Has The Big 12 Become The Big East 2.0....

[wbgvwbgv]

Sorry, it's not bogus. None of the other ones were bogus either. You never demonstrated why the other ones were bogus.

Most of your links have been from pseudo reporters and blog posters infused with some name dropping and misrepresented conclusions from legitimate sites. Here is an article contradicting you from Forbes by an actual staff reporter:

The SEC Is Finally The Most Valuable Conference In College Sports

As always, those TV deals are the real difference maker. Live sports telecasts are among the last DVR-proof properties, which has turned them into some of the most valuable TV programming around. That’s particularly true of college sports. We estimate that the ten most valuable conferences generated a combined $1.3 billion in TV money alone last year. A whopping 27% of that was collected by the SEC, while the Big Ten took 21% of the total.

Though the SEC has grabbed the top spot and will likely stay there thanks to its increasingly profitable network, the Big Ten isn’t going anywhere just yet. In fact, the conference will soon be renegotiating its first-tier rights agreement with ESPN, meaning its member schools are in line for a serious windfall. The conference has already projected that member schools will receive $44.5 million apieceas soon as 2017-18.

The Big 12 is well behind its Power Five peers in terms of total revenue, but with just ten schools it’s neck-and-neck with the Pac-12 in terms of per-school income; last year both conferences generated just over $25 million per member. The per-school figure is important because the more schools a conference has, the more teams it can send to bowl games and the NCAA Tournament. Even more importantly, the additional regular season games provide more content to be sold to networks. With 15 members, including football-independent Notre Dame, the ACC lags behind at $22 million in revenue per school.

An important reminder: Our per-school figures represent how much revenue each conference generated per member school, but not necessarily how much will be distributed to each conference member. Conferences typically keep a slice of the total revenue pie in order to cover conference-level expenses like executive salaries. For instance, the SEC generated $34 million per school from its biggest revenue streams last year, but the conference’s actual revenue distribution was $31.2 million per member.

And as the above graph illustrates, the world of college sports is very clearly split between the haves and the have nots. The back half of our list – comprised of the American, Mountain West, Big East, C-USA and MAC – generated a combined $213 million last year. Consider that the Big 12, the lowest-earning Power Five conference, took home $253 million. And that wealth gap would be even wider if not for the College Football Playoff, which shared $80 million among the so-called Group of Five (AAC, MWC, C-USA, MAC and the Sun Belt Conference).

That massive difference in conference revenue also explains why many schools often appear so eager to abandon their conferences for greener pastures. Maryland, Rutgers, Notre Dame, Louisville, Missouri, Texas A&M and TCU have all moved in recent years, and it’s all been for the single purpose of trying to find the best conference revenue pipeline available. And if one thing has become abundantly clear it’s that, right now, there’s no better home than the SEC.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm...most-valuable-conference-in-college-sports/2/


And when revenue from 3rd tier rights are included the difference between the Big 12 and ACC is even greater and the difference between the Big 12 and SEC is a lot smaller.


ACC fans only have one defense when it comes to comparisons of conference payouts - confuse the issue as much as possible and hope it goes away. LOL

 

[topdecktiger]

Yea...your quote (from a link where a subscription is required to read) does seem to sum the TOTAL PROFIT and INCOME for your school. Is that all they made....? No mention of those third tier profits that are not part of the ESPN deal...yet we always hear exist ?? Wouldn't that be the time to mention even more income ??

While their income from ticket sales is impressive.....that TOTAL from the ACC isn't... WVU, while still not getting a full payout from the Big 12 can challenge/beat it.

The Big 12 paid out $27 million this year. The ACC paid out $25 million. Hard to see how that's bad. Plus, the ACC will get a $2 million increase if ESPN doesn't start a network. That would put both conferences at $27 million.

Clemson does get Tier 3 money. They have a contract with Learfield Sports. That's who does the radio broadcasts. Do you think Clemson just gives that away for free? The article didn't list every source of income. Again, it said:

Radakovich told Clemson’s board of trustees last week that his department showed a net profit of $118,000 for fiscal year 2015, which ended June 30. The $80.2 million in revenues includes $21 million worth of support from IPTAY (the private nonprofit that supports Clemson athletics), another $25 million from the Atlantic Coast Conference and $22.6 million from ticket sales, according to the financial data he shared with the board.

It wasn't an all inclusive list. $21 million + 25 + 22.6 million = 68.6. 80.2 million - 68.6 million = 11.6 million. So, you have 11.6 million that wasn't named in the article. That's plenty of room for Tier 3. The article just highlighted some of the bigger payments, not all of them.

