"The Big 12 is still sitting on a 10-member conference, which leaves the Big 12 without a conference championship game. It is unknown if the lack of a championship game will hold a Big 12 champion back from making the College Football Playoff, but the possibility does still have some concerned and wondering how this all plays out. For now, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby is not focused on expanding the conference to 12 members to get a conference championship game back on the schedule because of the lack of ideal candidates available.

“In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there,” Bowlsby said in a Q&A with The Oklahoman. “We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value.”

Schools that have been tied to some form of expansion rumor or another in recent years have included Florida State, Clemson, UCF, USF, Cincinnati and BYU. It has been a few years now, and there has been no movement from the Big 12 to expand after adding West Virginia and TCU. The Mountaineers and Horned Frogs were added following the departures of Texas A&M and Missouri to the SEC, Nebraska to the Big Ten and Colorado to the Pac-12.

“I don’t see much movement in the near- to mid-term,” Bowlsby said. “As we get near the end of some of these TV contracts, which would be 10 or 12 years down the road, there may be some renewed conversations. The only movement that is possible right now is from some of the secondary-level conferences that might move people into one of the five high profiles.”

Bowlsby also suggested any talk about super conferences — 16-team mega conferences that could potentially split from the NCAA model entirely — was nothing more than a fabrication crested by the media. He might be right about that.

“I have heard no serious conversation among people who do this for a living that the super-conference concept has got any traction,” Bowlsby said. “It’s always dangerous when the media starts to interview the rest of the media, and I think that’s where the super-conference thing came from.”

So, for about the 148th time in the past couple of years, the official company line from the Big 12 is the conference is not interested in expanding. At this time, there is no reason to suggest otherwise."















Bowlsby says no expansion

I find it more interesting that he actually cares enough to respond to all the supposed "nonsense" out there.

The conference will do whatever Texas wants. Nothing ever changes in the Big XII.

(10-29-2014 08:40 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  The conference will do whatever Texas wants. Nothing ever changes in the Big XII.

Which, in this case, is to continue propping up the internal perceived value of the present day Big 12 while at the same time taking shots at talking points that are becoming louder and louder. Why would he do that? Because they weaken the position of a stonewalling Texas if that is what Texas is doing in order to get whatever they want.

he didnt exactly rule it out. he did say the possible movement could be from one of the secodary conferences to one of the 5 high profile conferences.
let the rumors continue...

(10-29-2014 07:45 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  “In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there,” Bowlsby said in a Q&A with The Oklahoman. “We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value.”

Of course this is true, but no matter how many times people like Bowlsby say it, some people keep believing it's false.

Then again, some people keep believing that all of the manned moon landings were faked, or that Howard Hughes is still alive, so even if something is absolutely true you'll never convince everyone.

Imagine if you will a scenario in which a 1 loss BIG12 team is passed bye on the last week of the season by a team from say the B1G that wins there conference championship game and thus the BIG12 champ misses the playoffs! Is it possible that the tone begins to change in BIG12 land?

(10-29-2014 09:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 07:45 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  “In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there,” Bowlsby said in a Q&A with The Oklahoman. “We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value.”

Of course this is true, but no matter how many times people like Bowlsby say it, some people keep believing it's false.

Then again, some people keep believing that all of the manned moon landings were faked, or that Howard Hughes is still alive, so even if something is absolutely true you'll never convince everyone.

Jerry Glanville always kept a couple of tickets out for Elvis.

(10-29-2014 09:20 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Imagine if you will a scenario in which a 1 loss BIG12 team is passed bye on the last week of the season by a team from say the B1G that wins there conference championship game and thus the BIG12 champ misses the playoffs! Is it possible that the tone begins to change in BIG12 land?

Imagine a 1 loss Big 12 team passes a previously 1 loss SEC/Pac 12/Big 10/ACC school who loses in their ccg. Does the fondness for a ccg in those conferences change then?

And a team getting knocked out is a much more realistic possibility based on history.

This literally means nothing. The PAC-10 spent years publicly denying that they would ever expand. Tom Hansen even specifically said in an interview shortly before stepping down that Utah would never be in the PAC because "there's not enough TV sets." Lo and behold, Utah is in the PAC.

These conferences will always play the denial game in public until the news breaks that a team or teams have received the invite.

(10-29-2014 09:24 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 09:20 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Imagine if you will a scenario in which a 1 loss BIG12 team is passed bye on the last week of the season by a team from say the B1G that wins there conference championship game and thus the BIG12 champ misses the playoffs! Is it possible that the tone begins to change in BIG12 land?

Imagine a 1 loss Big 12 team passes a previously 1 loss SEC/Pac 12/Big 10/ACC school who loses in their ccg. Does the fondness for a ccg in those conferences change then?

