Realignment talk not going away

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

1 hour ago, Sir Ulrich said:

In my opinion this is a race to 20 for the power 5 leagues with the Big 10 and SEC already at 14+2 on the way.

SEC- If they can get ND to say yes (highly unlikely) then adding Clemson, FSU, and Miami would be the best case scenario. When the Big 10 finally takes ND then adding those 3 and a back fill of the biggest remaining brand would still be a net positive. 

Big 10- Once ND joins they'll have 17 committed and could either add the two Virginias and BC/Syracuse/Pitt or take Stanford and Cal and a wild card. 

ACC- If they have enough members after getting poached by the Big 10 and SEC they could look to add WVU and make a run at the Kansas schools when the Big 12 adds half the Pac. The ACC will have to fight to stay alive but they're are enough decent G5 names they can add to stay in the 15ish member range

Big 12- If they add those Pac schools I would count WVU as the biggest flight risk to the ACC so lets say they are sitting on 17 schools. Adding SMU, Memphis, and a team like Boise would get them to 20 assuming the Kansas schools stay put. 

PAC 12/MWC- After the Big 10/12 run through the PAC it looks like there are 4 schools remaining without a home, Stanford, Cal, Oregon State, and Washington State. If the PAC 12 wants to stay alive then they will have to merge with the MWC and finally get to use the Pac 16 name.

Yeah I imagine inside the SEC/Big Ten area it all comes down to ND.   The Big Ten can now offer them more and bigger rivalries than anyone else, especially if they scoop up Stanford.   Losing ND could break the ACC...so:

Big Ten:  ND and Stanford to 18, try and get UVA/UNC (those two schools are tied at the hip) to 20. 

SEC: Clemson and three of VTech/FSU/NCState/Miami to 20

Big 12: Ducks, Huskies, ASU, Arizona, Utah, Colorado to 18

After that, this is who is left:

BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Duke, Wake, GTech, Washington State, Oregon State, Cal and some leftovers of the VTech/FSU/NCS/Miami

Wake/WSU/Oregon State definitely seem like odd men out.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Hurtlocker

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

3 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

I'm not sure those are the words I would use but everyone soured on a 12 team playoff the moment Texas and ou joined the SEC.  Spiteful?  What the big 12 is doing to Texas and ou right now can be viewed as spiteful.  Well within their rights, but looks petty to me.

I would imagine everyone looks at the 12 team playoff differently, and IIRC, the Big 12 wanted to go with it.  The Pac was a big "no" vote.

The Big 12 is just trying to get the money they think they're owed.  If Texas and OU cut that check, it would end.  Obviously there's some level of spite.  My point is there really isn't an incentive for the Big 10 and SEC in the future to not be part of that expanded playoff and throw the Big 12 and ACC a bone with a guaranteed spot each.  They'll still net the lion's share of the profit.

[closetohumping 17,442]

15 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Is there though?  Would love to see a valuation ranking from a TV exec as you know those exists.   You have dead weight in Wazzu/Oregon St., sure, but where do you slot Kansas St., Iowa St., UH, Cincy, etc.  I would think more value in all the other remaining PAC schools.

Right.  We probably deliver the Houston market better than UH and tOSU delivers the Cincy market better than Cincy.  The current marquee school is Oklahoma st?  Do they deliver the Dallas market?  Eh.  Maybe BYU.  Pac leftovers deliver Phoenix, Portland, Denver, part of SLC, Seattle and possibly the Bay Area. 

[camel at sea 589]

10 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Is there though?  Would love to see a valuation ranking from a TV exec as you know those exists.   You have dead weight in Wazzu/Oregon St., sure, but where do you slot Kansas St., Iowa St., UH, Cincy, etc.  I would think more value in all the other remaining PAC schools.

TCU and Baylor both usually outdraw Washington State and Oregon State at the gate.  K-State, ISU, and WVU usually beat them by 10K+ at the gate.  WSU is lucky to break 30K for a home game.  Every school in the new Big 12 has a better local recruiting footprint than the Beavers and Cougars.  

