Kansas City Star: Big 12 Not looking to Expand at this Time

[arbitragegls]

Blair Kerkhoff who covers the Big 12 and Kansas Teams had the following tweets this evening which confirmed:
League talked expansion and is happy with ten members for now. Note that both Texas and Oklahoma as well as Commissioner Neinas (outgoing but given cudos for saving conference) all believe Big 12 should stay at 10 for now. If this is truly the case...big sigh here. Do you believe this?
Also note comments about the NC proposals.

http://twitter.com/#!/BlairKerkhoff

 

[PeteCalvin]

Sounds like the Big12 and SEC want to corner the market on BCS Championships. They know that by going with the Top 4 Teams approach, they could each have two in there thanks to the crappy subjective rankings. And to further throw daggers at the other conferences, the Big12 agrees with the SEC on "strength of schedule" playing a HUGE role. Again, that would tilt the scales in their favor.

However, it looks like the other major conferences are in favor of the Top 4 Conference Champions approach, which is what it should be in the short term. As far as I'm concerned, I don't really care if Alabama and LSU are both great teams. Whoever wins the SEC is the team that should represent the SEC for a chance at the title. Same for Texas and Oklahoma in the Big12. No way certain "anointed" teams should get two cracks at the trophy when other solid teams won't even get one. You lose, you're done. So don't lose against your super tough schedule, morons!

Give the SEC and Big12 a couple of years of the 4 Conference Champions model and they will be screaming for a 4 and 4 (top 4 conference champions and top 4 at-large), which is closest to what it should be anyway.

I think if the other conferences hold strong against the SEC and Big12, they will never get their Top 4 team preference.

 

[NKR1978]

Wonder if they're just saving face after being rebuffed by their top choices.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

 

[SU2NASA]

Wonder if they're just saving face after being rebuffed by their top choices.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

I don't think there was any discussion to begin with. It was a rumor from a message board that happened to blow up.

Now everyone go out and blow up 'Oklahoma to the Big Ten'.

 

[Jake]

they're just saying the right things until after the playoff system is ironed out. FSU set the table for a motive to leave and the big 12 can't be perceived as pursuing teams. Smells a lot like Mizzou and aTm to the SEC last summer. the only caveat is that I truly think OU and Texas would rather stay at 10 and not have to play a conference championship game before heading to the a bowl.

We'll see if UT has been castrated or not.

 

[HtownOrange]

I don't think there was any discussion to begin with. It was a rumor from a message board that happened to blow up.

Now everyone go out and blow up 'Oklahoma to the Big Ten'.

OK, I give up, I'm in. OU to B1G, will play in 2013, bringing +1, Kansas is the heavy favorite.

 

[HtownOrange]

they're just saying the right things until after the playoff system is ironed out. FSU set the table for a motive to leave and the big 12 can't be perceived as pursuing teams. Smells a lot like Mizzou and aTm to the SEC last summer. the only caveat is that I truly think OU and Texas would rather stay at 10 and not have to play a conference championship game before heading to the a bowl.

We'll see if UT has been castrated or not.

Under the current TV deal, I definitely agree. Most people have forgotten that the Big 12 is still going to collect their Championship game money even at 10 teams. To bring in any new teams before the current deal ends will not trigger a new deal. It would only dilute the current payout.

 

[SURules]

they're just saying the right things until after the playoff system is ironed out. FSU set the table for a motive to leave and the big 12 can't be perceived as pursuing teams. Smells a lot like Mizzou and aTm to the SEC last summer. the only caveat is that I truly think OU and Texas would rather stay at 10 and not have to play a conference championship game before heading to the a bowl.

We'll see if UT has been castrated or not.

I think your right as this looks like Mizzou and aTm with the SEC. I think this is a true mistake by Clemson especially. Time will tell though as a few extra dollars isn't going to help their Win / Loss ratio and access to a NC IMHO.

 

[Chip]

they're just saying the right things until after the playoff system is ironed out. FSU set the table for a motive to leave and the big 12 can't be perceived as pursuing teams. Smells a lot like Mizzou and aTm to the SEC last summer. the only caveat is that I truly think OU and Texas would rather stay at 10 and not have to play a conference championship game before heading to the a bowl.

We'll see if UT has been castrated or not.

That's the biggest potential reason, but they also must not feel that any 2 teams (short of ND plus anyone) will add enough value to their conference revenue sources to make it worth their while to take the risk of the Conf Championship game. So if it were for an additional $3 to $5M per year, they're probably thinking they'd rather have the easier path to the Final 4. Who knows what the price point is that will make them take on that risk, $10M per year? If they don't expand right away, then it's clear that FSU and Clemson don't deliver that desired amount of additional revenue. And it would be clear that ND is not interested, which pretty much anyone who took math in 3rd grade understands.

 

[rrlbees]

I don't think there was any discussion to begin with. It was a rumor from a message board that happened to blow up.

Now everyone go out and blow up 'Oklahoma to the Big Ten'.

