Expansion smoke?

[Buckaineer]

Wow you are a victim of major inflated self worth if you think you are important enough to stalk. We both have been posting on this board since 2001 so to say I am stalking is ludicrous.
I will be clear to answer your question, but I bet anyone you are too afraid the answer the question I have asked twice, now soon to be a third time after my answer.

1. I have never ever claimed expansion is of no interest to me. I want expansion but with the right teams and not with a bunch of crap teams that happen to put 1 or 2 good years together only to fall on their ASS. The previous two years UCF was the school of choice for many because they had several good years together. But UCF is no longer the flavor the month because they fell flat on their face this year. Now Memphis and Houston have a good year, and everyone jumps on that band wagon.

2. I am not at all afraid of expansion but I would rather stay at 10 teams and play a round robin then add crap teams where WVU is placed in a division like the ACC coastal or BIG10 west, where 1 loss and you are out. Why do you think UNC has just 1 loss and is ranked 10th behind a 2 loss FSU, ND, and Stanford. UNC could beat Clemson this week and they still won't make the CFP because their division sucks and they don't play anyone.

My hope for expansion is the BIG poaches ACC teams like GT, and UNC, leaving FSU And Clemson ready for a move and the BIG12 smart enough to pick them up. However I am not confident that when it comes to expansion the BIG12 is smart enough. If they were Those 2 teams would already be in the BIG12.

So I answered your questions, stop being afraid and answer mine.

You are so sure that expansion is coming and coming soon. Give me your general opinion when this well happen, 2016, 2017, 2020, beyond? How many years will it take for expansion not to occur before you are man enough to admit you were wrong? I bet you won't answer, but will change the subject thinking no one will notice you being a coward.

It's ok to want expansion with P5 teams. At some point though you must deal with the reality of the situation which is what seems to get you so twisted in knots.

The BIG 12 conference has expansion needs-as evidenced not by posters on message boards saying it but by people like the president of Oklahoma saying it, or the president of West Virginia or several ADs and other leaders.

You ignore all the evidence to the contrary to determine in your mind that no teams outside of the P5 are worth anything-yet yearly several P5 programs prove they can in fact be better (if they aren't already and some assuredly are) than multiiple teams in the P5 ranks. So therefore expansion CAN'T happen.

You create fantasies in your mind such as that WVU will be placed in a made up division where they never again play schools from Texas or Oklahoma. This isn't based on anything but your imagination but you toss it out as fact and rail against expansion because of it. Problem is, that is only in your head--its NOT REAL.

Your "hope" for expansion is something again, that is just fantasy. The BIG 12s tv contracts expire in 2025. The ACCs contracts (and grant of rights agreements) expire in 2027. The BIG 12 must negotiate and secure NEW contracts before 2025--therefore ACC schools are off the docket. Those schools aren't going anywhere obsession by yourself or not.

Now back to the reality of the situation. OU's president called for expansion. The conference formed a committee to identify targets. The committee members have clearly been meeting with presidents and leaders of schools believed to be targets and those target presidents have tweeted photos and brief statements about these meetings. The BIG 12 has tv contract renewal a bit off still, but knowing they can't wait until the last minute to do something. Notice the Big Ten for example expanded with Nebraska, then RU and Maryland years ahead of their renegotiations to get those programs integrated into their league and to have evidence to demonstrate to broadcast partners.

The Big Ten is about to get new contracts which could change the playing field in financial terms and finances are what keep conferences stable or destabilize them primarily. The other conferences will respond to that and the BIG 12s members must also--not to mention the SECs contracts set through the mid 2030s will continue to increase gradually through that time. The BIG 12 must keep its members in the same ballpark and they can't do that by doing nothing.

Unlike you, I have no desire to play fantasy, or worry about my personal "wishes" for expansion in the conference--I simply discuss what's actually happening or appears from the available news on the subject to be happening. We know the conferences has needs and a desire on many fronts to take action-and indeed it seems just under the surface they very possibly are doing that. There's no reason to leap to some wild conclusion that because OU might make the playoff one year that everything else has changed--especially when Gordon Gee flew out to the university of Houston a day or two ago to meet with the president of that university for some odd reason. It may be expansion smoke as I stated. We will find out soon enough.

 

[Buckaineer]

The problem is, TV contracts don't work the way you think they do. It's not limited to an individual city where the school is located. The TV networks consider the surrounding areas (usually the state) to be the "footprint" of the school. Texas is a national brand that carries all the markets in the state of Texas. You mentioned that many people in Texas hate UT. Well, that's the point. Those fans will watch, if for nothing else to see Texas loose.

The Big 12 already gets paid for having the Houston market in its footprint. Whether you want to believe it or not, that's the truth. That's why all these other conferences are adding teams that expand the footprint. There is a reason the SEC takes Missouri, but won't even look at Florida St.

TV networks and those that create ratings tend to focus on markets. Their reports are based on metered markets-not states or regions, and they deal with real numbers of viewers as their technology allows in those markets--then they compile those reports into a larger picture.

Houston being one of the top metered markets in the nation with quite a bit of wealth probably is going to be a benefit in tv negotiations. Being able to demonstrate your conference is the primary in huge markets like Houston is not a negative, the question is will the addition of a school there changed the dynamics of that market for the BIG 12 and only the conference and media partners really know that.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

You make bold claims of what UT will do. Present evidence to back that up. What's that? You don't have ANY evidence? You are just talking (or writing) out of your @$$?? That's what everyone thought.

