Skip to content

Report: Big Ten will continue to swim in TV money for years

Jim Delany

Big Ten members will be able to make like Scrooge McDuck and swim in a giant vault of money for years to come according to the latest financial projections. Despite adding more members to the pool, there will be plenty of cash to distribute thanks to the most profitable media rights packages in the country, fueled by the conference’s own Big Ten Network.

The Journal & Courier reports Big Ten schools should expect to receive an estimated $44.5 million each during the 2017-2018 academic year, the first year Nebraska will receive a full share since joining the conference in 2011. The Huskers are going through a six-year financial integration plan, which will expire that year. Maryland and Rutgers, each joining the Big Ten this year, will also have to wait six years before being eligible for a full share of the conference’s revenue split. Each existing Big Ten member, not including Nebraska, is expected to receive $27 million from current media deals and bowl revenue. The Big Ten’s projected revenue shares is expected to rise by nearly $4 million next year ($30.9 million), another $4 million the next year ($34.1 million) and to $35.5 million by 2016-2017.

And then things get interesting. The Big Ten will have a brand new television deal in place. With the costs of media deals always escalating and with the Big Ten fully entrenched in the New York and Washington D.C. markets (the first and perhaps only reasons Rutgers and Maryland were considered in the first place), it should be expected the Big Ten will be able to make like bandits with their future television partners. The conference moving to a nine-game schedule will add to its inventory of games as well.

The Big Ten currently has working relationships with ESPN and FOX in addition to its own Big Ten Network. FOX owns a share of the Big Ten Network and is the broadcast partner for the Big Ten Championship Game.

Helmet sticker to CBSSports.com.

Permalink 14 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big Ten Conference, Rumor Mill, Top Posts
14 Responses to “Report: Big Ten will continue to swim in TV money for years”
  1. andreweac says: Apr 26, 2014 12:11 PM

    Exploiting young folks pays dividends. Literally.

    The NCAA and the Big Ten refuse to recognize the outcome of the Civil War that slavery is illegal.

  2. blendedwhiskey says: Apr 26, 2014 12:34 PM

    Several B1G schools have huge athletic budgets. This money is needed to support all of the many non-revenue sports. Ask the student-athletes that compete in wrestling, volleyball, track and field, baseball, lacrosse, rowing, etc if they enjoy receiving scholarship money for their non-revenue sport. I’m confident they would all say they are thankful for what they receive. Without it, their sports and their scholarships are eliminated. This doesn’t sound like slavery to me. It allows all of these student-athletes to enjoy the benefits of the money produced by the revenue sports.

  3. tigers182 says: Apr 26, 2014 12:44 PM

    andreweac says:
    Apr 26, 2014 12:11 PM
    Exploiting young folks pays dividends. Literally.

    The NCAA and the Big Ten refuse to recognize the outcome of the Civil War that slavery is illegal.

    ———————————————————————————–

    Didn’t the Big 10 states win the civil war?

  4. ebrownwareagle says: Apr 26, 2014 1:40 PM

    @blendedwhiskey

    “wrestling, volleyball, track and field, baseball, lacrosse, rowing, etc if they enjoy receiving scholarship money for their non-revenue sport.”
    So what your saying is it’s ok for The Money Generating Sports of Football and Basketball to pull the weight of every other sport financially and get no Monetary compensation for it other than a Scholarship. Yet the Non revenue generating sports bask in the same glory and produce nothing financially. STOP IT PLEASE. Sounds exactly like Pure American Exploitation at its best. I wonder if the Demographical make up Of The Vast majority of D1 Football or Basketball Teams have anything to do wit it. Just a thought.

  5. barkleyblows says: Apr 26, 2014 1:46 PM

    That first comment is laughable. Ur a fuckin idiot comparing this to the civil war you racist hack.

  6. blendedwhiskey says: Apr 26, 2014 2:12 PM

    @ebrownwareagle

    I see it as an issue of fairness to all student-athletes, regardless of whether or not their sport generates revenue. Many of the student-athletes in non-revenue sports receive only partial scholarships or no scholarships at all, and they likely represent 90% of all student-athletes at their university. They work just as hard and sacrifice just as much as their football and basketball brethren. To classify student-athletes of the revenue sports as somehow “more deserving” of additional monies creates a whole new issue of elitism and favoritism.

  7. Kevin S. says: Apr 26, 2014 2:41 PM

    Actually, that’s exactly what they are. The more revenue you generate, the more your company pays you. Or do you think it’s unfair that the top accountants make more than the receptionists?

  8. germanflats13a38 says: Apr 26, 2014 3:18 PM

    Considering that all of these players are receiving valuable training in an elite field (i.e., sports entertainment), I don’t see them as exploited. If pay discrepancy equals exploitation, then the janitor at Apple should feel exploited that he makes just as much as the janitor at Wal-Mart.

  9. ebrownwareagle says: Apr 26, 2014 3:23 PM

    @blendedwhiskey

    so in essence Everyone college or non college should receive The same treat in ALL ASPECTS OF LIFE, equal pay equal rights etc….. No matter what your job or occupation is. A Janitor should get pay the same as the President. After all the Common man makes Up the 99 percentile. Equality for All right. Flawed Logic at its best. College is suppose to get you ready for the real world is a phrase I hear in this America. If that’s the case “The More Money/Revenue you generate… THE MO MONEY U MAKE.” Ijs

  10. 6thsense10 says: Apr 26, 2014 6:56 PM

    blendedwhiskey says:
    Apr 26, 2014 12:34 PM

    Several B1G schools have huge athletic budgets. This money is needed to support all of the many non-revenue sports. Ask the student-athletes that compete in wrestling, volleyball, track and field, baseball, lacrosse, rowing, etc if they enjoy receiving scholarship money for their non-revenue sport. I’m confident they would all say they are thankful for what they receive. Without it, their sports and their scholarships are eliminated. This doesn’t sound like slavery to me. It allows all of these student-athletes to enjoy the benefits of the money produced by the revenue sports.
    ————————————

    This is false. All those other sports were supported well before this explosion in revenue from revenue producing sports. Most of that money is going towards inflated coaching salaries, paying off coaches fired in the middle of a guaranteed contracts, building huge facilities. Even if one were to accept that revenue producing sports supports non revenue sports that still doesn’t account for the other millions pouring into these schools. Where is that money going? The Big 10 schools are set to rise from $26 million per school this year to $44 million per school by 2017-18. A nearly 70% increase. You can’t tell me that extra increase in revenue is going to support non revenue sports.

  11. normtide says: Apr 26, 2014 8:07 PM

    I thought that espn only had a relationship with the SEC, And that’s why the SEC is “hyped up”? If they deal with the B1G as well, then the hype comes from performance.

  12. iownyou2 says: Apr 26, 2014 9:22 PM

    andreweac says:
    Apr 26, 2014 12:11 PM

    Exploiting young folks pays dividends. Literally.

    The NCAA and the Big Ten refuse to recognize the outcome of the Civil War that slavery is illegal.
    ———————————————————-
    spoken like a true northwestern players mommy. I will gladly go trade my bachelors degree debt from a big 10 school to play a sport on tv and receive a free education.

  13. xli2006 says: Apr 27, 2014 11:43 PM

    Market aside, most Big Ten fans aren’t too keen about adding Rutgers.

    There were several other options out there if the Big Ten wanted to go after the NY market.

  14. corvusrex96 says: Apr 28, 2014 8:06 PM

    Should have added Syracuse instead of Rutgers

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!