Realignment talk not going away

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

10 minutes ago, Texzilla58 said:

How is college football in the worst shape it’s ever been? The amount of money involved from TV and NIL is beyond anyone’s expectations, even for lower tier schools that will be left behind. You’re just all bent because Oregon is being exposed as the fuckstain it has always been. When I lived in Portland only blue bloods liked Oregon; the unwashed preferred the Beavers. The reality is don’t give a shit is the majority opinion.

Oregon brings nothing but dilution to any conference they want to go to.

Wtf? Talk about a fucking troll. I'm a Texan, born and raised. I have family that worked/retired at UT-Austin. I've been on that campus for most of my life. Wtf is your issue? My mom is from Oregon but I don't really care what conference they're in. To me, Oregon is the same team with without the B1G. It's just some of these posts are pure comedy, especially from USC fans.  When USC/UCLA first accepted a bid from the B1G, everyone on forums and within the media said Oregon is next. And then some ex-FOX executive, with a propaganda, said Oregon was only worth $30 million, yet, the entire PAC is getting offers for $30 million per school. And then we hear/read really stupid shit from Canzana and the rest of the media on how the PAC is going to survive and stay together forever. People are buying into journalists with an agenda.

College football makes money because live sports is worth more today than ever.  It is not healthy. It's the same few teams competing for the title every year. They get nearly all the top recruits. Their third string talent is equal to some Bluebloods' first string. It didn't used to be that.

Why are they expanding and looking for every dollar they can get their hands on? Attendance has been sinking for years. Saban has even said they need to line up and play each other or the fans are going to stop attending. Of course, Saban is a part of the issue. He's spent the past decade plus paying players under the table and hoarding all the talent. I don't blame him. Everyone else needs to join him and make it competitive.

[closetohumping 17,442]

7 hours ago, Texzilla58 said:

How is college football in the worst shape it’s ever been? The amount of money involved from TV and NIL is beyond anyone’s expectations, even for lower tier schools that will be left behind. You’re just all bent because Oregon is being exposed as the fuckstain it has always been. When I lived in Portland only blue bloods liked Oregon; the unwashed preferred the Beavers. The reality is don’t give a shit is the majority opinion.

Oregon brings nothing but dilution to any conference they want to go to.

This is true in almost every state. Most blue bloods prefer Virginia, most unwashed prefer VT. Oregon would arguably be the most valuable program in big 12 and to me a plus addition anywhere else

[SimonBolivar 10,958]

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by SimonBolivar

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

Well, we'll find out what they want to do with the Pac12 and Big 12 pretty soon.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

I also think this lets UT and OU get to the chant sooner than later.  My guess is Fox and the Mouse instruct a few Pac 12 schools to go east and let UT and OU out with a new look Big 12 (16?) starting next season.

Win/win for pretty much everyone here.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Al_4_ISU

[SimonBolivar 10,958]

2 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I also think this lets UT and OU get to the chant sooner than later.  My guess is Fox and the Mouse instruct a few Pac 12 schools to go east and let UT and OU out with a new look Big 12 (16?) starting next season.

Win/win for pretty much everyone here.

I agree, but I think there would be some different timing on entrances with the Pac12 GOR lasting to 2024 (iirc). I can see this being a swap for ESPN giving them OU & UT in the SEC next year and we get a bit better of a contract to lure in the 4 corners for 2024 or 2025.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

2 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

I agree, but I think there would be some different timing on entrances with the Pac12 GOR lasting to 2024 (iirc). I can see this being a swap for ESPN giving them OU & UT in the SEC next year and we get a bit better of a contract to lure in the 4 corners for 2024 or 2025.

Yeah, I guess I'm not familiar with the mechanics of that, but I definitely think there's going to be some aspect of negotiating an exit for OU and UT that makes the remaining 12 happy, makes UT and OU happy, and makes the networks happy.

[Hiphopopotamos 20,875]

4 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

I agree, but I think there would be some different timing on entrances with the Pac12 GOR lasting to 2024 (iirc). I can see this being a swap for ESPN giving them OU & UT in the SEC next year and we get a bit better of a contract to lure in the 4 corners for 2024 or 2025.

