Realignment talk not going away

[billfromlaketravis 11364]

4 minutes ago, utee94 said:

If the B12 makes the same from the TV deals after TX and OU leave, as before, then there are no damages, and TX and OU would pay nothing, with respect to the GOR contract.  They'd still be on the hook for some portion of the exit penalties.

And if The Alliance is making moves to freeze out the SEC, then the B12 will become a pretty important scheduling partner for the SEC.

The Alliance can only freeze out the SEC if individual members row in the same direction. USC announced to a home and home series with LSU hours after The Alliance press conference. 

 

[utee94 15746]

4 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

The Alliance can only freeze out the SEC if individual members row in the same direction. USC announced to a home and home series with LSU hours after The Alliance press conference. 

 

Oh yeah, for sure. But even 50% compliance will leave the SEC searching harder for OOC games to schedule, and the B12 could make significant inroads right there. 

As you say, USC already "broke ranks" to schedule LSU.  And I'd be surprised if Clemson or GaTech or FSU abandon their annual games against SEC teams.

Honestly, I think if any conference is likely to adhere in lock-step, it's the B1G.  They're used to following orders from on high.  Shoot, they allowed freaking Rutgers into their conference, just because their Emperor told them to.

 

 

[billfromlaketravis 11364]

12 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Oh yeah, for sure. But even 50% compliance will leave the SEC searching harder for OOC games to schedule, and the B12 could make significant inroads right there. 

As you say, USC already "broke ranks" to schedule LSU.  And I'd be surprised if Clemson or GaTech or FSU abandon their annual games against SEC teams.

Honestly, I think if any conference is likely to adhere in lock-step, it's the B1G.  They're used to following orders from on high.  Shoot, they allowed freaking Rutgers into their conference, just because their Emperor told them to.

 

 

Agreed. The jury is still out on Warren, but the Big Ten is a very powerful league office. Warren made it a point though to say that the no current scheduling agreements will be broken. Texas will play Michigan in 2024 and 2027, Ohio State in 2025 and 2026. 

Warren also said The Alliance won't take effect until 2034. A lot can and probably will happen in 13 years. 

As pointed out here and elsewhere, The Alliance is a press conference to announce future games and a voting bloc to stop the SEC from fast tracking CFB Expansion. 

[DFW Horn 6118]

1 hour ago, Burt Macklin said:

Think about it, why would 4 schools who currently make $9 mil per year off Tier 1 rights, suddenly increase the Irate 8 from about $10mm per year (after UT and OU leave) up to $22mm per year like that article claims? 

Speaking of which, where did you get the $10mm per year figure for the Irate 8's Tier 1 rights sans UT and OU?

[camel at sea 589]

8 hours ago, kopp0e said:

Do you ever see a day where Buffalo (State University of New York) is seriously looked over for a shot at adding the state of New York to B1G..?

Hypothetically it's possible.   They're an academic and geographic fit.  They're a long way from fitting athletically.  If they were to win big for the next 15 years (multiple AAC championships, good TV numbers, a few expanded CFP trips), and if all of that success became P5 caliber facilities, then maybe they could partner with someone else to get in, in the way that Rutgers came in with Maryland.  

That said, the Rutgers add is going poorly.   I saw an article this week suggesting that Rutgers might have to jump ship out of the Big Ten due to not being able to afford the increased expenses of Big Ten membership.  I don't think the B1G will be in any hurry to repeat anything that resembles the Rutgers experiment.  

['stache 21778]

37 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

The Alliance can only freeze out the SEC if individual members row in the same direction. USC announced to a home and home series with LSU hours after The Alliance press conference. 

 

I don't think the "Alliance" was about "don't schedule SEC." I think it was about "let's not raid each other for now" and to not agree to a 12 team playoff just yet to avoid it being 8 SEC schools plus a few others.

[Texasrocks 2125]

18 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Oh yeah, for sure. But even 50% compliance will leave the SEC searching harder for OOC games to schedule, and the B12 could make significant inroads right there. 

