Realignment talk not going away

[closetohumping 17,440]

Spoiler

Chip Brown

Here’s the latest on what I’m hearing regarding realignment:

The Pac-12 is in its exclusive negotiating window with current Tier 1 and 2 media partners FOX and ESPN.

I’m hearing FOX isn't even bidding on the Pac-12 because FOX went all-in on the Big Ten (after FOX gave its blessing - wink, wink - for USC and UCLA to move to the Big Ten) and put in the winning bid for the new Big Ten media rights deal totaling $1.2 billion, from what I'm told. More on that in a second.

That leaves ESPN at the table right now for the remaining schools in the Pac-12 - at least until Aug. 4, when the Pac-12's exclusive rights negotiating window with ESPN and FOX closes, and the Pac-12's media rights deal goes to the open market.

I’m hearing ESPN has made two offers to the Pac-12: a short-term deal that averages $24.5 million per school annually as well as a 12-year deal for all three tiers of the league's broadcast rights that averages $32 million per school per year. (The SEC and Big Ten are likely to receive between $80 million and $100 million per school per year in their new media rights agreements with the SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma and the Big Ten adding USC and UCLA).

If the remaining schools in the Pac-12 take ESPN's 12-year deal, it would allow ESPN to create a combined Pac-12/ACC Network with both leagues' third-tier rights through 2036, which is the ACC's current media rights expiration, sources said.

Considering FOX and ESPN are the Big 12’s current Tier 1 and 2 media rights partners, if the Pac-12 was to agree to ESPN’s 12-year deal, it could leave the Big 12 in a position to be low-balled by FOX and/or ESPN in a year when the Big 12's exclusive negotiating window opens.

The question is if the remaining Pac-12 schools are willing to take the 12-year deal paying them $32 million per year? Or do schools start splitting off looking for something bigger and better?

There didn't figure to be enough money per school from media rights revenue to make a full-blown merger of the Pac-12 and Big 12 work, sources said.

But could, say, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado earn more than $32 million per year for the next 12 years in the Big 12? Arizona is leading that charge, sources told 

Horns247. But it’s unclear exactly where Arizona State, Utah and Colorado stand at the moment.

The remaining schools in the Big 12 are hoping to earn roughly what they’re earning right now - about $40 million per year - in the league’s next media rights deal, which will begin negotiations in 2024. A couple industry experts have told me it’s likely to be closer to $30 million or $35 million per school annually.

You could argue adding Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado wouldn’t help increase the Big 12’s media rights value as much as adding Oregon and Washington.

Sadly, in today’s realignment world, the Big 12’s best hope to increase value would likely be if the Pac-12 fell apart. While some have floated the notion that the Pac-12 should add schools such as Boise State, San Diego State or Fresno State, those schools wouldn't bring a full share of revenue to the league and would only dilute the league's payout.

The bottom line is if the remaining schools in the Pac-12 stay together and agree to ESPN’s 12-year deal, it could mean low-ball offers to the Big 12 - possibly at or below $30 million per school per year in the league’s next media rights deal.

And very few think the SEC and Big Ten are done expanding, although those dominoes could take a while to unfold.

Everyone's trying to read each other's hands in a game of incredibly high-stakes poker. — 

Fcb

9 hours ago, maninblack said:

This is all so stupid until the "haves" break away from the "have nots".

I think the interesting thing is some of the have nots (Cal, UW) may end up with the halves.

[BurntOrange&White 39,931]

Bobby:

 

Some Longhorn thoughts along with items I’ve picked up elsewhere in talking with folks around college football…

- The PAC-12 reportedly received a lowball offer from ESPN, reducing a team’s financial package by $12mm per year from its previous number. At the same time, Big 10 commissioner Kevin Warren said the Big 10 was not finished with expansion. Stanford, Cal, Washington and Oregon are all possibilities, as well as Miami and Florida State, along with Notre Dame.

Noticeably absent are the “four corners” schools of Colorado, Utah, Arizona and Arizona State. We all know the Big 12 is trying to jump on the four corners schools while also hoping they can grab other PAC-12 schools, too, those not named Oregon State and Washington State.

