OU/OSU Jumping Ship?
- Thread starter TexanMark
- Start date
kyleslamb
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 338
- Like
- 24
Interestingly... the A&M publishers over on Scout are of the impression the Texas/Notre Dame proposal to the B1G is legit, and when Oklahoma heard of it, that was partially responsible for their commitment to see this Pac-12 move through. In other words, Oklahoma is full speed ahead with their departure in part because of Texas flirting with the Big Ten.
texasorange
2nd String
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 579
- Like
- 350
Local DFW radio has been reporting the Orangeblood story by Chip Brown too. I wonder who else Baylor will look to sue if/when OU & OSU leave.
Mark I started a thread on this earlier and said
With Texas' mouthpiece putting this out there I believe it has some creditability. Texas is doing everything they can to keep the Big 12-3 together so they can get the benefits of the LHN 300 million dollar contract they have signed with ESPN. If Oklahoma and Oklahoma St bolt for the Pac-12 say goodbye to the Big 12. I heard that people are underestimating the potential for zipper divisions in the event Oklahoma, Oklahoma St joined the Pac-12. Meaning the schools would put all of the geographic rivals in separate divisions and have them as protected cross over games.
So if the Pac-14 (or 16 if Texas and Texas Tech went) could look like this with a 9 game schedule. 7 division games, 1 protected rival, and 1 crossover game every year.
Division 1 Division 2
Oregon Oregon St
Washington Washington St.
Colorado Utah
Stanford California
UCLA USC
Arizona Arizona St
Oklahoma Oklahoma St.
Texas Texas Tech
This would protect the CA recruiting all of the schools in Pac-12. With the B1G putting Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions and potentially playing 2 times a year the chance rivals could play twice wouldn't be uncommon.
Its doubtful in my scenario you would get many zipper rivals playing twice in a year. Maybe USC-UCLA or Oklahoma-Oklahoma St once in a decade, but I doubt it would happen as often as I believe Ohio St-Michigan will be playing twice a year once Brady Hoke recruits a defense to Michigan. Ohio State fans would love nothing more than to beat Michigan twice a year.
HtownOrange
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 12,150
- Like
- 15,433
Orangebloods is a Texas mouthpiece, homer of a site. Nothing wrong with being sold out to your team, but putting unverified info out there as fact and not putting out sources and such, well that makes me think he is stirring the pot more than anything else, much like TM, TO and Alsacs have indicated.
But, OU probably wants some stability and if Texas is not sold out (which OU would have a really good indication of), then I fully understand why OU would look west. I still prefer the B1G 10 for us or to pick off a few ACC schools for the Big East. Actually, I prefer that the Big East gain some ACC teams whether we are in the Big East or teh B1G 10.
But, OU probably wants some stability and if Texas is not sold out (which OU would have a really good indication of), then I fully understand why OU would look west. I still prefer the B1G 10 for us or to pick off a few ACC schools for the Big East. Actually, I prefer that the Big East gain some ACC teams whether we are in the Big East or teh B1G 10.
sufan
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 352
- Like
- 72
-------------------------
1)
from John Hoover: covers Oklahoma Sooners football for the Tulsa World
"What I expect: OU regents will vote on Big12/Pac12 move next Mon. Will be approved. OSU will follow suit. Pac-12 will announce soon after."
2)
SEC Commissioner Mike Slive:
"We remain optimistic that Texas A&M will be a member of the SEC and have started to look at schedules for 2012-13 involving 13 teams."
Jake
Mod
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2011
- Messages
- 9,790
- Like
- 72,848
Something to keep in mind with the Northwestern insider. He is deliberately posting this information on the free side of their site to reach people. Seems more purposeful than most "inside information"...his latest piece of info is written like someone wrote it for him - look at the terminology. Someone is having him post this information in an attempt to influence others outside the conference. interesting chess match.
Orangello
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 10,257
- Like
- 11,004
kyleslamb
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 338
- Like
- 24
No question there's some PR going on with his posts.
Last summer, the Big Ten was furious with the leaks of information. The story was that the Big Ten tried plugging the leaks (and in fact all Big Ten schools were explicitly told not to leak any info to the media). Reportedly, that guy was approached by the Big Ten and kind of made a compromise to let him keep posting, but in return would keep an open line and kind of dictate what was put out. So if all that is true, most definitely there is some motivation to get certain information to the public and stir things up. That makes his posts somewhat suspect in that it can be considered propaganda, but I also believe there's some truth to what is being said.
