Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
Author Message
westsidewolf1989 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,220
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 74
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #141
RE: Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
(05-25-2016 11:01 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 10:47 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 03:09 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 03:07 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 12:55 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  First bolded point- and you know this how? My opinion is that a clear structural path to P5 and the additional revenues and publicity that come with it would bring donations from many high net worth alums that are unwilling to give much now because of the uncertainty as to where it's going/ what value they would get out of it (I certainly would give substantially more in that scenario). Please stop stating your OPINIONS as facts. Better yet, go to your real home on Coogfans and stay there.

Second bolded point- Rutgers?

Won't Rice first need the money to build itself into a P5 candidate? The investment would need to be made before any moves happen. You're putting the cart before the horses. And no, Rice doesn't have many deep pocketed donors at all. That's not possible with such a small number of living alumni. Of that number, how many care enough about athletics to make meaningful donations? I'm sure you must know. And I remember Rutgers having a very competitive football program when they were invited. Couple that with the fact that they brought a gigantic new market and you can see why they were asked to join. How about those facts?

I don't think a competitive football program is the primary focus of these expansions.

Sure that's true, but it's a very big factor. There are countless variables that I'm certain they consider .

I honestly think football just has to not be a drag. Rice and UH are probably viewed the same in the football box. Couple bowls the last few years checks the box. It's all the other stuff that will differentiate any school that's mentioned.

Example Memphis... Not a very solid football program. You know what they have? A rich donor and a new tv market. Even their basketball team isn't great anymore.

Completely disagree with your first paragraph. First of all, football is a drag on our overall athletic program and would be the worst or second to worst team in any P5 conference, if we joined one today. Secondly, Rice and UH are not in the same zip code anymore when it comes to football. We have zero seasons in the last five years in which we were ranked in the top 25, they have two. Other than BYU and Cincinnati, they have more wins than any other G5 team in the last decade. They just beat Florida State in a major bowl game (who were two seasons removed from winning a national title)...we have beaten Air Force and Fresno State and gotten curb stomped by Mississippi State. Not saying that UH has advantages in other, potentially more important factors, but let's not pretend that just because UH makes bowl games and we make bowl games that that puts us on the same level as them. We're just lucky we're playing them in 2017 and not this upcoming season.
(This post was last modified: 05-25-2016 11:48 PM by westsidewolf1989.)
05-25-2016 11:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cr11owl Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,717
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #142
RE: Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
(05-25-2016 11:47 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 11:01 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 10:47 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 03:09 PM)cr11owl Wrote:  
(05-25-2016 03:07 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  Won't Rice first need the money to build itself into a P5 candidate? The investment would need to be made before any moves happen. You're putting the cart before the horses. And no, Rice doesn't have many deep pocketed donors at all. That's not possible with such a small number of living alumni. Of that number, how many care enough about athletics to make meaningful donations? I'm sure you must know. And I remember Rutgers having a very competitive football program when they were invited. Couple that with the fact that they brought a gigantic new market and you can see why they were asked to join. How about those facts?

I don't think a competitive football program is the primary focus of these expansions.

Sure that's true, but it's a very big factor. There are countless variables that I'm certain they consider .

I honestly think football just has to not be a drag. Rice and UH are probably viewed the same in the football box. Couple bowls the last few years checks the box. It's all the other stuff that will differentiate any school that's mentioned.

Example Memphis... Not a very solid football program. You know what they have? A rich donor and a new tv market. Even their basketball team isn't great anymore.

Completely disagree with your first paragraph. First of all, football is a drag on our overall athletic program and would be the worst or second to worst team in any P5 conference, if we joined one today. Secondly, Rice and UH are not in the same zip code anymore when it comes to football. We have zero seasons in the last five years in which we were ranked in the top 25, they have two. Other than BYU and Cincinnati, they have more wins than any other G5 team in the last decade. They just beat Florida State in a major bowl game (who were two seasons removed from winning a national title)...we have beaten Air Force and Fresno State and gotten curb stomped by Mississippi State. Not saying that UH has advantages in other, potentially more important factors, but let's not pretend that just because UH makes bowl games and we make bowl games that that puts us on the same level as them. We're just lucky we're playing them in 2017 and not this upcoming season.