Yet the mere announcement by the Big 10 puts a kibosh on the Big 12’s thought of going beyond the four corners schools because the others will undoubtedly wait on the Big 10.

So what is the Big 12 looking at from a rights deal if they add those four schools?

According to two industry people I spoke with yesterday, the numbers would not increase by much at all for Big 12 teams.

What would change is that it would relatively assure the long-term survival of the conference. The Big 12 still would not be on par with the SEC and Big 10, nowhere near it in fact, but they would be closer to the ACC at least.

[closetohumping 17,440]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Really?  They seemed like the obvious class of the Big East (with Miami) at the time it went down.

Still, we've seen people say that the Oklahoma schools had to be a package (obviously not), and that the Texas legislature would never let Aggy and UT split (obviously not) and wouldn't let Tech stay behind (obviously not).

If the Iowa legislature demanded that ISU be let in to the Big 10, Kevin Warren would respond with something to the effect of "triple your state's population and we'll think about it.  Maybe."

Politicians let aggy go because we were still around to feed Baylor, Tech and TCU.  When we left, the politicians stood down because aggy set the precedent.

[closetohumping 17,440]

15 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

  Hide contents

Chip Brown

Here’s the latest on what I’m hearing regarding realignment:

The Pac-12 is in its exclusive negotiating window with current Tier 1 and 2 media partners FOX and ESPN.

I’m hearing FOX isn't even bidding on the Pac-12 because FOX went all-in on the Big Ten (after FOX gave its blessing - wink, wink - for USC and UCLA to move to the Big Ten) and put in the winning bid for the new Big Ten media rights deal totaling $1.2 billion, from what I'm told. More on that in a second.

That leaves ESPN at the table right now for the remaining schools in the Pac-12 - at least until Aug. 4, when the Pac-12's exclusive rights negotiating window with ESPN and FOX closes, and the Pac-12's media rights deal goes to the open market.

I’m hearing ESPN has made two offers to the Pac-12: a short-term deal that averages $24.5 million per school annually as well as a 12-year deal for all three tiers of the league's broadcast rights that averages $32 million per school per year. (The SEC and Big Ten are likely to receive between $80 million and $100 million per school per year in their new media rights agreements with the SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma and the Big Ten adding USC and UCLA).

If the remaining schools in the Pac-12 take ESPN's 12-year deal, it would allow ESPN to create a combined Pac-12/ACC Network with both leagues' third-tier rights through 2036, which is the ACC's current media rights expiration, sources said.

Considering FOX and ESPN are the Big 12’s current Tier 1 and 2 media rights partners, if the Pac-12 was to agree to ESPN’s 12-year deal, it could leave the Big 12 in a position to be low-balled by FOX and/or ESPN in a year when the Big 12's exclusive negotiating window opens.

The question is if the remaining Pac-12 schools are willing to take the 12-year deal paying them $32 million per year? Or do schools start splitting off looking for something bigger and better?

There didn't figure to be enough money per school from media rights revenue to make a full-blown merger of the Pac-12 and Big 12 work, sources said.

But could, say, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado earn more than $32 million per year for the next 12 years in the Big 12? Arizona is leading that charge, sources told 

Horns247. But it’s unclear exactly where Arizona State, Utah and Colorado stand at the moment.

The remaining schools in the Big 12 are hoping to earn roughly what they’re earning right now - about $40 million per year - in the league’s next media rights deal, which will begin negotiations in 2024. A couple industry experts have told me it’s likely to be closer to $30 million or $35 million per school annually.

You could argue adding Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado wouldn’t help increase the Big 12’s media rights value as much as adding Oregon and Washington.

Sadly, in today’s realignment world, the Big 12’s best hope to increase value would likely be if the Pac-12 fell apart. While some have floated the notion that the Pac-12 should add schools such as Boise State, San Diego State or Fresno State, those schools wouldn't bring a full share of revenue to the league and would only dilute the league's payout.

The bottom line is if the remaining schools in the Pac-12 stay together and agree to ESPN’s 12-year deal, it could mean low-ball offers to the Big 12 - possibly at or below $30 million per school per year in the league’s next media rights deal.

