The Big Ten’s TV deal is done, with the league announcing details today alongside its partners FOX, CBS, and NBC. It’s significant, and it’s interesting, and it’s not exciting but it should lead to some excitement, because everybody has reportedly been waiting on this to finish before they make any other moves. Let’s do the interesting bits first:
Schools are expected to make between $80M and $100M annually, which is an average over a seven-year period through which revenue is expected to rise, so they aren’t making that right away, but is nonetheless a step up from the roughly $57M Navigate estimated they made this year. Some of this is likely the appreciation of the existing brand, some of it’s likely a reflection of the industrial health of college football, some of it’s probably inflation. But some of it—a lot of it, possibly—is adding USC and UCLA. According to the Out of Home Advertising Association of America, Nielsen’s 2021 DMA rankings estimated there to be 5.7 million homes in the Los Angeles market. That’s nearly double even Philadelphia, which ranked fourth. Add in that USC and UCLA are two of the more prominent brands in college sports, and the value multiplies. Amidst all the reactions there were to get out there, we may have somehow neglected how big a coup USC and UCLA was for the Big Ten. Also, as we have said: It really weakened the already-struggling Pac-12.
There’s been some laughter thrown at the idea of Rutgers being one of the highest-revenue football programs in America, and it’s fair. That program has not often been any good. That fanbase exists, but you sure don’t hear a lot from it in the discourse. But while it lacks USC and UCLA’s heft, Rutgers does bring plenty to the table. New York’s DMA was estimated to hold 7.5 million homes last year. That’s roughly as many as Atlanta, Houston, and Washington D.C. combined (all of those are in the top ten, those are not sneaky-small cities or anything). Rutgers might not be a powerhouse, but it’s a valuable brand, fair or unfair as that may be seen. The same is true for Illinois, which is a few hours from Chicago but certainly has a presence there (as does Wisconsin, and as does Penn State in New York and Philadelphia). Adding Rutgers might have felt like a stretch at the time it happened, but the narrative likely underestimates the degree to which they’re pulling their weight, even if it’s just by giving Ohio State a place to play every other year that’s close to New York City. (Now would probably be a good time to disclaim: I’m not an expert on the television industry. But neither are the other folks you’re reading about this.)
The fact the SEC is drawing comparable money to the Big Ten (more, eventually, possibly) on a per-school basis speaks to how strong SEC fanbases are. With USC and UCLA in the fold, the Big Ten “owns” each of the four largest DMA’s in the country. The SEC “owns” three of the top eight, none of which are in the top five and two of which came in with the addition of Texas and Oklahoma. The Southeast is less urban than the Northeast and Midwest, something that dates back centuries (the new Big Ten/SEC map looks a ton like the Civil War map, by the way—all the way down to an empty Plains & Mountains and California being on the side of the North). Still, it has the market to compete financially with the Big Ten. That’s one of those things that gets wilder and wilder the longer you think about it.
The Big Ten’s deal only runs through 2029-30, making it still not as constricting as the ACC’s contracts. That’s probably a good segue into this next point: There remains the question of how much any of this stuff will matter in a decade, should live TV continue to pivot as a market from cable dominance to streaming dominance. Just last month, YouTube TV released numbers showing them holding nearly a third as many subscribers as Comcast. From that Hollywood Reporter article: “Major (virtual multichannel video providers) now have a combined 12.4 million subscribers, just shy of 20 percent of the active pay TV universe.” It’s only 20 percent, but what was it a decade ago? Ironically, the Big Ten’s deal itself may play into this, as Peacock housing a number of football and basketball games may lead to subscription-by-necessity for older audiences in the Midwest, thereby making those audiences more comfortable with a potential switch to streaming full-time. Is the Big Ten going to be the driving force behind an American wave from cable to streaming? No, but it might be the driving force behind a Big-Ten-fan wave from cable to streaming, and for their purposes, that’s a lot more important. If streaming does become the game, and if it has its expected effect on the significance of DMA’s, Rutgers may outlive its usefulness and find itself scrambling come 2030.
And, finally, there is the Notre Dame piece. As seems to always be the case with college football media developments, Notre Dame’s the big winner. The Irish maintain their arrangement with NBC (with a presumed *big* payout coming their way when they negotiate their next deal) with what are expected to be quality Big Ten games supporting them in other Saturday windows. NBC getting more into college football is great for Notre Dame, further cementing the absence of any need on that front to be anything but independent. (If the ACC crumbles and they need a home for other sports, well…)
Now. Realignment.
