First a few "facts"

1) The current contract allows for up to four members to be added pro rata.
2) ISU has said that they will not support expansion unless there is an extension of the GOR.
3) To get an GOR extension, then the media rights agreement must be extended.
4) At least ESPN is supposedly against paying for the expansion.

Thus, getting members added pro rata and and an extension of the GOR may be mutually exclusive.

So could this scenario be being played out. The Big 12 wants expansion and an extension of the media contract so that the GOR may be extended. The minute the Big 12 asks for a new media contract extension; ESPN say that the old contract must be dismissed and that the new contract will not have the pro rata for the new members.

The Big 12 balks at losing the pro rata for new members and ESPN will then not negotiate for a media contract extension without a lower pay scale for new members. This will leave only FOX being able to bid for the new extension after the current one ends in 8 years. Realize that it would not be in the best interest of either a CBS or NBC to bid on a contract that does not start for another 8 years.

Thus, the Big 12 may want out of the current deal trying to get better terms from FOX, CBS and NBC. ESPN may be then threatening to sue if the Big 12 tries to end the current contract.

Does this scenario make sense and why it might take a long time to hammer out an agreement between the Big 12 and there media partners? ESPN will not increase the length of the media contract without the loss of the pro rata clause and lower initial payments for new members while the Big 12 cannot look weak by losing the pro rata clause or not extending the GOR. Leaves both sides with a need to posture for the best outcome for themselves.

That's plausible.

However, strictly speaking there doesn't need to be an extension of the media contract in order to have a GOR. The Rights are Granted to the conference, not to ESPN.

But your theory is plausible if Texas wants to be 100% positive they'll be well paid in exchange for giving up ownership of their home game broadcasts. Without a signed contract, there's a small chance that the market could change in a way that would screw over the Big 12 and leave Texas way behind the SEC/Big 10 and without any broadcast rights to sell. The fear of that chance is the type of thing that could lead to lengthy negotiations.

Not safe to say that the Big 12 wants to extend the GOR, some do for sure others universities maybe no.
Assuming there is no right of first refusal on the TV contract for ESPN, Fox could agree to a deal now that
extends the TV contract where they are primarily Tier 1 and 2.

(08-29-2016 08:59 PM)Justme Wrote:  First a few "facts"

1) The current contract allows for up to four members to be added pro rata.
2) ISU has said that they will not support expansion unless there is an extension of the GOR.
3) To get an GOR extension, then the media rights agreement must be extended.
4) At least ESPN is supposedly against paying for the expansion.

Thus, getting members added pro rata and and an extension of the GOR may be mutually exclusive.

So could this scenario be being played out. The Big 12 wants expansion and an extension of the media contract so that the GOR may be extended. The minute the Big 12 asks for a new media contract extension; ESPN say that the old contract must be dismissed and that the new contract will not have the pro rata for the new members.

The Big 12 balks at losing the pro rata for new members and ESPN will then not negotiate for a media contract extension without a lower pay scale for new members. This will leave only FOX being able to bid for the new extension after the current one ends in 8 years. Realize that it would not be in the best interest of either a CBS or NBC to bid on a contract that does not start for another 8 years.

Thus, the Big 12 may want out of the current deal trying to get better terms from FOX, CBS and NBC. ESPN may be then threatening to sue if the Big 12 tries to end the current contract.

Does this scenario make sense and why it might take a long time to hammer out an agreement between the Big 12 and there media partners? ESPN will not increase the length of the media contract without the loss of the pro rata clause and lower initial payments for new members while the Big 12 cannot look weak by losing the pro rata clause or not extending the GOR. Leaves both sides with a need to posture for the best outcome for themselves.

Big 12 is in perfect size. I don't know why they want to expand. If it is a championship game, now they can have it even with 10 teams.

I don't think BYU, Houston and Cincinnati are good enough for Big 12. Just keep as it is.

(08-29-2016 08:59 PM)Justme Wrote:  First a few "facts"

1) The current contract allows for up to four members to be added pro rata.
2) ISU has said that they will not support expansion unless there is an extension of the GOR.
3) To get an GOR extension, then the media rights agreement must be extended.
4) At least ESPN is supposedly against paying for the expansion.

Thus, getting members added pro rata and and an extension of the GOR may be mutually exclusive.

So could this scenario be being played out. The Big 12 wants expansion and an extension of the media contract so that the GOR may be extended. The minute the Big 12 asks for a new media contract extension; ESPN say that the old contract must be dismissed and that the new contract will not have the pro rata for the new members.

The Big 12 balks at losing the pro rata for new members and ESPN will then not negotiate for a media contract extension without a lower pay scale for new members. This will leave only FOX being able to bid for the new extension after the current one ends in 8 years. Realize that it would not be in the best interest of either a CBS or NBC to bid on a contract that does not start for another 8 years.

