With the woes of the PAC 12, would make more sense for the Cali schools to join them than the other way around.
How much of that bump is attributable to return of the conference title game after several years? No doubt it is an impressive amount but that % increase might be a one time deal if the CCG’s resurrection was a major factor in the $ spike.
(03-15-2018 07:12 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote: [ -> ]How much of that bump is attributable to return of the conference title game after several years? No doubt it is an impressive amount but that % increase might be a one time deal if the CCG’s resurrection was a major factor in the $ spike.
from story-
The conference reported nearly $371 million in revenue for a fiscal year that ended June 30, 2017 — an increase of $57 million, or more than 18%, in its income from the previous year.
so this was for last year....
Big 12 payout was $34m per school .... yeah, on death's door.
(03-15-2018 07:11 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2018 06:21 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...426331002/
And people are convinced this league is going to collapse?
They have no guaranteed income beyond 2025.
Which matters greatly, because (a) 2025 is like, tomorrow, and (b) there's every reason to think their media and bowl partners realize they were radically wrong about the appeal of the Big 12 when they last signed deals in 2012, when they were the paragon of conference stability.
Er, well, um ....
(03-15-2018 07:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]Big 12 payout was $34m per school .... yeah, on death's door.
The Ottoman Empire had a few lucrative years in the 19th century too.
(03-15-2018 07:36 AM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2018 07:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]Big 12 payout was $34m per school .... yeah, on death's door.
The Ottoman Empire had a few lucrative years in the 19th century too.
Beat me to it.
I was thinking Enron had a few good years as well. How did THAT work out in the end?
I'm sure at least some of that money was from getting paid NOT to expand. Let's see how things shake out in the next 2-3 years as negotiations begin and contracts expire.
Something to keep in mind. The XII still doesn't have their own network. The other Big 4 do. The PAC might be shaky right now, but having their own network is an asset and has value.
Dennis Dodd
Verified account @dennisdoddcbs
Replying to @ByBerkowitz
Adding Texas’ annual $15 million for LHN, that’s approximately $50 mill per year for UT.
(03-15-2018 07:55 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote: [ -> ]Dennis Dodd
Verified account @dennisdoddcbs
Replying to @ByBerkowitz
Adding Texas’ annual $15 million for LHN, that’s approximately $50 mill per year for UT.
How will they get by?
Remember
Right B4 all the Big 12 “investigation”
of possible AAC schools Being considered
as additional ‘meat 4 da’ Big 12?
Da Big 12 & the Zona schools had “conversations”
Today, the Zona’ AD’s
are looking @ that $8-10 million $$$ gap
& thinking, more $$$ in Texas or Calf?
Texas recruits or Calf?
Better PR in Texas or Calf?
Lubbuck is closer 2 both Zona schools than any Pac school
& over half the Big 12 schools are closer to them
than over half of the Pac 12 schools
The problem isn't that the Big 12 isn't doing well, it's that ESPN's hurting.
Well, maybe the Big 12 actively looks at acquiring Arizona and Arizona State (again, or for the first time, depending on the source). The B1G could look at expanding West and nabbing California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC and Washington (to get to 20).
Since the PAC would be crushed, that would leave out Colorado, Utah, Oregon State, Washington State. Colorado could easily fit in with the B1G (that would get them to 21). Not sure they would want to go back to the Big 12 with Texas. Utah could also go to the new Big 12. Not sure about either Oregon State or Washington State. Interestingly enough, those two additions would perfectly fit in the two missing states on the West Coast for the MWC.
Good money but I think the big 12 is getting an a high payout in part to keep Texas and OU in place which can work for them. Also, think the pac 12 is getting screwed because they want to keep 100% of their network. If you put Texas and Ou in a pac 16-20, their revenue would go way up.
(03-15-2018 09:48 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: [ -> ]Well, maybe the Big 12 actively looks at acquiring Arizona and Arizona State (again, or for the first time, depending on the source). The B1G could look at expanding West and nabbing California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC and Washington (to get to 20).
