Realignment talk not going away

[Dnaguy 11,916]

1 minute ago, thunderlounge said:

Not quite. The CFP money the PAC2 would get by holding out would get distributed to the “P4”. ESPN is paying the same either way. 
 

This is definitely a wild scenario, but far from impossible. It wouldn’t last long, IIRC they have 2 years to get back to a minimum of 8 schools before the NCAA will not recognize them as a conference. Trickledown effect from there, and the CFP would then be able to follow. 
 

But initially with a PAC representative being on the CFP board, and changes needing unanimous approval (allegedly), it could be a bumpy ride.

Not sure there is an advantage to the b12 to add them, unless it could be on the super cheap.

 

 

So Oregon state and Washington st sit tight for two years.

Each school gets 300 + mil from the CFP and whatever they can scrounge for their media rights which will be minimal.

Then they only invite 6 MW schools. and sign some media deal worth 3-5 mil / school.

That still puts them at what, 35 mil / school?

How much is the Big12 making / school with the new CFP money?

Not much more. 

And isn't that in line with what the ACC makes?

Plus Oregon St and Wash St just netted say 150-200 mil after all the expenses of essentially being independent for two years.

 

If all this is true, they're definitely not staring at the cliff I thought they were a couple of weeks ago.

[Laxtonto 12,078]

7 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

Not quite. The CFP money the PAC2 would get by holding out would get distributed to the “P4”. ESPN is paying the same either way. 
 

This is definitely a wild scenario, but far from impossible. It wouldn’t last long, IIRC they have 2 years to get back to a minimum of 8 schools before the NCAA will not recognize them as a conference. Trickledown effect from there, and the CFP would then be able to follow. 
 

But initially with a PAC representative being on the CFP board, and changes needing unanimous approval (allegedly), it could be a bumpy ride.

Not sure there is an advantage to the b12 to add them, unless it could be on the super cheap.

 

The 300M number is not a real number to the B12. The 300M is the loss for 3 years, which would really be closer to 40 or so (300 split across the 9 other conferences with it being weighted towards the P4). So why does the B12 have to take the hit of adding those 2 to see a potential 40M increase...

Now if the B12 will take the hit as leverage for a scheduling agreement with the other Power conferences and the TV rights holders want to throw them a bone because of the scheduling agreement, sure why not...

 

But there is no huge hit to the B12 here. Its a big number from a shock value standpoint but that is a drop in the bucket from a CFP revenue standpoint.

[thunderlounge 7,813]

18 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

The 300M number is not a real number to the B12.

Nope, it’s sure not. 75 is the number to them, and the other 3, since the PAC2’s share would be folded back into the main pool. 
 

That money doesn’t go away, it’s just redistributed between the remaining 4.

This has potential clusterfuck written all over it in the short term.

They can play each other, then pay out 11 teams pretty well to fill their schedule, and still pocket over $100M each. Just from the CFP distributions.

They can sit on it for 2 seasons, make $200M, and then go join an NCAA recognized conference.

They have to absolutely be salivating at that prospect. Both would wipe their debt first year, and stock their coffers the next.

It’s a chickenshit move, but what else do they have at this point?

They merge with the MWC or whatever, and they’ll end up losing the power designation, thus their playoff/tournament meal ticket. They also end up with significantly less year over year.

At that point, they’re both better off taking a half share from the b12, which would still be more than what they would be looking at post-merger.

Hypothetically, if they were to join the b12 at a half share, the rest of the b12 isn’t losing money. They’d get a couple mil bump just from the CFP. Say you pay them 20M, closer to 2/3 of a share. Just the $75M bump from the additional CFP money (the PAC2 $300M share being divided by P4) would pay for that addition and leave $35M for the rest of the b12 to pile onto what they’re already going to receive.

That’s without any other contributions from media partners, who might kick in a few bucks.

 

Whole thing is a disaster waiting to happen. Watching this unfold will be interesting.

 

There really isn’t an advantage for the b12 at all. A couple mil/school probably isn’t worth the addition, or the additional headaches. 

