(08-04-2016 10:58 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 09:14 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 09:09 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The B12 is about to pull a Big East circa 08-10 and never decide on who to add.

I disagree. They have been wrestling with 13 and 14, not 11 and 12. JMO. Sooner or later, they need to decide and pull the trigger. I think they have decided, and the trigger gets pulled in the next couple of weeks.

Ok...let's assume that's true. They have decided on who to add. Why the wait? Waiting at this point only hurts the conference. ESPN talking about a dead conference walking isn't good for the teams there not named Texas or OK.

there are a number of factors in play

the Big 12 suffers from terrible leadership consisting of the idiot boren and toilet bowlsby that have never met a mic that they will not answer a stupid question to or say something they have pulled completely out of their ass to

I think the Big 12 is MUCH FURTHER behind on actually evaluating members than people believe they are

I think most of the non sense that can when the idiot boren first talked about a "disadvantage" was taken and tossed in the trash because the Big 12 know that was just boren being an idiot and trying to feel important and it was never evaluated at all

too much reliance on "consultants" and having to give them data so they can make it say what they think you want it to say and give it back to you

the networks are in no hurry to get this done before the 2016 season and on fact it gives their idiot talking heads something to bore us all to death with all season if it drags out

the networks would just assume see what happens with this season and the Big 12 and a playoff spot or not and what types of records expansion candidates have

if dem coogs doh, Memphis, Temple, Cincy or any other program drop off the map and or have a breakout season or of they lose a coach at the end of the season all of that makes decisions for the networks and the Big 12 different than they are right now

in a properly run conference these decisions would not be made based on 2 years worth of data, but as of now there is really one seasons worth of data to work with and a season season would at least be more than not close to enough

if all the available teams all the sudden look like dead weight the Big 12 is in a bind.....if some of those look "can't miss" then the media partners could have an easier time swallowing paying for them

the media partners are not just going to sit down and agree to pay the Big 12 more with 10 teams in order to save some money over adding teams they would prefer not to pay for they are going to hold out on that and another season works in their favor for a number of reasons and they have to at least have some negotiations you are talking about tens of millions per year and hundreds of millions over 8 years

it is not a car deal being made here

(08-04-2016 08:50 AM)bullet Wrote:  Going to market with new media options in 2024-25 is better than locking in now in the current market. Much like the Big 10 surprisingly signed a short term deal, only 6 years. Reports have indicated they think those options will be there in that time frame and they can do better with a new contract then instead of a long term deal now.

If that was the plan, then the Big 12 schools would just extend their GOR now and go to market with their TV rights later. The Big 12 can sign a GOR that is longer than the term of their TV contract. The Big Ten's GOR extends well beyond the end of their new Fox and ESPN deals.

(08-04-2016 10:58 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 09:14 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 09:09 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The B12 is about to pull a Big East circa 08-10 and never decide on who to add.

I disagree. They have been wrestling with 13 and 14, not 11 and 12. JMO. Sooner or later, they need to decide and pull the trigger. I think they have decided, and the trigger gets pulled in the next couple of weeks.

Ok...let's assume that's true. They have decided on who to add. Why the wait? Waiting at this point only hurts the conference. ESPN talking about a dead conference walking isn't good for the teams there not named Texas or OK.

B/c they are still working out contract details with the networks, still debating a GoR or TV extension, still debating divisional structure, etc.

Wedge,

I wonder if it's the media that's confused, then? Maybe they're conflating the GOR and the primary TV contract?? Which also does happen on this board, so it's understandable.

Because the article did specifically talk about TX and OU not being interested in extending the "rights". You might think that means GOR, but maybe it actually was supposed to mean "rights to broadcast league home games"??

(08-04-2016 11:13 AM)Wedge Wrote:  If that was the plan, then the Big 12 schools would just extend their GOR now and go to market with their TV rights later. The Big 12 can sign a GOR that is longer than the term of their TV contract. The Big Ten's GOR extends well beyond the end of their new Fox and ESPN deals.

While that is possible does anyone believe Texas or Oklahoma would sign away their media rights without knowing what the payout would be? It's going to be hard enough getting UT or OU to agree to extend the GOR (I won't go full Dude of WVU and say they NEVER will like he guaranteed about The ACC) but I will say most will be surprised if they don't sample the free agent market in 2025.
CJ

All a GOR does is keep the teams together.

It doesn't assign any value to the primary TV contract, nor commit the teams to work with any particular network on it. They can take their primary TV contract out to bid in 2025.

