Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Killing the BIG XII
Author Message
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 14,490
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 738
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-11-2018 09:27 AM)Erictelevision Wrote:  PG: you're OBVIOUSLY correct that I overstated the geographic spread of the AAC. As to why the BIG XII is constantly discussed for implosion? It's the least geographically stable, and has an alpha-dog looking to get out.

I'd say the ACC is at least as geographically/culturally unstable. The ACC sprawls from Miami Beach in the south to Boston in the north and Louisville basically in the midwest.

And politically, it has its football-first deep south contingent and its mid-atlantic basketball-first contingent, and then its Yankee emphasize-both contingent as well.

Their commish did a great job with the GOR and promise of an AACN to settle things down, but those fissures still exist and if things head south, particularly if ACCN revenues don't materialize as hoped for, they could re-open.

Quo the ACC exists for three reasons:

1. It was initially cheap to acquire.

2. It was a great place to park the OBE teams that ESPN wanted to keep out of an independent Big 10 Network and away from Jim Delany and since the OBE was at least on par with, if not stronger than, the ACC at that time it was a move to protect ESPN's investment in the ACC.

3. The ACC existed to keep the SEC from becoming too strong in the Southeast, at least in terms of leverage over key states like Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. Tech was conveniently already in the ACC. And in '91 ESPN successfully kept Clemson and even more so Florida State out of the SEC's hands. Serendipity was they also made sure that South Carolina stayed out of the ACC's hands. The last thing they wanted was for a conference to control a whole state. So the market model was used as an excuse to break up states.

If you don't believe me just look at the ESPN's property maps and remembered they targeted North Carolina, Virginia and Texas to break up state monopolies by conferences. They knew from day 1 that if they could split these big states it gave them an in to each of them without having to go through their primary conference. They were wiling to pay more short term on subscription fees but their plans all along were to shift to a % of the market pay model. Streaming refined that beyond their initial thinking so that in the future more of the pay will be based on actual viewership. Both play into the original plan of divide and conquer.

So Quo the ACC is not in peril as it should be because ESPN has a use for it. Whereas the Big 12 only has 3 maybe 4 products the networks are interested in: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and possibly Texas Tech since it is a P5 public in the state of Texas.

Breaking up the Big 12 is not a fan fantasy, it is a network fantasy. Texas and Oklahoma can be used to improve the Big 10 or SEC without giving them huge leverage.

Oklahoma in the SEC puts the SEC in Dallas without giving them control of the whole state by giving them Texas. Texas is large enough they may get their own way, but I would bet that ESPN would love to pair them with N.D. in the ACC, or even use them to gain more leverage with the Big 10. Kansas would be a good travel partner with either OU or UT. But neither FOX nor ESPN own a % of the PAC and there isn't much there for them. They both lease 50% of the PAC product and that gives them all they want for that time slot.

I seriously doubt that Texa-homa to the PAC is viable because those 4 all earn more than any PAC school for their TV rights and could earn even more in either of the Big 10 or SEC. In the case of Texas they earn close to 22 million more than the PAC schools for TV rights and OU earns about 11 million more. So it's not happening.

But if the networks could poach UT / OU / KU and another out of the Big 12 then when the contract expires in 2025 they are off the hook for 35 million each for the other 6. Does that mean the other 6 all lose P status? Probably not.

The PAC could be assisted with the Texas market by only Tech and T.C.U. if the networks are willing to underwrite that and even if the PAC TV revenue only goes up 3 million per school the networks would be saving about 5 million each on ever how many Big 12 schools head there so for the cost of about 21 million they could add two schools to the PAC and increase their CTZ inventory of PAC brands and do so without wasting OU or UT on a PAC schedule.

WVU could be another football / basketball bone to the ACC now that Louisville has cracked the academic argument there.

So I wouldn't rule out the absorption of the Big 12, but I would rule it out for about 5 more years.
01-11-2018 12:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,310
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 886
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 09:52 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  As long as Texas is making money on par with other big-time blue bloods (which they are), and UT/OU still have an opportunity to make the CFP playoff each year (now with the CCG, they can), I don't think the Big 12 is going to go anywhere.

As far as expansion, we all know the story with the Big 12 fiasco 18 months ago. However, their current deal is split between ESPN/Fox. When their deal expires, who's to say that Fox pays more to be the sole media rights holder? Or ESPN? One of the hangups for expansion (aside from the then current options) was that neither network could agree on such an addition. If ESPN gets the next Big 12 package, solely, why would they not consider a UCF/USF combo addition to the league? It would drive the price of the AAC down (cheap quality content), it would add Florida to a power conference (w/ the SEC and ACC), and - by then - it will have added two programs that have shown they can compete with the power programs.

The Big 12 - as a whole - is more valuable with its current membership together than split apart. Texas needs the Big 12, and the Big 12 needs Texas. As long as all parties continue to make tons of money (which they are), I really don't think the conference is in danger as many predict.

