Well, here's the deal. Programming inventory isn't worth more just because you have it. If what they wanted was quantity, then sign the MWC for pennies on the dollar. If what you want is quality match ups, then that gets a lot harder to put together. Generally speaking, inventory is paid out in teirs:
Tier One: Over the air/national games, generally big ticket match ups or important ones late in the season. These are the quality games and generally sell for around $3-6M a pop in the P5
Tier Two: National cable games, e.g. ESPN/FS1. These tend to be the the good, but not elite, match ups and pay out around $2M-$4M a pop for the P5
Tier Three: Lastly, it is everything else. Prior to the B1G forming BTN, this was a no mans land of either not being on TV, getting a PPV run, or being on a small regional channel like FSN, ESPN Regional, etc. The advent of BTN put a value on these for the first time, so it is like free money, but it isn't worth a lot. These games generally go for about $1-2M a pop, though concessions are sometimes made to increase viewership. In short, these are the low end quality games where you have to sell 3-5 of them to get the value of one T1 game.
In a perfect world you want as much of your inventory on T1/2 as possible, then generate as much as you can off the dregs of T3.
The B1G expanded with Nebraska and Penn State and it was a home run. It gave them 12 teams and 4 elites for a whopping 33% of their conference being elite. The B12 at the time had 25%, which was still damn good. The SEC, before expansion, was sitting on about 30% too. That gave the networks a lot of gigantic match ups on the T1 game and a lot of solid match ups when Oklahoma played KSU or OSU played Iowa or Bama played SC. In short, good programming all around.
The B1G then made a conscious effort to F@#K with that perfect set up to bolster BTN, in short it is shifting money. Their T1 won't be worth more, because those elite teams will play less often, but their T2/3 inventory will be worth more and will get more play in the highly populated northeast corridor. They are trying to get paid for their dregs by putting OSU/Michigan/Penn State in DC/NYC early and often.
The SEC pulled a similar move, but with better properties. Neither A&M and Missouri are elite, but they are great T2/3 filler. After Nebraska, A&M is still the best realignment move from a TV stand point. They didn't increase their big game match ups though, which is why CBS is only paying enough to cover the two new teams. Unless Florida, Georgia, Bama or LSU is playing, CBS doesn't really care, that's how they do their math, just like ABC/FOX don't care unless you're Texas/Oklahoma. So, like the B1G, they are shifting value from T1 to T3, but they had to. The SEC, with their agreement to have everything on ESPN, was getting to the point where some games were not going to be aired because there are only so many time slots in a day. Now, with the added inventory, they can shift 45 games to a new network, letting their choice T2 games fall onto ESPN's lay out easily.
The Pac did horrible in realignment. They aimed for Texas and Oklahoma and got Colorado and Utah. That diluted their T1/2 match ups and they didn't really have an elite to good ratio like the other conferences to begin with. All they really gained was low end inventory, which helps you put games on the PacNetworks, but doesn't really create a compelling reason for anyone outside Pac alums to watch the Pac Networks.
The ACC is its own animal, but like the Pac, expanded to survive, not for money. Too many small private schools to really compare them to the SEC or B1G. If FSU keeps winning they are good, if, like the prior decade, that slides, the ACC goes back to being a basketball conference who gets to play ND.
The B12 is sitting in a precarious position in terms of expansion. It is solid with a 20% elite ratio, which is just under the SEC/B1G ratios of around 25%, but ahead of both the ACC and Pac. That makes them more stable than most like to admit and also gives them value on par with the big two. If you consider the B1G and SEC even with value, the B12 is just a rung lower on the ladder, not down on the ground. However, it cannot just expand just to expand for several reasons:
1 - The B12 keeps its value so high because it has the highest percent of games on T1/2 of any of the conferences. A whopping 90% of their games are in both and they are paid a bit more for them due to FS1 having zero audience (If ESPN brings the audience for you, you get less money...see the ACC contract. If you serve as fodder to launch a network, you get paid more for your inventory. See the Pac/B12 deals or how ESPN has outbid everyone for Bowl games, Playoffs, etc.) Adding inventory lowers that percent or shifts more of it to less valued match ups.
2 - The B12 cannot afford to lower its elite ratio any more. Dropping from 25% to 20% was easily absorbed without a valuation issue (Losing Nebraska/Colorado was a 9% drop, A&M/Missouri didn't move the meter because, at ten, they leverage Texas/Oklahoma with every other property well. On a side note, the east coast also loves WVU football. When Smith was there that first year you couldn't turn a corner without someone talking about how they would be taking on Texas, that helps expand the B12's reach more than most surmise. If they went to 12 teams with something like Louisville/Cinci (which everyone clamored for for a while) they would have dropped to a 16.6% elite ratio...going to 16 means it is a 12.5% ratio. The B12's T1/2 value would plummet like a rock.
3 - The way the B12 played the post season construction was masterful. No conference made out with a better deal than the B12. Instead of paying out by team, they pay out by conference, and they are lined up with the SEC for the best non-playoff bowl out there with the Sugar. The B12/B1G/Pac/SEC each make $90M on average over the next 12 years on the playoffs and Rose/Sugar (it will pay out around $72M next year, and a whopping $114M in 2025, thanks inflation!) That means that while the Pac makes $7.5M per team in the post season, the B12 makes $9M per team. The B1G/SEC make $6.5M for that same inventory, but make some of it up with their deal with the Orange. The ACC is had to even fathom since they only make $5.7M at most, and lost some of their other bowl match ups to ND. So, if the B12 adds two teams, each school will lose $1.5M per year, which means the schools they add have to bring even more value than they had to prior to the playoffs.
This got long and boring, but I'm sitting in an airport avoiding work. The short version of this is there is no way the B12 can afford to expand with ANY school who isn't a top tier team. And by top tier we're talking FSU/LSU type schools. Anyone else will lose money because you dilute the total inventory of who plays who. Also, if you go to 12 without an elite you have no choice but to shut down the RRS and put Oklahoma and Texas in their own divisions. You cannot have two elites in one division and none in the other or you crush the value of the CCG you'd have to add to help pay for expansion.
How MacGuiver (MHVer3) got to $50M per team is beyond me. The B12 is paid $200M for their T1/2 now, which increases yearly. But adding 6 teams in conferences that barely pay out $5M per school is all of a sudden going to quadruple the B12's revenue to $800M?! That's just insane. You could add LSU, FSU, A&M, Bama, Georgia and Florida and not get to $800M, but you're going to do it with Memphis and UCF? The guy is high.
At the end of the day, inventory is only worth what it is worth. T1 will always be more valuable than T2, which is more valuable than T3, e.g. conference networks. You can play the quality over quantity card and you can make up for lost quality by selling more volume on the low end, but that doesn't make T3 games more valuable than T1 games. It just doesn't work that way.
