Big 12 vs Big Ten Debate
- Thread starter ForeverIowan
- Start date
Yeah ND for sure. I do think one of Miami or FSU pays for itself barely for b10. Texas or A&M would. It’s always been rumored they want UVA/UNC but with the fact Washington and Oregon were iffy and Cal/stan, Arizona and KU all got passed on I can’t imagine those two would be a slam dunk.
The poor schools best hope is one more round of expansion like ND/FSU or something, because the next money grab after that is a step down for them for the benefit of the rich programs.
I've been saying for a while now it wouldn't surprise me at all if the conference distributes more CFP/bowl money to the schools that earn the bids, which IMO would be completely fair. So that would be unequal revenue sharing. I doubt it'll happen with the media revenue though. The biggest and richest conference following a blueprint that pretty much wrecked the Big 12 wouldn't make much sense.
So why didn’t Carter state that clearly? He left it very open ended. You think that was just coincidence? No way.
When Rutgers and Maryland were brought in the B10, it was $50 million more was added to the contract, that was most likely the high point, as you divide the pie more and more there is just going to be less for each school. What they do not want to do is bring in teams, and end up getting less than what they were getting before. ND is the only school that they can add that is going to bring in each more money individually, adding Virginia and UNC is not going to move the needle much money wise.
You also have to factor in the way the B10 made money, they were charging more for the citizens of a state that had a team, compared to those that didn't, not sure if they still do that or not. So they were charging the citizens of Iowa more per month then a state like Missouri, where there is not a team. More citizens per state meant more money rolling in for BTN
The only reason it wrecked the Big 12 is because the wealthy schools left to go to wealthier places. That option doesn't exist now.
This is the reckoning we've told you is coming. Ohio State and Michigan will eventually tire of subsidizing Purdue and Rutgers.
Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State have been altruistic long enough to pull the biggest brands from the other conferences in. Now that they have them, they can start to lean on the less influential schools to gain an even bigger share.
What's Iowa going to do? Leave for the Big 12? Might honestly make a lot of sense, but either way Ohio State isn't going to give a ****. They aren't going to lose any money if the bottom 70% of the conference got mad and left over unequal revenue. They're Ohio State.
In isolation FSU and Clemson would for BIG. The combo of FSU-Miami just as valuable to BIG as USC-UCLA
But without adding new premium windows, 18 schools already can fill all the windows , so the incremental increase of going to 20+ not the same as going from 14 to 18 schools
Going to 20+ is in the money due to macro benefits- more CFP from killing the ACC, eventually more CBB postseason revenue, and lowering risk of new entrants taking schools
It keeps getting lost on SEC and B1G team members that the reason they don't have sharing now is because it simply wasn't necessary. They're already on top in money and chose expansion to grow funding instead. You can only expand so far before it stops making sense, and the farther away they become from the Big 12 and ACC, the more directly they will be competing with each other only.
When that happens, the schools get upset and start infighting. There's nothing to prevent this from happening. It's like not ESPN and Fox would care, the no-name brands aren't driving their media revenues. They aren't paying massive amounts to televise Maryland and Vanderbilt.
Both schools will be bring in less than ND would, and it makes less sense to bring in two schools from a state IF the BTN model of pricing is still the same. This has always been about two things, brand and money, they took Nebraska for the brand name, but took Rutgers and Maryland for the money that the states would bring in to BTN. Comparing any school or combination of schools to ND is laughable at best. You get ND you get one of the best academic schools in the country and a tradition rich athletic program that has large numbers of fans all over the country.
You’re mistaking a symptom for the ailment
Unequal revenue is a symptom. The illness is too much of the conference value being due to a small minority of schools
That was true in both the original Big 12 and BIG
The primary difference was the top of BIG was not in a hodgepodge conference of schools that came together only for more TV money
That’s no longer the case. And when the BIG adds ACC, it will be even more a made for TV conference. Tough to see the Illinois and Purdue types getting those welfare checks past the next cycle
Well if anything changes it can't change until after 2030. After that it would probably take the president's voting to change the conference bylaws that require equal revenue distribution. They'd probably need at least 10 votes to do that. I guess we'll see in 5 years.
That’s the point. He could’ve been clear, but wasn’t on purpose. It was no accident. He is saying without saying that he will push for uneven distribution beyond just playoffs money.
No one is comparing schools to ND.
Previous eras of realignment are not informative, and more likely to lead to faulty reasoning in the current round
Although adding ND makes further additions more difficult to boost the average, adding “with” ND makes many more schools possible without lowering the average.
Adding before ND, not an issue- boost with FSU and Miami, then boost even more with ND
TV rights appreciation does the same. The BIG rights per school are likely going up next deal regardless of who they add. The schools added just impact how much. That provides a window to add splurges on academic brands like UNC or UVa. Same with adding ND, which helps pay for others (similar to USC). It’s much easier to handle an opportunity cost, than an actual cost
Iowa will be one they would keep, it is admittedly one of the better brands once you go past the blue bloods. Purdue and Rutgers, yes I would definitely watch out. You still need someone to lose to the big teams
He said it without saying. That was literally in my reply to you. Can you address my point or just resort to dumb jokes and lol’s?
Why wasn’t he clear about revenue sharing? Do you believe that was just an accident? Do you not think it’s fair to infer from him not being clear that it means he will push for uneven distribution beyond playoff money?
They aren't going to kick any of them out.
They'll just take more money which will eliminate most of the advantage that those schools currently have over similar ACC and Big 12 programs.
