Big Ten Expansion - Texas?

[herbicide]

Well, if you know how to use a hyperlink, the blog links all of its information, I'd say he did a pretty good job of providing evidence.

I don't see anything that indicates the Big 10 would increase TV revenue or overall revenue to Texas. I am not arguing the Big 12 makes or splits more money, we all already know that.

What I do see is that the Big 12 splits 78M of its money, but we also know the Big 12 does not split all of the money, which is what benefits Texas and one of the reasons why us "little guys" don't like the TV package of the Big 12. That 78M is only the revenue that is split.

[aeroclone]

I was looking at this yesterday. It is my firm belief that the only way Texas would come to the Big Ten is if TAMU also receives an offer, so just for a second, I'll assume that Texas, TAMU, and ND join the Big Ten. The Big 12 could then 1 up the Big 10 by going to 18, with the following teams:

Big 18

West

Texas Tech
Baylor
TCU
Utah
BYU
Boise State
Wyoming
Houston
New Mexico

East

Nebraska
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Missouri
Colorado
Colorado State

Essentially, what you have in the East is the old Big 8 + Colorado State. You would not play anyone in they other division, you'd only play the other 8 teams in you division. This would ensure that the conference title game would NEVER be a rematch, which would be pretty cool.

An interesting twist to the West might be to add teams like San Jose State, San Diego State, or Fresno State to expand into California.

I'm sorry, but I just have to laugh whenever I hear most of these schools getting their names tossed out in these expansion discussions. None of these schools have the fanbase, facilities, or media markets to really justify being in a BCS conference. That is why they are mid-majors. Sure, some of them have had some recent success in football, but what about their other sports? What about their academics? What does Boise have other than a good football team that plays in a small stadium with a blue field? What about Boise basketball? What about the academic standards of the school? How about that massive Idaho media market? And don't even get me started on some of these other schools.

I haven't seen anybody propose a change yet that I think would be beneficial to the Big 12. You think our TV contract and Bowls lineup stinks now, just imagine what it will be if we start replacing schools like Mizzou or Texas with Wyoming. As far as ISU is concerned, we either need any Big Ten expansion to come from someone outside the Big 12, or we need to be one of the ones leaving. Anything else is going to end up as a big loss.

[hawkfan]

I don't see anything that indicates the Big 10 would increase TV revenue or overall revenue to Texas. I am not arguing the Big 12 makes or splits more money, we all already know that.

What I do see is that the Big 12 splits 78M of its money, but we also know the Big 12 does not split all of the money, which is what benefits Texas and one of the reasons why us "little guys" don't like the TV package of the Big 12. That 78M is only the revenue that is split.

The last financial year, Texas made $12 million in TV revenue, while in the same year, EVERY Big Ten team made $22 million in TV revenue. Indiana made more from TV revenue in the Big Ten than Texas did in the Big 12 - BY TEN MILLION DOLLARS. If Texas moved to the Big Ten today, they'd increase their TV revenue by roughly $10 million, and that is without including the added viewers from the state of Texas in the BTN. With those viewers added in, you're probably looking at an added $2-$5 million per school - Texas is a HUGE market.

The move would make big time financial sense for Texas, but again, the biggest reason for Texas to join would be academics. Back in the early 90's, Texas approached (yes, Texas WENT TO) the Pac Ten and Big Ten to join those respective conferences. The PAC Ten voted no (due to Stanford giving Texas a "no" vote), and the Big Ten couldn't vote for another 4 years because they had just added Penn State. Texas went to both the PAC Ten and Big Ten before (essentially) being forced to join the Big 12 by Texas legislators.

Remember, ultimately the university presidents (NOT the athletic directors) are the ones who have to vote for conference expansion. This is more about academics than it is athletics, and the research grants in the Big Ten are MUCH bigger than those in the Big 12. Texas would get a BIG academic boost ($$$ wise) by joining the Big Ten.

[hawkfan]

I'm sorry, but I just have to laugh whenever I hear most of these schools getting their names tossed out in these expansion discussions. None of these schools have the fanbase, facilities, or media markets to really justify being in a BCS conference. That is why they are mid-majors. Sure, some of them have had some recent success in football, but what about their other sports? What about their academics? What does Boise have other than a good football team that plays in a small stadium with a blue field? What about Boise basketball? What about the academic standards of the school? How about that massive Idaho media market? And don't even get me started on some of these other schools.

I haven't seen anybody propose a change yet that I think would be beneficial to the Big 12. You think our TV contract and Bowls lineup stinks now, just imagine what it will be if we start replacing schools like Mizzou or Texas with Wyoming. As far as ISU is concerned, we either need any Big Ten expansion to come from someone outside the Big 12, or we need to be one of the ones leaving. Anything else is going to end up as a big loss.