And very few think the SEC and Big Ten are done expanding, although those dominoes could take a while to unfold.

Everyone's trying to read each other's hands in a game of incredibly high-stakes poker. — 

Fcb

I think the interesting thing is some of the have nots (Cal, UW) may end up with the halves.

From the article:

 

The remaining schools in the Big 12 are hoping to earn roughly what they’re earning right now - about $40 million per year - in the league’s next media rights deal, which will begin negotiations in 2024. A couple industry experts have told me it’s likely to be closer to $30 million or $35 million per school annually.

[Zinhead 42]

The following link is to study that attempts to measure fan support. Y’all should like it since Texas does very well.

 

Altimore Collins Fanbase Survey

 

Here is what I think the BIG’s immediate plan is.

 

Step 1 – Take USC and UCLA as they are the only two school combination that meets the minimum valuation requirements for BIG.

Step 2 – Tell Stanford/Cal/UW/UO that they will be under consideration for BIG membership, but will have to take a haircut on distributions since they don’t pull their own weight.

Step 3 – Tell the other PAC schools they are not under consideration for BIG membership, and never will be.

Step 4 – Say you are “waiting on Godot/Notre Dame” while you sit back and let the four remaining target schools go through the motions of figuring out how much they are worth on the open market without USC/UCLA. We are at this stage right now, with talk of uneven distributions within the PAC or PACC mergers to bolster some more TV money.

Step 5 - Cross your fingers that the Big 12 tries to raid the PAC, and one or more of the four corner schools breaks and further destabilizes the conference.

Step 6 – Once Stanford/Cal/UW/UO figure out how much they are worth on the open market, come in with the BIG offer that is slightly higher than that.  There is plenty of time to wait them out because they don’t have any good choices.

Step 7 – Profit.

The end game is that Stanford/Cal/UW/UO will be in the BIG in a few years. They only thing that will derail this is if the state governments come and try to tie UW with WSU and OU with OSE, but I don’t think they will.

[bullet 1,596]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I've laid out in this thread a million times how our administration publicly fellated Texas, played on LHN, called it a good thing for the league, recognized that OU/UT were the bell cows, etc.

And your last point is crazy.  The last time politics have mattered in realignment was when Ann Richards got Baylor out of the SWC.  That was nearly 30 years ago.

Ann Richards had nothing to do with it.  Zero.  Zilch.

It was Bob Bullock, Lt. Gov.

[Texas Wahoo 3,395]

1 minute ago, closetohumping said:

Politicians let aggy go because we were still around to feed Baylor, Tech and TCU.  When we left, the politicians stood down because aggy set the precedent.

In both cases, an additional Texas team was moved up a rung as well.  So although the remaining Big 12 teams were worse off than they would have been had A&M and then Texas stayed, another Texas school (TCU and then Houston) were much better off afterwards.  I think the fight would have lasted longer, especially when Texas announced they were leaving, if not for the fact that UH was likely to benefit.

[YouLoveMyPenises 79]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

If the Iowa legislature demanded that ISU be let in to the Big 10, Kevin Warren would respond with something to the effect of "triple your state's population and we'll think about it.  Maybe."

Well, get to fuckin'.

[LTbear 4,168]

13 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

From the article:

 

The remaining schools in the Big 12 are hoping to earn roughly what they’re earning right now - about $40 million per year - in the league’s next media rights deal, which will begin negotiations in 2024. A couple industry experts have told me it’s likely to be closer to $30 million or $35 million per school annually.

Funky quote. I think the Big XII's current 40-ish is total distributions, not just media revenue. 

 

Regardless, I don't think the four corners schools would add revenue, but I'd still add them if they don't significantly shrink it. 

[bullet 1,596]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Really?  They seemed like the obvious class of the Big East (with Miami) at the time it went down.

Still, we've seen people say that the Oklahoma schools had to be a package (obviously not), and that the Texas legislature would never let Aggy and UT split (obviously not) and wouldn't let Tech stay behind (obviously not).

If the Iowa legislature demanded that ISU be let in to the Big 10, Kevin Warren would respond with something to the effect of "triple your state's population and we'll think about it.  Maybe."

