Left Behind: A Quick Dose Of Post Big 12 Reality

[statsman 5472]

That’s a lot of words, but but I don’t see anybody (UT, OU, ESPN, Fox, Big XII) writing a check to anybody else for damages unless told to by a court of law. If it gets to that, UT always has sovereign immunity. If any state legislators carp, Texas will ask them if they really want to fight that, do they really wish to never play any sport in Austin ever again?

“Butt Funble”, out of curiosity, who is your team?

[closetohumping 17449]

2 hours ago, Tex Long said:

I'm too fucking lazy to scratch and claw at the 'Net to find the information, but it'd be interesting - aand perhaps crucial - to compare the buyouts for all the years of the XII up 'til now. 

If it is in fact true that Nebraska, Colorado, aggy, Missouri all walked away paying half or less than the full  amount required, I'd think most rational, uninterested Jurors would be likely to feel that the demand by Bowlsby and the Boys for all the marbles is not just excessive, but completely unprecedented.

I have no idea what the current state of negotiations is, but I'd think it's at the point where we are offering around half or see y'all in court, sooner or later.

Personally, I lean toward pulling the team off the field at the very first sign of referee fuckery, calling over the XII official attending the game and telling him we're going to forfeit if another egregiously incorrect call happens. You might want to see how the broadcaster, the one who's paying for the game, feels about being faced with hours of no product to show. That's fucking extreme, but then so was the OSU game which saw the refs calling holding on a DL who was trying to escape from two OL who were holding him, awarding a fumble recovery to the OSU QB who never got into the pile, and hip-checking our HC and then penalizing the coach. We should have taken that opportunity to refuse any game with that ref crew. Nothing like that is going to happen, ever, but it's a delicious thought...

While I think this is a rational approach to look at things, I think we signed a new, more iron clad and penalizable agreement after the losers left right?  Kind of like a show of unity, loyalty and strength?  Deloss didn't want to leave.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Ask Mike Leach how sovereign immunity works.  

[Laxtonto 12090]

My guess is that the Big 12 is getting nervous because the CUSA/SBC spat about the 3 teams leaving early all of the sudden to the SBC has a sovereign immunity tie in thrown there since they are doing the "throw everything possible at the wall method to see what sticks and bog down the opposing legal team" strategy.

All it takes is one local judge tied to the university to throw out some overreaching judgment and then Texas and OU may jump and then just tie it up in the courts and let the uncertainty of the law put all of the risk at the feet of the B12.

Do I think SI really ties into all of this, probably not, but is the added uncertainty provides a reason for the B12 to probably go back to the table.

The real question is where is the money coming from and is this in a response to the AAC also trying to tie up the B12 adds for an extended time as well. Taking the UT/OU money to help the new ads offset their exit fees might be a part of this as well.

Edited March 6, 2022 by Laxtonto

[ButtFumble 5180]

50 minutes ago, statsman said:

That’s a lot of words, but but I don’t see anybody (UT, OU, ESPN, Fox, Big XII) writing a check to anybody else for damages unless told to by a court of law. If it gets to that, UT always has sovereign immunity. If any state legislators carp, Texas will ask them if they really want to fight that, do they really wish to never play any sport in Austin ever again?

“Butt Funble”, out of curiosity, who is your team?

ESPN does not have sovereign immunity.....that is the issue at hand

and enticing Texas and OU to break a contract could cost them a great deal of money all the more so if other actions come to light or prove to be true

[statsman 5472]

How would it cost them money? Is your alma mater (who is your alma mater?) going to sue ESPN for the money?

[ButtFumble 5180]

10 minutes ago, statsman said:

How would it cost them money? Is your alma mater (who is your alma mater?) going to sue ESPN for the money?

Fox owns half of the Big 12 content.....losing Texas and OU and that content is a sizable loss to Fox and the value of the contract they are paying for.....and if it can be proven that ESPN, the SEC SEC SEC, or anyone else enticed Texas and OU to break that contract or interfered in the completion of that contract then ESPN (or anyone else proven to have done that) could be on the hook for 3X the damages plus the actual damages

and if The Big 12 and their members can prove that same thing they would also be able to collect damages possibly up to #x the actual damages

That is what Bowlsby accused ESPN (with the aid of the AAC) of trying to do......to contact members of the Big 12 and tell them they have a "safe spot" in the AAC if they want to join in hopes that the conference would dissolve......but the idiots that run the AAC apparently forwarded emails between them and ESPN discussing that plan to some members of the Big 12....once that accusation was made and a legal letter was sent to ESPN suddenly the talk of Texas having $120 ready to pay the Big 12 to leave ASAP died off......that would have been the approximate $90 million in damages plus an extra $30 million to let Texas out of the GOR early.....instead suddenly "OU does not have the money" 

Edited March 6, 2022 by ButtFumble

[statsman 5472]

So, you’re thinking Fox will sue ESPN for breaking a Big XII rule? For (possibly) doing what Fox did 30 years ago when getting the NFL from CBS?