(08-04-2016 07:27 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 11:12 PM)Rabonchild Wrote:  I never thought I would see the day. Texas and Oklahoma on their knees crying uncle! I figured P12 has USC & Oregon, B10 has Ohio St, Michigan/michigan st., ACC has Florida St. & Clemson and the SEC has Alabama & LSU. So I thought Texas & Oklahoma were strong enough to keep the B12 together and strengthen it. But all chips are off the table since ESPN & FOX have spoken, and said NO!

Now I hear TX & OK are talking about bailing out on the conference as soon as they get close to the end of the present GOR. Just a few years ago They were talking about taking teams from the ACC. Now we see it was lol smoke and screens.

The ACC took Louisville and boom it became a P5 major player. Now ESPN & FOX are telling the B12 we don't think you have the ability to do the same for Cincy, Houston, UCONN, ECU, UCF or any other G5 school.

Without a GOR extension the B12's days as a power conference are over. The Power Conferences will have beaten TX & OK into submission. They will have become just another Colordo, Utah, Missouri, or TX A&M. In fact A&M will look a lot smarter than the other two schools because they got out of the B12 first. How do you like that TX & Ok are just followers, following TAM's example.

And all it would take to succeed is a GOR extension, and guts.

you do not seem to have any clue what is going on here

1. Texas has not talked at all about leaving the Big 12 especially over the expansion issue that was OU that did that stupidity and that has proven to be david boren just being a moron and talking to much

2. Texas and OU will always have the ability to keep the big 12 together if that is what they desire to do

3. keeping the Big 12 together has nothing at all to do with adding G5 schools that no fan base in the Big 12 has even a modicum of interest in being in a conference with

4. it should not be the concern or the care of the Big 12 and existing members to add G5 programs to help those G5 programs it should be the concern of the Big 12 to help existing members

and the Big 12 has already made clear that adding any G5 members does not help them athletically it would at best be a "maybe the get better and that benefits us"

so with that REALITY there is nothing imperative about adding G5 members towards keeping UT and OU in the conference or helping the conference be more stable or last beyond 2024-25

5. no one is going to extend the GOR simply based on adding G5 members

6. the ONLY way a GOR extension would make sense is if the Big 12 had a media contract that matched that GOR extension in length

7. the Big 12 would be stupid to sign a media deal now even to then have a reason to extend the GOR because every major conference out there besides ACC will be renewing a major portion or all of their media rights before the Big 12 will so signing a media deal now or extending the current one only ties you into a deal that you have no idea of how it will stack up to anyone else 7 or 8 years from now much less after those conferences sign new deals

Texas and OU are not going to be stupid enough to do this especially with a GOR and they are not going to sign a GOR with no idea of what a media contract would be

so Texas and OU are not going to be signing a GOR extension now no matter what

so adding teams in the hopes it gets you a new media deal and or gets you an extension of the GOR is not happening

8. the issues with the media partners and the Big 12 are about NOW and the next 8 years not anything to do with the future

9. all the more so if the media partners do not want to pay for G5 teams NOW who in the hell would think they want to pay for them in a contract extension much less a really good extension that OU and UT could not possibly turn down

10. so no media contract extension is coming, no media contract extension that would make UT and OU feel that there is no reason to see what other teams get 6-8 years from now is coming

so OU and UT are not signing a GOR extension now because they are not going to get a media contract that would be 100% sure fire "can't miss" now

11. so all of this is about can the Big 12 get more money from the media partners for not adding teams at all or can the Big 12 (stupidly) add 2 teams and possibly get a bit more money that would have gone to 2 more teams and not add 2 more and save the media partners a little money while making more money

12. adding even 2 teams is a horrible financial issue especially as it relates to "stability" and that means no new contract extension that acceptable to UT and OU and thus no GOR extension even if two teams are added

so no matter what happens with being stupid enough to add new teams and take a lot of their money or even more stupid to take 4 teams and take a lot of their money or not adding teams and getting paid not to there is not going to be a media contract extension offered that will make UT and OU believe that they should accept that without seeing what other conferences get 6-8 years from now and surely not with a GOR and of course no GOR extension with a totally unknown media situation after 2024-25

no GOR extension is coming for the Big 12 and no media extension is coming the Big 12 is going to see what happens in 2022-23 and 2022-24 and go from there

(08-03-2016 11:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 11:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  Or maybe UT and OU are smart and see the media market changing and want to take advantage of it WITH the Big 12 in 2025.