The ACC expansion was Miami, Syracuse and BC.  They publicly toured the Syracuse campus.  Then the politicians told UVA they had to vote no unless VT was included.  So UVA joined Duke and UNC in opposing Miami until VT was included.  The next year BC got in.  Syracuse was left holding the bag.

[LTbear 4,168]

1 minute ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Well, get to fuckin'.

Play the long game

[thunderlounge 7,825]

29 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

I think the interesting thing is some of the have nots (Cal, UW) may end up with the halves.

Those not in this phase of the grand scheme may or may not end up in the final, end game league. 
 

Some in one of the two, shall we say holding ponds, won’t make it either. Or maybe they do.

ISU isn’t moving this phase. They have a solid chance for the end game, but like others on the fringe they will have to take less in the short term. 

[LTbear 4,168]

32 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Chip Brown

Here’s the latest on what I’m hearing regarding realignment:

The Pac-12 is in its exclusive negotiating window with current Tier 1 and 2 media partners FOX and ESPN.

I’m hearing FOX isn't even bidding on the Pac-12 because FOX went all-in on the Big Ten (after FOX gave its blessing - wink, wink - for USC and UCLA to move to the Big Ten) and put in the winning bid for the new Big Ten media rights deal totaling $1.2 billion, from what I'm told. More on that in a second.

That leaves ESPN at the table right now for the remaining schools in the Pac-12 - at least until Aug. 4, when the Pac-12's exclusive rights negotiating window with ESPN and FOX closes, and the Pac-12's media rights deal goes to the open market.

I’m hearing ESPN has made two offers to the Pac-12: a short-term deal that averages $24.5 million per school annually as well as a 12-year deal for all three tiers of the league's broadcast rights that averages $32 million per school per year. (The SEC and Big Ten are likely to receive between $80 million and $100 million per school per year in their new media rights agreements with the SEC adding Texas and Oklahoma and the Big Ten adding USC and UCLA).

If the remaining schools in the Pac-12 take ESPN's 12-year deal, it would allow ESPN to create a combined Pac-12/ACC Network with both leagues' third-tier rights through 2036, which is the ACC's current media rights expiration, sources said.

Considering FOX and ESPN are the Big 12’s current Tier 1 and 2 media rights partners, if the Pac-12 was to agree to ESPN’s 12-year deal, it could leave the Big 12 in a position to be low-balled by FOX and/or ESPN in a year when the Big 12's exclusive negotiating window opens.

The question is if the remaining Pac-12 schools are willing to take the 12-year deal paying them $32 million per year? Or do schools start splitting off looking for something bigger and better?

There didn't figure to be enough money per school from media rights revenue to make a full-blown merger of the Pac-12 and Big 12 work, sources said.

But could, say, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado earn more than $32 million per year for the next 12 years in the Big 12? Arizona is leading that charge, sources told 

Horns247. But it’s unclear exactly where Arizona State, Utah and Colorado stand at the moment.

The remaining schools in the Big 12 are hoping to earn roughly what they’re earning right now - about $40 million per year - in the league’s next media rights deal, which will begin negotiations in 2024. A couple industry experts have told me it’s likely to be closer to $30 million or $35 million per school annually.

You could argue adding Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado wouldn’t help increase the Big 12’s media rights value as much as adding Oregon and Washington.

Sadly, in today’s realignment world, the Big 12’s best hope to increase value would likely be if the Pac-12 fell apart. While some have floated the notion that the Pac-12 should add schools such as Boise State, San Diego State or Fresno State, those schools wouldn't bring a full share of revenue to the league and would only dilute the league's payout.

The bottom line is if the remaining schools in the Pac-12 stay together and agree to ESPN’s 12-year deal, it could mean low-ball offers to the Big 12 - possibly at or below $30 million per school per year in the league’s next media rights deal.

And very few think the SEC and Big Ten are done expanding, although those dominoes could take a while to unfold.

Everyone's trying to read each other's hands in a game of incredibly high-stakes poker. — 

Fcb

I think the interesting thing is some of the have nots (Cal, UW) may end up with the halves.