It looks like you’ve got a lot of “ifs”, “maybes” and a few “could be’s” thrown in. All I know is that ESPN/ABC and Fox are sending money to the Big XII office and the Big XII is keeping Texas’ and OU’s share. For two years. 

Edited March 6, 2022 by statsman

[ButtFumble 5180]

2 minutes ago, statsman said:

So, you’re thinking Fox will sue ESPN for breaking a Big XII rule? For (possibly) doing what Fox did 30 years ago when getting the NFL from CBS?

 

no I am not saying that at all.....your analogy with Fox and CBS is meaningless because the contract between CBS and the NFL had ended thus Fox was free to bid on those rights

What I am discussing is Texas and OU attempting to leave the Big 12 before the GOR has ended and the implications of that if it is determined that ESPN (or anyone else) offered Texas and OU financial incentive to break and EXISTING contract.....that is not legal to do....that is not the same as bidding on a contract and the rights to something AFTER an existing contract has ended

[statsman 5472]

Let me explain this. Read slowly. 
 
There is no governmental body that is going to step in and punish ESPN, Texas and OU for their evil doings. 
To get redress, the Big XII and/or Fox will have to initiate something. Nothing happens until then. 
If one of them starts a court action, they can (and will be) deposed under oath, too. 
Texas and OU can ask the court to put a hold on media disbursements to all schools, until this is worked out, if the Big XII tries to overstep. Everybody gets to pay lawyers, then!

 

Edited March 6, 2022 by statsman

[ButtFumble 5180]

10 minutes ago, statsman said:

Let me explain this. Read slowly. 
 
There is no governmental body that is going to step in and punish ESPN, Texas and OU for their evil doings. 
To get redress, the Big XII and/or Fox will have to initiate something. Nothing happens until then. 
If one of them starts a court action, they can (and will be) deposed under oath, too. 
Texas and OU can ask the court to put a hold on media disbursements to all schools, until this is worked out, if the Big XII tries to overstep. Everybody gets to pay lawyers, then!

 

you don't seem to understand some very basic aspects of contract law......enticing  party to break an existing contract is illegal and that is enforced all the time.....interfering with one party fulfilling an existing contract is illegal and it is enforced all the time

you seem to have this idea that Texas and OU are not touchable for some reason (sovereign immunity or otherwise) and what I am telling you is that there are other parties involved in all of this that in no way shape or form have sovereign immunity and it does not matter if the parties they enticed or interfered with to break a contract have sovereign immunity or not ESPN or others besides Texas and OU can suffer a great deal of financial damages

thus ESPN is telling Texas and OU to fulfill the existing contract before moving on and or payout additional money to break the GOR and make sure ESPN (or others) have their asses covered and then move on

not to mention that no state university has used sovereign immunity to get out of paying damages for leaving a conference.....but again it does not matter of Texas and OU can use that and it is successful there is a massive financial risk to ESPN (and possibly others) if it can be shown they lured Texas and OU to break the GOR and leave early

Edited March 6, 2022 by ButtFumble

[closetohumping 17449]

[Pancho 44856]

16 hours ago, Patron said:

 

This was also put out by the official UT Athletics twtter about 45 minutes ago. 

 

Something is afoot…

[Surly Bevo 25048]

25 minutes ago, Pancho said:

This was also put out by the official UT Athletics twtter about 45 minutes ago. 

 

Something is afoot…

Absolutely. You don’t just randomly put that out. 

[mdmost 43004]

Maybe we're going to tell OU that we'll see them in 2025. 

[Vertigo 20290]

12 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Absolutely. You don’t just randomly put that out. 

I was wondering the same thing. I wonder if an agreement has been struck somewhere. The report that came out earlier this week about OU may have been some misdirection.

[LTtxfan 49247]

43 minutes ago, Pancho said:

This was also put out by the official UT Athletics twtter about 45 minutes ago. 

Something is afoot…

 

Strange things are afoot...

 

[closetohumping 17449]

23 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

I was wondering the same thing. I wonder if an agreement has been struck somewhere. The report that came out earlier this week about OU may have been some misdirection.

Came from chip right?   CDCs mouthpiece

[JohnnyRage 1617]

Holy fuck I couldn’t really get a hold of what y’all were blathering about. Watched that hype video and was about ready to run through a wall, and then at the end was totally not expecting an SEC logo.

Fucking Hook’em!

