Big 12 Expansion (new thread)

[cyIclSoneU]

@FriendlySpartan

What do you think about going all in on raiding the ACC? Clemson, GT, FSU, UNC, Duke, UVa, and any other you need to pull that off? Otherwise known as Delaney's wet dream.

Assuming as you say, USC to SEC is no threat.

This ends the SEC hegemony. Sacrifice the ACC to balance things out, but with Maryland also preserving a lot of the ACC. Add PSU and it is what the ACC should have been.

Also gets the BIG a ton of markets for their linear model, streaming and basketball tournament inventory for the future, and into the south population/recruiting area the BIG so desperately needs.

Also, maintains the pipe dream of ND to the BIG.

Seems like B1G only needs UVA, UNC, Georgia Tech to pull this off. Add Duke to make UNC happy if needed; otherwise Kansas can be school #18. Or add them both for basketball cache and Colorado or Iowa State can be school #20.

Clemson and FSU aren't AAU. Georgia Tech is in the Rutgers/Maryland lucky position of getting in-market BTN carriage rates in Atlanta.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

I don't think it is a sure thing that the Big 12 just votes along with the Alliance without those leagues letting them in. After all, if the Alliance starts scheduling each other and freezing out the SEC and Big 12, those two leagues are likely going to play each other a lot in the non-conference, and the Big 12 will probably realize it needs the SEC to vouch for its inclusion at the big table if the B1G PACC won't do it.

I am holding out hope for a 4-conference Alliance in which every school (more or less) plays an 8+1+1+1+buy game schedule, which would leave the SEC on an island. The B1G-Pac can own the Rose Bowl and the Big 12-ACC can split the Orange.

I could very well see this happening. The scheduling part of the alliance is so far out though that it really doesn't matter either way though.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

8 years? ACC GoR isn’t up until 2025. Add a year or two to transition and you are saying the big ten isn’t doing anything for 15 years. The SEC will be laughing at the big ten at that point.

8 years ish. Big ten's new deal goes good in 2023, 8 years from there is more what i was thinking which gets us to 2031 which is about the time to start having those talks.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Longtime realignment fan here, I admit. Better than the games themselves

1.) Maybe not, but perhaps they should be. Between streaming and likely changes to NCAA tournament revenue distribution, this is not only 2010 criteria. Their linear profile is not bad with KC. THere is also the fact the SEC could add them to lure UNC, Duke, UVa etc. KU-UNC basketball have a lot of ties. Those ACC schools lean SEC already, due the SEC brand being stronger, culture, politics, etc. Plus the SEC can always leverage the threat of inviting NC St and Va Tech, whereas I am not sure the BIG can.

2. The Pac12 is screwed because it lacks leverage to get its network in-market on enough subscribers, and years of poor time slots. Rolling 8-9 teams into the BIG (Network) solves both. The Pac12 brands valuation is likely much higher after a few years in the BIG. Adding 8-9 Pac 12 would strengthen the Big 12, as it forces a few Pac 12 teams to that conference.

3.) UT USC is not going to the SEC ever. $40 million per year more changes things.

4.) Will they be afforded that by the SEC? The SEC has leverage with Clemson, UNC, and UVa. They are the kingmakers of college athletics.

1. I think you might have a higher value of KU then the big ten does. Remember the new media deal will be around 70-80mil per school. Kansas doesn't even have close to that value even with a basketball team that is about to get crushed with the one and dones going straight to the NBA now

2. No reason for the big ten to do this and this is a pac12 pipedream

3. Trust me USC's president will never join the SEC

4. SEC could do just about anything but i have no inside knowledge of the SEC

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Seems like B1G only needs UVA, UNC, Georgia Tech to pull this off. Add Duke to make UNC happy if needed; otherwise Kansas can be school #18. Or add them both for basketball cache and Colorado or Iowa State can be school #20.

Clemson and FSU aren't AAU. Georgia Tech is in the Rutgers/Maryland lucky position of getting in-market BTN carriage rates in Atlanta.

Yep that is most likely the plan just without Kansas. Big ten really seems to love and value those schools from both the academics side and the athletics side. Need to wait awhile for the ACC deal to get closer to running out.

 

[BCClone]

Yep that is most likely the plan just without Kansas. Big ten really seems to love and value those schools from both the academics side and the athletics side. Need to wait awhile for the ACC deal to get closer to running out.