No I agree they are way ahead right now in football. I just don't think that matters. I think it's like a checked box or not as to whether your program has been competent in the G5. And no matter how much people want to hate on Bailiff we've been decent by all outside accounts. Like I don't think a UTSA would meet the "competent" box as an example. All the schools mentioned going to the big 12 have been competent or good in the last 10 years.
05-26-2016 12:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Online
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #143
RE: Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
The point being made is that p5 knows that anyone can be competitive WITH their resources... the question is, are you committed to being competitive WITHOUT them.

UH has spent more than Rice (on football) and that has given them better results. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone... and certainly isn't a surprise to p5... since almost to a letter, the more they spend, the better they are as well. Sure, it can be a chicken or egg thing... but I don't think p5 really cares. Similarly, Rice has certain Institutional barriers to success in athletics that UH doesn't have... which will keep Rice from consistently being 'at the top' of any conference (without spending more).... but as long as athletics isn't used as a piggy bank (which it hasn't been for decades now at Rice)... MOST conferences value what Rice does and has more than they value wins.

IMO, UH isn't going to the B1G or SEC or PAC. B1G and PAC value academics more and SEC doesn't need more 'top' football teams. UT doesn't want them in the B12 (because they directly compete with them and numerous others in the conference) but they may have to hold their nose and take them. ACC I just don't know enough about. They certainly SEEM to value academics... but they also seem to be among the weaker conferences (to my untrained eye.. and speaking overall, not that like the B12 they can't have 1 or 3 really good teams) so maybe they can go there?

but I think there is value in academics to most of them. I think there is value in appealing to a DIFFERENT fan (growing the pie, even if only by 1%). I think there is value in being good (or at least having something like academics with which to recruit) in Olympic sports.

Remember that women's and Olympic sports actually create the opportunity for the BIG football schools to spend even more on Football... and if you're going to have to spend money on them, you want to get value from it.



What is often lost in here is that EVERY p5 conference has at least one and often two (or 10) schools that are ranked in the top 50-100... and some with multiple schools in the top 25. VERY FEW of them are not considered highly academic schools... which is PART of why UH has pushed so much for 'Tier 1' status (which is only one measure, but it's a measure). That is perhaps UH's biggest challenge. While certainly not the same, their model was similar to the model that set up the 'STATE' schools system and the UT and A&M systems. UH had the 'model' of UTSA or Sam Houston, but without the backing. It's really quite impressive in that regard. But I think if you look at the conferences I mentioned as unlikely for UH, I think Rice 'fits' far better. Competitiveness/competency is merely a question of commitment... and commitment doesn't always mean throwing money at it.
05-26-2016 10:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
owl40 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,875
Joined: Sep 2007
Reputation: 77
I Root For: Owls
Location:
Post: #144
RE: Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
Solid read. Big 12 TV payout to each team > all Rice revenues for all sports. Literally 100% increase in revenues to get to something like this. Also, good datapoints on how value is declining due to cord cutting and other OTT (over-the-top) solutions.



Football
Big 12 expansion: Every conference wants its network to be must-see TV

Posted May 26th, 2016

Suzanne Halliburton American-Statesman Staff

@suzhalliburton
Story highlights

As the SEC network approaches its second anniversary, it’s been valued at nearly $5 billion
ESPN already has pushed off its plans for a network for the Atlantic Coast Conference that's been in the works since 2013
The Big 12 will announce how its annual television revenue will be distributed next week

The Southeastern Conference toyed with the idea of establishing a television network back in 2009, when its major TV rights were expiring with ESPN and CBS and were up for negotiation.