You know what Ive always wondered about these kind of arguments? It will likely cost 30-40 million a team for the next B12 agreement. Adding a pair of AAC teams to the Big12 would then have a price tag of between 60-80 million for an additional 12 (or so) games of inventory. The AAC gets 20 million now. An upper tier non-CFP bowl could be had for less than 10 million a year or a CFP bowl could probably be purchased as an add on for 40 million a year.

So essentially, ESPN could probably buy the entire AAC for 60 million--add a CFP game for 40 million---and manufacture themselves 60+ games of "contract conference" inventory for what about what it would cost to add 2 AAC teams to the Big12.
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2018 12:34 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-11-2018 12:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JHS55 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,674
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Killing the BIG XII
It seems to me that ESPN want to have a p4, this would mean the b12 would lose the top 4 teams, The schools left out would add 4 teams from somewhere
Would it be
The p4 and now be g6?
Jrsec said that the b12 would still be a p conference, Iam not sure about this , there would be no flagship team left no matter who they shuffle in there from the g5, heck they might even invite Texas st
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2018 12:55 PM by JHS55.)
01-11-2018 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 14,490
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 738
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 12:53 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  It seems to me that ESPN want to have a p4, this would mean the b12 would lose the top 4 teams, The schools left out would add 4 teams from somewhere
Would it be
The p4 and now be g6?
Jrsec said that the b12 would still be a p conference, Iam not sure about this , there would be no flagship team left no matter who they shuffle in there from the g5, heck they might even invite Texas st

What I said is that if the existing P5 consolidated to a P3 of 20 schools each that the remnant of the Big 12 could merge with the 3 service academies (if they desired) and the next ever how many top G5 schools to form a 4th 20 team P conference.

That's what I said. That would be inclusive of UConn, Cincinnati, Houston, Boise State, San Diego State, U.C.F., U.S.F., E.C.U., Colorado State, Temple, S.M.U., etc.
01-11-2018 01:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,482
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 136
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #35
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 12:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-11-2018 09:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-11-2018 09:27 AM)Erictelevision Wrote:  PG: you're OBVIOUSLY correct that I overstated the geographic spread of the AAC. As to why the BIG XII is constantly discussed for implosion? It's the least geographically stable, and has an alpha-dog looking to get out.

I'd say the ACC is at least as geographically/culturally unstable. The ACC sprawls from Miami Beach in the south to Boston in the north and Louisville basically in the midwest.

And politically, it has its football-first deep south contingent and its mid-atlantic basketball-first contingent, and then its Yankee emphasize-both contingent as well.

Their commish did a great job with the GOR and promise of an AACN to settle things down, but those fissures still exist and if things head south, particularly if ACCN revenues don't materialize as hoped for, they could re-open.

Quo the ACC exists for three reasons:

1. It was initially cheap to acquire.

2. It was a great place to park the OBE teams that ESPN wanted to keep out of an independent Big 10 Network and away from Jim Delany and since the OBE was at least on par with, if not stronger than, the ACC at that time it was a move to protect ESPN's investment in the ACC.

3. The ACC existed to keep the SEC from becoming too strong in the Southeast, at least in terms of leverage over key states like Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. Tech was conveniently already in the ACC. And in '91 ESPN successfully kept Clemson and even more so Florida State out of the SEC's hands. Serendipity was they also made sure that South Carolina stayed out of the ACC's hands. The last thing they wanted was for a conference to control a whole state. So the market model was used as an excuse to break up states.

If you don't believe me just look at the ESPN's property maps and remembered they targeted North Carolina, Virginia and Texas to break up state monopolies by conferences. They knew from day 1 that if they could split these big states it gave them an in to each of them without having to go through their primary conference. They were wiling to pay more short term on subscription fees but their plans all along were to shift to a % of the market pay model. Streaming refined that beyond their initial thinking so that in the future more of the pay will be based on actual viewership. Both play into the original plan of divide and conquer.

So Quo the ACC is not in peril as it should be because ESPN has a use for it. Whereas the Big 12 only has 3 maybe 4 products the networks are interested in: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and possibly Texas Tech since it is a P5 public in the state of Texas.

Breaking up the Big 12 is not a fan fantasy, it is a network fantasy. Texas and Oklahoma can be used to improve the Big 10 or SEC without giving them huge leverage.

Oklahoma in the SEC puts the SEC in Dallas without giving them control of the whole state by giving them Texas. Texas is large enough they may get their own way, but I would bet that ESPN would love to pair them with N.D. in the ACC, or even use them to gain more leverage with the Big 10. Kansas would be a good travel partner with either OU or UT. But neither FOX nor ESPN own a % of the PAC and there isn't much there for them. They both lease 50% of the PAC product and that gives them all they want for that time slot.

I seriously doubt that Texa-homa to the PAC is viable because those 4 all earn more than any PAC school for their TV rights and could earn even more in either of the Big 10 or SEC. In the case of Texas they earn close to 22 million more than the PAC schools for TV rights and OU earns about 11 million more. So it's not happening.

