Jump to content

bullet

Full Members
  • Posts

    3201
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by bullet

  1. 4 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

    I think going to 10 is the most likely path for the Irate 8. They'll want to limit the slices of pie. 

    Baylor, TCU, and possibly Texas Tech will try to block UH to maintain a perceived recruiting advantage. That's more than enough votes. 

    I could see the Irate 8 ducking a fight with ESPN for AAC teams, and instead adding Boise and BYU. 

    Big 12 made $97 million from the CFP/Sugar Bowl last year.  That's $9.7 million per team.  At 12 teams that's 8.1 million.  At 14, 6.9 million.  At 16, 6.1 million.

    Just to make up for splitting the CFP pie smaller, going from 12 to 14 would require $14.4 million in addition to matching the revenue the other schools make.  I'm not sure there are 6 schools that can match the current membership, let alone exceed it.  There certainly are not 8.  There are probably just 3-BYU, UH and Cincinnati.  

    If you go to 8, that means most likely UCF and USF.  Then you have to find 3 others.  SMU?  CSU?  Memphis?  Probably drag down the average.  Boise maybe, but they have a lot of other drawbacks, like travel, basketball and academics.

    Just no way they can do 16.  And 14 seems questionable, as well as premature until they see if 12 works.

     

  2. Just now, camel at sea said:

    If those underlying factors were in place five years ago... aren't they still in place now?  

    They are still there.  The pressure is probably broader, but without Rick Perry, its not as immediate.  Perry was a C student at A&M when it made Arkansas look like a great school.  He wanted to return A&M to his time and pushed them to rapidly grow from 45k to 65k.  That issue was the reason Powers almost got removed as UT president.  He resisted Perry's effort to dumb down the university.

    There are still more and more good suburban students who can't get into UT or A&M.  That creates pressure.

    California has 7 public and 3 private AAU universities.  Texas has 2 public and 1 private.

  3. Tech and UH at the time (UTD has joined them) were the two schools getting money from the National Research University Fund.  That's the state fund to try to promote more research oriented universities in Texas.  Both wanted more money pumped into that fund.

  4. 1 hour ago, camel at sea said:

    The Texas legislature, Governor Abbott, and Texas Tech's President endorsed Houston to the Big 12 five years ago so that UT could get a research campus in Houston?  

    I think the real reason was that Texas wants UH to do well to get some of the pressure off Texas to lower admission standards the way A&M has.  Houston in the Big 12 in 2016 might have helped stem some of the good students going to Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama etc.  Houston is a better school than the majority of the SEC in just about any ranking other than USNWR.  Its much tougher to get into.  It ranks higher in the research oriented rankings like ARWU.  Only Florida, Georgia, Vandy and A&M are clearly better.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  5. https://www.oklahoman.com/story/sports/2021/08/30/big-12-expansion-already-has-list-applicants-2016/5647450001/

    Trammel talks expansion

     

    "The Big 12 is back in the expansion business. The beleaguered conference will not need to draw up a list of potential candidates. 

    That list already exists. 

    The Big 12’s infamous 2016 expansion process, during which the conference asked for applications from prospective members and interviewed at least 11 schools, gives the league more than a jumpstart....

    Trammel thinks BYU, UH, Cincinnati, SMU, UCF, Boise and Memphis are likely to be in the lead.

     

  6. 3 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

    26:50 - “I can tell you, that networks would probably have paid 95%, 92-95% of the total Big12 television contract just to OU and Texas if they decided to just like to be independents.  Just to give you a sense of like…we’re not paying, we’re not paying to like televise the other teams.”

    I think he might be exaggerating a bit lol but goes to the greater point we’ve been making on this thread.

    Maybe hurtlocker can give some insight, but it isn't clear how much the networks are paying for the blockbuster games relative to routine games.

    Is a game with 5 million viewers worth twice as much as one with 2.5 million viewers?  Or is it worth 4 times as much?  I really don't know.