Taking advantage being the literal truth as when 2024 rolls around and those two give the ultimatum of "here are our demands, refuse them and we walk."

laughably asinine comment coming from an A&M supporter in light of the 100% proven fact that A&M was threatening to sue the Big 12 for a guaranteed $20 million per year distribution right up to and until they left the Big 12 while UT and OU had declined to take that extra revenue from other Big 12 members

You know, a long term contract that extends past 2024 could be done with "look in" provisions that would automatically reset the Big12 payout to reflect the average value per team of the other 4 power conferences. That would remove the primary risk in signing a long term extension (falling behind the rest of the P5 when they renegotiate) while providing stability/security to the members outside of UT/OK.

(08-04-2016 11:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 10:58 AM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 09:14 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 09:09 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The B12 is about to pull a Big East circa 08-10 and never decide on who to add.

I disagree. They have been wrestling with 13 and 14, not 11 and 12. JMO. Sooner or later, they need to decide and pull the trigger. I think they have decided, and the trigger gets pulled in the next couple of weeks.

Ok...let's assume that's true. They have decided on who to add. Why the wait? Waiting at this point only hurts the conference. ESPN talking about a dead conference walking isn't good for the teams there not named Texas or OK.

B/c they are still working out contract details with the networks, still debating a GoR or TV extension, still debating divisional structure, etc.

Divisional structure is a substantial issue in getting to eight for a choice of two or four adds.

Kansas State is not going to want a division structure that substantially reduces their trips to Texas. Their best outcome in an expansion would likely be an expansion by four, with the Kansas', the Oklahoma's, Texas, TTech and Baylor in their division, Houston and TCU in the other division with ISU, WVU, and the three other adds, and with balanced scheduling and 9 game conference schedule they continue to get nearly two trips to Texas a year (~1.9).

In an expansion by two, Texas, TTech, and the Oklahomas being in one division could well force the Kansas' into the other division with WVU and an eastern add. TCU and Houston in their division would be one trip to Texas per year in division, and if they spread it out 2 trips to Texas in three years out of four.

(08-04-2016 11:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:27 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 11:12 PM)Rabonchild Wrote:  I never thought I would see the day. Texas and Oklahoma on their knees crying uncle! I figured P12 has USC & Oregon, B10 has Ohio St, Michigan/michigan st., ACC has Florida St. & Clemson and the SEC has Alabama & LSU. So I thought Texas & Oklahoma were strong enough to keep the B12 together and strengthen it. But all chips are off the table since ESPN & FOX have spoken, and said NO!

Now I hear TX & OK are talking about bailing out on the conference as soon as they get close to the end of the present GOR. Just a few years ago They were talking about taking teams from the ACC. Now we see it was lol smoke and screens.

The ACC took Louisville and boom it became a P5 major player. Now ESPN & FOX are telling the B12 we don't think you have the ability to do the same for Cincy, Houston, UCONN, ECU, UCF or any other G5 school.

Without a GOR extension the B12's days as a power conference are over. The Power Conferences will have beaten TX & OK into submission. They will have become just another Colordo, Utah, Missouri, or TX A&M. In fact A&M will look a lot smarter than the other two schools because they got out of the B12 first. How do you like that TX & Ok are just followers, following TAM's example.

And all it would take to succeed is a GOR extension, and guts.

you do not seem to have any clue what is going on here

1. Texas has not talked at all about leaving the Big 12 especially over the expansion issue that was OU that did that stupidity and that has proven to be david boren just being a moron and talking to much

2. Texas and OU will always have the ability to keep the big 12 together if that is what they desire to do

3. keeping the Big 12 together has nothing at all to do with adding G5 schools that no fan base in the Big 12 has even a modicum of interest in being in a conference with

4. it should not be the concern or the care of the Big 12 and existing members to add G5 programs to help those G5 programs it should be the concern of the Big 12 to help existing members

and the Big 12 has already made clear that adding any G5 members does not help them athletically it would at best be a "maybe the get better and that benefits us"

so with that REALITY there is nothing imperative about adding G5 members towards keeping UT and OU in the conference or helping the conference be more stable or last beyond 2024-25

5. no one is going to extend the GOR simply based on adding G5 members

6. the ONLY way a GOR extension would make sense is if the Big 12 had a media contract that matched that GOR extension in length

