my last comment was well researched. I already knew the answer and didn't include any !!!!!!!!!! it was my way of saying BS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rutgers loss to Hartford hurts the B1G RPI
- Thread starter arcb102000
- Start date
my last comment was well researched. I already knew the answer and didn't include any !!!!!!!!!! it was my way of saying BS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
if the BIG 10 network was all about the money and markets, they should have added USC, UCLA, Texas, Texas A&M, ND, Florida and Alabama. and dropped IU, Purdue, Iowa and Minnesota.
I've read too many articles explaining why Rutgers, Nebraska and Maryland were added. and the reasoning was market share and the areas that would buy into the BIG 10 network. But now that we added those three teams, I've see n very few "well researched" articles that reflect if our estimated revenue gains by adding those three came anywhere close to the projections. And unfortunately, now that we added them, we can't really unload them for better shinier stars. if the goal was simply to increase market area and those subscriptions etc as those well researched articles pointed out so well, I would have used that same research data and chosen three different schools to add.
I've read too many articles explaining why Rutgers, Nebraska and Maryland were added. and the reasoning was market share and the areas that would buy into the BIG 10 network. But now that we added those three teams, I've see n very few "well researched" articles that reflect if our estimated revenue gains by adding those three came anywhere close to the projections. And unfortunately, now that we added them, we can't really unload them for better shinier stars. if the goal was simply to increase market area and those subscriptions etc as those well researched articles pointed out so well, I would have used that same research data and chosen three different schools to add.
Last edited:
sad , but true. We can't drop Rutgers either. But didn't we drop U of Chicago back in the old days before even I was born?
I can understand why the BIG 10 would want to add Texas. but that network deal Texas created for the BIG 12 where they receive almost half the profits is crazy in their favor. if I was them, I'd never leave that deal and come to the BIG 10 and share equally. That's sort of like ND. I can understand why the BIG 10 wants them, but can also understand why ND loves having their football team an independent.
The BTN revenues have significantly increased. It's not because viewers in Montana were demanding to their cable companies that they want BTN, it's because of millions of new subscribers in NJ, NY, CT, Maryland, DC and Virginia.
From an article after the fiscal year that MD/Rutgers added:
The conference reported about $317 million in "Sports Revenue" in fiscal 2014 and almost $397 million in 2015 — an $80 million difference. Based on reports from other conferences that approximate their bowl revenue increases from the CFP, it is likely that $50 million to $60 million of the Big Ten's "Sports Revenue" increase is attributable to the TV rights fee increases that resulted from adding Maryland and Rutgers.
Similar threads
