COLUMN: Pollard candid on Big 12 expansion

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

Cloneman89

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2014
485
350
63
CW - I read this and saw between the lines that the B12 is pulling a power play on the networks and trying to get an extended contract with GoR and not add anyone at all. The conference has thrown out all these fake support references for Houston and BYU along with musings about new markets (Cincy/Memphis)! Ha - is all BS as the networks do not want these low level intramural teams. If they were such good cnadidates why are they still outside looking in? UConn is a joke - even the ACC laughed at them. If we want geography then add NMU - might as well grab a partner for TTU too! I fell for this for awhile but as it drags along and the networks remain aloof I see UT/OU meeting saying we tried and bolting in 2024. Hanging around and waiting for the PAC12 to implode is a fool's game as B12 is always last to innovate. They will go to Twitter or Apple while we figure out the TV networks are done and gone. Old men in suits will doom this conference as Texas schools are blind to their diminishing relevance in TV market!
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Sigmapolis

SpokaneCY

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
13,294
8,484
113
Spokane, WA
For those who didn't listen to the podcast, some thoughts/analysis of Big 12 expansion from Jamie Pollard.

http://cyclonefanatic.com/2016/07/williams-pollard-candid-on-big-12-expansion/

Listening to JP and reading all the other articles leads me to believe the additional teams (2 or 4) have already been selected and will be announced shortly. I don't think there there is any grand scheme to manipulate TV networks, impact negotiations or anything... I don't think there is a wizard behind the scenes pulling the levers. JP was very clear that ISU is ONLY along for the ride and we have zero clout (obvious statement). He says he doesn't know but will vote with all the other universities.

I think the conference has to evolve and grow or die on the vine as the southern schools can go anywhere and make lots and lots of money. Money drive this thing but we could be facing becoming a craft brewery in a big brewery land.

And Poland?
 
  • Like
Reactions: usedcarguy

cykadelic2

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2006
3,116
1,123
113
JP was very clear that ISU is ONLY along for the ride and we have zero clout (obvious statement). He says he doesn't know but will vote with all the other universities.

Zero clout? ISU/KSU and one other school can block any expansion without an extended GOR.
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
21,896
17,567
113
Exactly the direction that ISU needs. We do not need more teams, nor would we really be penalized by adding more teams. ISU needs a stable conference first and foremost. I'm glad that Pollard's focus is on the GOR and will vote based on what will get that extended.
 

Rogue52

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Oct 20, 2006
8,847
3,383
113
Cedar Rapids, IA
This is absolutely the correct stance. If the other 10 members won't vote to extend the GoR, then any expansion candidate should be a NO vote and see where we stand in 6 years. We can always decide to join the best of the rest if we need to. We don't need to bring them in now UNLESS they bring stability.
 

psychlone99

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2006
1,940
1,274
113
psychlone99.wordpress.com
CW - I read this and saw between the lines that the B12 is pulling a power play on the networks and trying to get an extended contract with GoR and not add anyone at all. The conference has thrown out all these fake support references for Houston and BYU along with musings about new markets (Cincy/Memphis)! Ha - is all BS as the networks do not want these low level intramural teams.
Not gonna lie... The same thought crossed my mind after listening to this interview on Friday. Sudden change of heart, and now the leaks about adding before the season begins. Who's pressuring who?

The question is can our TV partners be pressured into a deal that guarantees something above what would be owed if we expanded, but for a shorter term? That's what would have to happen, right, to incentivise status quo?
 

HoopsTournament

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
7,159
3,672
113
51
St. Joseph, MO
www.hoopstournament.net
CW - I read this and saw between the lines that the B12 is pulling a power play on the networks and trying to get an extended contract with GoR and not add anyone at all. The conference has thrown out all these fake support references for Houston and BYU along with musings about new markets (Cincy/Memphis)! Ha - is all BS as the networks do not want these low level intramural teams. If they were such good cnadidates why are they still outside looking in? UConn is a joke - even the ACC laughed at them. If we want geography then add NMU - might as well grab a partner for TTU too! I fell for this for awhile but as it drags along and the networks remain aloof I see UT/OU meeting saying we tried and bolting in 2024. Hanging around and waiting for the PAC12 to implode is a fool's game as B12 is always last to innovate. They will go to Twitter or Apple while we figure out the TV networks are done and gone. Old men in suits will doom this conference as Texas schools are blind to their diminishing relevance in TV market!

Holy Reading Between the Lines Batman.
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
21,896
17,567
113
If you think ISU can influence this at all, I feel you are a little naive. We will vote for whatever Texas and OU want.

I agree that ISU really doesn't have a say in who gets added. But when it comes time to vote, if an extension of the GOR isn't on the table then ISU has 1/3 of the power needed to block adding teams. I would think that we'd have KSU and Baylor join us in that vote to stop it. But if anyone is proposing expansion without an extension of the GOR that should be a signal of their intension to leave in 6 years. At that point, ISU needs to do what's best for ISU. I don't see two or four more P5 schools in the mix as a good thing for ISU.
 

cykadelic2

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2006
3,116
1,123
113
If you think ISU can influence this at all, I feel you are a little naive. We will vote for whatever Texas and OU want.
Not if it doesn't include a GOR extension. You are failing to grasp that point. Just 2 schools need to side with ISU on that and it's safe to assume those two schools exist.
 