[JohnnyRage 1617]

I Sayt Got Dayum

[BurntOrange&White 39934]

Shit like that doesn’t get posted with something more imminent approaching 

[closetohumping 17449]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Shit like that doesn’t get posted with something more imminent approaching 

 

10 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

I Sayt Got Dayum

 

1 hour ago, Vertigo said:

I was wondering the same thing. I wonder if an agreement has been struck somewhere. The report that came out earlier this week about OU may have been some misdirection.

Especially not from this admin.  Something has to be happening otherwise it would be "we are still in the big 12 till 2025."  And it was placed at the very end for effect.

[Nueces River Rat 5539]

On 3/6/2022 at 2:57 AM, Patron said:

 

The only thing missing at the end is SEC! SEC! SEC!      LOL!

[JohnnyRage 1617]

That logo is kind of dog shit though. You want to hype it with out aggy hyping it. It has to be the moon because of the camera angle, but it still could have had some morphing effects ending up with being a burnt orange harvest moon reprise.

Edited March 8, 2022 by JohnnyRage

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

https://nvgt.com/blog/power-5-conference-payout-estimates/

 

Quote

Our team estimated the rise in average Power 5 conference payouts over the next 8 years. You can see from the chart above that each conference’s average payout is expected to increase significantly during that time. We project that the SEC will overtake the Big 10 for the top spot, paying out over $100M to member universities by the end of this decade.

 

Quote

A few considerations to keep in mind when analyzing these results:

These estimates include all Tier I, II, and III media rights for each conference.

These estimates are based on historical growth rates in college and pro media rights deals.

These estimates include a new CFP agreement in 2026 with expansion to 8.

It is widely expected that expansion will occur in some form over this time period. We used an 8-team expansion, rather than the commonly discussed 12-team expansion in an effort to factor in the additional revenue, but remain conservative in our estimation.

These estimates include current realignment (SEC & Big 12) and their impact on media rights values.

These new estimates also include how the ACC Network will have a full year of distribution beginning in FY 2023.

These estimates do NOT reflect any strategies conferences may adopt in the structuring of their media rights, the negotiation process, or other potential moves to maximize value.

These estimates do NOT reflect adjustments from advance payouts of conference distributions or other COVID related adjustments that are not public knowledge.

These estimates include additional revenue from NCAA units, bowl payouts, conference championships and other revenue streams beyond media rights; all of these revenues are assumed to have steady growth rates.

 

[camel at sea 589]

That's a really good outcome for the Big 12 if they pull that off, especially after you add in the Texas/OU buyout money coming their way.  They won't be competitive for national titles in football but none of those schools are anyway.  Widening the resources gap doesn't change much except to solidify the present reality in concrete.  But if you're Oklahoma State, Baylor, Iowa State... the present reality is not that bad.  They could keep their programs in about the same spot where they are now (developing high 3 stars and the portal into Top 25 programs) and in some sense elevate themselves with a prestige boost of winning conference titles and making CFP appearances.  That fulfills the university's mission with football.  The Big 12 will also have the money to be competitive in men's basketball on the national level, too, which should keep KU happy.

I think with a disparity like that, the biggest impact will be coaching salaries / stability.  The B1G and SEC's middle weights will be able to money whip for OOC coaches in a way they haven't been able to before.  But that will be offset a little bit by how much more difficult it will be to meet W/L expectations at those places.  Mizzou has averaged about 6 wins per year, for the last 7 years.  Add Texas, OU, and a 9 game SEC slate, and maybe that drops to 4-5 wins per year.  It'll be interesting to see how that shakes out long term with respect to a job's attractiveness.  It actually probably ends up being a bigger deal for Olympics than for football.  A Big 12 school probably fights to keep a good football or men's hoops coach.  They'll let an elite golf / baseball / softball coach go.  

[Al_4_ISU 12464]

Those figures don't bother me one bit.  There's been so much evidence of diminishing returns in the current landscape (Texas being the golden example) that at this point things like playoff access after 2026 seem like a bigger deal than those TV payouts.

Mizzou might be able to outspend an OK State, Baylor, or ISU for a coach, but Mizzou has almost 0 hope of exceeding 6-7 wins on a regular basis in the future, and that money will come with expectations that one do exactly that.  Also, there are 30 schools in the Big 10 and SEC and there will be plenty of head coaches climbing the ranks looking for opportunities across the rest of the P5.  Same with players and NIL.  Guys who want to get to the NFL are going to need playing time in college and there's only so much to go around.

If the SEC and Big 10 want to shove that money into Olympic sports and own them, I really couldn't care less.

I also think there's room for the Big 12 to grow it's payouts ahead of the ACC and Pac 12.  I wouldn't be surprised at all if the new Big 12 pulls better ratings just due to fan engagement.  Unless college sports make some kind of renaissance on the west coast, I don't see viewership for the Pac 12 getting better.  The ACC is harder to peg demographically, because you have schools like FSU and Clemson that will always be major draws, but the rest of the league seems relatively apathetic.

