Big 12 to expand...or not | Page 4 | Syracusefan.com

Big 12 to expand...or not

He's playing loose with the numbers. It is a pro-rata share. It depends on when teams join (not this season) and has 9 seasons left. If teams moved by next season (unlikely especially if they expand by more than 2) there remains 8 seasons. The writer is not nearly as bad at math as the Dude, but when playing loose with numbers, the increase at 4 schools for 8 years is $736MM, assuming the $23MM figure is the correct number.
 
His point was Nebraska was a junior member, which is basically made-up.

Rutgers on the other hand, they have zero respect within the conference.
This is like telling Deacon Jones in the '60s, "No, that wasn't a sack, it was a tackle for a loss."

Everyone knows what I'm talking about. It's a common phrase.
 
I imagine this plays out like the election, got to win Ohio and Florida.

so I think cincy & likely sfu, with Memphis...and either byu or colorodo st.
 
That's incorrect. There's no such thing as a 'junior member'. The Big Ten evenly splits revenue.

Rutgers is the only exception as they are being ramped up to a full share.
Nebraska on track for big payday in 2017; Maryland’s larger Big Ten payout is part advance

Though the discrepancy in dollars between Maryland and Nebraska is sure to have some Husker fans grumbling, especially given Nebraska’s longer tenure in the league, Big Ten Deputy Commissioner Brad Traviolia defended the distributions.

Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers were all given six-year terms to transition to a full Big Ten share. Payments from the league were then set at what the schools were projected to receive from their old leagues during those years at the time of negotiations — 2010 for Nebraska and 2013 for Maryland and Rutgers.

Nebraska’s $14 million payment during 2011-12, its first in the Big Ten, was based on what it had been expected to receive from the Big 12 in that year.

Likewise, Maryland’s $24.5 million base payment for 2014-15 was based on what it was projected to receive from the ACC that year.

Rutgers was coming out of the lower-tier American Athletic Conference, the reason for its low-ball Big Ten payment. The school did not release its first-year payment figure last week, but Traviolia put it at about $10 million.

Public documents show Nebraska’s payments have gradually ramped up: to $15.4 million in year two, then $16.9 million, $18.7 million and about $22 million for the current year.

Those transition-year payments were not adjusted even though, as it turned out, Big 12 members have actually received larger payments than were projected back in 2010.

The Big 12 negotiated a new TV deal after Nebraska’s departure that was somewhat more lucrative than had been expected. Additionally, Big 12 payments have grown higher simply because the league has fewer schools sharing the dollars. League tax filings show only eight Big 12 schools in recent years received full shares, with West Virginia and TCU both receiving lesser payments as new league members.

Traviolia said terms for entering schools do not call for adjusting payments even if actual payouts in their old leagues turn out to be different.

“It was based on what the Big 12 was projected to pay at the time we negotiated,” Traviolia said of Nebraska’s payments.

The Big Ten did adjust Nebraska’s payout over the last two years to take into account the new College Football Playoff, the main reason payments to Nebraska have spiked more than $5 million over those years. Nebraska would have received that bump as either a member of the Big 12 or Big Ten, Traviolia said.

Far bigger rewards appear ahead for Nebraska beginning in July 2017, when the school becomes a fully vested member of the league. Not only will the school be eligible for a full share, the league will also be entering a new network television contract that year. Annual payments to league schools are expected to top $40 million, and some have suggested they could reach $50 million.
 
Personally I think the best options are in order:
  1. BYU (fan base, national appeal)
  2. Houston (market, geography, rivalries)
  3. Cincinnati (rival and geographic partner for WVU, also probably the most balanced program from a competitive nature)
  4. Memphis (logical partner with UC and WVU), FedEx$
  5. UCF (recruiting)
I think the first 2 are clear. B12 has to give WVU a bit of a break for non-revenue sports travel so I think Cincy is logical. It also gets the B12 into Ohio which isn't Florida from a recruiting aspect but it ain't bad. So many teams recruit Florida its hardly necessary to place a team there. Hard to pass up the fully underwritten FedEx B12 Championship game imo.
 
Good points...but you fixed one issue (WVU on an island) but created a new one BYU now on an island...not an issue is BYU is FB only and plays their hoops in Gonzaga's league...however, if they are a full member adding CSU might make sense.
 
I think it was 13, they were unlucky and lost. Seriously, one reason they built on campus is to get students to games. Regardless, UT, OU and a few other teams would bring enough fans and just being in NOLA brings out the travelers (like we did!) because it makes for a great weekend getaway. The Louisiana recruiting would also be a prize. Staking a claim in SEC territory wouldn't hurt, either.
Tulane to the ACC !
 
Not sure this has been addressed, but Clay Travis from Fox Sports wrote about this earlier, kind of an interesting take, more or less says this will act as a reverse auction and the schools will make lowest bid for membership, essentially the B12 selling their spots ...

Big 12 Auctions Off League Membership For Big Money
College football realignment is about the only thing Travis is good for.
 
Not sure this has been addressed, but Clay Travis from Fox Sports wrote about this earlier, kind of an interesting take, more or less says this will act as a reverse auction and the schools will make lowest bid for membership, essentially the B12 selling their spots ...

Big 12 Auctions Off League Membership For Big Money
This is what Tomcat was saying based on my theory. If ESPN and Fox each have to pony up 250 million dollars extra a year to the Big XII based on their pro rata contract the league can go to the American schools and put them off each other.
Okay Memphis we won't give you an equal share of 25 million a year will you take 8 million which is better than the 3 million you are getting and now and we keep that extra 17 million for current members.
Same for Cincinnati/UConn/USF/UCF.

The big XII would know each school is desperate to leave the American and would take less money.
 
This is what Tomcat was saying based on my theory. If ESPN and Fox each have to pony up 250 million dollars extra a year to the Big XII based on their pro rata contract the league can go to the American schools and put them off each other.
Okay Memphis we won't give you an equal share of 25 million a year will you take 8 million which is better than the 3 million you are getting and now and we keep that extra 17 million for current members.
Same for Cincinnati/UConn/USF/UCF.

The big XII would know each school is desperate to leave the American and would take less money.
So we know what each of the B 12 schools are - now it's a matter of establishing their price.
 
Day2 said:
College football realignment is about the only thing Travis is good for.

Travis was confident just a week or two as that the ACC would never get a network.
 
ESPN could also tell the AAC... hold tight we'll triple your payout per team to stay and we'll give you a streaming conference network.
 
I am still trying to wrap my head around this. I realize that the B12 has a prorata clause in their current contract that they believe will get the conference the same amount of TV money. But if they go for lowest bidder, does that give ESPN/FOX the right to say we will only increase by the negotiated agreed payout of the incoming member, not the current member rate? Not a lawyer so I am just asking.

Also, let's assume ESPN/FOX is stuck with the $20M plus for each expansion candidate, I haven't heard of a clause like the ACC had that contains a penalty if a network isn't developed in "x" number of years. So, is a conference network really viable based upon who is already in the conference and who are available as expansion candidates?

Interesting times ahead.

Cheers,
Neil
 
Travis was confident just a week or two as that the ACC would never get a network.

He is still sticking to that, thinks that ESPN subscribers will drop by ~10mm by 2019 and the network will never get off the ground
 

Forum statistics

Threads
168,150
Messages
4,753,113
Members
5,943
Latest member
Diamondmakr

Online statistics

Members online
224
Guests online
1,326
Total visitors
1,550


Top Bottom