Texas isn't trying to leave the BIG 12 and expanding the conference won't make Texas leave. There is no detriment to Texas in expanding the conference and there's no benefit to Texas in leaving the conference. You seem to be mistaking UT and OU with the schools that left.

The grant of rights is a solid binding legal document that can't be "shredded". It could be litigated in court which would be extremely expensive and take years and likely result in a huge payment to the conference anyway--but then again what conference with a grant is going to want to try and destroy grants of rights? NONE. And the networks that pay the media rights certainly aren't going to violate contracts they have with conferences making them all null and void (and opening up the conferences to freely go elsewhere).

Deal with reality.

Agree with most of the things you have said. I don't see Texas leaving just because big12 expands. However, Texas and a several other BIG12 programs are anti expansion and it is clear at this point there is not enough support for expansion. Reading over the BIG12 bylaws indicates expansion requires a Supermajority approval. The bylwas further state that a Supermajority is 75%. Given the B12 has only 10 schools that means 8 will have to approve and the BIG12 just does not have 8 schools willing to expand.

In recent past I know and read that Texas, Texas Tech, and TCU are against expansion. With a new AD I don't know if Texas is still dead set against expansion, but assuming these three schools are against expanding it can't pass. Even if Texas has changed their minds, TT and TCU only only needs one school to either vote with them or sustain from voting.

 

[Buckaineer]

I believe his point is that it won't hurt recruiting or our finances. Adding any team, Houston or otherwise, will hurt our round robin schedule. If we have to bring in a team Houston is not a bad choice given its market size but as has been stated it doesn't expand our footprint.

Agree, adding a Houston will not hurt WVUs finances or recruiting. Round robin schedules will be eliminated, but that works out quite well for the other P5 conferences most of the time.

Will be interesting to see if the conference makes a choice to add Houston and how that is viewed by the networks and the advertising partners.

 

[skygusty]

The BIG 12 can't make the college football world expand to 8 teams in the playoffs. They can do what they can for their own success though. If you read direct quotes from Bowlsby, neither he nor the other leaders believe going above 4 makes sense--because of the physical demands and it would destroy the bowl system among other things.

Expansion isn't about just the playoffs--but then again if you dont have lots of success there over the next decade then that causes other problems.

One more game for 8 teams isn't going to destroy anything. The bowl system is a mess anyway, seriously 5 win teams in a bowl? And no, the Big12 can't make it happen by themselves. but let the SEC get left out, the PAC10, the Big10 and the ACC a few times and the bitching about 4 slots for 5 conferences is going to ratchet up from all sides.

 

[Buckaineer]

Agree with most of the things you have said. I don't see Texas leaving just because big12 expands. However, Texas and a several other BIG12 programs are anti expansion and it is clear at this point there is not enough support for expansion. Reading over the BIG12 bylaws indicates expansion requires a Supermajority approval. The bylwas further state that a Supermajority is 75%. Given the B12 has only 10 schools that means 8 will have to approve and the BIG12 just does not have 8 schools willing to expand.

In recent past I know and read that Texas, Texas Tech, and TCU are against expansion. With a new AD I don't know if Texas is still dead set against expansion, but assuming these three schools are against expanding it can't pass. Even if Texas has changed their minds, TT and TCU only only needs one school to either vote with them or sustain from voting.

The most recent reports show that the coach at Texas is ambivalent to expansion. Their new president and AD haven't really addressed the issue. Texas Tech's AD stated this regarding BIG 12 expansion :“There’s a process that is led by [Big 12 commissioner] Bob Bowlsby, who I think is one of the best leaders in college athletics, as well as our president, and I know that we will continue to look at the landscape and be as strategic and proactive as we possibly can be,” hardly seems to indicate an anti expansion view. TCU I believe has spoken out against expansion for travel reasons.

WVU, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Iowa State and others have spoken out publicly in favor of expansion however, and the entire conference created an expansion committee to identify candidates which they certainly appear to be doing. Circumstances change and change views. The new Big Ten contracts may change views, threats from other conferences change views and undoubtedly, being a regular participant in the playoffs has a great impact regardless of what the conference states about the matter publicly.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

It's ok to want expansion with P5 teams. At some point though you must deal with the reality of the situation which is what seems to get you so twisted in knots.

The BIG 12 conference has expansion needs-as evidenced not by posters on message boards saying it but by people like the president of Oklahoma saying it, or the president of West Virginia or several ADs and other leaders.

You ignore all the evidence to the contrary to determine in your mind that no teams outside of the P5 are worth anything-yet yearly several P5 programs prove they can in fact be better (if they aren't already and some assuredly are) than multiiple teams in the P5 ranks. So therefore expansion CAN'T happen.

You create fantasies in your mind such as that WVU will be placed in a made up division where they never again play schools from Texas or Oklahoma. This isn't based on anything but your imagination but you toss it out as fact and rail against expansion because of it. Problem is, that is only in your head--its NOT REAL.

Your "hope" for expansion is something again, that is just fantasy. The BIG 12s tv contracts expire in 2025. The ACCs contracts (and grant of rights agreements) expire in 2027. The BIG 12 must negotiate and secure NEW contracts before 2025--therefore ACC schools are off the docket. Those schools aren't going anywhere obsession by yourself or not.