Similar to the Big12 - doesn't the Pac12 GOR only exist as long as their are a minimum number of members?  They lost two already - how many would need to join the Big12 for the Pac to no longer exist?

[Gidnik 3,270]

https://247sports.com/college/texas/Article/Texas-Longhorns-football-Big-12-TV-partners-early-negotiations-impact-Texas-Oklahoma-departure-SEC-192343044/?Notification.Success=Your+Article+has+been+successfully+created

 

anyone got the copy pasta? i know its fcb but i want to see what hes lying about first thing this morning. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

6 minutes ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

Similar to the Big12 - doesn't the Pac12 GOR only exist as long as their are a minimum number of members?  They lost two already - how many would need to join the Big12 for the Pac to no longer exist?

I would think losing 4 more, and leaving only 6 remainders, would be awfully close.

[TexEx15 17,535]

Public acknowledgment from the Big12. That’s huge.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

Obviously the Big 12 wants this.

[tx ind 7,013]

Pac is toast if Fox/ESPN are negotiating first with the Big 12.

['stache 21,816]

I personally think we're both fucked. Our fanbases care a lot more but like the PAC we don't have any bluebloods left and they are who the networks really want. If the PAC was offered $25 mil each, I suspect we might get $30 or $35, which still sucks shit. I also worry that our package will be heavy on ESPN+ ensuring that we have to pay extra to follow our programs. It would absolutely ensure that none of us could put up ratings to make a case for entry into the SEC/BIG. I like Yourmark though and hope he's heavily involved and doesn't let them fuck around the way dickless Bowlsby was for most of his tenure.

[SimonBolivar 10,958]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I personally think we're both fucked. Our fanbases care a lot more but like the PAC we don't have any bluebloods left and they are who the networks really want. If the PAC was offered $25 mil each, I suspect we might get $30 or $35, which still sucks shit. I also worry that our package will be heavy on ESPN+ ensuring that we have to pay extra to follow our programs. It would absolutely ensure that none of us could put up ratings to make a case for entry into the SEC/BIG. I like Yourmark though and hope he's heavily involved and doesn't let them fuck around the way dickless Bowlsby was for most of his tenure.

No matter where we go it's going to be an upcharge for tier 3 I bet. It could be any of ESPN+, Amazon, or Peacock.

[camel at sea 589]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I also think this lets UT and OU get to the chant sooner than later.  My guess is Fox and the Mouse instruct a few Pac 12 schools to go east and let UT and OU out with a new look Big 12 (16?) starting next season.

Win/win for pretty much everyone here.

Yeah.  UT and OU join the SEC early.  Disney gets its "After Dark" games via the Big 12 after the Four Corners move.  FOX has better leverage with the remaining PAC invitees it wants as their state governments will suddenly be more cooperative and desperate.  Colorado has to publicly deny that they think of the Big 12 as a juco league.  

 

One thing I'm curious about is whether someone else gets involved to help carry the Big 12's Tier 1 inventory.  The "game of the week" needs to go somewhere and I'm not sure where it might land at either FOX or Disney.     

['stache 21,816]

1 minute ago, camel at sea said:

Yeah.  UT and OU join the SEC early.  Disney gets its "After Dark" games via the Big 12 after the Four Corners move.  FOX has better leverage with the remaining PAC invitees it wants as their state governments will suddenly be more cooperative and desperate.  Colorado has to publicly deny that they think of the Big 12 as a juco league.  

 

One thing I'm curious about is whether someone else gets involved to help carry the Big 12's Tier 1 inventory.  The "game of the week" needs to go somewhere and I'm not sure where it might land at either FOX or Disney.     

I some how missed this in all the shuffle. Fuck that shit.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

5 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Yeah.  UT and OU join the SEC early.  Disney gets its "After Dark" games via the Big 12 after the Four Corners move.  FOX has better leverage with the remaining PAC invitees it wants as their state governments will suddenly be more cooperative and desperate.  Colorado has to publicly deny that they think of the Big 12 as a juco league.  

