Why? What do we contribute to the actual value of the TV deals (i.e. the revenue we think we deserve more of)?

Yep. It is extremely, extremely unlikely. And it's also extremely, extremely rare that there are two G5 teams with any chance of winning a national championship. If you're arguing for a consolation prize, you're going to get consolation prize money.

Very likely (though there are like a dozen that all touch on the same argument. But yea, this one is on a role and out there.

Primarily because posters are presenting questionable info and arguable archaic logic. Yes the financial gap between P4 and G5 is increasing and will continue to do so. Keep in mind, so to are expenses. “Nebraska made $143 million in 2022 and $200 million in 2023.” Don’t confuse revenue and profit. Big difference between the two as every child that ever ran a lemonade stand knows. In fact, the majority of that increase at Nebraska ($200 vs $143), is attributed to nearly $61 million in contributions from fans and boosters related to the university’s new $165 million football building. Don’t expect our “buy game” payment to increase to “a minimum $8 million game” on the backs of their fan’s contributions. That’s not the way business works. You sit down and say “I deserve X$ because you had revenue of Y$” is simply an indication you shouldn’t be at the table.

Are profits at the P4 increasing? Indeed. Nebraska (staying with them for a moment) had a profit on football of over $50 million. Anyone who thinks they would then turn and give us 15% of that profit is… mistaken. Why would they not? Because there are more than enough opponents (customers) to choose from at a price that is more in line with the marketplace. In 2024, there were over 120 games between P4 teams and either G5 or, gasp, FCS opponents. Same in 2023. For 2025 there are already over 90 and full schedules have not been announced. Why? Because the G5 (and FCS) teams need the revenue to help support their programs (hence many G5s have more than 1 "buy game”). And the P4s need the games (currently) to fill out their schedule. While there may arguably be an imbalance, but there is mutual need and the marketplace will address the imbalance.

And no, sorry to disappoint, the Nebraska fans really don’t care if they are playing Nebraska-Kearney or Ohio – as evident by their game with Houston Christian this coming year (right after their game with Akron). Or by Penn State that welcomes FIU and Villanova to Happy Valley this year. No, my cousin will not be selling off his season tickets in protest or disgust, nor probably even sell his tickets to those games (though he could easily find a buyer) – instead he may just head back to the tailgate a little sooner and get ready for the Oregon game. And guess what, BTN will still show all the games.

So the price of “buy games” are not going to jump because of new revenue streams at the P4 level. And no, G5 schools are not going to ban together in a revolt against the changing system (because they need the money and have no leverage to stop the train). Ohio State is located in Columbus, not Caracas, the marketplace will dictate the price.

In fact, more likely than getting all the G5s to ban together (remember, getting only a few passionate souls to join together has no value) is the likelihood that a few G5s will take a look at the changing marketplace and consider new business models accordingly. For example, “G5 University” approaches a power P4 program and acknowledges “we are basically becoming a farm system for P4. We can’t compete with NIL and are fans are already becoming accustomed to the portal taking our best players. You on the other hand know it’s an arms race and want to recruit as many of the best players you can, but can’t get them all reps – and then you lose them. So let’s align. You recruit and stockpile select players here. We’ll cover their scholarship while on campus (and win some games), you cover the NIL. Then if the player blossoms. We all have an agreement that you get first right at their transfer. In exchange, you provide $10 million annually to our athletic program.”

I’m not saying this concept will work, nor if the numbers are remotely accurate. What I am saying is the “buy game” marketplace has not changed to the degree that what was worth $2 million is now remotely worth $8 million (nor probably even $3). That mindset is like people telling Henry Ford “I’m not going to drive one of those things, I just want a faster horse.”

You are not going to see a sea change in pricing for “Buy games” but the market is transforming. Adapt. And if you want to go in and demand $8 million for a game that the marketplace will laugh at….make sure to park your horse outside.

I suggested something similar once, though you've put more thought into it. Definitely an out of left-field idea, but really the only suggestion in this thread that addresses the actual challenge G5 schools face and considers a sustainable way to generate funds from the P4 that actually moves the needle for both parties in a meaningful way.

This happens in European soccer all the time. Big clubs like Man City and Chelsea often have partners in other domestic leagues where they loan players they're paying (or, at least, they're paying the majority of the wages to) who help develop the players. Chelsea has a club in Belgium, for instance.

Okay, being dysfunctional myself I'll join this dysfunctional thread with one dysfunctional comment.

When BL made the point about getting OHIO alumni to give more to Julie Cromer than Ross Bjork, it reminded me of a remark that OHIO alumnus John Galbreath once made. He was asked why he gave so much money to Ohio State athletics and not Ohio athletics; he said, and this is rough paraphrase, that Ohio didn't aspire to have a national calibre football team. I found that comment irksome at the time, and still find it so. To me it says something about the perception that our athletic department promulgates of being second class and being content with being second class. This was briefly changed during the tenure of Bill Rohr when we put out a different message, but in general this has been kind of the vibe one gets from the OHIO ADs office. I suspect we have well-heeled alumni who would give more to our athletic program if they got a different vibe from the institution about what our aspirations were.

So what would a fair payment be? 10% of OSU's revenue? 5%? I just don't see how you can say 1.9 Million for a single football game that is within bus driving distance is a terrible deal.

Can you imagine if 70% of NFL franchises lost money but only Dallas made money?

+1

"Ding. Ding. Ding. Also gold star to DCF as well. Seems some are starting to get the point.

I would also mention two points:

1. On the above quoted post - this is my problem with Cromer. Instead of looking out for Ohio (and working to band together with the other G5's) - she (and her peers) are scared to death (and completely irresponsible) by not taking this on as an initiative, for fear it will cost them opportunities to work at the P4's. This is my biggest single issue. Cromer is so busy trying to get back to the 479, that it appears she won't accept responsibility for improving the 740."


B-Love-I have stated on a few occasions that the West Virginia deal three game series is not a great business opportunity for Ohio. Three games for a total net of $1 million dollars for the total of that series when 1-AA schools like Albany are being paid $475 K per game is not a great deal. Big 12 teams can afford way more than that. Terrible business deal! Of course many on this forum think that the AD can do no wrong.

Give it up. Bobcat Love doesn't want any of that fat cat fancy lip wiggling.

Nope. If I were, I'd know all about Cromer's sexism, cruelty, and the terrible work environment. You know, the stuff you insist is the case, but can't provide any evidence for and that caused Billy to avoid the Common Denominator thread like it's the plague (on his main account).

I don't actually think you all are the same person. But you all are the same sort of spineless, so it's fun to point out the similarities. You two are basically soulmates.

You two should arrange a club for people who like to act like they have insider info, but disappear when pressed for specifics.

Getting back to the topic at hand before this is sent to Siberia, here's an interesting site that shows the athletic budgets across the MAC and all of FBS. Each school is broken down with revenues and expenses. The most interesting part for me is that in a five year period between 2018-2023, Ohio's lost 10% of their revenue, but they've also lowered their overall expenses. So essentially Ohio keeps doing more with less and less.

The biggest dropoff in revenue appears to from alumni donations. Now, I have no idea how accurate this is or how often data like that is collected, but that is quite interesting. Seems we (collectively BA.com and Ohio alums) need to put our money where our mouth is.

https://knightnewhousedata.org/fbs/mac

https://knightnewhousedata.org/fbs/mac/ohio-university