http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-panicking

Casual fans seem to think the Big 12 needs to expand to survive, but that isn't true. Things are looking pretty good the way they are right now.

That article is pure comedy. Oklahoma is far from happy and is likely headed to the B1G in a few years.

Any school not named Oklahoma, Texas or Kansas should have a ton of angst about expansion.

I agree with the article for the most part. Short term the league looks fine. The league is strong financially and strong competitively. Is the league at risk long term falling behind the SEC and Big 10? Sure, but so are the PAC-12 and ACC. And more importantly, there is no easy way to bridge that gap, especially not via expansion. What happens long term, happens. In the meantime, sit back and focus on the things we can control.

(06-09-2016 09:34 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I agree with the article for the most part. Short term the league looks fine. The league is strong financially and strong competitively. Is the league at risk long term falling behind the SEC and Big 10? Sure, but so are the PAC-12 and ACC. And more importantly, there is no easy way to bridge that gap, especially not via expansion. What happens long term, happens. In the meantime, sit back and focus on the things we can control.

Yup...the best the ACC, Big XII and Pac 12 can do financially is try to stay within shouting distance of the SEC/B1G

I rate this article as fiction. There is friction in the Big 12. Oklahoma is not happy, and neither are several schools as well. Oklahoma is looking out for the whole conference, while Texas is only looking out for themselves. Oklahoma wants to improve the conference, Texas is killing the conference.

(06-11-2016 12:51 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  I rate this article as fiction. There is friction in the Big 12. Oklahoma is not happy, and neither are several schools as well. Oklahoma is looking out for the whole conference, while Texas is only looking out for themselves. Oklahoma wants to improve the conference, Texas is killing the conference.

But .... Boren has changed his tune pretty dramatically the last couple months, eh?

The biggest thing short term, that helps $$ in B12 would be adding champ game. They did that. They are not getting a network anytime soon, so that is a moot point. Olk isn't that unhappy, They get 7 mil from tier 3, 30+ mil from one and 2, and now get another 2.5 to 3 mil from champ game. At 40 mil per year they are above Pac 12 and ACC by a large margin, and hanging in there with SEC/Big.

Boren wanted expansion, his bosses, the BOT did not. His sudden change in direction, likely came from them. I don't see any expansion until TV deal gets close, if ever.

(06-11-2016 06:56 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The biggest thing short term, that helps $$ in B12 would be adding champ game. They did that. They are not getting a network anytime soon, so that is a moot point. Olk isn't that unhappy, They get 7 mil from tier 3, 30+ mil from one and 2, and now get another 2.5 to 3 mil from champ game. At 40 mil per year they are above Pac 12 and ACC by a large margin, and hanging in there with SEC/Big.

Boren wanted expansion, his bosses, the BOT did not. His sudden change in direction, likely came from them. I don't see any expansion until TV deal gets close, if ever.

Nothing is stopping the rest of the Big 12 from developing their own streaming network and charging a monthly fee. I would wager that the other 7 could make an extra 1 or 2 million per year if they did that.

Another thing that the Big 12 could do to help close the gap is to affiliate itself with either the new Austin bowl game or the one that might be going into Little Rock.

I still maintain that the Big 12 adding a network would be very destabilizing for it. So far only the Big Ten and SEC Networks have been wildly successful. The PAC-12 Networks aren't making all that much and the ACC Network can't seem to get off the ground. The Big 12 could well be closer to the latter two. Beyond that, keeping 3rd tier rights with the schools means the Longhorn Network can continue which means Texas is unlikely to leave and they are the ones with the best opportunity to leave if they wanted.

Even if you compensated Texas the $15 million and they agreed to stay (iffy over the long term), it's also questionable if the network would make enough after that to be profitable for schools like Oklahoma and Kansas. It's not like their 3rd tier rights right now are worthless. They are selling them for a decent profit. You factor that in, plus Texas's extra cut, and a network that might look more like the PAC-12 than the Big Ten or SEC, and it is very possible they lose money on the deal (part of me wonders if number crunchers at Oklahoma gave Boren some pause).

(06-09-2016 09:34 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I agree with the article for the most part. Short term the league (Big 12) looks fine. .......

Short term the Big East once looked fine.