SCNCY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 11, 2009
9,577
7,010
113
36
La Fox, IL
Not if it doesn't include a GOR extension. You are failing to grasp that point. Just 2 schools need to side with ISU on that and it's safe to assume those two schools exist.

Agreed. Texas and Oklahoma are the only sure things to be in a major conference. After those two, there can be cases made against all other schools. Baylor has too much baggage, tech has poor academics for PAC 12, OSU, doesn't bring anything that Oklahoma can, Kansas is poor in football, etc.

It is in the best interest of all other schools that a GOR is signed.
 

SpokaneCY

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
13,294
8,484
113
Spokane, WA
Not if it doesn't include a GOR extension. You are failing to grasp that point. Just 2 schools need to side with ISU on that and it's safe to assume those two schools exist.

You think the "power 3" that would vote to stop an expansion would be in a better position either within the B12 or affiliated with an as yet undetermined conference? I can't think of a single scenario where we vote against the true powers that be in the conference and have a good outcome for ISU.

Our bread is buttered by Texas and OU and what they want. I'm OK thinking we ARE an inferior school when matters of conference expansion and money are concerned.
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
21,896
17,567
113
You think the "power 3" that would vote to stop an expansion would be in a better position either within the B12 or affiliated with an as yet undetermined conference? I can't think of a single scenario where we vote against the true powers that be in the conference and have a good outcome for ISU.

Our bread is buttered by Texas and OU and what they want. I'm OK thinking we ARE an inferior school when matters of conference expansion and money are concerned.

But if OU and UT are trying to expand without an extension of the GOR, then I don't think it really matters what ISU votes. If they aren't willing to sign a GOR then we can consider them gone when the current GOR expires. At that point, ISU needs to decide whether it's best to have two or four additional P5 schools to compete with for a landing spot.
 

cykadelic2

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2006
3,116
1,123
113
You think the "power 3" that would vote to stop an expansion would be in a better position either within the B12 or affiliated with an as yet undetermined conference? I can't think of a single scenario where we vote against the true powers that be in the conference and have a good outcome for ISU.

Yes, as do JP and Leath. They don't want to be "stuck" with schools like Houston, UC, etc. and God forbid Memphis with no GOR extension and if the B12 implodes at the end of the current GOR. The odds of ISU landing in the B10 or P12 in case of B12 implosion are much higher.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
7,703
6,266
113
Dubuque
IMO all 10 schools hold a lot of power when it comes to Big12 expansion. Obviously, Texas and OU hold the most power because if they both don't sign a GOR extension, I am not sure expansion happens.

When it comes to which schools are invited to join, then each school IMO has a lot of power. It only takes 3 to say no and there could be competing agendas. WVU might want to add eastern teams, UT + Houston politics, importance of academics in selection, etc

However, I think in the end, who gets the invite to join will be determined by the numbers- which group of 2-6 schools bring the most TV value based on what the Big12 sees the go-forward revenue model. Is there still a chance at a Big12 Network? Are ESPN, FOX/CBS/NBC Sports channels willing to bid on Big 12 content? Is the future Netflix, Amazon, etc?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: SpokaneCY

CYCLNST8

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2008
10,813
12,152
113
Urbandale
www.gimikk.com
Why does everyone assume that Texas & Oklahoma are so eager to leave? Why give up big fish in little pond status?

To me, it'd be foolish to leave money on the table. Adding four teams is a cash grab to level the playing field in the short term.

The long term goal should be advancing the future of online content. The Big 12 has the opportunity to be a pioneer in this regard. Use the freedom of NOT being tied to a conference cable network.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
7,703
6,266
113
Dubuque
Why does everyone assume that Texas & Oklahoma are so eager to leave? Why give up big fish in little pond status?

To me, it'd be foolish to leave money on the table. Adding four teams is a cash grab to level the playing field in the short term.

The long term goal should be advancing the future of online content. The Big 12 has the opportunity to be a pioneer in this regard. Use the freedom of NOT being tied to a conference cable network.

I wouldn't characterize it as eager to leave. But IF the Big10, SEC or ACC want to expand to 16 teams, who do they add? I don't think they add Pac12 teams. I don't see them adding teams that have been mentioned with Big12 expansion like BYU, Cincy, Memphis, Houston, UCF, USF, etc. IMO UConn is a possibility for the Big10 or ACC.

So the only way for the Big10, ACC or SEC to add value to their existing TV contracts would be adding programs like OU and UT. If I was OU or UT and I was a free agent in 2025- why wouldn't I see what my value is by joining another conference? Some posters act like the Longhorn Network is going to last forever. ESPN could extend beyond 2031, but they could just as easily approach UT at some point and offer to buyout their agreement.

I agree that UT and OU have a good thing in the Big12 in 2016 from a revenue and ability to earn a playoff berth, but will th same hold true in 2020, 2025, 2030 or 2035?
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: HoopsTournament

Help Support Us

Become a patron