[closetohumping 17,433]

Nothing to see here. 
 

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

2 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Nothing to see here. 
 

This probably has way more to do with comparing viewership of broadcasts on FOX, ABC, and ESPN with broadcasts on FS1. I don't really understand the attempted flex here.

[statsman 5,450]

1 minute ago, Jabberwocky said:

This probably has way more to do with comparing viewership of broadcasts on FOX, ABC, and ESPN with broadcasts on FS1. I don't really understand the attempted flex here.

The flex is- there aren’t going to be any Big XII games on ABC in Texas. There will be SEC games involving UT, OU or TAMU. There won’t be many Big XII games on ESPN; most will be on ESPN2, etc. Texas could have Big XII games on Fox, unless there is something bigger like a Big 10 game involving blue bloods. (Think Fox will put a Big XII game on Fox when Texas plays Michigan?😄). 
 
Maybe they will have Texas-Auburn on ESPN instead of ABC, so they can have the UH-TT game on ABC. Does that seem likely to you?

[closetohumping 17,433]

8 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

This probably has way more to do with comparing viewership of broadcasts on FOX, ABC, and ESPN with broadcasts on FS1. I don't really understand the attempted flex here.

Not really a flex.  Just mocking the leftovers

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

59 minutes ago, statsman said:

The flex is- there aren’t going to be any Big XII games on ABC in Texas. There will be SEC games involving UT, OU or TAMU. There won’t be many Big XII games on ESPN; most will be on ESPN2, etc. Texas could have Big XII games on Fox, unless there is something bigger like a Big 10 game involving blue bloods. (Think Fox will put a Big XII game on Fox when Texas plays Michigan?😄). 
 
Maybe they will have Texas-Auburn on ESPN instead of ABC, so they can have the UH-TT game on ABC. Does that seem likely to you?

ESPN isn't paying all that money for media rights to just put every Big 12 game on ESPN +. That just isn't happening.

As far as talking shit because you are leaving for a different conferece... that seems like some dumb aggy shit to me. We only won the motherfucker like three times, so it can't be that terrible of a conference.

[statsman 5,450]

8 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

ESPN isn't paying all that money for media rights to just put every Big 12 game on ESPN +. That just isn't happening.

As far as talking shit because you are leaving for a different conferece... that seems like some dumb aggy shit to me. We only won the motherfucker like three times, so it can't be that terrible of a conference.

ESPN is paying a lot of that money to facilitate Texas leaving the B12. There was a report about it last week. 
 
Care to share which B12 future matchup you see being on ABC, when OU is playing LSU at the same time?
 
We will see what happens with the next B12 media contract. 

Edited September 27, 2023 by statsman

[66BUFF 2,562]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

ESPN is paying a lot of that money to facilitate Texas leaving the B12. There was a report about it last week. 
 
Care to share which B12 future matchup you see being on ABC, when OU is playing LSU at the same time?
 
We will see what happens with the next B12 media contract. 

Colorado as long as Deion is there.

[utee94 15,805]

39 minutes ago, 66BUFF said:

Colorado as long as Deion is there.

It'll be interesting to see how much the interest/ratings drop off after Deion's first loss last week.  The Colorado-Oregon game actually beat out Ohio State - Notre Dame on Saturday, which is pretty shocking given the consistently high average TV ratings of those two blue bloods.

 

[Frank Drebin 5,654]

42 minutes ago, 66BUFF said:

Colorado as long as Deion is there.

So maybe one to two years in the Big 12, tops?

He ain't staying at CU long.

[66BUFF 2,562]

28 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

So maybe one to two years in the Big 12, tops?

He ain't staying at CU long.

He seems to like living there and he has complete control over every decision in the AD.  He has an easier path to the playoffs in the Big 12.

[Frank Drebin 5,654]

3 minutes ago, 66BUFF said:

He seems to like living there and he has complete control over every decision in the AD.  He has an easier path to the playoffs in the Big 12.

If I was a CU fan, I would be in denial also.

