What are the most valuable teams in the Big 12? Or should I say, how would one value the Big 12 from top to bottom?

According to USA Today and a matter of pure revenue the list would go like this:

1. Texas - $161M
2. Oklahoma - $129.2M
3. Oklahoma State - $117.8M
4. Kansas - $97.6M

5. West Virginia - $77.6M
6. Texas Tech - $76.7M
7. Kansas State - $72.9M
8. Iowa State - $68.1M

Baylor and TCU apparently didn't report, but it's probably safe to assume they are somewhere in the middle.

I find it fascinating that OSU makes close to the amount OU makes. In fact, they are #11 overall in earnings nationally. Kansas is strong here as well.

The others are about the same...decent amount of revenue, but small markets probably keep the revenue down. ISU rounds out the bottom at 48th nationally which isn't that bad really given their utter lack of exposure and other weaknesses.

I find the revenue comparison interesting because it gives us a glimpse at the relative potential of a program. The more money a program makes, the more money there is to potentially be made by the league at large. It points directly to fan support.

My suggestion would be to go hard after the top 4 here....UT, OU, OSU, and KU. Then I would look hard at ISU and WVU and be done with this nonsense.

(09-08-2015 04:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  What are the most valuable teams in the Big 12? Or should I say, how would one value the Big 12 from top to bottom?

According to USA Today and a matter of pure revenue the list would go like this:

1. Texas - $161M
2. Oklahoma - $129.2M
3. Oklahoma State - $117.8M
4. Kansas - $97.6M

5. West Virginia - $77.6M
6. Texas Tech - $76.7M
7. Kansas State - $72.9M
8. Iowa State - $68.1M

Baylor and TCU apparently didn't report, but it's probably safe to assume they are somewhere in the middle.

I find it fascinating that OSU makes close to the amount OU makes. In fact, they are #11 overall in earnings nationally. Kansas is strong here as well.

The others are about the same...decent amount of revenue, but small markets probably keep the revenue down. ISU rounds out the bottom at 48th nationally which isn't that bad really given their utter lack of exposure and other weaknesses.

I find the revenue comparison interesting because it gives us a glimpse at the relative potential of a program. The more money a program makes, the more money there is to potentially be made by the league at large. It points directly to fan support.

My suggestion would be to go hard after the top 4 here....UT, OU, OSU, and KU. Then I would look hard at ISU and WVU and be done with this nonsense.

Privates frequently do not report through the same services as the state schools if they report at all.

All of the numbers for revenue, attendance, etc. are in the Important threads in one titled "Realignment Just by the Numbers" and the most recent are in "Realignment Just by the Numbers 2015". They are at the top of this screen.

(09-08-2015 04:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 04:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  What are the most valuable teams in the Big 12? Or should I say, how would one value the Big 12 from top to bottom?

According to USA Today and a matter of pure revenue the list would go like this:

1. Texas - $161M
2. Oklahoma - $129.2M
3. Oklahoma State - $117.8M
4. Kansas - $97.6M

5. West Virginia - $77.6M
6. Texas Tech - $76.7M
7. Kansas State - $72.9M
8. Iowa State - $68.1M

Baylor and TCU apparently didn't report, but it's probably safe to assume they are somewhere in the middle.

I find it fascinating that OSU makes close to the amount OU makes. In fact, they are #11 overall in earnings nationally. Kansas is strong here as well.

The others are about the same...decent amount of revenue, but small markets probably keep the revenue down. ISU rounds out the bottom at 48th nationally which isn't that bad really given their utter lack of exposure and other weaknesses.

I find the revenue comparison interesting because it gives us a glimpse at the relative potential of a program. The more money a program makes, the more money there is to potentially be made by the league at large. It points directly to fan support.

My suggestion would be to go hard after the top 4 here....UT, OU, OSU, and KU. Then I would look hard at ISU and WVU and be done with this nonsense.

Privates frequently do not report through the same services as the state schools if they report at all.

All of the numbers for revenue, attendance, etc. are in the Important threads in one titled "Realignment Just by the Numbers" and the most recent are in "Realignment Just by the Numbers 2015". They are at the top of this screen.

Go to the USDoE equity in sports site it has data on privates. This website is the best for looking at who makes what and how they make it. You could write a lot of interesting stuff if you are someone who likes to get into numbers like this.