For the sake of argument, I think UW is closer to a have than a have not than many schools currently with the "haves."

[bullet 1,596]

55 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Just for the sake of accuracy, Ann gave no fucks and didn't do shit; that's just a refuses-to-die internet myth because it sounds so obvious. Bob Bullock was the politician who led the charge for Baylor and Tech. 

Kind of like the LHN killed the Pac 16 deal.  Another internet myth that refuses to die.  Along with the Big 12 had the most unequal revenue sharing and that broke up the conference when the 6 who have left are among the 7 haves who favored unequal revenue sharing.  When USC was making 3 times what Washington St. was in the Pac 12 and similar for Miami and Temple in the Big East, but the range in the Big 12 was something like $7 million to $11 million.

Now aggy and corn aggy gave reason for another myth, that A&M and Nebraska left the Big 12 because of Texas and unequal revenue sharing-and that CU and MU did as well.  But when you listen to their presidents after the fact, that's another internet myth.

[bullet 1,596]

56 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Not at the time. TCU was on a multi-decade run of absolutely awful football back then and had horrible attendance/ interest. As a football program, Baylor was clearly better, they just immediately went into a nosedive once the Big XII started play/ after Teaff retired. 

Yes.

Although President Cunningham did say TCU was in the running for spot #12.  He did not consider UH.

[closetohumping 17,440]

8 minutes ago, LTbear said:

For the sake of argument, I think UW is closer to a have than a have not than many schools currently with the "haves."

PNW is growing.  Great academic school.  Yes.

7 minutes ago, bullet said:

Kind of like the LHN killed the Pac 16 deal.  Another internet myth that refuses to die.  Along with the Big 12 had the most unequal revenue sharing and that broke up the conference when the 6 who have left are among the 7 haves who favored unequal revenue sharing.  When USC was making 3 times what Washington St. was in the Pac 12 and similar for Miami and Temple in the Big East, but the range in the Big 12 was something like $7 million to $11 million.

Now aggy and corn aggy gave reason for another myth, that A&M and Nebraska left the Big 12 because of Texas and unequal revenue sharing-and that CU and MU did as well.  But when you listen to their presidents after the fact, that's another internet myth.

I think Texas was initially for equal revenue sharing.  Nobody mentions that.

[thunderlounge 7,825]

12 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Play the long game

Long game is important when fuckin, sure. 

[LTbear 4,168]

*Of course, on the other hand, once the Cascadia Subduction Zone goes off - good chance in the next 50 years - both UW and UO are gone. 

[bullet 1,596]

25 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

From the article:

 

The remaining schools in the Big 12 are hoping to earn roughly what they’re earning right now - about $40 million per year - in the league’s next media rights deal, which will begin negotiations in 2024. A couple industry experts have told me it’s likely to be closer to $30 million or $35 million per school annually.

So Chip is just repeating what he heard and not understanding it.  Its like reading the Dude of WV.

The Big 12 is currently earning about $28 million a year on media rights.   The conference distributed $42.6 million per school last year from all sources.

So are the experts saying their media will be $30-$35 with distributions of $45-$50 or are they saying it will be $20-$25 with distributions of $30-$35?  Those are big differences.

That $32 million long term deal for the Pac was something MHVer3 said.  So is that Chip's source????

[LTbear 4,168]

1 minute ago, bullet said:

So Chip is just repeating what he heard and not understanding it.  

Chip not understanding what he's talking about? I am shocked! Shocked I tell you. 

[closetohumping 17,440]

3 minutes ago, bullet said:

So Chip is just repeating what he heard and not understanding it.  Its like reading the Dude of WV.

The Big 12 is currently earning about $28 million a year on media rights.   The conference distributed $42.6 million per school last year from all sources.

So are the experts saying their media will be $30-$35 with distributions of $45-$50 or are they saying it will be $20-$25 with distributions of $30-$35?  Those are big differences.

That $32 million long term deal for the Pac was something MHVer3 said.  So is that Chip's source????

No clue.  But the Big 12 is adding more schools that really don't bring a lot to the negotiating table.  Not meaning to offend our UH, Cincy, UCF and BYU fans.  Yes, they're winning programs.  So was Boise and TCU last go round.