With expanded playoffs, you want to be in one of the big 2 conferences.  And for recruiting, you definitely do.

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

A lot of cap in here about the Big 12 and future viewership, and it comes off as misplaced pettiness by Texas fans. As a Texas fan myself, I don't get it.

Anyway.... Clemson rumblings.

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/carolina/sapakoff-clemsons-acc-departure-may-be-sooner-as-gamecocks-fret/article_844ab88a-5b9d-11ee-bf7f-13daaf7cde8d.html

[Doc Daneeka 6,769]

5 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

A lot of cap in here about the Big 12 and future viewership, and it comes off as misplaced pettiness by Texas fans. As a Texas fan myself, I don't get it.

Anyway.... Clemson rumblings.

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/carolina/sapakoff-clemsons-acc-departure-may-be-sooner-as-gamecocks-fret/article_844ab88a-5b9d-11ee-bf7f-13daaf7cde8d.html

What’s petty about discussing relative popularly and watchability of various programs in light of the “mean ol’ Texas was selfish” talk from people who had what they had in large part because Texas is more of a draw than they are?

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

18 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

What’s petty about discussing relative popularly and watchability of various programs in light of the “mean ol’ Texas was selfish” talk from people who had what they had in large part because Texas is more of a draw than they are?

Who cares?... 

You want to have a dick measuring contest with Oklahoma State? Be my guest, Brah.

As far as the mean old Texas shit, I mean it is what it is. Texas has wanted to get paid instead of being a good business partner since the beginning of the Big 12. Are we going to try and pretend it was anything else? Why would we try and delude ourselves? Nebraska wanted to get paid, Missouri wanted to get paid, Colorado wanted to get paid, A&M wanted to get paid, USC wanted to get paid, UCLA wanted to get paid.... Texas wanted to get paid, and it is what it is.

[TxEx84 398]

42 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

A lot of cap in here about the Big 12 and future viewership, and it comes off as misplaced pettiness by Texas fans. As a Texas fan myself, I don't get it.

Anyway.... Clemson rumblings.

https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/carolina/sapakoff-clemsons-acc-departure-may-be-sooner-as-gamecocks-fret/article_844ab88a-5b9d-11ee-bf7f-13daaf7cde8d.html

Paywall

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

2 minutes ago, TxEx84 said:

Paywall

Spoiler

CLEMSON – The Clemson football program is 3-5 in its last eight games against Power 5 conference foes or Notre Dame. That includes presently 0-2 in the ACC for the first time since 2010, and unranked with four other ACC teams ranked.

Could be worse: The Tigers are a few plays away from 3-7 in their last 10 games against major college teams (wins of 34-28 at Florida State and 27-21 over Syracuse last season).

It's nothing a few key transfer-portal additions and a couple of coaching-staff changes won’t fix before Clemson muscles up for what should be a great 2024 season-opener against Georgia in Atlanta.

But Clemson fans likely won’t have to wait that long to soothe the sting of a relatively disappointing season with big-picture perspective.

School administrators indicate an announcement about a Clemson bolt from its growing financial disadvantage in the ACC relative to SEC and Big Ten schools is coming soon, probably along with Florida State and North Carolina and perhaps another ACC school or more — even as University of South Carolina officials try to block Clemson from the SEC.

How soon?

“Sooner than later,” a Clemson senior administrator said last week when asked about a timetable

Sometime in 2023?

“Stay very tuned,” the administrator said.

It’s possible this is about pressuring the ACC into more incentive-based action.

But it’s certain Clemson officials believe the ACC’s grant of rights agreement that theoretically ties member schools to the conference through 2036 can be negotiated. Or as another Clemson official said, “there is strength in numbers if we’re not the only (departing ACC school) doing the negotiating.”

While most Clemson administrators and fans prefer a move to the SEC, the Big Ten is a possibility.

The process, perhaps unfolding, might go like this:

• The Big Ten gets serious about adding a Southern tier led by North Carolina — the top non-Notre Dame prize for both the Big Ten and SEC — and also including Clemson and Florida State, with perhaps Georgia Tech and/or Miami.