Here is AD revenue for some privates in 2013-2014

Baylor $86M
TCU $77M
Vanderbilt $64M
Notre Dame $115M
Wake Forest $56M
Boston College $65M
Syracuse $87M
Northwestern $68M
Stanford $110M
USC $106M
BYU $60M

There could be a new player in the competition to get valuable Big 12 programs. AT&T is said to be in negotiations to acquire a stake in the PAC 12 Network.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...v-and-att/

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/with_replies

Should this deal go through AT&T would have incentives to go after Central Time Zone programs. Being that it's headquartered in Dallas there would already be a local connection should the Pac 12 get into DFW and other Texas locales.

(09-09-2015 11:14 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  There could be a new player in the competition to get valuable Big 12 programs. AT&T is said to be in negotiations to acquire a stake in the PAC 12 Network.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...v-and-att/

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/with_replies

Should this deal go through AT&T would have incentives to go after Central Time Zone programs. Being that it's headquartered in Dallas there would already be a local connection should the Pac 12 get into DFW and other Texas locales.

I do think this is a viable possibility. Especially if their demand for a percentage fo the PAC12N is just a ploy to leverage such a move. It will be worth watching for sure.

(09-09-2015 11:14 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  There could be a new player in the competition to get valuable Big 12 programs. AT&T is said to be in negotiations to acquire a stake in the PAC 12 Network.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...v-and-att/

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/with_replies

Should this deal go through AT&T would have incentives to go after Central Time Zone programs. Being that it's headquartered in Dallas there would already be a local connection should the Pac 12 get into DFW and other Texas locales.

Interesting development for sure....Another shot at the Pac 16 with Texas, Oklahoma, Okie St, and another team (likely TTech)?

Works well will time zones if it becomes Rocky/Central division vs Pacific. Helps work through that issue.

PAC Pacific
Oregon
Oregon St
Washington
USC
UCLA
Cal
Washington St
Stanford

PAC RockyCentral
Texas
TTech
Oklahoma
Okie St
Colorado
Utah
Arizona
Arizona St

Wow...this actually seems like a possibility. So long as the Longhorn Network doesn't get in the way.

(09-10-2015 09:20 AM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(09-09-2015 11:14 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  There could be a new player in the competition to get valuable Big 12 programs. AT&T is said to be in negotiations to acquire a stake in the PAC 12 Network.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...v-and-att/

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/with_replies

Should this deal go through AT&T would have incentives to go after Central Time Zone programs. Being that it's headquartered in Dallas there would already be a local connection should the Pac 12 get into DFW and other Texas locales.

Interesting development for sure....Another shot at the Pac 16 with Texas, Oklahoma, Okie St, and another team (likely TTech)?

Works well will time zones if it becomes Rocky/Central division vs Pacific. Helps work through that issue.

PAC Pacific
Oregon
Oregon St
Washington
USC
UCLA
Cal
Washington St
Stanford

PAC RockyCentral
Texas
TTech
Oklahoma
Okie St
Colorado
Utah
Arizona
Arizona St

Wow...this actually seems like a possibility. So long as the Longhorn Network doesn't get in the way.

I think that is the question. Somehow, ESPN would either have to let UT out of the contract and lose most of their content in a league like the PAC or they would have to sell the LHN to the PAC/AT&T, but they would still lose UT content in either scenario.

I think from that perspective then that it's unlikely the PAC lands Texas. I can see them going after Texas Tech and TCU though...maybe even Houston. Kansas State and Iowa State would both serve that league as well.

(09-09-2015 08:47 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 04:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 04:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  What are the most valuable teams in the Big 12? Or should I say, how would one value the Big 12 from top to bottom?

According to USA Today and a matter of pure revenue the list would go like this:

1. Texas - $161M
2. Oklahoma - $129.2M
3. Oklahoma State - $117.8M
4. Kansas - $97.6M

5. West Virginia - $77.6M
6. Texas Tech - $76.7M
7. Kansas State - $72.9M
8. Iowa State - $68.1M

Baylor and TCU apparently didn't report, but it's probably safe to assume they are somewhere in the middle.

I find it fascinating that OSU makes close to the amount OU makes. In fact, they are #11 overall in earnings nationally. Kansas is strong here as well.

The others are about the same...decent amount of revenue, but small markets probably keep the revenue down. ISU rounds out the bottom at 48th nationally which isn't that bad really given their utter lack of exposure and other weaknesses.