As you say, USC already "broke ranks" to schedule LSU.  And I'd be surprised if Clemson or GaTech or FSU abandon their annual games against SEC teams.

Honestly, I think if any conference is likely to adhere in lock-step, it's the B1G.  They're used to following orders from on high.  Shoot, they allowed freaking Rutgers into their conference, just because their Emperor told them to.

 

 

It doesn't really make sense to freeze out the SEC - marquee games draw huge numbers. A USC vs LSU home-and-home is good for USC and the Pac 12 overall. I'm sure Clemson/GA drew huge numbers. Where the alliance needs to stay aligned is in designing the playoff and preventing the SEC from stacking the deck in its favor. From a scheduling perspective, it would make more sense for the alliance to avoid the lower-tier teams. Play Nebraska or Iowa instead of Nevada or UNLV. In other words, use the alliance to raise the floor rather than freeze out the SEC and lower the ceiling.

[DFW Horn 6118]

2 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

That said, the Rutgers add is going poorly.   I saw an article this week suggesting that Rutgers might have to jump ship out of the Big Ten due to not being able to afford the increased expenses of Big Ten membership.  I don't think the B1G will be in any hurry to repeat anything that resembles the Rutgers experiment.  

But, they're THE State University of New Jersey!

[Pato del Muerto 52360]

50 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

The Alliance can only freeze out the SEC if individual members row in the same direction. USC announced to a home and home series with LSU hours after The Alliance press conference. 

 

Or the sunbelt. Or the swac. Or the southern. 

[Huckleberry 32710]

15 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I don't think the "Alliance" was about "don't schedule SEC." I think it was about "let's not raid each other for now" and to not agree to a 12 team playoff just yet to avoid it being 8 SEC schools plus a few others.

What a ridiculous thing to say. The proposal was the 6 highest ranked conference champions. 

So 7 SEC teams. 

[bullet 1596]

4 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

Wow, that's better than I thought the revamped Big 12 would do. Only a $4 MM pay cut annually? The Irate 8 should be very happy with this result. They can potentially make up the difference with an expanded CFB Playoff.

Well if the contract would be $40-$50 million with UT and OU, a 50% haircut gets you down to $20-$25.  The payout now is $28 per Bowlsby (contract averaged $20, but it escalated over the 13 years).

[bullet 1596]

And as I mentioned, 10 years ago, the Big East with TCU, WVU, Cincinnati and 6 others (Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, UConn, Louisville and USF) was worth about $15 million per football school.  With inflation, its easy to see TCU, WVU, Cincinnati along with Oklahoma St., Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, UCF, Kansas St., Kansas, BYU and Iowa St. being worth $22 million.

[thunderlounge 7761]

2 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

The Mouse must have given them the wink. 

Let Texas/OU leave amicably, absorb the best of the AAC/expand to 16, and ESPN will make the TV money work after Fox is out of the picture. 

I bet it was a gentleman’s agreement. 
 

 

2 hours ago, Hiphopopotamos said:

OU is going to have to Rent-A-Center their Big12 exit.

Funny, but OU has already said they have the whole thing if needed. Was within a few days, or a week or so, from the cat coming out of the bag. Was even mentioned that the money saved from somewhere (LHN into SEC-West? Or some shit) for ESPN would cover both if need be, and still save the mouse money.

Either way, fuck it. We’re out. 

[Gaffords 755]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

Curious if the SEC-Big 12 Sugar Bowl agreement lasts past 2025 (as far as the current contract goes).  

I'm pretty sure they will not have a major bowl tie in after this cycle....   Oh no, ESPN is trying to get us to merge with the AAC...  Nope, can't do that, we would lose too much money! So instead, let's invite half AAC to join us....  

I'm sure the money will end up being about half that 24 mill number...  And no network.  ESPN probably would have done a network with majority of the Ir8 in the AAC.  Keep going the way they are and FOX might get the entire Ir8 package in 2025 for the bargain price of 5 mill per school as the only real bidder interested.   ESPN might send them to the desert to wonder for a few years with only Mana from Fox to eat.