Now back to the reality of the situation. OU's president called for expansion. The conference formed a committee to identify targets. The committee members have clearly been meeting with presidents and leaders of schools believed to be targets and those target presidents have tweeted photos and brief statements about these meetings. The BIG 12 has tv contract renewal a bit off still, but knowing they can't wait until the last minute to do something. Notice the Big Ten for example expanded with Nebraska, then RU and Maryland years ahead of their renegotiations to get those programs integrated into their league and to have evidence to demonstrate to broadcast partners.

The Big Ten is about to get new contracts which could change the playing field in financial terms and finances are what keep conferences stable or destabilize them primarily. The other conferences will respond to that and the BIG 12s members must also--not to mention the SECs contracts set through the mid 2030s will continue to increase gradually through that time. The BIG 12 must keep its members in the same ballpark and they can't do that by doing nothing.

Unlike you, I have no desire to play fantasy, or worry about my personal "wishes" for expansion in the conference--I simply discuss what's actually happening or appears from the available news on the subject to be happening. We know the conferences has needs and a desire on many fronts to take action-and indeed it seems just under the surface they very possibly are doing that. There's no reason to leap to some wild conclusion that because OU might make the playoff one year that everything else has changed--especially when Gordon Gee flew out to the university of Houston a day or two ago to meet with the president of that university for some odd reason. It may be expansion smoke as I stated. We will find out soon enough.

 

[Buckaineer]

One more game for 8 teams isn't going to destroy anything. The bowl system is a mess anyway, seriously 5 win teams in a bowl? And no, the Big12 can't make it happen by themselves. but let the SEC get left out, the PAC10, the Big10 and the ACC a few times and the bitching about 4 slots for 5 conferences is going to ratchet up from all sides.

Its pretty clear the media will do everything in their power to include the SEC and Big Ten and apparently the ACC as well. The Pac 12 knocked themselves out and the BIG 12 was on the verge of doing that.

Going to 8 teams isn't on the docket, just an idea some want-- but Big Ten financial increases, years of playoff inclusion or exclusion and not too distant contract renegotiations fo the BIG 12 are all on the docket of things that will happen.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

It's ok to want expansion with P5 teams. At some point though you must deal with the reality of the situation which is what seems to get you so twisted in knots.

The BIG 12 conference has expansion needs-as evidenced not by posters on message boards saying it but by people like the president of Oklahoma saying it, or the president of West Virginia or several ADs and other leaders.

You ignore all the evidence to the contrary to determine in your mind that no teams outside of the P5 are worth anything-yet yearly several P5 programs prove they can in fact be better (if they aren't already and some assuredly are) than multiiple teams in the P5 ranks. So therefore expansion CAN'T happen.

You create fantasies in your mind such as that WVU will be placed in a made up division where they never again play schools from Texas or Oklahoma. This isn't based on anything but your imagination but you toss it out as fact and rail against expansion because of it. Problem is, that is only in your head--its NOT REAL.

Your "hope" for expansion is something again, that is just fantasy. The BIG 12s tv contracts expire in 2025. The ACCs contracts (and grant of rights agreements) expire in 2027. The BIG 12 must negotiate and secure NEW contracts before 2025--therefore ACC schools are off the docket. Those schools aren't going anywhere obsession by yourself or not.

Now back to the reality of the situation. OU's president called for expansion. The conference formed a committee to identify targets. The committee members have clearly been meeting with presidents and leaders of schools believed to be targets and those target presidents have tweeted photos and brief statements about these meetings. The BIG 12 has tv contract renewal a bit off still, but knowing they can't wait until the last minute to do something. Notice the Big Ten for example expanded with Nebraska, then RU and Maryland years ahead of their renegotiations to get those programs integrated into their league and to have evidence to demonstrate to broadcast partners.

The Big Ten is about to get new contracts which could change the playing field in financial terms and finances are what keep conferences stable or destabilize them primarily. The other conferences will respond to that and the BIG 12s members must also--not to mention the SECs contracts set through the mid 2030s will continue to increase gradually through that time. The BIG 12 must keep its members in the same ballpark and they can't do that by doing nothing.

Unlike you, I have no desire to play fantasy, or worry about my personal "wishes" for expansion in the conference--I simply discuss what's actually happening or appears from the available news on the subject to be happening. We know the conferences has needs and a desire on many fronts to take action-and indeed it seems just under the surface they very possibly are doing that. There's no reason to leap to some wild conclusion that because OU might make the playoff one year that everything else has changed--especially when Gordon Gee flew out to the university of Houston a day or two ago to meet with the president of that university for some odd reason. It may be expansion smoke as I stated. We will find out soon enough.

Again you make valid some valid points about expansion except for me living in a fantasy world.

Yes I do have a preference to expand with power 5 teams. Yes, I think expanding without the right teams is a huge mistake.

Yes I think if Expansion happens OU and Texas will demand to be in same conference. As long as you don't divide the conference up east/west or north/south there is a chance to balance the conference. However if it is divided by region, WVU will clearly be in a week division.

One last comment and as I predicted you still are avoiding 2 simple questions. Why are you afraid to do so.

This is a Serious questions. You are so sure that expansion is coming and coming soon. Give me your general opinion when this well happen, 2016, 2017, 2020, beyond? How many years will it take before you admit you were wrong?

 

[skygusty]

Its pretty clear the media will do everything in their power to include the SEC and Big Ten and apparently the ACC as well. The Pac 12 knocked themselves out and the BIG 12 was on the verge of doing that.

Going to 8 teams isn't on the docket, just an idea some want-- but Big Ten financial increases, years of playoff inclusion or exclusion and not too distant contract renegotiations fo the BIG 12 are all on the docket of things that will happen.

