A fierce battle has erupted in the midwest concerning the television viewing rights of University of Michigan football fans and has drawn the attention of state Rep. John Dignell. The Democrat, who is chairman of Michigan’s House Energy and Commerce Committee and whose job it is to oversee broadcast regulations, has expressed unease about the terms of availability for University of Michigan football games this year. At issue is the threat of losing those games to cable television.

The Big Ten Conference, which counts more than 10 colleges and universities among its members, has cut a 20-year broadcast deal with the News Corp. subsidiary Fox Cable networks to form a regional sports channel that would span the eight midwestern states in which the conference operates. With the creation of the Big Ten network (slated to launch in August) arises the possibility that not all Michigan games will be available to fans. This has been a cause for concern for Dignell and a number of his fellow congressmen. moreover, officials at the biggest multiple cable systems operator in the region, Comcast, have decided the fledgling network’s rate is a bit too expensive for its subscribers.

Comcast has about 5.7 million subscribers in the eight-state Big Ten region. The large MSO would be a lucrative carrier for the Big Ten network, which has reached agreements with some 40 smaller cable operators as well as direcTV to offer the network. (The Big Ten and Fox are also seeking outlets to take their channel national.) but getting Comcast on board would ensure the venture becomes a success.

in a letter to the Big Ten commissioner, James Delany , and dated June 25, Dignell wrote, “While I understand the motivation on the part of the Big Ten Conference and its member schools to create a new all-Big Ten cable channel, I am increasingly concerned about the migration of previously free, over-the-air content to a pay television tier.”

Dignell’s letter comes a little late though: With the exception of some weekend football games in the fall and college sports, and a smattering of basketball, hockey, tennis, golf, and other fare, very few games are still available on broadcast TV. Each of the professional sports leagues has negotiated a cable deal of some kind, and most teams enjoy a cable TV deal — some teams even own networks.

The Big Ten is simply following the lead of the pros in seeking a larger payday by creating its own entity. But Comcast has its own interests in mind in resisting the overtures of the Big Ten network. Included among Comcast’s programming are Big Ten events that the cable company could lose to the new network. it could also be sour grapes on the part of Comcast executives who initially wanted a stake in the nascent network, but bowed out of the negotiations before being succeeded by News Corp.’s Rupert murdoch at the bargaining table.

The Big Ten wants to charge about a $1.10 per subscriber and wants its network offered on the “expanded basic” tier, which means that all Comcast subscribers — sports fans or not — would be forced to pay for the channel. Comcast, which operates the Versus Network, among others, would place the Big Ten network on a “digital sports” tier, which would be available for purchase specifically by those who wanted it. beyond the eight-state area, the Big Ten appears to be willing to work out agreements to appear on pay tiers at rates of about $0.30 a subscriber.

Quick math shows that if Comcast were to come on board, the Big Ten could anticipate gross revenues of slightly more than $6 million a month, or $72 million annually, before advertising dollars have even been factored.

But the Comcast model would promise a significantly lower profit margin for the Big Ten, since the buy rates for a stand-alone sports network are typically lower than that of basic cable. Indeed, the numbers would be meager even if the Big Ten network were offered as part of an a la carte package or a pay-sports tier at double or triple the $1.10 figure. basic expanded cable remains the goal for the Big Ten.

In his letter, Dignell also pointed out — somewhat naively — that 10 of the 11 Big Ten schools are publicly supported (with Northwestern the lone private school). What Dignell has either forgotten or doesn’t know is that, these days, college sports programs are a multi-billion dollar business desperate for new revenue streams.

“The free broadcasts of football and basketball games might not make the most money for the conference, but they enable the taxpayer the ability to enjoy what their money has provided,” Dignell wrote to delany. “College sports provide a touchstone, not only for a school or alumni group, but also for an entire state and have become, over the years, a public good and part of our common culture.”

Meanwhile, another battle is brewing in North Carolina. This one pits the mid-Atlantic Sports network (operated by the Baltimore Orioles and Major League Baseball) against Time Warner inc., which shares ownership in Sportsnet New York with the Mets and Comcast. on June 25, the mid Atlantic Sports Network launched the Web site Playballnow.org, on which it asked baseball fans to pressure North Carolina elected officials, the state attorney general, and the Federal Communications Commission to get the network placed on a basic expanded tier instead of a digital one.

Strangely, the Web site seems to have overlooked efforts by the chairman of the FCC, Kevin Martin, to amend cable television rules governing how networks are offered. martin has encouraged Congress to require cable operators to make networks available to consumers on an a la carte basis instead of on a bundled, basic expanded package. Martin thinks consumers would be better served by the chance to cherry pick the networks for which they’ll pay. Again, it is an alternative that strikes fear in the hearts of cable television industry executives everywhere.

The ongoing Michigan-Ohio State rivalry on the gridiron will draw fans this fall, but in the end, it’s just a game. The real battle is between the sports leagues and conferences and the cable TV operators. As subscribers sit helplessly on the sidelines, both sides will duke it out for control of their wallets.