New Big 12 Thread

[Pony_Law]

I think are only real way to get in is for some group of boosters just straight bribe a majority of the Big 12 College presidents and commissioner of the Big 12.

[Pony^]

Another problem is the non-Texas schools my not want anymore Texas teams -- it takes 8 votes to admit a team. No P5 conference currently has more than four teams from one state:

ACC -- Duke, Wake Forest, UNC and NC State.

PAC -- Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA and USC.

Big 12 -- Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor and TCU.

[Bergermeister]

I think are only real way to get in is for some group of boosters just straight bribe a majority of the Big 12 College presidents and commissioner of the Big 12.

Seems to work just fine in many business situations. Nothing wrong with a friendly bribe.

[Dukie]

None of the candidates for the Big XII, with the possible exception of BYU, move the dial enough for a TV audience to make bringing them in worth it in terms of media money; If they did they'd already be in the conference right now. In fact, splitting the pie ten ways instead of twelve has made it even more lucrative for the schools. As a result even the less powerful schools have been against expansion, not just Texas.
Point is, there is no money to give. The expansion schools are most likely going to cut into any media revenue that the current schools are receiving in some way to being with. The only reason the conference is looking to expand is to protect it's jugular, access to the CFP, so they're stuck expanding for defensive purposes, and as a result they are picking through the leftovers.

Digetydog's following post quickly comments that none of the quoted language above is true, but that post didn't specifically explain why. For the next decade (Big XII TV contracts currently expire in 2026), the Big XII automatically gets more than $23MM per school added from their TV partners. It doesn't matter if they admit Notre Dame or Sul Ross State. $23MM per school, per year gets added. So yes, bribes (or, willingness to take less than a pro rata cut) do matter.

[max the wonder dog]

I think are only real way to get in is for some group of boosters just straight bribe a majority of the Big 12 College presidents and commissioner of the Big 12.

Seems to work just fine in many business situations. Nothing wrong with a friendly bribe.

FedEx is trying to buy a slot for Memphis, offering title sponsorship of FB championship, TV sponsorship package for basketball, etc. The company invests a lot in sports sponsorships and they believe they can get a solid ROI from this investment.

[smupony94]

Hope Big12 gets money up front from Fred

[Digetydog]

None of the candidates for the Big XII, with the possible exception of BYU, move the dial enough for a TV audience to make bringing them in worth it in terms of media money; If they did they'd already be in the conference right now. In fact, splitting the pie ten ways instead of twelve has made it even more lucrative for the schools. As a result even the less powerful schools have been against expansion, not just Texas.
Point is, there is no money to give. The expansion schools are most likely going to cut into any media revenue that the current schools are receiving in some way to being with. The only reason the conference is looking to expand is to protect it's jugular, access to the CFP, so they're stuck expanding for defensive purposes, and as a result they are picking through the leftovers.

Digetydog's following post quickly comments that none of the quoted language above is true, but that post didn't specifically explain why. For the next decade (Big XII TV contracts currently expire in 2026), the Big XII automatically gets more than $23MM per school added from their TV partners. It doesn't matter if they admit Notre Dame or Sul Ross State. $23MM per school, per year gets added. So yes, bribes (or, willingness to take less than a pro rata cut) do matter.

Your post is consistent with my understanding of the situation. In many ways, the B12 is "auctioning" off the spots to the teams willing to step up.

[Pony^]

Your post is consistent with my understanding of the situation. In many ways, the B12 is "auctioning" off the spots to the teams willing to step up.

Hmmm, I wonder if Hart was hinting at this when he said, "We feel that we belong and have assets no one else can offer."

http://beta.thescore.com/ncaaf/news/1062860-smu-feels-it-has-assets-no-one-else-can-offer-big-12

[Pony^]

For what its worth, according to a finance professor, SMU sports has a higher value on the open market than UH sports.

http://www.hookem.com/2016/07/25/big-12-expansion-uconn-usf-lead-houston-bottom-athletics-worth-per-report/

[FIVE-O-FAN]

If SMU has anything to offer the conference it's loyalty - SMU isn't going to dump the Big XII for the PAC-12 or SEC - That needs to be made clear to the conference immediately. It doesn't do the Big XII any good to bring in a school that is going to bigger-better-deal them in five or ten years.

I would love to see the looks on the faces of the other Big 12-2 ADs when Rick promises them we won't be leaving for the Pac-12 or SEC.

I laughed out loud

To use the terminology of my 13 year old daughter and all of her friends, "Same!"

[Digetydog]

For what its worth, according to a finance professor, SMU sports has a higher value on the open market than UH sports.

http://www.hookem.com/2016/07/25/big-12-expansion-uconn-usf-lead-houston-bottom-athletics-worth-per-report/

My finance professor would have flunked that guy. There is no way on God's Green Earth that USF basketball has the value attributed to it.