7. the Big 12 would be stupid to sign a media deal now even to then have a reason to extend the GOR because every major conference out there besides ACC will be renewing a major portion or all of their media rights before the Big 12 will so signing a media deal now or extending the current one only ties you into a deal that you have no idea of how it will stack up to anyone else 7 or 8 years from now much less after those conferences sign new deals

Texas and OU are not going to be stupid enough to do this especially with a GOR and they are not going to sign a GOR with no idea of what a media contract would be

so Texas and OU are not going to be signing a GOR extension now no matter what

so adding teams in the hopes it gets you a new media deal and or gets you an extension of the GOR is not happening

8. the issues with the media partners and the Big 12 are about NOW and the next 8 years not anything to do with the future

9. all the more so if the media partners do not want to pay for G5 teams NOW who in the hell would think they want to pay for them in a contract extension much less a really good extension that OU and UT could not possibly turn down

10. so no media contract extension is coming, no media contract extension that would make UT and OU feel that there is no reason to see what other teams get 6-8 years from now is coming

so OU and UT are not signing a GOR extension now because they are not going to get a media contract that would be 100% sure fire "can't miss" now

11. so all of this is about can the Big 12 get more money from the media partners for not adding teams at all or can the Big 12 (stupidly) add 2 teams and possibly get a bit more money that would have gone to 2 more teams and not add 2 more and save the media partners a little money while making more money

12. adding even 2 teams is a horrible financial issue especially as it relates to "stability" and that means no new contract extension that acceptable to UT and OU and thus no GOR extension even if two teams are added

so no matter what happens with being stupid enough to add new teams and take a lot of their money or even more stupid to take 4 teams and take a lot of their money or not adding teams and getting paid not to there is not going to be a media contract extension offered that will make UT and OU believe that they should accept that without seeing what other conferences get 6-8 years from now and surely not with a GOR and of course no GOR extension with a totally unknown media situation after 2024-25

no GOR extension is coming for the Big 12 and no media extension is coming the Big 12 is going to see what happens in 2022-23 and 2022-24 and go from there

(08-03-2016 11:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 11:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  Or maybe UT and OU are smart and see the media market changing and want to take advantage of it WITH the Big 12 in 2025.

Taking advantage being the literal truth as when 2024 rolls around and those two give the ultimatum of "here are our demands, refuse them and we walk."

laughably asinine comment coming from an A&M supporter in light of the 100% proven fact that A&M was threatening to sue the Big 12 for a guaranteed $20 million per year distribution right up to and until they left the Big 12 while UT and OU had declined to take that extra revenue from other Big 12 members

You know, a long term contract that extends past 2024 could be done with "look in" provisions that would automatically reset the Big12 payout to reflect the average value per team of the other 4 power conferences. That would remove the primary risk in signing a long term extension (falling behind the rest of the P5 when they renegotiate) while providing stability/security to the members outside of UT/OK.

I am a big fan of conference/media "look in's" they are proven to be boons for conferences. I'm trying to think of a "look in" happening where ESPN added $ to the schools without adding several years to their contract. Well.....I can't think of a single one. The ACC had several "look in's" that added a few bucks and several centuries to their ALL tier ESPN contract I guess...
Cheers!

(08-04-2016 09:26 AM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:58 AM)CyclonePower Wrote:  Like the Iowa State AD said, if they extend the GOR it will be after they renegotiate with the tv partners. Expanding may be able to get the TV partners to come to the table and maybe the GOR won't be extending too much(10-12 or so years). This way it isn't like they are tied down forever and they ease the nerves of schools like ISU and KSU.

As an Iowa State fan I have a question for you. In reference to the podcast link where I believe it was your AD that said the position of the Iowa State president was that without an extension of the current GOR signed by every conference member he wouldn’t vote favorably for any expansion candidate, is he the kind of person who would take a hard stand on that position?

With all the talk of expansion for so long now I’m just wondering if it’s coming down to the refusal to sign the GOR extension by one or more schools that has Big12 expansion in a holding pattern.

If all accounts are true about teams not getting enough votes I wouldn't be surprised if there are schools that are refusing to vote unless the GOR gets extended. It sounds like our AD and President have the same goal and that's to keep Iowa State in a power conference.

I also believe they may have a hard time picking what schools to extend an invite to. After Texas came out advocating for UH our president said some schools weren't happy with adding another Texas school so you could have a block school saying no to UH and then the pro-UH block refusing to vote for other schools.

I'm a fan of expansion for the big 12 but if there isn't and extension of the GOR and new TV deal. I just see any teams getting enough votes.

