Big 12 to expand...or not | Page 19 | Syracusefan.com

Big 12 to expand...or not

I can see a P5 conference taking Texas and Oklahoma. Maybe WVU. Maybe Kansas. The others? Why? This isn't a charity.

Can't see the SEC ever taking ECU.

Can't see the ACC taking Cincy, Temple and UCF. Why would they do that? Those schools aren't going to help the existing ACC schools make more money.

If ND becomes a full member, the ACC will add another to get to an even number. If it is Texas, that is the only scenario I see where the ACC gets to 18, if Oklahoma also wants in. The 18th school would be a real free for all...the last helicopter out of Saigon.

The SEC would love to get into NC, but unfortunately the only option is ECU. That is a stretch that I only think happens if the SEC wants 18 teams. Thinking about it WV wouldn't really be worth it so I think they stay at 16.

I think one conference will get to 18 or even 20. The other 2 will at least go to 16. Going to 18 might be a stretch. It would depend on the value of adding extra markets and having a 3-4 team conference football tournament. I would think that the extra inventory, added markets, added recruiting grounds, and expanded conference tournament would add value for the ACC. At worst I think we see:

P12 stays at 12
B1G adds Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, UConn
SEC adds Okie State, Houston (possibly Baylor or TCU instead)
ACC adds West Virginia (if 18 is worth it then Cincy and Temple)

That works out better for the ACC.
 
Been saying it for well over a decade, and being told no way, but it'll end at 4x16. It's getting closer and closer.

I have considered that option, too. I am simply not yet convinced the networks want to deal with just four powers as they can unify and operate similarly to the NFL with one overall deal with the networks. Regardless, whether the networks want four powers or more, the B1G TV deal just proved what may have been thinking for some time which is that the schools/conferences are still being underpaid.*

*Ignore the ESPN cutbacks. Disney likes operating in heavy margins, as do their shareholders. ESPN is a money machine and the cutbacks simply improved the bottom line.
 
I think this is all starting to end game. I think the end game will be that the politics in Texas will determine the endgame. I also wouldn't underestimate government intervention if college football essentially shuns teams from their new cabal.

The black swan events are Texas govt making some deal and Congress getting their hands on this set up.


Texas politics may signal the beginning of the end game, fortunately, Texas politics will have little say in the grand scheme.
 
If so, I don't see all of of the XII surviving while some G5 may sneak in.
Texas politics may try to force Austin to keep the XII together.

UT can afford to stay with the current Big 12 deal until the LHN deal expires. UT has the resources to keep the Big 12 together with OU. It remains to be seen whether the networks are willing to let one of the other P5 steel UT and OU away.

I fully agree that some of the current P5 teams could be left in the cold. As sutomcat says, this is not charity.
 
Texas politics may signal the beginning of the end game, fortunately, Texas politics will have little say in the grand scheme.

I think once you create an environment of 4 conferences ONLY taking part in some high stakes game of cash grab, the government will get involved and figure out a way to even that playing field. It's an absurd cash grab where these colleges operate in a tax free environment.

Open your eyes to what's going on in the world politics wise. This will not go smoothly.
 
I think once you create an environment of 4 conferences ONLY taking part in some high stakes game of cash grab, the government will get involved and figure out a way to even that playing field. It's an absurd cash grab where these colleges operate in a tax free environment.

Open your eyes to what's going on in the world politics wise. This will not go smoothly.

Like the NFL/MLB sweetheart deals? I don't think so.
 
I have considered that option, too. I am simply not yet convinced the networks want to deal with just four powers as they can unify and operate similarly to the NFL with one overall deal with the networks. Regardless, whether the networks want four powers or more, the B1G TV deal just proved what may have been thinking for some time which is that the schools/conferences are still being underpaid.*

*Ignore the ESPN cutbacks. Disney likes operating in heavy margins, as do their shareholders. ESPN is a money machine and the cutbacks simply improved the bottom line.

