Big 12 to expand...or not | Page 10 | Syracusefan.com

Big 12 to expand...or not

TexanMark said:
The latest...this guy has a solid track record

FOX Continues Support for Big 12 Expansion with G5 Teams
Expand...

Good find, Mark. This tends to agree with the position UT has of looking east for more exposure and OU not really wanting western teams but eastern teams. With ESPN holding the major eastern properties and the key secondary eastern properties, it is easy to understand why ESPN is reluctant to part with a few teams for the Big 12: 1) They would be paying these same schools much more than presently; 2) they would be losing proven secondary properties; 3) they would be helping their arch-nemesis in sports broadcasting; 4) they would have to back fill their secondary properties with lesser properties. For ESPN, Big 12 expansion makes little sense. For Fox, Big 12 expansion makes perfect sense.

Perhaps Fox gets smart and sweetens the deal for ESPN by paying both shares and getting a few more choice games? I agree with Cusian, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
 
Notre Dame is never coming, so the ACC should put a nail in the Big 12 coffin, and take the only 2 schools that have any TV following in the 2 major sports, Cincinnati, and Uconn. That also ends any more moves by the Big 10, and gives Louisville back their partner, also adds to the TV network in basketball.
 
NKR1978 said:
I'm willing to talk to Mike Bloomberg about giving me a couple hundred million. Temple and I have about the same chance.
Expand...
4hYyd5L.png
 
baggerbob said:
Notre Dame is never coming, so the ACC should put a nail in the Big 12 coffin, and take the only 2 schools that have any TV following in the 2 major sports, Cincinnati, and Uconn. That also ends any more moves by the Big 10, and gives Louisville back their partner, also adds to the TV network in basketball.
Expand...
disagree, notre dame will have to play ball eventually. I think they know it already and these deals are just to appease the old timers that are worried about independence, in a time where it makes no sense. there is no reason to take notre dame off the table as a full member, when if they do decided to join you could take virtually anyone as the 16th. especially not to add just cinci and Yukon.

another thing, is that I keep reading on the Yukon board about how they deliver the NYC market. they are in Connecticut. I don't care about weird nuances about the tv ratings. they do not move the needle in NYC. no one in NYC gives a flying about Yukon football. you people need to stop it. then again, maybe the big12 is dumb enough to believe your BS.
 
orangehomer said:
disagree, notre dame will have to play ball eventually. I think they know it already and these deals are just to appease the old timers that are worried about independence, in a time where it makes no sense. there is no reason to take notre dame off the table as a full member, when if they do decided to join you could take virtually anyone as the 16th. especially not to add just cinci and Yukon.

another thing, is that I keep reading on the Yukon board about how they deliver the NYC market. they are in Connecticut. I don't care about weird nuances about the tv ratings. they do not move the needle in NYC. no one in NYC gives a flying about Yukon football. you people need to stop it. then again, maybe the big12 is dumb enough to believe your BS.
Expand...
If the CFP field is increased from 4 to 8, as many think it will be, ND will have no reason to join a league.
 
Hoo's That said:
Wow! That's "bolt from the blue".
Expand...

Tulane is an AAU school - the NY Times referred to the AAU back in March as "a prestigious, if anachronistic" collection of research universities - and beyond that as a private school promotes the value of undergraduate education unlike most of the big state schools that have classes with up to 500 or more students in a huge lecture hall and yet still call that education. They were former SEC members who left in 1966, two years after Ga Tech did, and I still read some comments on the Ga Tech SB nation site promoting them for ACC membership. On the cloak and dagger side, there are several stories on the Web that they were involved in some secret USG biological reseach projects and had connections to the CIA at the time USG was trying to eliminate Castro - so don't mess with them! New Orleans is a hotbed for those kind of rumors you know.
 
HtownOrange said:
Good find, Mark. This tends to agree with the position UT has of looking east for more exposure and OU not really wanting western teams but eastern teams. With ESPN holding the major eastern properties and the key secondary eastern properties, it is easy to understand why ESPN is reluctant to part with a few teams for the Big 12: 1) They would be paying these same schools much more than presently; 2) they would be losing proven secondary properties; 3) they would be helping their arch-nemesis in sports broadcasting; 4) they would have to back fill their secondary properties with lesser properties. For ESPN, Big 12 expansion makes little sense. For Fox, Big 12 expansion makes perfect sense.

