This article makes it pretty clear how difficult it will be for us to break into the Big 12 any time soon.

(https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-...50605.html)

Key quote IMO:

“The conference schedule is absolutely great,” Luck said. “Our tagline is ‘one true champion.’”
Luck added that there really aren’t any viable teams from outside the Power 5 conferences that would bring added revenue to what the conference already creates. The league announced a record $220.1 million in distribution revenue to split among each school last week.
“Out dominator is 10,” Luck said. “The more you split it up … I don’t think we can find a partner who’s available right now to stay at the value we have (per school) or let alone increase what we have. That’s the consensus we have (staying at 10).”

Nothing surprising there. Big 12 is in a good spot right now.

He's not wrong

But wouldn't bringing in two schools create a conference championship game that would, in turn, bring in more TV money? So while the denominator would increase by two, the numerator would presumably increase as well.

I guess the thought would be that the added money a conference championship game brings doesn't offset the additional two mouths to feed?

(06-13-2014 02:31 PM)Barrett Wrote:  But wouldn't bringing in two schools create a conference championship game that would, in turn, bring in more TV money? So while the denominator would increase by two, the numerator would presumably increase as well.

I guess the thought would be that the added money a conference championship game brings doesn't offset the additional two mouths to feed?

Yes, the conference championship game does not bring as much money. You have to be able to bring in $20 mil per year for the Big 12 to even consider you.

For example: The biggest title game of them all, the SEC Championship Game, was worth about $15 mil total according to this 2013 article.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/col...s/1836389/

I would imagine the Big 12 game wasn't worth as much. I would also think if it were worth it, they would have found a way to add teams to make it happen. Right now, they have perfect symmetry in their scheduling and plenty of cash. They are in a nice spot.

Given Luck's marital connections with Rice, I almost have to take this as a smoke signal wafting precisely in our direction.


Just win, baby.

(06-13-2014 05:34 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Given Luck's marital connections with Rice, I almost have to take this as a smoke signal wafting precisely in our direction.


Just win, baby.

Ha, I wish.

They want us. They really do.
It's time to stop playing hard to get...

(06-13-2014 05:34 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  Given Luck's marital connections with Rice, I almost have to take this as a smoke signal wafting precisely in our direction.


Just win, baby.

I don't think there's much to read between the lines here. Oliver Luck will not (and should not be expected to) support any expansion that will be a net cost to WVU. That's assuming that E. Gordon Gee has even delegated any real power to Luck on this issue.

WVU is just one vote anyway. UT and OU are the schools that have leverage.

I do think Rice can get into the conversation, but there is a lot of work to do first.

Obviously, we need to replace one of the existing schools...

'Sam Cooper/Dr. Saturday@Yahoo! Sports Wrote:“Our demominator is 10,” Luck said.

(The "Out dominator" in the article must have been either a typo or due to an ignorant reporter.)

WE need to work on increasing OUR numerator. Period.

I think the clearer message is that any expansion candidates should not expect a comparable "deal" to what TCU and WVU got, specifically because the league was operating out of desperation at the time to maintain a minimum number of teams for the TV contract.

BYU and probably a couple others (Louisville, perhaps?) may have been offered a comparable deal at the time and said no, or dragged their feet, or wanted to negotiate further.

Now BYU is back at the table and this article is simply making it clear that B12 is no longer playing at THAT table where discussions happened, and that any deals offered then out of conference desperation are officially null and void.

I'd even go so far as to say that during those negotiations, B12 probably had to suspend a standing policy of "Never consider adding BYU" because they were one of the options possibly available ON SHORT NOTICE.

How this affects any other potential expansion candidates is less clear, but to me the takeaway is (a) the onus is on YOU to show us you add value (however you perceive value), and (b) the last deal is not available and and adds will probably be looking at fractional shares of the pot for a while.

(06-14-2014 12:26 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I think the clearer message is that any expansion candidates should not expect a comparable "deal" to what TCU and WVU got, specifically because the league was operating out of desperation at the time to maintain a minimum number of teams for the TV contract.

BYU and probably a couple others (Louisville, perhaps?) may have been offered a comparable deal at the time and said no, or dragged their feet, or wanted to negotiate further.
...
How this affects any other potential expansion candidates is less clear, but to me the takeaway is (a) the onus is on YOU to show us you add value (however you perceive value), and (b) the last deal is not available and and adds will probably be looking at fractional shares of the pot for a while.