And a team getting knocked out is a much more realistic possibility based on history.

Interesting, I guess that is entirely possible. My answer to that would be that the money earned bye the schools in those conferences and the national exposure they get for there championship games are worth it enough it to take that risk. I think the BIG12 may be taking a much bigger risk if say, they consistently missed the playoffs due to there lack of a championship. we shall see how it plays out. End result may be a playoff that jumps to 8 teams so that the all of the P5 are included on a yearly basis and to be honest I think that is a far more likely outcome.

(10-29-2014 09:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 07:45 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  “In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there,” Bowlsby said in a Q&A with The Oklahoman. “We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value.”

Of course this is true, but no matter how many times people like Bowlsby say it, some people keep believing it's false.

Then again, some people keep believing that all of the manned moon landings were faked, or that Howard Hughes is still alive, so even if something is absolutely true you'll never convince everyone.

How much does the Big 10, ACC, Pac 12 and SEC make on their conference title games? Both from TV, sponsors, game revenue, etc?

Gotta be at least $20M a game. Hell, it's almost like the quarterfinals of the national playoffs.

Adding two teams gets you access to that money. Not adding two teams prevents access to that money.

Next, factor in that adding two teams produces eight or nine more conference football games to the inventory, plus four or five nonconference games. Plus a lot more basketball inventory.

Extra inventory itself has significant value.

Do the two extra teams need to be attractive? Sure. But let's be real. If the bar ever was "You need to be making as much on your own as we make ourselves," then Utah, TCU, Louisville, Rutgers, West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, etc would have never been added to their respective leagues.

The NBC article was editorialized and didn't tell the whole story. Follow the source of the article, http://newsok.com/big-12-qa-with-big-12-..._click=rss. There you can see the ACTUAL question and his full answer:

Quote:With a four-team football playoff and five power conferences, do you see conference consolidation coming? Power conferences maybe?

"There are several of us that are numerically challenged. I don’t know that anybody could’ve anticipated that the Big 12 would have 10 and the Big Ten would have 14. ... In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there. We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value. ... But the opportunity to move from one high-visibility conference to another is pretty slim right now. I don’t see much movement in the near- to mid-term. As we get near the end of some of these TV contracts, which would be 10 or 12 years down the road, there may be some renewed conversations. The only movement that is possible right now is from some of the secondary-level conferences that might move people into one of the five high profiles."

The question only asked about P5 to P5 conference realignment. Bowlsby himself was the one to bring up G5 to P5 movement... and he acknowledged that it could happen: "The only movement that is possible right now is from some of the secondary-level conferences that might move people into one of the five high profiles."

This indicates two things. Bowlsby reinforces the idea that GOR's will hold, at least until TV contracts are renegotiated. That should be non-news to most people. The interesting thing to take away from this is that he took the initiative to say that a G5 school could move up in the near future. He didn't say it would be the Big 12, but I personally find it unlikely that he would offer up such information if the Big 12 didn't have at least some interest in the matter.

Indeed, he admitted that some conferences are "numerically challenged," and then immediately went on to discuss the idea of Big 12 expansion. Make of that what you wish, but he is almost certainly referring to the Big 12 being too small.

And to those that say Bowlsby claimed there weren't any candidates out there, reread his statement: "...In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there." In contrast to previous statements, he didn't say that there aren't any candidates (and that the Big 12 is happy at 10), just that he didn't know if there are a lot of obvious candidates. Depending on his tone, he may indeed have meant there were no viable Big 12 candidates at all, or he could have been insinuating that there are a few viable candidates. With a video of this interview, it might be easier to interpret.

Overall, this is not disappointing news for G5 hopefuls. If anything, hopefuls should be excited that Bowlsby himself seemingly implied that the Big 12 was too small and said that some G5 schools could move up to a P5 in the near future. Personally, I don't put a lot of weight in Bowlsby's responses today either way, as many were generalized and not specific. Conference realignment isn't publicly discussed until after the fact. But if this interview means anything, it more affirms that a G5 to P5 movement could happen soon rather than denying the possibility of any Big 12 expansion. My two cents.

(10-29-2014 09:36 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 09:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 07:45 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  “In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there,” Bowlsby said in a Q&A with The Oklahoman. “We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value.”

Of course this is true, but no matter how many times people like Bowlsby say it, some people keep believing it's false.

Then again, some people keep believing that all of the manned moon landings were faked, or that Howard Hughes is still alive, so even if something is absolutely true you'll never convince everyone.

How much does the Big 10, ACC, Pac 12 and SEC make on their conference title games? Both from TV, sponsors, game revenue, etc?