Not sure where you can find this "docket" you speak of. I guarantee you that if those other conferences get left out with any frequency, expanding the playoffs will become an issue of importance to more and more people. I'm hoping Oklahoma squeaks in at number 4 and they get to play Clemson in the first round. If Oklahoma wins the national championship it will do a lot for all those things you are worried about. Adding teams like Houston, Cincy, Memphis, or UCF are not slam dunk decisions. We add TV sets, but lose in prestige, weaken schedules, lose the round robin. I'm not dead set against expansion but I don't like any of the options right now. I think there is a lot of time in which to consider alternatives.

 

[Buster68]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. It doesn't make it right. I trust the people responsible for evaluating Big 12 expansion have been enlightened by this thread and now are confident of the direction the conference must take. I personally like the 10 team round robin sheduling in football and basketball but understand the expansion option if and when it is needed. Adding the right teams is critical. There are reasons that support many of the teams discussed in the thread.

 

[Darth_VadEER]

In the end a stronger conference is best for WVU.

 

[locustwv]

WVU might as well move to Texas.....

They have room. That's for sure

 

[Buckaineer]

Not sure where you can find this "docket" you speak of. I guarantee you that if those other conferences get left out with any frequency, expanding the playoffs will become an issue of importance to more and more people. I'm hoping Oklahoma squeaks in at number 4 and they get to play Clemson in the first round. If Oklahoma wins the national championship it will do a lot for all those things you are worried about. Adding teams like Houston, Cincy, Memphis, or UCF are not slam dunk decisions. We add TV sets, but lose in prestige, weaken schedules, lose the round robin. I'm not dead set against expansion but I don't like any of the options right now. I think there is a lot of time in which to consider alternatives.

The BIG 12 can only address what it can control--things such as the makeup of their own conference and whether they want to go through yearly the negative scrutiny of not having a CCG or being at the bottom of the selection process waiting for others to falter. They can't make the playoffs expand and indeed the playoffs may never expand.

Adding schools doesn't alter the strength of the BIG 12, it doesn't weaken schedules. What it does is make it possible for the good teams in any year to not all beat one another up, to have more teams with fewer losses, to possibly have two undefeated teams going into the playoff decision weekend, as well as many other benefits in potential recruiting, fan increase, better tv ratings etc. There is some time to consider the alternatives, but there are also things that will happen that make taking action not timeless.

Next year the Big Ten will renegotiate tv contracts. If they switch networks this is going to open up slots on the ESPN networks--lots of them that cant' be filled with the current conference makeup. If they don't switch, they are still going to get more money and that will have implications for every power conference in the future including the BIG 12.

In 2019 bowl agreements are once again up. If the BIG 12 wants to add to its potential revenues in that area, they must address that prior to 2019.

Conference networks. The Big Ten and SEC are already making money off of theirs and some would have you believe the ACC is going to get one or get more money for some reason. The BIG 12 has to make a decision on which way they will go soon, because within the next five years several schools existing tier 3 deals are coming up for renewal and they'll have to increase significantly in some cases to keep BIG 12 schools finances on par with other conference teams

Attacks from other conferences. There's no reason to believe anyone in the BIG 12 is looking around. Other conferences covet BIG 12 teams though and in 2023 the Pac 12 will renegotiate its media deals and will almost without a doubt try to attract BIG 12 teams--the BIG 12 will at that time be within two years of a new contract and must be in a strong position going forward at that time. In 2025 the SEC may make moves because they'll likely be behind the Big Ten financially at that time. The BIG 12 must have its eggs in its baskets to make departures unlikely after 2025.

 

[Buckaineer]

In the end a stronger conference is best for WVU.

Agree, and as we found out too well in the defunct Big East--there's nothing to gain from being the smallest conference with the smallest voice.

 

[Buckaineer]

Again you make valid some valid points about expansion except for me living in a fantasy world.

Yes I do have a preference to expand with power 5 teams. Yes, I think expanding without the right teams is a huge mistake.

Yes I think if Expansion happens OU and Texas will demand to be in same conference. As long as you don't divide the conference up east/west or north/south there is a chance to balance the conference. However if it is divided by region, WVU will clearly be in a week division.

One last comment and as I predicted you still are avoiding 2 simple questions. Why are you afraid to do so.

This is a Serious questions. You are so sure that expansion is coming and coming soon. Give me your general opinion when this well happen, 2016, 2017, 2020, beyond? How many years will it take before you admit you were wrong?

There are no "right" teams. There are just teams. Some are better fits than others, and when the conference expands they'll pick the best possible fits. If they can get P5 teams then great. That's not very likely though before 2025 but there are still reasons to grow and no reasons not to other than not having a round robin schedule which has not benefitted the conference--only led to losses for everyone each year.

I haven't avoided any question, I've answered numerous times here and elsewhere as best as possible since I don't deal with fantasy, just what actually occurs. Circumstances will determine when the conference will expand. With OU likely making the playoffs, this puts the desired time period of after the Big Ten contracts are renewed back in play. If they are left out again next year for not having a CCG or beating each other up, it may rear its head quickly again. If OU wins the mnc it may slow things down again for awhile. All determined by circumstances which to date have not favored the BIG 12 very much.

Any expansion though is going to take a couple of years to actually attain--schools don't generally leave right away--the extraction process takes a couple of seasons. It will be announced prior to it actually occurring--probably a year or two in advance of the schools actually moving.