Thus, the Big 12 may want out of the current deal trying to get better terms from FOX, CBS and NBC. ESPN may be then threatening to sue if the Big 12 tries to end the current contract. Does this scenario make sense and why it might take a long time to hammer out an agreement between the Big 12 and there media partners? ESPN will not increase the length of the media contract without the loss of the pro rata clause and lower initial payments for new members while the Big 12 cannot look weak by losing the pro rata clause or not extending the GOR. Leaves both sides with a need to posture for the best outcome for themselves.

A GOR is between conference members. It doesn't require a contract extension. Its essentially just a contractual arrangement that effectively requires the conference to remain together. That said, typically, there isn't much point in signing a GOR without a contract.

However, a simple signed guarantee from FOX to indicating they will buy ALL the B12 content at the same average payout rate of the other 4 P5 conferences (at the end of the contract) if ESPN opts out would probably be sufficient to tie the group together. If the Big12 signs a GOR extension, I doubt that will be necessary.

Here's the reason I think that----ESPN will have a problem. ESPN already lost half the Big10 inventory. An extension of the B12 GOR means the B12 will survive as a P5 well into the future. No way ESPN wants to be completely boxed out of a major surviving P5 conference. So, for the Big12, signing a GOR extension pretty much makes the ESPN position an empty threat. The only way the ESPN threat works is if they can dismantle the conference. The GOR ends their ability to do that.

Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

Exactly. For the schools not named Texas and OU, expansion is the best chance for the Big12 survive the loss of UT/OU as anything close to a power conference. Also, if they were to add Houston---the same political pressure in Texas pushing UT and Tech to support Houston would also tend to make it more difficult for UT to leave in the future. You'd essentially have the legislative lobbies for 4 schools (2 located in the largest cities in the state with the strongest legislative presence). It wouldn't make it impossible for UT to leave, but it would certainly make it more difficult. Of course--Im part of the minority of folks that don't think Texas really wants to leave. Personally, in the end, I think Texas will see their cozy B12 relationship that provides them with their own network and the has made them the highest paid school in FBS, places them in the best position for the future.

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

Most of your post is spot-on - ISU's only priority should be to keep Texas in the Big 12. But I disagree with the bolded part. If Texas eventually leaves, adding 2 schools now does nothing to help ISU post-Texas.

If there's still a rump Big 12, they'll invite the best AAC/MWC schools. And those schools will come running. Remember, the Big East only had 3 schools left and they ended up choosing all of their new conference mates.

Even if Iowa State is the only B12 school not invited to a P4, the AAC and MWC will compete to invite ISU as team #13.

So either way, ISU will end up in the 5th best conference.

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

I think Iowa State's concern is that expansion now without an extension might drastically increase the chances the B12 dissolves at the end of the current contract.

In order words, since ESPN has already shown they will orchestrate reshuffling with the BigEast/ACC stuff, do you want to piss off ESPN and "force" them to give you a pro rate increase now, knowing in just 7 years they can blow up your conference through their control of Texas?

Like others explained, your "fact" 3 is bogus.

Granted, most people probably don't even understand that the TV contract and the GOR are two separate entities, which need not be extended simultaneously nor have concurrent terms.


Of course, it could be valid speculation. But I don't buy it.

A GOR doesn't care who the media partner is. It's purely about the desire of the members to stay together and make it painful for someone to leave. It would be just as enforceable if the TV contract ended and no new media partner was found, for some reason.

Btw it was ISU's AD that said no expansion without GOR extension. Its not the school's official position and he doesn't get a vote. The president later said expansion was likely and didn't caveat it. My guess is TX doesn't want to take a vote unless Houston has the yes votes, vs 3+ "Hell No" UH votes. Who blinks first?

Can't see there being a GOR extension regardless unless it's only 3-5 more years, simply bc it seems unlikely OU will agree (GOR is not a 8/10 vote, must be unanimous). ESPN would probably fight 4 new members but not 2. At the same time they're not going extend the contract or insist on a new GOR since they're overpaying 10s of millions for duration of contract. Keep their options open to see what happens to the landscape between now and 2023.

(08-30-2016 12:42 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

Most of your post is spot-on - ISU's only priority should be to keep Texas in the Big 12. But I disagree with the bolded part. If Texas eventually leaves, adding 2 schools now does nothing to help ISU post-Texas.

If there's still a rump Big 12, they'll invite the best AAC/MWC schools. And those schools will come running. Remember, the Big East only had 3 schools left and they ended up choosing all of their new conference mates.