[SMUstangs22]

Buckle up guys

[fan]

For what its worth, according to a finance professor, SMU sports has a higher value on the open market than UH sports.

http://www.hookem.com/2016/07/25/big-12-expansion-uconn-usf-lead-houston-bottom-athletics-worth-per-report/

The fact that we're even listed says something.

No matter what happens we'll be in good shape. Funny thing is, if we don't make the cut this round, the AAC losing top teams automatically elevates us to top midget thus making us more attractive in 2026 when all hell breaks loose.

[leopold]

If SMU has anything to offer the conference it's loyalty - SMU isn't going to dump the Big XII for the PAC-12 or SEC - That needs to be made clear to the conference immediately. It doesn't do the Big XII any good to bring in a school that is going to bigger-better-deal them in five or ten years.

I would love to see the looks on the faces of the other Big 12-2 ADs when Rick promises them we won't be leaving for the Pac-12 or SEC.

I laughed out loud

Laugh all you want, but I'm right.

If the Big XII doesn't get the right schools they can start looking to become, in the coming years, what the Big East was a decade ago; i.e. a springboard conference that allows developing programs a BCS/P5 harbor until a more lucrative, permanent membership becomes available. Remember what Miami, VT, Louisville, Notre Dame, and even TCU did to the Big East? Because it's going to start happening to the Big XII if it doesn't start coming up with some long term solutions, now. Call it stability, loyalty, whatever you want but there is no way for the Big XII to exist if SCHOOLS KEEP LEAVING.
If UT is going to stay, they want someone they can own for the next half-century, not a bargain-basement replacement that is going to look to leave at the first signs of success.

Hell, anybody here own a business? If you're trying to build a business and you can afford better help (and the Big XII CAN afford better help) do you bring in half assed teenagers you pay minimum wage to that are going to leave when they start to show the first signs of competence because you low-balled them? Or do you offer some small amount of ownership to a young, hungry go-getter who is willing to sacrifice for you and build the company and make it better? Which one is the better decision in the long run?
SMU needs to walk in and say 'Yes, we like the bigger conference payout, but we want to play Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU! We want to be with all of our old friends and play the schools we grew up with and to hell with the yankees up north and the hicks to the east and the surfers to the west, we are a Texas school and we want to build a Texas(ish) conference!" Because UConn, Cincy, BYU, Memphis, and everyone else will bolt as soon as they can when given the opportunity, just like Louisville did, and just like Miami and Va Tech did, and the Big XII can't afford to watch those schools pull their act together and leave ten years from now, otherwise they are going to be right back in the same spot.

[leopold]

None of the candidates for the Big XII, with the possible exception of BYU, move the dial enough for a TV audience to make bringing them in worth it in terms of media money; If they did they'd already be in the conference right now. In fact, splitting the pie ten ways instead of twelve has made it even more lucrative for the schools. As a result even the less powerful schools have been against expansion, not just Texas.
Point is, there is no money to give. The expansion schools are most likely going to cut into any media revenue that the current schools are receiving in some way to being with. The only reason the conference is looking to expand is to protect it's jugular, access to the CFP, so they're stuck expanding for defensive purposes, and as a result they are picking through the leftovers.

Digetydog's following post quickly comments that none of the quoted language above is true, but that post didn't specifically explain why. For the next decade (Big XII TV contracts currently expire in 2026), the Big XII automatically gets more than $23MM per school added from their TV partners. It doesn't matter if they admit Notre Dame or Sul Ross State. $23MM per school, per year gets added. So yes, bribes (or, willingness to take less than a pro rata cut) do matter.

Yeah, and how long has that option been in place and why haven't they taken it? When Nebraska and then Colorado walked out the door, and then A&M and then MIzzou, they could have gone right back to 12 schools at any time, but they didn't. Why not?
ANSWER: Because it wasn't worth it.
http://www.sbnation.com/college-footbal ... nt-revenue
This article takes into account the additional revenue, and while it's a year old, pretty much all of it still applies. Long story short, the schools available do not bring in enough TV attention to make a difference.
Realistically the Big XII would break even by bringing in new schools, perhaps even make a little more if the new schools had some success in football or men's basketball, but they could also watch their revenue each drop a million or two if they tank.
The real risk, however, wasn't the financial aspect, it was possibly upsetting the political apple cart that's already out of whack. Non-Texas schools didn't want to see a more Texas-based conference with Houston or SMU. West Virginia needs a conference away game that doesn't require getting on a space shuttle to attend, but bringing in Cincy or UConn may require more than just geographic sacrifices for schools like Baylor and Tech, and who the heck knows what issues BYU is going to bring to the table? They could end up driving schools out of the conference even faster.
Point is, I would bet you a paycheck if I could that lowballing the conference would't make a difference, because
1) a few million alone isn't going to fix the Big XII's inherent issues, i.e. stability and uneven financial distribution - in fact it would make it even worse, and
2) That money would mostly end up in UT's and OU's coffers anyway and they don't need it. They want control and bringing in the wrong school could water down their say in dominating the conference.