A message board had the power to cause multiple Presidents, AD's and BOT members to speak up including some who said they have an open mind? OK.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[ImperialOrange]

That's the biggest potential reason, but they also must not feel that any 2 teams (short of ND plus anyone) will add enough value to their conference revenue sources to make it worth their while to take the risk of the Conf Championship game. So if it were for an additional $3 to $5M per year, they're probably thinking they'd rather have the easier path to the Final 4. Who knows what the price point is that will make them take on that risk, $10M per year? If they don't expand right away, then it's clear that FSU and Clemson don't deliver that desired amount of additional revenue. And it would be clear that ND is not interested, which pretty much anyone who took math in 3rd grade understands.

OR FSU and Clemson are actually about as interested as Colorado, aTm, & Mizzou were to be playing in the awesome conference that is/was the Big 12. Big 12 hasn't exactly landed new teams from another power conference lately and if fsu and clemson were so easy for them to land then why did wvu and tcu get taken first?

 

[baggerbob]

The next 2 schools to move, will be after talks stall with the Big East. After the Big East turned down the last contract,TCU never came Syracuse, Pitt and West Virginia left. The LHN was used as a means to save the Big 12, because without the LHN Texas would have been gone. Just my own feeling, but 5 conferences playing all sports with about 80 teams, seems to be the way for everything to shake out. The Big East will go back to being a basketball conference.

 

[Toga]

The next 2 schools to move, will be after talks stall with the Big East. After the Big East turned down the last contract,TCU never came Syracuse, Pitt and West Virginia left. The LHN was used as a means to save the Big 12, because without the LHN Texas would have been gone. Just my own feeling, but 5 conferences playing all sports with about 80 70 teams, seems to be the way for everything to shake out. The Big East will go back to being a basketball conference.

Corrected

 

[SU2NASA]

A message board had the power to cause multiple Presidents, AD's and BOT members to speak up including some who said they have an open mind? OK.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Did you miss PurpleBookCat last year?

 

[texasfight]

Under the current TV deal, I definitely agree. Most people have forgotten that the Big 12 is still going to collect their Championship game money even at 10 teams. To bring in any new teams before the current deal ends will not trigger a new deal. It would only dilute the current payout.

There's an elevation clause at 12 with a championship, another one at 14 and 16. They are going to 12 with FSU/Clemson. That's agreed in principle by intermediaries. It'll unfold in the coming weeks after the lawyers have been satisfied. See also the Missouri & A&M transition process.

You are right that the champions bowl money would be split to small pieces, but the CCG will bring in a lot of additional money. Where your argument makes more sense is they won't go from 12 to 14 immediately. They won't actually ever play a season at 14. SEC is demonstrating why that sucks. They will go to 14 likely next summer, SEC will then move to 16, and then B12 will pick up their last two.

 

[texasfight]

The next 2 schools to move, will be after talks stall with the Big East. After the Big East turned down the last contract,TCU never came Syracuse, Pitt and West Virginia left. The LHN was used as a means to save the Big 12, because without the LHN Texas would have been gone. Just my own feeling, but 5 conferences playing all sports with about 80 teams, seems to be the way for everything to shake out. The Big East will go back to being a basketball conference.

I don't entirely disagree with you on 5 conf at 16 teams each for 80 total. But, if we consolidate power to SEC/B12/B1G/PAC, filling the remaining 16 slots to get them to 16 teams each, and drawing from what's on the market (mostly all of ACC, but also possibly ND, BYU, Boise, Houston, SMU, Louisville, and Cincy) then where is there another 16 schools that could form a conf that could seriously compete in football with those power confs? How does the champion of that watered down conf deserve a seat at the same table with schools that had to go through Bama & LSU/UT & OU/USC & Oregon/Michigan & Ohio St? And how do you fit 5 conf champs into 4 slots that isn't going to end with the those four confs being in the top four every time - if the rules allow for two from one power conf or not really doesn't have any impact on ACC.

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

There's an elevation clause at 12 with a championship, another one at 14 and 16. They are going to 12 with FSU/Clemson. That's agreed in principle by intermediaries. It'll unfold in the coming weeks after the lawyers have been satisfied. See also the Missouri & A&M transition process.

You are right that the champions bowl money would be split to small pieces, but the CCG will bring in a lot of additional money. Where your argument makes more sense is they won't go from 12 to 14 immediately. They won't actually ever play a season at 14. SEC is demonstrating why that sucks. They will go to 14 likely next summer, SEC will then move to 16, and then B12 will pick up their last two.

Actually, you are off the mark quite a bit:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...orn-again-and-feeling-its-oats-at-10-12-or-14

"The new Big 12 TV deal is expected to be announced any day, perhaps here this week as a celebration of the league's new-found strength. Within that deal is a clause that will give any new expansion candidates the same money as the current members (estimated to be at least $20 million per year).

One industry source said that number applies whether the Big 12 invites, "Appalachian State or Florida State." And according to another industry source, ESPN wouldn't stand in the way of Big 12 expansion even after negotiating a new deal with the ACC."