[LTbear 4,168]

Just now, closetohumping said:

No clue.  But the Big 12 is adding more schools that really don't bring a lot to the negotiating table.  Not meaning to offend our UH, Cincy, UCF and BYU fans.  Yes, they're winning programs.  So was Boise and TCU last go round.

Sure, but if OU and UT were staying, the contracts would gain tens of millions just because we're near the end of a contract and prices have escalated. So I wouldn't be surprised if the additions brought enough, considering the new market prices, to keep the Big XII close to what it is now. 

[clapclapclap 9,000]

11 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

That’s what you took from that article? Man, your reading comprehension really sucks.

Obviously not, since you had to cut out most of what I wrote to set up your strawman:

Also, here's an interesting, albeit long, look behind the curtain at the Big Ten HQ before and after former Vikings COO Warren began his transformation.  More drama and intrigue than expected, and the AD's even contemplated a mutiny.  Looking like his and Fox's vision is to turn it into more of a pro style league

When someone writes that the article they are linking to is long, most would not expect Cliff Notes of the whole thing.  

Not the first time you've heavily edited a quote to play games.  What's your deal? (no Pete Carroll)

 

[closetohumping 17,440]

Just now, LTbear said:

Sure, but if OU and UT were staying, the contracts would gain tens of millions just because we're near the end of a contract and prices have escalated. So I wouldn't be surprised if the additions brought enough, considering the new market prices, to keep the Big XII close to what it is now. 

Yes, but from the network's standpoint, they've gotten all the relevant schools into the corral.  This is ancillary costs now.  You're the XFL/USFL to them.  

 

You're also dividing the pie by two more schools now and remember ESPN could've reduced the current contract when the cowards jumped ship but decided not to.  So the ten of us were getting paid a contract meant for 14 schools.

[LTbear 4,168]

Just now, closetohumping said:

Yes, but from the network's standpoint, they've gotten all the relevant schools into the corral.  This is ancillary costs now.  You're the XFL/USFL to them.  

 

You're also dividing the pie by two more schools now and remember ESPN could've reduced the current contract when the cowards jumped ship but decided not to.  So the ten of us were getting paid a contract meant for 14 schools.

Fully aware. Hence why the Big XII will make half or less than the B1G. But it's still programming that sells. So ya, a new contract that's about equal to the rear end of an old contract with prices set in a long-ago market is certainly reasonable.

[closetohumping 17,440]

1 minute ago, LTbear said:

Fully aware. Hence why the Big XII will make half or less than the B1G. But it's still programming that sells. So ya, a new contract that's about equal to the rear end of an old contract with prices set in a long-ago market is certainly reasonable.

Totally get it and it may even be a bargain given prices escalate every year.  But, I, and I'm not speaking to you directly, I'd pull back on the "we're so much more valuable than the PAC losers" talk just yet.  A few of them may get an invite to the big show.

[Vertigo 20,285]

1 minute ago, closetohumping said:

Totally get it and it may even be a bargain given prices escalate every year.  But, I, and I'm not speaking to you directly, I'd pull back on the "we're so much more valuable than the PAC losers" talk just yet.  A few of them may get an invite to the big show.

In theory there is no reason the B12 should be more valuable than the PAC. But those schools look like they are playing a game of survivor right now trying to force their way into the B10. 

[LTbear 4,168]

2 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Totally get it and it may even be a bargain given prices escalate every year.  But, I, and I'm not speaking to you directly, I'd pull back on the "we're so much more valuable than the PAC losers" talk just yet.  A few of them may get an invite to the big show.

That's fine. As you correctly say, I'm not one who's been saying that. The advantage that the Big XII has right now is just born of a combo of having greater numbers, not currently going through the process, not having anyone of obvious/ can't turn it town value to the B1G and SEC, having solid timeslots and average engagement, and not teetering in a position where it's obvious that the remaining big brands are desperately looking to jump (like UO and UW are). 

[closetohumping 17,440]

1 minute ago, Vertigo said:

In theory there is no reason the B12 should be more valuable than the PAC. But those schools look like they are playing a game of survivor right now trying to force their way into the B10. 