TV is the thing that matters, though, and it's hard to compare for a lot of reasons.  A lot of the PAC inventory has been unrated on the PACN for the last decade.  Almost every bad Big 12 game has been aired somewhere (FS1, ESPNU, etc.)  The new AAC adds have been playing games on ESPNU, at weird times, on weird days, against private schools.  The weakness of the AAC makes it easier for UH, Cincy, and UCF to string together really good seasons occasionally (and the AP ranking boots the TV numbers when that happens.)  But that league has been an albatross around the necks of those schools, too.  The longer term upside leans *heavily* in favor of the Big 12's AAC adds against WSU/OrSt.

Another thumb on the scale for the Big 12 is basketball.  WSU and Oregon State have essentially zero value in the other revenue sport.  UH and UC both have legitimate value there.  UCF is capable of it, too, given the local basketball recruiting turf in Orlando.  

[closetohumping 17,442]

5 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I would imagine everyone looks at the 12 team playoff differently, and IIRC, the Big 12 wanted to go with it.  The Pac was a big "no" vote.

The Big 12 is just trying to get the money they think they're owed.  If Texas and OU cut that check, it would end.  Obviously there's some level of spite.  My point is there really isn't an incentive for the Big 10 and SEC in the future to not be part of that expanded playoff and throw the Big 12 and ACC a bone with a guaranteed spot each.  They'll still net the lion's share of the profit.

Seems like everyone else that left got a negotiated buyout?  Now, I admit the circumstances are a bit different in that there's some finality here, when aggy and CU left, we were still holding this conference together. Our respective schools are on different sides of this so I get where you're coming from and I hope you get where I'm coming from.  Yes, a contract is a contract and you literally have nothing to lose by holding our feet to the fire but seems like everyone else was able to negotiate.  From here, it looks like the Big 12's message is "give me whatever the amount is in the contract and you're free to go."

[camel at sea 589]

2 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Right.  We probably deliver the Houston market better than UH and tOSU delivers the Cincy market better than Cincy.  The current marquee school is Oklahoma st?  Do they deliver the Dallas market?  Eh.  Maybe BYU.  Pac leftovers deliver Phoenix, Portland, Denver, part of SLC, Seattle and possibly the Bay Area. 

You can't compare UH to UT, or Cincinnati to Ohio State, to get a sense for how little Washington State is worth.

[Francisco 2.0 32,390]

Not that it matters to me, but whenever someone will wake up in the Rose Bowl offices and see how their world has changed, I wonder what they are going to do going forward?

I can't see the game itself ceasing to exist, but it's going to be a major adjustment for the Rose Bowl committee and their way of doing things.

 

 

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

1 minute ago, closetohumping said:

Seems like everyone else that left got a negotiated buyout?  Now, I admit the circumstances are a bit different in that there's some finality here, when aggy and CU left, we were still holding this conference together. Our respective schools are on different sides of this so I get where you're coming from and I hope you get where I'm coming from.  Yes, a contract is a contract and you literally have nothing to lose by holding our feet to the fire but seems like everyone else was able to negotiate.  From here, it looks like the Big 12's message is "give me whatever the amount is in the contract and you're free to go."

I wonder to some extent if Bowlsby's taking it personally lead to the lack of a negotiated buyout?

It's been so long that I'm fuzzy on the details, but I think that 10 years ago, there was no GOR.  Just buyouts.  The stakes were lower, financially, which lead to a greater willingness to just find something that worked.

Also, the Big 12 was up for a new TV deal that drastically increased it's payout from the old one.  That wasn't looking to be the case here.  The 10 school Big 12 knew they were getting a big revenue bump and that would make it hurt less to cut the others loose.  The Irate 8 were looking at taking a bath.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

Here's a blog purporting to show last year's TV viewing numbers:

https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-programs-were-the-most-watched-in-2021-49ef4f315858

The Pac 12 is behind a lot of the Big 12.  The Big 12 has "dead weight" in the Top 30.

[CleverNickname 1,310]

I think the real move would be for the bigger names in the Hateful 8 and PAC remainder to just pull together their own 12 team league, and let the weak relegate as the league TV deals expire. So not PAC or Big12, but a wholly new 12 teamer that is the Best of the Rest.

[camel at sea 589]

2 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Not that it matters to me, but whenever someone will wake up in the Rose Bowl offices and see how their world has changed, I wonder what they are going to do going forward?

I can't see the game itself ceasing to exist, but it's going to be a major adjustment for the Rose Bowl committee and their way of doing things.

