Can Ducks Count on Full B1G Shares After 2029?

[HDuck]

USC and UCLA are full-share members; Washington and Oregon are not. They receive half shares of the media rights revenue through the duration of this contract cycle until summer of 2030..

 

The Huskies and Ducks do receive full shares of conference revenue related to the NCAA basketball tournament and College Football Playoff, with the latter scheduled to increase substantially in the 2026 season.

 

The days of Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State sharing the Big Ten’s media rights cash equally are coming to a close, folks. We fully expect the conference to adopt a brand-based model for the next media deal.

 

Which means this: The West Coast schools need to win.

 

They need to win and draw eyeballs and contribute to the enhancement of Big Ten football, because an unequal-share distribution model can be....(coming to major conferences including the B1G)

 

Why UW might not graduate to full Big Ten revenue shares in 2030 | Mailbag | The Seattle Times

ARCHIVE.PH

---

archived 15 Feb 2025 17:58:09 UTC

 

[HDuck]

Okay, not sure what is happening with that link.

 

If you click on the bold black title, you'll get the column.   If you click on the gobbledygook address, you won't.

[GatOrlando]

So 2030 then..... Not sure what the author means by Oregon and Washington having to win to draw eyeballs. Oregon had three of the highest drawing games in the B1G this past year and they won the league. Pretty sure that doesn't get them a year closer to full shares.

[Charles Fischer]

I am not the least bit worried with Dan Lanning running things, as the upside has only begun.

 

I disagree with his last statement in the article, his conclusion.  I am not so sure about USC, in fact I have more confidence in Washington over the next four years--by a mile.  That bastard Fisch is a damn good coach, and he is ahead of where I thought he'd be in the rebuilding and a long ways ahead of Jonathon Smith at Michigan State.

 

What he did at Arizona still ranks as one of the most impressive coaching miracles I've seen, as the Wildcats had been the tire-fire for a long time.  How you recruit to that is very hard...and he did. He also found gems that turned into great players, and he will do that at Washington, I believe.  

 

My Ernest Wish for Washington...

 

[30Duck]

On 2/16/2025 at 5:34 PM, Charles Fischer said:

I am not so sure about USC, in fact I have more confidence in Washington over the next four years--by a mile.  That bastard Fisch is a damn good coach, and he is ahead of where I thought he'd be in the rebuilding and a long ways ahead of Jonathon Smith at Michigan State.

Could not agree more. The Huskies were crazy L's to WSU & Rutgers, from being 8-4 instead of 6-6, and those were with Rodgers at QB. Don't let his showing against the Ducks color your opinion, the freshman QB will be a sophomore next season. Riley at SC is much more likely to stay in their loop, than Washington is.

 

[Mike West]

Playoff appearances will count here.  Oregon has the Brand recognition.  Now OBD must advance far into each season, including at least a title before 2029 to secure close to the shares UM and osu2 will get.  I believe OBD are already at PSU’s level and climbing (it helped beating them in the CCG).

 

Though most will disagree, it’s time to start visiting the SEC powers ( since they obviously won’t be coming to Eugene).  We need a few victories in the South ( which is entirely possible given Lanning’s L3 recruiting classes).  Not to mention active recruiting in that territory is easier-especially with a win or two.

 

It’s time to take the tiger by the neck, and grip as long as possible.  Choke ‘em out if you can, but I doubt it results in death.  We are on the rise and it’s time to go after the jugular.  We have the right coach, and the timing is better now that NIL has leveled the playing field.

 

The SEC can’t hog all the players anymore now that they want to play (and get paid).  The SEC was able to hide their NIL before it was legal, and Scam Newton is ground zero as an example. 
 

The refs are starting to respect our brand, now it’s time to make everyone else pay attention.  Besides, we can start calling out Florida, Auburn, and Ole Miss for hiding their behinds in the South and claiming they’re national powers  (unlike Bama, LSU, Texas and Tennessee-who go anywhere, anytime).

[30Duck]

On 2/16/2025 at 7:22 PM, Mike West said:

Though most will disagree, it’s time to start visiting the SEC powers ( since they obviously won’t be coming to Eugene).

I agree. If the games aren't competitive, OBD have problems, a W would be great, and a L, now when they don't ruin a season would be a good loss. Oregon's brand will just get bigger with games in the SEC. 

[DanLduck]

Being full share members is a necessity in my thinking. Without it could Indiana have the season they did?

Unbalanced financial revenue would just continue to keep the conference teams unbalanced. The top teams always winning and bottom half never able to improve.

I think rather a super league makes more sense, especially with paying players now becoming a reality. 

 

So, not wanting to be political, I have a question. 

