In conclusion,

1)Brett McMurphy asked schools of their Big 12 Expansion private discussions.

2) President David Rudd of Memphis told McMurphy to kiss his ass, he signed a Non-Discloscure Agreement with the Big 12.

Therefore,

A) The schools not in the discussion begging for Big 12 inclusion told McMurphy all their juicy pleas he could ask for.

B) McMurphy utilized his professional Journalism skills to conclude Memphis was never even in the Top 9 because President Rudd treated him like an annoying pest, told McMurphy to kiss his ass and go away.

(07-20-2018 03:29 PM)I_LUV_MEMPHISTIGERS Wrote:  In conclusion,

1)Brett McMurphy asked schools of their Big 12 Expansion private discussions.

2) President David Rudd of Memphis told McMurphy to kiss his ass, he signed a Non-Discloscure Agreement with the Big 12.

Therefore,

A) The schools not in the discussion begging for Big 12 inclusion told McMurphy all their juicy pleas he could ask for.

B) McMurphy utilized his professional Journalism skills to conclude Memphis was never even in the Top 9 because President Rudd treated him like an annoying pest, told McMurphy to kiss his ass and go away.

C) Why hold grudges like school children. We all went to the dance with the pretty single girl, but she went home with the Networks. We all got dumped.

Hope we all land $10M+ per school in the next contract. Onward we march until the next major conference shakeup/deal. Hopefully sooner than later, but until then we got us alot of fun college sports to watch as "P6" .

Bowlsby called the 11 finalists before the press conference.

Source


Here is the press conference video.

About 30 minutes in, Chuck Carlton asked about the reactions of the 11 schools, considering that the Big 12 voted to expand in May and voted not to expand today.

Bowlsby said he talked to all of the schools that afternoon. He said they were respectful but disappointed. He also said, "I need to correct one thing you said. We did not vote to expand in May." He did not correct the statement about 11 finalists.

(07-20-2018 10:29 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  Won't be surprised if the puppet masters get something else going right when we start negotiating. Rumor mill will start, networks will low-ball based on the assumption that teams X,Y,Z leaving the conference is imminent. Once the ink is dry, the whole thing disappears.

Makes one wonder if there is an angle Aresco and co. can take along the same lines. Maybe on a smaller scale.

(07-20-2018 08:25 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Bowlsby called the 11 finalists before the press conference.

Source


Here is the press conference video.

About 30 minutes in, Chuck Carlton asked about the reactions of the 11 schools, considering that the Big 12 voted to expand in May and voted not to expand today.

Bowlsby said he talked to all of the schools that afternoon. He said they were respectful but disappointed. He also said, "I need to correct one thing you said. We did not vote to expand in May." He did not correct the statement about 11 finalists.

In private conversations Bowlsby later clarified his May and August statements. None of the Big 12 Presidents ever actually ate breakfast in May. They only "broke a fast" during the AM hours in May. Big difference. He wanted to be clear on that point.

He didn't understand why his May comments led to some confusion among schools looking to join the Big 12. Strong Big 12 Academics he's accustomed to.

The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Makes you wonder if there is a plan for a "long run."

(07-21-2018 09:14 AM)rosewater Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Makes you wonder if there is a plan for a "long run."

I don't think the Big12 has a plan beyond "survive and make $$$$".

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

(07-21-2018 06:09 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

Houston agrees to a 10 year GOR? Come on, Houston’s dream is the SEC. Last couple of years the new dream for some Coog fans has been the PAC 12. The Big 12 is the most realistic chance for Houston to get back to the Big boy table.
If Big 12 calls tomorrow, Houston takes that invite yesterday.

(07-21-2018 06:09 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

SMH.

1) No network is offering a GOR for < 10 years.

2) At least half of AAC member schools aren't signing a 10+ year GOR (especially considering most P5 conferences are due for renegotiation in the mid-2020's).

(07-21-2018 06:17 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 06:09 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

Houston agrees to a 10 year GOR? Come on, Houston’s dream is the SEC. Last couple of years the new dream for some Coog fans has been the PAC 12. The Big 12 is the most realistic chance for Houston to get back to the Big boy table.
If Big 12 calls tomorrow, Houston takes that invite yesterday.

I know Houston would jump at an invite from one of the high revenue conferences but realignment is over, billy... And not signing a GOR now only handcuffs everyone else from this league from getting a significant bump $$$.

(07-21-2018 06:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 06:09 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

SMH.

1) No network is offering a GOR for < 10 years.

2) At least half of AAC member schools aren't signing a 10+ year GOR (especially considering most P5 conferences are due for renegotiation in the mid-2020's).

If realignment was to occur again no way half get an invite.

An AAC GOR forces high revenue leagues to pass invitations to desire future programs something I don't see happening anymore.

Expansion is over

GOR adds little value. Everything is locked in for 7 more years. Disney didn't get powerful by pissing away money.

(07-21-2018 06:17 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 06:09 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

Houston agrees to a 10 year GOR? Come on, Houston’s dream is the SEC. Last couple of years the new dream for some Coog fans has been the PAC 12. The Big 12 is the most realistic chance for Houston to get back to the Big boy table.
If Big 12 calls tomorrow, Houston takes that invite yesterday.

