WOW...CU and Nebbie buyout penalties

[Stormin]

As much as I would like to see that money at ISU, I say we take Memphis, get their 10 million, take someone else from a big city (not sure who or from where) and go after a couple big schools, offering them $20 million each. The 10 current members of our conference each take 1 million as consolation. The two new big schools have their 20 mill, we have some money, Memphis and whatever other school we invite get in with the big boys. Our conference is expanded to 14 and also has an enlarged TV footprint, making us much more attractive to TV execs. We leverage this to a better TV deal, ultimately making more money than the 4 million we would have if we had just split the money in the first place.

NO. And NO.

If we learned one thing from this whole mess, it is that the Big XII is not necessarily a wounded product with the loss of Nebraska and Colorado. The league has a certain national appeal. And unless you are going to form a Conference Network, the television imprint is a bit irrelevant.

Adding Memphis is going to gain us $10 million annually. But Memphis would also get a split of Conference TV revenue which will be about $14 million. So you actually end up losing about $4 million on the deal.

Does Memphis really add $4 million of extra revenue each year? Not IMO. Adding Memphis just gives the TV another option of NOT showing ISU and so we would be looking at decreased revenue.

The Big 12 has two really, really big names. Texas and Oklahoma. The rest have some appeal. And some have little appeal. Adding teams with little appeal or even modest appeal lessens the chance of a lower profile team like ISU to get on TV. And that means less exposure and less money.

We need to stick to 10 teams period. NO League Championship game. We play a round robin, so there is no need for it. We have a highly likely scenario of getting two BCS bids every year because of that. That increases revenue and makes for better bowls for those of us farther down the pecking order.

We are in good shape in basketball as it is. So it looks like we are decent with revenue with not much money to be added to the pot even if we would expand. Dividing that limited amount of money by 10 makes more sense than dividing it by 12.

 

[thrillcat]

Are you seriously trying to find something to argue about?

Your example is unrealistic.

Also, keep in mind that we are talking much different scales. The way money is managed in a department like this is nothing like the average person manages their finances.

At the end of the day Nebraska and Colorado are going to pay us 10 million and you are worried about the payment options hurting them?:biglaugh:

I want whatever hurts their programs more. My example was to simply point out that its easier to make plans going forward for lost income than paying out what you've already spent.

Now I am looking for an argument.

 

[StLouisClone]

We need to stick to 10 teams period. NO League Championship game. We play a round robin, so there is no need for it. We have a highly likely scenario of getting two BCS bids every year because of that. That increases revenue and makes for better bowls for those of us farther down the pecking order.

We are in good shape in basketball as it is. So it looks like we are decent with revenue with not much money to be added to the pot even if we would expand. Dividing that limited amount of money by 10 makes more sense than dividing it by 12.

I agree. Unless the Big 12 can pull in a Notre Dame, I think they'll keep the league at 10 teams. Bringing in teams like Arkansas, Houston, Memphis or Louisville would only weaken ISU's brand name.

 

[Stormin]

I agree. Unless the Big 12 can pull in a Notre Dame, I think they'll keep the league at 10 teams. Bringing in teams like Arkansas, Houston, Memphis or Louisville would only weaken ISU's brand name.

I really don't think that the Big 10 added any value by getting Nebraska. They maybe enhanced their perception of football teams and some rivalry games. But that is about it. It is going to cost them 9% of each teams revenue. So they would have to get an increase of about $20 million plus by adding Nebraska just to break even.

 

[Clark]

I really don't think that the Big 10 added any value by getting Nebraska. They maybe enhanced their perception of football teams and some rivalry games. But that is about it. It is going to cost them 9% of each teams revenue. So they would have to get an increase of about $20 million plus by adding Nebraska just to break even.

The Big 10 Championship game alone will net more than that.

 

[CrossCyed]

Harvey Perlman, Tom Osborne and NU can go **** themselves.

 

[chadm]

The Big 10 Championship game alone will net more than that.

As long as the loss doesn't take one of the teams from the BCS bowls.

 

[jaretac]

I want whatever hurts their programs more. My example was to simply point out that its easier to make plans going forward for lost income than paying out what you've already spent.

Now I am looking for an argument.

I want to see them hurt as well, but having them pay a lump sum or have it withheld really isn't that big of deal because either way it is going to hurt badly.

I have a tenant that is in limbo trying to move out. I told them that they will lose their subsidized rent at the end of the month and they will have to pay almost $900 a month if they are not moved out by the 1st. Their response was, "we don't care, we are declaring bankruptcy anyway".

There comes a point where it just doesn't matter anymore (to them).

 

[TheGovernator]

As long as the loss doesn't take one of the teams from the BCS bowls.

That all depends on how much more added revenue comes from the championship game. If it's a dollar more than $24 million, they still come out ahead because the conference only gets ~$4 million for a second BCS game.