If you basically run a conference, why would you leave? Doesn’t appear they are hurting for money and after seeing what happened to NE in the big ten and getting no say. Also they will see it happen to OU and UT in the SEC, I think the NC schools will stay tight.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

If you basically run a conference, why would you leave? Doesn’t appear they are hurting for money and after seeing what happened to NE in the big ten and getting no say. Also they will see it happen to OU and UT in the SEC, I think the NC schools will stay tight.

They very well could stay. I'm not arrogant enough to think that the big ten can just get whoever they want by asking. As to why they would leave, well they would be getting double the money and moving to the premier academic conference (with those additions). If they don't want to come the big ten can read the landscape and see if they want to stay still again but by the time the GOR is semi close to being done who knows what NLI will have done to the college football landscape

 

[cyIclSoneU]

If you basically run a conference, why would you leave? Doesn’t appear they are hurting for money and after seeing what happened to NE in the big ten and getting no say. Also they will see it happen to OU and UT in the SEC, I think the NC schools will stay tight.

Everything bolded applies to Texas and the Big 12 even more strongly than to UNC and the ACC. And yet.

 

[JM4CY]

Everything bolded applies to Texas and the Big 12 even more strongly than to UNC and the ACC. And yet.

Additional factor though: Texas also has biggest egos that exist among mankind.

 

[BCClone]

Everything bolded applies to Texas and the Big 12 even more strongly than to UNC and the ACC. And yet.

I know, but Texas is a different beast entirely. They are the unhappy boss who gets married every two years to a different woman because their ego gets dinged a little. OU was basically thinking the ship would sink without their big brother UT. The big XII hurt Texas’ feelings when everyone started leaving so they decided to run and cry elsewhere.

I think the NC schools will see that they would lose their close rivalries, power, and many traditions leaving. I also think they believe they are the premier academic conference so it would be a step down in that regard.

 

[WhoISthis]

1. I think you might have a higher value of KU then the big ten does. Remember the new media deal will be around 70-80mil per school. Kansas doesn't even have close to that value even with a basketball team that is about to get crushed with the one and dones going straight to the NBA now

2. No reason for the big ten to do this and this is a pac12 pipedream

3. Trust me USC's president will never join the SEC

4. SEC could do just about anything but i have no inside knowledge of the SEC

1.) Some forward looking media people think otherwise, but it is often tied to the NCAA tournament changes. And there is still the fact KU in the SEC kills UNC to the BIG
2.)Is there a need for the Alliance?
3.) LOL, USC's president won't have carte blanche, trust me on that. This is above his pay grade tbh
4.) You gotta make better connections.

 

[scyclonekid]

When will UNI move up?

 

[scyclonekid]

Anyway, those going to Vegas have fun, safe trip and don’t be a fool wrap your tool!! Lol.

 

[isucy86]

Financially, the Big10 can maintain status quo at 14 teams and they will get big money starting 2023/24 school year.

But the Pac12 TV Rights new deal starts in 2024/25. What kind of response will they get? Will it be 60% of the Big10 deal like it is today? Or will the Pac12 schools fall farther behind?

The Pac12/Big10 commissioners had the opportunity to spend a lot of time this weekend in attending the OSU v Oregon and Mich v Wash games together. The Alliance has to be about more than scheduling and a voting block. Those 2 issues have little value to the Pac12 if they continue to flounder financially with their next TV deal.

Would FOX buy out 51% of the Pac12 Network and structure a deal with the Pac12 similar to what they have with Big10. Would FOX then bundle Big10 & Pac12 carriage fees? The Big10 Network is viewable in 60M households and the Pac12 Network less than 15M households. Would that automatically increase Pac12 TV money by $5, $10, etc million/school?

The other big event could be Texas & OU getting out of their GOR's early and the financial cost to Texas/OU. That could create a blueprint for ACC schools breaking their GOR prior to 2036. The big question is whether that blueprint would be just as workable 12 years before GOR expiration as 3 years before expiration?

If the Pac12 can't keep pace with Big10/SEC and/or ACC GOR falls apart- then the Big10 better be aggressive, because you know the SEC would expand to 30 teams in a second if it meant they dominated college football.

IMO ESPN is going to need to step up and enrich the ACC deal in the next 2 years. The problem with the ACC is for every Clemson, FL State, Miami and UNC is a Syracuse, Boston College, Wake Forest and Duke. Maybe ACC schools would be willing to distribute $ drastically different based on on field results.