     

  7. 13 games over 5 years vs. 12 over 5 years.  There are between 420 and 490 ACC games over 5 years and 300 to 350 Big 12 games and you are saying the ACC outperformed the Big 12 because of that with 40% more games?  You must be a social science major.

    The R8 have better average attendance than the Pac 12 (2016-2019) or the ACC.  They can't match the TV ratings of Clemson or USC.  But they beat the average teams.  And virtually every member of the R8 has been in the hunt for an MNC in November in the last 15 years.  TCU and Oklahoma St. may have well won one if ESPN had given them the chance.  TCU maybe 2.  Tech, Baylor, KSU, WVU and even KU(!) have been a late November (or December) loss from a title game.  No other conference can match that top to bottom consistency.  Half the SEC has never been that close.  The r8 have no superstars, but they have some good performers.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  8. 7 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

    And they (ESPN/FOX) made this very clear during the exclusive negotiation window as neither wanted to even bid on the rights with UT/OU included. That was likely the final straw that convinced UT that it was time to go (OU had been trying to leave for years already).

    To be accurate they didn't want to bid early.  They both wanted to keep their options open to bid on the Big 10.  They didn't want to commit slots to the Big 12 until they knew how much of the Big 10 they had.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  9. 15 hours ago, camel at sea said:

    In 2019-2020, the ACC's distribution averaged $32.3M per school and they can't negotiate a new rights deal for another decade+.  Assuming that the IR8 are worth about half of the Big 12's $40M per school distribution, then they have a chance to be alright.  The Big 12's current deal is a decade old.  Big 12 v.4 just need live TV to continue escalating in value.  Pretty much all live TV is seeing huge pay increases.   If they can get per-school payout into the high 20s and keep P5 status (with the CFP access and money that comes with it) they'll have the worst house in the neighborhood but they'll still be in the P5 neighborhood.  

    It's not realistic to try competing financially with the SEC or B1G.  But if money can be competitive-ish with the ACC and PAC, then it's probably good enough to keep Big 12 football programs in roughly the same spot they've been in.  

    And the Big 12 schools are the most financially healthy.  They run pretty lean athletic departments and do a lot fewer sports than the Big 10 and Pac 12 schools and a little fewer than the ACC.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  10. 21 hours ago, Gaffords said:

    It doesn't matter who they have, the contract itself is going to fall way short of the other conferences.  And I have a feeling that Bowlsby's projected 50% loss is optimistic.  

    If the duck could have made even 10 cents to the dollar, don't you think the Big 12; would be at 12/14/16 with a real conference title game and a network by now?  There wasn't any available teams to move the mark past where it stood...   

    Now there isn't any combination of available teams (even if the Ir8 jumped to 20) to put them within half of what they lost with the exit of OU and Texas.   

    Conferences are anchored by blue bloods for a reason...  Someone has to keep the lights on when the entire league is down... Blue bloods still get National viewers even if not in contention.  But unless TT/OSU/ect... is undefeated late in the year, AND in serious conversations of taking it all, they don't get National interest unless playing a National Brand (which seldom happens at all). 

    So the real question becomes; once the butthurt subsides and reality of the cash cow(s) having been stolen,will the Ir8 really care to compete at P5 level when they can't afford to keep facilities, stadiums, coaches salaries, ect. which will kill recruiting and such, just for the prestige of status?  10 to 15 mill off TV deals competing against conferences pulling between 50 - 60 mill is a huge gap will just keep getting wider and wider...  

    99.9% those on the outside looking in, want in for the money.  It will be interesting to see if they still want in when they will be making a few million more as a P5 but needing to spend  that and more, just in the new travel expenses. Not to mention P5 coaching salaries, and all the bells and whistles needed to draw in recruits.  

    Football drives the bus when it comes to $$$.  But when it becomes a cash drain instead of the money tree, teams step down to lower divisions or shit can it completely....  This is something i could see Kansas do.  Even if they lost two or three million a year playing in a BB conference instead of losing 6 or 7 million a year paying for a football program that can't pay for it's own toilet paper.