The reason the website is subscription-based is because that's our local paper, where this article appeared. I have a subscription to the paper, hence I have a subscription to the website. If you really want proof, I can send you the actual newspaper with the article. It's sitting on my desk as we speak.

 

[topdecktiger]

Most of your links have been from pseudo reporters and blog posters infused with some name dropping and misrepresented conclusions from legitimate sites. Here is an article contradicting you from Forbes by an actual staff reporter:

The SEC Is Finally The Most Valuable Conference In College Sports

As always, those TV deals are the real difference maker. Live sports telecasts are among the last DVR-proof properties, which has turned them into some of the most valuable TV programming around. That’s particularly true of college sports. We estimate that the ten most valuable conferences generated a combined $1.3 billion in TV money alone last year. A whopping 27% of that was collected by the SEC, while the Big Ten took 21% of the total.

Though the SEC has grabbed the top spot and will likely stay there thanks to its increasingly profitable network, the Big Ten isn’t going anywhere just yet. In fact, the conference will soon be renegotiating its first-tier rights agreement with ESPN, meaning its member schools are in line for a serious windfall. The conference has already projected that member schools will receive $44.5 million apieceas soon as 2017-18.

The Big 12 is well behind its Power Five peers in terms of total revenue, but with just ten schools it’s neck-and-neck with the Pac-12 in terms of per-school income; last year both conferences generated just over $25 million per member. The per-school figure is important because the more schools a conference has, the more teams it can send to bowl games and the NCAA Tournament. Even more importantly, the additional regular season games provide more content to be sold to networks. With 15 members, including football-independent Notre Dame, the ACC lags behind at $22 million in revenue per school.

An important reminder: Our per-school figures represent how much revenue each conference generated per member school, but not necessarily how much will be distributed to each conference member. Conferences typically keep a slice of the total revenue pie in order to cover conference-level expenses like executive salaries. For instance, the SEC generated $34 million per school from its biggest revenue streams last year, but the conference’s actual revenue distribution was $31.2 million per member.

And as the above graph illustrates, the world of college sports is very clearly split between the haves and the have nots. The back half of our list – comprised of the American, Mountain West, Big East, C-USA and MAC – generated a combined $213 million last year. Consider that the Big 12, the lowest-earning Power Five conference, took home $253 million. And that wealth gap would be even wider if not for the College Football Playoff, which shared $80 million among the so-called Group of Five (AAC, MWC, C-USA, MAC and the Sun Belt Conference).

That massive difference in conference revenue also explains why many schools often appear so eager to abandon their conferences for greener pastures. Maryland, Rutgers, Notre Dame, Louisville, Missouri, Texas A&M and TCU have all moved in recent years, and it’s all been for the single purpose of trying to find the best conference revenue pipeline available. And if one thing has become abundantly clear it’s that, right now, there’s no better home than the SEC.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm...most-valuable-conference-in-college-sports/2/


And when revenue from 3rd tier rights are included the difference between the Big 12 and ACC is even greater and the difference between the Big 12 and SEC is a lot smaller.


ACC fans only have one defense when it comes to comparisons of conference payouts - confuse the issue as much as possible and hope it goes away. LOL

Sorry no, my links were not from blogger or "pseudo reporters." This guy Chris Smith at Forbes is no more credible than Dennis Dodds at CBS. Both work for well-respected news organizations. Just a lie on your part.

Now if you want to talk about bad information, your chart is a perfect example. It compares the SEC's payout for this year with last year's payout for the other conferences. The Big Ten paid out $32 million dollars this year. That information was just published this week. http://www.jconline.com/story/mike-carmin/2015/07/16/btn-profits-increase-big-ten-revenue/30226149/

In the graph you posted, it has the Big Ten at around $26 million, which is an incorrect figure. That's what the Big Ten made last year.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Maybe if you sent an email to Forbes showing them their errors, they could make the appropriate corrections. LOL

You linked an article by the famous Ken Ruinard (who) when you referenced the ACC conference payout and not Dennis Dodds - just more deception.

ACC fans aren't very happy about the payout and the lack of a network. Since you are not having much luck here (except with Orlaco but he is brain dead), try some of the ACC boards.

Here is one: http://csnbbs.com/thread-743213.html

 

[topdecktiger]

Maybe if you sent an email to Forbes showing them their errors, they could make the appropriate corrections. LOL

You linked an article by the famous Ken Ruinard (who) when you referenced the ACC conference payout and not Dennis Dodds - just more deception.