Once the Big Ten contracts are done and the few stragglers understand that no one is leaving any P5 conference to join the Big Ten anytime soon, and other conferences like the ACC begin reacting, then the Big 12 will probably do something as well.

In 2019 they have to renew bowl agreements and/or land new ones and by 2023 we can expect another assault from the Pac 12 as silly as that would appear. The conference has to be prepared for these things, they can't wait until they happen or its already too late.

 

[skygusty]

The BIG 12 can only address what it can control--things such as the makeup of their own conference and whether they want to go through yearly the negative scrutiny of not having a CCG or being at the bottom of the selection process waiting for others to falter. They can't make the playoffs expand and indeed the playoffs may never expand.

Adding schools doesn't alter the strength of the BIG 12, it doesn't weaken schedules. What it does is make it possible for the good teams in any year to not all beat one another up, to have more teams with fewer losses, to possibly have two undefeated teams going into the playoff decision weekend, as well as many other benefits in potential recruiting, fan increase, better tv ratings etc. There is some time to consider the alternatives, but there are also things that will happen that make taking action not timeless.

Next year the Big Ten will renegotiate tv contracts. If they switch networks this is going to open up slots on the ESPN networks--lots of them that cant' be filled with the current conference makeup. If they don't switch, they are still going to get more money and that will have implications for every power conference in the future including the BIG 12.

In 2019 bowl agreements are once again up. If the BIG 12 wants to add to its potential revenues in that area, they must address that prior to 2019.

Conference networks. The Big Ten and SEC are already making money off of theirs and some would have you believe the ACC is going to get one or get more money for some reason. The BIG 12 has to make a decision on which way they will go soon, because within the next five years several schools existing tier 3 deals are coming up for renewal and they'll have to increase significantly in some cases to keep BIG 12 schools finances on par with other conference teams

Attacks from other conferences. There's no reason to believe anyone in the BIG 12 is looking around. Other conferences covet BIG 12 teams though and in 2023 the Pac 12 will renegotiate its media deals and will almost without a doubt try to attract BIG 12 teams--the BIG 12 will at that time be within two years of a new contract and must be in a strong position going forward at that time. In 2025 the SEC may make moves because they'll likely be behind the Big Ten financially at that time. The BIG 12 must have its eggs in its baskets to make departures unlikely after 2025.

It doesn't matter if we add 2 teams or 4 teams and have a conference championship. 4 slots for 5 conferences is the reality. Some conference is going to be on the outside looking in every year. It will just be some other set of excuses for who is left out. How can you simultaneously say that it will make it easier to not beat each other up and not lessen the schedule? I will grant you the point that it may make it easier to go undefeated within conference, but it will lessen the strength of the schedule for everyone. Adding teams like Memphis and UCF, if not Cinncy and Houston would also give the talking heads more ammunition to disparage the Big12. If Texas and Oklahoma leave at some future date for some unknown reason, it won't matter that the Big12 expanded with the teams that are available today. Without these two teams, the BIG12 has no clout. It would fall below the ACC in any discussion of strength of conferences. There is no remedy for that. I find it hard to believe that a BIG12 conference with any combination of new teams from the pool of BYU, Colorado State, Memphis, Houston, UCF or Cincy is stronger, more stable, worth more money, better football, better fan experience, or higher interest to TV viewers. I find it hard to believe that adding these teams makes the BIG12 so attractive to OK and TX that they would never leave. I understand that you think we will be in a stronger negotiating position with regard to future contracts. I just don't see it. I think we have an expansion committee so that they can talk about all these scenarios and tradeoffs internally. I don't think changes are imminent.

 

[sammyk]

WVU the Pluto of the Big 12 conference.

 

[topdecktiger]

TV networks and those that create ratings tend to focus on markets. Their reports are based on metered markets-not states or regions, and they deal with real numbers of viewers as their technology allows in those markets--then they compile those reports into a larger picture.

Houston being one of the top metered markets in the nation with quite a bit of wealth probably is going to be a benefit in tv negotiations. Being able to demonstrate your conference is the primary in huge markets like Houston is not a negative, the question is will the addition of a school there changed the dynamics of that market for the BIG 12 and only the conference and media partners really know that.

That's not how the TV contracts work though. I understand what you are saying about ratings, but the issue is coverage. What you have to understand is that the big issue is the regional games. The Tier 1/national games aren't much of a factor, because their value is pretty well set in stone. Those games are broadcasted nationally, and the value is simply in how many people will watch. Pretty simple.

Where is gets more complicated is with Tier 2/3 games. Those games are mostly broadcasted regionally. The region of the broadcast is mostly determined by the footprint of the conference. In other words, the regional broadcast will primarily be in the states/regions where the conferences has teams. Well, that puts a cap on the possible audience/ratings right off the bat. Even if you have a bunch of viewers within that market, your audience can't be larger than that market. Therefore, to expand your audience, you need to add markets to your conference to gain a larger footprint.

This is where the issue with Houston comes in. Whenever the Big 12 has a regional broadcast, the game is already on in Houston. There will never be a situation where a Big 12 game is broadcasted in Dallas, for example, but not Houston. So the Big 12 already has Houston in the footprint.