I'm fully aware this would be a "big loss" for Big 12 schools, but what other option would they have? Would you rather just go back to the Big 8? Is that a superior option? What happens if Texas and TAMU both leave the Big 12? That was the purpose of this thread, I am genuinely interested to hear what would happen if the two staple Texas schools left the Big 12.

[herbicide]

The last financial year, Texas made $12 million in TV revenue, while in the same year, EVERY Big Ten team made $22 million in TV revenue. Indiana made more from TV revenue in the Big Ten than Texas did in the Big 12 - BY TEN MILLION DOLLARS. If Texas moved to the Big Ten today, they'd increase their TV revenue by roughly $10 million, and that is without including the added viewers from the state of Texas in the BTN. With those viewers added in, you're probably looking at an added $2-$5 million per school - Texas is a HUGE market.

The move would make big time financial sense for Texas, but again, the biggest reason for Texas to join would be academics. Back in the early 90's, Texas approached (yes, Texas WENT TO) the Pac Ten and Big Ten to join those respective conferences. The PAC Ten voted no (due to Stanford giving Texas a "no" vote), and the Big Ten couldn't vote for another 4 years because they had just added Penn State. Texas went to both the PAC Ten and Big Ten before (essentially) being forced to join the Big 12 by Texas legislators.

Remember, ultimately the university presidents (NOT the athletic directors) are the ones who have to vote for conference expansion. This is more about academics than it is athletics, and the research grants in the Big Ten are MUCH bigger than those in the Big 12. Texas would get a BIG academic boost ($$$ wise) by joining the Big Ten.

Ugh. They made 12M from the revenue split. That doesn't include the $ they earned by not splitting; Texas would have to give up more of the other income.

The big 10 and big 12 DO NOT split revenue the same way.

[hawkfan]

Ugh. They made 12M from the revenue split. That doesn't include the $ they earned by not splitting; Texas would have to give up more of the other income.

The big 10 and big 12 DO NOT split revenue the same way.

I'm not following. They made 12M from the revenue split, but they were splitting substantially LESS money. Every team in the Big Ten made $22M, and that was BEFORE they add Texas, which would add a substantial sum to the BTN's revenue. I guess, explain to me how Texas would lose TV revenue signing a better TV deal with a higher revenue?

Texas got 15% (12M) of the Big 12's 78M TV contract. Let's assume there are 14 teams in the Big 10 - The Big 10's TV contract netted about $225M last year. 1/14th of that is about 7%. 7% of $225M is $15.75M. Without even adding the TV sets from the state of Texas (which would add SUBSTANTIALLY to the BTN's revenue, we're talking tens of millions here), Texas would gain $3 million dollars - again without adding TV sets from the state of Texas.

I think you're misunderstanding something, Texas would CLEARLY gain money from the Big Ten revenue sharing agreement.

[herbicide]

IIRC, Texas gets to keep the $ for games on espn, etc. that are not on the normal big 12 deal, or something like that; not all the tv revenue is split.

If you've paid attention around here, most of us are jealous of the big 10 tv deal, but its because the big 12 package slights ISU and the other small schools, in favor of the Texas/bigger schools.

[hawkfan]

IIRC, Texas gets to keep the $ for games on espn, etc. that are not on the normal big 12 deal, or something like that; not all the tv revenue is split.

If you've paid attention around here, most of us are jealous of the big 10 tv deal, but its because the big 12 package slights ISU and the other small schools, in favor of the Texas/bigger schools.

I know that, but that is still money included in the Big 12's overall TV deal, it simply is not split. As of my understanding, that ESPN money is included in that $12M figure.

[herbicide]

I know that, but that is still money included in the Big 12's overall TV deal, it simply is not split. As of my understanding, that ESPN money is included in that $12M figure.

Ah, well there is no denying who has the best television contract of the two conferences.

There is something missing from those blogs, check these stats out from 2007:

Forbes' Most Valuable College Football Teams

Texas is #1 with $120M, Ohio State is #2 with $118M.

Here is another one:

Orlando Sentinel - College Gridiron 365 Blog – How much revenue did your favorite Football Bowl Subdivision school take in in 2007-08? This chart will tell you

Texas is the #1 revenue school, followed by Ohio State.

From a comment on the article:

According to that article, revenue by conference in decreasing order.
Southeastern Conference $853,790,632
Big Ten $840,609,482
Big 12 $797,769,024
ACC $648,921,163
Pac-10 $587,672,004
Big East $364,427,638
Conference USA $308,481,690
Mountain West $276,800,202
Mid-American Conference $259,970,993
Western Ath. Conference $184,072,761
Sun Belt Conference $110,459,084
Independent $103,310,348

Something to me does not add up with those #'s in the blogs. The Big 10 makes $43M more total, but according to the blogs they make $162M more via TV contracts. Sounds pretty disproportionate to me.

Same goes in comparing Texas TV income to their total income, in comparison to Ohio State.