 

 

Killing the Rose Bowl as a political power player is a big part of current events.  The expanded playoff needs early round games at home stadiums, to really work, and the Rose Bowl was in the way of that.  

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1,291]

32 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

12 team playoffs:

4 conference champ spots and leave the remaining 8 at large.  They will probably all come from the Big 10 and SEC, and then everyone gets what they want:  the smaller leagues have guaranteed access, but the at large set up favors the brands so in most years there will be 10 Big 10 and SEC teams and 2 from the other, if that's what bears out.

I think that would be good enough for the SEC and Big 10, especially with their bigger TV contracts.  If it's just about spiting and harming the remaining schools, they can always just do their own playoff too.

I think you would end up taking some 8-4 teams if 8 at large schools come from two conferences. It's more realistic to expect 2-3 teams from each of the Big 12, B1G, and ACC, and 4-5 teams from the SEC.

Edited July 5, 2022 by The Hot Dog Buffet

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

College realignment's next steps: ACC, Big 12 and Pac-12 scramble amid chaos

Snippets:

Quote

The Big 12 is the most stable of the three remaining leagues. That would have been considered a punchline for much of the past two decades, when the league endured so much infighting that it became the archetype of instability.

But here's the reality for the Big 12: The league is the most stable among the "Next Three" because there are no programs that are clearly coveted by the Big Ten or SEC.

"We're more galvanized than we've ever been," a league source said. "There's no interest by Big 12 members going to the Pac-12 or ACC."

Yormark has been aggressive, per sources. The most logical play for the Big 12 remains going after Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah.  If Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah go to the Big 12, it would essentially kill the Pac-12. Would Washington and Oregon end up following? The Pac-12 would be largely vacant, and they'd need a home better than a juiced-up Mountain West.

The Big 12's advantage over the ACC in potentially poaching schools is that they are headed to open market after the 2024 football season.

The ACC can reopen its TV deal if schools are added, but there's unlikely to be an eye-popping increase in the value of that ACC contract.

The Big 12 can pitch potential schools on the allure of a lucrative deal that could potentially involve streamers, networks and perhaps new linear partners.

Quote

When assessing the ACC in the race for No. 3, the fact that it is seemingly protected legally looms as a giant factor. The ACC has a handful of high-end properties left on the board, and those schools have agreed to a binding grant of rights that ties them together through 2036, when its ESPN television contract expires.

The ACC's options are simple: stand pat, add a select handful of schools to open up the ESPN deal for potentially more revenue or enter a strategic merger.

The issue for the ACC is that there are enough current members unsettled at the notion of the league evenly splitting its income between its 14 football members that it has become a tension point.

There's been informal discussion of unequal revenue sharing in the ACC for months, and commissioner Jim Phillips' biggest challenge is going to be keeping big brands that could have interest from the Power 2 -- Clemson, North Carolina, Miami, Florida State and Virginia -- happy.

Quote

Clearly, this league is the most vulnerable going forward. There isn't a strong appetite among the remaining 10 members to add a few Mountain West schools like San Diego State or Boise State or the WCC's Gonzaga in basketball and soldier on.

They want to think bigger, but the loss of USC and UCLA has meant a loss of leverage. Perhaps the most nerve-wracking thing for Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff is that any school can leave without penalty after 2023. Just like USC and UCLA did. So it's hard to poach when the contract leaves you vulnerable to being poached.

Kliavkoff must be aware of conflicts of interest. As Pac-12 expert Jon Wilner pointed out recently, the Pac-12's new board chair is Washington president Ana Mari Cauce. Clearly, Washington is going to have a wandering eye for safer ground. Can she be relied on to guide the league through a period where its survival is at stake?

There isn't much current interest from the Big Ten in adding Washington and Oregon at a full share nor are USC or UCLA lobbying for them to join.

The Big Ten is waiting on Notre Dame, just like everyone else. That underscores why things are so tenuous for the Pac-12, as it's hard to envision Washington and Oregon agreeing to some type of long-term binding grant of rights through the length of whatever next deal the league could put together. The cruel reality of the environment is that outside of the Power 2, the best programs in all the other leagues are plotting to get across the moat and join them. In today's environment, the financial disparity after the Power 2 is going to accentuate the instability everywhere else.

 

[closetohumping 17,442]

6 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I wonder to some extent if Bowlsby's taking it personally lead to the lack of a negotiated buyout?