What happens now—or what should happen now, given what we’ve been told all summer—is that the Pac-12 gets its bids and makes its collective decisions between a short-term deal, a normal-term deal, expansion, contraction (not unreasonable!), unequal revenue sharing, and dissolution, something that wouldn’t happen from the top down but could happen from the bottom up. Those Navigate estimates we referenced were made with Texas and Oklahoma out of the Big 12 but USC and UCLA in the Pac-12, and they had the Pac-12, ACC, and Big 12 all on a similar revenue trajectory through the end of the decade. There is no way the Pac-12 can offer Stanford and Washington what the Big 12 or ACC can absent unequal revenue sharing or a landmark new member joining, and candidates to be that member are not exactly clear. The ACC’s whale of a deal puts it in a similar position to the Pac-12 in that to offer the best option possible, it would need to give these valuable brands a better set of contracts than its other schools hold. There’s no Newtonian law saying this can’t work, but it would be messy, and it feels like a short-term solution (though all of this is short-term: The Big Ten’s going to have another set of negotiations seven summers from now).
It’s because of all this that the clear answer remains the Big 12 for any Pac-12 school which either moves the Big 12 revenue-per-school needle in a positive direction or helps convince a needle-moving school to make the leap. Which schools are those? In order, it’s Stanford, then Washington, and then it gets unclear. Oregon has the tie with Nike and a mid-sized market nearby in Portland. Cal is part of the Bay Area DMA, but if Stanford’s in the fold for somebody, that presence has already been obtained. Denver’s DMA continues to grow, but Colorado’s revenue is low. Salt Lake City’s got all that young population growth we talk about with the LDS Church, but it’s still a small market, but then again Utah might make the College Football Playoff this year and get themselves into a Clemson situation. The Phoenix DMA is pretty large, the Tucson DMA is tiny but so is the State College one, those are solid athletic departments in terms of revenue. All eight of the non-Washington State/Oregon State schools have a valuable angle (which is one argument for the Pac-12 to contract, or to jettison old partners in favor of more valuable growth elsewhere). Stanford’s unusual university priorities (academics, namely, though they also probably want a home for Olympic sports just like Notre Dame does) make them a wildcard, one who could conceivably even go independent for a little while in football if they had confidence in their ability to schedule and a strong enough partner in other sports.
What will happen? I don’t know. Given the Pac-12 hasn’t dissolved yet, it’s evidently not a clear decision. Given the industry seems to buy the conventional wisdom that ten teams is a bad number, I’d bet they’re trying to expand. Given that they’re in a worse position for drawing revenue than either the Big 12 or the ACC, it’s really hard to see it working unless Stanford decides it cares enough about travel time for Olympic sports and Washington’s dissatisfied enough with the alternatives to sign a short-term deal. This would be my guess, at this point: A short-term deal with unequal revenue sharing that throws Oregon State and Washington State (and Colorado, in some interpretations) a lifeline while Washington tries to beef up its résumé and Oregon tries to sign LeBron’s kid and Stanford tries to shape the next generation of world leaders. But an 18 or 20-team Big 12 makes the most medium-term sense.
If I’m the Pac-12, I’m catering to Stanford and Washington, but I’m also aggressively pursuing expansion. If I’m TCU, I don’t listen, but SMU? Maybe their wacky confidence from a month and a half ago wasn’t that wacky after all. Dallas-Ft. Worth’s a big market, and SMU’s decent enough in the money sports to look better against Pac-12 competition than Rutgers does against Big Ten competition. Boise State, San Diego State, and UNLV are all heavily-mentioned candidates, and we’ve talked about Memphis before as a potential partner, but what about Louisiana-Lafayette? They’re not in a strong position media-wise, but SEC country does just fine at this financial game, and the athletic department there has demonstrated its competence. The AAC deal is a problem, as is the Sun Belt deal, but Cincinnati got out of the AAC and into the Big 12, so if the Pac-12 goes the ESPN route, ESPN schools (schools from the AAC and Sun Belt) are maybe attainable? It gets messy fast. (Also, the Pac-12 should still add Gonzaga and Saint Mary’s, but that’s a pretty peripheral thing—this is about football, not everything else.)
If I’m the Big 12, I’m catering to Stanford and Washington, and I’m willing to play a numbers game. Adding eight teams rather than two or four might actually ease travel concerns (divisions in all sports becomes a reasonable idea at that size), and if the Big 12 needs legitimacy in the narrative (which is what the Big 12, Pac-12, and ACC all need, with no College Football Playoff success for the first two and a potentially dry well for the latter), giving yourself the most chances to put a team in the playoff (or to put 16 teams in the NCAA Tournament) can help you get there.