[HornsofBevo 122]

From fan interest alone, the new Big 12 would be well positioned to be a solid third football conference every year. The problem for them will be that with NIL becoming an increasing factor, even teams like Mizzou will be able to pay top coaches and players more money, build better facilities, etc. We are talking almost $50 million more per team by 2026 than what the Big 12 would pay. The divide in college football will rapidly increase at this rate with conferences outside of the SEC and BIG 10 making less than half of what those two make. For right now the BIG 12 will be okay but as time goes by the talent and money gap is going to hurt worse and worse for schools like ISU, OSU and Tech. Basketball may hold up but football is going to go from being competitive with the Big 2 to wishing for an upset every once in a while.

[Nivek 16945]

Those figures don't bother me one bit.  There's been so much evidence of diminishing returns in the current landscape (Texas being the golden example) that at this point things like playoff access after 2026 seem like a bigger deal than those TV payouts.
Mizzou might be able to outspend an OK State, Baylor, or ISU for a coach, but Mizzou has almost 0 hope of exceeding 6-7 wins on a regular basis in the future, and that money will come with expectations that one do exactly that.  Also, there are 30 schools in the Big 10 and SEC and there will be plenty of head coaches climbing the ranks looking for opportunities across the rest of the P5.  Same with players and NIL.  Guys who want to get to the NFL are going to need playing time in college and there's only so much to go around.
If the SEC and Big 10 want to shove that money into Olympic sports and own them, I really couldn't care less.
I also think there's room for the Big 12 to grow it's payouts ahead of the ACC and Pac 12.  I wouldn't be surprised at all if the new Big 12 pulls better ratings just due to fan engagement.  Unless college sports make some kind of renaissance on the west coast, I don't see viewership for the Pac 12 getting better.  The ACC is harder to peg demographically, because you have schools like FSU and Clemson that will always be major draws, but the rest of the league seems relatively apathetic.

Mizzou will be fine. They have shown they can be competitive and they have won divisions, more than Kentucky, Tennessee, Vandy and others since they have been in the SEC.

Mizzou just needs a coach and time.

NIL and the formation of the superconferences is going to relegate the B12 to Big East status, and basketball won’t stop that. The best move is to join. The financial differences over the next 2 decades will likely be dramatic in their impact.

[Al_4_ISU 12464]

7 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Mizzou will be fine. They have shown they can be competitive and they have won divisions, more than Kentucky, Tennessee, Vandy and others since they have been in the SEC.

Mizzou just needs a coach and time.

NIL and the formation of the superconferences is going to relegate the B12 to Big East status, and basketball won’t stop that. The best move is to join. The financial differences over the next 2 decades will likely be dramatic in their impact.

1) With Big 12 players and the best coach in anyone's recent memory at that school.  Who knows how the future SEC schedules will play out for them.  Could be getting a lot more Bama in their life.

2) You say it like it can just happen.

2 superconferences will end up with 3-4 schools always winning and everyone else along for the ride collecting checks.  That's pretty much what you guys have signed up for in the SEC.  You're there to cash a bigger check, and we're just here hoping that the winner of our league has a chance to get thumped by Bama too, and we can put together enough of a squad to enjoy the rest of the season (seems like this will be possible).  At this stage, everyone is kind of resigning themselves to a very small elite group of schools (like 5 in the whole sport) with any chance to actually win, and everyone else basically playing for pride.  Which isn't really all that different from the status quo, just a more naked version of it.

[Al_4_ISU 12464]

50 minutes ago, HornsofBevo said:

From fan interest alone, the new Big 12 would be well positioned to be a solid third football conference every year. The problem for them will be that with NIL becoming an increasing factor, even teams like Mizzou will be able to pay top coaches and players more money, build better facilities, etc. We are talking almost $50 million more per team by 2026 than what the Big 12 would pay. The divide in college football will rapidly increase at this rate with conferences outside of the SEC and BIG 10 making less than half of what those two make. For right now the BIG 12 will be okay but as time goes by the talent and money gap is going to hurt worse and worse for schools like ISU, OSU and Tech. Basketball may hold up but football is going to go from being competitive with the Big 2 to wishing for an upset every once in a while.

The goal of the Big 12 going forward isn't to keep up financially with the SEC and Big 10 - that isn't happening.  It's to keep up with the Pac 12 and the ACC.  And that is very realistic.

[Royale with cheese 1467]

On 3/6/2022 at 9:45 PM, JohnnyRage said:

I Sayt Got Dayum

 

[oSuJeff97 3435]

3 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The goal of the Big 12 going forward isn't to keep up financially with the SEC and Big 10 - that isn't happening.  It's to keep up with the Pac 12 and the ACC.  And that is very realistic.