(06-11-2016 02:13 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-11-2016 12:51 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  I rate this article as fiction. There is friction in the Big 12. Oklahoma is not happy, and neither are several schools as well. Oklahoma is looking out for the whole conference, while Texas is only looking out for themselves. Oklahoma wants to improve the conference, Texas is killing the conference.

But .... Boren has changed his tune pretty dramatically the last couple months, eh?

Publicly, yes.

(06-11-2016 08:13 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:34 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I agree with the article for the most part. Short term the league (Big 12) looks fine. .......

Short term the Big East once looked fine.

the Big East comparison is meaningless

the Big East added teams multiple times and it was some of those teams that were added that were some of the first to leave

and it is specious to claim that if the Big East had added more teams sooner that would have helped somehow

teams left the Big East because they had better offers not because there were not enough teams in the conference at any point

and every time the Big East added teams either the couple of good ones left ASAP (and even some of the bad ones) or they just added worse and worse teams

(06-11-2016 07:59 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(06-11-2016 06:56 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The biggest thing short term, that helps $$ in B12 would be adding champ game. They did that. They are not getting a network anytime soon, so that is a moot point. Olk isn't that unhappy, They get 7 mil from tier 3, 30+ mil from one and 2, and now get another 2.5 to 3 mil from champ game. At 40 mil per year they are above Pac 12 and ACC by a large margin, and hanging in there with SEC/Big.

Boren wanted expansion, his bosses, the BOT did not. His sudden change in direction, likely came from them. I don't see any expansion until TV deal gets close, if ever.

Nothing is stopping the rest of the Big 12 from developing their own streaming network and charging a monthly fee. I would wager that the other 7 could make an extra 1 or 2 million per year if they did that.

Another thing that the Big 12 could do to help close the gap is to affiliate itself with either the new Austin bowl game or the one that might be going into Little Rock.

I know Iowa State has a very good streaming we site. It also doubles down as a TV channel if you have cable in Iowa. I hope the B12 streaming site models itself after Cyclones.TV if they get one. I just wonder would the provider would be.

(06-11-2016 08:13 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:34 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I agree with the article for the most part. Short term the league (Big 12) looks fine. .......

Short term the Big East once looked fine.

The massive difference between the Big East and Big 12 is the presence of tent-pole schools. As long as TX and OU, really TX alone, are in the Big 12, it's fine.

Now if you say "well what if they leave"? Well yeah the Big 12 would be in trouble. But really, only the B1G and SEC are deep enough to know they would be fine if their top two schools left. Where would the PAC be if USC and UCLA left? The ACC if North Carolina and FSU left? The Big East didn't have any tentpoles, trust me I lived through that.

And i seriously doubt Texas would leave the Big 12. Texas loves two things, money and power. The LHN ensures that for the forseeable future their money will be at the same level as the B1G and SEC. No worries there, and even Boren has bowed to that reality.

And power? Texas, like UNC, LOVES being in control. Loves being THE big enchilada. They are that in the Big 12, but wouldn't be anywhere else.

(06-11-2016 10:15 AM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(06-11-2016 07:59 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(06-11-2016 06:56 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The biggest thing short term, that helps $$ in B12 would be adding champ game. They did that. They are not getting a network anytime soon, so that is a moot point. Olk isn't that unhappy, They get 7 mil from tier 3, 30+ mil from one and 2, and now get another 2.5 to 3 mil from champ game. At 40 mil per year they are above Pac 12 and ACC by a large margin, and hanging in there with SEC/Big.

Boren wanted expansion, his bosses, the BOT did not. His sudden change in direction, likely came from them. I don't see any expansion until TV deal gets close, if ever.

Nothing is stopping the rest of the Big 12 from developing their own streaming network and charging a monthly fee. I would wager that the other 7 could make an extra 1 or 2 million per year if they did that.

Another thing that the Big 12 could do to help close the gap is to affiliate itself with either the new Austin bowl game or the one that might be going into Little Rock.

I know Iowa State has a very good streaming we site. It also doubles down as a TV channel if you have cable in Iowa. I hope the B12 streaming site models itself after Cyclones.TV if they get one. I just wonder would the provider would be.

I didn't know about Cyclone TV. But I'm sure there would be several companies more than willing to put that together for the Big 12 members.