Perhaps Fox gets smart and sweetens the deal for ESPN by paying both shares and getting a few more choice games? I agree with Cusian, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Expand...

A brilliant analysis I think of what is really happening there.
 
baggerbob said:
Notre Dame is never coming, so the ACC should put a nail in the Big 12 coffin, and take the only 2 schools that have any TV following in the 2 major sports, Cincinnati, and Uconn. That also ends any more moves by the Big 10, and gives Louisville back their partner, also adds to the TV network in basketball.
Expand...
take wvu, ou texas. and cincinnati
 
the B12 should do the "smart" thing and soak up the most $ before it implodes in under a decade.

go to 16 with the addition of Houston, Cincy, Colo St, Memphis and Tulane as full members and BYU as a football only in a reverse ND deal

expansion into new (old) markets with an almost workable footprint and bulk up enough in anticipation of up to 6 schools jumping at the end of the current GOR, when they will jump on the likes of the FL directionals and Tulsa
 
I don't understand why the networks would have to pay more to have teams like Houston and Colorado St., are they forced to pay more because there are more teams, or can they just say no, because they add no real value?
 
orangefog said:
I don't understand why the networks would have to pay more to have teams like Houston and Colorado St., are they forced to pay more because there are more teams, or can they just say no, because they add no real value?
Expand...
The current deal with the Big12 includes a clause that does not allow for renegotiation of the contract if the Big12 expands, in exchange, the Big12 is guaranteed that they can add up to 4 teams and the payout to the Big12 would increase for each team added by an equal share for the current teams. Ex: (Easy math only, I don't have the payout schedule handy) Assume the payout this year is $200MM, or $20MM/team.. The Big 12 expands by tow they would not receive $240MM, still $20MM/team. If they expand by four, the payout would be $280MM, again, $20MM./team.

As this is contractual, the networks cannot "block" the expansion outright, they must have cause, for the first four teams. It has been brandied about that if the Big12 expands by six, they would be able to re-negotiate their current deal. However, ESPN is balking at the expansion now (they stand to lose teams under much lesser agreements), it stands to reason that they would refuse to pay even more for the loss of up to six teams.

Fox wants the expansion as they need game inventory. ESPN owns most of the properties that the Big12 is truly interested in so they would be giving up properties (AAC, CUSA) to Fox and would be paying significantly more for the same property under the Big12 deal.

UT and OU want to remain relevant so they must determine whether the Big 12 is sustainable long term or to jump (probably at the end of the current GOR - 9 seasons).
 
HtownOrange said:
The current deal with the Big12 includes a clause that does not allow for renegotiation of the contract if the Big12 expands, in exchange, the Big12 is guaranteed that they can add up to 4 teams and the payout to the Big12 would increase for each team added by an equal share for the current teams. Ex: (Easy math only, I don't have the payout schedule handy) Assume the payout this year is $200MM, or $20MM/team.. The Big 12 expands by tow they would not receive $240MM, still $20MM/team. If they expand by four, the payout would be $280MM, again, $20MM./team.

As this is contractual, the networks cannot "block" the expansion outright, they must have cause, for the first four teams. It has been brandied about that if the Big12 expands by six, they would be able to re-negotiate their current deal. However, ESPN is balking at the expansion now (they stand to lose teams under much lesser agreements), it stands to reason that they would refuse to pay even more for the loss of up to six teams.

Fox wants the expansion as they need game inventory. ESPN owns most of the properties that the Big12 is truly interested in so they would be giving up properties (AAC, CUSA) to Fox and would be paying significantly more for the same property under the Big12 deal.