No question PBC is a conference stooge it has been correctly pointed out he claims Texas will apply for an offer this week while in the past he said Texas has a standing offer on the table. This guy is throwing misinformation out there to get the B1G talking points out there. Of course every conference wants Texas but as we learned last year in the conservations between the Ohio St and Texas presidents Texas can't join the B1G because of its "Tech" problem A&M is being allowed to leave because Texas will remain and give welfare to Texas Tech. If Texas thinks the legislature will let them get away with the B1G they are wrong. Texas has 3 options 1. Go to the Pac-16 with Oklahoma, Oklahoma St. Texas Tech. 2. Let Oklahoma and Okie Light go and create a new SWC with Texas Tech, Baylor, SMU, Rice, Houston, Kansas St, Kansas, Iowa St, Missouri and keep their LHN money. 3. If OU and OSU go to the Pac-14 then become a Independent petition the Big East for the ND package and put their football games on the LHN and become the Notre Dame of the South.
If the B1G COULD get Notre Dame and Texas they wouldn't add a 15 and 16th team there would be no need to cut the pie 2 more ways.
If the B1G COULD get Notre Dame and Texas they wouldn't add a 15 and 16th team there would be no need to cut the pie 2 more ways.
kyleslamb
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 338
- Like
- 24
I promise you, Texas Tech will have a home in the Pac-12 with or without Texas. The Tech problem is not a problem any longer. It was last year, but the way things are shaking out now, it's not a problem... which is exactly why the Big Ten has been acting as they have been.
Trust me on this... the Big Ten has an agenda, which no one disputes. But they're not stupid... they have a method to their madness.
Also you're mistaken about the Big Ten not expanding to 16 teams. The Big Ten will expand further if other teams can add enough TV homes to make each of the existing shares increase. Missouri and Maryland, for instance, would bring over 5-6 million new homes to the conference, each at over $9 per year in additional revenue. That could be another $55 million in subscriber revenue alone, regardless of postseason payouts and advertising. I promise, promise, promise you the Big Ten would not necessarily stop at 14 teams even if it got Notre Dame and Texas. It will likely still go to 16, but it's concentrating on the big fish first.
Total misnomer when people assume the Big Ten wouldn't want to cut the pie two more ways. That's not the issue. The only issue is whether those two additional slices would make everyone else's slice bigger. Missouri and Maryland would, and others probably could too.
Tech will not get into the Pac-12 without Texas for sure. The Pac-12 bylaws allow 1 school to veto any new schools inclusion in expansion. You can bet that douche president from Stanford(who was key behind us leaving the AAU) will not allow an outlaw school like Tech in the Pac-12 without Texas as part of the package. Also, your right Missouri and Maryland are good picks if the B1G wanted 16 teams, but 9 million per yr in new subscriptions is not equal to the 25 million per team the B1G pays now. Adding 2 more to get 16 also dilutes the rivalries the B1G teams have now. Having 14 vs. 16 means there are 2 more teams to rotate on the schedule and less Minnesota-Iowa, Illinois-Wisconsin matchups which these teams care about. Overall, though I agree with most of your logic I just laugh at the fact Rutgers thought it was in the B1G 1 year ago now they are nowhere close to being the future of that conference.
kyleslamb
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 338
- Like
- 24
The $25 million per team is a bit of an exaggeration that got started by people that didn't really know what they were talking about LOL
Last year, the Big Ten paid was paid a total of $80 million by the BTN (according to tax records I researched myself). In 2009 it was $74 million. That's $7.2 million per school last year. In other words, if we assume the Big Ten's 50/50 split of profits with News Corp. (it's technically 49/51 for the Big Ten), $54 million in subscriber revenue is enough to add two new shares of $8 million and add $1 million more per team. Again, that does not even take into account advertising or tier-1 rights from ESPN (football) and ESPN/CBS (basketball).
The actual numbers come out to having payouts of about $22 million per school, but that's total conference distribution including ALL media, plus NCAA Tournament payouts plus bowl revenues after expenses plus gate receipt sharing in football and basketball. The Big Ten receives about $80 million a year right now from the BTN, but that escalates about 3% per year. Beginning this year, that number will increase now that News Corp's initial $80 million investment has been paid back by way of profits.
Regarding Texas Tech and the Pac-12... Stanford can object all they want, but who are the other options? If we assume Texas goes to the Big Ten, and A&M goes to the SEC, the only realistic options for the Pac-12 are:
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St.
Kansas
Kansas St.
Texas Tech
Missouri
UNLV
Boise St.
Nevada
Baylor
Iowa St.
That's not exactly a list of Ivy League-caliber schools. So Stanford can sit there and veto if they want, but if they do, the Pac-12 won't get to 16 teams without taking Tech. Missouri/Kansas would be a nice package, but Missouri by all accounts does not want to go West.
Everyone conveniently says "no way the Pac-12 takes Tech without Texas." Yet, there's never any credible substitute as to who is clearly a better option without them included.