Since the PAC would be crushed, that would leave out Colorado, Utah, Oregon State, Washington State. Colorado could easily fit in with the B1G (that would get them to 21). Not sure they would want to go back to the Big 12 with Texas. Utah could also go to the new Big 12. Not sure about either Oregon State or Washington State. Interestingly enough, those two additions would perfectly fit in the two missing states on the West Coast for the MWC.
In that scenario, I could see Washington being the odd man out.
Pretty sure that Nebraska would lobby for Colorado to be the sixth team with SC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, and Oregon. I couldn't see the B1G going to 21, probably stick to 20, makes the divisions easier.
WEST
USC
UCLA
CAL
STANFORD
OREGON
PLAINS
COLORADO
NEBRASKA
IOWA
MINNESOTA
WISCONSIN
MIDWEST
NORTHWESTERN
ILLINOIS
PURDUE
INDIANA
tOSU
EAST
MICHIGAN
MICHIGAN ST
PSU
RUTGERS
MARYLAND
(03-15-2018 10:05 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2018 09:48 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote: [ -> ]Well, maybe the Big 12 actively looks at acquiring Arizona and Arizona State (again, or for the first time, depending on the source). The B1G could look at expanding West and nabbing California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC and Washington (to get to 20).
Since the PAC would be crushed, that would leave out Colorado, Utah, Oregon State, Washington State. Colorado could easily fit in with the B1G (that would get them to 21). Not sure they would want to go back to the Big 12 with Texas. Utah could also go to the new Big 12. Not sure about either Oregon State or Washington State. Interestingly enough, those two additions would perfectly fit in the two missing states on the West Coast for the MWC.
In that scenario, I could see Washington being the odd man out.
Pretty sure that Nebraska would lobby for Colorado to be the sixth team with SC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, and Oregon. I couldn't see the B1G going to 21, probably stick to 20, makes the divisions easier.
WEST
USC
UCLA
CAL
STANFORD
OREGON
PLAINS
COLORADO
NEBRASKA
IOWA
MINNESOTA
WISCONSIN
MIDWEST
NORTHWESTERN
ILLINOIS
PURDUE
INDIANA
tOSU
EAST
MICHIGAN
MICHIGAN ST
PSU
RUTGERS
MARYLAND
Better chance that Oregon would be left out.
It's a lot easier to find flights to Seattle than Eugene from LA and the Bay Area, not to mention Denver, Chicago, Indianapolis, and Detroit. And, more TV households in Washington than Oregon. And, better academics at UW over UofO.
(03-15-2018 09:54 AM)bluesox Wrote: [ -> ]Good money but I think the big 12 is getting an a high payout in part to keep Texas and OU in place which can work for them. Also, think the pac 12 is getting screwed because they want to keep 100% of their network. If you put Texas and Ou in a pac 16-20, their revenue would go way up.
How does Texas get more than $50M per year in the PAC? Even if you assume that the expanded PAC would grab 100% of the Big 12's media deal value, that's still less than $40M per school. The PAC currently earns less than the Big 12 and you would have to divide by 16.
So what's it going to be? I'm confused
1) The Big 12 is going to raid the PAC and steal AZ and AZ-State?
2) The Big 12 implodes the moment its GOR expires?
How about:
3) The Big 12 rolls along past 2025 as a power conference with the same membership.
(03-15-2018 07:48 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2018 07:36 AM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ] (03-15-2018 07:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]Big 12 payout was $34m per school .... yeah, on death's door.
The Ottoman Empire had a few lucrative years in the 19th century too.
Beat me to it.
I was thinking Enron had a few good years as well. How did THAT work out in the end?
I'm sure at least some of that money was from getting paid NOT to expand. Let's see how things shake out in the next 2-3 years as negotiations begin and contracts expire.
Something to keep in mind. The XII still doesn't have their own network. The other Big 4 do. The PAC might be shaky right now, but having their own network is an asset and has value.
The SEC and ACC don't have their own networks. ESPN owns their networks and makes payments to them.
The B1G has half of a network, the other half is owned by FOX (actually, 51%).
The PAC does own its own network, but gets paid peanuts by it.
Owning a network is great, but it's how much you get paid that is the bottom line.
Much better to own nothing but get paid $40m a year than to own something and get paid nothing for it.