    Well the interesting thing is that the Big 12 was making $9-$10 million in conference distributions back before the 2010 Pac 16 plan.  So they will be making 50% more than the Big 12 was making then if Bowlsby's prediction was accurate.

  11. 2 hours ago, camel at sea said:

    This leads me to believe he thinks that he has a post-expansion media rights buyer who is not Disney.  Maybe he does.  If someone like CBS wants into the college athletics space for their streaming app, they could probably pick up the Big 12 v.4 at a discount and get some relatively good return on that.  

    Or maybe NBC wants someone to fill days they don't have Notre Dame?

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-picks-schedule-predictions-against-the-spread-odds-for-week-0-games/

     

    Not much new, but Bowlsby is still speaking "truth to power."  Yes, he REALLY said that.  What?  Does he think he's an 18 year old college student?

     

    "...Bowlsby still believes ESPN conspired with SEC and American to (perhaps mortally) wound his league. Bowlsby has not shared evidence to this end; both ESPN and AAC commissioner Mike Aresco denied the accusation.

     

    "You know me well enough," Bowlsby told CBS Sports this week. "I wouldn't have said it unless it was absolutely true."

    Bowlsby hasn't lost any part of his bravado since that day. Asked if it's possible to mend fences with a powerful rights holder in future negotiations, Bowlsby did not relent.

    "Any time you speak truth to power, you run risks," he said...."

  13. 3 hours ago, mdmost said:

    This is why the Pac 12 didn't have to expand. If each school in the Pac 12 is getting an ACC and Big 10 team twice a year while keeping their existing slice of the pie, why bring on schools that don't really add that much in the Big 8 leftovers? Maybe the Pac 12 goes away after their TV ends but Tech, oSu, and others weren't going to make a new TV deal any better.  

    The Big 10 and ACC aren't going to drop valuable teams for Pac teams.  Others have said the Pac is driving this.  I can't see the Big 10 seeing any value in this.  How many Big 10 teams want to play Arizona and Utah and skip Ohio St. or Michigan?

  14. 16 minutes ago, Speedway said:

    E. Gordon Gee, University of West Virginia President, has stated he is no longer in favor of a 12 team playoff format.  I would suspect his vote flip-flop is an effort to leverage his seat on the College Football Playoff Board of Directors for a spot in the ACC for West Virginia.  That would put the proverbial stake in the Walking Dead Big XII.

    WVU is the one school they could probably lose.  Now maybe WVU is the most valuable remaining school, but losing them doesn't hurt the cohesion.

  15. 51 minutes ago, BluTechsan said:

    Very true. And it’s an end game that I don’t want to see happen. 

    But let me ask you this, and this is not meant as an insult to the home team of this community here, why did the SECSECSEC need Texas and OU?

    It was asked above why does the SECSECSEC  need Texas Tech

    Same can be said of the Sooners and Horns - while it’s great for both schools, theSECSECSEC doesn’t need either of them. 

    The SECSECSEC is already dominating CFB and the playoffs. They are already printing money faster than they can spend. Their media presence is already huge - even in Texas. Their teams already get the pick of the litter in recruiting.

    But there is one answer to all of it.

    E.S.P.N.

    They want to control, it is argued they already do, but they want to run CFB free and clear of anything the NCAA has to say about it.

    But they don’t want the hassle of babysitting 120 schools.

    Nope, they want a league made up of the elite few - basically the blue bloods and a few others.

    So, start with the biggest conference first as your foundation. and then start picking off teams bit by bit.

    They probably would have been cool to stand at 16 for awhile why GORd expire but the rumblings coming from the BIG/PAC this week that they aren’t ready for change means they need to give the elites in those conferences a little nudge and they do that by moving on without them vis-a-vie further expansion now.

    And right now, the two biggest P5 free agents on the board are Tech and oSu.

    (I say free agents because we all know the B12 as a P5 is dead)

     

    Texas and OU give them lots more money.  Anyone else who is available other than Notre Dame doesn't.

  16. "...With the announcement Thursday that the Pac-12 Conference will not explore expansion in the near future, the fracturing Big 12 will throw its energy into looking at potential new members, Kirby Hocutt said.

