Who is best for the Big 12?

[MisterO]

From this fan’s perspective…I guess I don’t understand the point (other than the obvious money grab) of a huge ‘conference’ when you don’t play all the teams in your conference regularly. Seems more of like a loose collective of schools who happen to play each other on occasion.

It’s kinda like everything else the powers that be feed all of us sheep: over-priced and watered down.

 

[NWICY]

Haven’t seen this posted, but the absolute best scenario includes the Big 12 getting the Arizona schools, Oregon, and Washington…and that being enough to entice OU and Texas to come back/stay. I loathe Texas…but that’s truly the best of all possible scenarios…

Let Tx try to destroy the SEC. I was good with them in conference because they were the "big" name, what they really are is a bunch of rich spoiled whiners that don't play well with others.

 

[jakemcilroy]

Access to the CFB play-off determines conference viability. If the new Big 12 (assuming it is stable), regardless of who's in it, has access, then it's a better long-term solution than being Rutgers. The problem is assuming stability is a dangerous thing in modern college sports.

Unless the "New Big 12" (whether it's 12 or 16 teams) has an iron-clad Grant of Rights, then it's all a paper lion because Iowa State, or anyone, would go to the Big 10 in a heartbeat to guarantee long-term stability.

 

[NWICY]

I think we all better realize that the P12 is probably going to go on the offensive. They might very well be discussing which B12 teams they can poach. There will be a west coast league, unless the B10 takes several more from the P12 - there are just too many people who live there. I think the B12 stability is a risk again.

I'll respectfully disagree, there are tons of people there but none of them care about college sports poorly filled FB stadiums and BB arenas through out that conference. If they do go on the offense I feel confident ISU would be one of the pursued teams.

 

[SCarolinaCy]

Goin' be a hit the road running for the new Big 12 commissioner. Good time for a new hire.

 

[BCClone]

If the big ten is looking at 100 MM per team, Oregon and washington would have to be equal to that. Lets say they aren't and are worth 80 MM so the big then says no thanks. They can't secure that on their own, but in the big 12 (assuming we are supposed to stay flat at 40 MM, it could bump us to 50 MM each) and 50 MM each is more than the PAC 12 would pay.

 

[jakemcilroy]

If the big ten is looking at 100 MM per team, Oregon and washington would have to be equal to that. Lets say they aren't and are worth 80 MM so the big then says no thanks. They can't secure that on their own, but in the big 12 (assuming we are supposed to stay flat at 40 MM, it could bump us to 50 MM each) and 50 MM each is more than the PAC 12 would pay.

Correct. Remember, the #1 thing in conference expansion is existing conference schools aren't going to take LESS money to welcome in new schools. The pie gets divided more. If the new schools don't allow a larger TV check that hence, gives EVERYONE more money, then they will vote no. That's why OU/TX went to the SEC and USC/UCLA went to the Big 10.

The Big 12 right now is making calls to TV execs weighing expansion TV #'s. The 6 biggest schools to watch are Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Oregon, Washington, & Notre Dame.

 

[GoldCy]

Other than MI/OSU and SC/UCLA, what matchups will be attractive ($$) in the conference? Do those games justify a huge contract when you have to carry Rutgers/NW also.
SEC has a couple more relevant games but also a lot of duds. B12 will just be missing the 2 big games.
BYU/UT would be kind of big.

 

[SCarolinaCy]

Correct. Remember, the #1 thing in conference expansion is existing conference schools aren't going to take LESS money to welcome in new schools. The pie gets divided more. If the new schools don't allow a larger TV check that hence, gives EVERYONE more money, then they will vote no. That's why OU/TX went to the SEC and USC/UCLA went to the Big 10.

The Big 12 right now is making calls to TV execs weighing expansion TV #'s. The 6 biggest schools to watch are Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Oregon, Washington, & Notre Dame.

Some strong brands here BUT not big TV#'s.

 

[jakemcilroy]

Some strong brands here BUT not big TV#'s.

Notre Dame does. They literally have their own national TV contract, lol.

 

[clonedude]

Oregon and Washington will now have to pay huge fees to get out of the PAC since they didn't get out yesterday, right?

 

[Cyclad]

Correct. Remember, the #1 thing in conference expansion is existing conference schools aren't going to take LESS money to welcome in new schools. The pie gets divided more. If the new schools don't allow a larger TV check that hence, gives EVERYONE more money, then they will vote no. That's why OU/TX went to the SEC and USC/UCLA went to the Big 10.

The Big 12 right now is making calls to TV execs weighing expansion TV #'s. The 6 biggest schools to watch are Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Oregon, Washington, & Notre Dame.

Agree on the 6 big names to watch. But I assume you do not mean that the B12 will be pursuing them - as that is not going to happen. I suspect the SEC and BIG will gobble those 6 up.

 

[clonedude]

What are the odds that the B1G adds just USC and UCLA, and nothing else happens in realignment for quite a while? I'd say that is the most likely scenario right now. I don't know that any of the other conferences are just going to be in a state of panic and start making moves in the next week.

 

[cymonw1980]

I think we all better realize that the P12 is probably going to go on the offensive. They might very well be discussing which B12 teams they can poach. There will be a west coast league, unless the B10 takes several more from the P12 - there are just too many people who live there. I think the B12 stability is a risk again.

I don't disagree... But, I don't think wash / oregon get left behind. The brands are too valuable.