[hawkfan]

Ah, well there is no denying who has the best television contract of the two conferences.

There is something missing from those blogs, check these stats out from 2007:

Forbes' Most Valuable College Football Teams

Texas is #1 with $120M, Ohio State is #2 with $118M.

Here is another one:

Orlando Sentinel - College Gridiron 365 Blog – How much revenue did your favorite Football Bowl Subdivision school take in in 2007-08? This chart will tell you

Texas is the #1 revenue school, followed by Ohio State.

From a comment on the article:



Something to me does not add up with those #'s in the blogs. The Big 10 makes $43M more total, but according to the blogs they make $162M more via TV contracts. Sounds pretty disproportionate to me.

Same goes in comparing Texas TV income to their total income, in comparison to Ohio State.

The numbers that the Blog used were reported from an ESPN story by Outside the Lines, and they used numbers from this past year. The biggest problem with using 2007 was that the BTN numbers probably weren't figured in as 2007 was its inaugural year - and it didn't turn nearly as much of a profit as it did in 08 and 09. The key is that the Big Ten now has the BTN, which is essentially a gold mine for all schools involved in the Big Ten - the figures you found probably didn't even include that.

Here is a segment done by ESPN's Outside the Lines that aired about 3.5 weeks ago, I doubt you'll find anything more credible than this:

Television's Impact On College Sports - ESPN Video - ESPN

[herbicide]

The numbers that the Blog used were reported from an ESPN story by Outside the Lines, and they used numbers from this past year. The biggest problem with using 2007 was that the BTN numbers probably weren't figured in as 2007 was its inaugural year - and it didn't turn nearly as much of a profit as it did in 08 and 09. The key is that the Big Ten now has the BTN, which is essentially a gold mine for all schools involved in the Big Ten - the figures you found probably didn't even include that.

Here is a segment done by ESPN's Outside the Lines that aired about 3.5 weeks ago, I doubt you'll find anything more credible than this:

Television's Impact On College Sports - ESPN Video - ESPN

That link does not have any information on UT's total TV income, so my initial point of where does that blogger get the total TV money for Texas from?

[hawkfan]

The TV Money for Texas comes from the Outside the Lines story written with the video shoot they did. I am 100% certain that that # is correct. I'll find the link later, I don't have time right now, but I know that number is right.

Trust me, no team in the country would lose TV money joining the Big Ten, it just wouldn't happen. The BTN along with the Big Ten/ESPN deal pretty much guarantees it.

[herbicide]

The TV Money for Texas comes from the Outside the Lines story written with the video shoot they did. I am 100% certain that that # is correct. I'll find the link later, I don't have time right now, but I know that number is right.

Trust me, no team in the country would lose TV money joining the Big Ten, it just wouldn't happen. The BTN along with the Big Ten/ESPN deal pretty much guarantees it.

But would they lose overall money, which again was my original argument. I also think Texas got a hefty check this year for playing in the title game that it doesn't have to share.

Besides, the Big 12 tv contract is not staying static. You're crazy if you don't think an SEC, Big 12, PAC 10, ACC networks aren't already being planned.

[MIhawk]

Herbie and others,

I googled:
"television revenue, Big 12 conference 2009"

every hit that I looked at indicates that TOTAL television revenue for the conference was $78 million

If you divide that evenly by 12 it would be ~$6.5 million per school.
The fact that TX is shown having $12mil coming in from tv shows that they are getting their disproportionate cut.

What the blogger is arguing is that financially TX is better of getting an equal slice of a MUCH bigger pie than an oversized part of a small pie.

And those numbers that show TX athletic income/ value at number one in the country wouldn't have to change. The vast majority of that is from things they wouldn't have to share like gate receipts, seat licenses, luxury box sales and donations. If they added B10 tv revenue they would even further distance themselves from the other programs.

[herbicide]

Herbie and others,

I googled:
"television revenue, Big 12 conference 2009"

every hit that I looked at indicates that TOTAL television revenue for the conference was $78 million

If you divide that evenly by 12 it would be ~$6.5 million per school.
The fact that TX is shown having $12mil coming in from tv shows that they are getting their disproportionate cut.

What the blogger is arguing is that financially TX is better of getting an equal slice of a MUCH bigger pie than an oversized part of a small pie.

And those numbers that show TX athletic income/ value at number one in the country wouldn't have to change. The vast majority of that is from things they wouldn't have to share like gate receipts, seat licenses, luxury box sales and donations. If they added B10 tv revenue they would even further distance themselves from the other programs.

Again, that is not an apples to apples comparision, because the big 12 does not split revenue that way; it is the 6.5M + an unknown amount (pending verification of the 12M).

The real question that has not been answered is what is the total revenue for Texas, not just their split of the big 12 pie, and how much of that total is from TV.

All that said, does anyone want to place a wager that Texas will join the big 10?