UT and OU want to remain relevant so they must determine whether the Big 12 is sustainable long term or to jump (probably at the end of the current GOR - 9 seasons).
Expand...
Thank you, that explains it well, and there is nothing to say that the new teams would get equal shares, only that up to four adds to the whole. So, theoretically, and it has probably been stated earlier, they could give those new teams peanuts and then divide the rest among the current teams. But, they will have to dilute the product to do this. If they have to wait out the 9 years anyway, they might as well take the money grab. I think the big four have been established and that the Big 12 is on life support. Taking on any four of the teams previously mentioned pulls the Big 12 closer to being a mid major, not that it would be perceived that way so long as Texas and Oklahoma are a part of the conference, but perception will be that it is a weak conference.
 
orangefog said:
Thank you, that explains it well, and there is nothing to say that the new teams would get equal shares, only that up to four adds to the whole. So, theoretically, and it has probably been stated earlier, they could give those new teams peanuts and then divide the rest among the current teams. But, they will have to dilute the product to do this. If they have to wait out the 9 years anyway, they might as well take the money grab. I think the big four have been established and that the Big 12 is on life support. Taking on any four of the teams previously mentioned pulls the Big 12 closer to being a mid major, not that it would be perceived that way so long as Texas and Oklahoma are a part of the conference, but perception will be that it is a weak conference.
Expand...

They would probably do something similar to what the B1G did to Rutgers - give a scaled payout over the remaining term of the current contract. Then, theoretically, they could build up the new markets and get an increase in their next contract. That's probably easier said than done, but I would expect whichever schools they add there will be an increase in the fanbase.
 
HtownOrange said:
The current deal with the Big12 includes a clause that does not allow for renegotiation of the contract if the Big12 expands, in exchange, the Big12 is guaranteed that they can add up to 4 teams and the payout to the Big12 would increase for each team added by an equal share for the current teams. Ex: (Easy math only, I don't have the payout schedule handy) Assume the payout this year is $200MM, or $20MM/team.. The Big 12 expands by tow they would not receive $240MM, still $20MM/team. If they expand by four, the payout would be $280MM, again, $20MM./team.

As this is contractual, the networks cannot "block" the expansion outright, they must have cause, for the first four teams. It has been brandied about that if the Big12 expands by six, they would be able to re-negotiate their current deal. However, ESPN is balking at the expansion now (they stand to lose teams under much lesser agreements), it stands to reason that they would refuse to pay even more for the loss of up to six teams.

Fox wants the expansion as they need game inventory. ESPN owns most of the properties that the Big12 is truly interested in so they would be giving up properties (AAC, CUSA) to Fox and would be paying significantly more for the same property under the Big12 deal.

UT and OU want to remain relevant so they must determine whether the Big 12 is sustainable long term or to jump (probably at the end of the current GOR - 9 seasons).
Expand...

Nice summary.

Just to add, there seems to also be some dispute as to how much. Some articles are using the lifetime average of the two contracts combined (13 years) which is supposedly around $20 million a year (which is what you use above and I believe is correct), while others are using the average of what is remaining over the last 10 years which B12 fans are claiming is $25M per team. This is why some articles say ESPN/FOX would have to dole out an additional $800M if expansion were to 14, while some blogs are stating $1B. But we know they tend to overstate their $$$ on a consistent basis. Still, who knows? We may never know which is correct.

Cheers,
Neil
 
texascpa said:
Why is Florida St. in their chart? They aren't going to Big12, no way, no how. I wish writers would get off that wagon.
Expand...

That would take logic and intelligence, something that sports writers lack for some odd reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cusefan0307
    • Like
    • Love
CNBC says the Syracuse Athletic Department is worth 487 Million $
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
JimBoston
J
sutomcat
    • Like
TV Ratings for Holiday Bowl
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
OburgOrange
OburgOrange
JeffCuse
  • Poll
Will Syracuse men's basketball win a conference title in the next two decades?
Replies
14
Views
1K
HoustonCuse
HoustonCuse
O
    • Like
Who We Beat
Replies
4
Views
978
Sdot
S
NineOneSeven
    • Don't Like
  • Question
What year took the longest to win a game against a top conference opponent?
Replies
0
Views
413
NineOneSeven
NineOneSeven

Forum statistics

Threads
172,329
Messages
5,010,667
Members
6,026
Latest member
Upstate33

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
242
Guests online
1,531
Total visitors
1,773
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom