AZ is chomping at the bit to join the B12.
I was kind of thinking the same thing. Why would AZ want out of the Pac-12?
My conference tidbit
- Thread starter rebecacy
- Start date
I was kind of thinking the same thing. Why would AZ want out of the Pac-12?
Sorry, but this grand plan with OU just doesn't add up for me. If there was truly a "plan in place" with OU + the other 7 schools to bring TX back in line, then why even bother with all of the legal roadblocks for the TAM move? Why would Baylor be publicly begging for people to write their representatives to save the B12? I don't buy it.
Baylor has the most to lose when A&M leaves. They get a big attendance boost when A&M comes to town. Plus, I think they are doing this as somewhat of a smokescreen for what is actually going on. I think the rest of the schools plan to sign those waivers eventually. Just not until we get Texas signed on to the "Alamo Plan" that rebecacy speaks of.
Good points. There is a reason why UT, Alabama, and tOSU have the highest athletic budgets in FBS, and that is because they have large active alumni bases and large national followings. They can deliver nationwide audiences, which in turn can draw the big TV deals. OU is getting close, but I don't think they are quite there yet.
The Big 12 will make less TV $$ without UT. I don't see how that can be avoided. If the money is enough to keep everybody happy, things will be OK. However, if certain schools are always looking over the fence to see if things are greener and there is more money to be made elsewhere, as you say, the instability will remain.
Last edited:
I don't see the big 12 being bigger than 11/12 teams anytime soon. I see them doing everything they can to follow the big 10s very successful model including their own network. Don't need texas to do that. Who is the big 10s texas?? It's not Michigan or tOSU anymore. They want it to be ND but they are doing just fine without the Irish. The Big xii has a template to follow once they get texas to play fair or bail. I also doubt Texas bails and would take the risk of calling their bluff with so little to lose.
Last edited:
Breaking News Found in the trash out back in downtown Dallas-----
From the Desk of the Big 12 Commish to the UT AD
SUBJECT: Possible Recruits for America's Super Conference
Dear Bevo,
As your prize confidant and front man, I have been making numerous calls, sending emails to the country, using my go to boys, to come up with potential members in your next move to build America's Super Conference. See the bolded schools for my recommendations. I added some personal notes that are not to be divulged to Stoops.
Signed,
BB.
THE SECRET LIST
#81 Colorado State better than big brother
#127 University of Denver Why not?
#130 Boulder CU you kidding me?
UCONN #85 - ISU plays them
FLorida International #121 Cuban imports
UCF #186 Orlando recruits headed to ISU
USF #202 Tampa recruits headed to ISU
Emory #32 - is this a school?
ND #16 - hit them hard
KSU #189 too many creationists
KU #152 hangin on
U Louisville #146 better than KU
ISU #68 sounds right
UTEP #118 - might do
Rice #22 is nice
Dayton #105 wright brothers
Penn #21 the other penn
Portland State #138 too far
Okie - #187 - outright fail
Buffalo #160 - too cold
Idaho #99 - too cold
Arkansas #228 - really?
Marquette #49 - do they play fball?
Wiliam &M ary #24 - sign them up
V Tech #43 - nice
West Virginia #163 - below the cutline
Alabama #131 - too low
Harvard #6 - yeah sign them up
Jackson State #9 - who?
Ol Miss #136 - nope
New Mexico State #149 - no cigar
I would see first tier quite a bit higher if UT stays. ESPN paid 20M/year for the LHN. So that would be one huge bargaining starting point. I would wildly guess the first tier to match the Pac 12 at 3B over 12 giving us 25 mil/year for first, 7.5 for second. So we would have 32.5mi/annually (average) plus the third tier.
Two years or so ago, ISU was around 9 for conference money.
The Big 10's Texas? Ohio State. The Big 10's Oklahoma? Michigan. The Big 10's A&M? Penn State.
In the event Texas would leave, the Big 12 has?
The Big 10 has the top schools in a ton of states (Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Nebraska, Michigan). We have the top schools in Oklahoma, Missouri, and Kansas (and Texas if they chose to stay put). BIG difference.