But the economy was in recession. Then commissioner Mike Slive elected to wait. Two years later, he raided the Big 12 for two of its teams — Texas A&M and Missouri — and added the schools for 2012.

It expanded the SEC to 14 teams. But most important, the two new schools allowed the SEC to increase its cable footprint by more than 10 million homes.

The SEC Network was created in time for the 2014 season, and it’s been akin to a mega bonus slot-machine win for the conference. As the network approaches its second anniversary, it’s been valued at nearly $5 billion.

Texas A&M To Join The SEC - Press Conference

Coaches and administrators in the Big 12 certainly noticed the first big payout each SEC school received last May. Who didn’t? It was record money, with schools from A&M to Vanderbilt to Kentucky to Alabama each receiving $31.2 million. Just by adding the SEC Network, which has been valued at $4.77 billion, the payout increased by nearly $11 million per school.

Meanwhile, the Big 12, already the smallest by number of teams, could slip behind the other four Power Five conferences in the amount of money doles out per school. It’s why the idea of expansion, or at least adding a football championship game, will be on the agenda next week when the Big 12 presidents and athletic directors gather in Irving for their spring meetings. It’ll take a super majority of eight schools to agree to expansion invitations.

But the lucrative television money may be more bust than boon these days, given the slipping fortunes of the cable sports networks.

Still, there is desire for a conference-wide network.

Last fall, Oklahoma president David Boren started pushing for the Big 12 to expand by at least two teams. He also wanted ESPN to dissolve Texas’ Longhorn Network and add one focused on the whole conference.
The University of Texas' 20-year, $300 million deal with ESPN pays UT $15 million annually. (Ralph Barrera/AMERICAN-STATESMAN)
The University of Texas’ 20-year, $300 million deal with ESPN pays UT $15 million annually. (Ralph Barrera/AMERICAN-STATESMAN)

Earlier this spring, Oklahoma State coach Mike Gundy jumped on the expansion bandwagon, with its anti-Longhorn Network bumper sticker.

“If we don’t eliminate the Longhorn Network and create our own network, they’re going to continue to have issues with this league,” Gundy told CBS Sports.

“Everything is based on marketing. Right now the Big 12 is not getting the marketing we need because of the Longhorn Network. Now, nobody wants to hear that but … You are getting the SEC Network, and you are getting the Big Ten Network and you are getting the Pac(-12 Network). Until we come together as a group (and) find a financial solution to eliminating the Longhorn Network, (there will be concerns).”

What’s happening with the Big Ten is telling as the conference negotiates the last major sporting rights deal of the decade. It could be a harbinger of future problems. ESPN already low-balled the Big Ten, which allowed Fox to step in.

Why would ESPN do that?

The cable network, which reportedly accounts for a quarter of parent-company Disney’s operating profit, is in the midst of belt tightening.

In 2011, ESPN reached 100 million households, equivalent to the entire country’s cable market. But that number, as of last year, had dropped to 92 million and probably will continue to decline, given a disturbing trend for cable networks.

Younger people are choosing to cut the cable cord and go with more of an a la carte, live-streaming approach to watching programming on their laptops or smart phones.. Other subscribers are cutting costs by dropping the more expensive television packages.

The Weather Channel has lost 11.2 percent of its subscription base since 2011; ESPN has dropped by 7.2 percent and Nickelodeon has declined by 6.9 percent.

This spring, Sports Business Daily reported that rather than negotiate with the Big Ten, ESPN made a “non-competitive offer.”

RELATED COVERAGE: EXAMINING THE BIG 12’S OPTIONS: EXPANSION? STAND PAT?

RELATED COVERAGE: Big 12 expansion primer: Everything you need to know

With the money not as much as expected, the Big Ten agreed to divide up its rights package, with Fox reportedly buying 50 percent of the conference’s inventory for the next six years at a cost of $250 million. The deal allows Fox to broadcast 25 football games and 50 in basketball.

The previous Big Ten deal was for 10 years at a cost of $1 billion.