 

One thing I'm curious about is whether someone else gets involved to help carry the Big 12's Tier 1 inventory.  The "game of the week" needs to go somewhere and I'm not sure where it might land at either FOX or Disney.     

CSB and NBC both have room for a game or two.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

12 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I personally think we're both fucked. Our fanbases care a lot more but like the PAC we don't have any bluebloods left and they are who the networks really want. If the PAC was offered $25 mil each, I suspect we might get $30 or $35, which still sucks shit. I also worry that our package will be heavy on ESPN+ ensuring that we have to pay extra to follow our programs. It would absolutely ensure that none of us could put up ratings to make a case for entry into the SEC/BIG. I like Yourmark though and hope he's heavily involved and doesn't let them fuck around the way dickless Bowlsby was for most of his tenure.

I mean, the bottom half of the Big 10 is going to be playing the bulk of their games on streaming.  We're definitely going to have more games there.

We're only fucked if anyone thought there was a chance of similar money to the SEC and Big 10.  That was never going to happen.  We're looking more and more likely to be cemented as the 3rd conference, with a seat at the table.  This financial gap is turning into diminished returns.  UT has had waaaaaaaaaaaay more money than the rest of us for years and it hasn't made them win. 

From a fan's perspective, things are going about as well (honestly exceeding expectations) for the new Big 12 as we could have dreamed of a year ago.  None of us are going to the Big 10 or SEC.  This is our best bet, and it really doesn't look that bad.  Certainly not compared to what we (or at least I was) were bracing for.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Al_4_ISU

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

18 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Yeah.  UT and OU join the SEC early.  Disney gets its "After Dark" games via the Big 12 after the Four Corners move.  FOX has better leverage with the remaining PAC invitees it wants as their state governments will suddenly be more cooperative and desperate.  Colorado has to publicly deny that they think of the Big 12 as a juco league.  

 

One thing I'm curious about is whether someone else gets involved to help carry the Big 12's Tier 1 inventory.  The "game of the week" needs to go somewhere and I'm not sure where it might land at either FOX or Disney.     

They have good shoulder programing for both ESPN and Fox.   If Fox's big game is noon, I could see them on the 3:30.   I could also see CBS getting involved to snatch up basketball to go with their Big Ten package, which is normally Sunday games.   Toss Big 12 football shoulders at noon, basketball on Saturday.

If you look at the ACC and SEC, the bulk of their content is on conference networks.  Missouri played one game outside it last year, as did other programs like Pitt, BC, Cuse, etc.  Now that the Big 12 has more inventory, one of Fox/ESPN making a linear network to lock up rights where they could pay for it by bundling with SEC or BTN could also work.   Then you just pick the best games for shoulders and drop everything else to linear.   It's not $100m a year, but it's not $25m.  If they expanded with 4 corners and charged half of BTN, Fox would be generating about $350m/year in carriage alone - which is around $15-20m/year per team at 16.

(Napkin Math: same original deal as BTN, 50/50 split.   Fees are 40% of total revenue, ads bring in 60%, 10-20% expenses = $750m.-$100m in expenses= $650m split, fox takes $325, Big 12 splits $325)

Edited August 31, 2022 by Hurtlocker

['stache 21,816]

20 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I mean, the bottom half of the Big 10 is going to be playing the bulk of their games on streaming.  We're definitely going to have more games there.

We're only fucked if anyone thought there was a chance of similar money to the SEC and Big 10.  That was never going to happen.  We're looking more and more likely to be cemented as the 3rd conference, with a seat at the table.  This financial gap is turning into diminished returns.  UT has had waaaaaaaaaaaay more money than the rest of us for years and it hasn't made them win. 

From a fan's perspective, things are going about as well (honestly exceeding expectations) for the new Big 12 as we could have dreamed of a year ago.  None of us are going to the Big 10 or SEC.  This is our best bet, and it really doesn't look that bad.  Certainly not compared to what we (or at least I was) were bracing for.