This.

As for those estimates above, I'd love to understand what is driving the PAC to go from the lowest P5 payout in 2022-23 to the third highest after the SEC/B1G by 2029. Are the PAC schools going to get *more* engaged in CFB over the next decade?

The new Big 12 will easily keep par with the PAC and ACC, and probably exceed the PAC just based on viewership/fan engagement down the road.

 

[Al_4_ISU 12464]

28 minutes ago, oSuJeff97 said:

This.

As for those estimates above, I'd love to understand what is driving the PAC to go from the lowest P5 payout in 2022-23 to the third highest after the SEC/B1G by 2029. Are the PAC schools going to get *more* engaged in CFB over the next decade?

The new Big 12 will easily keep par with the PAC and ACC, and probably exceed the PAC just based on viewership/fan engagement down the road.

 

I assume those numbers are making that assumption, but I think a realistic assessment suggests that if anything their engagement will DECREASE.

[statsman 5472]

What?!?!

The PAC has USC as a football blue blood and UCLA as a basketball blue blood. On the next tier, UCLA, UW and Stanford have won football NCs. They are in incredibly populous states and cities. 
The Big XII’s standard bearers are…? It’s guaranteed ratings grabbers are…? I guess BYU won a NC in 1984…

I don’t get looking down your nose at the PAC

[Al_4_ISU 12464]

6 minutes ago, statsman said:

What?!?!

The PAC has USC as a football blue blood and UCLA as a basketball blue blood. On the next tier, UCLA, UW and Stanford have won football NCs. They are in incredibly populous states and cities. 
The Big XII’s standard bearers are…? It’s guaranteed ratings grabbers are…? I guess BYU won a NC in 1984…

I don’t get looking down your nose at the PAC

It's not looking down our noses.  It's pointing out how little the people in those areas care about college sports.  Look at some pictures of USC football attendance recently.  People in LA, and in the Pac 12 footprint in general, don't care that much about college sports.

Those numbers don't matter that much when they aren't tuned in.  If they did matter, the Pac 12 wouldn't be making less than the Big 12, which it currently is.

Edited March 16, 2022 by Al_4_ISU

['stache 21819]

2 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

It's not looking down our noses.  It's pointing out how little the people in those areas care about college sports.  Look at some pictures of USC football attendance recently.  People in LA, and in the Pac 12 footprint in general, don't care that much about college sports.

Those numbers don't matter that much when they aren't tuned in.

This. The west coast has proven it doesn't give a shit about college football. If USC is ever back to the Pete Carroll level of success they might get better rating and attendance, but that alone isn't going to double their payouts for everyone else.

[Al_4_ISU 12464]

The new Big 12 doesn't have a blue blood, but it has 11 programs that have been competitive in the last decade (I believe every school but KU has appeared in an NY6 bowl in that time frame).  The one school that's bad at football is a bona fide basketball blue blood.  It has markets where people have a higher interest in college sports.  Even in states where the Big 12 school isn't the favorite school, pretty much everyone who follows CFB will have the game on.  IE most Iowa fans I know watch Iowa State games when they aren't at the same time.  You will see this happen in Texas, Ohio, and Florida.  BYU has a big audience.

Again, absolutely no one is putting this on par with the Big 10 and SEC, so don't try and act like we are.  What we're saying is the league's draw should be able to keep outpacing the Pac 12 and ACC which have larges chunks of their league in places that are indifferent to college sports, or are schools with very small fanbases.

Edited March 16, 2022 by Al_4_ISU

[statsman 5472]

The B12 doesn’t get more than the PAC now because people in Stillwater care more than people in Los Angeles. It’s because it has UT and OU. 
 
Attendance is only part. TCU has half the attendance Texas has. That doesn’t mean UT has twice the “engagement”. A ticket to the (non Texas) TCU game can be had for $40. It takes over twice that to get into the UT game. Then there are donations required to even buy the ticket. The TCU one game gate is $2M. The UT one game gate is over $10M. 
 
The ratings don’t tell the whole story. Are the people watching the games buying Teslas or Kia’s? 
 
Hey, don’t take my word for it. Maybe I’m wrong along with every person who analyzed the new conference’s potential media contracts. 

[Al_4_ISU 12464]

1 minute ago, statsman said:

The B12 doesn’t get more than the PAC now because people in Stillwater care more than people in Los Angeles. It’s because it has UT and OU. 
 
Attendance is only part. TCU has half the attendance Texas has. That doesn’t mean UT has twice the “engagement”. A ticket to the (non Texas) TCU game can be had for $40. It takes over twice that to get into the UT game. Then there are donations required to even buy the ticket. The TCU one game gate is $2M. The UT one game gate is over $10M. 
 