ESPN is expected to bid on the second package, along with CBS, Turner and NBC, for the rest of the Big Ten’s inventory of games.

ESPN already has pushed off its plans for a network for the Atlantic Coast Conference. It’s been in the works since 2013. If it’s not on air by July 1, ESPN would have to pay the ACC $45 million, according to a report in Gridiron Now. The $45 million would be divided by the ACC schools and probably would allow the league’s annual payout per team to exceed the Big 12’s.

The Pac-12 network also has struggled a bit. This week, Fox and ESPN modified its contract and agreed to reduce the number of conference night games shown on the Pac-12 Network.

The Big 12’s television deal was last negotiated in 2012. The conference inked 13-year deals with both ESPN and Fox for its first- and second-tier rights for a combined $2 billion. It allowed schools like Baylor, Iowa State and Kansas State to do massive renovations to their athletic facilities.

Third-tier rights of games not picked up by the networks belong to each school. Each one has signed a deal with a cable company.

Financial details weren’t available for most contracts, but Fox bought Oklahoma’s third-tier rights for $58 million over 10 years. West Virginia bundled its television along with its radio and on-line rights and sold them to IMG College for $80 million.

In its deal with ESPN, Texas receives $15 million annually from the Longhorn Network.
FORT WORTH, TX - OCTOBER 25: The Big XII logo on a pylon at Amon G. Carter Stadium on October 25, 2014 in Fort Worth, Texas. (Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images)
FORT WORTH, TX – OCTOBER 25: The Big XII logo on a pylon at Amon G. Carter Stadium on October 25, 2014 in Fort Worth, Texas. (Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images)

If there ever is a Big 12 Network in the near future, those individual long-term deals would have to be resolved.

The Big 12 will announce how its annual revenue will be distributed next week. A year ago, the conference divided a revenue pool of $252 million. Eight schools, including Texas, Texas Tech and Baylor, received a share between $25.5 and $27 million. The share depended on how many teams qualified for an NCAA playoff or championship.

TCU and West Virginia, which joined the Big 12 in 2012, received smaller checks. TCU received $24 million; the Mountaineers earned $23 million.

But given how much money is out there for other leagues, the Big 12 will look at the viability of a network.

Said Iowa State athletic director Jamie Pollard: “Financially for the last several years a network has been very lucrative to the SEC and to the Big Ten, which is one set of facts.

“On the other side of it, the current model’s been very advantageous to all the 10 members of the Big 12, including Iowa State, because we really like what we’ve been able to brand with Cyclones.tv, and I would say that’s contributed to our rise in attendance, donations and revenues because we’ve been able to do what we need to do, which is get exposure in the state of Iowa for those factors. But you have to weigh those factors against what’s the long-term financial interest for the 10 members in the league and, again, that’s where it gets back to, if it was a black and white, easy decision, it would’ve already been made, but it’s not. It’s really complicated and any one of those tentacles you go down you can get to another fork in the road.”

THE POWER 5 TV DEALS

When each Power 5 conference’s TV rights deals are set to expire:

Big Ten: 2022-23

Pac-12: 2023-24

Big 12: 2024-25

ACC: 2026-27

SEC: 2033-34
05-27-2016 07:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
westsidewolf1989 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,220
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 74
I Root For: Rice
Location:
Post: #145
RE: Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
Yeah, but coaching makes the difference.
05-28-2016 01:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgewebb Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,582
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Rice!
Location:

The Parliament AwardsDonators
Post: #146
RE: Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
Wow - the ACC will get $45 million for NOT having a network.
05-28-2016 02:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Online
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #147
RE: Colorado State's Pitch to the Big 12
nice read, 40.... and one of the reasons i think about dropping the tv deal

i think going over air and internet would make us unique, eliminate scheduling issues (mostly) and I think that internet crowd is more our market anyway

the guy buying multiple a la carte sports packages doesn't care about schools ranked 50+ in sports
05-28-2016 08:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.