I'm not talking about similar money, I push back on the OSU boards when they talk about "keeping up with the BIG/SEC." That ain't happening. But if they are making $100 mil (including Rutgers et al), I was hoping we could at least get $50, but I'm worried it'll be more like $35. I get that there are diminishing returns too, but 30% of those leagues is just reinforcing the "minor league" perception. But in general my biggest concern is being relegated too much to streaming. I think my school has a damn good argument for the SEC based on where we show up on TV ratings (among other things). Still a longshot, but I think we fit a lot of the mold. If half our games are on ESPN+ or even Amazon, our ratings will either not be recorded or show to be much lower than when we are OTA or on ESPN (and before anyone chimes in we have had plenty of games against non-UT/ou games broadcast on the big stage). If we can't get access to ratings, we're definitely going nowhere, and I want the ability to at least continuing to make our case by winning game and drawing interest nationally.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

12 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I'm not talking about similar money, I push back on the OSU boards when they talk about "keeping up with the BIG/SEC." That ain't happening. But if they are making $100 mil (including Rutgers et al), I was hoping we could at least get $50, but I'm worried it'll be more like $35. I get that there are diminishing returns too, but 30% of those leagues is just reinforcing the "minor league" perception. But in general my biggest concern is being relegated too much to streaming. I think my school has a damn good argument for the SEC based on where we show up on TV ratings (among other things). Still a longshot, but I think we fit a lot of the mold. If half our games are on ESPN+ or even Amazon, our ratings will either not be recorded or show to be much lower than when we are OTA or on ESPN (and before anyone chimes in we have had plenty of games against non-UT/ou games broadcast on the big stage). If we can't get access to ratings, we're definitely going nowhere, and I want the ability to at least continuing to make our case by winning game and drawing interest nationally.

And my school has a similar argument for the Big 10.  Ain't happening for the same reason you ain't getting into the SEC.

We'll still get quite a few regular TV windows, and as long as OSU keeps winning, they'll be in those windows.  I think one of the biggest things that can hurt perception is openly pining to go be overpaid whipping boys.  Everyone knows that all the admins in the Big 12 would join the SEC or Big 10 if offered.  We're all better off just being focused on making the Big 12 the best product it can be.  Just my opinion, naturally, but even though I'd rather be in a western division of the Big 10 all things considered, it just ain't happening.  I'm not even going to waste my mental energy on it.

I'd rather win the Big 12 than go 6-6 in the Big 10 anyhow.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Al_4_ISU

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

16 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I'm not talking about similar money, I push back on the OSU boards when they talk about "keeping up with the BIG/SEC." That ain't happening. But if they are making $100 mil (including Rutgers et al), I was hoping we could at least get $50, but I'm worried it'll be more like $35. I get that there are diminishing returns too, but 30% of those leagues is just reinforcing the "minor league" perception. But in general my biggest concern is being relegated too much to streaming. I think my school has a damn good argument for the SEC based on where we show up on TV ratings (among other things). Still a longshot, but I think we fit a lot of the mold. If half our games are on ESPN+ or even Amazon, our ratings will either not be recorded or show to be much lower than when we are OTA or on ESPN (and before anyone chimes in we have had plenty of games against non-UT/ou games broadcast on the big stage). If we can't get access to ratings, we're definitely going nowhere, and I want the ability to at least continuing to make our case by winning game and drawing interest nationally.

The Big 12 was aiming more towards $65-70m before realignment, I'd expect they end up around $45-50m now.   They lost massive brands, but they exploded in markets.   To your point, the Big 12's entire vision now has to be how to we grow our brands.   Having better ball in these markets will help the next round of negotiations around 2031.

Adding 4 from the Pac could increase it as well due to having more inventory to create a network in bigger cities.   DMAs matter a lot more in affiliate fees.    Just need to do it right.  While Oregon/UW are the biggest brands left, likely makes more sense for the Big 12 to focus on four corners just for geography.   Helps build the conference up.   Though you could also get the 4 corners by just getting Colorado and ASU, since you have Utah with BYU, and watching.  Connecting the BYU dot isn't going to hurt.

['stache 21,816]

52 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

And my school has a similar argument for the Big 10.  Ain't happening for the same reason you ain't getting into the SEC.