Why would they unify? The B1G/SEC make more money than the ACC/P12. Why would they share revenues?

I would think that ESPN wants it to go to 4 conferences. Right now they control 28 of the 65 school TV rights, split the rights of 36 schools, and own zero of ND's home games. With a 4 x 16 they would own 32 of the 64 school TV rights, including ND. They would then split the rights of 32 schools with FOX.
 
I agree with Bees. 4x16 makes sense to me.

The best outcome for the ACC is to add Texas and Notre Dame as full time members.

That takes the ACC past the SEC and B1G as the top conference in college athletics.

The ACC has been working towards this for years and I think all behind the scenes discussions and patience will eventually be rewarded.

The B1G ends up with Oklahoma and Kansas or UConn.

The SEC adds West Virginia and someone else, a B12 refugee or Houston.

And the Pac-12 ends up adding 4, probably all from the B12, though maybe UNLV or BYU sneak in.
 
I agree with Bees. 4x16 makes sense to me.

The best outcome for the ACC is to add Texas and Notre Dame as full time members.

That takes the ACC past the SEC and B1G as the top conference in college athletics.

The ACC has been working towards this for years and I think all behind the scenes discussions and patience will eventually be rewarded.

The B1G ends up with Oklahoma and Kansas or UConn.

The SEC adds West Virginia and someone else, a B12 refugee or Houston.

And the Pac-12 ends up adding 4, probably all from the B12, though maybe UNLV or BYU sneak in.


4 x 16 is a nice number but it likely will never happen. There is no way in hell BYU makes the P12. No G5 schools are being added to the P12 without Texas and/or Oklahoma coming too. They aren't taking TCU or Baylor for religious reasons. K State, Iowa State, Texas Tech aren't worth it. WV is too far away. Oklahoma State and Houston are possible additions but not worth going to 16 if it means you need to take 2 more G5 teams as well. So unless Texas goes West, the P12 will be at 12 forever.

If the ACC can get Texas why leave Oklahoma on the table? Why not go to 18 if you can grab Oklahoma and Kansas? Then you can split into 6 pods for FB and play every team twice in 5 years.

Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas
ND, BC, Pitt
UVA, UNC, Duke
Clemson, NC State, Wake
Louisville, VA Tech, SU
FSU, Miami, GA Tech
 
I think once you create an environment of 4 conferences ONLY taking part in some high stakes game of cash grab, the government will get involved and figure out a way to even that playing field. It's an absurd cash grab where these colleges operate in a tax free environment.

Open your eyes to what's going on in the world politics wise. This will not go smoothly.
Politically, the only thing the conferences and networks would need to ensure is that the majority of states and population are covered. With NY, CA, FL, TX, MI, OH, PA, NC, VA, MD, NJ, MA, WV, OK, IA, MO, KA, AR, IL, UT, CO, IN, WI, MN, SC, GA, AL, MI, TN, KY, LA, WA, OR and AZ covered, a majority of Senators and Congressmen are in line. Small states simply lack power on this issue anyway (see NE states not named MA, AK, Hawaii, Wyoming, N & S Dakota, etc.) on top of lacking a majority. Sure, some politicos will make noise, but in the end, politicians will protect their own.

As to a potential issue with a monopoly, not really an issue. Whether a monopoly (MLB) or not (NFL, NBA, MHL), there is plenty of money to be made. Exercising a little control over the lofty salaries would do well to level the playing field among teams (and I generally don't want government oversight in my sports). If the schools would set some controls AND enforce them, this would also go a long way to keep government watchdogs off their collective backs.

As to profits: Non-profits may use funds generating activities to support the overall mission of the entity. So long as no distributions are mode to owners there is no problem. Academic institutions' primary goal is education and raising money from athletics supports that goal (scholarships, some schools actually send money back to the university) then all is well. Even more so in a day when most State schools are losing funding and forced to be self supporting.
 