['stache 21778]

10 minutes ago, Gaffords said:

I'm pretty sure they will not have a major bowl tie in after this cycle....   Oh no, ESPN is trying to get us to merge with the AAC...  Nope, can't do that, we would lose too much money! So instead, let's invite half AAC to join us....  

I'm sure the money will end up being about half that 24 mill number...  And no network.  ESPN probably would have done a network with majority of the Ir8 in the AAC.  Keep going the way they are and FOX might get the entire Ir8 package in 2025 for the bargain price of 5 mill per school as the only real bidder interested.   ESPN might send them to the desert to wonder for a few years with only Mana from Fox to eat.

[camel at sea 589]

3 hours ago, Js1 said:

Curious if the SEC-Big 12 Sugar Bowl agreement lasts past 2025 (as far as the current contract goes).  

If the CFP expands, nobody is going to have a bowl tie-in.  The major bowls will be part of the playoff and won't have a say in who plays year to year.  Alternatively, if the bowls end up being pushed out of the playoff process, the tie-ins will be worth a lot less.  SEC #5 vs. Big 12 #3 is not worth a huge annual check.

That said, I'd guess that the Big 12 v4 ends up getting a big slice of the expanded CFP pie (more than enough to offset not having the Sugar Bowl tie-in.)  

  

[Jasper_Jester 356]

First rule of Alliance is you don't talk about the "Alliance". Second rule is you have to do whatever the Big 10 decides. Third rule is Big XII schools stop asking to join the other conferences in the "Alliance." Fourth rule is have fun in the "Alliance"

[Texasrocks 2125]

56 minutes ago, bullet said:

And as I mentioned, 10 years ago, the Big East with TCU, WVU, Cincinnati and 6 others (Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, UConn, Louisville and USF) was worth about $15 million per football school.  With inflation, its easy to see TCU, WVU, Cincinnati along with Oklahoma St., Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, UCF, Kansas St., Kansas, BYU and Iowa St. being worth $22 million.

I know nothing about TV contracts, but I could see ESPN+ being more interested in the Houstons, Baylors, etc. of the world than it used to be. Lots of folks weren't willing to sign up for LHN for one football game a year plus non-revenue sports. That would change considerably if LHN was carrying most Texas games.

ESPN is getting ESPN+ up and running and needs content to attract subscribers. A typical UH football game isn't going to move the needle unless it's against Texas, LSU, or other big name programs. But with ESPN+, ESPN gets $6 a month per subscriber or $72 a year. That's $7.2 million for every 100,000 subscriptions on top of the ad revenue. ESPN doesn't need UH games to draw 4 million viewers, it needs UH's season to attract 200,000 subscribers.  Carrying most of UH's home games on ESPN+ would probably do that. Package football and basketball and these second/third tier schools could actually be pretty attractive. 

[kopp0e 1135]

The projected cost of BYU olympic sports in WCC move to XII:

 

[DFW Horn 6118]

13 minutes ago, kopp0e said:

The projected cost of BYU olympic sports in WCC move to XII: $1MM

I like WCC hoops, but it won't hold a candle to the new Big 12 with KU, BU, Tech, OSU, UH, UC, et al. That's a damn good basketball league.

[TKthunder2 4981]

https://www.anchorofgold.com/2021/9/9/22664634/the-alliance-is-really-about-killing-off-the-big-12

[TKthunder2 4981]

Sugar Bowl runs through 2027

https://www.al.com/sports/2012/11/sugar_bowl_is_awarded_sec_vs_b.html

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- The new Champions Bowl between the SEC and Big 12 will be played in New Orleans and adopt the Sugar Bowl as the game's name.

The conferences announced today New Orleans won the rights to the lucrative bowl for 12 years beginning Jan. 1, 2015. For months, the SEC's strong preference was to stage the game at the Sugar Bowl given the SEC's long history with the game.

[pops 6975]

With the ruling from the 5th circuit today re tamu copyright infringement why can't Texas tell the big 12 to fuck off and leave and when anyone tries to sue they claim sovereign immunity?   

I'll hang up and listen. 

