Id rather have anywhere from 2-4 of the 4-corners schools as permanent members than Or/WA as temporary members
Their problems mean nothing to me.
Their problems mean nothing to me.
Big 12 Conference Realignment
- Thread starter t-noah
- Start date
Yeah. It definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. With all the talk of our conference's togetherness, and how much Yormark values it, I highly doubt that the Big 12 powers would be content to throw it all out the window and start making exceptions for one or two programs again.
I'd probably rather us stay put at 12 then go to unequal shares again. Remember what Yormark said... "the best deals are sometimes the ones that don't get done."
I'd probably rather us stay put at 12 then go to unequal shares again. Remember what Yormark said... "the best deals are sometimes the ones that don't get done."
I'm not buying this. Sounds more like noise to negotiate with other current PAC member.
Yes, the fundamentals for Oregon and UW going to the B10 are strong largely to support USC and UCLA's presence there. It might already have happened if Kevin Warren hadn't left for the Bears' job, or maybe he left because it didn't?
Can't see B12 expansion until that happens though - the B10 taking those two. Then the P12 craters and the B12 can absorb the leftovers it chooses.
The exception would be a B12 GOR's "out" for both which this internet person says is in the works. Yormark may be thinking: ownership is nine tenths of the law, so take them now and deal with the future then. His first objective may be to kill the P12.
Can't see B12 expansion until that happens though - the B10 taking those two. Then the P12 craters and the B12 can absorb the leftovers it chooses.
The exception would be a B12 GOR's "out" for both which this internet person says is in the works. Yormark may be thinking: ownership is nine tenths of the law, so take them now and deal with the future then. His first objective may be to kill the P12.
If the Big12 standard payout is $31.7M, does a 115% share mean Washington wants $36.45?
If that's the case, and Oregon has been offered the same deal, does that mean the other 12, 14 or 16 Big 12 teams would subsidize a total of $9.5M of unequal payments to Oregon & Washington combined? A subsidy of $600k-$800k for the remaining 16-12 teams.
I understand people's resistance to a new version of the Longhorn Network, but this would be different if Oregon & Washington are consistent CFB Playoff teams. They would probably bring the Big12 more than the $10M annual subsidy.
Why are you treating a non verified Twitter post from an account with less than 600 followed as legit? In what world would the big 12 accept uneven distribution for Pac12 schools? Also this idea about UW and UO ending up in the big ten has zero info backing it. If the big ten wanted them they would already be in the big10.
But why would they make that offer? Just tell the 4 top choices that there are two spots. Even distribution but requires a long GOR. First two to sign the paperwork get the offer. The other two die a slow death in the remaining PAC conference.
They wouldn't, their going off a Twitter account no one has ever heard of and treating is as fact. Kinda sad you would think so little of the Big12 to think this was possible
Where did I say it was legit, I just asked what it meant from a financial perspective. Does it mean $5M more for Washington?
But in general, I don't have an issue with some schools making more if they drive higher revenue for the conference. The Longhorn Network was/is about making more money for 1 school. And it was to the detriment of the other 8 schools.
But looking forward, some schools might grow conference revenue by being a consistent CFB Playoff team. I have no problem giving Big12 teams that make the CFB Playoff a bonus or increased share vs. non-playoff Big 12 teams.
Washington & Oregon might grow conference revenue because ESPN & Fox value those 2 school's contribution to a media rights deal significantly more than the Big12's future per school payout of $31.7M annually. For example, what if ESPN & Fox told Yormark they would bump the Big12's Media Rights deal by $100M per year if Washington & Oregon joined the Big12. If the $100M was split $38M to Washington, $38M to Oregon and the remaining $24M increased the other 12 conference school's media rights share from $31.7M to $33.7M. That's not the same as the Longhorn Network, all the other Conference Schools benefit financially, but Oregon & Washington a little more.
I realize a lot of people feel every school should get an even split on the media rights deal. I'm just not in that group. Mainly because I don't believe more money equates to more wins. Texas' AD revenue is probably $150M more than ISU and we held our own over the last decade. But giving Jamie Pollard $2M more each year might be the difference between keeping a head or assistant coach in Ames or improvements to wrestling facilities, etc. etc.
He didn’t say you said it was legit, he said you’re treating it like it’s legit. Why?
Love it. Fascinating take. More interesting than many of the B1G matchups (e.g. Purdue-Minnesota, Indiana-Rutgers).
Aside from being an unverified account with a few hundred followers, I’m going to call ******** just in the substance. The B12 has no reason to give away the store to anyone from the PAC, and certainly not to schools that very well might be short-term members.
The B12 is in a position of power, and I’d expect them to negotiate like it.
My source just told me if BY did make that offer, he’s losing his job tomorrow. And if this somehow played out as true and Pollard was on board, my donations to ISU athletics stop immediately.
Just in case anyone didn’t get my hyperbole here, this is a ******** source. Throwing **** at the wall is one thing, this is throwing **** at the whole house.
Because this is a message board, where we discuss topics posted.
I guess I didn't realize people would take offense to my belief it would be OK to pay Washington/Oregon a higher media rights multiplier if they brought the Big12 accretive investment by ESPN/FOX.
I guess I'd prefer $33.7M vs. $31.7M. I don't care if another school makes $38M.
That's the beauty of capitalism- some people/entities get paid more if they bring in more money.
contrarymary
may her colors ever fly
That's fun to think about, for sure and the best thing about it is the ability to have full round robins, even in football. However, the biggest problem I see with your alignment is that all the Texas teams will want to be together. So, try this one on for size:
Rocky division
Colorado
Utah
BYU
Arizona
Arizona State
Great Plains division
ISU
KU
KSU
OSU
Western Michigan
Appalachian division
WVU
Louisville/Appalachian State
Pitt
Virginia
Cincinnati
Gulf division
Baylor
Houston
TCU
Texas Tech
UCF
If TT would allow it, put them in the Great Plains and substitute Thulane for Western Michigan in the Gulf. Just having fun!
Would such a deal greatly benefit the Big 12, particularly Iowa St? Absolutely- the removal of PAC by getting its best remaining is of huge value to B12 and Iowa St.
The Big out clause isn’t giving up much imo. The revenue per team given up would be well spent.