I find the revenue comparison interesting because it gives us a glimpse at the relative potential of a program. The more money a program makes, the more money there is to potentially be made by the league at large. It points directly to fan support.

My suggestion would be to go hard after the top 4 here....UT, OU, OSU, and KU. Then I would look hard at ISU and WVU and be done with this nonsense.

Privates frequently do not report through the same services as the state schools if they report at all.

All of the numbers for revenue, attendance, etc. are in the Important threads in one titled "Realignment Just by the Numbers" and the most recent are in "Realignment Just by the Numbers 2015". They are at the top of this screen.

Go to the USDoE equity in sports site it has data on privates. This website is the best for looking at who makes what and how they make it. You could write a lot of interesting stuff if you are someone who likes to get into numbers like this.

Here is AD revenue for some privates in 2013-2014

Baylor $86M
TCU $77M
Vanderbilt $64M
Notre Dame $115M
Wake Forest $56M
Boston College $65M
Syracuse $87M
Northwestern $68M
Stanford $110M
USC $106M
BYU $60M

Good stuff, thank you. I'm surprise Stanford makes as much as they do...Syracuse too at that.

(09-09-2015 11:14 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  There could be a new player in the competition to get valuable Big 12 programs. AT&T is said to be in negotiations to acquire a stake in the PAC 12 Network.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...v-and-att/

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/with_replies

Should this deal go through AT&T would have incentives to go after Central Time Zone programs. Being that it's headquartered in Dallas there would already be a local connection should the Pac 12 get into DFW and other Texas locales.

The AT&T Chairman/CEO is Randall Stephenson, a native of Oklahoma City and got his MBA at OU.

(09-10-2015 04:48 PM)BaylorFerg Wrote:  

(09-09-2015 11:14 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  There could be a new player in the competition to get valuable Big 12 programs. AT&T is said to be in negotiations to acquire a stake in the PAC 12 Network.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...v-and-att/

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/with_replies

Should this deal go through AT&T would have incentives to go after Central Time Zone programs. Being that it's headquartered in Dallas there would already be a local connection should the Pac 12 get into DFW and other Texas locales.

The AT&T Chairman/CEO is Randall Stephenson, a native of Oklahoma City and got his MBA at OU.

In my opinion if the PAC lands the Texahoma crowd they may as well move to 20 and take 8 of the Big 12 schools. I say that because without Texas and Oklahoma on the menu the Big 10 and SEC will get really serious about taking schools from the ACC. Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, and Texas Tech along with either T.C.U. or Baylor.

Then if the SEC and Big 10 took 6 each from the ACC we would have some nicely balanced conferences. I've always liked the 3 x 20 for competitiveness.

This will take a while.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...-collapse/

(09-13-2015 10:36 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  This will take a while.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...-collapse/

Yep, I saw that on another site. I think it is just the start of negotiations. I also believe it is the first cannon shot over the bow of all conferences that the future payouts are not going to exponentially go up. I think this means that the PAC will retain majority ownership in their network, but will get much less of a boost than they expected.

I also think it is likely going to embolden ESPN with regards to the ACCN and that it will likely spell a smaller increase for the Big 10 than hoped for.

The economic climate simply isn't what it needs to be for extravagance to continue for college sports contracts.

If expansion occurs now it will be at the behest of the networks and for much smaller increases than the schools want. I also think it means that we could see no more than two schools added to Big 10 and SEC, and possibly just 1 each. Texas and Oklahoma will get in somewhere. Maybe Kansas gets in as well. And if that is the case the Big 12 GOR will have to expire before movement.

(09-13-2015 11:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The economic climate simply isn't what it needs to be for extravagance to continue for college sports contracts.

If expansion occurs now it will be at the behest of the networks and for much smaller increases than the schools want. I also think it means that we could see no more than two schools added to Big 10 and SEC, and possibly just 1 each. Texas and Oklahoma will get in somewhere. Maybe Kansas gets in as well. And if that is the case the Big 12 GOR will have to expire before movement.

It would actually benefit the networks to wait about 10 years. The economic climate could be much better or it could be much worse. Either way, the conditions to sign new contracts will be much more understood than today.

That's especially true when you consider the impact of cord cutting. It's one thing to predict how the market will shake out and another to watch it happen before you make any decisions. The safer bet is the latter.

Perhaps we'll see the Big 12 expand and limp on for a little while longer.