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

46 minutes ago, pops said:

With the ruling from the 5th circuit today re tamu copyright infringement why can't Texas tell the big 12 to fuck off and leave and when anyone tries to sue they claim sovereign immunity?   

I'll hang up and listen. 

Sovereign immunity would only apply to payment of damages; the GOR is about getting paid, so without playing nice, Texas theoretically could end up not receiving Tier 1 money.

Of course, no one knows how enforcement of the GOR would work if Texas' media appearances were simply in a different conference's bucket. That's the mildly interesting diversion to the story. I expect it will be made irrelevant. Texas will pay something, and the issue will go away.

[mdmost 42873]

Unintended consequences of our move to the SEC: more terrible football

 

[Texas Wahoo 3383]

1 hour ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Sovereign immunity would only apply to payment of damages; the GOR is about getting paid, so without playing nice, Texas theoretically could end up not receiving Tier 1 money.

Of course, no one knows how enforcement of the GOR would work if Texas' media appearances were simply in a different conference's bucket. That's the mildly interesting diversion to the story. I expect it will be made irrelevant. Texas will pay something, and the issue will go away.

What?  The Big 12 (or their media partners) would still have to sue Texas and try to obtain specific performance.  It's not like the rights are sitting in the Big 12 offices and Texas would have to sue to get them back.

[TKthunder2 4981]

39 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

What?  The Big 12 (or their media partners) would still have to sue Texas and try to obtain specific performance.  It's not like the rights are sitting in the Big 12 offices and Texas would have to sue to get them back.

Yep, I’m not sure what kind of hoops the Big12 would have to jump through to prove their claim on our rights, I don’t think they could sue ESPN who is just distributing the SEC’s rights as is their right, nor they could sue the SEC who would claim the Texas signed over their TV rights to the conference, so I assume it would all come back to Texas for giving its rights out twice…and that brings us back to sovereign immunity.

[TKthunder2 4981]

1 hour ago, mdmost said:

Unintended consequences of our move to the SEC: more terrible football

 

Rumor is that the Sun Belt is trying to get Southern Miss and North Texas back, if the American raids CUSA for Rice and UAB then the Sun Belt may end up being the better football conference and CUSA would just have better markets but that matters less in the age of streaming.  The below is from 247 Arkansas State site https://247sports.com/college/arkansas-state/Article/CUSA-v-Sun-Belt-TV-deals-116260412/

”The Sun Belt payment is rumored to be in the range of $475,000 to $500,000 per year and production standards to produce the 51 games will be at ESPN standards. CUSA's payment is rumored to be in the $400,000 to $500,000 range and will not include the cost of producing 60 games for CUSA TV with mixed production values. Financially looks like a wash.”

So if I the money is the same and the Sun Belt has Coastal Carolina winning a CWS and two teams ending the 2020 season ranked not including App State and you’re SoMiss or UNT which conference would you choose?

Texas St, Louisiana, UL-Monroe, Arkansas St, Troy, Southern Alabama, Georgia St, Georgia Southern, Coastal Carolina, Appalachian St

vs

UTEP, UTSA, LA Tech, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky, Marshall, Old Dominion, Charlotte, FAU, FIU

CUSA is more spread out from El Paso to Kentucky/WV/Virginia, down to the Miami metro while the Sunbelt has a fairly small footprint (at least small for today’s FBS conferences) which is better on the budget for their athletic departments.

Southern Miss would have LA Tech and MTSU as their closest schools in CUSA versus Southern Alabama, Troy, Louisiana, and UL-Monroe in the SBC.  I see the appeal for them, but not so much UNT who pretty much has to fly to the majority of their games either way but they might see this as a better move for fb.  The Sun Belt trying for these two makes sense as top targets since CUSA will be so Eastern based soon.  UTEP is a travel headache and the SBC already has TX St up the road from UTSA, and LA Tech has refused to join ULL/ULM in the Sun Belt for years opting for the old WAC and its outrageous travel cost over taking a hit to their pride.

There have been rumors of a CUSA/SunBelt voluntary realignment (ending with a mostly Eastern time zone conference in one and a mostly Central time zone conference in the other) but that seems to come from CUSA having buyer’s remorse on their unwieldy footprint not from the Sun Belt who is clearly trending up.