Gotta be at least $20M a game. Hell, it's almost like the quarterfinals of the national playoffs.

Adding two teams gets you access to that money. Not adding two teams prevents access to that money.

Next, factor in that adding two teams produces eight or nine more conference football games to the inventory, plus four or five nonconference games. Plus a lot more basketball inventory.

Extra inventory itself has significant value.

Do the two extra teams need to be attractive? Sure. But let's be real. If the bar ever was "You need to be making as much on your own as we make ourselves," then Utah, TCU, Louisville, Rutgers, West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, etc would have never been added to their respective leagues.

If it was that easy to instantly add over $50 million per year in value, the Big 12 would have 12 schools already, because when money talks the guys in suits listen.

TCU and WVU are in because the Big 12's TV deals required at least 10 schools in the league. Louisville is in the ACC because having 13 football teams is almost unworkable. When a conference already grosses over $200 million/year from TV alone, and doesn't need to backfill and just add "best available", the test is like what Bowlsby said it is.

If ESPN or some connected consultant shows the Big 12 that each Big 12 school will make a lot more money if they add Schools X and Y, then it will happen. It's going to take either that, or some unexpected defection from the conference.

While we don't have a large sample to work with, the higher rated team wins a P5 conference title game about 75% of the time.

If asked about expansion there are three basic answers possible
1. Yes we are looking to expand (interpretation they are going to expand)
2. I don't want to discuss expansion. (interpretation they are going to expand)
3. No we aren't looking at adding anyone (interpretation, we are going to expand but we are keeping it quiet).

Right now there seems to be no motivation for ESPN to see rights it owns outright through the life of the contract (ACC schools) to a conference where those rights have to be shared to some degree with Fox nor to see a Big XII move to the ACC where Fox would have some degree of rights ownership in the home games of the team moving. Why would ESPN want to give Clemson, Va.Tech, FSU, or UNC fans a reason to tune into Fox when Texas hosts one of them?

Leaving the G5 door open is perfectly logical. Raising the profile of the Big XII in new markets has some value especially if it eases the WVU travel situation. But right now there is no Utah with 5 top 25 (including two top 5) finishes in the past decade or TCU with 8 top 25 in a decade and three top 10 finishes (four in the coaches poll) in the past decade to choose from.

(10-29-2014 10:35 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  The NBC article was editorialized and didn't tell the whole story. Follow the source of the article, http://newsok.com/big-12-qa-with-big-12-..._click=rss. There you can see the ACTUAL question and his full answer:

Quote:With a four-team football playoff and five power conferences, do you see conference consolidation coming? Power conferences maybe?

"There are several of us that are numerically challenged. I don’t know that anybody could’ve anticipated that the Big 12 would have 10 and the Big Ten would have 14. ... In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there. We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value. ... But the opportunity to move from one high-visibility conference to another is pretty slim right now. I don’t see much movement in the near- to mid-term. As we get near the end of some of these TV contracts, which would be 10 or 12 years down the road, there may be some renewed conversations. The only movement that is possible right now is from some of the secondary-level conferences that might move people into one of the five high profiles."

The question only asked about P5 to P5 conference realignment. Bowlsby himself was the one to bring up G5 to P5 movement... and he acknowledged that it could happen: "The only movement that is possible right now is from some of the secondary-level conferences that might move people into one of the five high profiles."

This indicates two things. Bowlsby reinforces the idea that GOR's will hold, at least until TV contracts are renegotiated. That should be non-news to most people. The interesting thing to take away from this is that he took the initiative to say that a G5 school could move up in the near future. He didn't say it would be the Big 12, but I personally find it unlikely that he would offer up such information if the Big 12 didn't have at least some interest in the matter.

Indeed, he admitted that some conferences are "numerically challenged," and then immediately went on to discuss the idea of Big 12 expansion. Make of that what you wish, but he is almost certainly referring to the Big 12 being too small.

And to those that say Bowlsby claimed there weren't any candidates out there, reread his statement: "...In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there." In contrast to previous statements, he didn't say that there aren't any candidates (and that the Big 12 is happy at 10), just that he didn't know if there are a lot of obvious candidates. Depending on his tone, he may indeed have meant there were no viable Big 12 candidates at all, or he could have been insinuating that there are a few viable candidates. With a video of this interview, it might be easier to interpret.

Overall, this is not disappointing news for G5 hopefuls. If anything, hopefuls should be excited that Bowlsby himself seemingly implied that the Big 12 was too small and said that some G5 schools could move up to a P5 in the near future. Personally, I don't put a lot of weight in Bowlsby's responses today either way, as many were generalized and not specific. Conference realignment isn't publicly discussed until after the fact. But if this interview means anything, it more affirms that a G5 to P5 movement could happen soon rather than denying the possibility of any Big 12 expansion. My two cents.