Big 12's strength is unity.....until the SEC or B1G come along.  "We're all going stag for prom.....unless Doug from the Brady Bunch asks us out"

[hawkfan 60]

 

 

 

That makes things pretty clean and pretty much resolves most loose ends outside the ACC.

[Hagbard Celine 10,859]

On 7/26/2022 at 3:27 PM, Sandman said:

I agree. As an OSU fan, what more were we supposed to do? We got a BMD to pour in cash. We hired good coaches. We haven't had a losing season in 15 years, won a coference title and played for several more. We're in the top 10-12 in wins over the last decade.  And for that, we're called a leech? I feel like we did our part.

see my post late last night to al4isu about "doing everything you could".  you gave us no reason to stay.   especially after 2015.

[closetohumping 17,440]

7 minutes ago, hawkfan said:

 

 

 

That makes things pretty clean and pretty much resolves most loose ends outside the ACC.

That means Cal, WSU and OSU are hosed.

[Hagbard Celine 10,859]

On 7/26/2022 at 3:34 PM, statsman said:

You could have had Gundy vote OU just one spot ahead of Texas in 2008, instead of five. But, you didn’t and he didn’t. I get it- his brother is a Sooner coach. Your schools have a special relationship. I’m sure it was a lot of fun going down, lots of laughs.
Go take your sobbing over to the Sooners. They owe you one. We don’t

this.  and the corollary is tech needs to go after aggy for starting this mess.

['stache 21,813]

2 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

see my post late last night to al4isu about "doing everything you could".  you gave us no reason to stay.   especially after 2015.

Ugh, we get it, we didn't sufficiently kiss the ring, which is why we're left behind. I'm sure the sec will give you all the love and all the calls. Also you or the other guy keep bringing up Gundy and the 2008 coaches poll. I don't see where he even had a vote that year. But we get it, sorry for everything, good luck y'all.

https://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/polls/coaches-poll/2008-2009/2008-11-30/

[Hagbard Celine 10,859]

On 7/26/2022 at 4:13 PM, Okie State said:

On 7/26/2022 at 3:34 PM, statsman said:

You could have had Gundy vote OU just one spot ahead of Texas in 2008, instead of five. But, you didn’t and he didn’t. I get it- his brother is a Sooner coach. Your schools have a special relationship. I’m sure it was a lot of fun going down, lots of laughs.
Go take your sobbing over to the Sooners. They owe you one. We don’t

You keep bringing this up as if any of us had anything to do with it. Weird thing to get hung up on.

2015

['stache 21,813]

Ah yes, the refs screwed you in 2015, ergo, OKST belongs in the AAC. I guess that's why Oregon is being left behind too, because of the onside kick against OU in 2006. Suck it ducks. 

[Gidnik 3,268]

can you fucking idiots learn to copy/paste in plain text ?

Edited July 28, 2022 by Gidnik

[hawkfan 60]

8 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

That means Cal, WSU and OSU are hosed.

I don't see how WSU/OSU aren't going to end up in the MWC.

I also don't see the value of adding Cal+Stanford for the B1G, just not big enough fan bases to justify both IMO.

[closetohumping 17,440]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

Ah yes, the refs screwed you in 2015, ergo, OKST belongs in the AAC. I guess that's why Oregon is being left behind too, because of the onside kick against OU in 2006. Suck it ducks. 

Doesn't look like Oregon is getting left behind.  You won't be in the AAC, so congrats on that.  But what exactly do you want from us?  

['stache 21,813]

1 minute ago, closetohumping said:

Doesn't look like Oregon is getting left behind.  You won't be in the AAC, so congrats on that.  But what exactly do you want from us?  

Nothing. You keep acting like we're asking something of you, we're not. We're venting about how stupid this entire thing has played out, and the responses are all about how worthless we are, and how badly we've treated lord Texas over the years. Al has been crystal clear, the league could have worked but didn't, largely because we came togeter way after the BIG and SEC, and their historical relationships have dead weight making $100 million while we're left behind. It's infuriating that this entire thing has been piecemeal, every decade it changes, and subjective metrics don't matter. That's what's most frustrating in all of this.