• The SEC counters, wanting North Carolina primarily, and seeking to block such a major Big Ten (or Big 12) move into its footprint.

While SEC officials this week again declined to talk about specific schools, SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey was to the point in his annual SEC Media Days address while in Atlanta in July of 2022. Sankey said the SEC is happy with the move to 16 members with the addition of Oklahoma and Texas.

“But we’ll watch what happens around us,” Sankey said, “and be thoughtful but be nimble.”

Very thoughtful and nimble, you can bet, probably including teams of analysts working in a secret basement at SEC headquarters or off-site in Muscle Shoals.

Meanwhile, at South Carolina, there is a mix of joy and angst.

Beamer’s recruiting edge
“Our fan base and coaches do not want Clemson in a league that gives us a great recruiting advantage,” a school senior administrator said. “We respect what our fans want. (And) we will play (Clemson) in all the sports anyway.”

Gamecocks head football coach Shane Beamer in August talked about that precious recruiting edge. He said how thankful he was to be in a conference other schools are scrambling “privately or publicly” to join.

“I mean, every time I look on the phone there’s a school in another conference that’s begging to get out of the conference that they’re in and into the SEC,” Beamer said. “They’re leaving, they’re just trying to figure out how and when.”

Well aware of Gamecock Nation sentiment, Clemson officials have been “politicking hard,” a Clemson senior administrator said, with both the SEC and South Carolina. A primary selling point: With the SEC almost certainly moving to nine conference football games in 2025 or soon after, having Clemson as a conference opponent will make South Carolina’s non-conference scheduling simpler.

That's maybe not the most convincing argument.

But the SEC recently added Texas without Texas A&M holding a welcome party.

The Big Ten remains an option, the Clemson administrator said. Scheduling would be alleviated by other ACC schools joining and a renewed rivalry with Maryland. Association of American Universities academic status, as reported by Brett McMurphy, is not a prerequisite for Big Ten expansion candidates with other academic qualities (Nebraska is the only Big Ten member not part of the AAU, which doesn’t include Clemson).

A memorable 2023 season?
One way or another, one conference or another, change is as likely as a Saturday morning drive-thru line at any Chick-fil-A near a football stadium.

The ACC in May announced a “success incentive initiative” to start in 2024 designed to stratify revenue sharing within the conference,  but it doesn’t come close to alleviating concerns at Clemson and Florida State. The Big Ten gave out $58.8 million per school in fiscal 2021-22, the SEC $49.9 million and the ACC between $38 million and $41 million, with the ACC gap sure to grow with new Big Ten and SEC television deals.

Clemson, Florida State and North Carolina were the “No” votes Sept. 1 in a 12-3 ACC decision to add Stanford, California and SMU. North Carolina’s Board of Trustees took the hardest stance against, as seen in a pre-vote statement issued by its trustees.

“Although we respect the academic excellence and the athletic programs of those institutions, the travel distances for routine in-conference competitive play are too great for this arrangement to make sense for our student-athletes, coaches, alumni and fans,” the statement said.

It’s already been a rough football year for Clemson.

Something is brewing that might make the 2023 season more memorable.

Just in time for a 12-team playoff in 2024.

Follow Gene Sapakoff on Twitter @sapakoff

 

[statsman 5,450]

Sounds like Clemson has about 80% of a plan. All they need is:

1. Either the SEC or B10 to invite them

2. A way out of the GOR. 

[Huckleberry 32,845]

36 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

Who cares?... 

You want to have a dick measuring contest with Oklahoma State? Be my guest, Brah.

As far as the mean old Texas shit, I mean it is what it is. Texas has wanted to get paid instead of being a good business partner since the beginning of the Big 12. Are we going to try and pretend it was anything else? Why would we try and delude ourselves? Nebraska wanted to get paid, Missouri wanted to get paid, Colorado wanted to get paid, A&M wanted to get paid, USC wanted to get paid, UCLA wanted to get paid.... Texas wanted to get paid, and it is what it is.