['stache 21778]

9 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

What?  The Big 12 (or their media partners) would still have to sue Texas and try to obtain specific performance.  It's not like the rights are sitting in the Big 12 offices and Texas would have to sue to get them back.

TV money goes to the conference and then gets distributed. I think the contracts say that the distributions are withheld. Then Texas has to sue to get that money and waives immunity for direct counterclaims. The real issue is for ESPN. They could theoretically double pay both your old league and new league but in reality it will just get negotiated and resolved for you to leave early. Why are so many of you so obsessed with avoiding the payment? You signed the contract, Espn will end up paying it, it’ll get negotiated down some. That’s how most of these contract situations work.

[NoRagrets 1125]

42 minutes ago, 'stache said:

TV money goes to the conference and then gets distributed. I think the contracts say that the distributions are withheld. Then Texas has to sue to get that money and waives immunity for direct counterclaims. The real issue is for ESPN. They could theoretically double pay both your old league and new league but in reality it will just get negotiated and resolved for you to leave early. Why are so many of you so obsessed with avoiding the payment? You signed the contract, Espn will end up paying it, it’ll get negotiated down some. That’s how most of these contract situations work.

I think we view the payment as an obstacle of GTFO.

Staying until 2025 is like breaking up with your girlfriend because you’ve found someone way hotter, but you’re going to keep living with the old gal until your lease is up on the apartment and therefore can’t bang said new girl.

[Huckleberry 32710]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

TV money goes to the conference and then gets distributed. I think the contracts say that the distributions are withheld. Then Texas has to sue to get that money and waives immunity for direct counterclaims. The real issue is for ESPN. They could theoretically double pay both your old league and new league but in reality it will just get negotiated and resolved for you to leave early. Why are so many of you so obsessed with avoiding the payment? You signed the contract, Espn will end up paying it, it’ll get negotiated down some. That’s how most of these contract situations work.

Catch me up on this theory. If Texas and OU say see ya we're starting SEC play in 2022 and then do so, what TV distribution money is the Big 12 withholding? One season (2021)? Okey dokey, sounds great, see ya later.

[Hornbeliever 708]

Who benefits (on the field) in the New 12 if we get them on our side to let us leave early?  OSU and Tech, right?  Wouldn't they want 3 extra years of easier schedules to win conference championships and maybe make playoffs? 

I'm sure it's all dollars and cents though and not field related.

['stache 21778]

38 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Catch me up on this theory. If Texas and OU say see ya we're starting SEC play in 2022 and then do so, what TV distribution money is the Big 12 withholding? One season (2021)? Okey dokey, sounds great, see ya later.

The Big XII owns your media rights through 2025, so you cannot join the SEC media package, and if you aren't playing Big XII games, you don't get paid from that media package either. It effectively means you cannot join the SEC before 2025 unless you buy out of the Big XII grant of rights. I suppose in theory you could play SEC games, but you wouldn't be on TV, and neither you nor the SEC get paid anything. The web of rights and obligations are meant to make it impractical, if not impossible, for you to leave early without buying out of the grant of rights. I think we all agree that those negotiations are ongoing and the company line is "we'll join in 2025" until the financial buyouts are negotiated and agreed upon.

Edited September 10, 2021 by 'stache

[Viper 12034]

1 hour ago, NoRagrets said:

I think we view the payment as an obstacle of GTFO.

Staying until 2025 is like breaking up with your girlfriend because you’ve found someone way hotter, but you’re going to keep living with the old gal until your lease is up on the apartment and therefore can’t bang said new girl.

to take this analogy to its natural conclusion, could we work out some way to play in both conferences at the same time?

Edited September 10, 2021 by Viper

[utee94 15746]

39 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Catch me up on this theory. If Texas and OU say see ya we're starting SEC play in 2022 and then do so, what TV distribution money is the Big 12 withholding? One season (2021)? Okey dokey, sounds great, see ya later.

Yes, B12 can withhold 2021-22. One year's worth.  That's it.