Even if Iowa State is the only B12 school not invited to a P4, the AAC and MWC will compete to invite ISU as team #13.

So either way, ISU will end up in the 5th best conference.

That's true except that several years in the Big 12 would help BYU, Houston, Cinci or UConn dramatically. They'd have a much stronger case to the networks when the deal expires than they would if they waited. It's very likely that those schools would be fully perceived as P5 and the league would either have a better chance of holding OU and or UT, or of getting a deal without them.

(08-30-2016 01:05 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  Btw it was ISU's AD that said no expansion without GOR extension. Its not the school's official position and he doesn't get a vote. The president later said expansion was likely and didn't caveat it. My guess is TX doesn't want to take a vote unless Houston has the yes votes, vs 3+ "Hell No" UH votes. Who blinks first?

Can't see there being a GOR extension regardless unless it's only 3-5 more years, simply bc it seems unlikely OU will agree (GOR is not a 8/10 vote, must be unanimous). ESPN would probably fight 4 new members but not 2. At the same time they're not going extend the contract or insist on a new GOR since they're overpaying 10s of millions for duration of contract. Keep their options open to see what happens to the landscape between now and 2023.

I would only add to this--- if a GOR extension is required for expansion then Texas effectively can veto expansion with just one vote. GOR's must be unanimous.

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

I agree with your first paragraph, but strongly disagree with the second paragraph. I think you are selling Iowa State short.

First they are academically superior, being an AAU school. Second they have tremendous fan support. Third they have great facilities. A 60,000+ seat stadium which is the third largest in the Big12. A 14,000 seat basketball arena. They routinely fill both facilities. Fifth they have very competitive basketball and wrestling teams.

Their football is mediocre, but playing in the Big12 is somewhat tougher than playing in the AAC or MWC.

IMO they out class the Big12 Expansion candidates hands down, except maybe for BYU. Let me put it this way, if they were currently and independent, how high would they rate with the Big12 expansion candidates.

I think they would be at the top of the list.

I know they "had" to add a 10th school when they grabbed West Virginia but I wonder if the Big 12 regrets that now. I wonder if they would have been more content with this set up:

West: Air Force, Colorado State, BYU, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor
East: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Kansas, Iowa State

(08-30-2016 01:41 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

I agree with your first paragraph, but strongly disagree with the second paragraph. I think you are selling Iowa State short.

First they are academically superior, being an AAU school. Second they have tremendous fan support. Third they have great facilities. A 60,000+ seat stadium which is the third largest in the Big12. A 14,000 seat basketball arena. They routinely fill both facilities. Fifth they have very competitive basketball and wrestling teams.

Their football is mediocre, but playing in the Big12 is somewhat tougher than playing in the AAC or MWC.

IMO they out class the Big12 Expansion candidates hands down, except maybe for BYU. Let me put it this way, if they were currently and independent, how high would they rate with the Big12 expansion candidates.

I think they would be at the top of the list.

Football is poor in a tougher conference, but the flip side of that argument is that ISU has failed to take advantage of its superior resources. Many of the teams mentioned in expansion from the AAC, MWC and, to a lesser extent, the Big East arguably outperformed given more limited resources. As to facilities there's no reason to believe other programs couldn't match or exceed what they receive given equal revenue. Stadium size and attendance are fine, but they really don't move the needle in college realignment. Look no further than ECU. Finally, as to academics, you drastically overstate ISU's case. Several of the expansion candidates, including UConn and UC have been mentioned as strong AAU candidates in recent years. The divide academically between schools like UConn, ISU, UC and others isn't that far at all. But where they differ significantly is market. ISU brings no market; many other schools do.

(08-30-2016 02:00 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 01:41 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

I agree with your first paragraph, but strongly disagree with the second paragraph. I think you are selling Iowa State short.

First they are academically superior, being an AAU school. Second they have tremendous fan support. Third they have great facilities. A 60,000+ seat stadium which is the third largest in the Big12. A 14,000 seat basketball arena. They routinely fill both facilities. Fifth they have very competitive basketball and wrestling teams.

Their football is mediocre, but playing in the Big12 is somewhat tougher than playing in the AAC or MWC.

IMO they out class the Big12 Expansion candidates hands down, except maybe for BYU. Let me put it this way, if they were currently and independent, how high would they rate with the Big12 expansion candidates.

I think they would be at the top of the list.

Football is poor in a tougher conference, but the flip side of that argument is that ISU has failed to take advantage of its superior resources. Many of the teams mentioned in expansion from the AAC, MWC and, to a lesser extent, the Big East arguably outperformed given more limited resources. As to facilities there's no reason to believe other programs couldn't match or exceed what they receive given equal revenue. Stadium size and attendance are fine, but they really don't move the needle in college realignment. Look no further than ECU. Finally, as to academics, you drastically overstate ISU's case. Several of the expansion candidates, including UConn and UC have been mentioned as strong AAU candidates in recent years. The divide academically between schools like UConn, ISU, UC and others isn't that far at all. But where they differ significantly is market. ISU brings no market; many other schools do.

