# Big Ten vs. SEC Networks



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

tonyd79 said:


> I would. I do not get the SEC network but I get the Big Ten network. The Big Ten network is on more systems than you think. Plus the Big Ten network is supplementary to the ABC/ESPN contract the Big Ten also has. Every Big Ten game has been available nationally since the Big Ten network went live. The SEC cannot say that. (Heck, we have a guy in ALABAMA complaining because he is not getting SEC games in HD. What are the odds of that happening in Columbus or Ann Arbor for the Big Ten?)
> 
> You can judge it by the money. The Big Ten schools are getting 22 million per year for TV. The SEC gets less than half of that.


Ok - I'm modifying this from my original thoughts/post cuz I figured out the reasons for the money differences.

You have an indirect comparison here... you've combined the Big Ten's separate carriage deals instead of just the Big Ten network. The Big Ten network vs. the SEC network there is no comparison. The SEC network is more lucrative (Big Ten is about 9-11 million, SEC is about 15 million per school in 2009). The Big Ten + Espn is close to the SEC network financials (since the SEC doesn't get a 2nd deal from ESPN). So I'd say we are at about a wash. Factor in ABC's Big Ten network deal and then CBS's SEC deal. So the end result is pretty close. But Big Ten divides among 11, SEC among 12.

The financials are only one part. For the SEC it was about visibility. It took the Big Ten 3+ years to get widespread cable system coverage (and its still not even close to 100%). The SEC got 100% on day 1. Which is what they wanted. They didn't want to have to deal with the carriage agreements that would take them 3+ years to get.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

BudShark said:


> Ok - I'm modifying this from my original thoughts/post cuz I figured out the reasons for the money differences.
> 
> You have an indirect comparison here... you've combined the Big Ten's separate carriage deals instead of just the Big Ten network. The Big Ten network vs. the SEC network there is no comparison. The SEC network is more lucrative (Big Ten is about 9-11 million, SEC is about 15 million per school in 2009). The Big Ten + Espn is close to the SEC network financials (since the SEC doesn't get a 2nd deal from ESPN). So I'd say we are at about a wash. Factor in ABC's Big Ten network deal and then CBS's SEC deal. So the end result is pretty close. But Big Ten divides among 11, SEC among 12.


I am quoting numbers from analysts that know the numbers. They were both aggregate numbers. They were part of the analyses done by several people on the Big Ten expansion conversations.


BudShark said:


> The financials are only one part. For the SEC it was about visibility. It took the Big Ten 3+ years to get widespread cable system coverage (and its still not even close to 100%). The SEC got 100% on day 1. Which is what they wanted. They didn't want to have to deal with the carriage agreements that would take them 3+ years to get.


What you keep missing is that the SEC Network is REGIONAL. Unless you have Comcast in Maryland, you do not get the SEC Network. The Big Ten Network is NATIONAL. And the Big Ten gets choice spots on ABC/ESPN with two noon games and the ABC/ESPN slot at 3:30 plus other games.

I will repeat. There has not been a SINGLE Big Ten game that was not available NATIONALLY since the Big Ten network started. You cannot say that about the SEC.

The Big Ten network was on DirecTV and Dish from the startup. Comcast was the big holdout. That is the only way you can claim your 3 year timeframe.

The SEC could have had that and still had their CBS and ESPN contracts. They decided to do a regional network. ESPN was willing to build the network with them (just as Fox is partners on the Big Ten network).

Plus, the Big Ten gets coverage of every damned sport. The SEC does not.

I have no idea how you can claim that visibilty for a part time network that goes on podunk stations in Mobile, AL (heart of SEC country) is more than a 24/7 channel that is only an adjunct to the same (if not better) national network coverage that the Big Ten gets.