Beyond that, if Texas wanted to, then UT could give the finger to the B12 and tell them to try and sue us for the money.  Despite what 'stache is saying, Texas games in 2022 would still be broadcast using the SEC's media contracts, ESPN would still pay the SEC for Texas' additional portion, and the SEC would still distribute that money to Texas. Texas would be the party in breach, and the B12 would have to sue Texas, in order to get that SEC-distributed money from Texas.

In reality, it won't come to that, it will be settled out of court.  Most likely, for around the amount of money that the B12 can withhold from us.

 

 

[Huckleberry 32710]

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The Big XII owns your media rights through 2025, so you cannot join the SEC media package, and if you aren't playing Big XII games, you don't get paid from that media package either. It effectively means you cannot join the SEC before 2025 unless you buy out of the Big XII grant of rights. I suppose in theory you could play SEC games, but you wouldn't be on TV, and neither you nor the SEC get paid anything. The web of rights and obligations are meant to make it impractical, if not impossible, for you to leave early without buying out of the grant of rights. I think we all agree that those negotiations are ongoing and the company line is "we'll join in 2025" until the financial buyouts are negotiated and agreed upon.

The problem is that you're viewing things from the possession is 9/10 perspective only in the Big 12's favor. That makes sense that the Big 12 doesn't distribute the current year's TV revenues.

But how does that work for 2022 and beyond? Texas and OU would play games and what would stop them from making money for the broadcasts? Bowlsby tweeting "THEY CAN'T DO THAT!!!"?

The SEC isn't going to pay Texas and OU care of the Big 12 office. 

[BurntOrange&White 39707]

How is that ESPN/Fox contract payments to Big 12? I just saw it's a joint deal for t1...but not sure who pays more?

['stache 21778]

3 minutes ago, utee94 said:

Yes, B12 can withhold 2021-22. One year's worth.  That's it.

Beyond that, if Texas wanted to, then UT could give the finger to the B12 and tell them to try and sue us for the money.  Despite what 'stache is saying, Texas games in 2022 would still be broadcast using the SEC's media contracts, ESPN would still pay the SEC for Texas' additional portion, and the SEC would still distribute that money to Texas. Texas would be the party in breach, and the B12 would have to sue Texas, in order to get that SEC-distributed money from Texas.

In reality, it won't come to that, it will be settled out of court.  Most likely, for around the amount of money that the B12 can withhold from us.

 

 

How does the SEC broadcast Texas games if someone else owns the media rights? The network that broadcasts the games without owning the rights is the one who would be sued. Media rights are a big deal for networks, they aren't going to just do it to make you happy.

Edited September 10, 2021 by 'stache

['stache 21778]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

The problem is that you're viewing things from the possession is 9/10 perspective only in the Big 12's favor. That makes sense that the Big 12 doesn't distribute the current year's TV revenues.

But how does that work for 2022 and beyond? Texas and OU would play games and what would stop them from making money for the broadcasts? Bowlsby tweeting "THEY CAN'T DO THAT!!!"?

The SEC isn't going to pay Texas and OU care of the Big 12 office. 

See above. If you're not playing Big XII games, you can't be broadcast. So yeah, you can play games and make money from attendance, etc., but you can't be on TV.

[Viper 12034]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

How does the SEC broadcast Texas games if someone else owns the media rights? The network that broadcasts the games without owning the rights is the one in breach and who would be sued. Media rights are a big deal for networks, they aren't going to just do it to make you happy.

who would have standing to sue? 

Though really this is all moot. I'm sure it's all negotiated away in the next few months.

Edited September 10, 2021 by Viper

['stache 21778]

2 minutes ago, Viper said:

who would have standing to sue? 

The Big XII conference. It's is a legal entity that can sue and be sued. If you and OU are being televised outside of the Big XII's media package, the network that broadcasts it is infringing on all sorts of IP laws. Again, why are some of you so obsessed with screwing people over? Just negotiate a buyout, like what happens every day in business.

