Comments on: Why The Big 12 TV Contracts Stink

By: Matador44

Matador44 — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:56:12 +0000

And another glaring indictment of how the contract stinks – the A&M-Tech game will NOT be on TV, and there’s at least two duds of conference games that WILL be on that roughly no one cares about!

By: Matador44

Matador44 — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:55:02 +0000

Well, the Big 12 needs to get on the stick, quickly, and get a network, because our part of country is getting overrun with over-the-air SEC broadcasts now (thank you, very little!) and with the Big 10 network.
MWC even has a network, though I don’t get that in Dallas with Uverse.

But Big 12 needs to 86 Dan Bebee horribly, and get going on this fast!

By: srr50

srr50 — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:01:31 +0000

I was surprised as well Taylor, over the success of the Big 10 Network, they thought their fan base was large enough outside their primary area to sustain a monthly subscription fee from the carriers.

I guess the mass movement away from the Rust Belt actually helped their venture.

By: TaylorTRoom

TaylorTRoom — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:45:20 +0000

That makes sense. I think the Big 10 is looking smarter and smarter, though. They organized a network and worked out the revenue agreement to everybody’s satisfaction- big and small schools. That’s ironic, because I remember a lot of articles criticizing the Big 10 network at its launch, asking how they ever expect to make money on it.

By: srr50

srr50 — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:00:07 +0000

When everybody in the country is able to click to the content they want, won’t population density matter less, and total number of fans regardless of density matter more?

Which, IMO will make the SEC even stronger as time goes on. their multi-billion dollar contract with ABC/ESPN and CBS is probably the last major broadcast contract.

By: TaylorTRoom

TaylorTRoom — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:40:46 +0000

SRR, will population density become less important, as more TV content is delivered through the web? In the old antenna days, and still in the current TV cable days, it was/is important to have high densities of fans in high population centers, due to the technology. When everybody in the country is able to click to the content they want, won’t population density matter less, and total number of fans regardless of density matter more?

By: hobbeshorn

hobbeshorn — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:58:12 +0000

The enthusiasm factor is huge… Here in Wichita, KS ( largest metro in KS) the #1 local radio sports talk show spent 1 hour discussing wichita state’s new turf for the baseball field and 45 min discussing the WSU plane crash….maybe 10 min devoted to Big 12 overall and another 5 to MLB…. This isn’t an everyday schedule but it would not happen in OKC…. College football is more important to SEC metro fans because they have no NFL….Check coverage of the Falcons and Cowboys to see my point. All those states with no professional teams leaves a huge void which college football has filled. Big 12 has Dallas, Denver, KC, Houston, St. Louis for the fan who never attended college (or went to a small college) to follow… the SEC has Tennessee, Atlanta, New Orleans (Carolina and Jacksonville are gimmicks) Miami is not SEC country. Competition for dollars is tougher in Big 12 country.

By: srr50

srr50 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:06:28 +0000

Again, while the SEC has more regional population, the all-important metro areas are fairly even, maybe with a slight B12 edge.

Take a look at the DFW market (#5)and its coverage of college football compared to Atlanta (#8)

It is not even close. College football is much more important in the major metro areas of the SEC. Houston is a Top Ten market but it cares even less about college football than Dallas — at least Big 12 football.

By: Neon Boudreaux

Neon Boudreaux — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:35:50 +0000

I agree Ricky, but more than regional population there’s the problem of enthusiasm. There are probably more people in non-metropolitan SEC land, but most of their population centers are split with at least 1 other conference.

Miami, Tampa, Atlanta- all should really only be counted as 1/2 SEC at most. I would give Houston and St Louis 1/2 Big 12 and the major metros go basically like this:

1. Dallas, B12 6.5m
2. Houston 1/2 B12 5.8m ~2.9m
3. Atlanta 1/2 SEC 5.7m ~2.8m
4. Miami 1/2 SEC 5.4m ~2.7m
5. Denver B12 3m
6. St. Louis 1/2 B12 2.9m ~1.5m
7. Orlando SEC 2.7m
8. Kansas City B12 2m
9. Nashville SEC 1.8m
10. Louisville 1/2 SEC 1.3m ~0.7m
11. OKC B12 1.3m
12. Greenville SEC 1.2m
13. Birmingham SEC 1.2m
14. New Orleans SEC 1.2m
15. Knoxville SEC 1m
15. Tulsa B12 1m

Again, while the SEC has more regional population, the all-important metro areas are fairly even, maybe with a slight B12 edge. I think the answer lies in enthusiasm gap, though that should be more obvious in AD revenues and it’s not as much as I thought it would be.

By: Ricky

Ricky — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:30:30 +0000

I don’t think TV is looking much beyond the merchandising and ticket sales numbers when it comes to negotiating a contract (correct me if I am wrong). They don’t care if A&M’s AD can’t balance a budget, unless they can get him as the Big 12’s lead negotiator. TV needs viewers to sell to advertisers. They might like the fact that Nebraska sells out their stadium every home game, but if there is no one at home left to watch the game on TV then those sell outs look like money losers. I have to think population and popularity are two of the most compelling factors in getting a good TV contract and the Big 12 is definitely lacking in population to a much greater degree than any other major conference.