ACC fans aren't very happy about the payout and the lack of a network. Since you are not having much luck here (except with Orlaco but he is brain dead), try some of the ACC boards.

Here is one: http://csnbbs.com/thread-743213.html

Deflection on your part. The graph you posted was demonstrably false. You have no explanation for that.

I was not referring to the ACC column. You said that all of the links I posted, going back to that previous thread about the Big 12 contract, were written by pseudo journalists. Dennis Dodds is the writer who broke the story about the expansion clause in the Big 12's contract, which was validated by David Boren, by the way.

Oh, I'm having plenty of luck. I've refuted everything you've argued about. You are reduced to dismissing articles that clearly contradict what you say because you can't refute them. Notice how you never address those points when I refute them. For example, the ACC payout is $25 million, higher than what you thought. Clemson has a Tier 3 deal, which you claimed ACC schools didn't have. And going back to that earlier thread, the expansion clause does in fact exist in the Big 12's contract.

 

[pressvirginia]

tiger is bringing that fire & brimstone lecture, win the jury over courtroom approach. this to an amateur message board for fan banter.

so glad we have an authortative expert voice to teach us the nuances of the business. much to learn we still have.

where do I click to award trophies?

 

[wbgvwbgv]

LOL. Why would anyone think that Forbes is more knowledgeable than an ACC troll on an free WVU anonymous message board and of course you have links to Ken Ruinard (who) to back you up. As silly as this has become, it is still somewhat amusing watching ACC fans so defensive about their conference payout. I especially enjoy the postings about the ACC Network.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

.....say around year 2000 ??

The Big 12 is not a conference. Its basically just 9 other teams who Texas needs to play what are considered to be "conference games." Texas IS the Big 12. They can do whatever they want. They'll be in the Big 12 as long as LHN is valuable. If it fails, they're gone.......either to independence like ND (and perhaps and ND-like deal with the ACC) or to the Big 10.

The wild card is OU. They would probably be welcomed by the Pac 12, Big 10, SEC, or ACC but those leagues wont want OKST, who they are tied to.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

The Big 12 is not a conference. Its basically just 9 other teams who Texas needs to play what are considered to be "conference games." Texas IS the Big 12. They can do whatever they want. They'll be in the Big 12 as long as LHN is valuable. If it fails, they're gone.......either to independence like ND (and perhaps and ND-like deal with the ACC) or to the Big 10.

The wild card is OU. They would probably be welcomed by the Pac 12, Big 10, SEC, or ACC but those leagues wont want OKST, who they are tied to.

What happened to the Panty-Lair? It is starting to remind me of a Pitt home game at Heinz Field - deserted.

Any conference would be hurt by the two highest profile programs leaving. Imagine the B10 without Michigan & Ohio State, the PAC12 without USC & Oregon, and the ACC without Florida State & Clemson.

The Big 12 has 4 schools (40% of the conference) in the top 25 revenue producing athletic departments. The ACC only has one. The Big 12 has 8 schools (80% of the conference) in the top 50 revenue producing athletic departments. And the two private schools that don't provide revenue information have just built new stadiums and are ranked as top 10 football programs this year.

Texas and Oklahoma have the best conference arrangement in the country. They aren't going anywhere especially to the cold Big 10. ACC fans should be more concerned about FSU getting paranoid about the financial disparity between them and their SEC southern neighbors (Florida, Auburn, Alabama, and Georgia).

 

[eers1foru]

In some ways yes in other ways no. Are we routinely discussed as the weakest conference on the field? No, we are top to bottom the best in both major sports. And we do have two flagship universities in the conference. That was major downfall of the Big East. So on the field we are much better than the last iteration of the Big East.
Now the behind the scenes goings on are eerily similar to the old Big East. No urgency to put ourselves on equal footing with other conferences by way of numbers or a championship game is exactly what started the initial fracture (why Miami left) and subsequent collapse (when Syracuse, Pitt and WVU left) of the Big East conference as we knew it. Hind sight is 20/20, but having lived through this once was enough. We could have just as easily been like UConn. or Cinci. Mark my words, in our present state we will not make the next cut of schools if realignment means this conference collapses. Their will be too many other schools with similar resumes and bigger TV followings than us.

 

[Orlaco]

.....say around year 2000 ??

So to sum up this thread..... .....yes.

It seems after the recent Big 12 media fest that the players and coaches agree.....and the AD's are just proving it.