KaiserUEO
2022 and 2x ESPN Tourney Challenge Winner
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 18,914
- Like
- 22,954
Thanks Kyle. Im with you on this.
Remember, this is a board where people google 'syracusefan', ponder and then come up with a screen name, wait for acceptence...then either post is the game on tv or whats your favorite uniform combo??
I said this before, i no longer see smoke, i just see a fire. the oklahomas are gone. the pac 12 just needs to decide whether they stay at 14 or take tech and a lottery winner. smart $$ is they go to 16 and be done for eternity.
after that i still cant figure out how the PBC plays into this. maybe hes got it, maybe hes a mouthpiece trying to force NDs hand. regardless, hes in on something, can likely figure out a tv guide and should not be ignored.
a nightmare scenario for Syracuse is aTm gets into the SEC, the okies go west with tech, and texas goes to the b1o and both them and the SEC sit on 13...expansion hell remains open.
im also with jake...its acc or bust.
and if texas goes to the b1o...Cuse needs NO PART of that.
if ND joins...good lord.
Remember, this is a board where people google 'syracusefan', ponder and then come up with a screen name, wait for acceptence...then either post is the game on tv or whats your favorite uniform combo??
I said this before, i no longer see smoke, i just see a fire. the oklahomas are gone. the pac 12 just needs to decide whether they stay at 14 or take tech and a lottery winner. smart $$ is they go to 16 and be done for eternity.
after that i still cant figure out how the PBC plays into this. maybe hes got it, maybe hes a mouthpiece trying to force NDs hand. regardless, hes in on something, can likely figure out a tv guide and should not be ignored.
a nightmare scenario for Syracuse is aTm gets into the SEC, the okies go west with tech, and texas goes to the b1o and both them and the SEC sit on 13...expansion hell remains open.
im also with jake...its acc or bust.
and if texas goes to the b1o...Cuse needs NO PART of that.
if ND joins...good lord.
I think we agree on a lot of the overall points. However, the Pac-12 needs value in expansion right now they signed a 15yr-3BILLION dollar TV contract and if they decided to expand with Oklahoma and Okie Light to get to 14 they would add value as OU is a top 10 football power. Also Colorado's president said
"One of the reasons - and there are a lot of reasons - we got in the Pac-12 is to play regularly on the West Coast," Colorado president Bruce Benson"When I hear things like East-West divisions, we're going back to the Big 12 again. I sure don't want to get shorted out of the West Coast." Bringing in Oklahoma and Okie Light doesn't kill Colorado playing games on the West regularly. I have a feeling the Pac-12 adds 2 schools stops at 14. The SEC adds a 14th team either Va Tech or WVU. The ACC adds 2 teams to get to 14 and uses the expansion to renegotiate its TV contract with ESPN. Texas recreates a SWC like conference with the Big 12 leftovers. B1G does not make any moves until Notre Dame is ready to join the conference. I just hope SU gets out of the BE before it becomes CUSA.
kyleslamb
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 338
- Like
- 24
The thing is: Larry Scott mentioned that the Pac-12's tier-1 deal with Fox & ESPN actually includes a provision that their TV value must increase with expansion. So the good news for them is that unlike the SEC who only has a "look-in" provision, the Pac-12 is guaranteed of earning at least a pro-rata increase by the number of teams they expand (or at least, that's my understanding of the trigger). The thing about Texas Tech is that despite being in Western Texas, that half of the state, excluding the Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Austin, Corpus Christi and Beaumont markets to the East, they still encompass 1.2 million television homes and would give the conference at least some presence in Texas to recruit and earn some TV ratings.
I don't think Texas Tech is a slam dunk. They're certainly flawed. However, the Pac-12, without Texas, doesn't have the option of choosing from the homecoming court. They're going to a dance where the prettiest girls already have dates. Their options are going to be limited and Tech is at least worth being seen with in public.
Regarding the Big Ten: I too think they'd like to wait on Notre Dame, but they might also be forced into taking teams 13 & 14 to create enough instability that guarantees Notre Dame's acceptance. They still, most likely, need the Big East to be shaken a bit. Taking a team from the ACC or Big East and hoping the ACC expands would move that along a bit.
HtownOrange
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 12,150
- Like
- 15,433
You are way to generous to Texas Tech. They are no where near the level of academics that the PAC 12 wants, only the SEC would tolerate TTech's academic reputation. The PAC 12 will accept OSU (a.k.a. T. Boone U) because they want OU. Also, T. Boone and other large donators have forced the hand at OSU to improve on their academics. Though the State of Texas has agreed to elevate U of Houston and Texas Tech to first tier research universities, Houston is first and Texas Tech will have to wait. The PAC 12 was and is only willing to take TTech IF Texas brings them along.