It's been so long that I'm fuzzy on the details, but I think that 10 years ago, there was no GOR.  Just buyouts.  The stakes were lower, financially, which lead to a greater willingness to just find something that worked.

Also, the Big 12 was up for a new TV deal that drastically increased it's payout from the old one.  That wasn't looking to be the case here.  The 10 school Big 12 knew they were getting a big revenue bump and that would make it hurt less to cut the others loose.  The Irate 8 were looking at taking a bath.

Lots of details to corral.  I’m guessing bowlsby took it really personally.  As for the tv deal, I thought part of the desire to leave stemmed from Fox telling Joe C that we weren’t going to get that much more money?  Remember the networks did us a favor by not protracting the contract when the four losers left

[utee94 15,823]

1 hour ago, CastHorn said:

 

The SEC already has two Bulldogs and three Tigers, so sure, why not???  Arizona's about to need a new conference, so grab them, too.

 

 

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by utee94

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

2 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

I think you would end up taking some 8-4 teams if 8 at large schools come from two conferences. It's more realistic to expect 2-3 teams from each of the Big 12, B1G, and ACC, and 4-5 teams from the SEC.

I think that's accurate too, I'm just saying it's possible for the SEC and Big 10 to soak up 10 out of 12 spots, and I think that would be enough to placate them into participating in this event.

What the schools outside of those leagues care about most at the end of the day won't be the barrel of $, it will be knowing that if they take care of business, they'll get a shot at the top.

The money they make will be enough to pay coaches really well, build great facilities, and NIL's supposed to come from the donors anyhow.

[camel at sea 589]

6 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Here's a blog purporting to show last year's TV viewing numbers:

https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-programs-were-the-most-watched-in-2021-49ef4f315858

The Pac 12 is behind a lot of the Big 12.  The Big 12 has "dead weight" in the Top 30.

The "new" Big 12 was being projected to make similar money to the PAC before SC and UCLA left.  That should say a lot about where the rest of the PAC is actually valued.  

[Shhhh 4]

1 hour ago, DFW Horn said:

Coming back will be a blessing in disguise for them. CU was better recruiting TX than CA.

Big 18...just rolls off the tongue

That is what she said. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

1 minute ago, closetohumping said:

Lots of details to corral.  I’m guessing bowlsby took it really personally.  As for the tv deal, I thought part of the desire to leave stemmed from Fox telling Joe C that we weren’t going to get that much more money?  Remember the networks did us a favor by not protracting the contract when the four losers left

I'm saying in 2011, we made a big jump up financially in the new conference.  The 10 team Big 12 was making exponentially more than the 12 team Big 12.  This likely made the remaining 10 schools more willing to agree to a buy out.

In 2021, when UT and OU left, the remaining schools were looking at LESS money in the future contract, which made them more inclined to fight for every penny.

Whatever hard feelings exist, this is probably a bigger motivator.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

2 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

The "new" Big 12 was being projected to make similar money to the PAC before SC and UCLA left.  That should say a lot about where the rest of the PAC is actually valued.  

Exactly, and those TV numbers back that up.

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

4 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

The "new" Big 12 was being projected to make similar money to the PAC before SC and UCLA left.  That should say a lot about where the rest of the PAC is actually valued.  

 

 

[Uncle Nate 2,097]

22 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Seems like everyone else that left got a negotiated buyout?  Now, I admit the circumstances are a bit different in that there's some finality here, when aggy and CU left, we were still holding this conference together. Our respective schools are on different sides of this so I get where you're coming from and I hope you get where I'm coming from.  Yes, a contract is a contract and you literally have nothing to lose by holding our feet to the fire but seems like everyone else was able to negotiate.  From here, it looks like the Big 12's message is "give me whatever the amount is in the contract and you're free to go."

It's not personal, Sonny.  It's business.

['stache 21,815]

I'm certain the PAC negotiations will include a lot of "what if" scenarios with the aim (from their perspective) of learning what teams would add value to them. Or they'll learn they're more likely to be the poachees and not the poachers. 

[Eugene11 379]

27 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Right.  We probably deliver the Houston market better than UH and tOSU delivers the Cincy market better than Cincy.  The current marquee school is Oklahoma st?  Do they deliver the Dallas market?  Eh.  Maybe BYU.  Pac leftovers deliver Phoenix, Portland, Denver, part of SLC, Seattle and possibly the Bay Area. 