My four are still : BYU, CSU, Cincy, and UH/Memphis

(08-04-2016 12:05 PM)CyclonePower Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 09:26 AM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 07:58 AM)CyclonePower Wrote:  Like the Iowa State AD said, if they extend the GOR it will be after they renegotiate with the tv partners. Expanding may be able to get the TV partners to come to the table and maybe the GOR won't be extending too much(10-12 or so years). This way it isn't like they are tied down forever and they ease the nerves of schools like ISU and KSU.

As an Iowa State fan I have a question for you. In reference to the podcast link where I believe it was your AD that said the position of the Iowa State president was that without an extension of the current GOR signed by every conference member he wouldn’t vote favorably for any expansion candidate, is he the kind of person who would take a hard stand on that position?

With all the talk of expansion for so long now I’m just wondering if it’s coming down to the refusal to sign the GOR extension by one or more schools that has Big12 expansion in a holding pattern.

If all accounts are true about teams not getting enough votes I wouldn't be surprised if there are schools that are refusing to vote unless the GOR gets extended. It sounds like our AD and President have the same goal and that's to keep Iowa State in a power conference.

I also believe they may have a hard time picking what schools to extend an invite to. After Texas came out advocating for UH our president said some schools weren't happy with adding another Texas school so you could have a block school saying no to UH and then the pro-UH block refusing to vote for other schools.

I'm a fan of expansion for the big 12 but if there isn't and extension of the GOR and new TV deal. I just see any teams getting enough votes.

My four are still : BYU, CSU, Cincy, and UH/Memphis

Thanks for the input.

So wouldn't those two bloc's get one team each?? In other words, Houston + the team that Iowa St/Kansas's/Oklahoma's want??

(08-04-2016 12:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  So wouldn't those two bloc's get one team each?? In other words, Houston + the team that Iowa St/Kansas's/Oklahoma's want??

At least from what I've heard Iowa State is fine with not expanding so some schools could take the stance of no more Texas schools or we aren't expanding.

I should say that UH is probably in if we do expand but I think if they are in the TV deal and GOR is extended also.

Interesting thought: I wonder if non-OU Big 8 teams would form a bloc that trades picking an expansion team in exchange for extending the GOR??

Note, the GOR is not the TV deal.

In other words, Iowa St/K St/KU/OK St come together and say something like "you all can pick whichever two teams (within reason) that you want, and we'll vote for them ... but in exchange you all have to agree to keep this group of teams together (extend the GOR) into 203x."

(08-03-2016 10:45 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The Big 12 has been talking to Memphis for almost 3 years, and have said some things to us that make me feel they are ready to add 4 teams.

Interesting.

For almost three years, the Big 12 has been coming to UH saying:

"Memphis just offered this and that. What are you prepared to offer."

Methinks Memphis and their Fed Ex sugar daddy are being played to drive up the price of poker for the rest of us.

(08-04-2016 03:30 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 10:45 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The Big 12 has been talking to Memphis for almost 3 years, and have said some things to us that make me feel they are ready to add 4 teams.

Interesting.

For almost three years, the Big 12 has been coming to UH saying:

"Memphis just offered this and that. What are you prepared to offer."

Methinks Memphis and their Fed Ex sugar daddy are being played to drive up the price of poker for the rest of us.

Well then you better find your sugar daddy then.

Expand or implode that is the question!

(08-04-2016 03:30 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 10:45 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The Big 12 has been talking to Memphis for almost 3 years, and have said some things to us that make me feel they are ready to add 4 teams.

Interesting.

For almost three years, the Big 12 has been coming to UH saying:

"Memphis just offered this and that. What are you prepared to offer."

Methinks Memphis and their Fed Ex sugar daddy are being played to drive up the price of poker for the rest of us.

The Big12 has been airing those offers so publicly that I think your explanation is plausible. I have also had that same thought.

(08-04-2016 03:32 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 03:30 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 10:45 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The Big 12 has been talking to Memphis for almost 3 years, and have said some things to us that make me feel they are ready to add 4 teams.

Interesting.

For almost three years, the Big 12 has been coming to UH saying:

"Memphis just offered this and that. What are you prepared to offer."

Methinks Memphis and their Fed Ex sugar daddy are being played to drive up the price of poker for the rest of us.

Well then you better find your sugar daddy then.

..and he doesn't have shareholders to answer to.

Chip Brown's latest article was pretty negative in regardes to expansion happening.

Would not be surprised if the Big 12 schools take the money and tell the G5 schools bye.