The ratings don’t tell the whole story. Are the people watching the games buying Teslas or Kia’s? 
 
Hey, don’t take my word for it. Maybe I’m wrong along with every person who analyzed the new conference’s potential media contracts. 

Of course, but all we hear is how worthless the rest of the Big 12 is, how bad it will be, etc, and here the projections for the new Big 12 are basically on par with the Pac 12 and ACC.  Why is that?  We all agree that both of those leagues have more blue bloods, and have bigger population footprints.  If it was just blue bloods and footprints, the Big 12 would be valued less than it's being valued at.

[Vertigo 20290]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Of course, but all we hear is how worthless the rest of the Big 12 is, how bad it will be, etc, and here the projections for the new Big 12 are basically on par with the Pac 12 and ACC.  Why is that?  We all agree that both of those leagues have more blue bloods, and have bigger population footprints.  If it was just blue bloods and footprints, the Big 12 would be valued less than it's being valued at.

The key to the B12 moving forward is going to be parity. Parity in teams, cities, fan bases, boosters, etc. To me, that makes for a more interesting conference from top to bottom because any given year a team can surprise and win the ccg. It is like the NFL in a sense without the suckitude of Jerry Jones and his ilk. With the PAC, USC is the straw that stirs the drink, and while there are other quality schools in conference like Washington and Oregon, at the end of the day USC needs to remain happy for that conference to be viable. The ACC has a similar problem with North Carolina for basketball and Clemson for football. The B10 is Ohio State/Michigan. Other teams can always ascend to those top spots, but it won't be the same kind of competitive landscape throughout the conference. The SEC will be ultra competitive like that at the top end of the spectrum, but the B12 should be the most interesting conference year over year among the other P5s.   

[statsman 5472]

So, basically like a midwestern WAC?

[camel at sea 589]

6 hours ago, statsman said:

The B12 doesn’t get more than the PAC now because people in Stillwater care more than people in Los Angeles. It’s because it has UT and OU. 
 
Attendance is only part. TCU has half the attendance Texas has. That doesn’t mean UT has twice the “engagement”. A ticket to the (non Texas) TCU game can be had for $40. It takes over twice that to get into the UT game. Then there are donations required to even buy the ticket. The TCU one game gate is $2M. The UT one game gate is over $10M. 
 
The ratings don’t tell the whole story. Are the people watching the games buying Teslas or Kia’s? 
 
Hey, don’t take my word for it. Maybe I’m wrong along with every person who analyzed the new conference’s potential media contracts. 

The post upthread that has the Big 12 basically running pretty even with the PAC and ACC after Texas and OU leaves is from someone who analyzes potential media contracts.  The new Big 12 doesn't have the bigger brands of the two coastal leagues  but it has far fewer absolute dead weight programs than either so it basically evens out.  If the Big 12 minus UT/OU is running even with the PAC and ACC, I think what we can infer from that is that if UT and OU had stayed in the Big 12, conference payouts would have been well north of the two coastal conferences even if it remained well south of the B1G and SEC.

Big 12 schools will have to choose whether or not to replace the once-per-year gate revenue boost of having either UT or OU visit.  Those games also helped to move donations and season ticket packages so I'd guess we'll see more aggressive OOC scheduling at some places.  OSU (to name one place) was already going that route anyway with Arky, Oregon, and Bama on the future slate.  Baylor has Oregon and Auburn on the future schedule.  I'd guess this reality is why Tech is trying to land a long term annual OOC series with UT.    

[Nivek 16945]

On 3/16/2022 at 9:36 AM, Al_4_ISU said:

1) With Big 12 players and the best coach in anyone's recent memory at that school.  Who knows how the future SEC schedules will play out for them.  Could be getting a lot more Bama in their life.

2) You say it like it can just happen.

2 superconferences will end up with 3-4 schools always winning and everyone else along for the ride collecting checks.  That's pretty much what you guys have signed up for in the SEC.  You're there to cash a bigger check, and we're just here hoping that the winner of our league has a chance to get thumped by Bama too, and we can put together enough of a squad to enjoy the rest of the season (seems like this will be possible).  At this stage, everyone is kind of resigning themselves to a very small elite group of schools (like 5 in the whole sport) with any chance to actually win, and everyone else basically playing for pride.  Which isn't really all that different from the status quo, just a more naked version of it.