 

[texasfight]

Actually, you are off the mark quite a bit:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...orn-again-and-feeling-its-oats-at-10-12-or-14

"The new Big 12 TV deal is expected to be announced any day, perhaps here this week as a celebration of the league's new-found strength. Within that deal is a clause that will give any new expansion candidates the same money as the current members (estimated to be at least $20 million per year).

One industry source said that number applies whether the Big 12 invites, "Appalachian State or Florida State." And according to another industry source, ESPN wouldn't stand in the way of Big 12 expansion even after negotiating a new deal with the ACC."

First, no one actually gets to see these contracts, not even supposed insiders. The ACC contract has been actually signed for weeks and there are still a lot of questions about what it says.

Second, adding the same value per team added is an elevation clause. With the exception of perhaps ND, you don't get more money per school by adding more teams, you normally get less. Guaranteeing that the pie will grow enough to ensure no school gets a small piece throws the way open for expansion. However, I have my doubts it actually says that. The way Louisville has been played out in that they are not a candidate at all after a study revealed their market value would decrease the per school take... that seems to indicate that there is more fluidity in the contract than the story you're linking to indicates. I have no doubt that author is reporting what they've been told, but you shouldn't believe contract conditions until you see them in writing. That's days away though, at least till it's signed and get a better idea what it actually says. Lets not get into too big an uproar till we hear that result.

 

[PhatOrange]

They are going to 12 with FSU/Clemson. That's agreed in principle by intermediaries. It'll unfold in the coming weeks after the lawyers have been satisfied.

We'll see if this happens and when you're wrong don't come back.

 

[HtownOrange]

There's an elevation clause at 12 with a championship, another one at 14 and 16. They are going to 12 with FSU/Clemson. That's agreed in principle by intermediaries. It'll unfold in the coming weeks after the lawyers have been satisfied. See also the Missouri & A&M transition process.

You are right that the champions bowl money would be split to small pieces, but the CCG will bring in a lot of additional money. Where your argument makes more sense is they won't go from 12 to 14 immediately. They won't actually ever play a season at 14. SEC is demonstrating why that sucks. They will go to 14 likely next summer, SEC will then move to 16, and then B12 will pick up their last two.

So the Big 12 officials don't know their own contract which continued the current deal paying for the CCG inspite of the fact that it will not be played? And the deal they have and the extension only allow the addition of new teams at the then current payouts, not re-evaluations or per-team inncreases. Nevermind that they already dispelled this rumor as did the Big 12 TV partners. Please post the deal or a link to a serious writer with named official sources. Until I see something concrete to support your claims I think I trust CBS and ESPN more on this one.

 

[All4SU]

They are going to 12 with FSU/Clemson. That's agreed in principle by intermediaries. It'll unfold in the coming weeks after the lawyers have been satisfied.

Source please.

 

[HtownOrange]

First, no one actually gets to see these contracts, not even supposed insiders. The ACC contract has been actually signed for weeks and there are still a lot of questions about what it says.

Second, adding the same value per team added is an elevation clause. With the exception of perhaps ND, you don't get more money per school by adding more teams, you normally get less. Guaranteeing that the pie will grow enough to ensure no school gets a small piece throws the way open for expansion. However, I have my doubts it actually says that. The way Louisville has been played out in that they are not a candidate at all after a study revealed their market value would decrease the per school take... that seems to indicate that there is more fluidity in the contract than the story you're linking to indicates. I have no doubt that author is reporting what they've been told, but you shouldn't believe contract conditions until you see them in writing. That's days away though, at least till it's signed and get a better idea what it actually says. Lets not get into too big an uproar till we hear that result.

Please explain: "adding the same value per team added is an elevation clause". Adding the same value is not an "elevation" clause, because only the incoming school gets the money, there is no new money for any existing conference member.

Next, explain why every move, from the highest levels to the lowest levels, has resulted in EVERY school involved receiving an increase, but you state, "With the exception of perhaps ND, you don't get more money per school by adding more teams, you normally get less."

I agree that as long as the new school is getting the same share and nobody gets a cut for inviting new schools that expansion can occur, butit is not a catalyst by any measure. Based on the history of the last decade or so, expansion has resulted in higher payouts.

As for Louisville lessening the value of the TV deal, I would need to see the full report. They have more upside, in a bigger market and an equal or larger fanbase than WVU. The math does not work as presented.

 

[All4SU]

There's an elevation clause at 12 with a championship, another one at 14 and 16. They are going to 12 with FSU/Clemson. That's agreed in principle by intermediaries. It'll unfold in the coming weeks after the lawyers have been satisfied. See also the Missouri & A&M transition process.

You are right that the champions bowl money would be split to small pieces, but the CCG will bring in a lot of additional money. Where your argument makes more sense is they won't go from 12 to 14 immediately. They won't actually ever play a season at 14. SEC is demonstrating why that sucks. They will go to 14 likely next summer, SEC will then move to 16, and then B12 will pick up their last two.

I've read that Oklahoma is going to the Big10 to be reunited with Nebraska.

 

[PhatOrange]

Source please.

CoonSkinCap over at the WVU board and it was confirmed by RoAdKill1 - duh.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

Source please.

You guys are being mighty disrespectful to Mr. Dodds.