[clapclapclap 9,000]

2 minutes ago, Gidnik said:

can you fucking idiots learn to copy/paste in plane text ?

Boeing New Roman or Airbus Sans?

[closetohumping 17,440]

5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Nothing. You keep acting like we're asking something of you, we're not. We're venting about how stupid this entire thing has played out, and the responses are all about how worthless we are, and how badly we've treated lord Texas over the years. Al has been crystal clear, the league could have worked but didn't, largely because we came togeter way after the BIG and SEC, and their historical relationships have dead weight making $100 million while we're left behind. It's infuriating that this entire thing has been piecemeal, every decade it changes, and subjective metrics don't matter. That's what's most frustrating in all of this.

Of course subjective metrics don’t matter.  This is about money.  

['stache 21,813]

I think the ND question is very real. They want them and will wait on them. Either way, I've said it before, SEC and BIG will both go to unequal revenue share within the next few years, and even the lower payouts will be better than ACC and Big XII so there will be no defections.

[LTbear 4,168]

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think the ND question is very real. They want them and will wait on them. Either way, I've said it before, SEC and BIG will both go to unequal revenue share within the next few years, and even the lower payouts will be better than ACC and Big XII so there will be no defections.

I'd say that's a pretty good bet 

[Okie State 3,818]

2015

What happened in 2015? Haven't ever heard that mentioned on this board.

[bullet 1,596]

22 minutes ago, sportsbay said:

No, what will derail this are the horrible programs that make up 50% of the b10.  Why should Oregon take less than Minnesota, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, and Maryland?

The b10 has a serious deadweight problem.

In football.

That was always the issue with the UT to the Big 10.  Did we really want to play Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana and Purdue?  And was Iowa that much better than Kansas St.?

[bullet 1,596]

12 minutes ago, Okie State said:

46 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

2015

What happened in 2015? Haven't ever heard that mentioned on this board.

You are being facetious, right?

The only question is whether the refs were bribed or just hated Charlie Strong and UT.  Worst hose job I've ever seen in any sport.  It wasn't just one or two bad calls for Okie St.

[bullet 1,596]

And other than CU's 5th down vs. Missouri, that fumble non-recovery was probably the single worst call I've ever seen.

[hawkfan 60]

29 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I think the ND question is very real. They want them and will wait on them. Either way, I've said it before, SEC and BIG will both go to unequal revenue share within the next few years, and even the lower payouts will be better than ACC and Big XII so there will be no defections.

 

You realize that everyone in the B1G is equal equity owners of the BTN right?  I don't see them ever forfeiting that or voting themselves into less revenue.  The Detroit Lions get paid the same as the New England Patriots to promote stability.

What's created instability in college sports is the revenue gap between leagues.  The only way that could conceivably happen would be if tOSU/UM/USC/PSU/Etc. have an opportunity to leave for more money, they don't have any leverage to get a bigger share of the pie unless that is a realistic possibility.

If the SEC & B1G remain on equal revenue footing, they'll never go to unequal revenue sharing because I don't see Alabama/Georgia/Florida/Etc. wanting to go north or tOSU/UM/PSU/USC/etc. wanting to go south.

Edited July 28, 2022 by hawkfan

['stache 21,813]

4 minutes ago, hawkfan said:

 

You realize that everyone in the B1G is equal equity owners of the BTN right?  I don't see them ever forfeiting that or voting themselves into less revenue.  The Detroit Lions get paid the same as the New England Patriots to promote stability.

What's created instability in college sports is the revenue gap between leagues.  The only way that could conceivably happen would be if tOSU/UM/USC/PSU/Etc. have an opportunity to leave for more money, they don't have any leverage to get a bigger share of the pie unless that is a realistic possibility.

If the SEC & B1G remain on equal revenue footing, they'll never go to unequal revenue sharing because I don't see Alabama/Georgia/Florida/Etc. wanting to go north or tOSU/UM/PSU/USC/etc. wanting to go south.

Yeah, we'll see. I'll bet a pizza its unequal by 2030. What are they gonna do, threaten to leave for the Big XII? Lol.