 

[doctom4]

Big East 2.0....If we were that, I'd enjoy watching the games more instead of seeing teams pass the ball 120 times. WVU needs to get back to running the ball and turning games into fistfights, slow the pace down and frustrate the other guys.

 

[bluesjoc]

The reason the Big 12 lost those schools was that Texas & Oklahoma were in talks with the PAC10 conference about joining. And it is way to early to say if anyone of those four schools made the right choice to leave. A significant number of Nebraska fans aren't happy in the Big 10 and no one seems that excited about Colorado being in the PAC12.

The Big 12 was smart enough to bring in TCU and WVU plus they secured a decade long TV contract worth billions of dollars. Big 12 schools have never been in a better financial position and the stability is sound (no one is leaving especially with the Grant of Rights Agreement).

IMO, the Big 10 and SEC would both like to expand into the Virginia/North Carolina area and that is where the next expansion battles will take place well into the future when the current ACC contracts expire. (10+ years).

Actually Colorado has always flirted around with going to the PAC10 since the Big8 conference. 45% of their alums live in Cali and they have recruited in Cali very heavy since the 50's
Missouri had always wanted to be in the Big 10. Missouri begged the Big 10 for years to join

Nebraska lost its only rivalry game when the Big XII was formed because they were in the North and OU was in the South. The Big XII had the three major powers Texas,OU,Nebraska. It was a major power struggle between Nebraska and Texas and OU acting as the buffer between the two. Long story short Nebraska made a couple bad coaching hires and fell to mediocre status and then would start nonsense trouble like issues with having the BigXII headquarters based in Texas. OU sided with Texas on a few issues and pissed Neb off.
Meanwhile you have the Big10 talking to Missouri and while they are leading Missouri on a wild goose chase they were actually working with Nebraska behind closed doors and took Nebraska.

 

[Woody in Helvetia]

Nebraska lost its only rivalry game when the Big XII was formed because they were in the North and OU was in the South. The Big XII had the three major powers Texas,OU,Nebraska. It was a major power struggle between Nebraska and Texas and OU acting as the buffer between the two. Long story short Nebraska made a couple bad coaching hires and fell to mediocre status and then would start nonsense trouble like issues with having the BigXII headquarters based in Texas. OU sided with Texas on a few issues and pissed Neb off.
Meanwhile you have the Big10 talking to Missouri and while they are leading Missouri on a wild goose chase they were actually working with Nebraska behind closed doors and took Nebraska.

The root of all the problems in the Big 12 are located in one city Austin, Texas. The Longhorns think they are the center of the universe and act accordingly. Nebraska, Missouri and Texas A&M just got the opportunity to leave and put up a NO Longhorn in my China Shop sign in their aathletic Departments. Colorado was just totally buzzed and went with the best WEED states in the west.

 

[doneagain]

The Big 12 is a great conference in football and basketball and baseball. I think WVU needs to win a championship before we even think about comparing it to our old conference.

Any conference would be hurt by the two highest profile programs leaving. Imagine the B10 without Michigan & Ohio State, the PAC12 without USC & Oregon, and the ACC without Florida State & Clemson.

Texas & Oklahoma have the best setup conference wise in the entire country and they are never going to leave. Ridiculous to even discuss it.

Except for the fact that Texas almost left for the P12.

Never say never.

 

[Woody in Helvetia]

Texas will go where and when they want to go. However I do not see them ever going to the west coast since the set up out there never satisfy them. The would become part of the 8 team SW division including AZ, AZ St, Col and Utah along with the other 3 midwest teams they take, Games with the original P8 teams USC, UCLA, Oregon, Stanford, Wash, WSU, Cal and Ore ST would be about 2 a year. Not a glamorous schedule.

 

[dogeered_again]

Deflection on your part. The graph you posted was demonstrably false. You have no explanation for that.

I was not referring to the ACC column. You said that all of the links I posted, going back to that previous thread about the Big 12 contract, were written by pseudo journalists. Dennis Dodds is the writer who broke the story about the expansion clause in the Big 12's contract, which was validated by David Boren, by the way.

Oh, I'm having plenty of luck. I've refuted everything you've argued about. You are reduced to dismissing articles that clearly contradict what you say because you can't refute them. Notice how you never address those points when I refute them. For example, the ACC payout is $25 million, higher than what you thought. Clemson has a Tier 3 deal, which you claimed ACC schools didn't have. And going back to that earlier thread, the expansion clause does in fact exist in the Big 12's contract.