The only other question ratings. Adding UH won't increase the ratings. The Big 12 already has the two most popular teams in the region, Texas and Oklahoma. Those two teams alone draw the audience from Houston. Most UH fans are going watch these games, regardless of whether UH is in the Big 12. Since the Big 12 already has coverage in Houston, and UH isn't popular enough to bring in extra viewers, they don't have value to the Big 12.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

There are no "right" teams. There are just teams. Some are better fits than others, and when the conference expands they'll pick the best possible fits. If they can get P5 teams then great. That's not very likely though before 2025 but there are still reasons to grow and no reasons not to other than not having a round robin schedule which has not benefitted the conference--only led to losses for everyone each year.

In 2019 they have to renew bowl agreements and/or land new ones and by 2023 we can expect another assault from the Pac 12 as silly as that would appear. The conference has to be prepared for these things, they can't wait until they happen or its already too late.

You can argue all day there are no "right" and therefore no "wrong" teams. You can also argue that adding more teams for increase the geographic footprint makes the conference stronger in the long run.

However and 1 thing we both can agree on. The BIG12 is dysfunctional as hell. Getting a majority to agree upon something is difficult. Getting supermajority, to agree (8 out of 10 teams) is nearly impossible. I don't see the BIG12 expanding with non power 5 teams unless it is clear it is needed to keep access to CFP games equal. At this point we don't know if it is positive, negative or a push. If it becomes a positive or a push, I don't see the B12 expanding with non power 5 programs.

 

[atlksnwvu]

Very hard to imagine any expansion right now with ESPN losing 7 million subscribers in the last 2 years. None of the networks are going to add cash to the pie until they see subscribers stabilize--which is not going to happen. They will continue to lose subscribers. Unless current B12 wants to take less tv money there will be no expansion.

 

[JIMEER86]

The BIG 12 can't make the college football world expand to 8 teams in the playoffs. They can do what they can for their own success though. If you read direct quotes from Bowlsby, neither he nor the other leaders believe going above 4 makes sense--because of the physical demands and it would destroy the bowl system among other things.

Expansion isn't about just the playoffs--but then again if you dont have lots of success there over the next decade then that causes other problems.

This year Notre Dame and the PAC12 champ are getting left out of the playoffs
I think it's possible that the ACC champ gets left out if NC wins.
If Bama would somehow lose to Fla (yes, I know) then the SEC gets left out and PAC12 or OSU goes in.

Eventually the "leaders" are going to figure out that 6 (5 conf champs + ND) does not fit in to 4.
Also, eventually the "leaders" need to realize that the bowl system is ridiculous and playing the playoffs at home sites (except the NC game) is the way to go. TV doesn't care where you play, they will still pay.

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers]

1.A round robin schedule cost Baylor and TCU a shot at the playoffs last year, nearly cost the conference again this year (had ND beaten Stanford it would have certainly) and will cost the conference an extra playoff related bowl this year.

2.There are no schools then that add "prestige as far as brand" coming to the BIG 12. Some can't accept this but it is the simple truth. Houston and Cincinnati are respected in their own right as much a multiple P5 teams as are some others.

3.The BIG 12 has contracts in place that guarantee pro rata shares if schools such as Houston and Cincinnati were added. There's nothing to "impress" --its written in the contracts.

4.The ACC myth is a fantasy that isn't ever going to happen during the BIG 12s current contracts which expire in 2025. First, the ACC has a grant of rights through 2027. Second the BIg Ten will negotiate next year for new tv contracts and isn't going to add anyone after that deal is done and if they were adding someone it would have to be a done deal now to get in under that contracts. Their projections of best case don't allow them to pay any P5 teams buyout, make them or their former conference whole financially from the grant of rights for the next decade plus, or provide the new schools with something more--all without causing huge losses to the existing Big Ten schools.

If the BIG 12 expands it will be with non P5 schools unless someone leaves the SEC and that just isn't going to happen and everyone knows it.

You're going to have to explain this to me:

3.The BIG 12 has contracts in place that guarantee pro rata shares if schools such as Houston and Cincinnati were added. There's nothing to "impress" --its written in the contracts.

The Big 12 divides $300 million in TV money among its 10 schools. That's $30 million per school. If adding two teams ups the ante to $320 million, as you saying that the 10 members still get their $30 million and the 2 new schools get $10 million apiece?

My math tells me that the Big 12 would have to increase the TV pot to $360 million to get the SAME money that the current schools receive.

Explain this to me. I'm a slow learner.

 

[Cheers]

It's ok to want expansion with P5 teams. At some point though you must deal with the reality of the situation which is what seems to get you so twisted in knots.

The BIG 12 conference has expansion needs-as evidenced not by posters on message boards saying it but by people like the president of Oklahoma saying it, or the president of West Virginia or several ADs and other leaders.

You ignore all the evidence to the contrary to determine in your mind that no teams outside of the P5 are worth anything-yet yearly several P5 programs prove they can in fact be better (if they aren't already and some assuredly are) than multiiple teams in the P5 ranks. So therefore expansion CAN'T happen.

You create fantasies in your mind such as that WVU will be placed in a made up division where they never again play schools from Texas or Oklahoma. This isn't based on anything but your imagination but you toss it out as fact and rail against expansion because of it. Problem is, that is only in your head--its NOT REAL.

Your "hope" for expansion is something again, that is just fantasy. The BIG 12s tv contracts expire in 2025. The ACCs contracts (and grant of rights agreements) expire in 2027. The BIG 12 must negotiate and secure NEW contracts before 2025--therefore ACC schools are off the docket. Those schools aren't going anywhere obsession by yourself or not.