Edited September 10, 2021 by 'stache

[Huckleberry 32710]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

How does the SEC broadcast Texas games if someone else owns the media rights? The network that broadcasts the games without owning the rights is the one in breach and who would be sued. Media rights are a big deal for networks, they aren't going to just do it to make you happy.

This is completely wrong. The two parties to the GOR are Texas and the Big 12. Neither ESPN nor the SEC are parties and therefore can't possibly be in breach. 

['stache 21778]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

This is completely wrong. The two parties to the GOR are Texas and the Big 12. Neither ESPN nor the SEC are parties and therefore can't possibly be in breach. 

The grant of rights pools the media rights, and then contracts with the networks. The networks ultimately own the media rights by contract with the Big XII conference. Anyone who broadcasts games without media rights are exposed to all sorts of legal trouble.

Edited September 10, 2021 by 'stache

[utee94 15746]

Just now, Huckleberry said:

The problem is that you're viewing things from the possession is 9/10 perspective only in the Big 12's favor. That makes sense that the Big 12 doesn't distribute the current year's TV revenues.

But how does that work for 2022 and beyond? Texas and OU would play games and what would stop them from making money for the broadcasts? Bowlsby tweeting "THEY CAN'T DO THAT!!!"?

The SEC isn't going to pay Texas and OU care of the Big 12 office. 

This is correct.  The courts aren't going to enforce "specific performance" which would mean, forcing Texas games to still be broadcast through the B12 media contracts with ESPN and Fox, with all moneys going to the B12.  That's not going to happen because that's not how any of this works.

Instead, the courts will look for a remedy that involves paying actual damages, because those can actually be calculated.  Actual damages, are whatever the difference is between what the B12 actually gets paid including Texas and OU, and whatever they would get paid without Texas and OU, for the duration of the remainder of the GOR.  If the B12's media partners do not decrease the payouts at all-- as has happened every other time schools have left conferences-- then there are no actual damages, and therefore no buyout to be paid with respect to the GOR contract.

I think ESPN will go along with that, first because they always have before, and second because they stand to gain more by having Texas and OU in the SEC, than they will lose just continuing to pay out to the B12 at the current rate.

So the real question is, what will Fox do?  In the past they, too, have not decreased their payouts despite conference members leaving and/or being replaced with lesser-valued media properties.  If they DID decide to decrease the payment, it would be the first time, and it would show that Texas and OU are SIGNIFCANTLY more valuabe properties than are Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, and Texas A&M.  At that point, the starting point for negotiations would be the delta between what Fox paid including Texas and OU, and what Fox decreased the annual payments to, over the life of the GOR contract (thru 2025).

[utee94 15746]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

How does the SEC broadcast Texas games if someone else owns the media rights? The network that broadcasts the games without owning the rights is the one who would be sued. Media rights are a big deal for networks, they aren't going to just do it to make you happy.

It's very straightforward-- Texas sells its media rights to the SEC. Then it's up to the B12 to sue for breach.

I understand WHY you want to view things the way you do, you're thinking of things punitively from the point of view of an angry fan, but that's not how any of this works.  Only actual damages can be realized.

Regardless, it doesn't matter.  If there are any actual damages-- in other words if Fox decreases the payout-- then the applicable amounts for the GOR release will be negotiated. 

['stache 21778]

2 minutes ago, utee94 said:

This is correct.  The courts aren't going to enforce "specific performance" which would mean, forcing Texas games to still be broadcast through the B12 media contracts with ESPN and Fox, with all moneys going to the B12.  That's not going to happen because that's not how any of this works.

Instead, the courts will look for a remedy that involves paying actual damages, because those can actually be calculated.  Actual damages, are whatever the difference is between what the B12 actually gets paid including Texas and OU, and whatever they would get paid without Texas and OU, for the duration of the remainder of the GOR.  If the B12's media partners do not decrease the payouts at all-- as has happened every other time schools have left conferences-- then there are no actual damages, and therefore no buyout to be paid with respect to the GOR contract.

I think ESPN will go along with that, first because they always have before, and second because they stand to gain more by having Texas and OU in the SEC, than they will lose just continuing to pay out to the B12 at the current rate.