I'm guessing that the never heard of radio station contract on their tier 3 arrangement is worth around 100K per year and goes to the same number of households.

 

[Sultan__of__Swine]

Most of your links have been from pseudo reporters and blog posters infused with some name dropping and misrepresented conclusions from legitimate sites. Here is an article contradicting you from Forbes by an actual staff reporter:

The SEC Is Finally The Most Valuable Conference In College Sports

As always, those TV deals are the real difference maker. Live sports telecasts are among the last DVR-proof properties, which has turned them into some of the most valuable TV programming around. That’s particularly true of college sports. We estimate that the ten most valuable conferences generated a combined $1.3 billion in TV money alone last year. A whopping 27% of that was collected by the SEC, while the Big Ten took 21% of the total.

Though the SEC has grabbed the top spot and will likely stay there thanks to its increasingly profitable network, the Big Ten isn’t going anywhere just yet. In fact, the conference will soon be renegotiating its first-tier rights agreement with ESPN, meaning its member schools are in line for a serious windfall. The conference has already projected that member schools will receive $44.5 million apieceas soon as 2017-18.

The Big 12 is well behind its Power Five peers in terms of total revenue, but with just ten schools it’s neck-and-neck with the Pac-12 in terms of per-school income; last year both conferences generated just over $25 million per member. The per-school figure is important because the more schools a conference has, the more teams it can send to bowl games and the NCAA Tournament. Even more importantly, the additional regular season games provide more content to be sold to networks. With 15 members, including football-independent Notre Dame, the ACC lags behind at $22 million in revenue per school.

An important reminder: Our per-school figures represent how much revenue each conference generated per member school, but not necessarily how much will be distributed to each conference member. Conferences typically keep a slice of the total revenue pie in order to cover conference-level expenses like executive salaries. For instance, the SEC generated $34 million per school from its biggest revenue streams last year, but the conference’s actual revenue distribution was $31.2 million per member.

And as the above graph illustrates, the world of college sports is very clearly split between the haves and the have nots. The back half of our list – comprised of the American, Mountain West, Big East, C-USA and MAC – generated a combined $213 million last year. Consider that the Big 12, the lowest-earning Power Five conference, took home $253 million. And that wealth gap would be even wider if not for the College Football Playoff, which shared $80 million among the so-called Group of Five (AAC, MWC, C-USA, MAC and the Sun Belt Conference).

That massive difference in conference revenue also explains why many schools often appear so eager to abandon their conferences for greener pastures. Maryland, Rutgers, Notre Dame, Louisville, Missouri, Texas A&M and TCU have all moved in recent years, and it’s all been for the single purpose of trying to find the best conference revenue pipeline available. And if one thing has become abundantly clear it’s that, right now, there’s no better home than the SEC.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissm...most-valuable-conference-in-college-sports/2/


And when revenue from 3rd tier rights are included the difference between the Big 12 and ACC is even greater and the difference between the Big 12 and SEC is a lot smaller.


ACC fans only have one defense when it comes to comparisons of conference payouts - confuse the issue as much as possible and hope it goes away. LOL

The one thing the ACC has going for it when compared to the Big 12 and the Big 10 is population growth across the conference footprint. If you look at the states in the Big 12 and Big 10 there is a lot of yellow and light orange. The population is moving to the Southeast, Southwest, and Texas.

 

[GetYaNumbersUp]

The Big 12 Conference is likely to stay at 10 for another decade IMO. I think that Boren is around 74 years old so his time as OU's President isn't going to last much longer.


It is ridiculous to talk about Texas and/or Oklahoma leaving the Big 12. It is completely idiotic to attempt to make a comparison between the Big 12 and the Big East.

Ridiculous to discuss UT and OU leaving? They tried their hardest to leave a couple years ago & go to the Pac but the sips wouldn't drop the Longhorn Network. The Big 12 is by far the least stable P5 conference.

 

[Orlaco]

The one thing the ACC has going for it when compared to the Big 12 and the Big 10 is population growth across the conference footprint. If you look at the states in the Big 12 and Big 10 there is a lot of yellow and light orange. The population is moving to the Southeast, Southwest, and Texas.

If that's the 'one thing' the ACC has going for it then it's in a worse situation than I thought before reading your reply.....but anyway...

How many years before that growth has a solid impact ? At least one or two generations if you're basing that growth on birth and almost no benefit if you're talking about transplanted Americans. ....because (almost) no fans of college athletics (certainly not alumni) relocates and changes loyalty.

