Texas/ESPN and KU talking to the Big East

**Al_4_State** · 11-30-2010, 08:07 PM

Originally Posted by twojman

I will have to find it but I think 50% of the TV money is split equally. The other 50% is based on television appearances. If you are the feature game on ABC you would get a bigger chunk then if you were a regional game on ABC or on FOX. You get $0 if you are on Fox College Sports.

I just have a hard time believing Texas would give up an auto BCS bid and built in manageable schedule for a few million bucks. They had to be aware of whether or not Independence was their best move this summer. If they were leaving, they would have gone then. What do they gain by leaving now? I'm just having a hard time seeing it.

If they leave, it would cause a massive shift in conferences with the north schools probably going to the Big East, and the south schools going between the SEC and Pac 10. It would be very easy for the conferences to squeeze the Independents out of the BCS, etc. Notre Dame really hasn't done **** since the BCS came around. They have a lot of money, but who cares when they don't win more than 8 games? The Big 12 and BCS has been good to Texas, and will continue to be.

**RustShack** · 11-30-2010, 08:07 PM

I would love for us to go to the Big East. We could actually compete for conference championships and get a BCS bid. I'm all for the four schools moving, unless Texas lets us have a big share of the money, which wont happen.

**thatguy** · 11-30-2010, 08:11 PM

with Perkins out, I would like Mike Aldon to be leading the course of getting us into the Big East if that is so happening. Pollard is a good AD (maybe) but ISU and K-State don't bring as much to the table as MU and KU does. It is a power game and we don't have much power. Less TV sets than KU and MU, second school in our own state (if you don't believe this, than you aren't paying attention) and the smallest budget. We should be happy they want to include us.

**Rogue52** · 11-30-2010, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by Al_4_State

I was under the impression that currently in the Big 12, there wasn't any revenue sharing of broadcast money. Bowl money, yes. Broadcast money, no.

I'm not convinced that Texas can get more money as an Independent than they can in the Big 12. For ESPN's sake, they'd certainly get more $ from the Big 12 as a whole, than Texas alone.

There is a revenue distribution model which does include some sharing. The difference now is broadcast rights not taken by the conference contract is given back to the schools.

In any case, I still don't think Texas as an independent works -- maybe for football, but not for all their other sports.

**Rogue52** · 11-30-2010, 08:17 PM

Please end ISU to Big East talk.

There was a reason we made the desperation move to offer all the buyout money to Texas, Oklahoma, and A&M.

**Nycclone** · 11-30-2010, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by Rogue52

Please end ISU to Big East talk.

There was a reason we made the desperation move to offer all the buyout money to Texas, Oklahoma, and A&M.

Self: Big East was set to take Kansas, others - CBSSports.com

kapow

**Al_4_State** · 11-30-2010, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by thatguy

with Perkins out, I would like Mike Aldon to be leading the course of getting us into the Big East if that is so happening. Pollard is a good AD (maybe) but ISU and K-State don't bring as much to the table as MU and KU does. It is a power game and we don't have much power. Less TV sets than KU and MU, second school in our own state (if you don't believe this, than you aren't paying attention) and the smallest budget. We should be happy they want to include us.

Well, we bring more TV sets than either KU or KSU alone. Iowa has more people than Kansas. Obviously KU basketball has a national following, but as far as a TV footprint, we're add 3 million sets to the BE. Not like that's a ton, but it's 3 million they didn't have before.

Yeah, we're the 2nd team in the State of Iowa, but we'd still deliver the entire state as far as a network is concerned, which I think makes us somewhat attractive to the Big East, probably more so than even KSU.

**Rogue52** · 11-30-2010, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by Nycclone

Self: Big East was set to take Kansas, others - CBSSports.com

kapow

Of course it was a possibility, that's NOT the point.

The MONEY does NOT justify it.

**justcynn** · 11-30-2010, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by Rogue52

Please end ISU to Big East talk.

There was a reason we made the desperation move to offer all the buyout money to Texas, Oklahoma, and A&M.

Its a message board, thats what you do - talk, speculate, debate - call each other stupid...repeat.

**Boxerdaddy** · 11-30-2010, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by justcynn

Its a message board, thats what you do - talk, speculate, debate - call each other stupid...repeat.

So let me get this straight. The people that want us to go to the Big East have these reasons:

1. Conference is weaksauce in football so we COULD be at the TOP.
?

Reasons not to:

1. $ The Big East schools make about a fourth of what we make now in our CRAPPY DEAL. Sure the Big East may get a new contract but now split that among 20+ schools...ISU cannot command a huge chunk of that change.

2. Basketball will be extremely difficult...so while you wanted an "easier" path in Football....Basketball is much tougher.

3. We lose the Texas recruiting pipeline. And say what you want about TCU..but it is not TEXAS.

Just some of my points...feel free add to them on either side. You can probably see how I lean though. But with that being said....the Big East as our fallback wouldn't be the worst possible outcome.

**jbhtexas** · 11-30-2010, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by Rogue52

Please end ISU to Big East talk.

There was a reason we made the desperation move to offer all the buyout money to Texas, Oklahoma, and A&M.

It won't end. The Big 12 could sign a TV deal assuring every team $30 million/year, and there would still be people here clamoring how the Big East would be better and more "stable".

**justcynn** · 11-30-2010, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by Boxerdaddy

So let me get this straight. The people that want us to go to the Big East have these reasons:

1. Conference is weaksauce in football so we COULD be at the TOP.
?

Reasons not to:

1. $ The Big East schools make about a fourth of what we make now in our CRAPPY DEAL. Sure the Big East may get a new contract but now split that among 20+ schools...ISU cannot command a huge chunk of that change.

2. Basketball will be extremely difficult...so while you wanted an "easier" path in Football....Basketball is much tougher.

3. We lose the Texas recruiting pipeline. And say what you want about TCU..but it is not TEXAS.

Just some of my points...feel free add to them on either side. You can probably see how I lean though. But with that being said....the Big East as our fallback wouldn't be the worst possible outcome.

I think the biggest draw is IF the leadership ever gets the feeling Texas is going to pick up and actually run, then it would be great to preempt that and make our own move - if the big 12 can stay together and we can get at least sloppy seconds, then I agree its the right move to stay - just have to make sure we stay in a AQ Conference.

**Nycclone** · 11-30-2010, 08:42 PM

It'd clearly be the fallback option, but at least we know it's there. Of course, if it did happen, it would make it a lot easier for me to catch a game or two, I'm probably one of like three people looking forward to playing uconn next year in football. But I'm smart enough to realize our best option is to keep the current conference afloat.

**Clonefan94** · 11-30-2010, 08:44 PM

I understand, if we have no other option, yeah, the Big East would be better than the MAC, but seriously, can someone explain to me how it's an exciting proposition now? Let's take the BCS conference that makes the least amount of money, add 5 teams (including TCU) and divide the measly pot up even more? TCU adds a decent market for sure, but they don't hole the clout that other Texas schools have and who are you going to put on TV, TCU or the mighty UT?

I can't believe that people actually prefer this over keeping the big XII intact and eventually adding a couple of teams.

**Judoka** · 11-30-2010, 08:45 PM

While I don't have an issue with the Big East over any other conference that isn't the Big XII (since we'd never get an invite to the Big 10 because we don't bring in extra TV sets), but for everyone saying we'd be able to win the Big East every year... what do you think would happen to recruiting when we aren't playing games in Texas every year? Recruiting would get a whole heck of a lot more tough in the Big East than it is in the Big XII.