Oregon had the highest athletic revenue in all of college athletics last year despite the terrible tv money in the pac. They totaled $392M, #2 was tosu at $234M, $160M gap... Normally, oregon is more like top 25 in rev, but jumped to #1 with a big nike contribution. However, they get one of those infusions every ~5yrs or so). It makes too much sense to create a west coast wing to pair with UCLA/USC and lighten the travel requirements. Could be 4 teams could be 6 (wash, ore, cal, stan).

Washington is top 20 in revenue and has better attendance, fan support than most of the pac. After USC and Oregon, I think they are next in line in terms of value (they were #2 before the nike money started rolling in for oregon). UCLA has basketball... but washington is the better football program with more consistent fan support. Washington is consistently ahead of UCLA in ticket revenues including +10M (28M v. 18M) in 2019. UCLA finished #40 in overall revenue, wash was #18. Despite a $20M gap in media/rights revenue driven by the b10 v. pac tv deals, washington still had higher revenue than neb overall.

I obviously have no better idea than anyone else what will ultimately happen. So, if the asu/ari/colo/utah schools believe that they are better staying put that is fine. But I think the writing is on the wall for the pac. I think the tv rights per school are going to be similar for the new B12 and current pac10. So, why are B12 schools going to go to the pac if you are in the B12 footprint? It's one thing to fly all your teams across the country if you are making $100M/yr in tv revenue (UCLA, USC). It's another when you are making $30M - $40M. Also, who are the next teams to get called up by sec/b10? pac membership is less stable than current B12 membership imho. Every team not in the b10, sec will leave if they get an invite (except, for now at least, ND).

I think the pac schools likely listen to the tv rev options in the now pac 10 vs. future Big 12 and decide if they stay in the pac until wash / ore leave or if they leave now. If they decide to leave it likely forces ore, wash to join too (until they ultimately join the b10.

just my take though.

 

[HFCS]

What are the odds that the B1G adds just USC and UCLA, and nothing else happens in realignment for quite a while? I'd say that is the most likely scenario right now. I don't know that any of the other conferences are just going to be in a state of panic and start making moves in the next week.

I think in that case we still got a little boost. You can’t argue a 10 team Pac without USC and UCLA is above big 12 in pecking order or media rights. They were struggling even before they lost two of their biggest three brands and biggest media market.

You hold tight knowing you are less likely to get poached, make sure members ignore any calls from Pac with reality the 4 mountain schools from Pac are more likely to join us than vice versa.

 

[cysmiley]

I realize TV money is paramount, but at some point in time; when both the TV networks and conferences start looking at value added to conference revenue, will schools start taking a little less in order to maintain a championship program. Will Vanderbuilt fans be satisfied with 2-10 records for eternity, even though they draw $100 million SEC revenue. And, in ten years; will we see the Alabama's saying hey you don't add anything to the league; you get less ;we get more. Start the Texas/Nebbie war all over again.

 

[cymonw1980]

What are the odds that the B1G adds just USC and UCLA, and nothing else happens in realignment for quite a while? I'd say that is the most likely scenario right now. I don't know that any of the other conferences are just going to be in a state of panic and start making moves in the next week.

I honestly don't think this happens.

I think the usc, ucla adds destabilize the pac and provide a path for oregon, wash to leave osu, wsu behind.... Not sure how palatable it was for those states to break their P5 schools apart, now their hands will be forced. Ore, Wash only, or on your own with all four. So, I think this is just a necessary first move that makes adding oregon and wash possible/easier.

Building a west coast wing is much more attractive than adding two schools geographically isolated. A 4 - 6 team (add cal, stan too depending on $) west coast wing makes the travel more do able, especially for the non-rev sports.

 

[isutrevman]

I realize TV money is paramount, but at some point in time; when both the TV networks and conferences start looking at value added to conference revenue, will schools start taking a little less in order to maintain a championship program. Will Vanderbuilt fans be satisfied with 2-10 records for eternity, even though they draw $100 million SEC revenue. And, in ten years; will we see the Alabama's saying hey you don't add anything to the league; you get less ;we get more. Start the Texas/Nebbie war all over again.

Agree. At some point the money isn't worth it if you go 3-9 every year. You'll eventually decimate your fan base and offset any monetary gain you have by being in the big conference. This isn't like the NFL where the owner can only care about money. These schools need/want to keep their alumni interested in the athletics programs which keeps them engaged in the school as a whole.

It's hard to predict how fast that can happen, though. Nebraska hasn't been relevant in 20 years and their fan base still appears strong. USC and UCLA's fan bases are nothing like they used to be though, at least based on attendance numbers.

 

[cymonw1980]

I think we could get a seat in the BIG someday, but it may not be a terrible option if we were in a strong B12/PAC merger.

There’s still a lot of moving left to do…who knows where it all shakes out.

I think the best case scenario for ISU is that the conference system is tossed and a new 60 team league is formed.

Not sure if this will ever happen, but if b10, sec decide to just toss conferences and create a super league. Then maybe ISU makes the cut in a 60 team league.

again, don't think this is likely... but see this before either b10 or sec invites us. Just being honest. if we continue on the conference path, they will be looking to drop teams in the future not add (think vandy, nw, etc.).

But I would be happy to be wrong.

 

[CycloneSpinning]

Let Tx try to destroy the SEC. I was good with them in conference because they were the "big" name, what they really are is a bunch of rich spoiled whiners that don't play well with others.

You’re right. Texas destroying the SEC would truly be the best possible outcome.