So the real question is, what will Fox do?  In the past they, too, have not decreased their payouts despite conference members leaving and/or being replaced with lesser-valued media properties.  If they DID decide to decrease the payment, it would be the first time, and it would show that Texas and OU are SIGNIFCANTLY more valuabe properties than are Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, and Texas A&M.  At that point, the starting point for negotiations would be the delta between what Fox paid including Texas and OU, and what Fox decreased the annual payments to, over the life of the GOR contract (thru 2025).

If that happens, it will all be by agreement, and the courts are never involved. Again, the way I've read things, its not set up to ever need to go to court, and its never meant to have games played in one conference with payments to another. Thats not practical or realistic at all. It's designed to reach agreement on exactly the terms you just noted. Determine what the damages would be in a theoretical lawsuit, and that's the amount you pay to buy your rights back. Probably negotiated down as part of an agreement. You can't be broadcast outside the Big XII package until you get those rights back. 

['stache 21778]

6 minutes ago, utee94 said:

It's very straightforward-- Texas sells its media rights to the SEC. Then it's up to the B12 to sue for breach.

I understand WHY you want to view things the way you do, you're thinking of things punitively from the point of view of an angry fan, but that's not how any of this works.  Only actual damages can be realized.

Regardless, it doesn't matter.  If there are any actual damages-- in other words if Fox decreases the payout-- then the applicable amounts for the GOR release will be negotiated. 

Jesus Christ, that's not how it works, and it has nothing to do with being an "angry fan." These are business contracts, and there's nothing punitive about enforcing contract rights. Texas cannot sell its media rights to the SEC until 2025. They don't own them, and the SEC can't buy them. The SEC's media partners can't utilize rights that someone else owns. This isn't a business where people just breach media contracts willy-nilly. The breach would be committed by the network that broadcasts a game without the media rights, and the plaintiff would be the Big XII Conference which owns those rights. The reality is that there will be negotiations for you to buy out of the Big XII grant of rights, then you can sell them to the SEC, who will then sell them to the SEC's media partners. That's how this whole thing is set up and it makes sense from a business perspective. 

Edited September 10, 2021 by 'stache

[Huckleberry 32710]

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The grant of rights pools the media rights, and then contracts with the networks. The networks ultimately own the media rights by contract with the Big XII conference. Anyone who broadcasts games without media rights are exposed to all sorts of legal trouble.

No, the grant of rights is a completely separate contract from the network deal. The GOR allows the conference to negotiate the network deal on behalf of the schools but it's not the same contract. 

An employee has a 13 year employment contract. The contact allows the employer to negotiate health insurance on the employee's behalf. You're basically arguing that when the employee breaches the employment contract and quits early that the employer still gets to negotiate his health insurance. And that any insurance company that covers the employee is in breach of his contract with his employer. 

That's exactly how nonsensical you're being about the GOR.

[mdmost 42873]

Yeah, we've all been waiting for this...

 

[utee94 15746]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If that happens, it will all be by agreement, and the courts are never involved. Again, the way I've read things, its not set up to ever need to go to court, and its never meant to have games played in one conference with payments to another. Thats not practical or realistic at all. It's designed to reach agreement on exactly the terms you just noted. Determine what the damages would be in a theoretical lawsuit, and that's the amount you pay to buy your rights back. Probably negotiated down as part of an agreement. You can't be broadcast outside the Big XII package until you get those rights back. 

You're right, up until this statement.

Texas absolutely could say eff you to the B12, play in the SEC, have its games broadcast through the SEC contracts, and get paid by the SEC.  At that point, the B12 would have to sue Texas for breach.  Texas shouldn't be able to sell its rights to the SEC, but the only way to prevent it, would be to sue, and request the courts ensure specific performance. They're just not going to do that.  It's not going to happen.

As we keep agreeing though, it's never going to get to that point.  It'll be settled long before then.  And if the B12 media partners agree to keep the payments the same-- as they have every other time this has happened-- then there will be no actual damages, and Texas and OU will owe nothing to the B12 with respect to the GOR agreement.