Good analysis of the value of the next TV contract.

[CL82]

Big East sees huge jump in FS1 top end ratings

The Big East contract with FOX is coming to a close after the 2025 season, and the conference is currently in a negotiating window with the broadcaster to renew the pact going forward. It’s p…

painttouches.com

For those of you who ask "why did the Big East invite Connecticut to join the conference", this article has the answer.

One really interesting observation is that BE games (excluding UConn) that have a big 10 leading draw substantially more viewers. There has been some talk online that FOX's Big Ten content quote devalues BiG East content. The reality seems just the opposite. The combination of the two leagues enhances viewers.

For what it's worth, Seton did well, being in two or three of the top 10 games. Creighton appears to be the strongest after Connecticut, but that may have been due to the fact that they had big 10 lead in for those games.

Bottom line: This author is estimating a new contract of approximately $7 1/2 million per school. While that doesn't allow us to compete with the Big Ten and SEC of the world, it's a meaningful number that distinguishes us from the pack of non-P* schools. I was hoping for a little bit more, but that's an OK number. Less than that, is problematic.

 

[Hall91]

So if we are now able to use 20% of Athletic Budget to pay student athletes, I have to assume the TV contract is additive to whatever our cost is to run all the sports. That’s assuming we are obligated to abide by the Power 5 settlement.

 

[Burnsly]

Why would the Big East be obligated to abide by the Power 5 settlement?

 

[cams555]

Although Seton Hall is second to last in revenue spent they are top half in viewers. Besides UConn and Creighton they are in the ballpark to jockey with any other team in the Big East.

Dollar for dollar you cant argue the success of the program over the last decade.

 

[CL82]

Why would the Big East be obligated to abide by the Power 5 settlement?

Two reasons that I can think of. First, the NCAA is a signatory and we are a member of that organization. Second, it pretty much appears that the big boys have decided that the cost of participating in athletics with them means that we have to agree to subsidize some of their cost in the settlement.

It sucks, but it is what it is.

 

[Burnsly]

1 - The signatory agreement was with the NCAA & the P5 conferences.
2 - Says who?

 

[radecicco]

1 - The signatory agreement was with the NCAA & the P5 conferences.
2 - Says who?

The BE and every other conference, Football 5(4) or not, are part of the NCAA. If the BE schools are members of the NCAA , then they are part of the settlement. The final numbers of who is paying what might be tweaked a bit but that’s about it.

 

[Burnsly]

So the power 5 negotiated a settlement on behalf of the entire NCAA even though a disproportionate # of players involved were football players?

 

[hinson32]

So the power 5 negotiated a settlement on behalf of the entire NCAA even though a disproportionate # of players involved were football players?

Correct. Probably even worse. It was probably mainly the SEC and the BIG.

 

[MooneyHall07]

Two reasons that I can think of. First, the NCAA is a signatory and we are a member of that organization. Second, it pretty much appears that the big boys have decided that the cost of participating in athletics with them means that we have to agree to subsidize some of their cost in the settlement.

It sucks, but it is what it is.

This. As a member of the NCAA that voted to uphold and enforce various rules and regulations pertaining to bans on athlete compensation, etc. the NCAA, though the majority will of the P5 members, has full authority to bind SHU and every Big East team to the settlement agreement. The majority also has full authority to allocate the obligation to pay the settlement amongst the NCAA member schools. The P5 has the power, so we are screwed.