I'd like to see the text of the Big 12 television agreement

[jbhtexas]

All the articles are pointing out is the pro rata clause. The Big 12 can add as many schools as they want and the television networks would have to pay each additional school the same amount they're paying current schools. But, if the Big 12 adds a couple schools and the networks are forced to pay the extra amount, those schools better be appealing to the networks or the next go around of negotiations will not be pleasant at all.

Particularly if the Big 12 adds some AAC schools...schools which ESPN currently has in its portfolio for about $10 million per year...and ESPN is now forced to pay them 3 times as much for the next 9 years...

 

[Newell]

Grant of Rights is pretty straight forward and no one has broken it but no one has challenged it either..

As for bigv12 deal it's exactly what has been said and you will never see that contract..yes big 12 can add any team but they aren't stupid and networks know they aren't gonna add UNI.

If we add 2-4 teams and teams sign new GOR then all is golden if there is no new GOR then Pollard needs to position ISU for ACC or beg BIG.

Edit: adding teams will increase revenue..any team we add will beg to be in this conference and negotiate a lower share to get in..increasing current 10 teams revenue payout. I have a feeling that when 2-4 teams are added a new TV deal will be worked out where both sides make out well.

If we "will never see the contract" what are the writers basing their opinion on? I've seen multiple articles claiming grant of rights contracts are not legally binding but the contract language sure looks legally binding to me. The ACC just extended their GOR and the ACC consulted the laywers who wrote the Big 12 GOR when writing their GOR.

The article implies distribution to schools has already been calculated for the remainder of the contract and isn't based upon revenue. If that's the case show me what Iowa State's distribution is for each of the next 6 years. You can't because the networks base distribution upon revenue which isn't known until after the numbers come in. I suspect "pro rata" simply means the networks agree to distribute revenue equally among the schools, not guaranteeing a total number which would be impossible since the networks don't know what the number will be in future years.

I don't understand the rush to expand. What does the Big 12 expect to gain by expanding?

 

[Stormin]

If we "will never see the contract" what are the writers basing their opinion on? I've seen multiple articles claiming grant of rights contracts are not legally binding but the contract language sure looks legally binding to me. The ACC just extended their GOR and the ACC consulted the laywers who wrote the Big 12 GOR when writing their GOR.

The article implies distribution to schools has already been calculated for the remainder of the contract and isn't based upon revenue. If that's the case show me what Iowa State's distribution is for each of the next 6 years. You can't because the networks base distribution upon revenue which isn't known until after the numbers come in. I suspect "pro rata" simply means the networks agree to distribute revenue equally among the schools, not guaranteeing a total number which would be impossible since the networks don't know what the number will be in future years.

I don't understand the rush to expand. What does the Big 12 expect to gain by expanding?

More money. Divisions. CCG. More inventory of games for next TV contract. That is why the Big 12 is taking the responsible approach of trying to get the best teams possible for expansion. All of the candidates have flaws. Some worse than others.

 

[yowza]

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/col...ate-additional-7-million-year-current-members

another article on topic with Bowlsby quotes

 

[besserheimerphat]

If we "will never see the contract" what are the writers basing their opinion on? I've seen multiple articles claiming grant of rights contracts are not legally binding but the contract language sure looks legally binding to me. The ACC just extended their GOR and the ACC consulted the laywers who wrote the Big 12 GOR when writing their GOR.

The article implies distribution to schools has already been calculated for the remainder of the contract and isn't based upon revenue. If that's the case show me what Iowa State's distribution is for each of the next 6 years. You can't because the networks base distribution upon revenue which isn't known until after the numbers come in. I suspect "pro rata" simply means the networks agree to distribute revenue equally among the schools, not guaranteeing a total number which would be impossible since the networks don't know what the number will be in future years.

I don't understand the rush to expand. What does the Big 12 expect to gain by expanding?

They talk to people who have read the contract and ask them what it means for the parties involved. AD, university presidents, conference spokespeople, network spokespeople, etc.

 

[Cycsk]

Still can't believe that the Big 12 can pick anyone they want and the TV network has to give them another $30 mil.

 

[Bryce7]

http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...t-candidates-byu-cincinnati-uconn-houston-ucf

 

[Palmer]

BYU/Houston is not diluted content. Rutgers/Maryland is.

 

[CTTB78]

Cowherd's take yesterday was that none of the schools mentioned most often (Cincy, Memphis, Houston and BYU) were worth the money ESPN and FOX would have to fork out. Hope this is only his take and not the position of his employer.

 

[Newell]

BYU/Houston is not diluted content. Rutgers/Maryland is.

The Big 12 already has the Texas television market and in Houston pro football overshadows college football. Houston drew under 30,000 twice last year in attendance. The governor of Texas wants the influx of cash from the Big 12 television deal to benefit Houston. ISU would lose money in that deal.

BYU adds the Salt Lake City television market. They might be at least neutral in television revenue but travel costs for the rest of the conference would be high. I don't know who the 12th school would be. What I'm sure of is it would be a really bad idea to try to pull a fast one on the networks.

What I don't understand is what's wrong with $30 million a year plus tier 3 revenue? Five years ago Iowa State fans - and most of the rest of the Big 12 - would have accused you of being delusional if you told them the Big 12 would be distributing that kind of cash to each school. Now it is a reality. What is wrong with it? The conference sent a school to the football playoff last year which debunks the idea of needing a championship game. I don't understand the head over heels rush to expand when the best candidates aren't available.