Now back to the reality of the situation. OU's president called for expansion. The conference formed a committee to identify targets. The committee members have clearly been meeting with presidents and leaders of schools believed to be targets and those target presidents have tweeted photos and brief statements about these meetings. The BIG 12 has tv contract renewal a bit off still, but knowing they can't wait until the last minute to do something. Notice the Big Ten for example expanded with Nebraska, then RU and Maryland years ahead of their renegotiations to get those programs integrated into their league and to have evidence to demonstrate to broadcast partners.

The Big Ten is about to get new contracts which could change the playing field in financial terms and finances are what keep conferences stable or destabilize them primarily. The other conferences will respond to that and the BIG 12s members must also--not to mention the SECs contracts set through the mid 2030s will continue to increase gradually through that time. The BIG 12 must keep its members in the same ballpark and they can't do that by doing nothing.

Unlike you, I have no desire to play fantasy, or worry about my personal "wishes" for expansion in the conference--I simply discuss what's actually happening or appears from the available news on the subject to be happening. We know the conferences has needs and a desire on many fronts to take action-and indeed it seems just under the surface they very possibly are doing that. There's no reason to leap to some wild conclusion that because OU might make the playoff one year that everything else has changed--especially when Gordon Gee flew out to the university of Houston a day or two ago to meet with the president of that university for some odd reason. It may be expansion smoke as I stated. We will find out soon enough.

Very well stated. One thing that may hinder expansion is the available dollars. We see ABC/ESPN making drastic cuts because they paid too much for certain entities and are losing money. I don't think the money's there right now for ESPN or any network to pay exorbitant fees for college product or any product at this time or in the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see what the BIG gets for the rights to broadcast their games. Maybe in the end it's the non-P5 conferences that get dropped completely or cut to bare minimum levels to pay for the P5. Either way, I doubt we see deals in the stratosphere. Instead I suspect you will see much more modest increases. I liked reading your very rational post. Thanks.

 

[torontoeers]

Maybe she's just looking for an OLD SUGAR DADDY to help her get out of Houston. Some women are attracted to old guys in powerful positions. Look at Fred Thompson the late Senator from Tennessee. He got Lori Morgan in her orime and then landed an even younger one.

Anna Nicole went Necrophelia on the old Texas Billionaire.

Btw she is the hottest university president I've ever seen, but then again the only female college president I can compare is Donna Shalala who quite honestly makes dog $#!+ look attractive.

As for Houston in the Big XII, I don't see it. 4 Texas schools gonna say "OH Hell No!"

Lol...best post in the thread...well...I also like a lot of what gusty has to say....smart cookie![thumb2]

 

[topdecktiger]

You're going to have to explain this to me:

3.The BIG 12 has contracts in place that guarantee pro rata shares if schools such as Houston and Cincinnati were added. There's nothing to "impress" --its written in the contracts.

The Big 12 divides $300 million in TV money among its 10 schools. That's $30 million per school. If adding two teams ups the ante to $320 million, as you saying that the 10 members still get their $30 million and the 2 new schools get $10 million apiece?

My math tells me that the Big 12 would have to increase the TV pot to $360 million to get the SAME money that the current schools receive.

Explain this to me. I'm a slow learner.

The Big 12 has a clause in its contract which states that if new teams are added, the payout will be readjusted so that the schools get the same amount as they did before. The Big 12 gets $200 million a year now from ESPN and Fox (not 300). That's $20 million per team. If two more teams are added, that means ESPN and Fox would raise the total payout up to $240 million a year, to make up the difference for the two extra teams.

I know you think that sounds crazy, but it's actually not. The reason is, it precludes ESPN and Fox from having to renegotiate if the Big 12 expands. For example, when the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt, ESPN's yearly payout increased from $156 million a year to $238 million. That's $82 million a year extra. By contrast, with this clause, the Big 12's increase is locked in at ~$40 million, and ESPN and Fox are only on the hook for $20 million each. So the upshot for ESPN and Fox is that they guarantee a little bit more, in return for not having to potentially pay a lot more.

The issue for the Big 12 is that this precludes them from realistically getting any P5 teams. Since the increase is locked in, ESPN and Fox don't have to renegotiate and give a bigger raise if the Big 12 got some marquee teams (i.e. Florida St, Notre Dame). There wouldn't be any incentive for P5 teams to join, because since the payout won't increase, they won't really get any more money than they do now. The only teams that would be interested are mid-major teams (Houston, Cincinnati), since this payout would still be a lot more than they get now.

 

[Buckaineer]

You're going to have to explain this to me:

3.The BIG 12 has contracts in place that guarantee pro rata shares if schools such as Houston and Cincinnati were added. There's nothing to "impress" --its written in the contracts.

The Big 12 divides $300 million in TV money among its 10 schools. That's $30 million per school. If adding two teams ups the ante to $320 million, as you saying that the 10 members still get their $30 million and the 2 new schools get $10 million apiece?

My math tells me that the Big 12 would have to increase the TV pot to $360 million to get the SAME money that the current schools receive.

Explain this to me. I'm a slow learner.

WVU, TCU, Texas, OU, etc. each recieve an amount from tv money each year in addition to everything else they get from the conference.

I don't believe your numbers are accurate for tv money alone-the conferences tv contracts with FOX and ESPN.

But for sake of explanation, lets use them. If the BIG 12 is getting $300 million for TV alone, that is $30 million apiece. The BIG 12 has written in its contracts that new conference members will also get $30 million per year. Therefor the addition of two new members will change the payout to $360 million-not $320 million. I don't know who said $320 million but it wasn't me.