----------



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

That new SEC Network is a joke. I live in SEC Territory and there are still games i don't get from the SEC. I had to end up purchasing ESPN Full Court just to watch the basketball games in the middle of the week. I use to get all the SEC Games from FSN South on Wednesday Nights but now I don't get them. I had to purchase the Full Court Package. Next year I'm cancelling ESPN Full Court because the SEC is a joke anyway. I hope that some other conference starts stepping it up and becomes better than the SEC. I'm so tired of hearing people talk about how good the SEC Conference is. Yeah they've been good for a long time but i'm hoping that changes soon.


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

tonyd79 said:


> I am quoting numbers from analysts that know the numbers. They were both aggregate numbers. They were part of the analyses done by several people on the Big Ten expansion conversations.


The 11 million is the 2008-2009 payout. The 2009-2010 payout hasn't been made yet. The 2008-2009 payout did not include the new CBS deal (more than double) or the ESPN deal (worth 15 million to each school by itself). The 2009-2010 payout is estimated to exceed 22-24 million a school (the wash I referred to).



> What you keep missing is that the SEC Network is REGIONAL. Unless you have Comcast in Maryland, you do not get the SEC Network. The Big Ten Network is NATIONAL. And the Big Ten gets choice spots on ABC/ESPN with two noon games and the ABC/ESPN slot at 3:30 plus other games.
> 
> I will repeat. There has not been a SINGLE Big Ten game that was not available NATIONALLY since the Big Ten network started. You cannot say that about the SEC.


I think this is the confusion. There are two components of the 2.25 BILLION deal between ESPN and the SEC. A large part of ESPNs programming is now guaranteed to the SEC. More football, more basketball, more baseball, etc. So, yes, the SEC Regional Network (produced by ESPN) is not national, it is more widespread than in the past, AND it carries second tier games.
We may disagree on this point, but I don't think coverage of every sport, every game matters. Its diminishing returns. Few people care if Minn-Ill is broadcast on Big Ten Network Saturday night. But... ESPN guarantees Saturday night to the SEC so even if no one cares about Kentucky-Vandy, Millions will watch it.



> The Big Ten network was on DirecTV and Dish from the startup. Comcast was the big holdout. That is the only way you can claim your 3 year timeframe.
> 
> The SEC could have had that and still had their CBS and ESPN contracts. They decided to do a regional network. ESPN was willing to build the network with them (just as Fox is partners on the Big Ten network).
> 
> ...


ESPN did not pay 2.25 billion for regional networks... but for coverage on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN3, GamePlan, etc... I think the confusion or issue is over what the deal was. Yes, The SEC Network is regional coverage of local sports. BUT... the big part of it is prime (and actually preferred) placement on ESPN networks. Which is huge, and national.

And here's where the gamble is.
In 10 years, if college sports grows and TV grows, the Big Ten Network looks good. But if online grows, The Big Ten owns that and if Illinois has huge online presence, they have to share that with Minnesota. This may be huge- it could be big money that makes all other conferences pale. But if it fails, that money will dry up for ALL the schools.
In 10 years, if it grows, the SEC doesn't get a penny more than their contract. But if it goes down, they still get 2.25Billion from ESPN. ESPN owns the risk. And, this doesn't affect online presence which each SEC school still owns for itself. So they left themselves an out to form an SEC online network in the future.

There's plus and minuses to both... but the SEC deal is not nearly as bad as it was made out to be...


----------



## rbird (Apr 24, 2002)

Sorry to chime in a little late, but I just wanted to make the quick point that the "SEC Network" only carries one (or perhaps two a couple times a year) game per week. So even if you're missing that game due to no coverage in your area, or whether it's not in HD on your local station, you're still seeing the other 4-10 games that week nationally in HD. And if you truly have no coverage, the game is still on GamePlan (though apparently still in SD as of last year).

The other HUGE benefit of the new deals is that each SEC team now only has at most one game on PPV during the season. Under the previous system, a large number of out-of-conference games were shunted to PPV/GamePlan. The change in exposure for teams like Vanderbilt is unbelievable.


----------