Why would they unify? The B1G/SEC make more money than the ACC/P12. Why would they share revenues?

I would think that ESPN wants it to go to 4 conferences. Right now they control 28 of the 65 school TV rights, split the rights of 36 schools, and own zero of ND's home games. With a 4 x 16 they would own 32 of the 64 school TV rights, including ND. They would then split the rights of 32 schools with FOX.

Arguments for:
- The schools can bargain as a whole. They know that the networks are underpaying them. The B1G's short term deal that doubles the SEC payout proves that there is far more money to go around than has been let on. Already, ESPN has issued assurances to the SEC and ACC that they will receive significant increases soon (probably at the "look-in" periods).
- The Networks can work with one agreement, each individually contracting with the Power Group, or collectively simplified negotiations and relationships make planning much easier. Business tends towards this, at least until there is one behemoth that can be successfully broken apart (ATT, Standard Oil).

Arguments against:
- Conferences can get better deals (this is short term as the next conference up can beat the last "Best deal".)
- More teams can still compete, at least on paper.

Teams already share revenues equally within the conference (excluding stipends for playoffs/championships/bowls). Getting a few $MM more than another conference for a few years really is peanuts in the big boy budgets (Syracuse AD budget was north of $85MM and that is probably with fuzzy math as Syracuse owns the Dome outright). The AD budget is peanuts to the overall budget of the University, most of which are measured in the $Billions.

Ultimately, the players (P5 teams) are in an elite club with elite friends 9networks) and elite enforcers (Congress). They will work together far more than they will fight. It pays better and doesn't waste resources.
 
If they can get Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas their choices for #18 are Iowa State or UConn. Seems like an easy choice to take the better market and better BBall program.

Why do you assume that the Big Ten wants Kansas?
 
Why does everyone think that Kansas is attractive? KU has possibly the worst football team of any P5 school. Yes, I know they have a good hoop team. Kansas has neither the football team nor TV market to be attractive to any conference. They would only be included if they were the least bad alternative.
 
Why does everyone think that Kansas is attractive? KU has possibly the worst football team of any P5 school. Yes, I know they have a good hoop team. Kansas has neither the football team nor TV market to be attractive to any conference. They would only be included if they were the least bad alternative.
Other than the length of time they have been playing football, Kansas is kinda like UConn. Rather, UConn is kinda like Kansas. Good hoops, awful football. Kansas' only major advantage is that they've been a P5 school. Something our CT friends can't say...
 
Other than the length of time they have been playing football, Kansas is kinda like UConn. Rather, UConn is kinda like Kansas. Good hoops, awful football. Kansas' only major advantage is that they've been a P5 school. Something our CT friends can't say...
Sounds like SU, other than a few brief years here and there of football relevance. Just saying.
 
The pressure on Texas to join the SEC will be considerable. It's also the best geographic fit for them by far and reunites them with A&M.

Texas' alums will have zero appetite for traveling anywhere north of the Mason Dixon unless it's to play ND, Mich, OSU and MAYBE Penn State (hello Pitt, Syracuse, BC). They also will have no interest in playing Wake. They also don't give a crap about hoops.

Just can't see the ACC being a fit for Texas - politically, socially, or otherwise. Similarly, the Pac 12 isn't a fit - Texas alums won't be excited about a Saturday night game in Pullman, Corvallis or Salt Lake (isn't that where Utah is?).

I expect they'll go SEC and pull along TT. Okie will then bolt to the Big 10 to be reunited with Nebraska.

The rest of the Big 12? Gonna be grim for them. Fighting over 1 or 2 remaining slots.
 
Why do you assume that the Big Ten wants Kansas?

Brand, Market, BBall, Geographic Continuity, AAU, History with Nebraska/Texas/Oklahoma. Also they have studied Kansas in the past as an expansion candidate.
 
