Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor
This is accurate.
The issue is the subscriber fees paid by cable providers (per household) for the Big Ten Network. Within the conference footprint, the BTN charges something close to double for cable networks to carry it.
Lots of folks in DC / MD / VA and the NY/NJ media markets already get the BTN as part of their expanded cable package, and the B10 receives a set price per household. With the expansion of Rutgers and MD, now each of those cable viewers will be worth double to the BTN. Additionally, the BTN pushes cable providers to make the BTN a part of the basic cable package in these markets (and they run spots telling fans to "call your cable operators" and demand the BTN on their basic cable). If THAT happens, it increases the amount of money the BTN receives exponentially.
It's, among many reasons, why Cincinnati isn't considered any kind of "fit" for the BTN -- Cincinnati / NKY is already considered part of the BTN's footprint. They don't add revenue by adding Cincinnati the same way they would, say, Georgia Tech (Atlanta metro).
If Rutgers is so valuable based on potential cable subscribers, why did the ACC ignore Rutgers when it was wooing Pitt and Syracuse? Why did the Big 12 when it went after West Virginia?