The BIG 12 isn't going to explode. It will still exist long after 2025. Soon they'll extend the GOR.
Expansion not dead
- Thread starter Mountaineer Steve
- Start date
The BIG 12 isn't going to explode. It will still exist long after 2025. Soon they'll extend the GOR.
Colorado State would have to show they have the support necessary to warrant a P5 invite. There's already three FBS schools in Colorado (CU and AF the other two). I like them better than a metro school or directional Florida, but I don't like them enough for expansion. I'd need sold on them.
BYU is just another geographic outlier. Do we want a conference spanning three time zones? They already are trying to act like Mormon Notre Dame. Why bother? If they had value, they'd already be in a P5 conference.
Cincinnati and the rest of CUSA old do not add anything other than decency in maybe one sport. They were necessary for the Big Least, but they are not for the XII. If we go that route, I'll hang up and wait for us to be left by half of our current conference.
It goes back to him thinking pretty much any American Conference team would add value.
Here's my case for CSU:
Colorado State is building a new football stadium--granted only with 41,000 capacity. Enrollment is about 32,000, so there is opportunity to get decent attendance with better teams coming to play. Their basketball arena seats about 8700 and they made the tourney in 2012 and 2013. Plus, the Denver TV market would be nice to add (I don't know how Colorado and CSU compare there in terms of fan support).
UC has an enrollment of over 42,000 students, so they have a lot of room to grow. But I mostly like them as an option due to close proximity to WVU. I think they are basically equivalent to Louisville.
I'd be fine if we stay at 10, but if we do expand UC and CSU are my picks.
Lgm!
...and oddly enough SO DOES THE BIG 12!!!
You thinking they don't is the issue, not me agreeing with WVUs president and the rest of the leaders of the BIG 12.
I'd go with Colorado too. There is supposedly some grumbling in Nebraska but not enough to ever leave the Big10. Why not poach Colorado and an Arizona school? Snyder is wrong about one thing. WVU would be better off in the SEC in terms of travel, rivalries and stability.
Last edited:
Give it a try in 2024--that's when the PAC contract must be renewed. Long before that the BIG 12 must expand with the available candidates
We'll see. Of the major conferences, the Big 12 is on the most unstable ground. It's precisely why all of this news broke about Big 12 expansion after the ACC announced its new network and grant of rights extension. I mean, just days ago, the Big 12 ADs insisted there wouldn't be expansion; now, it seems like a certainty...
I'll just say this... Texas makes for unpleasant bedfellows. Oklahoma is a bit better, but still a bunch of jerks. They do what benefits them exclusively. If one of them decides it makes more sense financially to jettison the rest of the Big 12, they will. In fact, I think Oklahoma will finally tired of Texas and the lack of a network that they'll be the first to leave, which could start a domino effect.
For your sake, I hope it doesn't happen that way.
Yeah, I would be shocked if the Big 12 didn't expand by four. Per reports, the Big 12's contract with FOX and ESPN mandates them to increase their payout to the conference by $20-25M PER school. That's as much as $100M per year. Furthermore, the conference will not gives those new schools a full cut of that $20-25M. Instead, they will be relegated to junior member status.
That all sounds good for now, Mountaineers. But contracts like that breed contempt. It's a big reason why Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado left the Big 12 to begin with... The conference members don't like to operate as a single entity; instead, they act solely in their self interests. It doesn't make for a good long-term business relationship.
You're a little off on this. The payout doesn't go up $20 million per school. The average payout right now is ~$23 million per school. The clause in the contract just keeps the payout at $23 million. So in other words, the contract goes up enough to cover the cost of having to split the pie 2/4 extra ways.
How is that different than what I'm saying? If you add two schools, the Big 12 receives $46M. If it adds four, it receives $92M. Right?
Because you have to split the payout 2/4 extra ways. Right now, the average lump sum is $200 million a year. (It's actually a little higher than that, but let's just use an even number). You divide that by 10 schools, and it's $20 million per school. You divide that by 12 schools, and it's $16 million per school. You add in that $46 million increase, divide by 12, and now you get back to $20 million per school. There isn't a net increase. It just gets you back to the same payout you had with only 10 schools. The way you were phrasing it, you said the payouts to each school would go up $20-25 million a year. It doesn't. The actual payout to each school stays the same. The contract just goes up enough to cover the cost of splitting the pie extra ways, so the schools don't lose money.
Now, if you don't give the new schools a full share, then yeah, the original 10 schools will make more money. That's exactly what the Big 12 is planning to do. That's really a jury rigged way of getting more money, though.
You and I are saying the same thing... I just don't think we're communicating it well to one another.
Yes, IF BROKEN UP EVENLY, everyone will get the same amount of revenue. However, from everything I've read, the current 10 members have no intention of breaking it up evenly. Instead, they will give the two/four new members less money, keeping the rest for themselves.
Yeah, but your numbers are way off. $46 million / 10 schools only comes out to $4.6 million per school. So, if the Big 12 added 2 new schools, and kept the entire increase for the original 10, that sill only works out to an extra $4.6 million per school, not the $20-25 million you were claiming. In reality, the new school would get a least $5-6 million a year. So, let's say you add 2 new teams, and give them each $5 million a year. That's $10 million off of your $46 million, leaving you $36 million total. Divide that by 10 schools, and you get $3.6 million per school. That's not anywhere $20-25 million per school, like you said.
Just like they did to us and TCU. This is the first year we get full share money.
Sorry. Per NEW school. Jesus Christ.
I thought it was abundantly clear that I meant per new school when I said $100M in the next sentence. ($100M divided by $25 equaling four.)
Not forgetting the only reason TexA$$ would be willing to expand is to add more $$ to their bottom line. The could give a rats ass about the stability of the conference just what is in it for me.
Maybe but I'm right about you two. Just a couple computer geeks that have no life. Your posts are about as relevant as tits on a warthog!!!
Latest posts
-
GAME THREAD Weekend Baseball Series Thread - WVU vs Queens- Latest: bobhertzel'ssweatpants
-
-
-