How did I DRASTICALLY over state Iowa State's case. I said they were AAU and the other are not. Talk is cheap. Either you are AAU or your not.

Being located in a market is not worth much if you can't deliver it. IF that were the case everybody would want Rice.

And finally that old argument ...build it and they will come. Maybe they will and maybe they will not. That is not worth much to the Big12.

(08-30-2016 02:00 PM)MickMack Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 01:41 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 12:27 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Iowa State is shooting themselves in the foot if they take that position. They are probably the school with the most to lose and the least chance to land in a P5 if the B12 dissolves. I know they want an extended GOR to prevent it, but the reality is what they need is at least 2 more schools so that the B12 lives if UT and OU bail on it when this GOR ends.

Iowa State seriously has nothing on most of the schools being considered in expansion and offers less than several of them. I think they will become convinced of this reality soon, and will vote to expand. If the B12 thrives post expansion, there's a fair chance UT or OU will choose to stay anyway, but they aren't signing an extension now.

I agree with your first paragraph, but strongly disagree with the second paragraph. I think you are selling Iowa State short.

First they are academically superior, being an AAU school. Second they have tremendous fan support. Third they have great facilities. A 60,000+ seat stadium which is the third largest in the Big12. A 14,000 seat basketball arena. They routinely fill both facilities. Fifth they have very competitive basketball and wrestling teams.

Their football is mediocre, but playing in the Big12 is somewhat tougher than playing in the AAC or MWC.

IMO they out class the Big12 Expansion candidates hands down, except maybe for BYU. Let me put it this way, if they were currently and independent, how high would they rate with the Big12 expansion candidates.

I think they would be at the top of the list.

Football is poor in a tougher conference, but the flip side of that argument is that ISU has failed to take advantage of its superior resources. Many of the teams mentioned in expansion from the AAC, MWC and, to a lesser extent, the Big East arguably outperformed given more limited resources. As to facilities there's no reason to believe other programs couldn't match or exceed what they receive given equal revenue. Stadium size and attendance are fine, but they really don't move the needle in college realignment. Look no further than ECU. Finally, as to academics, you drastically overstate ISU's case. Several of the expansion candidates, including UConn and UC have been mentioned as strong AAU candidates in recent years. The divide academically between schools like UConn, ISU, UC and others isn't that far at all. But where they differ significantly is market. ISU brings no market; many other schools do.

Exactly. Put ISU in a G5 with G5 resources and a G5 schedule and you'd have a drastically different school. That stadium would be smaller and half full. Hoops bounced up with Freddy but he's in Chicago and mediocrity will return. It's AAU and that's a plus, but it's also second fiddle in its own tiny state. It has zero market appeal to anyone, and no national brand in any sport to trade on.

I'm not hating on ISU, KState is in similar shape. OK State probably better with recent football success. Texas Tech is another that wouldn't move the needle for anyone, no real market, no real success at anything. Those schools don't know how lucky they are and how massive their advantages are over schools in the G5. There are several G5 schools who would outperform many legacy P5 if they had access to the money and schedules that those schools have.

(08-30-2016 02:26 PM)HuskyHawk Wrote:  Exactly. Put ISU in a G5 with G5 resources and a G5 schedule and you'd have a drastically different school. That stadium would be smaller and half full. Hoops bounced up with Freddy but he's in Chicago and mediocrity will return. It's AAU and that's a plus, but it's also second fiddle in its own tiny state. It has zero market appeal to anyone, and no national brand in any sport to trade on.

I'm not hating on ISU, KState is in similar shape. OK State probably better with recent football success. Texas Tech is another that wouldn't move the needle for anyone, no real market, no real success at anything. Those schools don't know how lucky they are and how massive their advantages are over schools in the G5. There are several G5 schools who would outperform many legacy P5 if they had access to the money and schedules that those schools have.

I'm not one to argue for the Cyclones, but they have had great success in wrestling. There is no denying that.

I think the real question is whether the fans would keep supporting Iowa State if they were dropped to a G5. I would imagine basketball attendance would still be maintained, and there is plenty of history for high attendance G5 basketball programs. But I would bet their football attendance drops off big time. Big 10 would gobble up the state.

ISU fans have supported Cyclone football through years and years of losing to teams like Nebraska, Missouri, K St, and OU. Then some more years losing to Texas schools.

Why stop because they start winning vs G5 teams in a G5 league??