. My methodology I thought was pretty clear, for the 75m number you presented as being from Bowlsby, Dodd or whomever I found the following Texas 15m, Kansas 6m, KState 3m, West Virginia 9m, that would mean that ISU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and TCU would need to AVERAGE 7.2m each to get to the 75m number. I don't believe any of those teams even reached 7m. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to resort to profanity I can't stop you but it seems unnecessary, if I haven't sworn at Kilroy, Herby etc for making Hawk fans look bad than I can't imagine the situation that calls for it.
There is vulgarity, profanity and obscenity, which are different things. I am fluent in all three.I apologize for giving offense. I was frustrated....in part because I kept finding contradictory information. For instance, I think the West Virginia figure of $9 million is too high; I suspect it includes things I didn't want to include in this discussion.
As I've said in recent posts, I no longer have confidence in the $75 million figure. As you point out, the math just doesn't work. In my defense -- if I don't defend myself, who will? -- my original statement that ISU's rights probably bring between $2 and $5 million appears to be accurate. I also will stand behind my position that the third-tier rights are significant; they are prominently mentioned in every article I've read about Big XII expansion.
It says he has been around here since 2001. Long before 'likes' were a thing on Rivals.
Third-tier rights are significant. But the difference in B12 and B10 third tier rights is negligible, at best. B10 may actually be in front of B12, despite not having the non-conference football game.
Similar threads