If I’m the ACC, I’m catering to Stanford and Washington, and I’m playing the Notre Dame angle hard in my talks with Stanford. The ACC’s problem isn’t so much markets or brands as it is the contract itself. They simply signed a bad deal. But Stanford and Washington might be able to sweeten that deal, and they’d keep the ACC able to play the academic card both they and the Big Ten like to play.
The timetable isn’t the least clear it’s been, but it’s close. At some point, the Pac-12 needs to make a move. Last year, the Big 12’s expansion was announced September 10th. Does similar context necessitate similar timing here? We don’t know. This isn’t something we have a large sample on. But we were told to wait for the Big Ten to sign their deal, and they signed it. Now, all eyes return to what’s left of the Pac-12.
LeBron James: Family Man, Businessman
I didn’t expect to write so much about LeBron this week.
Hours after we speculated yesterday that LeBron might try to team up with his son in the NBA as soon as the summer of 2024, the superstar signed an extension that keeps him in Los Angeles until that summer, with a player option for 2024-25 giving him the flexibility to choose when he next approaches free agency. So, yeah, LeBron & Bronny is very much on the table. Meanwhile, Malachi Nelson—that quarterback prospect who passed Arch Manning in some rankings—is signing with Klutch Sports, per ESPN. Klutch Sports is an agency run by Rich Paul, LeBron’s agent and good friend, but it also might kind of just be run by LeBron? There are a lot of things—the NBA, for example—that LeBron doesn’t technically run but seems to control.
LeBron James is annoying, but it’s hard not to respect his business acumen, which is even more impressive considering he became a professional athlete straight out of high school. There’s a lot of American Dream in his story, and a lot of admirable vision when it comes to how he became so much more, institutionally, than a basketball player. One smart business move that could be going on with this extension? That player option gives him the option to wait for his next move until 2025, which could give Bronny another incubation year in college if he’s not ready for the pros and get Bryce James, Bronny’s younger brother, through high school at Sierra Canyon. The James family is an industry unto itself, but in a way that at least seems a lot more professional and healthy than, say, the Ball family.
While I’m feeling the most charitable towards LeBron I will likely feel for years (the last time I felt this way was when he published the Sports Illustrated article about returning to Cleveland), there’s an angle where playing for the Lakers was best for his family: It put him in the same city as his kids while putting them through the high school arguably best-equipped to develop them as basketball players. I don’t know how accurate or inaccurate that is, but if ESPN needs some fodder for a glowing LeBron profile in the next few years and one of their people is reading this, there’s your narrative.
Can a Rain Delay Turn a Season Around? What About a Grand Slam?
The Yankees either broke out of their slump or pulled off an improbable win in the midst of the slump, depending on what happens from here. Down 4-2 against the Rays, with Tampa Bay runners on first and second and just one out in the seventh, the rain came down in the Bronx. When it stopped, Lou Trivino worked out of the jam, the Yankees rallied in the bottom half but only scored one, the Rays threatened in the eighth but couldn’t break through, Anthony Rizzo tied it with a longball in that bottom half, and after a scoreless ninth, the Rays plated three in the tenth on a Francisco Mejía double off of Aroldis Chapman. It was a disaster for the Yankees, a comeback squelched, a losing streak prolonged.
Then, Gleyber Torres knocked a single.
Then, Anthony Rizzo took a four-pitch walk from Jalen Beeks.
And finally, with still nobody out, Josh Donaldson hit a high fly ball to right field which splashed down into the pandemonious crowd of Yankee Stadium. (It would have been a home run in roughly half of MLB stadiums.)
For a week or so, now, we’ve been saying “maybe, but probably not” about a full-on Yankees collapse. FanGraphs has consistently given them about a five percent chance of losing the division, and while the Blue Jays’ struggles against the Orioles these last ten days have kept that at bay, five percent is still just five percent. One in twenty. Cause for concern—and nobody wants to limp into October—but not cause for panic. Getting swept by the Rays? It might have pushed the number up closer to ten percent, but still: Not a massive game. Sports are funny, though, in what either is or comes to be seen as a source of momentum. As a turning point. I’d imagine everyone trying to get a sense of the Yankees is curious what comes next.
Other baseball:
AL East
Those Yankees deal with four against those Blue Jays this weekend, and they’re at home. The Blue Jays remain so good on paper, and they struggle so much on the field, and were Ross Stripling not pitching like a Cy Young candidate when he can stay on the mound (seven strikeouts, one hit against the Orioles yesterday in a rare Toronto win), these guys might be a couple games worse. As it stands, they enter the series ten back of New York, right alongside Tampa Bay. They and the Rays, who host Kansas City, both likely need to win this weekend’s set to have any hope of catching the Yanks. For the Rays, they likely need the Blue Jays to win as well.