We'll still get quite a few regular TV windows, and as long as OSU keeps winning, they'll be in those windows.  I think one of the biggest things that can hurt perception is openly pining to go be overpaid whipping boys.  Everyone knows that all the admins in the Big 12 would join the SEC or Big 10 if offered.  We're all better off just being focused on making the Big 12 the best product it can be.  Just my opinion, naturally, but even though I'd rather be in a western division of the Big 10 all things considered, it just ain't happening.  I'm not even going to waste my mental energy on it.

I'd rather win the Big 12 than go 6-6 in the Big 10 anyhow.

I don't think any administrators are "openly" pining for this but are surely doing so behind closed doors. And we are certainly going to move forward doing everything right to stay competitive and maintain attendance and ratings to the extent possible. It's the latter part that concerns me if half our games are streaming. Even our FS1 games get shit ratings because people don't know where to find the damn channel and its not part of the regular saturday flipping through the channels type thing where people might tune into OSU v. KSU. Even worse if you have to pay an extra $5 a month, click onto the ESPN app, then find the game. People will rarely casually find their way to those games. The Huly/Disney+ bundle has helped, especially since Hulu now shows ESPN+ stuff on the front page if you have the package, but it's still not the same. Like I said, I know it's a longshot, but I think we do have a chance at SEC if they go to 20 and certainly if to 24. And while we certainly won't have as many 10 win seasons, I don't see us being a permanent "whipping boy" in the SEC. We have all the tools to be competetive, and I trust that we'll do a decent job when Gundy retires. He said last week though that he could coach another decade. Pretty sure he said that a decade ago. He's clearly happier with the new administration and with Boone having kicked the bucket.

Edited August 31, 2022 by 'stache

[Vertigo 20,286]

1 hour ago, camel at sea said:

Yeah.  UT and OU join the SEC early.  Disney gets its "After Dark" games via the Big 12 after the Four Corners move.  FOX has better leverage with the remaining PAC invitees it wants as their state governments will suddenly be more cooperative and desperate.  Colorado has to publicly deny that they think of the Big 12 as a juco league.  

 

One thing I'm curious about is whether someone else gets involved to help carry the Big 12's Tier 1 inventory.  The "game of the week" needs to go somewhere and I'm not sure where it might land at either FOX or Disney.     

Bobby Burton slipped the other day on a video and said Texas would be in the SEC starting next season. I don't think anyone really called him out on it, but I noticed it and the more I think about it, the more it couldn't have been speaking out of turn. This confirms that the B12 is waving the white flag on the exit fee in order to secure the long term future of the conference. It is a good move considering they need to make moves now with more expansion options, and definitely NOT something Bowlsby would have done. He would have gone down with the ship waiting on the check. 

[Deej 76,797]

12 hours ago, Texzilla58 said:

the unwashed preferred the Beavers.

Dibs on "Unwashed Beavers" as a band name. 

[Vertigo 20,286]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

I'm not talking about similar money, I push back on the OSU boards when they talk about "keeping up with the BIG/SEC." That ain't happening. But if they are making $100 mil (including Rutgers et al), I was hoping we could at least get $50, but I'm worried it'll be more like $35. I get that there are diminishing returns too, but 30% of those leagues is just reinforcing the "minor league" perception. But in general my biggest concern is being relegated too much to streaming. I think my school has a damn good argument for the SEC based on where we show up on TV ratings (among other things). Still a longshot, but I think we fit a lot of the mold. If half our games are on ESPN+ or even Amazon, our ratings will either not be recorded or show to be much lower than when we are OTA or on ESPN (and before anyone chimes in we have had plenty of games against non-UT/ou games broadcast on the big stage). If we can't get access to ratings, we're definitely going nowhere, and I want the ability to at least continuing to make our case by winning game and drawing interest nationally.

If the B1G does include Oregon and Washington + + on a lower revenue tier, then I think that widens the conversation considerably and it wouldn't surprise me if the SEC follows that model to add some additional schools in the future. Ok State would be a great candidate for that kind of scenario, but I think the SEC looks to the ACC first before circling back to Stillwater. FSU and Clemson seem to be the top future targets.  

