Honestly, I have yet to understand why BYU's refusal to play on Sunday is seen as a big deal. I kind of admire them for it. Seems like an easy accommodation to make, and there's no reason to believe it's a slippery slope.
Big 12 Expansion - Looking at Numbers
- Thread starter AppleCornCy
- Start date
Honestly, I have yet to understand why BYU's refusal to play on Sunday is seen as a big deal. I kind of admire them for it. Seems like an easy accommodation to make, and there's no reason to believe it's a slippery slope.
Ditto. I'm not religious but I grew up friends with a Mormon family and really respected how dedicated they were to it. They just stayed home, read books, and cleaned the house.
I compare it to a friend I worked with at a restaurant who said he couldn't work on Sundays, but he'd come in and eat/drink on Sundays so I guess the rest of us had to work for him.
If the 8 schools think BYU will make them money and help their football prowess then they will make the accommodations to the wrestling or tennis or soccer schedules. Football doesn’t play on Sunday and I don’t think men’s hoops has played a conference game on Sunday in a long time. Nothing else matters from a $$$ perspective.
The Sunday scheduling issue was likely more of a red herring for the Pac-12 which has universities that don’t want to associate with BYU. For better or for worse, I’m pretty sure the schools in Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Texas won’t be as choosy.
I see you put a lot of effort in the OP!
I have to disagree though about the best add. The league will get paid on tv viewers. Nobody will add more viewers than Houston. A lot of fans talk about streaming and not markets. Well Houston is a big city that is going to be SEC first but the Big 12 still as a solid second adds viewers even in a new B12 that is probably a tweener between a P5/G5 after everything shakes out.
BUT AS FOR TV VIEWERS each game, I don't think anyone adds the viewers to games Houston does. Houston vs TT, TCU, Baylor and even Oklahoma St. will do well due to instate and a regional rivalry. I like BYU's data but I think its Houston first. Then throw in the number of recruits in the Houston area, BYU has no recruiting areas for the Big 12.
I think adding Houston is worth it even if 3 or 4 leftover PAC schools like Az/ASU/Utah/Colorado are available.
If you care about TV ratings you won't omit Houston. UH, BYU for all sports and the service academies for football only and then possibly 2-4 of Creighton, Wichita St., one or both of the New Mexico schools for basketball only would be interesting content.
Although, if you add Army and Navy that game is always played after conference championship games and a date when thats the only game. I don't if they would be willing to move the date of the game to join a conference.
Last edited:
What are Houston football’s TV ratings? Not their city population but how many people actually watch the games.
I certainly haven't read every post in every thread on this topic, so SIAP. Talking about live game attendance and cable viewer eyeballs really doesn't look at the entire picture. The entire picture includes the fan base of each of the competing teams in each game and for that matter the fan base of the entire conference collectively. We're Iowa State fans first but also fans of the Big 12 (or most of the Big 12, anyway.....).
So, I think that in the next round of media negotiations for football, MBB and WBB, the conference needs to look beyond live, real time eyeballs and into archiving. Whatever conference we wind up in should negotiate with its media partner the creation of a [insert conference name here] web site that not only streams games in real time (in addition to the over-the-air, cable, and satellite distribution systems) but also makes them available in an archive of all games in that conference covered by that network and can be acquired from other networks.
If I were a cord cutter and didn't get the games on TV, or if I lived in Alaska or the UK or Antarctica, I could watch Cyclone games in real time if I were awake or on the archive whenever it was convenient to me. Games I enjoyed I could watch over and over. Games would be streamed with their commercials, or subscribers could pay a premium rate to watch without commercials, as with MLB-TV.
Such an add-on to the base media rights agreement wouldn't cost a lot extra to the provider but would expand the viewer base to worldwide dimensions and make the archives quite compelling to advertisers.
I would jump at the opportunity to subscribe to such a service at the premium rate, not just to watch ISU games but also many other conference games, and I think the overall demand would be significant. Wouldn't matter where the viewers were or what time zone they were in. How much additional revenue could ISU and other conference members gain from this?
So, I think that in the next round of media negotiations for football, MBB and WBB, the conference needs to look beyond live, real time eyeballs and into archiving. Whatever conference we wind up in should negotiate with its media partner the creation of a [insert conference name here] web site that not only streams games in real time (in addition to the over-the-air, cable, and satellite distribution systems) but also makes them available in an archive of all games in that conference covered by that network and can be acquired from other networks.
