I have never stated the league would not go to unequal revenue, only that the schools would not leave the conference. Getting unequal shares is the problem they have to 60% of the vote to change it, that is going to difficult to do with so many schools needing money.
This is depressing... :(
- Thread starter CySmurf
- Start date
That seems crazy to me. Why would Ohio State agree to an equal media deal that gets them the same media money as Rutgers? That’s exact opposite direction college athletics is going right now.
They legit just signed up for this a couple years ago. This isn’t where college athletics is going, it’s where it went in the big12 and the conference was almost torn apart.
Happy to make a wager with you on this though. You can name the terms and loser donates to we will.
So the Big 12 members voted for unequal revenue sharing in the past when they needed money but the Big 10 won’t?
You act like nothing has changed since 2022 when they signed the current media deal. The Big Ten has multiple new teams since that deal was agreed on!
Maybe they don't want to be greedy or need the money. It could be they give the Rutgers of the conference equal media revenue but get a larger share than they now get for things like making the football playoff or NCAA bb tournament.
No they don’t they were added to make that deal what it was. Unless you mean Oregon and Washington which I’m not worried as they don’t get a new share due to when and how they were added.
Again, feel free to put some money on it if you’re so confident.
Exactly. Texas and OU had somewhere to go and the Big 12 had only been around 25 years, not 125.
Plus Ohio State hasn't destroyed multiple leagues like Texas has.
I understand why Jamie did what he did when he made LHN happen but you almost wonder if things may have turned out better for the remaining Big 12 schools if they'd have ripped the band-aid off then rather than delaying it another dozen years. We'll never know.
Yes I was alluding to Oregon and Washington.
I don’t bet on message boards. Sorry.
Tradition matters in college sports right? That’s why rivalries are dying, geography matters zero and things are changing on a dime that make little sense to college sports. I mean Stanford and Cal are in the Atlantic Coast Conference for football!
What more proof do you need that money is all that matters?
Consis
[QUOTE="CySmurf, post: 10097384, member: 12404"]
so
[/QUOTE]
consider the source,sparky
Hawkeye Athletics sets another revenue record while ISU, UNI struggle
For the fourth straight year, University of Iowa Athletics in 2025 set a new revenue record of $153.2 million — while athletics revenue at Iowa State University and University of Northern Iowa declined, leaving UNI with a nearly $3 million deficit.www.thegazette.com
Just because UT and Ou left does not mean everyone is out to get the most money out of every deal. Look at the original B12 school and why they left. aTm left to get away from UT, Missouri left because they saw they were going to get left out of the B12/ P12 merger and had a place to go. Colorado always wanted to be in the P12, and took the offer after the other B12 schools turned it down. Nebraska left because they saw their power and influence dropping and figured they could keep winning in the B10. Money helped in all those decision, but for most it was not the overriding factor. It would have to be for Ohio St. and Michigan to leave the conference, and then have a place to go that will be able to pay them money or risk going independent. They cannot jump to another league and make more money like OU and UT could, or Nebraska before that.
I think if Ohio State and Michigan are told they have to do the same media deal as Rutgers, Iowa, Northwestern and others they will jump to greener pastures. They will have options. If that means independent or SEC they will find a way to get more money than an equal Big Ten media deal.
Michigan is never joining the SEC, the SEC makes less money than the big ten and has for awhile now.
Not every school is Texas. Do you feel the same way about bama/georgia making the same amount of money as the SEC bottom feeders?
Well Michigan is talking about going independent not SEC so I agree with you there. I also don’t think the SEC isn’t going to agree to equal revenue sharing on their next deal either.
They've had several chances to do it in the past. Why now?
I also don't believe independence is viable. Would be impossible to schedule and get distribution for any of your non-revs and no one is going to open their doors like the ACC, foolishly, did for Notre Dame.
Because college athletics have never been crazier and schools have never been more greedy than they are right now.
Maybe, but I don't think they will, where are they going to go to get more money than what they are getting now, and if they would go to the SEC, they have equal revenue sharing. So they are going to leave the B10 but take less money and equal revenue from the SEC? Or they could go independent, look at Washington State and Oregon State to see how that is working out, ND gets less money off their TV deal than any B10 gets, what helps out ND is they get all the money when they make the football playoff and get a pay out even if they do not.
The powers of the B10 can still be willing to give up on unequal revenue, that will not have to votes to change it, but push for more money from the playoffs and bb tournaments.