 

[Sultan__of__Swine]

If that's the 'one thing' the ACC has going for it then it's in a worse situation than I thought before reading your reply.....but anyway...

How many years before that growth has a solid impact ? At least one or two generations if you're basing that growth on birth and almost no benefit if you're talking about transplanted Americans. ....because (almost) no fans of college athletics (certainly not alumni) relocates and changes loyalty.

I work for a Fortune 500 company that was based in Cincinnati, OH and merged with another Fortune 500 company in Charlotte. The HQ moved to Charlotte along with most of the upper management positions and support positions. Alot of my colleagues have since moved to North Carolina seeking opportunities at the HQ that no longer exist in the Midwest. If you think those families who moved to North Carolina are going to send their kids to Ohio State, Michigan, Indiana or any of the other Big 10 schools near Cincinnati and pay the out-of-state tuition when they have institutions in the state like NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, and UNC you are crazy. When you move your loyalties begin to change, especially when it starts affecting your bottom line.

The population shift to the Southeast and coasts will have an impact on schools where state populations are dropping. Less population means less state income tax, which means less money to invest in the universities. Nothing good comes from losing population.

 

[Orlaco]

I work for a Fortune 500 company that was based in Cincinnati, OH and merged with another Fortune 500 company in Charlotte. The HQ moved to Charlotte along with most of the upper management positions and support positions. Alot of my colleagues have since moved to North Carolina seeking opportunities at the HQ that no longer exist in the Midwest. If you think those families who moved to North Carolina are going to send their kids to Ohio State, Michigan, Indiana or any of the other Big 10 schools near Cincinnati and pay the out-of-state tuition when they have institutions in the state like NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, and UNC you are crazy. When you move your loyalties begin to change, especially when it starts affecting your bottom line.
.

Sure the kids matter....which is why I wrote two generations. Their parents will stay loyal to THEIR OWN schools.

HINT: If you're going to throw out a fake resume (or brag using words like 'Fortune 500') you should know that 'alot' should be expressed using two words.

If, as usual, I made errors please ignore them...because I do not work for a Fortune 500 company that merged with another. I'm simply an internet looser.

 

[TIREPUNK]

The Big 12 is not a conference. Its basically just 9 other teams who Texas needs to play what are considered to be "conference games." Texas IS the Big 12. They can do whatever they want. They'll be in the Big 12 as long as LHN is valuable. If it fails, they're gone.......either to independence like ND (and perhaps and ND-like deal with the ACC) or to the Big 10.

The wild card is OU. They would probably be welcomed by the Pac 12, Big 10, SEC, or ACC but those leagues wont want OKST, who they are tied to.

who left the door open!!!!

JK...I enjoy a pitter every once in awhile. Reminds me why they are in a panic..... Carry on.

 

[SilverSpringWVU]

with Nebraska, Colorado, Texas A&M, and Missouri leaving....you've asked a question when you already know the answer....if Texas or Oklahoma leave...stick a fork in it..it's done.

Last year it was the ACC in trouble. They signed a grant of rights and everything is smooth sailing. Now this year its the Big 12 in trouble yet they already have a grant of rights. Is one grant of rights better than the other? No... It summer time and this is what people talk about until the season starts.

I feel eventually the Big 12 and ACC will form with what left overs they both have to make the fourth power conference. The only other thing I could see happening is teams from the power 5 getting together and forming two leagues like the NFL.

 

[Buckaineer]

Texas and OU aren't leaving the BIG 12--its their conference.

What have we seen--OUs president Boren discussed things the BIG 12 needs to do to ensure its long term success.

People from elsewhere who covet OU and Texas and other BIG 12 teams twisted what he said into "OU wants to leave" but that's not what OUs president said--he said he wants the BIG 12 to expand and be more successful in the future.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Last year it was the ACC in trouble. They signed a grant of rights and everything is smooth sailing. Now this year its the Big 12 in trouble yet they already have a grant of rights. Is one grant of rights better than the other? No... It summer time and this is what people talk about until the season starts.

I feel eventually the Big 12 and ACC will form with what left overs they both have to make the fourth power conference. The only other thing I could see happening is teams from the power 5 getting together and forming two leagues like the NFL.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

Expansion probably has run it's course and there doesn't seem to be that much of a financial advantage adding more schools. I do think that there might be a significant financial advantage for two conferences to merge together and form divisions like the NFL; however, I don't think it will be the ACC and Big 12.