If I were a cord cutter and didn't get the games on TV, or if I lived in Alaska or the UK or Antarctica, I could watch Cyclone games in real time if I were awake or on the archive whenever it was convenient to me. Games I enjoyed I could watch over and over. Games would be streamed with their commercials, or subscribers could pay a premium rate to watch without commercials, as with MLB-TV.
Such an add-on to the base media rights agreement wouldn't cost a lot extra to the provider but would expand the viewer base to worldwide dimensions and make the archives quite compelling to advertisers.
I would jump at the opportunity to subscribe to such a service at the premium rate, not just to watch ISU games but also many other conference games, and I think the overall demand would be significant. Wouldn't matter where the viewers were or what time zone they were in. How much additional revenue could ISU and other conference members gain from this?
I think being in the Big 12 would elevate their games some although not what it would have with OU & UT. But a Big 12 with 3 other Texas schools and bordering state of Oklahoma with OSU should give decent ratings for those instate games and OSU.
***Also, keep this in mind Houston only has one Texas teams in the AAC in SMU. Add Houston to TT, TCU, Baylor and even OSU and you develop some synergy of markets and covering the league, improving ratings among all the games involving those teams.
Last year they were not good but that was a different year due to Covid and they had a bad year but Houston has had real good ratings in the past when they played Big 12 schools. A couple of those games was OU but at least one was 5.44M viewers on 09/01/19.
In 2018 Week 2 UH vs Arizona 2.53M (that might be combined with ABC's other regional game GT vs USF) but in comparison the same time slot on FOX with UCLA vs OU only had 2.89M. Week 3 UH vs TT had 1.08M viewers.
Below is a link to Sports Media Watch that lists the 2020 season and all the games. at the botom of the page you can go to page 2 for 2019 and it also has links for all seasons back to 2012. Its kind of interesting too look at.
College Football TV Ratings
College football TV ratings for the 2025 regular season, bowls, College Football Playoff and National Championship.
www.sportsmediawatch.com
Last edited:
How do you schedule 4 P5 OOC games against conferences that may only have 1 or 2 non conference opportunities each season when this shakes out, and because of it would prefer buying a win against a G5 10/10 times in that situation?
I could see adding Houston now that the Big 12 has neither Texas nor Texas A&M. There are more Houston fans in Houston than fans of TCU, Baylor, and Texas Tech. Those schools other than maybe Tech don’t have the statewide fan bases that Texas and Texas A&M have.
As for the Houston TV market though, once you get outside of the loop, and especially once you get outside of Harris County, Houston’s following drops off considerably. There are likely more LSU fans in the market overall.
I cannot support BYU being added to the conference simply because of the fact that their lineman will all be 25 years old. It puts them in a unique place and I don't begrudge them for it but we shouldn't be bringing a school in that circumvents the normal eligibility window.
I'm 100% with your 2-5 schools.
CW and Blum pod mentioned Houston, UCF, Cincinnati, and BYU a handful of times. CW also said he had heard about a service academy (unclear if he meant from a real source or just chatter) and Blum also floated Memphis. But I found it interesting that they revolved the conversation around those four options, which I have previously thought to be the best for the conference if the 8 end up sticking together.
If this is accurate, then:
*The league will likely split the Texas schools 2 & 2 across divisions (for recruiting);
*TCU and Houston won't be in the same division (for recruiting).
So I would expect the Big 12 West to include BYU, Kansas, K-State, Oklahoma State, TCU, and Texas Tech. The Big 12 East gets Iowa State, Baylor, Houston, Cincinnati, West Virginia, and UCF. Play the 5 in your division + 1 protected crossover (K-State for us) + 3 of the remaining 5 in the opposite division every year.
If this is accurate, then:
*The league will likely split the Texas schools 2 & 2 across divisions (for recruiting);
*TCU and Houston won't be in the same division (for recruiting).
So I would expect the Big 12 West to include BYU, Kansas, K-State, Oklahoma State, TCU, and Texas Tech. The Big 12 East gets Iowa State, Baylor, Houston, Cincinnati, West Virginia, and UCF. Play the 5 in your division + 1 protected crossover (K-State for us) + 3 of the remaining 5 in the opposite division every year.