 

[Die4Cy]

IMO at some point ESPN is going to need to step up and enrich the ACC deal in the next 2 years. The problem with the ACC is for every Clemson, FL State, Miami and UNC is a Syracuse, Boston College, Wake Forest and Duke. Maybe ACC schools would be willing to distribute $ drastically different based on on field results.

ESPN just can't afford to do that. Every indication is they are trying to consolidate as much of the brands they want under their umbrella and spinning off or low balling the brands that they don't. They've cut hundreds of jobs in on air talent. Disney wants the whole thing sold off. They've got the ACC for cheap for a good while and will need to keep it that way, just to make the other stuff work. And the best part for ESPN is, if the Clemsons and FSUs balk at the money they're getting now, ESPN-OU-UT has already shown them the way they can get more.

 

[Cyclones1969]

Again, why did you object to option 1 over option 2?

You're either resorting to strawmans, or dumb. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume strawmans as your white flag. Either way, those statements were never made or alluded to.

I see you still can't answer the questions:
Did Boise's brand grow? Would it have grown more if being 4-8 often? Would they have played OU in a big game if always 4-8?

No one picks going 4-8 over 8 or 9 wins for less OVERALL money (the example you chimed in on, JFC you're an idiot). No one would pick 4-8 over 8 or 9 wins for even a few million MORE. At some point perhaps you pick years of less wins for more money, but even then other factors come into play beforehand.

there is definite irony to you calling anyone else dumb.

What’s Boise’s brand? How has that translated into getting them into the next level?

and you’re right Purdue would much rather win 8 games in the aac making 7 million a year, than the 55 million they make now to win 4 games. I can’t believe more big 10 or sec schools don’t give away their budgets so they can play and win in Mac.

 

[isucy86]

ESPN just can't afford to do that. Every indication is they are trying to consolidate as much of the brands they want under their umbrella and spinning off or low balling the brands that they don't. They've cut hundreds of jobs in on air talent. Disney wants the whole thing sold off. They've got the ACC for cheap for a good while and will need to keep it that way, just to make the other stuff work. And the best part for ESPN is, if the Clemsons and FSUs balk at the money they're getting now, ESPN-OU-UT has already shown them the way they can get more.

I agree that ESPN is consolidating. Do they just televise SEC and ACC? By dropping Big12, Big10 and Pac12 can they bump up ACC deal.

If not, then I see no way Clemson, FSU, etc are going to stay in ACC.

 

[Win5002]

I think you are confusing what I said. I did not say that remaining big 12 schools are not watching the Big 10 and SEC. I think there is a substantial number of cross-conference viewership. I think intra-conference and games of regional interest are more appealing, but there certainly is some level of viewership that comes from out of conference fans.

Any B12 fan watching g SEC games unless their team is playing is slitting their own throat.

 

[t-noah]

This looks to be a pretty fun conference. Hopefully it works out fine revenue wise.

I'll bet most have seen this, but I'll put it here again. It gave me some encouragement. I liked the positive vibe anyway. [Other articles I've read project Big 12 members to receive about 20 mil/team, but that was before the four additions.]
New-Look Big 12 Revenue Reportedly Just Shy of Current Revenue (heartlandcollegesports.com)

I agree. As the saying goes, if you can't join them, beat them. It might be fun to be in a conference of equals that is focused on increasing its stock rather than just maintaining a position at the top.

" The new look Big 12 will be the most competitive conference in college football. Just about every school will enter each season with a legitimate shot at winning the conference championship and making the playoffs."
The Big 12 is America's Conference Now (heartlandcollegesports.com)

 

[WhoISthis]

there is definite irony to you calling anyone else dumb.

What’s Boise’s brand? How has that translated into getting them into the next level?

and you’re right Purdue would much rather win 8 games in the aac making 7 million a year, than the 55 million they make now to win 4 games. I can’t believe more big 10 or sec schools don’t give away their budgets so they can play and win in Mac.

Then don’t use strawmans.

Boise started off as a community college not that long ago, so I’d say getting vetted as a possible invite to a conference on par with the ACC and Pac12 means winning has translated to a LOT.

The BIG West is basically the MAC, but ignoring that, it would benefit those programs to have more seasons like UCF. In the past without playoffs and auto bids, there was merit in staying for perception.