As most articles point out, this is a straight money grab by B12. Each new school is guaranteed to be paid the same in TV revenue as all other schools. If those schools negotiate a lower payment initially, that means more money in the hands of current Big 12 schools. I've heard their TV contracts that each new member must be paid the same, all the way up to 16 members So, in essence, the more schools the B12 adds, the better, and more $$ in the pockets in B12 schools. So the questions is, why wouldn't the B12 NOT want to go to 16. It would equate to mega dollars for current members in additional TV revenue that would be withheld from more new members.

http://www.si.com/college-football/2016/...=si_social

For now, no one is quite sure if the Big 12 knows either. Is expansion such a naked money grab—up to $800 million—that it threatens the conference's relationships with FOX and ESPN after their television contract expires in 2024–25? “In my opinion,” said a television industry source, “you are basically saying eight years from now this is over, and we might as well take the money.”


____________________

Moderator Edit: Don't copy all or nearly all of any copyrighted article from another site. Provide a link to the article, and if you want, add a short excerpt from it. Please read the CSNbbs AUP if you have any questions. Thanks.

SURELY Fox and ESPN put a limit on the number of teams which could be added... right?

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  SURELY Fox and ESPN put a limit on the number of teams which could be added... right?

I heard that under B12's contract they could go up to 16 schools and each new school would receive the same $$.

I'll do you one better. Why don't they add 10 schools and just play two separate leagues under one banner. That way the current schools would be virtually unaffected (except a CCG) and would be $5–6 M per year wealthier.

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  SURELY Fox and ESPN put a limit on the number of teams which could be added... right?

I heard that under B12's contract they could go up to 16 schools and each new school would receive the same $$.

Have you seen the contract? I've "heard" lots of things that turn out not to be true. This one is highly unlikely. That number would be in the neighborhood of what all media companies are paying the entire G5.

(07-28-2016 11:21 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  SURELY Fox and ESPN put a limit on the number of teams which could be added... right?

I heard that under B12's contract they could go up to 16 schools and each new school would receive the same $$.

Have you seen the contract? I've "heard" lots of things that turn out not to be true. This one is highly unlikely. That number would be in the neighborhood of what all media companies are paying the entire G5.

OK, let me clarify. I READ it in an actual article on B12 expansion from a reputable source (not a blog).

I think 14 is a good number. I really don't think conferences should go to 16 unless it's a P4. The issue with 16 is you aren't going to be playing teams in the other division that often. Honestly I think 12 is the best but I think all the power conferences are being pushed to 14.

(07-28-2016 11:26 AM)CyclonePower Wrote:  I think 14 is a good number. I really don't think conferences should go to 16 unless it's a P4. The issue with 16 is you aren't going to be playing teams in the other division that often. Honestly I think 12 is the best but I think all the power conferences are being pushed to 14.

So you don't want the extra 400 Million in TV revenue that will be going to the B12 (and your school) for basically doing nothing, other than adding 2 more schools?

(07-28-2016 11:20 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'll do you one better. Why don't they add 10 schools and just play two separate leagues under one banner. That way the current schools would be virtually unaffected (except a CCG) and would be $5–6 M per year wealthier.

I read that they could go up to 16 without diminishing their TV dollars for new members. Read it in a reputable article. I will try to find the link, I read it a couple days ago. So no, you couldn't add 10 members if true.

Its the ultimate con job.

sign up 4 schools who, in desperation, all agree to receive little to none of that 25 million for the first 8 years (ie until the GOR runs out) and then UT and OU jump ship after they made millions off the schools who gave up their payment in hopes of a better future all while saying "hey we left you a P5 conference so no one needs to tag along with us!"

(07-28-2016 11:26 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:21 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  SURELY Fox and ESPN put a limit on the number of teams which could be added... right?

I heard that under B12's contract they could go up to 16 schools and each new school would receive the same $$.

Have you seen the contract? I've "heard" lots of things that turn out not to be true. This one is highly unlikely. That number would be in the neighborhood of what all media companies are paying the entire G5.

OK, let me clarify. I READ it in an actual article on B12 expansion from a reputable source (not a blog).

And I have read things in actual articles that turn out not to be true. The only "reputable source" on this subject is a copy of the actual contract.

(07-28-2016 11:28 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:26 AM)CyclonePower Wrote:  I think 14 is a good number. I really don't think conferences should go to 16 unless it's a P4. The issue with 16 is you aren't going to be playing teams in the other division that often. Honestly I think 12 is the best but I think all the power conferences are being pushed to 14.

So you don't want the extra 400 Million in TV revenue that will be going to the B12 (and your school) for basically doing nothing, other than adding 2 more schools?

I think adding 6 more schools would make us unstable. I think everyone will be content at 12 or 14. Once you get to 16 you are adding a lot of new faces and something that makes college football fun is tradition on playing old rivalries and conference mates.

I miss playing CU, NU, and Mizzou. I would trade TCU and WVU back for them if I could. If you add six schools that we don't have history with maybe the top dogs will fee like the conference got degraded. All the talks seem to be 12-14 and I haven't seen 16 in a single interview with presidents or ADs.

