Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

BTN, SEC network, NFL network and ESPN are all on youtube TV and all other popular streaming options

ESPN is going to start their own streaming channel

as the CATV numbers dwindle, those customers migrate to streaming

instead of paying the CATV provider for content, they pay the streaming provider for content

how the content is delivered is not important

the BTN will continue to get paid

What is the weakest football program in the B1G these days?  I could see Rutgers, Illinois, maybe Purdue?  

In the SEC it's clearly Vandy, the teams up from them can be 8-5ish decent in selected years, even winning ten every so often.

I was idly thinking about a B1G-SEC merger.

What is the weakest football program in the B1G these days?  I could see Rutgers, Illinois, maybe Purdue? 

In the SEC it's clearly Vandy, the teams up from them can be 8-5ish decent in selected years, even winning ten every so often.

I was idly thinking about a B1G-SEC merger.

From what standpoint? Eyeballs?

Just generally the weakest program in terms of wins and losses over time, prospects etc.  That probably correlates with eyeballs.  I'm wondering if someone could be cut in time.

Just generally the weakest program in terms of wins and losses over time, prospects etc.  That probably correlates with eyeballs.  I'm wondering if someone could be cut in time.

In that case, I would say the Rutgers, Indiana and Northwestern from a football standpoint, are the weakest in the B1G. 

you and I and others on this board

the true college football fans will have to pay to make up the difference

The biggest viewership numbers in all of American sports television come from the NFL, and if the NFL hasn't managed to force ALL of their content onto their own network, then I don't believe anyone can.

I don't think they can because they'd lose way too many "casual" viewers.  

Putting this back in a CFB context I think you can roughly categorize everyone into three groups:

• Don't care at all, aren't going to watch no matter what.  
• Casual fans will watch if it is on for free (or on a basic tier that they are already buying) but are NOT going to pay al a carte to view.  
• Diehard fans will crawl over broken glass to watch.  

The great thing about the SEC and B1G Networks was that it got a whole bunch of money from people in category #1 who got forced to pay for it as part of their basic cable.  

Group #2 is VASTLY larger than group #3.  If one viewer is worth $0.50 for a game (as ratings for advertising) then you can compare the value of group #2 and group #3.  

Example:
Assume that one viewer is worth $0.50 for a game in advertising revenue.  Now assume that there are 8 Million people in group #2 and that of those, 500,000 are also in group #3.  

Ok, if you air the game for free you get $4 Million (8 million people times $0.50 each).  If you switch to an al a carte system where you charge for the content you only have 500,000 viewers so your advertising revenue drops to $250,000.  You need to make up the missing $3,750,000 in streaming charges which means you need to charge people $7.50 each to watch the game ($3,750,000/500,000).  

If you are talking about a Purdue game and broadcasting in California you are probably better off to charge @betarhoalphadelta some streaming fee rather than broadcast it because there aren't many Purdue fans in California.  However, if you are talking about a Texas game and you are broadcasting in Austin or an Ohio State game and you are broadcasting in Cleveland then I think there is simply more money to be gained by broadcasting it for free and picking up the advertising revenue from the millions of viewers.  


Current example:
Ohio State's second game this season is hosting Youngstown State at noon on Saturday, September 9.  That game is on BTN.  I'm a cord cutter so I don't get BTN.  I'm a fan so I'd like to watch but it is YSU so I'm not that excited.  I'm not going to pay even the $7.50 from my example above to watch Ohio State blow up YSU.