I tend to think the the talent will get further stacked at the SEC/B10 Schools and siphoned away from the others.   I imagine USC/Oregon/ND will join up as well.  Schools like Washington,  OK State,  and Iowa State will still get those overlooked 2 stars that turn out to be badasses, but they will use your schools as a springboard into the super-conferences where the pay will be much better.   Nebraska has an opportunity to become relevant again in this system,  but I tend to think it will be about 4-8 schools that are winning each year.   I don't really think there is much hope for you school to compete for a MNC.   It will be rigged against you.  And the cash differential between the super-conference schools even those like Kentucky, will push them out of your league (assuming they want to pay for the talent).

 

For things to stay the same, a lot has to change.  

[statsman 5472]

Yep. The Big XII having a future depends on 64 teams being in the top division. A 30 team top division leaves them out. 

[Gaffords 757]

On 3/6/2022 at 2:28 PM, ButtFumble said:

there is the issue of media rights

Fox owns half of those and they are not going to just give those up to ESPN and the SEC SEC SEC for nothing

and if it was found that ESPN was a part of "enticing" Texas and OU to leave the Big 12 that could be extremely costly to ESPN.....and while some will want to discount the evidence that the Big 12 says they have from ESPN and the AAC discussing breaking up the Big 12 well after that news came out the talk of Texas having $120 million in pledged money to leave the Big 12 ASAP died down and suddenly a "financial issue" with OU popped up and Texas and OU were saying they would finish the contract in the Big 12

It could be costly for ESPN.  But it could cost the Big 12 even more in the long run...  ESPN is by no means obligated to enter the bidding war for the Big 12's upcoming contract. A contract which is already looking to take a sizeable hit, losing the biggest bidder would definitely have the Big 12 taking a nose dive down to G5 level pay

[Gaffords 757]

3 minutes ago, Gaffords said:

It could be costly for ESPN.  But it could cost the Big 12 even more in the long run...  ESPN is by no means obligated to enter the bidding war for the Big 12's upcoming contract. A contract which is already looking to take a sizeable hit, losing the biggest bidder would definitely have the Big 12 taking a nose dive down to G5 level pay

Besides, that would be separate from suing UT/UO.  They can sue the schools for not giving the proper notification, but that would only get the Big 12 so much (if any).  As for the schools, i bet there are things they can counter with.  Hell, I would hit them with the OkieLite game.  LOL.   There is probably room in there somewhere for the revenue not keeping pace with other conferences.  And there is probably room to work with one the BiG 12:s own predatory expansion practices.  I have a feeling they've been talking to Houston (probably Cinci and UFC also) for a long time.  

If you can't negotiate a contract dispute or even a breech of contract  down, you probably are in the wrong profession.

[Nivek 16945]

10 minutes ago, Gaffords said:

It could be costly for ESPN.  But it could cost the Big 12 even more in the long run...  ESPN is by no means obligated to enter the bidding war for the Big 12's upcoming contract. A contract which is already looking to take a sizeable hit, losing the biggest bidder would definitely have the Big 12 taking a nose dive down to G5 level pay

ESPN isn't going to pay shit.   Only a lawyer thinks there is merrit here.   

[Francisco 2.0 32395]

https://theathletic.com/3222097/2022/03/31/inside-the-big-12s-discussions-of-new-divisions-geography-texas-oklahoma-and-other-key-issues-loom/

 

Quote

The official beginning of a new era for the Big 12 is just 15 months away. The discussions about what exactly the growing conference will look like are well underway this spring.

Big 12 administrators are hoping to answer a key question for 2023 and beyond in early May at their spring meetings in Phoenix. The athletic directors of incoming members BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF will attend the three-day session, meeting with commissioner Bob Bowlsby and their new peers in-person for just the second time since the Big 12 expanded last September. Together, they’ll try to figure this issue out: What’s the plan for divisions?

 

Quote

During their last round of meetings at the Big 12 basketball tournaments in Kansas City earlier in March, the ADs of the current membership were presented with three models for divisional play from the conference’s working group and had high-level discussions but, according to sources, reached no consensus on which plan is best. The topic itself is a bit more complex than one might expect.

For starters, Oklahoma and Texas still have not given notice for an early SEC exit, so the Big 12 continues to operate under the assumption this will be a 14-team conference in 2023 and 2024. Their continued presence is perhaps the most interesting issue in devising these division models.

 

 

Spoiler

Should the Sooners and Longhorns be placed in the same division or not? There are multiple ways of looking at that. From a convenience standpoint, putting them in separate divisions makes it easier to move forward whenever they exit, avoiding a need to redo this process down the road. From a competitive standpoint, putting them in the same division — as they were in the old Big 12 South — would mean only one could reach the Big 12 title game. Can these ADs set pettiness aside in making that choice?

In The Athletic’s survey of Big 12 fans earlier this month, 54 percent of Texas and Oklahoma fans indicated they’d prefer to be in the same division, 26 percent wanted to be in different divisions and 20 percent expressed no preference. Both schools do have representation on the working group that is building the division models. If the preferred plan is putting Oklahoma and Texas in separate divisions, then the actual divisional setup becomes more important because it could end up being the plan the Big 12 sticks with for 2025 and beyond.