You can insert any of our names into that statement.

I think the biggest thing we might be gauging incorrectly is the per school amount expected on the next TV deal. I know we have a high opinion of our conference, but the casual fan and the networks don't see it the same way. I think people see us as having some of the better teams in the G5, but G5 all the same.

With that in mind, I think the deals made by the likes of CUSA will be an anchor in our negotiations. Sort of like using your current salary when offering a new job.

In other words, rather than saying "this is how much the B12 makes, but you guys are worth less so...", they will actually be saying "This is what CUSA just signed. You're better than that, so we'll give you X% more". (hint, X does not equal 700 in that scenario).

Anyway... Obviously, a GOR proposition would have to mean a huge jump in loot. If it's the difference between $5m and $15m, I'd be inclined to jump on board. Most would reply "never going to happen" to this, and that's probably true. Just saying that there is a point where the proposition makes sense. Either way, I'm not optimistic that we're just going to pull $12m on the next deal without one. And the recent B12 shenanigans will probably be used against us in negotiations.

Again, all hypothetical.

(07-21-2018 06:41 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 06:17 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 06:09 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

Houston agrees to a 10 year GOR? Come on, Houston’s dream is the SEC. Last couple of years the new dream for some Coog fans has been the PAC 12. The Big 12 is the most realistic chance for Houston to get back to the Big boy table.
If Big 12 calls tomorrow, Houston takes that invite yesterday.

I know Houston would jump at an invite from one of the high revenue conferences but realignment is over, billy... And not signing a GOR now only handcuffs everyone else from this league from getting a significant bump $$$.

Makes no sense. If realignment is over—why would any network pay some big premium for a GOR? I don’t see a GOR making much difference right now—especially when we are only talking about a 5 or 6 year GOR—which all anyone would likley sign.

(07-22-2018 08:08 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 06:17 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 06:09 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 12:39 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(07-21-2018 08:04 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The big 12 had no intentions on expanding. It was a shakedown of Disney which is going to be interesting on renegotiation. Probably wasn't smart in the long run.

Big 12 (and Boren) really wanted a network. This is why they were considering expansion. Needed more inventory for a network.

TV said "no dice" on the network. So the Big 12 did not need more inventory, and thus did not expand.

In retaliation, err exchange for no network, they strong-armed, err, convinced ESPN into paying to delete the pro rata clause. An extra $1M per school per year.

Anyone who thinks the Big 12 will expand now, given the lack of a pro rata clause, is foolish.

All the more reason for the American schools to agree to a medium term GOR (if it means more $$$).

After all, do we want to piuck, or get plucked by, the Big 12 leftovers should that league blow up.

I've been saying it (GOR) for a while now.

If this league does not put a GOR in place immediately and signs it it wil only continue to show poor strength within the conference.

A 10 year GOR should be the minimum but a longer one could be the difference between a weak or healthier tv contract, IMHO.

Houston agrees to a 10 year GOR? Come on, Houston’s dream is the SEC. Last couple of years the new dream for some Coog fans has been the PAC 12. The Big 12 is the most realistic chance for Houston to get back to the Big boy table.
If Big 12 calls tomorrow, Houston takes that invite yesterday.

You can insert any of our names into that statement.

I think the biggest thing we might be gauging incorrectly is the per school amount expected on the next TV deal. I know we have a high opinion of our conference, but the casual fan and the networks don't see it the same way. I think people see us as having some of the better teams in the G5, but G5 all the same.

With that in mind, I think the deals made by the likes of CUSA will be an anchor in our negotiations. Sort of like using your current salary when offering a new job.

In other words, rather than saying "this is how much the B12 makes, but you guys are worth less so...", they will actually be saying "This is what CUSA just signed. You're better than that, so we'll give you X% more". (hint, X does not equal 700 in that scenario).

Anyway... Obviously, a GOR proposition would have to mean a huge jump in loot. If it's the difference between $5m and $15m, I'd be inclined to jump on board. Most would reply "never going to happen" to this, and that's probably true. Just saying that there is a point where the proposition makes sense. Either way, I'm not optimistic that we're just going to pull $12m on the next deal without one. And the recent B12 shenanigans will probably be used against us in negotiations.

Again, all hypothetical.

The best comparison for our value is going to be other sports properties with similar ratings. I’ve made the case that MLS Soccer and the US Rights to Premier League Soccer are excellent similar properties to compare our value as MLS gets lower ratings and Premier gets generally similar ratings. Those properties sell for 75million a year and 160 million a year respectively. The low end there wouldn’t be just over 6 million a team. The high end is just over 13 million a team. I’ve been pretty conservative in my estimate that remains at 6-8 million a team. That estimate also lines up with data Cougar Red generated which looked at our total TV viewership vs P5 total viewership as a percentage and applied that same percentage to P5 earnings to estimate what we should be paid.

Those methods may not pan out—but at least they have some logical basis derived from the marketplace.