Clay Holmes went on the IL for New York with back spasms. It’s a good time for Holmes to reset, given his recent struggles after being so unhittable for the first half of the year. Nobody’s itching to go on the IL, but the Yankees might’ve been itching to get Holmes onto the IL. Just take some time. Regroup.
AL Wild Card
The Mariners finished a sweep of the Angels yesterday, grabbing a game-and-a-half lead on the top Wild Card spot ahead of a day off and a trip to Oakland. The Orioles’ loss dropped them a game and a half back of Tampa Bay and Toronto ahead of a one-off with the Cubs this afternoon. The Red Sox go for a four-game sweep of the Pirates tonight that would push them back above .500 for the first time since August’s earliest days and could bring them within three of playoff position.
AL Central
The White Sox could not pull it off against the Astros a third time, and with the Twins and Guardians each taking care of business (the latter on a six-run eighth-inning rally sparked by a two-out dropped third strike), Chicago has gone from AL Central favorite to underdog-against-both-rivals in the matter of a day. It’s a tight, tight division. Cleveland, then a game, Minnesota, then a game and a half, Chicago. Minnesota’s one back of Toronto and Tampa Bay, half a game up on Baltimore.
The White Sox did add Elvis Andrus just now, signing the recently-cut infielder to fill in for Tim Anderson. He’s been about league-average at the plate, so not a bad stopgap for the moment. Yesterday, though, they lost Leury Garcia to the IL with a lower back issue.
NL Central
Jordan Montgomery struck out eight and allowed just a run as the Cardinals took care of the Rockies. The Brewers fell 2-1 to the Dodgers, with Tony Gonsolin improving to 15-1 in the process (with a 2.12 ERA and a 3.34 FIP). That gap’s up to three games, with Milwaukee two back of a Wild Card spot.
Elsewhere in the Central, Joey Votto’s going to miss the rest of the year. Rotator cuff surgery. Ke’Bryan Hayes is on the IL for the Pirates.
NL East
Atlanta got to Max Scherzer a little, but Starling Marte got to Atlanta, homering twice to lead the Mets to a 9-7 win which pumped their division lead back up to four and a half. The series finale comes tonight, with Jacob deGrom facing Max Fried as Fried returns from the concussion IL. Eduardo Escobar went on the IL for New York prior to last night’s game (oblique), Taijuan Walker might miss a start after his back spasms on Tuesday. It’s hard to feel concerned about the Mets’ rotation when it’s led by Scherzer, deGrom, and Chris Bassitt.
NL Wild Card
Ranger Suárez and Nick Lodolo were each just about flawless in Cincinnati, but it was the Reds who got out with a 1-0 win, pushing the Phillies down to just half a game ahead of the Padres in fifth and sixth, respectively (the Padres jumped on the Marlins, winning 10-3 after a Jake Cronenworth grand slam put them up in the top of the first). The Giants bullpen couldn’t hold on in the eighth, as Jake McCarthy’s two-out single drove in two to put the Diamondbacks ahead after J.D. Davis’s home run had made it 2-1 San Francisco in the sixth. The Giants remain on life support.
The Cubs
Another series win for the guys, and Franmil Reyes continues to smack it at the plate. Two doubles from him, a P.J. Higgins home run, five innings and a little more good work from Drew Smyly. And the bullpen held it. No complaints.
**
Viewing schedule, second screen rotation in italics:
- 3:05 PM EDT: Cubs @ Baltimore, Sampson vs. Watkins (MLB TV)
- 7:20 PM EDT: New York (NL) @ Atlanta, deGrom vs. Fried (MLB TV/ESPN+)
- 1:15 PM EDT: Colorado @ St. Louis, Senzatela vs. Wainwright (MLB TV)
- 2:10 PM EDT: Houston @ Chicago (AL), Garcia vs. Giolito (MLB TV)
- 2:10 PM EDT: Los Angeles @ Milwaukee, Heaney vs. Burnes (MLB TV)
- 3:45 PM EDT: Arizona @ San Francisco, Gallen vs. Webb (MLB TV)
- 7:05 PM EDT: Toronto @ New York (AL), Berríos vs. Montas (MLB TV)
- 7:10 PM EDT: Kansas City @ Tampa Bay, TBD vs. Patiño (MLB TV)
- 9:40 PM EDT: Washington @ San Diego, Sánchez vs. Darvish (MLB TV)