That's an interesting point.

(06-14-2014 12:26 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I think the clearer message is that any expansion candidates should not expect a comparable "deal" to what TCU and WVU got, specifically because the league was operating out of desperation at the time to maintain a minimum number of teams for the TV contract.

BYU and probably a couple others (Louisville, perhaps?) may have been offered a comparable deal at the time and said no, or dragged their feet, or wanted to negotiate further.

Now BYU is back at the table and this article is simply making it clear that B12 is no longer playing at THAT table where discussions happened, and that any deals offered then out of conference desperation are officially null and void.

I'd even go so far as to say that during those negotiations, B12 probably had to suspend a standing policy of "Never consider adding BYU" because they were one of the options possibly available ON SHORT NOTICE.

How this affects any other potential expansion candidates is less clear, but to me the takeaway is (a) the onus is on YOU to show us you add value (however you perceive value), and (b) the last deal is not available and and adds will probably be looking at fractional shares of the pot for a while.

Hell, I would do whatever I had to to take a fractional share of the pot to get in there.

(06-15-2014 09:52 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(06-14-2014 12:26 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I think the clearer message is that any expansion candidates should not expect a comparable "deal" to what TCU and WVU got, specifically because the league was operating out of desperation at the time to maintain a minimum number of teams for the TV contract.

BYU and probably a couple others (Louisville, perhaps?) may have been offered a comparable deal at the time and said no, or dragged their feet, or wanted to negotiate further.

Now BYU is back at the table and this article is simply making it clear that B12 is no longer playing at THAT table where discussions happened, and that any deals offered then out of conference desperation are officially null and void.

I'd even go so far as to say that during those negotiations, B12 probably had to suspend a standing policy of "Never consider adding BYU" because they were one of the options possibly available ON SHORT NOTICE.

How this affects any other potential expansion candidates is less clear, but to me the takeaway is (a) the onus is on YOU to show us you add value (however you perceive value), and (b) the last deal is not available and and adds will probably be looking at fractional shares of the pot for a while.

Hell, I would do whatever I had to to take a fractional share of the pot to get in there.

Big XII schools make a lot of money right now, there's no way they'll take in Rice any time soon because we're another mouth to feed that adds negligible conference revenue.
[/quote]

Repost my 12/13 comment:

This is where I think Rice should flex its financial muscle: join conference xxxx (Big XII for discussion purposes) and agree NOT to share in that conference's TV revenue for y years (say 5 years) by which time hopefully Rice would be more competitive and pull its share of Houston TV market, and start contributing to conference xxxx's coffers. This plan would cost Rice in lost revenue of say $2mil/year ( our present TV deal) for 5 years or $10mil. We recoup our investment three years after that! And live happily ever after...
Rice has great potential, but right now we are a financial liability to these conferences--- let's eliminate that negative aspect. RICE CAN!!!
Also, we would have to show commitment to DiV I sports by , for example, promising to invest $$ in HRS renovations, new tennis facility, increase coaches salaries, etc. All doable. RICE CAN!!!

(06-15-2014 10:41 AM)Viejobuho Wrote:  

(06-15-2014 09:52 AM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(06-14-2014 12:26 PM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I think the clearer message is that any expansion candidates should not expect a comparable "deal" to what TCU and WVU got, specifically because the league was operating out of desperation at the time to maintain a minimum number of teams for the TV contract.

BYU and probably a couple others (Louisville, perhaps?) may have been offered a comparable deal at the time and said no, or dragged their feet, or wanted to negotiate further.

Now BYU is back at the table and this article is simply making it clear that B12 is no longer playing at THAT table where discussions happened, and that any deals offered then out of conference desperation are officially null and void.

I'd even go so far as to say that during those negotiations, B12 probably had to suspend a standing policy of "Never consider adding BYU" because they were one of the options possibly available ON SHORT NOTICE.

How this affects any other potential expansion candidates is less clear, but to me the takeaway is (a) the onus is on YOU to show us you add value (however you perceive value), and (b) the last deal is not available and and adds will probably be looking at fractional shares of the pot for a while.

Hell, I would do whatever I had to to take a fractional share of the pot to get in there.

Big XII schools make a lot of money right now, there's no way they'll take in Rice any time soon because we're another mouth to feed that adds negligible conference revenue.