[Texas Wahoo 3,397]

 

[pops 6,986]

[The Beast 585]

10 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

Opps

[bullet 1,597]

3 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

I agree, but I think there would be some different timing on entrances with the Pac12 GOR lasting to 2024 (iirc). I can see this being a swap for ESPN giving them OU & UT in the SEC next year and we get a bit better of a contract to lure in the 4 corners for 2024 or 2025.

I don't think we go until 2024.  That's when ESPN gets the CBS 3:30 SEC contract.  There's no a big incentive to give CBS UT and OU for a year.

[thunderlounge 7,837]

15 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

Key phrases:

”opened the contractual negotiations window”

”at this time”

 

Which pretty much means they’re figuring out what they need to and talking informally at the moment. Discussing options, scenarios, targets, etc so they can have all their ducks together before officially opening the window.

 

Should be a good sign for the b12 and their potential to be the 3rd conference. Less than 1/2, but beats the drop down to 4th and the next level with AAC, MW, etc.

 

[bullet 1,597]

3 hours ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

Similar to the Big12 - doesn't the Pac12 GOR only exist as long as their are a minimum number of members?  They lost two already - how many would need to join the Big12 for the Pac to no longer exist?

It expires next year with the TV contract.  No need to move any Pac schools until 2024 when the TV contract is over.  That's when USC/UCLA move.

As with UT/OU, I don't see ESPN giving up USC and UCLA a year early.  

[JFKFC 4,881]

24 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

Thank God that Gorbachev isn't alive to see the Big 12 humiliate itself like this. 

[bullet 1,597]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

I'm not talking about similar money, I push back on the OSU boards when they talk about "keeping up with the BIG/SEC." That ain't happening. But if they are making $100 mil (including Rutgers et al), I was hoping we could at least get $50, but I'm worried it'll be more like $35. I get that there are diminishing returns too, but 30% of those leagues is just reinforcing the "minor league" perception. But in general my biggest concern is being relegated too much to streaming. I think my school has a damn good argument for the SEC based on where we show up on TV ratings (among other things). Still a longshot, but I think we fit a lot of the mold. If half our games are on ESPN+ or even Amazon, our ratings will either not be recorded or show to be much lower than when we are OTA or on ESPN (and before anyone chimes in we have had plenty of games against non-UT/ou games broadcast on the big stage). If we can't get access to ratings, we're definitely going nowhere, and I want the ability to at least continuing to make our case by winning game and drawing interest nationally.

I don't like the idea of streaming either, but that's where things will be before too long.  An article a couple weeks ago said streaming had surpassed cable as the way Americans watch TV.  Both were around 35%.  Over the air was down below 22% (9% was other, whatever "other" is).

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

Wilner is just getting owned.

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Al_4_ISU

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

As expected

[SimonBolivar 10,958]

1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Wilner is just getting owned.

 

I like how it was ESPN reporters that first reported it, but Wilner is trying to say that maybe ESPN is wrong about ESPN?

[Francisco 2.0 32,395]

 

 

[TexEx15 17,535]

1 minute ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

Good. Make this our last year in the Big12.

[Gidnik 3,270]

Wilmer getting dunked on

['stache 21,816]

57 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

As expected

No wai. We were told repeatedly on here it was because us peons were totally butthurt and were just being mean to UT/ou. 

i keed, i keed (kinda)

['stache 21,816]

1 hour ago, Vertigo said:

If the B1G does include Oregon and Washington + + on a lower revenue tier, then I think that widens the conversation considerably and it wouldn't surprise me if the SEC follows that model to add some additional schools in the future. Ok State would be a great candidate for that kind of scenario, but I think the SEC looks to the ACC first before circling back to Stillwater. FSU and Clemson seem to be the top future targets.  

I can't imagine UO and UW come in with unequal revenue share while Indiana and Illinois et al still get a full cut (your suggestion appears to me to be about a permanent lower tier not a lower payout for the first few years after entry). I personally think the BIG won't expand until they know 100% on ND, and after they implement unequal revenue share among their current members. It's inevitable.

[utee94 15,824]

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

No wai. We were told repeatedly on here it was because us peons were totally butthurt and were just being mean to UT/ou. 

i keed, i keed (kinda)

2024 has always been the latest expected date, regardless of the GOR or exit penalties.