The further distribution of money for bowls, NCAA payouts, and conference playoff payout would mean some loss of payout to existing members--except that if a CCG is added it will deliver between $20-$30 million per school and this would make it so that there is only a slight loss of total payout, a break even or a slight gain in conference payout per school.

If schools are brought in that have basketball success--more NCAA money will be there to distribute amongst the schools further eliminating any losses. More teams capable of reaching bowls and /or new bowl agreements will also mean more revenues to existing and new members so that any losses from extra distribution will be eliminated or greatly reduced.

 

[Buckaineer]

The Big 12 has a clause in its contract which states that if new teams are added, the payout will be readjusted so that the schools get the same amount as they did before. The Big 12 gets $200 million a year now from ESPN and Fox (not 300). That's $20 million per team. If two more teams are added, that means ESPN and Fox would raise the total payout up to $240 million a year, to make up the difference for the two extra teams.

I know you think that sounds crazy, but it's actually not. The reason is, it precludes ESPN and Fox from having to renegotiate if the Big 12 expands. For example, when the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt, ESPN's yearly payout increased from $156 million a year to $238 million. That's $82 million a year extra. By contrast, with this clause, the Big 12's increase is locked in at ~$40 million, and ESPN and Fox are only on the hook for $20 million each. So the upshot for ESPN and Fox is that they guarantee a little bit more, in return for not having to potentially pay a lot more.

The issue for the Big 12 is that this precludes them from realistically getting any P5 teams. Since the increase is locked in, ESPN and Fox don't have to renegotiate and give a bigger raise if the Big 12 got some marquee teams (i.e. Florida St, Notre Dame). There wouldn't be any incentive for P5 teams to join, because since the payout won't increase, they won't really get any more money than they do now. The only teams that would be interested are mid-major teams (Houston, Cincinnati), since this payout would still be a lot more than they get now.

This is not entirely accurate. The BIG 12's revenue increases for expansion aren't locked in at a maximum of $20.1 million per school, they are guaranteed at a minimum. The conference can negotiate fo more money with expansion, and Notre Dame specifically has been mentioned as a school that would guarantee the BIG 12 MORE than pro rata increases--which is what they want. Bowlsby has said there aren't alot of teams that will bring more than pro rata increases, but there are some. Therefore the premise that no P5 schools could be attracted because they would be locked at a specific amount is 100% incorrect. Not to mention there is much more to the BIG 12s payouts than just the $20.1 million average for television. Additionally, BIG 12 schools receive from $3 million to $15 million additional in media rights for television tier 3 product each school retains for itself.

 

[topdecktiger]

This is not entirely accurate. The BIG 12's revenue increases for expansion aren't locked in at a maximum of $20.1 million per school, they are guaranteed at a minimum. The conference can negotiate fo more money with expansion, and Notre Dame specifically has been mentioned as a school that would guarantee the BIG 12 MORE than pro rata increases--which is what they want. Bowlsby has said there aren't alot of teams that will bring more than pro rata increases, but there are some. Therefore the premise that no P5 schools could be attracted because they would be locked at a specific amount is 100% incorrect. Not to mention there is much more to the BIG 12s payouts than just the $20.1 million average for television. Additionally, BIG 12 schools receive from $3 million to $15 million additional in media rights for television tier 3 product each school retains for itself.

No, that is accurate. You are right that $20 million is an average, but it's not a minimum. The contract pays out less than $20 million to begin with, and then pays out more that $20 million at the end. Otherwise, the average would be higher than $20 million.

The conference can't renegotiate from expansion. That's the whole point of the pro rata increase. The only way the contract could be renegotiated is if ESPN and Fox agreed to it. That's not going to happen. That's why ESPN and Fox included the pro rate increase, because the didn't want to negotiate.

Bowlsby hasn't said that. He said that the payouts were going to say the same. David Boren also said the same thing. Again, that's the whole point of the pro rata increase. Notre Dame wouldn't be more than the pro rata increase. The reason Notre Dame would have brought more money is that they were being considered for partial membership. As such, Notre Dame wouldn't take a full share, so therefore there would be extra money to be divided by the other teams.

It is 100% correct that P5 schools aren't coming to the Big 12 because they won't get more money. The Big 12's TV contract isn't going to increase, yet again due to the pro rata issue. The other conferences all have money in addition to TV contracts as well. All conferences generate money the same way: TV contracts, bowl games, NCAA tournament, etc. The TV contract isn't going to increase, and the other revenues will actually decrease, because they don't go up, and would have to be split 2 extra ways. As for the Tier 3, you keep misstating this. The Tier 3 money quoted for the schools is all inclusive. For example, West Virginia's Tier 3 deal is around $9 million a year. That includes TV. That's not TV by itself. That's TV mixed with radio and multimedia. The problem is, everybody else already gets radio and multimedia, so no change. The Tier 3 TV simply isn't worth the money you think it is. It's only one football game, against a crappy midmajor/FCS opponent. It simply doesn't generate much money.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

The further distribution of money for bowls, NCAA payouts, and conference playoff payout would mean some loss of payout to existing members--except that if a CCG is added it will deliver between $20-$30 million per school and this would make it so that there is only a slight loss of total payout, a break even or a slight gain in conference payout per school.

d.

You either missed typed or smoking weed or I totally misunderstand your point. The CCG may bring in 20-30 mill per year to the conference but there is no way in Hades it will bring in 20-30 mill per school