So now, NU and TAMU are just looking at different teams above them. Each had a good year in their new conference, but for the past two years are back to basically middle-of-the-pack teams.
COLUMN: Thank you, Oklahoma president
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
So now, NU and TAMU are just looking at different teams above them. Each had a good year in their new conference, but for the past two years are back to basically middle-of-the-pack teams.
nebraska and a&m never worked to equal the field. And Missouri was the first team to flirt with another conference (the big ten) which led to the instability. Neb and Aggie cried like girls and took their ball and went home.
i suggest re-reading how everything went down before posting on the subject.
I think its hard to generalize the whole situation, there were too many moving parts and depending on the perspective of the writer you get a different conclusion.
For instance Texas was the one who came up with the idea of a network and tried to get everyone on board, but everyone balked at the idea worrying about costs. Then it seems they took it to A&M with just the two of them and A&M still balked at the costs. I can see where they want a reward for being willing to take those risks which they have but at some point to stabilize the conference it has to turn into a conference network or the schools added will always be G5 schools with no hope at adding P5 schools. The other thing is any conference that is an alternative will require Texas to do the same thing, so if they really feel the Big 12 is best for them and care about having some "brand" schools in the conference they might as well give the LHN or roll it into a conference network maybe at the end of the current tv deal or as soon as expansion with P5 schools would come available.
If they don't do that the conference only holds together as long as other schools can't get other attractive options not because of a strong Big 12.
The Pac-12, Big 12 and ACC all have structural issues that aren't going away, IMO. The Pac-12 has too many teams that lack national appeal and they play too many games at times that most casual fans in the Eastern and Central time zones don't or won't watch. The Big 12 is burdened with too many small-market teams and not enough inventory. The ACC has great markets, but not very many teams with deep football tradition.
If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why do I want to take on these problems and form a collective bargaining group?
If I'm the Big Ten or SEC, why do I want to take on these problems and form a collective bargaining group?
Because ala carte TV program pricing may destroy their model in the years ahead causing a need for the collegiate sports business to rationalize.
Yeah, I guess the two leagues with the biggest brands and draw the most fans will have no idea how to make money in changing environments, and all of a sudden teams with smaller fan bases will be making money hand over fist. geesh!
Disagree. Missouri *created* the turmoil by lobbying for one of the invites to the Big 10 and getting turned down. Lucikly (for them) the ensuing instability (that they created) gave them an excuse to use the get out of jail free card from the SEC.
The poster didn't state that. Geesh!
The poster stated the existing gravy train model of premium CATV/SAT subs for BTN and SECN will significantly change and they will need to adapt accordingly. The only reason both conferences recently expanded was due to acquisition of premium cable subs for their conference networks. The long-term value of those premium cable subs have been reduced due to cord cutting and CATV/SAT unbundling which now raises questions regarding their decision to expand (especially the B10 with Rutgers). It is also raises a red flag over the rationale of the B12 to expand.
There are two things that are true:
1. GoR does not expire until 2025, so the chances of any team leaving this conference until then (or close to then) is very slim. The courts rarely if ever give someone back rights to something if they are the ones that break a contractual agreement.
2. The television landscape will be drastically different in 2025 than it is now. How that will impact Big 12 is completely unknown. How it will impact Big Ten and SEC is completely unknown.
Because of these two things, talk of teams moving out of Big 12 is 100% completely and utterly ridiculous at this point.
1. GoR does not expire until 2025, so the chances of any team leaving this conference until then (or close to then) is very slim. The courts rarely if ever give someone back rights to something if they are the ones that break a contractual agreement.
2. The television landscape will be drastically different in 2025 than it is now. How that will impact Big 12 is completely unknown. How it will impact Big Ten and SEC is completely unknown.
Because of these two things, talk of teams moving out of Big 12 is 100% completely and utterly ridiculous at this point.
Is there a team limit for the conference to remain a conference? If the PAC takes the 4 teams they were originally going to take and WV goes to the SEC is the Big 12 still a conference with 5 teams and can those 5 teams reap the benefits of the GoR?
You are 100% correct, but it's summertime man and there is 0 juice about football. Throw us a bone here!
The poster might not have said those exact words but all of you "cord cutting" , "alacarte is coming" tv phrophets all of a sudden pretend the two most popular leagues are somehow not going to be able to profit in a new environment. This tends to be a very simplistic view of things, and the conferences that control the content with the most demand are still going to find ways to profit one way or another.
I think the Rutgers expansion long term can work out very nicely for them. Putting them in a P5 league with OSU, Michigan, PSU, MSU regularly on the schedule is going to give them a chance to grow to be a true P5 team. New Jersey produces a lot of high school recruits, which was part of the reason for adding them and Maryland. The B1G only has one state Ohio that produces more than those two states in terms of football players. Pennsylvania might be close but probably does not in most years produce as many as New Jersey and Maryland. As well as having a lot of B1G alumni in the NYC area will create more interest overall in the Rutgers product.
Last edited:
When the B1G signs its new deal in a few years it's going to be massive, and will adapt to a la carte and whatever other media forces are at play. Delaney's a smart one.
Wrong again.
Nobody has said they won't profit but their current premium sub revenue model is at risk and they will need to adapt somehow. Both conferences expanded solely due to acquisition of premium cable subs for their conference networks and those moves now run the risk of diluting future revenue shares for incumbent members as those conferences eventually transition to a model with far less T3 CATV/SAT units with much higher rates per unit. The projected premium cable sub revenue growth won't be nearly as much as they originally projected.
Also as an FYI, the linked article strongly hints at the cord cutting issues facing CATV/SAT providers. Unbundling sports programming will be one of their responses to help stem the cord cutting tide:
http://www.cedmagazine.com/news/2015/06/study-pay-tv-video-subscriber-growth-drops-to-10-year-low
http://awfulannouncing.com/2015/exploding-rights-fees-putting-the-squeeze-on-sports-networks.html
Their new deal will be sizeable but likely not as much as expected. See link.
Wait - you don't think A&M has been a huge loss for the Big 12? You're kidding, right? Houston is basically an SEC town now.
We should have listened to Boren when he said Louisville would be a good addition for the conference.
I said that TAMU is back to being basically a middle of the pack FB team, just as they were in the Big 12. TAMU's conference record over their last ten years in the Big 12 was 37-44. Your schtick of twisting a poster's words is wearing really thin.
Your statement that Houston is an SEC town is laughable at best.
Last edited:
So what if CU, MU, aTm & NU are all huge losses...ISU was supposed to do what exactly to stop the exodus? ISU was supposed to wield what power to add Louisville? You can b*tch as much as you want to about this conference but if we had a better option we'd be there now.
Well, and don't they already have the framework with BTNtogo or something like that? Essentially like ESPN and HBO's streaming, where you had to have a cable subscription to get it, but like those other two, can be converted to a standalone subscription...
Well there we have it. To get to the "real" motives behind Boren's comments about his unhappiness with the Big 12, just visit the "OU message boards." That's great...