The conversation has been, could it and would it happen earlier?  It obviously didn't happen for 2022 but it's certainly still possible that it could happen in 2023.

 

[billfromlaketravis 11,485]

I almost feel bad for Wilner. He made a living for years covering Bay Area sports. Then he self promotes himself as the Woj of realignment and puts a target on his back. He would have been better off deleting his Twitter, and writing columns about the Sharks. 

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

4 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I almost feel bad for Wilner. He made a living for years covering Bay Area sports. Then he self promotes himself as the Woj of realignment and puts a target on his back. He would have been better off deleting his Twitter, and writing columns about the Sharks. 

Between him, Mandel, and John Canzano, it's just straight up Baghdad Bob.

I understand Wilner and Canzano's investment, but Mandel is the one I don't get.

[bullet 1,597]

3 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

The Big 12 was aiming more towards $65-70m before realignment, I'd expect they end up around $45-50m now.   They lost massive brands, but they exploded in markets.   To your point, the Big 12's entire vision now has to be how to we grow our brands.   Having better ball in these markets will help the next round of negotiations around 2031.

Adding 4 from the Pac could increase it as well due to having more inventory to create a network in bigger cities.   DMAs matter a lot more in affiliate fees.    Just need to do it right.  While Oregon/UW are the biggest brands left, likely makes more sense for the Big 12 to focus on four corners just for geography.   Helps build the conference up.   Though you could also get the 4 corners by just getting Colorado and ASU, since you have Utah with BYU, and watching.  Connecting the BYU dot isn't going to hurt.

Dodds has some odd numbers.  I recall Bowlsby saying in the legislature that the Big 12 was currently getting upper 20s media money.  Dodds claims they will get $44 million in the last year of the contract.  I think he may be confusing total distributions.  Finance is not his strong suit.

"...Those sources valued the annual rights of programs in those conferences anywhere from $21 million to $35 million annually. The Big 12 will make $44 million per school in the final year of its current agreement...."

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-opens-media-rights-negotiations-ahead-of-schedule-early-exit-for-oklahoma-texas-being-considered/

[bullet 1,597]

32 minutes ago, utee94 said:

2024 has always been the latest expected date, regardless of the GOR or exit penalties.

The conversation has been, could it and would it happen earlier?  It obviously didn't happen for 2022 but it's certainly still possible that it could happen in 2023.

 

2025 is the official date.  Nobody official has ever talked publicly about earlier dates.  I suspect they wanted 2022, but 2025 is when the GOR goes away.

[Mo Horn 8,843]

As soon as the new teams were announced to join the big 12 in 2023, it was a given that we would also leave that year, imo. Everything else is about the money. 

[Huckleberry 32,861]

3 hours ago, 'stache said:

I'm not talking about similar money, I push back on the OSU boards when they talk about "keeping up with the BIG/SEC." That ain't happening. But if they are making $100 mil (including Rutgers et al), I was hoping we could at least get $50, but I'm worried it'll be more like $35. I get that there are diminishing returns too, but 30% of those leagues is just reinforcing the "minor league" perception. But in general my biggest concern is being relegated too much to streaming. I think my school has a damn good argument for the SEC based on where we show up on TV ratings (among other things). Still a longshot, but I think we fit a lot of the mold. If half our games are on ESPN+ or even Amazon, our ratings will either not be recorded or show to be much lower than when we are OTA or on ESPN (and before anyone chimes in we have had plenty of games against non-UT/ou games broadcast on the big stage). If we can't get access to ratings, we're definitely going nowhere, and I want the ability to at least continuing to make our case by winning game and drawing interest nationally.

Unfortunately for competitive balance, NIL means that the less blatantly illegal bluebloods will grow the gap more than they had before. Those extra funds from being in the superconferences means less required from boosters which means more from boosters to players. It won't change the bust rate on recruits but it will drastically increase the transfer rate to those schools by players who have productive seasons for the schools who have less. Addison, Neyor, etc. from this season are just the trickle before the floodgates break open. 

Even nose in the air admins like the dummies in Austin are slowly figuring that out.