You're wrong about a lot of stuff and implied stuff in here, but I need you to pick a consistent tone. The most irritating thing about your last two posts is how you go from trying too hard to sound cool with dated slang like cap and brah, but then go middle aged woman with ellipses and "it is what it is."

I need to know if I'm dealing with a former frat bro or a Karen. Thanks. 

[bullet 1,596]

On 9/26/2023 at 11:48 AM, gatormarc said:

I know for other sports, the NCAA can set a minimum number of members in order to get an conference autobid to the postseason tournament but it shouldn't be able to dissolve a conference.

And Sankey said, the CFP is NOT the NCAA.  They will not treat a 2Pac/MWC merger as a "contract conference."  In any event, they have agreed to split the money by the number of P5 members.  So all a 2Pac gets is 2/70ths of the contract conference money.  Big 10 gets 18 shares, SEC and Big 12 get 16 and ACC gets 17 while ND gets 1.

[bullet 1,596]

On 9/26/2023 at 12:08 PM, Laxtonto said:

But they have a multiple-year window to fix membership. So if I'm the Pac12 I do everything I can to make sure they get a cut as long as I could. This falls right back into the potential issue of say the PAc12 reorgs membership with the MWC and then essentially keeps the CFP payout for OSU and WSU and then gives the old MWC teams a bump to be involved. So now you are stuck with a super weak autobid conference that would have to be ceded appropriately due to their autobid status thus making a major flaw in the strength of schedule in the playoff matrix..

So if  they stick around they want to be treated as a P5 on paper and payout and yet would most likely be talent equivalent to a G5 at large

But they do not get autobids without 6 basketball and 5 members for other sports.  So they are effectively dormant.  

[bullet 1,596]

16 hours ago, statsman said:

The flex is- there aren’t going to be any Big XII games on ABC in Texas. There will be SEC games involving UT, OU or TAMU. There won’t be many Big XII games on ESPN; most will be on ESPN2, etc. Texas could have Big XII games on Fox, unless there is something bigger like a Big 10 game involving blue bloods. (Think Fox will put a Big XII game on Fox when Texas plays Michigan?😄). 
 
Maybe they will have Texas-Auburn on ESPN instead of ABC, so they can have the UH-TT game on ABC. Does that seem likely to you?

Wrong.  They have a contract and will be on ABC and Fox.  This sort of thing is spelled out in these contracts.

This is just a fantasy in your head.

Now there will be more ESPN+ games and fewer FS1.

[SimkinsMan 4,385]

13 minutes ago, statsman said:

Sounds like Clemson has about 80% of a plan. All they need is:

1. Either the SEC or B10 to invite them

2. A way out of the GOR. 

It sounds like Clemson has an over-inflated sense of its self worth. I can see what North Carolina brings to the SEC. I see zero value in adding Clemson. 

[bullet 1,596]

2 minutes ago, SimkinsMan said:

It sounds like Clemson has an over-inflated sense of its self worth. I can see what North Carolina brings to the SEC. I see zero value in adding Clemson. 

North Carolina is a commodity in football like the 4 corners.  Not bad, but not P2 material except as filler.

Clemson is one of the regulars at the top of the polls and is top 10 in TV ratings over the last 10 years.  They fill an 80,000 seat stadium.

People don't seem to understand how strong a program Clemson has been since long before Dabo.  They are really the equivalent of an Auburn or Tennessee.

[bullet 1,596]

For those like the guy in the video who missed it, this was decided November last year for 2024 and 2025:

https://theathletic.com/3904973/2022/11/16/cfp-expansion-revenue-rose-bowl/

• "...The Board was able to resolve issues tied to revenue distribution for the 2024 and 2025 seasons, if the CFP is to expand from four to 12 teams before the end of its current contract.
• The source said that the revenue distribution model agreed upon by the Board will make payouts more even per Power 5 school.

What else to know

As it stands now, each Power 5 league earns roughly the same payout each year, regardless of how many teams it sends to the CFP or how far they advance. That has created some friction, especially for schools in leagues that are expanding.