PAC might barely deliver Portland.  It’s hard to tell when Oregon is playing a game here.  Even at a bar. Sometimes you have to look around and think for a second to tell they’re playing. Portland could deliver the nba market i guess….🤢

18 minutes ago, CleverNickname said:

I think the real move would be for the bigger names in the Hateful 8 and PAC remainder to just pull together their own 12 team league, and let the weak relegate as the league TV deals expire. So not PAC or Big12, but a wholly new 12 teamer that is the Best of the Rest.

BotR12 ? 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1,291]

It seems to me that the biggest problem the PAC has is that they have too much west coast inventory. They have programs with national relevance, but they can't put games on Oklahoma's 11 am time slot, and that really diminishes their value to a network. USC/UCLA are worth a lot more to a network in the B1G because all of their road games can kick off early if the network wants to put them there. It would work the same way for programs moving into the Big 12.

['stache 21,815]

31 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Seems like everyone else that left got a negotiated buyout?  Now, I admit the circumstances are a bit different in that there's some finality here, when aggy and CU left, we were still holding this conference together. Our respective schools are on different sides of this so I get where you're coming from and I hope you get where I'm coming from.  Yes, a contract is a contract and you literally have nothing to lose by holding our feet to the fire but seems like everyone else was able to negotiate.  From here, it looks like the Big 12's message is "give me whatever the amount is in the contract and you're free to go."

(1) You'll get a negotiated buyout too, it's just taking longer because (2) the media contract had a shorter term back then and we now have a gor, so that's an added wrinkle, (3) Texas played a big role on the conference side of those negotiations being happy to stay with the LHN deal, and (4) perhaps more importantly ESPN indicated a few weeks ago that they had no real interest in the new SEC contracts until 2025, either for financial reasons, or for negotiating reasons, or because they knew the BIG was looking to make a big move and wanted some time to see what was playing out.

In short, you'll get a negotiated buyout, but things are drastically different this time around, so it's gonna take some time. What would be considered not "spiteful" to you? "Hey guys, we loved having you around, don't worry about that buyout we all agreed to 10 years ago, we never really meant it, see ya later alligators!" This is business, you're out by 2025, or earlier on negotiation, based largely on what ESPN truly wants. It's business and contract stuff, not that uncommon except for the emotions of fandom.

Edited July 5, 2022 by 'stache

[utee94 15,823]

23 minutes ago, CleverNickname said:

I think the real move would be for the bigger names in the Hateful 8 and PAC remainder to just pull together their own 12 team league, and let the weak relegate as the league TV deals expire. So not PAC or Big12, but a wholly new 12 teamer that is the Best of the Rest.

 

2 minutes ago, Eugene11 said:

BotR12 ? 

 

It's popular to propose this, and I like the idea, but would would the actual steps be, to make it happen?

To make such a move before the B12 GOR expires, the conference would need a certain number of schools to vote to disband the conference.  Any shool that voted for that, would have to be assured of its place in the new BotR12, otherwise they'd be risking their future.  So how many B12 teams does it take to dissolve the conference?  Presumably Texas and OU would also vote for this, to get sprung to the SEC faster.  How many more votes are needed, and who are the likely candidates that would make the cut for the BotR12?  Are there enough votes to get it done?

And then there's similar maneuvering that would have to happen on the PAC side.  Do they have the same kind of bylaws providing for a method to vote and disband the conference?  If so, would they have enough assured spots at the table in the new BotR12 conference, to have enough votes to get it done? 

I'm assuming every school that doesn't make the cut, is going to vote against disbanding the conferences.

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

10 minutes ago, utee94 said:

 

 

It's popular to propose this, and I like the idea, but would would the actual steps be, to make it happen?

To make such a move before the B12 GOR expires, the conference would need a certain number of schools to vote to disband the conference.  Any shool that voted for that, would have to be assured of its place in the new BotR12, otherwise they'd be risking their future.  So how many B12 teams does it take to dissolve the conference?  Presumably Texas and OU would also vote for this, to get sprung to the SEC faster.  How many more votes are needed, and who are the likely candidates that would make the cut for the BotR12?  Are there enough votes to get it done?