Last edited:
The problem isnt the money. Everyone was making money here. Texas more. 1st and 2nd tier revenues are pretty much (about 70-80% i believe) split evenly already, and it wouldnt be a huge deal for us to just go 100% equal. OU and UT make a lot more money off of donors and tickets than they do off of TV. A couple million more evenly distributed if it promotes conference stability is a good thing for them. Now, go into 3rd tier rights and thats a bigger concession, especially for texas, who was paid far more than market value for 1-2 football games and some other minor sports. No one, not OU, not TAMU, was going to get a sweetheart deal like that. Not even close. Only chance of it is if ESPN\Fox decide they want the big 12 together and basically bribe them with their own network too.
The real problem here is Texas not acting like a conference member and acting more like they owned the place. A&M, Nebraska, OU, none come out clean in this, but Texas is the chief offender.
The real problem here is Texas not acting like a conference member and acting more like they owned the place. A&M, Nebraska, OU, none come out clean in this, but Texas is the chief offender.
Simple -- teams need to commit and sign agreements that really make it very painful to look or leave.
You don't think OSU has what Texas has? Please. The only difference there is Texas is in Texas. OSU, could do exactly what Texas has done. Michigan probably could too.
Agreed that we wouldn't need to go more than 12, and there is no need to go beyond 12 for the B1G model to work. However, you still need a couple big dogs to pull in those tier 1 dollars. We don't have that with OU+7+(BYU, Louisville, Houston, SMU, etc). I would say in the B1G those big dogs are still Michigan and tOSU. They are still big football brands that can pull a national audience despite maybe falling off on the field a little. You also have Penn State and Nebraska. A new Big 12 without UT just doesn't seem to have the inventory of games with national interest to pull that big tier 1 contract in 2016, that conference to me looks like a midwestern version of the current Big East. Sure, it is a BCS league, but it just doesn't have the TV value of the big boys. And at that point, I just see schools like OU and Mizzou starting to have wandering eyes yet again. In my mind, for a long term fix, this deal still needs Texas.
Why do they not do it then?? Because they like the model, they like where they are. The model the Big Xii is going to adapt. Oh and Big money games come from winning. Oregon, Boise, etc. were not big money games just a few years ago. The service academies have huge audiences. Thing bigger and a bit more positive. Funny how you all are the same group that had us in the crapper last year.
Why the hell would anyone want the Big 12 to blow up? Iowa State's best situation is in the Big 12 and nothing else is even close. Does it come with headaches? Hell yes, but a few headaches are worth dealing with when it comes to an extra few million dollars every year.
I would be shocked if OU and MU signed on to anything painful.
Unfortunately, it seems that there is not going to be true stability until the six BCS AQ conference TV packages are all similar in value, and for that to happen, there has to be ample big names in each conference. And for that to happen, the number of FB teams per conference needs to capped at 12. That's not going to happen, and thus, the hope for true stability seems bleak.
I can only imagine the upheaval that would occur if that UT/ND to Big Ten thing happened. The next Big Ten TV deal would be blockbuster, and the SEC would go ballistic. It was reported in the other thread some some SEC schools were already torqued that the Pac-12 TV deal was better than theirs. The SEC would go into full blown expansion mode, with OU/MU or ACC schools as targets etc.
Last edited:
No I didn't. I haven't throughout this whole ordeal. OSU doesn't leave because there is nowhere better for them to go from a competition and geography standpoint. You think they haven't put the pencil to it? Michigan likely hasn't left because they likely value the academic side of the Big Ten. Texas hasn't left either. The teams that have left are the ones that got an offer to somewhere they thought was better. If you actually think the Big Ten is this conference where everything is equal, you are wrong. OSU has their say. Michigan has their say. PSU has their say. Minnesota goes along. It just so happens the people in charge of OSU and Michigan, instead of making just themselves a bunch of money, have gotten together and helped the conference be extremely lucrative. Texas attempted to do that at least with aTm if not more. The people that have left or have thought of leaving were the ones who set up the infrastructure of the conference finances. These program, when the B12 formed, wanted it this way and now once Texas has taken advantage of that formation, they have bailed. It has been pointed out that the equal TV deal amounts to very little and IMO, that is how it should have been. Why should Texas have to give up everything to help us? Is it right for them to keep it all? No, but the league agreed to release 3rd tier rights. They then used that ability in a huge way and people got ****** because they couldn't.