If you pay attention you will see many parallels between The Big East of the early 2000's and The Big 12 of today:

1. Smallest top level conference
2. Only conference without a conference championship game ( until Big 12 killed theirs only to bring it back in 2017)
3. Visible vocal factions on expansion (Basketball onlys vs All Sports ) (Texas vs Everyone else)
4. Satisfied with being behind other conferences in revenues, recruiting, exposure

The reality is keeping Oklahoma and Texas happy concerning the aforementioned issues isn't an easy task for Bowlsby. It's too early yet, but in a few years as The Big 12 GOR becomes less of a hinderance to conference shuffling, we'll see how successful he is keeping everyone happy.
CJ

(06-11-2016 12:12 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  4. Satisfied with being behind other conferences in revenues, recruiting, exposure

Well except for the fact that the Big 12 is 3rd in revenue, and there's no evidence they trail anyone in recruiting or exposure.

If anything, the ACC is most like the Big East, simply because these days about half the conference is Big East, and it is in the worst revenue position.

(06-11-2016 07:59 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(06-11-2016 06:56 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The biggest thing short term, that helps $$ in B12 would be adding champ game. They did that. They are not getting a network anytime soon, so that is a moot point. Olk isn't that unhappy, They get 7 mil from tier 3, 30+ mil from one and 2, and now get another 2.5 to 3 mil from champ game. At 40 mil per year they are above Pac 12 and ACC by a large margin, and hanging in there with SEC/Big.

Boren wanted expansion, his bosses, the BOT did not. His sudden change in direction, likely came from them. I don't see any expansion until TV deal gets close, if ever.

Nothing is stopping the rest of the Big 12 from developing their own streaming network and charging a monthly fee. I would wager that the other 7 could make an extra 1 or 2 million per year if they did that.

Another thing that the Big 12 could do to help close the gap is to affiliate itself with either the new Austin bowl game or the one that might be going into Little Rock.

those bowls will be bottom of barrel bowls, little money and no big deal for B12. I think they already have 7 or 8 lined up for 10 schools, don't really need any more.

I think if they expand, they should go with Cincinnati & Houston. It'll boost football, add to basketball and the two new schools will be competitive if Baseball & Softball. Those are the big revenue producing sports and I think they're the two schools that make the most sense, break the divisions up like this and possibly sign a scheduling agreement with the Pac-12 and/or possibly a 6-game scheduling agreement with BYU without having to take their baggage.

Big 12 East
Baylor
Cincinnati
Houston
Iowa State
TCU
West Virginia

Big 12 West
Kansas
Kansas State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech

(06-11-2016 12:12 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  If you pay attention you will see many parallels between The Big East of the early 2000's and The Big 12 of today:

1. Smallest top level conference
2. Only conference without a conference championship game ( until Big 12 killed theirs only to bring it back in 2017)
3. Visible vocal factions on expansion (Basketball onlys vs All Sports ) (Texas vs Everyone else)
4. Satisfied with being behind other conferences in revenues, recruiting, exposure

The reality is keeping Oklahoma and Texas happy concerning the aforementioned issues isn't an easy task for Bowlsby. It's too early yet, but in a few years as The Big 12 GOR becomes less of a hinderance to conference shuffling, we'll see how successful he is keeping everyone happy.
CJ

Texas's contract with ESPN for their LHN runs through 2031. Texas isn't leaving the Big 12 before then.

OU doesn't want to leave the Big 12, or it wouldn't be going through these histrionics to make changes to the conference.

People forget that the SEC and B1G have given up all Tier 1/2/3 rights in their contracts.

The Big 12 retains Tier 3 rights at individual schools. The SEC distributed $32M last year, IIRC, and will likely go up to maybe $38M this fall (just guessing).

The Big 12 just distributed $30.4M. That means, at an average of $15M a year, Texas is making over $45M a year, and OU is making about $37M a year.

All other conferences would require Texas to give up its 3rd tier rights, except maybe the ACC, and if they do a network, then they won't allow it, either. And the AAC distribution substantially is below the Big 12.

Texas and Oklahoma have a MUCH better chance to make the CFP from the Big 12, than they do from the B1G or the SEC. Texas and Oklahoma aren't going anywhere before 2031, at least.