And then there's similar maneuvering that would have to happen on the PAC side.  Do they have the same kind of bylaws providing for a method to vote and disband the conference?  If so, would they have enough assured spots at the table in the new BotR12 conference, to have enough votes to get it done? 

I'm assuming every school that doesn't make the cut, is going to vote against disbanding the conferences.

- All it takes is one team left to keep the conference.   They can expand with all the St. Mary's of the Blind they want, but the conference will still function.   Only way to dissolve is unanimous vote.   Also, the Big 12's bylaws had a section added after 2010 that the moment you announce your intention to leave you lose your vote.   So, Texas and Oklahoma couldn't vote to disband.

- Per earlier posts, there are GoRs to contend with and buy outs to leave the conference.   In some situations, like the Big 12, they have written in that there could be future penalties due to diminished worth, but that's a court room conversation.   You'll have the buyout even if you leave without a GoR or after it. To break it it would take a negotiation of some sort.    If I remember right the B12's buyout is last two years revenue.   By leaving in 2024-25 there isn't the legal fight, but the buy out remains.

- For the Pac, their biggest issue right now is their media contract ends next year and they lost LA.  It's cheaper to flee the Pac 12 currently than it is any other conference due to that.

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Hurtlocker

[Sir Ulrich 5,187]

What is yalls relatively realistic dream scenario? Mine is the aggies see the Big 10s new deal netting them more than the SEC and they try to jump ship. Then the SEC adds Miami, FSU, Clemson, and Duke/UNC. 

Far from likely and just me wish casting what would bring me the most joy 

[Lidig8r 1,873]

20 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I'm saying in 2011, we made a big jump up financially in the new conference.  The 10 team Big 12 was making exponentially more than the 12 team Big 12.  This likely made the remaining 10 schools more willing to agree to a buy out.

In 2021, when UT and OU left, the remaining schools were looking at LESS money in the future contract, which made them more inclined to fight for every penny.

Whatever hard feelings exist, this is probably a bigger motivator.

And of course, there is the possible issue of "mitigation of damages." Any aggrieved party ordinarily has the duty to mitigate its own damages. (some exceptions exist). 

According to the Big 12 Conference’s bylaws, a withdrawing member must pay a buyout fee that is equal to the sum of the amount of distributions that otherwise would be paid to the member during the final two years of its membership. Therefore, regardless of a lawsuit, OU and UT ordinarily have to pay a buyout fee to the Big 12. According to the Big 12, in the event that we decide to leave early, UT and ou will be required to pay the amount of actual losses and damages. The effect of leaving early would be a violation of the Grant of Rights Agreement referenced in the bylaws, which gives the right to the conference’s television partners to televise the departing team’s games until the end of the contract. 

Ordinarily,  UT and ou would have to negotiate a settlement amount or pay damages to the conference for causing the conference to be unable to fully realize the revenue from its television contract. Similar to the WAC and Big East cases, member schools or the conference itself could file suit against OU and UT.

But, if the Big 12 were smart, it would be negotiating for a different  for a buyout fee and an agreement to schedule Big 12 opponents for a specified amount of time.

And this is where it gets interesting.  Apparently, to further expedite this impending issue, the AAC stated that it is willing to negotiate a higher exit fee to allow the three departing teams to leave for the Big 12 earlier than expected. If the Big 12 does not pursue this, are they truly mitigating its damages? If the Big 12 does not reach  out to viable future members for inclusion sooner rather than later, are they truly mitigating its damages? 

The Big 12 accepted a ridiculously low amount from aggy and Misery when they left. Precedent has been set.

The Big 12 has a chance to renegotiate its television contracts with commitments from Pac 12 teams.

NOW is the time to go to the Big 12 and say this is our last year!

[utee94 15,823]

1 minute ago, Hurtlocker said:

- All it takes is one team left to keep the conference.   They can expand with all the St. Mary's of the Blind they want, but the conference will still function.   Only way to dissolve is unanimous vote.   Also, the Big 12's bylaws had a section added after 2010 that the moment you announce your intention to leave you lose your vote.   So, Texas and Oklahoma couldn't vote to disband.