I do think that a merger of the Big 12 and SEC would create a "super" conference with significant financial rewards for all of it's members. Also, I could see the Big 10 and PAC 12 merging together as one conference. It would be kind of like the AFC and NFC with divisions within each conferences to help maintain geographical and historical rivalries (SEC East, SEC West, SEC North, SEC South). There would be a NFL like playoff and the winners of each "super" conference would play for the National Championship (SEC/B12 vs. B10/PAC12)

I don't think anything is going to happen until the current TV contracts expire, but after that anything is possible.

 

[WESTBGVA]

It's not the same... not even close... but you raise an interesting conundrum. What if? What if you stepped into a pothole and broke your ankle? No one knows. We are safe for now. Enjoy it!

I brought up Texas and Oklahoma because both teams have already tried to leave. If Texas had agreed to revenue sharing of the Longhorn network, they would be in the Pac 10 right now.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

The one thing the ACC has going for it when compared to the Big 12 and the Big 10 is population growth across the conference footprint. If you look at the states in the Big 12 and Big 10 there is a lot of yellow and light orange. The population is moving to the Southeast, Southwest, and Texas.

The problem with the ACC is that it also shares it's footprint with the SEC in the Southern region and the Big 10 in the Northern region.

 

[GetYaNumbersUp]

The problem with the ACC is that it also shares it's footprint with the SEC in the Southern region and the Big 10 in the Northern region.

There is more than 18 million people in NC and VA combined, and that is strictly ACC turf. Iowa, Kansas, and Oklahoma combined only have 10 million people & Texas these days is just as much SEC country as it is Big 12 country. In Houston, it's not even close, SEC dominates.

 

[Buckaineer]

Some important things ACC fans always leave out in their population reports is that Texas has more people than most of the ACC, and only two states in the ACC have anything near what you could call a dedicated ACC audience. MA, PA, KY, FL, SC, GA--these states are not ACC audiences. Even VA--much of the population is in the DC area and made up of fans from all over the place including the BIG 12 and Big 10--its not ACC territory exclusively by a long shot.

Another very important point--the tv networks pay the BIG 12 more--ALOT more per school. That has to do with value.

 

[topdecktiger]

Some important things ACC fans always leave out in their population reports is that Texas has more people than most of the ACC, and only two states in the ACC have anything near what you could call a dedicated ACC audience. MA, PA, KY, FL, SC, GA--these states are not ACC audiences. Even VA--much of the population is in the DC area and made up of fans from all over the place including the BIG 12 and Big 10--its not ACC territory exclusively by a long shot.

Another very important point--the tv networks pay the BIG 12 more--ALOT more per school. That has to do with value.

No true. The Big 12 TV contract with Fox and ESPN pays $2.5 billion over 13 years. That works out to an average of $19.2 million per school. The ACC TV contract pays out an average of $18 million schools. That's not A LOT more.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

There is more than 18 million people in NC and VA combined, and that is strictly ACC turf. Iowa, Kansas, and Oklahoma combined only have 10 million people & Texas these days is just as much SEC country as it is Big 12 country. In Houston, it's not even close, SEC dominates.

North Carolina and Virginia are also expansion target areas by both the SEC and Big 10 in the future. By the end of the current TV contracts, the ACC will be making a lot less money than the other conferences and their members will be ripe for the picking. And yes it is true Tiger.

 

[Buckaineer]

No true. The Big 12 TV contract with Fox and ESPN pays $2.5 billion over 13 years. That works out to an average of $19.2 million per school. The ACC TV contract pays out an average of $18 million schools. That's not A LOT more.

BIG 12 schools tv contract is for over $20 million per school per year average over 12 years. It does not include tv money for sports schools maintain individually which adds from $2 million to $15 million for each school. This past year, full share BIG 12 schools were paid $27 million from the conference while WVU and TCU received $23 and $24 million respectively.

The ACCs contract with 14.5 schools is for just under $18 million per school per year average. It includes all three tiers of sports coverage. It lasts through 2027. This past season FSU's budget shows they made just over $22 million for everything.

By the end of the BIG 12's current tv contract the BIG 12 will be at $44 million for conference payouts alone not including the third tier deals for tv, while the ACC is going to be in the $30's for everything.

Schools like WVU will be making around $50 million while FSU and Clemson get somewhere in the mid $30's. That is a huge difference.

 

[topdecktiger]

BIG 12 schools tv contract is for over $20 million per school per year average over 12 years. It does not include tv money for sports schools maintain individually which adds from $2 million to $15 million for each school. This past year, full share BIG 12 schools were paid $27 million from the conference while WVU and TCU received $23 and $24 million respectively.