 

We have assumed the media package in 2030 will be bigger then now. But, if pharmaceutical companies can no longer advertise on TV, that's a huge chunk of revenue that needs to be replaced. Will Fox and others be able to not only replace that but find more $$ somewhere?

 

[HDuck]

Fox Super Bowl had 59 commercials.   2 were pharmaceutical companies.  Both "issue advertising" (cancer) rather than promoting a particular drug.  Pfizer and Novartis placed the ads.

 

That being said, anytime a network loses an advertiser they have to seek replacement revenue for that 24 hours whether it is a sporting event or not.   Advertisers target the demographic of the audience - thus a lot of beer commercials for sporting events.

[DanLduck]

On 2/17/2025 at 11:52 AM, HDuck said:

Fox Super Bowl had 59 commercials.   2 were pharmaceutical companies.  Both "issue advertising" (cancer) rather than promoting a particular drug.  Pfizer and Novartis placed the ads.

 

That being said, anytime a network loses an advertiser they have to seek replacement revenue for that 24 hours whether it is a sporting event or not.   Advertisers target the demographic of the audience - thus a lot of beer commercials for sporting events.

I agree. But Pharm ads are a large part of the total income for a network. Call it a base income. My concern is that loss could impact total net worth and reduce ability to offer large payouts for sports.

 

I would think that the ads during the football game alone are not enough to cover the whole payout to each team

(except maybe super bowl).

 

But I'm just thinking out loud. There seems to be a lot of $$ out there to spend on CFB, at some point you think we might hit a wall, but clearly that's a long ways off.

[Mike West]

On 2/17/2025 at 11:04 AM, DanLduck said:

We have assumed the media package in 2030 will be bigger then now. But, if pharmaceutical companies can no longer advertise on TV, that's a huge chunk of revenue that needs to be replaced. Will Fox and others be able to not only replace that but find more $$ somewhere?

Very astute observation. I'm not sure how many people currently recognize they are on the butcher block. 

 

I foresee many media companies suffering without access to pharmaceutical ads ( talk about a growth line item the last ten years).

 

Of course, that would be disastrous financially for college football if trends remain the same.  Old geezers like most of us here pine for the good old days.  Will younger generations pick up the slack?

 

Fortunately college football is huge compared to other live TV, so media companies have a better shot at replacing the pharmaceutical gauntlet.  

 

It's looking more and more likely the super conference concept will take hold in the future.  

 

I'm interested in whether the P2 are beta testing that concept by adding inter conference matchups to see what and who gains traction (for example, we already know Ohio State, Alabama and Texas draw well nationally.  Who else will in a super conference?).

 

I'm not sure College Football has the capability of handling unfettered free agency the way the NFL can.  I think the private equity leadership will probably help the colleges and universities navigate this passage much better.  Hopefully they have a solid grasp of what truly makes college football tick.

 

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/17/2025 at 5:27 PM, DanLduck said:

I agree. But Pharm ads are a large part of the total income for a network. Call it a base income. My concern is that loss could impact total net worth and reduce ability to offer large payouts for sports.

 

I would think that the ads during the football game alone are not enough to cover the whole payout to each team

(except maybe super bowl).

 

But I'm just thinking out loud. There seems to be a lot of $$ out there to spend on CFB, at some point you think we might hit a wall, but clearly that's a long ways off.

 

When the Super Conference comes about, a players' union will negotiate restraints on transfer, team salary caps (no cap on NIL deals,) rules regarding eligibility, roster size, etc. Rosters will significantly shrink. A high school draft will rein in coach's salaries.

 

The Super Conference will in part at least, directly market its game inventory to the public as does the NFL Network. The Super Conference will stream much of its inventory. 

 

Money from networks will be an important part of the cash flow but the Super Conference negotiating collectively and not piecemeal conference by conference, will retain greater control over its product including control of a post-season playoff without bowl sites being involved.

 

This will come about in the early 2030s if not sooner. With the possible exception of Men's Basketball, conferences will exist for other sports with non-revenue sports aligned geographically. 

 

Private equity may be involved but I believe the Super Conference will be able to raise sufficient capital without having to trade equity. 

 

Do I like this? I prefer college football to be played in the sunshine on Saturday afternoons, with the Run for the Roses being the ultimate goal.

 

However, and as is often the case, I could be WRONG.

 

 

[Tandaian]

Where did this idea of pharmaceutical companies won't be able to advertise on TV?  The closest article I could find was from a couple weeks ago, where a proposal of new drugs couldn't be advertised until 3 years after FDA approval.  That is a far cry from no advertising at all.  The law hasn't even passed yet.  I don't think we have to be concerned about advertising money.