Member organizations are going to direct people working for them to do whatever is seen to be in the best interests of member organizations, up to and including shutting the lights out if they're the last ones to leave.
Pac-12 to decide whether to expand within a couple weeks
- Thread starter cyIclSoneU
- Start date
Member organizations are going to direct people working for them to do whatever is seen to be in the best interests of member organizations, up to and including shutting the lights out if they're the last ones to leave.
Sorry pride, but you are wrong. Conversations about were the members might end up aren't going to be had within the big 12 or its employees/consultants. There would be significant conficts otherwise. What is good for ISU is not necesarily good for the rest and vice versa.
The idea that Luck was hired to find resting places for the 8 other schools is far fetched to say the least.
But it is a necessary assumption for the people who think the B1G ACC Pac have already carved up the 8 and have landing spots for them, waiting to announce at the right moment. The B1GAnon truthers.
I bet Luck is here to navigate the Big 12‘s role in the NCAA constitutional convention, CFP expansion, the Alliance, stuff like that. Doing whatever it takes to keep the paradigm as “Power 5.” Big picture things that are bigger and trickier than adding Cincy and UCF. But not pulling strings to get ISU in the B1G lol.
A lot less desperate than thinking Luck was brought in to ensure the Big 12 was turned into the #1 G5 conference in the country. That viewpoint certainly fits in with a certain demographic of this site.
Like him or not, the guy's coached high major college teams and in the NFL. Never won a Natty or Super Bowl, but was always well
liked by his players and fans because he's a straight shooter. He's also one of FOX's top college football analysts and is well connected across football period.
So why are some completely discounting what he says? But they take "unnamed industry insiders with no connection to any conference" sources as the gospel truth? And those "unnamed industry sources" are who most of the writers (Thamel, Mandel, Wilner, etc) are using.
Wanny's been hanging out with B1G reps the last couple of weeks during the meetings with FOX and when he taped a segment for BTN. So in the last week, in talking with a bunch of folks from the B1G, Wanny's told that ISU & KU are going to get invites or it's strongly hinted at. In the last week mind you, not a month ago not 3 weeks ago. And somehow people portray this as not newsworthy.
One thing about realignment: a lot of the stuff you hear right at the very beginning that gets put on the news cycle back burner will turn out to be true in the end. ISU/KU were rumored right away to be serious B1G candidates and then we got the "well, they made a run but were told not now" line.
I don't buy that. I think the interest is mutual and that both will wind up in the B1G.
Last edited:
We have the head of the NCAA ADs at ISU so the constitutional convention he is basically in charge of. Don’t need Luck for that. CFP expansion, Bowlsby was/is extremely deep into that already, don’t need Luck for that. The “alliance”, supposed to be just 3 but it gives some separation with that so sure Luck helps. I just don’t see what we have him for if not explaining everything. The remaining 8 want to be in the top tier whether b12 or elsewhere.
There will be no G5 and P5 anymore. For the last decade five conferences made $30-50MM in TV money and five made a few million (the American highest at $7MM). A huge gulf, with basically two groups.
After the next media deals there will be two in the $60-70MM range, two in the $30-40MM, one around $20MM probably, and five at just a few million. There are more than just two groups.
That composition is not sustainable; it makes no sense that Purdue and Mississippi State make more than Clemson and USC. So it will break down within 15-20 years. Sucks that we are feeling the sting before the other similar schools do, but they’ll feel it just the same.
Got to disagree here too, and assume Luck is there primarily to help retain power conference status with path to the CFP, as well as trying to figure out something bold in terms of media rights if the Big 12 does indeed expand.
I don’t see there being coordination among schools in terms of trying to get into other conferences. Schools are going to do that independently.
Unless a majority of schools have a high level of confidence they are landing elsewhere, the conference ids going to keep moving ahead with these options. In fact, I doubt any school, ISU included could possibly feel so good about a landing spot that they would not take part in expansion discussions. I just don’t see how substantial negotiations to join a conference could take place until the OU UT mess has some clarity and schools know when to target a move, and how much money they will have to propose media rights forfeitures.
The league could keep going, it could dissolve in 2025, it could dissolve in 2023.
Or unequal revenue sharing with performance enhanced earning could be used by the PAC to close the gap with regards to their top teams' revenue shares (SC, Ore, Wash).