Last edited:
Cyclonepride
Thought Police
I don't see BYU dominating, even with 25 year old linemen. Should be good competition, but nothing that the other schools can't handle.
There is not one anchor school on the list, not one. What TV network is going to say "we have to bid on this conference," other than a filler for live broadcasts. I really doubt that league would average 15 to 20 million at most.
As others have said, this is Armageddon option if the other leagues do not add teams, but without a doubt this a our last option for all the former Big 12 teams involved.
We can debate it all day but the league has done its due diligence in regards to expansion, I feel like they know who they would take.
I would be fine if we let BYU in on an interim basis for a couple of years until the b1g and pac get things situated.
There seems to be a bit of a catch 22, we need teams that can bring revenue but in doing so, we are also helping those teams raise their profile. That creates more competition for the next round of expansion. We're in weird times.
I would be fine if we let BYU in on an interim basis for a couple of years until the b1g and pac get things situated.
There seems to be a bit of a catch 22, we need teams that can bring revenue but in doing so, we are also helping those teams raise their profile. That creates more competition for the next round of expansion. We're in weird times.
I hate to break it to you but there are not any anchor schools left. That is the new reality and why this sucks so bad for ISU.
I was a strong proponent of not expanding the B12 of 10 teams unless USC became available or Neb/Arkansas. But now the bar will be a lot lower because we are not diluting the number of games involving OU/UT.
The league will have to do their due dilligence. Is it still best to stay at 10, or does 12-16 make sense financially. It was a lot different threshold to add a team when the league was paying out 37M versus now 15M?
The best advice for the Big 12 will to be patient, even though it will be fun to speculate. For several reasons.
1. By waiting the remaining 8 adds another 4 years of being associated with OU/UT or collects valuable exit fees and maybe possibly some GOR violation money if that is found to be true.
2. By being patient maybe at least 6/8 of the schools get placement in the other leagues such as ACC & PAC allowing ESPN to move OU & UT sooner. The one caution is to make sure those leagues contracts can't be scrapped if the cream of those conferences is absorbed by B1G/SEC. The ACC at least has a long term deal and network which wasn't that great compared to the current P5 but is better than what the new B12 will get. If they go to the PAC they need to make sure a deal is signed past their current expiration date of summer of 2024.
3. Is 2-4 teams of AZ/ASU/Utah/Colorado the best addition? I really think the B1G is going to seriously consider USC and 5 others and the Big 12 may benefit from pressure from California to take all 4 California schools as part of that 6.
Schools from that mix might be considered the best additions, although I don't know that adding those are any better than Houston and BYU. Maybe regardless of those PAC leftovers added Houston and BYU make sense. No to WSU and Oregon St due to travel and low ratings. Not sure a loan northern California school like Cal or Stanford makes much sense either and I don't think they would want to join the B12.
4. All of the additions of the AAC & BYU are already there anyway unless the B1G and SEC go to 20-24 and essentially the B12 and ACC become the final two conferences of a P4 that are paid at a lot less. If that happens the networks are making the moves and picking the teams anyway. ACC may be the conference of eastern teams and the Big 12 mainly for teams west of the Mississippi.
If this happens it seems like a balancing act by CFB to pay probably 40 teams at an elite level and pay another 24-32 teams at a greatly reduced amount while still trying to make the remaining 32-40 teams feel like they are part of the club and get their fans to tune into national games of the SEC & B1G and CFP.
The question is at what rate will they pay the 2 remaining leagues 15M? (Ouch) 20M? probably not 25M. Hopefully teams can still at least field competitive basketball teams.
I for one will not watch any SEC games, B1G games not involving Iowa or CFP games unless ISU or Iowa are involved unless they pay the two remaining leagues an amount they can compete at.
I said they would play 2 (not 4) non conference P5 games, but yes, if power conferences play more than 8 conference games per season then it gets harder for us to schedule them. However, if they continue playing 8 non conference games, then there is a chance they will want to play a team from the new Big 12. If they don't, then we should invite the best G5 schools to join the conference so that we are guaranteed to at least be able to play them.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
DAILY CLONE: What are the expectations for Jaylen Raynor? (June 4, 2026)- Latest: loyalsons4evertrue