The ACCs contract with 14.5 schools is for just under $18 million per school per year average. It includes all three tiers of sports coverage. It lasts through 2027. This past season FSU's budget shows they made just over $22 million for everything.

By the end of the BIG 12's current tv contract the BIG 12 will be at $44 million for conference payouts alone not including the third tier deals for tv, while the ACC is going to be in the $30's for everything.

Schools like WVU will be making around $50 million while FSU and Clemson get somewhere in the mid $30's. That is a huge difference.

Actually, no, that's still wrong. I looked it up. The Big 12 signed a 13 year deal with Fox and ESPN worth $2.6 billion. That works out to exactly $20 million average. http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8346345/big-12-announces-media-deal-abc-espn-fox

The ACC's deal right now pays out $18 million per year. The original contract called for $3.6 billion over 15 years. However, when Notre Dame joined, the payout got bumped up to $18 million. http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...ue----more-than-1-million-per-school-annually

The ACC also gets $2 million more if ESPN decides not to start an ACC Network.http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/05/20/Media/ACC-net.aspx?

You specifically said

the tv networks pay the BIG 12 more--ALOT more per school

That's not true. The figures prove it. I just posted the money the TV networks pay each conference.

 

[topdecktiger]

And yes it is true Tiger.

No sorry, it's simply not true. The facts prove you wrong. Here is the Big 12 TV contract

The Big 12 Conference announced Friday it has reached an agreement on a 13-year media rights deal with ABC/ESPN and Fox.

The deal is worth $2.6 billion, an average of $200 million per year and worth $20 million per school, industry sources told ESPN.http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8346345/big-12-announces-media-deal-abc-espn-fox

Here is the ACC contract:

This will bump the ACC's per-school annual television revenue into the $18-plus-million range. In 2012, the ACC renegotiated a deal with ESPN for $3.6 billion over 15 years (or $17.1 million per school on average) for a 14-team football league.http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...ue----more-than-1-million-per-school-annually

ESPN, if it says no to a channel, would increase its compensation to the ACC, pushing the per-school average to close to $20 million.
http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/05/20/Media/ACC-net.aspx?

Those are the facts. You don't have any facts or numbers you can use to back up your statement. You just claim the Big 12's TV contract a lot bigger, but you don't have any proof to back it up.

 

[LowFatMilk]

For those of you that continue to debate topdicktiger.....

...he's a fairly smart guy that endlessly ignores facts (provided by others) to continue a debate on info that he provides as 'facts' (that are often respectfully disputed...yet not refuted by him).

While I encourage debate... ...he has an agenda and wants nothing to do with any truths.

 

[wbgvwbgv]

The fact that WVU will be making more than Florida State is driving the ACC fans nuts. Wonder if Tigertroll has any more links from Swofford or the ACC office about the payout for the 2014-15 school year - still waiting on that one.

Wonder who the nameless "source" is on the ACC network - LMAO. My money is on Ken Ruinard (who).

 

[topdecktiger]

For those of you that continue to debate topdicktiger.....

...he's a fairly smart guy that endlessly ignores facts (provided by others) to continue a debate on info that he provides as 'facts' (that are often respectfully disputed...yet not refuted by him).

While I encourage debate... ...he has an agenda and wants nothing to do with any truths.

Explain how you can justify that statement. I posted the facts about the Big 12 TV contract. It pays an average of $20 million per year. That's a fact. I posted the ACC contract. It pays $18 million per year now. It goes up to $20 million if ESPN declines to start a network .

Tell me how that's an agenda. Tell me how that has "nothing to do with the truth." The fact is, I'm right about the TV contracts, and the other posters are wrong. They claim the Big 12 payout is larger that what it actually is.

By the way, show me one fact I ignored. Show me.

Also, why don't you criticize the other posters for "ignoring the truth." I posted clear examples that contradict their assertions, but they still make the same claims, despite evidence to the contrary. Explain that to me.

 

[topdecktiger]

The fact that WVU will be making more than Florida State is driving the ACC fans nuts. Wonder if Tigertroll has any more links from Swofford or the ACC office about the payout for the 2014-15 school year - still waiting on that one.

Wonder who the nameless "source" is on the ACC network - LMAO. My money is on Ken Ruinard (who).

No, it's not a pissing contest about who makes more money. The issue is, you are making up figures for the payouts. What you say simply isn't true. I posted the actual figures. You don't have anything to back up your assertions, and you deflect from that by questioning my links (which are accurate, by the way).