*****The Super, Mega, Huge Big 12 Expansion Thread*****

Status
Not open for further replies.
Florida and Georgia. The SEC DOES NOT SHARE THIRD TIER RIGHTS. And it is considered one of the most stable conferences there is. And they don't share third tier rights. They don't share third tier rights. They don't share third tier rights.

In case you didn't catch it, the SEC doesn't share third tier rights.
They must have their share of southern egos maniacs also. $10M a year in the scheme of things is not a game changer when it is 7-10% of the budget. These school netwroks are more about seeing school smiley faces on the tube. This is more like invigorating the fan base by Joe D Bag having his friends over to review last weeks games with a brewsky. This is more like catching the latest coach interviews in the man cave so they can be drunked up for the big game on Saturday. This is like clonezone on droids. Is this what the world has come to? Yes.
 
Making the conference more stable by having a Big 10 type model. This would allow real teams to be attractive to the Big 12, this will not happen now. I think if the Big 12 were to adopt a Big 10 type network model, Pitt would be with us instead of the ACC as well as West VA.

OU might be able to get $5MM annually with their own network and Texas can get $15MM. What can the rest of the conference get combined? I had calculations earlier in this thread showing that each school would get (conservatively) $7.2MM annually with a Big 10 type network. Only Texas is hurt revenue wise and you can get some schools here with the attractiveness and large payout.
Again, a third of the $15M goes to education and not school sports. It is really a $10M pot for athletes. It is good pub to say you are doing something good for the education while raking in the dough.
 
Last edited:
The question concerning why Boren felt the need to hold a presser vs allowing the Chair of the conference to conduct the presser that was planned is a valid question. You would think intelligent men could get that, or their stories straight and deliver the same message. Dave Matter, Columbia sports writer, quotes Deaton in so much as saying anything's possible still...doesn't sing solidarity to me really.
This Boren/Deaton hoopla is about POWER and MANIPULATION.

MONEY is a side bonus. Stoops seemed uncomforatable with the boss around.
 
Well, I don't see it as that cut and dried. Texas is negotiating with member schools now for rights to show conference football games on LHN (Kansas). Entrance into a new conference could be set up in a way that has specific rights assigned, with a complete sharing of those tier 3 rights in the interim, to avoid allowing the Big XII (and their media partners) access to that content. It would be an intricate agreement with a new conference, but not impossible.

It is that cut and dried. Texas isn't just negotiating with member schools for rights, before they could even approach schools they had to get Fox to agree to sell the individual rights to those games to ESPN and the LHN.

The scenario you suggested could not happen because the new conference and the University has no say whatsoever in media content in the proposed scenario. If UT were to go to the Pac 12, for example, ESPN/ABC would have first rights to that game in Austin per the B12's media contract. UT or the Pac-12 don't get to "decide" that it is a tier 3 game. Games only fall to Tier 3 when all other contracted media partners have passed.
 
Just more tripe. The OU powerplay failed when Larry Scott was bounced to the curb by the six NO university president votes. Now Alden and Deaton stir the pot because they still have a hot offer from the SEC to go into oblivion. This is just trying to push UT over the cliff to dismantle the LHN. Really, these people should get a life and just get back to football.

Seems to me we need a BIG12 Network worse than ever so these people can parade on stage. Thank god, we have two reasonable people (GC/JP) at Ames.

Neinas first action should be to reinforce the $28M Tampon exit fee and tell the Agonies they have two weejs to get off the pot or further action will be taken to get a decision. The Aggies big dream off without an exit fee is going down the tubes. We need Ken "Shining" Starr to go visit the Jars and talk more sense to them.
 
So, let's say that UT goes to the Pac-12, and the Big 12 comes to own the rights to UT-USC game (among many others). Say that ABC has the Tier 1 deal with the Big 12 and wants to show that game. Why would ABC, as the holder of the Big 12 Tier 1 contract, not be allowed to show that game? Why would ABC pay the Big 12 for the game if they can't show it? I don't agree with your assertion that there would be no exposure for the defecting team. If UT reimbursed the Pac-12, I'm not sure why they would object to the showing the game.


JBH is correct, at least as I understand it. It would be up to ABC/ESPN to decide whether or not to broadcast a USC-UT game in Austin. However, the B12 would get the $$ for the broadcast, not UT or the Pac-12.
 
Again, a third of the 15N goes to education and not school sports. It is really a $10M pot for athletes. It is good pub to say you are doing something good for the education while raking in the dough.

Posturing here with the 5MM to school. If the AD closed shop who gets everything? UT. They are just passing it along earlier. I don't know if they give the academic side anything now or not. They already have more money than they know what to do with, so it is just a pittance to them.
 
Need to add NU to that list. They so badly want to say, "I told you so. Weren't we smart for leaving."
Nebby may meet their Waterloo at 7,280 feet in Laramie this weekend or then at Wiscyland. Then the catbird naysayers will be out en masse.

Tailgating at Madison is not as good as driving the flatlands to Oklahoma/Kansas/Texas road trips. Their big tailgating adventurelands wil now be IC (good luck with that) and Columbus. Maybe Northwestern for an expected win. Columbia has more appeal to their diehards as it more driveable.
 
Your bolded statement is the key, and IMO accomplishing that will require at least a couple of things: 1) UT controlling their greed and ambition, and 2) everybody else controlling their jealousy of what UT has. OU is kind of in both groups.

The Big Ten is a little different in that they are much more top-heavy revenue wise than the Big 12. They have more big $$$$ AD revenue schools, and the gap between tOSU and the rest is not as gaping as the gap between UT and the rest in the Big 12.
Chuck Neinas needs to bring his big Thor hammer.


 
Anyone know what this means?

TravHaney Travis Haney by ChrisMWilliams



I'm told 6-yr grant of rights is done at OU/OSU because those presidents have been given power by board. Others require board approval.

13 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

It means the other 7 schools' board of regents has to approve the "grant of rights" while OU/OSU's presidents can do it for them. For the people freaking out last night because this wasn't a signed, sealed, and delivered agreement....there simply wasn't even time to get everyone's approval in less than 24 hours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Help Support Us

Become a patron