For example, Alabama, a team that has participated in the CFP almost every year of its existence, would be making less per year than Washington State, which has never come close to participating — all because a 16-team SEC will be dividing its revenue by more members than a 10- or 12-team Pac-12 will.

The compromise agreed upon Wednesday reduces disparity and allows the focus to be on per-school payouts instead of per-league payouts that then get sliced different ways based on varying membership size. Payouts to the Group of 5 leagues remain unchanged...."

[Doc Daneeka 6,769]

53 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

Who cares?... 

You want to have a dick measuring contest with Oklahoma State? Be my guest, Brah.

As far as the mean old Texas shit, I mean it is what it is. Texas has wanted to get paid instead of being a good business partner since the beginning of the Big 12. Are we going to try and pretend it was anything else? Why would we try and delude ourselves? Nebraska wanted to get paid, Missouri wanted to get paid, Colorado wanted to get paid, A&M wanted to get paid, USC wanted to get paid, UCLA wanted to get paid.... Texas wanted to get paid, and it is what it is.

I’d say “not you,” but here you are again.

Obviously some people do care. 

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

11 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You're wrong about a lot of stuff and implied stuff in here, but I need you to pick a consistent tone. The most irritating thing about your last two posts is how you go from trying too hard to sound cool with dated slang like cap and brah, but then go middle aged woman with ellipses and "it is what it is."

I need to know if I'm dealing with a former frat bro or a Karen. Thanks. 

I sincerely don't give a shit about your personal approval of my vocabulary choice. It has nothing to do at all with the circumstances surrounding realignment, which I have not been wrong about.

Can you deal with that? Probably not.

[The Dog 44,018]

 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5,792]

4 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

 

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

 

[Liquor and Poker 3,659]

On 9/26/2023 at 9:58 AM, LTtxfan said:

Not sure how accurate...

Oregon State, Washington State Will Expand to the Big 12 Or ESPN Loses $320 Million

Sept 26th  

That's a really weird way to put it "Oregon State, Washington State Will Expand to the Big 12"  It sounds like those two schools are absorbing the others.

[Liquor and Poker 3,659]

6 hours ago, utee94 said:

It'll be interesting to see how much the interest/ratings drop off after Deion's first loss last week.  The Colorado-Oregon game actually beat out Ohio State - Notre Dame on Saturday, which is pretty shocking given the consistently high average TV ratings of those two blue bloods.

 

Surprised at USC-ASU getting those numbers.  Lopsided matchup late.

[bullet 1,596]

32 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

I'm guessing the P4, ND and the MAC and CUSA are part of the majority who favor dropping to 5/7.  MAC and CUSA will not benefit very often and so will be disadvantaged vs. AAC and MWC.  MAC has always kind of gone along with the Big 10.  MWC, AAC and 2Pac are opposed.  Not sure where the Sun Belt would fall.  But Aresco is taking a logical position of asking the P4 to do a deal.

I think Hancock is nuts if he thinks you can change the rules in the middle of the 2024 season.  But he won't be around.

 

[Ghost of LL 15,531]

2 hours ago, statsman said:

Sounds like Clemson has about 80% of a plan. All they need is:

1. Either the SEC or B10 to invite them

2. A way out of the GOR. 

I remain very skeptical of Clemson/UNC/Florida State moving out of the ACC anytime soon.  That requires the SEC or B1G inviting them.  And that requires the networks promising to pay.  

I'm not sure the networks are eager to undermine the ACC, particularly after seeing what has happened to the Pac12.

[Crockett 490]

19 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

This probably has way more to do with comparing viewership of broadcasts on FOX, ABC, and ESPN with broadcasts on FS1. I don't really understand the attempted flex here.

BYU v Kansas 1M was lined up against the Colorado v UO deathstar, Alabama vs top 25 Ole Miss, and top 25 matchup UCLA v Utah. Not a bad turn out under those conditions. 