Interesting take and maybe something to it. But I think the 25 million threshold is just too high for any G5--->P5 movement right now.

They only way the league enters into a discussion of expansion if the league starts/ obtains a conference based network. The problem right now is if it started a network, it would have no football inventory to put on it without restructuring it's deals with Fox/ESPN. It's third tier football inventory consists solely of one game per team, ususally an FCS game. Adding two teams would allow for product to be shown on the network. In addition, with conference networks markets become important for revenue expansion.

So unless the league obtains/starts a conference based network, expansion makes no sense for the Big 12- any teams added are only going to dilute per team revenue. And even then I wonder how hard it will be to get to that 25 million threshold.

(10-29-2014 08:58 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  he didnt exactly rule it out. he did say the possible movement could be from one of the secodary conferences to one of the 5 high profile conferences.
let the rumors continue...

The B12 will sit at 10 until it is raided.

Once raided it will then backfill with some AAC schools most likely.

Don't be surprised to see UConn in the B12 if they bring the most value.

(10-29-2014 09:36 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 09:14 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-29-2014 07:45 PM)OldGoldnBlue Wrote:  “In our case, I don’t know that there are a lot of obvious candidates out there,” Bowlsby said in a Q&A with The Oklahoman. “We’re distributing about $25 million per school through our distributable revenue, so anybody that would be considered for expansion in our league would have to bring at least pro-rata value.”

Of course this is true, but no matter how many times people like Bowlsby say it, some people keep believing it's false.

Then again, some people keep believing that all of the manned moon landings were faked, or that Howard Hughes is still alive, so even if something is absolutely true you'll never convince everyone.

How much does the Big 10, ACC, Pac 12 and SEC make on their conference title games? Both from TV, sponsors, game revenue, etc?

Gotta be at least $20M a game. Hell, it's almost like the quarterfinals of the national playoffs.

Adding two teams gets you access to that money. Not adding two teams prevents access to that money.

Next, factor in that adding two teams produces eight or nine more conference football games to the inventory, plus four or five nonconference games. Plus a lot more basketball inventory.

Extra inventory itself has significant value.

Do the two extra teams need to be attractive? Sure. But let's be real. If the bar ever was "You need to be making as much on your own as we make ourselves," then Utah, TCU, Louisville, Rutgers, West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, etc would have never been added to their respective leagues.

Depends on the quality of the inventory and where it can be placed. And what that additional inventory does to your existing inventory. For example, Alabama vs. LSU is much more valuable than Alabama vs. Vanderbilt. If the SEC were to expand, it would be hard not to dilute their existing inventory. It also depends on where it can be placed. Can you get it on Fox, CBS, ABC, NBC or ESPN? If not, its not worth a whole lot. The 12 and 14 team conferences pretty much have their primary TV slots as well as their conference network slots full. The Big 12 has their primary TV slots full and they don't have a conference network.

Once you get the ccg at 12, it gets tougher and tougher to justify. Another factor is the rise in the value of the P5 contracts and the playoff $. Its a lot tougher to find someone who generates $25 million than it is to find someone who generates $10 million.

A couple things that never seem to get brought up in these threads.

1. The WVU travel situation is WAY overblown on this board. It takes us just as long to bus to College Park Maryland as it does to fly to Lubbock Texas. Would it be nice to have a travel partner for the non revenue sports? Sure, but a few hundred extra K isn't breaking the athletic department bank with all the added revenue we now receive from being members of the Big 12.

Our future OOC schedule is chalked full of drivable games for our fans. Tenn in Charlotte, PSU, VT, BYU in DC etc. Our road attendance at Big 12 venues hasn't been too shabby either.

2. WVU doesn't necessarily want travel partners at this time. Let's say we add Cincy and UConn for arguments sake, that means the Big 12 will have to go to divisional play which means we would lose getting either Texas or Oklahoma at home every year and get Cincy or UConn in their place. That's a big friggin deal to us and our athletic department when it comes to selling season tickets and ticket packages, not to mention the strength of schedule hit we would take if we happened to make a run at the playoffs. There is also zero chance that KU,KSU and Iowa State will vote to add those schools for the same reasons. Going into Texas and Oklahoma for them is a big deal rivalry and recruiting wise.

Old Gold brings up a good point

You're not going to find too many B12 members who will vote "yes" to be in this division:

KU/KSU/ISU/WVU/AAC#1/AAC#2

particularly since, as he points out, no more annual visits from the only two teams most B12 fans really care about and fewer annual trips to TX for recruiting (though in theory this could be mitigated if it were the U_F twins admitted)