- Per earlier posts, there are GoRs to contend with and buy outs to leave the conference.   In some situations, like the Big 12, they have written in that there could be future penalties due to diminished worth, but that's a court room conversation.   You'll have the buyout even if you leave without a GoR or after it. To break it it would take a negotiation of some sort.    If I remember right the B12's buyout is last two years revenue.   By leaving in 2024-25 there isn't the legal fight, but the buy out remains.

- For the Pac, their biggest issue right now is their media contract ends next year and the lost LA.  It's cheaper to fleet the Pac 12 currently than it is any other conference due to that.

 

Thanks, appreciate the facts.

So in that case it makes more sense for the B12 to absorb PAC teams, than to disband both conferences and try to create a new one.

 

 

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

19 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Thanks, appreciate the facts.

So in that case it makes more sense for the B12 to absorb PAC teams, than to disband both conferences and try to create a new one.

 

 

I'm not sure the structure or name of the conference matters too much at this point.   It appears that the Big 12's bylaws are tighter than the Pac's, due to already dealing with realignment.   At the end of the day though it won't matter.   What matters is ESPN.

• The Big 12 is in bed with both ESPN and Fox; ESPN has thrown its weight behind the SEC, Fox is doing the same for the Big Ten.
• Since UCLA/USC went to the Big Ten and Texas/OU went to ESPN, the Big 12's GoR would affect ESPN more than Fox
• If ESPN provides backing to the Big 12 over the ACC/Pac12 with value time slots and channels (e.g. ESPN/ABC over ESPN2), or basically promising them the current Big Ten slots, (or pushing for a linear channel to take advantage of their DMA bump) the Big 12 could waive its GoR and ESPN could schedule Texas/Oklahoma in SEC games as early as 2024.
• The Big 12 then doesn't give a shit what the Pac/ACC's contracts say then because, like Texas/Oklahoma to the SEC, that's between them and their ex, not the new conference.   The GoR is the only issue that muddies the broadcast waters.

 

The Big 12 is playing a different game right now than the Big Ten and SEC, and it has to.   It is already going to make more money than they do now, but not the $100m a school money.   I'd expect their next deal would be an average of about $50-60m on a short contract, which wouldn't include the Texas/OU buyout money.    What they have done well is expanding their market.   They need to have every school invest heavily in sports, not just play them for the hell of it, and keep their competitiveness high.   When winning the non-brand schools do draw very well.   If over the course of this next contract they've been competitive in the post season, they'll start bumping up.   Their next contract is the growth contract...if they do well, then they start getting to the reward ones the Big Ten/SEC sign.

Edited July 5, 2022 by Hurtlocker

[billfromlaketravis 11,476]

A lot of bad takes on USC/UCLA from the national talking heads, including and especially Pat Forde.

Yes the travel will gut their men’s hoop programs because of Tuesday night games, but football is a different story. 
 

USC will play a much lighter OOC schedule. If they can get 3 annual opponents to play in the Coliseum, plus 4-5 conference home games, plus the UCLA game, they’d at worst play 8 games in LA every year. I think their trips to East Coast will be pretty limited, and they’ll play a bulk of their road games in the Midwest.

Edited July 5, 2022 by billfromlaketravis

[JFKFC 4,879]

I saw this on reddit. If you haven't read the ACC Grant of Rights, it is a hot mess:

https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uploads/2022/07/01185531/ACC-Grant-of-Rights-1.pdf

[hawkfan 60]

 

[Pancho 44,794]

5 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

.

Yes the travel will gut their men’s hoop programs because of Tuesday night games, but football is a different story. .

No it won’t.  Takes like this confirm some people don’t know what they are talking about (not saying you, but in general).

 

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

4 minutes ago, JFKFC said:

I saw this on reddit. If you haven't read the ACC Grant of Rights, it is a hot mess:

https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uploads/2022/07/01185531/ACC-Grant-of-Rights-1.pdf

And that says 2027, not the 2036 that's been reported.   That could spell trouble for the ACC if teams don't want to extend.

[Biggus Duckus 88]

[Texas Wahoo 3,395]

 

If they begin before Texas/OU leave, it would be 20 teams...

[JFKFC 4,879]

2 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

If they begin before Texas/OU leave, it would be 20 teams...