[Huckleberry 32,845]

3 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

I sincerely don't give a shit about your personal approval of my vocabulary choice. It has nothing to do at all with the circumstances surrounding realignment, which I have not been wrong about.

Can you deal with that? Probably not.

Tell me more about how you don't care. It's fascinating. 

[TKthunder2 4,985]

3 hours ago, bullet said:

Wrong.  They have a contract and will be on ABC and Fox.  This sort of thing is spelled out in these contracts.

This is just a fantasy in your head.

Now there will be more ESPN+ games and fewer FS1.

They do not have any guarantees on their broadcast windows. They and the ACC could theoretically never appear on ABC again. We know this won’t happen as a ranked v ranked matchup will get eyes but unlike the SEC and B1G which have over the air minimum considerations in their contracts.

The Big Ten will have the Big Noon on FOX, the 230 spot of CBS, and a night game on NBC. The SEC will have their 230 spot on ABC and likely a Noon/Night game as well (though that also is not guaranteed).

The Big 12’s biggest asset is that they are the only other major football conference on FOX and with the Big Ten’s exclusive OTA windows that leaves them some virtually guaranteed OTA windows.

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

On 9/26/2023 at 11:45 AM, Laxtonto said:

This is really interesting because I didn't know about the CFP need for 100% agreement for all changes and one of the P12 people is on the board...

It also tracks with the issue I had with where the $$ worked from the CFP. No one could tell me what happens if a confernece goes away or how they would redo a split.  Now this also falls into the question of how the NCAA can dissolve the the Pac12 due to lack of membership.

 

I always said big picture-wise that it was best for all other conferences if the Pac12 died vs retaining zombie status and now this adds that more credence to that idea.

They need 100% until this contract ends, they don't need it in 2026.

[Deej 76,752]

1 hour ago, Crockett said:

BYU v Kansas 1M was lined up against the Colorado v UO deathstar, Alabama vs top 25 Ole Miss, and top 25 matchup UCLA v Utah. Not a bad turn out under those conditions. 

Yeah, if they could have just gotten the "Well, nothing else is on, I guess I'll watch BYU and Kansas" crowd...

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

54 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Tell me more about how you don't care. It's fascinating. 

Is it really fascinating? 

Let's remember who it was that wanted to launch into this discussion with a critique of writing styles, which has nothing at all to do with the topic at hand.

[bullet 1,596]

53 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

They do not have any guarantees on their broadcast windows. They and the ACC could theoretically never appear on ABC again. We know this won’t happen as a ranked v ranked matchup will get eyes but unlike the SEC and B1G which have over the air minimum considerations in their contracts.

The Big Ten will have the Big Noon on FOX, the 230 spot of CBS, and a night game on NBC. The SEC will have their 230 spot on ABC and likely a Noon/Night game as well (though that also is not guaranteed).

The Big 12’s biggest asset is that they are the only other major football conference on FOX and with the Big Ten’s exclusive OTA windows that leaves them some virtually guaranteed OTA windows.

The prior contract had such specifications.  Do you have any evidence it has changed?  And of course Fox only has the one Big 10 window and can't do any Big 10 content on the other two windows.

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

They do not have any guarantees on their broadcast windows. They and the ACC could theoretically never appear on ABC again. We know this won’t happen as a ranked v ranked matchup will get eyes but unlike the SEC and B1G which have over the air minimum considerations in their contracts.

The Big Ten will have the Big Noon on FOX, the 230 spot of CBS, and a night game on NBC. The SEC will have their 230 spot on ABC and likely a Noon/Night game as well (though that also is not guaranteed).

The Big 12’s biggest asset is that they are the only other major football conference on FOX and with the Big Ten’s exclusive OTA windows that leaves them some virtually guaranteed OTA windows.

They do have slot and promotional guarantees.   That's how contracts get priced.

[TKthunder2 4,985]

16 minutes ago, bullet said:

The prior contract had such specifications.  Do you have any evidence it has changed?  And of course Fox only has the one Big 10 window and can't do any Big 10 content on the other two windows.