(09-13-2015 11:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-13-2015 10:36 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  This will take a while.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...-collapse/

Yep, I saw that on another site. I think it is just the start of negotiations. I also believe it is the first cannon shot over the bow of all conferences that the future payouts are not going to exponentially go up. I think this means that the PAC will retain majority ownership in their network, but will get much less of a boost than they expected.

I also think it is likely going to embolden ESPN with regards to the ACCN and that it will likely spell a smaller increase for the Big 10 than hoped for.

The economic climate simply isn't what it needs to be for extravagance to continue for college sports contracts.

If expansion occurs now it will be at the behest of the networks and for much smaller increases than the schools want. I also think it means that we could see no more than two schools added to Big 10 and SEC, and possibly just 1 each. Texas and Oklahoma will get in somewhere. Maybe Kansas gets in as well. And if that is the case the Big 12 GOR will have to expire before movement.

I've never bought into the mega conferences with more than 16 teams. I think 16 will be the end of realignment. I believe the last round was for money and viewership, while the next round will be for content/rivalries. 16 teams just works out well if you have 9 conference games and can get the rivalries settled in divisions.

I also think the current deals will be the pinnacle for TV deals. Once the B1G gets their deal done, its on the downhill for cable.

One bad thing for the networks about waiting is with online delivery becoming more popular they will have more rivals for that content in the future. The OTA networks would be better served to lock things up now for as long as they can IMO. Google and others are waiting in the wings and will start competing for that content at some point. FOX jump started itself as a legitimate network by obtaining big-time sports content (NFL NFC package) and the online deliverers will try to follow the same model eventually. The less places the online content delivery providers can go to for content the better for the networks if they want to try to lock out online providers.

(09-14-2015 09:29 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  One bad thing for the networks about waiting is with online delivery becoming more popular they will have more rivals for that content in the future. The OTA networks would be better served to lock things up now for as long as they can IMO. Google and others are waiting in the wings and will start competing for that content at some point. FOX jump started itself as a legitimate network by obtaining big-time sports content (NFL NFC package) and the online deliverers will try to follow the same model eventually. The less places the online content delivery providers can go to for content the better for the networks if they want to try to lock out online providers.

And the time for the networks to strike is now while the economic crisis is looming because the college presidents would love to lock into a long term contract for money they can depend upon. So yeah, I agree with you.

Steve Patterson has resigned. So UT now has to do another search for an AD.

So many unknown unknowns from 40 Acres.

(09-15-2015 11:32 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Steve Patterson has resigned. So UT now has to do another search for an AD.

So many unknown unknowns from 40 Acres.

Actually there is one thing that can be derived from all these unknowns. There is internal conflict of some proportion over the future direction of Longhorn sports. They just haven't been as vocal about it publicly as the Oklahoma crowd has been. I'd say the PAC option for Texas is very remote now and that the SEC while still unlikely is in the mix of discussion. "Big 10 or ACC?" may be the more pertinent question. We'll wait and see.

(09-16-2015 08:51 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2015 11:32 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Steve Patterson has resigned. So UT now has to do another search for an AD.

So many unknown unknowns from 40 Acres.

Actually there is one thing that can be derived from all these unknowns. There is internal conflict of some proportion over the future direction of Longhorn sports. They just haven't been as vocal about it publicly as the Oklahoma crowd has been. I'd say the PAC option for Texas is very remote now and that the SEC while still unlikely is in the mix of discussion. "Big 10 or ACC?" may be the more pertinent question. We'll wait and see.

The larger part of Patterson's dismissal should have been the treatment of UT fans and BMDs. Realignment/B12's future should be a very faint thought in this process.

(09-17-2015 04:32 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-16-2015 08:51 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-15-2015 11:32 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Steve Patterson has resigned. So UT now has to do another search for an AD.

So many unknown unknowns from 40 Acres.

Actually there is one thing that can be derived from all these unknowns. There is internal conflict of some proportion over the future direction of Longhorn sports. They just haven't been as vocal about it publicly as the Oklahoma crowd has been. I'd say the PAC option for Texas is very remote now and that the SEC while still unlikely is in the mix of discussion. "Big 10 or ACC?" may be the more pertinent question. We'll wait and see.

The larger part of Patterson's dismissal should have been the treatment of UT fans and BMDs. Realignment/B12's future should be a very faint thought in this process.

The reasons you mention are justifiable, but the pulling of the trigger likely has another motive.