Can't find the article that said expansion $$ was capped at 16, but I did read that. But here is another one that says, essentially, that the more teams added, the better.

http://newsok.com/article/5511075

____________________

Moderator Edit: See the note in post #1 in this thread.

(07-28-2016 11:35 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:26 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:21 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:00 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  SURELY Fox and ESPN put a limit on the number of teams which could be added... right?

I heard that under B12's contract they could go up to 16 schools and each new school would receive the same $$.

Have you seen the contract? I've "heard" lots of things that turn out not to be true. This one is highly unlikely. That number would be in the neighborhood of what all media companies are paying the entire G5.

OK, let me clarify. I READ it in an actual article on B12 expansion from a reputable source (not a blog).

And I have read things in actual articles that turn out not to be true. The only "reputable source" on this subject is a copy of the actual contract.

Totally agree with you. My only point is that I did not make it up out of thin air. It was reported. Whether true or not, who knows.

Add UConn and UCF for #15 and #16

(07-28-2016 11:30 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(07-28-2016 11:20 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'll do you one better. Why don't they add 10 schools and just play two separate leagues under one banner. That way the current schools would be virtually unaffected (except a CCG) and would be $5–6 M per year wealthier.

I read that they could go up to 16 without diminishing their TV dollars for new members. Read it in a reputable article. I will try to find the link, I read it a couple days ago. So no, you couldn't add 10 members if true.

I don't think we have any idea what is reputable and what is not? However, for the sake of this discussion let's assume that it is capped at 16 teams. Just move West Virginia and Texas Christian – the two new schools – in with the refugee schools and use the same principle.

(07-28-2016 11:34 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Its the ultimate con job.

sign up 4 schools who, in desperation, all agree to receive little to none of that 25 million for the first 8 years (ie until the GOR runs out) and then UT and OU jump ship after they made millions off the schools who gave up their payment in hopes of a better future all while saying "hey we left you a P5 conference so no one needs to tag along with us!"

Heck ECU would sign up for nothing, zilch, nada in Conference revenue. We could easily survive off what we would make in increased ticket revenue. We damn sure know how to budget with what we have and we could make a living off 55k tickets sold for $60+ every time a Big12 school game to Ficklen. If it was an all sports invite we would clean up in increased FB, BB and Baseball ticket revenue so you Big12 folks can keep that $30 million and split it however you like. We just want an invite

There are several schools that have their own tv contracts, and still could join taken less.

BYU
Boise State
Army
Navy
Air Force
UMass now if they start going undefeated. ESPN could throw them some games.

Now, you could add the 2 B schools. BYU and Boise State

Than add 4 schools on the east. All 6 would get the same amount from the Big 12, but BYU and Boise State still get more than the other 4 because of their own deals for home games.

14 team conferences suck and 16 team conferences suck worse unless you like being in big conferences filled with a bunch of teams that all have different goals and playing teams you you care nothing about most often while waiting a decade or so to play the few teams you do care about

and the premise of "more moniez" is a false one proffered by fools that do not understand conference finances

the current Big 12 members are set to make on average $36 to $36.5 million per year per team over the final 8 years of the Big 12 TV contracts depending on what the CCG pays

ONLY $22.5 million of that money comes from "TV" the other $13.5 million to $14 million comes from other things like The Sugar Bowl, NCAA Football Playoffs Payout and the fact that the current Big 12 members rack up a ton of NCAA credits per team and new members bring NONE of those with them and those take 6 years to fully pay out

so new members bring a per team DEFICIT of $13.5 to $14 million per team per year for 8 years if they come to the conference

so the more teams you let in the more sure fire bottom feeders you are going to have in your bloated conference filled with teams that no one cares about or wants to be in a conference with

and the only way you can make that "pay off" is to further make sure those new bottom feeders are less competitive then they would be and take even more money from the $22.5 million on average per year that each one brings and then you have a "highly stable" conference filled with teams making $15+ million dollars less than the other members of the conference for 8 years so that your current members can get an extra $1 million or so per year

ALL of the currently available teams with the exception of BYU would have some of if not the lowers budgets, highest academic side subsidies and lowest fan/donor support of not only the Big 12, but all P5 teams and that is WITH keeping their unsustainable academic side subsidies and for most of them that would be with a share of Big 12 revenues that is ABOVE the actual money they bring to the conference

and only a fool would think that in 9 years from now you are going to go into TV negotiations with 2-6 teams that have eaten a $15+ million deficit for 8 years and pretend that media partners are suddenly going to cough up enough money to make even MORE MONEY for the existing 10 members over and above what they would have just made including the money they were taking from the new members for 8 years and then cough up enough money so that 2-6 new members could make equal shares to the 10 existing members

that is simply not going to happen especially when it is pretty much guaranteed that the more of your under paid and under supported "project schools" you have the more of them will just be dead weight in 8 years and you are stuck with them

the only way that would be remotely worth it (and even then it is still not worth it) is if the current members put an ejector clause in there where new members with X number of losing seasons over those 8 years are given the boot with nothing to show for it

sadly some of those potential members would probably even agree to that

Quote:filled with a bunch of teams that all have different goals and playing teams you you care nothing about

Um....

You do realize this is how your fellow conference mates are describing the Big 12 right now as they discuss realignment right? Go check out their fan boards, its pretty much a word for word description.