    The Texas Tech athletics director is part of a four-person expansion subcommittee tasked with leading the effort, which starts immediately.

    "Right now, our complete focus is to make the Big 12 as strong as it can possibly be," Hocutt said, "and I expect that Texas Tech will play a leadership role in that. We're going to continue to be part of the power-five structure in college athletics."

    Williams column:Pac-12's decision latest body blow to Big 12

    Hocutt said Baylor AD Mack Rhoades, Kansas Chancellor Doug Girod and Iowa State President Wendy Wintersteen are the others on the subcommittee. The Big 12 in the past few days has enlisted Oliver Luck, the former West Virginia AD and XFL commissioner, as a consultant to aide in working through realignment. 

     

    Describing the group as already "active," Hocutt said they will meet with the Big 12 presidents early Friday and will have in-person meetings next week involving Big 12 athletics directors and media and television consultants...."

     

    https://www.lubbockonline.com/story/sports/college/football/2021/08/26/college-sports-kirby-hocutt-says-big-12-expansion-plans-under-way/5607522001/

    So the Big 12 is moving ahead.

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  17. 10 hours ago, utee94 said:

    We're joking about it but on another message board I frequent, there are actually Big Ten fans, that think Texas and the SEC are doing dirty deeds here, and are ruining college football.  They don't get it-- at all-- that it's THEIR conference that started all of this, both in 1991 when it added PSU, and in 2010 when they began raiding the B12 and ACC.

    If I were an ACC fan or administrator, I'd have ZERO trust in the B1G.  This is all their fault.

     

     

    And then they talk about "equal" revenue sharing.  SEC let Missouri and A&M in almost 100% equal.  Big 12 did 50/67/75/83/100 for TCU/WVU.  Pac 12 did something in between on Colorado and Utah got something similar to the Big 12.  The Big 10?  Rutgers in 2017-18, 3 years after joining, was only making $11.7 million in distributions.  The continuing members were making $54 million.  Nebraska was about $50 million behind where they would have been if they simply stayed in the Big 12 after 5 years.

  18. 9 minutes ago, LTbear said:

    I assume it's so the playoff goes to open market rather than default being controlled by ESPN. Possibly more money, possibly less ESPN monopoly control on the biggest aspects of CFB.

    So they are all mad at ESPN because the SEC got Texas and OU instead of them.

    Pac could have had us in 1990.  Probably could have in 1994 if they would have taken Tech.  Almost had us in 2010.  Big 10 wouldn't talk to us in 1990.  Wouldn't talk about our "Tech problem" in 1994 and 2010.

    If they give up 3 years of revenue in order to take it to open market, they probably never make it pay off.  Its like Nebraska.  If they had stayed in the Big 12 until now, they would be close to $100 million ahead.

  19. 11 hours ago, Surly Bevo said:

    The Athletic was not impressed

      Hide contents

     

    "...And that brings us to the ACC’s new commissioner, who was asked by The Athletic’s Stewart Mandel how the shared values of the alliance differ from the SEC. Phillips kicked off his answer with: “Education, research, service …”

    Maybe Phillips thought he was applying for tenure at his previous workplace, Northwestern. Or maybe he didn’t mind throwing shade at the Ph.D. he earned from the University of Tennessee. When he closed the answer by emphasizing  “It’s not a holier-than-thou statement,” that’s precisely what it was. These institutions should be proud of their academic heft, but the folks involved in athletics are trying to fill stadiums, win titles and raise funds. Considering that most SEC athletes were recruited by schools in the alliance, why insult their academic profiles with such undertones?

    Three ACC schools play SEC rivals every year, and as far as I can discern, their GPA doesn’t dip because of it. Duke football has upcoming games against Middle Tennessee, Charlotte and Liberty. Are we going to assert that academics mattered one scintilla in those contracts, or will we save the high-minded talking points for realignment?..."