It will not take 15-20 years. When the PAC negotiates its deal and barring Amazon overpaying Oregon and USC are going to be terribly disappointed to see that their league is killing them. Clemson will not tolerate getting absolutely left in the dust financially. These will be the root cause for instability and a major shakeup in the next couple of years. And the alliance has done zero to address these root causes. In fact, limiting an attractive option for these big brands to keep up (moving to the Big 10) only exacerbates it. CFB is absolutely unstable. PAC and ACC have to have drastic changes.
Last edited:
Yea there are comments about legal liability to dismiss a no expansion statement but isn’t Wendy on a expansion committee a potential liability? Wendy/KU could easily excuse themselves if that was the case. How is that different from SEC/Out/TX?
We’re getting into scenarios where 7-8 of the schools get landing spots & the alliance isn’t going to simply agree to B10 getting their AAU schools meanwhile the ACC has no choice but to take Baylor/WVU. A Amazon deal I think would be a great scenario at this point & I’m starting to get why Pollard smiled when he talked about fans running with expansion rumors
So obviously you have the B1G and SEC in the 60-70 Range. I'm confused on the rest. Guessing ACC in the 30-40 due to their GoR, but you think the PAC and big 12 will see cuts to their payments. PAC paid out 34MM last year (covid year) and bowlsby has the remaining 8 teams value at 26.4 now. So do you see the PAC going nowhere with their deal and the big xii is overvalued and will take a 25% haircut?
Pac is in the 30-40 range I mentioned. I don’t think Bowlsby has the Big 12 at 26.4. Is that the 50% OU/UT cut plus 40% growth number that people have been throwing around with no basis?
Bowlsby estimated a 50% cut from OU and UT leaving which would put us in the high teens. Probably a bit more of cut if we add UCF/Cincinnati/one more, who are going to be under that value by a little bit. Then hopefully we get an Amazon premium and some bump for live sports being valuable entering the mid 2020s. That’s the about $20MM number. But I am no TV consultant. Will be interesting to see where it shakes out, just have to hope it’s enough to keep high level facilities and coaches and let winning do the rest.
Bowlsby said that OU and UT would be a 14 MM hit going forward for the conference teams. While your 50% is correct (to a point, but not how you use it), only 28 of the 40 MM is from TV contracts and bowlsby specifically said 50% of TV contracts. For this year, ISU has 40.4 as the number from the big XII. Last year (Covid year) we paid out 34.5MM. That was with less games (less money) no team in the CFP (so no bonus there) and even basketball was messed up. Remember Bowlsby says 14MM going forward. So that is 26.4 without any increases. If we get a team in the CFP, then that number goes up.
Here is a link to what Bowlsby said.
.
If you are looking for the most negative take possible, you're going to get it lol
I guess we will find out if a new Big 12 is only a few million dollars off of the Pac-12 or ACC - I’m skeptical. There will be other losses in revenue not just in TV money. Being in the 20s would be good.
The remaining 8 also took it up the rear in their streaming platforms. It was mentioned that each team only received a million dollars for their tier 3 rights to go on ESPN+. Oh, when I say each team, I mean every team, OU and UT gets a cut of that even though they have their own agreements. ISU was much more with just cyclonesTV. So there is also money to be made when OU and UT leave.
I am perceived as bearish on here but I am quite bullish about media rights in a new Big 12. We’d be the only power league who isn’t tied to a cable network. We can go in big and fast on streaming in a way that other conferences cannot. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see all or nearly all of our media rights go to Amazon. My preference would be closer to something like CBS gets first pick of one game a week and all the rest are on Amazon (or maybe the worst one goes on CBSSN to give them more of a slice). And I think Amazon would be in a position to pay more per viewer than the cable networks would for multiple reasons: Breaking in to the game and serving up targeted ads as the two biggest.
Yes, there are options. The nice thing is ESPN really is kinda stuck keeping us in the same area of payments for the next four years, at least on a per team basis for the remaining 8. If we end up continuing the B12, then we can have the streaming services be 4 years further along and could be the only one willing to dive into that arena with a full charge. Many of our teams' fans have dealt with steaming for tier 3 stuff lately so many are comfortable with it. For the last three years, if we continue on and not dissolve ultimately, we may be able to pull two teams in for the reduced payout, 10MM each and bump them some each year. An AAC may cost us 15 MM/year (8MM to the team and pay 7 MM to replace the money to the conference). I think we will be darn close to where we are now when it's all said and done, pending we have a CFP bid.