IIRC the prior contract only specified that Tier One selections would be on either ABC or ESPN. If my memory is accurate, there was no requirement that X number of games be OTA with Disney.

[TKthunder2 4,985]

Here’s the best breakdown I could find. No requirements for OTA on ABC.

https://www.mattsarzsports.com/Contract/GameList/Big12/2023

Quote

Big 12 Broadcast Schedule

NOTE: This list includes telecasts that fall under the TV contracts for the conference. Any road non-conference games fall under the home team's telecast rights.

The Big 12 have a pair of contracts with ESPN and FOX Sports. Both contracts expire after the 2024-25 athletic year with a six year extension agreed to but not announced by the conference through the 2030-31 athletic year.

For the 2023 and 2024 football seasons, the ESPN deal allows for 32 games per year and games can air on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN+ and Longhorn Network (see note below re: LHN), though I assume that there will be an incremental increase for ESPN due to the increase in inventory with 14 members. FOX's deal is for up to 40 games per year to place games on FOX broadcast network and various FOX Sports pay TV platforms, though this may also be adjusted for the 2023 and 2024 seasons. A minimum of six of FSMG's games must appear on FOX with another six on FS1. Overall, a minimum of 25 games must air on ABC, ESPN, FOX and FS1. Starting in 2017, the conference reactivated their championship game. ESPN has the rights to the conference championship game to air on ABC or ESPN.

Big 12 selection order for each week will be determined via a draft of weeks before the season. In even numbered years, FOX will retain the top choice of weeks and in odd numbered years, ESPN wiil have it.

Individual institutions retain the rights to at least one game not aired by ESPN or FOX Sports, allowing those institutions to explore other avenues to televising those games. All schools except for Texas will air their institutionally held games on ESPN+. Starting with the 2025 season, all institutional rights will be removed and part of the national TV packages.

Starting with the 2025 season, ESPN will be the primary rightsholder. They will have priority for choosing the top four selections for the entire season and then roughly alternate with FOX Sports through the top 20 selections.

Regarding Longhorn Network, one Texas game per year airing on the network counts as an institutional game, like all other Big 12 schools. Any subsequent Texas games airing on Longhorn Network will count towards the ESPN contract.

I did see in a comments section while looking around that ESPN’s new “A” package is required to be on ABC. That’s only 4 games a year. Again, haven’t been able to confirm that from a real source though.

[The Dog 44,018]

 

[Hurtlocker 2,212]

2 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Here’s the best breakdown I could find. No requirements for OTA on ABC.

https://www.mattsarzsports.com/Contract/GameList/Big12/2023

I did see in a comments section while looking around that ESPN’s new “A” package is required to be on ABC. That’s only 4 games a year. Again, haven’t been able to confirm that from a real source though.

No no, the A package is the Mouse, the B package is Fox.  

In the A package they get:

• The top 4 overall picks
• 6 of the top 8
• 8 of the top 12 and
• 12 of the top 20 picks
• They also get the basketball and football CCGs

Fox, with the B package, gets to pick in the gaps of the above, and I'm guessing it goes 1 to 1 after 20.    However, Fox gets 26 games for Fox and FS1, which is basically 2 per week.   If you figure ESPN's is similar, but with better content, you should see roughly four games a week on ABC, Fox, FS1 and an ESPN channel.   The rest, that aren't on Thursday or Friday, will likely fall to ESPN+, but so far this year they have had more of the games that would stream land on something like the U.    To get to these kinds of payouts they need at least two T1 a week.

It also is likely to change.    With 12 teams you have 54 conference games a year.   With 16 you have 72.    They didn't pay the four new teams $120m a year for all that content to go on streaming.   My guess is they get an ABC/ESPN/FOX on Saturday, and some of these games fall to ESPN late night or on Friday.

[PittsburghTiger 6,175]

EDIT: Oops, sorry, didn’t see yesterday’s same post.

Edited September 28, 2023 by PittsburghTiger

[locodos 5,387]

13 hours ago, The Dog said: