But Neither Texas nor Oklahoma were in the Hunt either so where does that put things in perspective ?

(12-08-2014 07:45 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  But Neither Texas nor Oklahoma were in the Hunt either so where does that put things in perspective ?

Listening to Bob Bowlsby talk this morning on ESPN so glad to be in the ACC...The Big XII Presidents and AD have to be just shaking their heads...

(12-07-2014 11:40 PM)ODU1986 Wrote:  I agree. Adding Memphis and Cincy does not strengthen the Big 12. In fact it weakens them both on the field and financially. That is why at least three of the other P5 conferences will not allow a CCG with only ten members, thereby forcing the Big 12 to expand and weaken itself.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Adding UC and Memphis will bring in a lot of TV money to the Big12 - just like adding Rutgers and UM did for the Big10. In fact, they could offer LHN on local cable and it would sell.

(12-08-2014 08:42 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 11:40 PM)ODU1986 Wrote:  I agree. Adding Memphis and Cincy does not strengthen the Big 12. In fact it weakens them both on the field and financially. That is why at least three of the other P5 conferences will not allow a CCG with only ten members, thereby forcing the Big 12 to expand and weaken itself.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Adding UC and Memphis will bring in a lot of TV money to the Big12 - just like adding Rutgers and UM did for the Big10. In fact, they could offer LHN on local cable and it would sell.

If that were the case they would have already invited those teams. Fox has already told the Big 12, there really isn't anyone available (except maybe BYU) that would increase the per team payouts. So if you add two teams, each program is taking a paycut. Even more damaging is how would Texas feel? Would Texas be okay being in a conference with a Cincy and Memphis? There are huge reasons why the Big 12 decided to stay at 10 and a lot of it is based on what Texas wants.

(12-07-2014 10:52 PM)Stookey57 Wrote:  Adding Memphis in Cincinnati does not strength in the big 12

Yes it does. The B12 just lost 1 teams worth of revenue by missing the CFB playoff. The other teams revenue is covered by just hosting a championship game. They could invite Umass & Ball St. and be in a better position than they are in today.

(12-08-2014 09:02 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(12-08-2014 08:42 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 11:40 PM)ODU1986 Wrote:  I agree. Adding Memphis and Cincy does not strengthen the Big 12. In fact it weakens them both on the field and financially. That is why at least three of the other P5 conferences will not allow a CCG with only ten members, thereby forcing the Big 12 to expand and weaken itself.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Adding UC and Memphis will bring in a lot of TV money to the Big12 - just like adding Rutgers and UM did for the Big10. In fact, they could offer LHN on local cable and it would sell.

If that were the case they would have already invited those teams. Fox has already told the Big 12, there really isn't anyone available (except maybe BYU) that would increase the per team payouts. So if you add two teams, each program is taking a paycut. Even more damaging is how would Texas feel? Would Texas be okay being in a conference with a Cincy and Memphis? There are huge reasons why the Big 12 decided to stay at 10 and a lot of it is based on what Texas wants.

They didn't invite those teams because they thought they would still make the CFB playoff in their current format. That isn't the case. They are losing potential money by not having 12 teams and not making the playoff.

(12-08-2014 10:07 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 10:52 PM)Stookey57 Wrote:  Adding Memphis in Cincinnati does not strength in the big 12

Yes it does. The B12 just lost 1 teams worth of revenue by missing the CFB playoff. The other teams revenue is covered by just hosting a championship game. They could invite Umass & Ball St. and be in a better position than they are in today.

They only lost $2 million directly. Playoff bowls pay $6 million. Other Big 6 bowls pay $4 million.

(12-08-2014 08:42 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(12-07-2014 11:40 PM)ODU1986 Wrote:  I agree. Adding Memphis and Cincy does not strengthen the Big 12. In fact it weakens them both on the field and financially.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Adding UC and Memphis will bring in a lot of TV money to the Big12 - just like adding Rutgers and UM did for the Big10. In fact, they could offer LHN on local cable and it would sell.

I don't know about "a lot." You compared them to MD and Rutgers, whereas the Big Ten has a much different revenue model. Memphis and Cincy can make the Big 12 money for sure, but not in the same way.

Why add two teams and pay them 40 million dollars a year does not strengthen your league and its a waste of money, just to have a conference champion I don't think so no expansion coming boys. We gotta build up this conference with strong basketball and strong football.

This really sucks being a group of 5 conference man how depressing I'm used to the Big East Pittsburgh West Virginia Louisville

(12-08-2014 04:15 PM)Stookey57 Wrote:  Why add two teams and pay them 40 million dollars a year does not strengthen your league and its a waste of money, just to have a conference champion I don't think so no expansion coming boys. We gotta build up this conference with strong basketball and strong football.

The money can be worked out. The two new teams won't make 20 million to start anyway. Also, the Big Ten got $24 million per year for rights to their CCG and that was before the playoff system. With the playoff giving more meaning to the championship games (all 4 P5 CCG's were de facto play-in games to the CFP), there is speculation that a Big 12 CCG could be worth anywhere between $30 million and $50 million annually to a network. That would be more than enough to offset new additions, especially with a graduated payout for the new members.

(12-08-2014 04:18 PM)Stookey57 Wrote:  This really sucks being a group of 5 conference man how depressing I'm used to the Big East Pittsburgh West Virginia Louisville

I hear you. Once BC left, felt like we were losing our grip on the northeast stranglehold, even with PSU and Maryland elsewhere. Even as a Rutgers fan, if I were playing revisionist history, I wish the old Big East had survived. Even without Va Tech and Miami, it was still fun having a monopoly on the region and being talked about, even on the gridiron, on major Metropolitan radio. I never thought programs like WVA/BC football would have dropped significantly so long as the conference maintained the majority of market shares within the tri-state area.

Honestly, if I can go back, I'd have the SEC give back Mizzou and A&M to the Big 12, and the Big East to have kept all their programs based in the NE for 6 power conferences.