But if the networks could poach UT / OU / KU and another out of the Big 12 then when the contract expires in 2025 they are off the hook for 35 million each for the other 6. Does that mean the other 6 all lose P status? Probably not.

The PAC could be assisted with the Texas market by only Tech and T.C.U. if the networks are willing to underwrite that and even if the PAC TV revenue only goes up 3 million per school the networks would be saving about 5 million each on ever how many Big 12 schools head there so for the cost of about 21 million they could add two schools to the PAC and increase their CTZ inventory of PAC brands and do so without wasting OU or UT on a PAC schedule.

WVU could be another football / basketball bone to the ACC now that Louisville has cracked the academic argument there.

So I wouldn't rule out the absorption of the Big 12, but I would rule it out for about 5 more years.
This...04-cheers

The original proposal is wrong on so many levels. Look at the conference money the Big XII teams would lose. Some of them, like ISU, have just invested in major stadium renovations. This is a financial nightmare for them.
01-11-2018 02:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 25,640
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 541
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #36
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 09:36 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(01-11-2018 09:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Why is the Big 12 always the target here?

Big 12 is making money hand over fist, and on the football field they had an excellent year. All systems go ... 07-coffee3

For now.

In 4-5 years when new contracts are being negotiated and they won't be getting paid to NOT expand, we'll see.

Not to mention the lack of a conference network which the other P4 all have.

Remember, the last time the Big 12 negotiated media and bowl contracts was from late 2011 to mid-2012, shortly after TAMU and Missouri bolted, and just two years after Nebraska and Colorado bolted. The conference looked like it would be dismembered any day then.

And yet they signed deals worth as much as any other P5 conference.

It's hard to imagine that in 2025 the Big 12 can possibly be worse off than it was in 2011 - 2012, so I will believe that the Big 12 will sign deals then that will make it obviously no longer competitive with other P5 .... when i see it.

But not until then. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2018 02:54 PM by quo vadis.)
01-11-2018 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 13,996
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 355
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #37
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 09:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Why is the Big 12 always the target here?

I know, right? I haven't been around in a long time, and it's like the same conversations from two years ago are still going on.
01-11-2018 04:55 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 794
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 34
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Killing the BIG XII
The Big 12 will never be fully destroyed. Not all 10 schools will land in P4 conferences and the ones left behind would be better off collecting exit fees and rebuilding as a tweener conference with American schools and possibly BYU/MWC than joining a G5.

On another thought, as JR SEC points out, it's the networks that would most benefit from a Big 12 break up. Wouldn't it be in their best interest for everyone to low ball the Big 12 next time around, forcing Texas and Oklahoma to consider moving and knowing that you could leverage your other conference media holdings to absorb the best pieces?
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2018 04:58 PM by Fighting Muskie.)
01-11-2018 04:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,310
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 886
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 04:58 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Big 12 will never be fully destroyed. Not all 10 schools will land in P4 conferences and the ones left behind would be better off collecting exit fees and rebuilding as a tweener conference with American schools and possibly BYU/MWC than joining a G5.

On another thought, as JR SEC points out, it's the networks that would most benefit from a Big 12 break up. Wouldn't it be in their best interest for everyone to low ball the Big 12 next time around, forcing Texas and Oklahoma to consider moving and knowing that you could leverage your other conference media holdings to absorb the best pieces?

The low ball strategy only works if nobody else is very interested....otherwise FOX..or CBS...NBC...or Amazon....swoops in and steals it. The B12 is a prize possession so long as UT and Oklahoma remain.
(This post was last modified: 01-11-2018 05:44 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-11-2018 05:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ColKurtz Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 125
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 16
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Killing the BIG XII
(01-11-2018 05:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-11-2018 04:58 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Big 12 will never be fully destroyed. Not all 10 schools will land in P4 conferences and the ones left behind would be better off collecting exit fees and rebuilding as a tweener conference with American schools and possibly BYU/MWC than joining a G5.

On another thought, as JR SEC points out, it's the networks that would most benefit from a Big 12 break up. Wouldn't it be in their best interest for everyone to low ball the Big 12 next time around, forcing Texas and Oklahoma to consider moving and knowing that you could leverage your other conference media holdings to absorb the best pieces?

The low ball strategy only works if nobody else is very interested....otherwise FOX..or CBS...NBC...or Amazon....swoops in and steals it. The B12 is a prize possession so long as UT and Oklahoma remain.

If ESPN lowballs or is not interested, it reduces the incentive for its competitors to pay top dollar.

ESPN desperately needs to cut long term investments (liabilities). It's no guarantee at all that ESPN will pay for another contract at $100M per year for half of the B12's football games, and unlikely they would shell out more than the current contract. That's assuming Oklahoma has made up with UT and a new GOR is on the table. If not, an unstable B12 is going to scare away all players from putting up big, long-term money.
01-11-2018 06:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2018 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.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.