As to the assertion that they have 1.2 million homes, there are several other schools that bring that or more. Kansas is far more valuable and historically on par with TTech in football and far outshines them in hoops (imagine two all -time legendary schools together - UCLA and Kansas). Iowa State meets that requirement (close enough). Both Kansas and Iowa State (and K State, too) meet the academics, media exposure and quality of football for the PAC 12. AFA can also be thrown into that mix, too. Mizzou more than qualifies. Though Baylor brings everything, the PAC 12 will not budge on the religion issue, same with BYU and SMU (as well as our new conference brother, TCU).
Net result: TTech either follows Texas or goes MWC/WAC/CUSA. B1G 10 will NOT allow TTech in.
kyleslamb
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
- Messages
- 338
- Like
- 24
Couple things...
First, are you suggesting, then, the Pac-12 would take Iowa State before Texas Tech? I'll believe that when I see it. Missouri qualifies but they're not really interested in going West. They'll jump on an invite from the Big Ten or SEC before they'll remotely consider heading out West. As you mentioned, the Pac-12 isn't interested in religious denominations, which excludes those teams you mentioned. I believe Kansas would get an invite, but that's not the issue... it's who else? Missouri is the only one in that group that makes sense, and they probably have other preferences.
Second... Kansas has only 800,000 total households in its state. It can be debated whether they're on par in TV ratings, though all the data I've seen suggest otherwise, but nearly half a million TV homes is a HUGE deal for a TV network that retains its own subscriber fees (as the regional Pac-12 networks will do). Just for context, assuming even 30 cents per subscriber per month, and assuming only 75% of those extra 400k homes are subscribed, that's still an extra $11 million a year in subscriber fees. While Kansas would make up some of that money in advertising for basketball games, it would not be enough to break even.
Still, I'm not arguing Texas Tech would be taken ahead of Kansas. I think Kansas would get the edge because of academics. But that's irrelevant because I think Kansas and Tech are the two teams that will be taken with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State if Texas rebuffs.
Iowa State just does not have a chance at the Pac-12. They are not a team that will be profitable, academics be damned. I don't think you've taken into account how mediocre they are. Texas Tech as an institution has nearly twice the endowment and twice the athletics general revenue from local sources (contributions, ticket sales, concessions, camps, etc.) I've no doubt the Pac-12 would like to maintain some academic integrity, but Iowa State doesn't give them any profits. Texas Tech isn't a perfect solution, but after Texas there simply aren't any perfect solutions.
Truthfully, UNLV is the only team I could see the Pac-12 taking over Tech of that group (sans Missouri, but again I think Mizzou wants to stay East).
BlackKnight76
All American
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 4,473
- Like
- 3,855
I wouldn't accept TT on the basis of that awful "Gun's Up" promo.
HtownOrange
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 12,150
- Like
- 15,433
I understand your argumnets from a TV perspective, but the PAC 12 is not as worried about TV as many think. For available schools, I primarily used your list from above. I agree Mizzou is out for the west.
I respectfully disagree with you regarding academics. Research brings in FAR MORE $$$$ than athletics, even at Texas and Ohio State. Tech's reputation preceeds them. My guess is that if the PAC 12 is only able to secure OU and OSU, then they stop at 14 and wait for Texas or for another school to prove themselves worthy. Tech only comes along as a passenger on the Texas train, much like OSU riding the OU train. The PAC 12 may be more likely to overlook the religious issues with BYU, Baylor, SMU and TCU before they overlook Tech's academic issues.
Remember, TTech would not get into the B1G 10, ACC, Big East based on academic issues. The PAC 12 is on par with these conferences. Only the SEC would accept their academics and they are not going to the SEC. They hold onto Texas coattails or they get nothing. I think Baylor has already realized this, the exception being that the Big East may take Baylor as a filler to round out 12, 14, or 16.
By the way, should OU and OSU leave, and perhaps another team or two, and the Big 12 dissolve, then Texas may wait a year or two as an indy and go where they like without little brother. ESPN had an article that indicated that Texas does not believe they can make a go of it with 7 teams in the Big 12.
"Sources told Schad on Wednesday that Texas is willing to make financial concessions in order to keep the Big 12 together, but if Oklahoma and Oklahoma State join Texas A&M in leaving the conference, Texas does not consider a Big 12 with seven teams remaining to be viable."
From: http://espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/story...rs-not-decision-pac-12-move-seeking-stability
The above leads me to think that Texas does not want to expend its energy to save the conference even though they could backfill with suitable teams and perhaps a couple CUSA teams to get to 12, assuming OU and OSU are gone.