Repost my 12/13 comment:

This is where I think Rice should flex its financial muscle: join conference xxxx (Big XII for discussion purposes) and agree NOT to share in that conference's TV revenue for y years (say 5 years) by which time hopefully Rice would be more competitive and pull its share of Houston TV market, and start contributing to conference xxxx's coffers. This plan would cost Rice in lost revenue of say $2mil/year ( our present TV deal) for 5 years or $10mil. We recoup our investment three years after that! And live happily ever after...
Rice has great potential, but right now we are a financial liability to these conferences--- let's eliminate that negative aspect. RICE CAN!!!
Also, we would have to show commitment to DiV I sports by , for example, promising to invest $$ in HRS renovations, new tennis facility, increase coaches salaries, etc. All doable. RICE CAN!!!
[/quote]

Excellent points.

(06-15-2014 10:41 AM)Viejobuho Wrote:  This is where I think Rice should flex its financial muscle: join conference xxxx (Big XII for discussion purposes) and agree NOT to share in that conference's TV revenue for y years (say 5 years) by which time hopefully Rice would be more competitive and pull its share of Houston TV market, and start contributing to conference xxxx's coffers. This plan would cost Rice in lost revenue of say $2mil/year ( our present TV deal) for 5 years or $10mil. We recoup our investment three years after that! And live happily ever after...
Rice has great potential, but right now we are a financial liability to these conferences--- let's eliminate that negative aspect. RICE CAN!!!
Also, we would have to show commitment to DiV I sports by , for example, promising to invest $$ in HRS renovations, new tennis facility, increase coaches salaries, etc. All doable. RICE CAN!!!

I made a similar comment back in the conference-realignment frenzy days. Rather than taking 0% of the pot, Rice could instead ask for a share of the pot that matches what we currently get from CUSA and stay at that level until certain performance indicators are met (whether they are based on attendance, TV viewing, facility improvements, whatever). Once those performance goals are met, Rice gets an increasing share of the pot over a few years until becoming a full member. This was Rice's financial floor is no worse than in CUSA, but Rice's ceiling is much higher (to match its potential since it is in one of the largest media markets in the country). But Rice also isn't a financial drag on a conference until the negotiated goals are met, and is (presumably) a positive contributor after those goals are met. Heck, Rice could even negotiate a floor that would drop revenues to a certain level if Rice's conributions to the conference aren't satisfied.

I don't know if this is even possible, but getting a foot in the door with any of the major conferences becomes Step #1. Even without extra $$, Rice gets more interesting opponents, more exposure, and can make a better recruiting pitch (which should further increase talent on the field). Heck, if Rice never gets $1 more than we currently get in CUSA, its still a better deal because the theat of being left behind in an even worse CUSA disappears.

Of course, if this thought is just a pipe dream and conferences aren't interested in this kind of arrangement, priority #1 really still remains improving Rice athletics and graduating student-athletes.

Rice needs to continue to invest in it's football facilities, improve the product on the field and then enjoy the fruits of it's labor. It won't get us into a P5, but it will help us to beat some P5 programs in the future, like Notre Dame and A&M. It will increase our visibility and how the program is perceived by others around the nation. The reality is that no one needs Rice for any reason. We need to hope that CUSA matures and improves. Perhaps CUSA and the MWC form an alliance in the future and we'll have opportunities to play their teams as well. I think this is the best that Rice can hope for.

There is an old saying that luck is when preparation meets opportunity. I don't really buy that definition, but it seems here that we must keep preoaring ourselves, so that when/if the opportunity arises, we can seize it.

Luck is happy to get his West Virginia hillbillies in there even though it was a poor geographic fit.

(06-13-2014 02:03 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  This article makes it pretty clear how difficult it will be for us to break into the Big 12 any time soon.

(https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-...50605.html)

Key quote IMO:

“The conference schedule is absolutely great,” Luck said. “Our tagline is ‘one true champion.’”
Luck added that there really aren’t any viable teams from outside the Power 5 conferences that would bring added revenue to what the conference already creates. The league announced a record $220.1 million in distribution revenue to split among each school last week.
“Out dominator is 10,” Luck said. “The more you split it up … I don’t think we can find a partner who’s available right now to stay at the value we have (per school) or let alone increase what we have. That’s the consensus we have (staying at 10).”