[DFW Horn 6,123]

12 minutes ago, hawkfan said:

 

If Knight pulls the plug on B1G teams out of spite, adidas wins. Is UA still a player for team sponsorships? I know they took a bath on the UCLA deal.

https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2021/09/20/under-armour-files-countersuit-against-ucla.html

[closetohumping 17,442]

53 minutes ago, 'stache said:

(1) You'll get a negotiated buyout too, it's just taking longer because (2) the media contract had a shorter term back then and we now have a gor, so that's an added wrinkle, (3) Texas played a big role on the conference side of those negotiations being happy to stay with the LHN deal, and (4) perhaps more importantly ESPN indicated a few weeks ago that they had no real interest in the new SEC contracts until 2025, either for financial reasons, or for negotiating reasons, or because they knew the BIG was looking to make a big move and wanted some time to see what was playing out.

In short, you'll get a negotiated buyout, but things are drastically different this time around, so it's gonna take some time. What would be considered not "spiteful" to you? "Hey guys, we loved having you around, don't worry about that buyout we all agreed to 10 years ago, we never really meant it, see ya later alligators!" This is business, you're out by 2025, or earlier on negotiation, based largely on what ESPN truly wants. It's business and contract stuff, not that uncommon except for the emotions of fandom.

Emotion stemmed from your guy Bowlsby.  That's where it all started.  He's pissed and is/was holding our feet to the fire.  I get it, you lost your meal ticket and you're upset.

[Tex-19 2,872]

1 minute ago, DFW Horn said:

If Knight pulls the plug on B1G teams out of spite, adidas wins. Is UA still a player for team sponsorships? I know they took a bath on the UCLA deal.

https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2021/09/20/under-armour-files-countersuit-against-ucla.html

Nike isn't going to pull the plug on B1G teams. The company isn't Phil's little pet project anymore. Not to mention he probably still likes money. 

That said, he's clearly an influential guy in the sports world and can flex some muscles in all this.

[DFW Horn 6,123]

7 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

If they begin before Texas/OU leave, it would be 20 teams...

You do realize this is a professional-looking parody account, right?

@bobtrollsby ? Commissioner of the Big 12. Former CEO of Roc Nation. Realigner of Conferences.

['stache 21,815]

2 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Emotion stemmed from your guy Bowlsby.  That's where it all started.  He's pissed and is/was holding our feet to the fire.  I get it, you lost your meal ticket and you're upset.

We all hated Bowlsby. But I see you're like the other guy with the "leeches" and "meal ticket" stuff so there's no point in arguing. Us lowly peons enforcing contracts out of spite. Whatever.

 

[hawkfan 60]

I would interpret that to mean he's trying to pull levers to get Oregon/Stanford into the B1G, as we've had no indication that Stanford has any other home at this point (i.e. not included in any of the PAC to B12 discussions).

I think that's all going to depend on Notre Dame though - it's possible that they just add USC/UCLA to the B1G West and push Purdue to the East if Notre Dame doesn't join.

6 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

If Knight pulls the plug on B1G teams out of spite, adidas wins. Is UA still a player for team sponsorships? I know they took a bath on the UCLA deal.

https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2021/09/20/under-armour-files-countersuit-against-ucla.html

 

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

12 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

If they begin before Texas/OU leave, it would be 20 teams...

And the new schedule will make Texas and OU play each other 12 weeks in a row at Kyle Field

 

 

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

2 minutes ago, hawkfan said:

I would interpret that to mean he's trying to pull levers to get Oregon/Stanford into the B1G, as we've had no indication that Stanford has any other home at this point (i.e. not included in any of the PAC to B12 discussions).

I think that's all going to depend on Notre Dame though - it's possible that they just add USC/UCLA to the B1G West and push Purdue to the East if Notre Dame doesn't join.

 

Yeah Stanford is a ND carrot.

[closetohumping 17,442]

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

We all hated Bowlsby. But I see you're like the other guy with the "leeches" and "meal ticket" stuff so there's no point in arguing. Us lowly peons enforcing contracts out of spite. Whatever.

 

And you're "don't like it, shouldn't have signed the contract" guy.  All good.  Everyone else got to leave early (including schools that you poached) but it looks like we're stuck.  And yes, I know things can flip on a dime and it's just business.  Everything is negotiable once cooler heads prevail. 

[n64ra 1,082]

If the Big 12 wants six Pac-12 leftovers, why would Utah and Arizona State be selected over Stanford? Is it assuming Stanford would decline?