The conference is expected to maintain its nine-game league schedule in football, sources said, which in a 14-team league would mean six divisional games and three crossover games. This is a conference with rivalries dating back to the Southwest Conference and Big Eight era that should be protected. The alignment of the Red River rivals is important, but so is the matter of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and whether it’s best they be paired or placed in different divisions next year.

It’s fair to hit pause on this whole conversation, though, and ask: Should the Big 12 even have divisions in the future? It’s possible other Power 5 conferences move away from divisions in the years ahead, and the Big 12’s No. 1 vs. No. 2 setup of its conference title game over the past five years can certainly be defended as the best setup for improving its champ’s College Football Playoff hopes.

“We have planted a banner that we’re gonna put the two best teams from our league in the championship game and that’s going to help us with Playoff attention and opportunity,” one source said. “Why would we change that?”

NCAA bylaws currently require FBS conferences to either have two divisions or play full round-robin schedules in order to hold a conference championship game. The AAC did receive a waiver in 2019 to continue playing its conference title games when it became an 11-team league after UConn’s departure. But this should be an area where conferences pursue deregulation, because the rule itself was completely arbitrary when it was established.

Andy Staples reported on its origins in 2014 and found the requirement was adopted back in 1987. Where did it come from? Back then, the Pennsylvania State Athletics Conference wanted to put on a conference championship that was exempt from the regular-season game limits. The Division II conference submitted a proposal requiring leagues to have 14 schools split into two divisions (which it had) in order to hold conference title games. The Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association, which had 12 members and divisions, co-sponsored the legislation and got the PSAC to change the requirement from 14 schools to 12.

The legislation was enacted at the 1987 NCAA convention and applied to all three divisions. Nobody cared at the Division I-A level because, at the time, those conferences didn’t have more than 10 schools. The 12-school requirement was finally dropped in 2016, which allowed the Big 12 to revive its conference title game as a 10-member league. But the rest of the rule — requiring two divisions or full round-robin schedules — lives on today.

In The Athletic’s Big 12 fan survey, 63 percent of the more than 1,110 fans of 12 current/future members surveyed indicated they’d prefer divisions in the future. Some leaders consider a divisional setup useful to help address the travel issues that will come with a more spread-out conference, which raises the next issue.

The working group’s divisional models have been described by one AD as “somewhat regional” as expected, and certainly it will matter to some extent how the final alignment can be branded as North-South or East-West (or maybe Legends and Leaders?), but even those decisions are subjective and debatable. There are some natural groupings, like keeping the trio of Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State together. There are obvious bad ideas, like West Virginia and BYU as division-mates. But there doesn’t seem to be one obviously perfect way to divide up the conference’s new map.

There’s interest among ADs in ensuring every Big 12 member gets to play games in Texas and Florida, given its importance to recruiting. That aim would make a North-South setup a little less appealing. Would it mean it makes sense to, for example, put TCU and Texas Tech in one division with Baylor and Houston in the other? One AD did also note that, from a scheduling standpoint, there’s some interest in ensuring the remaining members still get home games against Oklahoma and Texas before they go.

For some, though, it’s hard to shake the feeling that all the 14-team talk still seems a little silly, even as that day is fast approaching. As one source skeptically put it: Does anyone honestly expect Oklahoma and Texas to still be in the Big 12 in 2023 and 2024?

The news this week of Conference USA resolving its separation with Old Dominion, Marshall and Southern Miss and letting them exit this summer does raise that question, which few can answer as the silent game of chicken drags on between the leadership of Oklahoma and Texas and Bowlsby, who has the ironclad grant of rights and no reason to budge.

“In the back of my mind I think, ‘We’re wasting a lot of time here. They’re not going to be here when these new schools come into our league,’” the source said. “But everybody is being so careful right now and not wanting to put their cards on the table.”

So the planning must continue. Can a divisional plan — or a decision on whether the Big 12 should even have divisions — get finalized during their May 2-4 meetings? Some sources view that as more of an optimistic aim, given the limited amount of discussion that has occurred so far and how many details need to be addressed. The Phoenix meetings will also be the first time all of the Big 12’s current and future football coaches will be in a room together, and surely they’ll have feedback to offer.

Those meetings will offer their first chance to really reckon with this unusual experience of moving forward as a hopefully tight-knit 12-member family living with two exes who still haven’t moved out. This 14-team league is happening, and it’s time to start making decisions about how this is actually going to work.

 

[Loose Stool 112]

Looks like Bowlsby is out...

Story on the Spun

Edited April 5, 2022 by Loose Stool