     

     

    On the point quote from that article is above.  There are only a dozen or so schools in the rebel paclantic alliance that are in the same category as Texas and Florida academically.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  20. 4 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

    What? Why the fuck would I subtract those #s? None of the PAC schools, currently, are at risk of leaving the PAC, so why do I need to re-evaluate what Oregon versus Oregon State does in regards to being attractive for the Beavers to join another conference?

    Oklahoma State is trying to sell what THEY offer to another conference. And what they sell no longer includes their two by far biggest viewership games of the year. Period. They don't get to sell that. And on the other end. UCLA isn't at risk from losing their games from their two biggest conference mates and trying to sell themselves to the Big 10 so there isn't some fuck all apples to apples to comparison you need to construct. There aren't two sides to this coin. 

    Because if they go to the Pac, they would have USC and Oregon and still look better than most of those Pac schools.

  21. 4 hours ago, 'stache said:

    So many of you keep saying this and the numbers just don't support it. OSU and Tech's TV ratings are better than everyone in the Pac 12 except USC. ISU would be squarely within the average for the Big 10 in football and their fans support their team regardless of whether they're good or not. KU has value in basketball, which is not the driving factor here, but it cannot be ignored.

    Well you could be better than half the Big 12, but still lower the average since UT and OU are such a high %.

    USC, UCLA, UW are probably a really big part of Pac 12 value.

  22. 7 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

    I get what you're saying here, I just fundamentally disagree. The march to an 8 or 12 team playoff is inevitable. Even with some SEC deflation by playing more games, you've got to think a committee picking the top 12 teams is going to find 3 SEC teams spots. I'd argue as many as 5. Because there will be Clemson and Ohio State and then a lot of 3 loss teams looking to get into it as well, and having 2-3 of those loses against higher ranked conference competition is going to look better on a resume. 

    That's why all other conferences should be on board with more spots, including the SEC. Right now the 4 team is Ohio State, Clemson, 2 SEC teams and occasionally a Washington or Notre Dame, maybe Oregon soon. You don't think the other 3 major conferences will realize that they might be better off letting in 3-4 SEC teams, but still having an extra 4-5 to split amongst themselves, or however the math breaks out?

    Everybody other than Ohio St., Alabama, Clemson and Georgia should be on board with more than 4 slots.

  23. 6 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

    Yeah, honestly, I think this is a Pac play to be honest.   They want to drop to 8 conference games to stop beating each other up, but know they can't with out other P5 games on the docket.   Doesn't hurt the ACC either.   They have 14 teams and only Louisville, Clemson, FSU and GTech play SEC crossovers every year, that leaves ten teams looking for better games as it is.    The only reason I see the Big Ten dropping to 8 games is if they expand and add content.

    As for the playoffs, my guess is it isn't blocking it, its slowing it down.   If media partners don't want to invest in CFB because they can't get a bite of the post season, then they're going to want to add to the structure to guarantee they do.  One idea I heard is blowing up the bowl system and having it all run through CFB (as opposed to a patchwork of individual interests) and then the first round would be on campuses and the next round would be in stadiums set in each conference's footprint, with domed stadiums being used in the north, each controlled by that conference and bid out.   So the SEC could have a game with ESPN, and Fox could have one with the Pac, and the Big Ten CBS, etc.    Then rotate the champ game like the NFL does every year or couple years.

    The thinking being if Fox can get some of the Big Ten's post season, they'll be more likely to invest in the Big Ten's regular season.   As it sits now, they basically market the ESPN's end of year games.   I'd also expect they hard code in more access, like limit the amount of teams per conference in the playoffs to three.

    TLDR: expansion will happen, but likely at the end of the contract instead of 2 years before.

    I don't think anyone is decreasing conference games.  SEC goes to 9.  Big 10 and Pac 12 stay at 9.  ACC stays at 8 + ND.  NCSU-Duke and Oregon St.-Arizona St. is more valuable than NCSU-Oregon St. and Duke-Arizona St.  Nobody from either region will watch the latter set of games.  The alliance needs to include premier games and not displace conference games.  And maybe Duke plays Arizona St. instead of Western Carolina.

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...