Brand, Market, BBall, Geographic Continuity, AAU, History with Nebraska/Texas/Oklahoma. Also they have studied Kansas in the past as an expansion candidate.
I still can't believe B1G passed on Mizzou who begging to join.
 
Other than the length of time they have been playing football, Kansas is kinda like UConn. Rather, UConn is kinda like Kansas. Good hoops, awful football. Kansas' only major advantage is that they've been a P5 school. Something our CT friends can't say...

Lawrence is a great small city college town located a little over a half-hour away from downtown Kansas City, Mo. It's a vastly nicer college town than Storrs and Kansas City is a much cooler city than Hartford. Kansas is also an AAU university, which the B1G finds appealing. Top notch hoops -- better than UCONN over the long haul -- and a place that has played "big boy" football several decades longer than the Huskies. Sure Kansas has sucked recently but who's to say they will suck in 2035? UCONN will.

All-in-all, I think Kansas has a good story to tell Delany and a reasonably good shot at being picked up by the B1G if they expand.
 
I still can't believe B1G passed on Mizzou who begging to join.
Like SU and Pitt, they thought Mizzou was going to be there when they were ready to hand out invites. Sucks to be them, they got Rutgers.
 
Lawrence is a great small city college town located a little over a half-hour away from downtown Kansas City, Mo. It's a vastly nicer college town than Storrs and Kansas City is a much cooler city than Hartford. Kansas is also an AAU university, which the B1G finds appealing. Top notch hoops -- better than UCONN over the long haul -- and a place that has played "big boy" football several decades longer than the Huskies. Sure Kansas has sucked recently but who's to say they will suck in 2035? UCONN will.

All-in-all, I think Kansas has a good story to tell Delany and a reasonably good shot at being picked up by the B1G if they expand.
Totally agree about the geography. I was talking about sports only.
 
4 x 16 is a nice number but it likely will never happen. There is no way in hell BYU makes the P12. No G5 schools are being added to the P12 without Texas and/or Oklahoma coming too. They aren't taking TCU or Baylor for religious reasons. K State, Iowa State, Texas Tech aren't worth it. WV is too far away. Oklahoma State and Houston are possible additions but not worth going to 16 if it means you need to take 2 more G5 teams as well. So unless Texas goes West, the P12 will be at 12 forever.

First, I didn't say BYU is going to the PAC-12. Just mentioned them as a candidate. As you have noted, the PAC-12 is going to have a tough time getting to 16. They aren't positioned as well geographically to take B12 schools. Disagree about religion disqualifying schools from PAC-12 consideration. They have already taken Utah, a school that was founded by the Mormon church, is located in Salt Lake City and has a really large Mormon population in its student body and alumni base. Even if they were to land Texas and Oklahoma (unlikely), they are going to have to settle for less than ideal candidates to get to 16.

If the ACC can get Texas why leave Oklahoma on the table? Why not go to 18 if you can grab Oklahoma and Kansas? Then you can split into 6 pods for FB and play every team twice in 5 years.

Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas
ND, BC, Pitt
UVA, UNC, Duke
Clemson, NC State, Wake
Louisville, VA Tech, SU
FSU, Miami, GA Tech

Or you stay at 16, play everyone in your division each year and 2 in the other division. There is a cost for every expansion in terms of intensity of rivalries. As the # of schools in a conference increases, the frequency that they play each other must decrease. 16 is a perfect number. Lots of inventory for a network, there are enough programs to keep the quality of the league high and it is possible to play other league schools relatively often.

The problem with your plan is that there just aren't enough good programs to fill all the slots. Ultimately, that is why the magic number becomes 64. If the PAC-12 wants to stay at 12, they can. It will be hardest for them to get there. In that case, there are only 60 slots...

Just my opinion.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
168,017
Messages
4,744,396
Members
5,936
Latest member
KD95

Online statistics

Members online
276
Guests online
2,281
Total visitors
2,557


Top Bottom