(07-30-2019 01:46 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Wherever they choose to be.

That says it all.

(07-29-2019 08:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-29-2019 08:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The way I see it, Oklahoma is going to want to move. Their first choice would be the SEC with Oklahoma St.

The SEC is going to ponder that move but ultimately I think they will end up passing because it means that without an NCAA rule change they would have no room to ever add again, meaning no Texas.

The SEC counters with an offer to take Oklahoma and Texas.

The Big Ten offers to take Oklahoma and Kansas. They offer Okahoma an immediate full share and offer both schools the flexibility to keep Bedlam and the Sunflower Showdown.

I think Oklahoma takes the Big Ten offer and Texas and TTU end up in the SEC.

Let's look at what motivations Texas might have to intentionally take that slot instead of Oklahoma. If this happens it may well start with a serious flirtation by the SEC with Oklahoma. But it won't be the SEC that moves on Texas, but Texas that would try to scoop Oklahoma's slot by insisting on Tech to come with them. Here's why:

Right now the Horns share Texas with 3 other Texas P5 schools in the Big 12 and Okahoma and Oklahoma State. The issue here is that all of those schools are splitting recruits in that state along with Texas A&M.

If Texas moves to the SEC with Tech and joins A&M they in effect take away A&M's recruiting advantage. So that's one perk to Texas. In the process they also demote Baylor and T.C.U. and use the excuse that Oklahoma was bolting and they had to protect Tech as their cover story. That tries to put the honus on the Sooners while demoting two more schools in the state of Texas. That's another perk for Texas. Now there would be only 3 P schools in the state of Texas and all three are in the SEC essentially locking other P conferences out of the in state Texas recruiting scheme. They know many of their kids want to stay at home to play. Next, by taking OU's place in the SEC they force Oklahoma to move to the Big 10 and they know OSU won't be able to go. So they demote another neighboring school that recruits DFW well and now they have Oklahoma back in another conference so that it limits their exposure in the state of Texas to smaller schools they wouldn't want to play a home and home with, and their annual game in Dallas. That's two more perks for the Horns.

So Muskie I think it will start with an OU flirtation that is serious with the SEC, and that UT knows that if the SEC could get three regionally televised games a week out of the State of Texas that it boosts both the T1 and T2 of the SEC significantly more than OU and OSU and it gives the SEC more leverage for ad rates inside Texas therefore there is little doubt that with ESPN's blessing the SEC's blessing, and make everyone more money while making Texas really compete with just 2 other Texas schools. Plus they scoop the Sooners and score a coup over every one of their present rivals.

Picking up Arkansas (beloved old rival), L.S.U. (not so beloved border rival), and Ole Miss would give their fans their key old rivals back and some good travel crowds and easy regional travel.

So in summation A&M is brought back to par with Texas, Tech is elevated but not to Texas and A&M status due mostly to distance, Baylor and T.C.U. are demoted along with Oklahoma State, and Oklahoma is sent north and loses some exposure in the State of Texas as far as number of competitions. And in the end they earn about 4-6 million more by joining than they do with the Big 12 revenue and the LHN. ESPN is off the hook. LHN studio becomes the SEC West Studio and Charlotte becomes the SEC East Studio and the SECN which is already in 17 Mexican cities is broadcast from Texas in Spanish. And the fans and alums get better games and old rivalries back and Texas still gets some exposure in Florida and Georgia and they can pretend Vandy is their only academic rival, even though Florida most certainly would be another.

That will be the reasoning and why Oklahoma is more likely to wind up in the Big 10. That and without Alabama and Auburn in the west Texas by moving Oklahoma to the Big 10 would only have to beat A&M, L.S.U., and Arkansas most years to make the CCG while Alabama would have Auburn, Florida and Georgia to get through.

Toss in Mike Slive's remarks at a Dallas gathering where he stated the SEC would be proud to have any of Texas's top 3 state schools, or all of them, and the Texas legislature wanting Texas, A&M and Tech to all play annually and it just seems like the simplest solution.

This is a very good explanation for why Texas will try to torpedo Oklahoma going to the SEC and leveraging a spot for themselves and TTU. Oklahoma gets somewhat edged out of Texas recruiting and TCU, Baylor, and Oklahoma St all effectively getting downgraded.

With the 4 OOC games they’d have in the SEC they could still schedule schools like Baylor and TCU but on 2 for 1 deals that favor Texas while still giving them road games in Texas. In a 12 game season I see them having at least 8 and potentially 9 games in state.

If the A&M game wasn’t sacred in 2011 there is no reason to believe that the RRR will be in 2026. Arkansas could very easily slip in to fill the void during the state fair as they have a history of doing neutral site games in Dallas.

Or the simplest path

OU and UT ditch the Tagalongs and just come by themselves

If reducing competition and improving schedules is the goal then that does it

They only compete against one other in state program, all the others are demoted and their schedule has A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and OU every year.

I mean as long as we’re throwing out off season hypotheticals with no real basis in reality, why not?

(07-30-2019 07:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Or the simplest path

OU and UT ditch the Tagalongs and just come by themselves

If reducing competition and improving schedules is the goal then that does it

They only compete against one other in state program, all the others are demoted and their schedule has A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and OU every year.

I mean as long as we’re throwing out off season hypotheticals with no real basis in reality, why not?

I've accepted the tag along role and embrace it. Texas Tech will be fine as the 3rd largest P5 school in Texas.

I doubt your alma mater makes the cut. Sucks but that's life.

Do you buy TCU season tickets?

(07-30-2019 08:07 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 07:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Or the simplest path

OU and UT ditch the Tagalongs and just come by themselves

If reducing competition and improving schedules is the goal then that does it

They only compete against one other in state program, all the others are demoted and their schedule has A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and OU every year.

I mean as long as we’re throwing out off season hypotheticals with no real basis in reality, why not?

I've accepted the tag along role and embrace it.

Well at least you are finally coming to terms with your place in all of this.

I mean you have literally no choice but to believe in insane realignment theories like “UT backstabs OU and throws away the RRR game in order to make sure Tech gets to tag along with them to the SEC”

But like I always say: go stand by the mail box and alert us the very second that Tech gets a P4 invite

(07-30-2019 08:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 08:07 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 07:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Or the simplest path

OU and UT ditch the Tagalongs and just come by themselves

If reducing competition and improving schedules is the goal then that does it

They only compete against one other in state program, all the others are demoted and their schedule has A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and OU every year.

I mean as long as we’re throwing out off season hypotheticals with no real basis in reality, why not?

I've accepted the tag along role and embrace it.

Well at least you are finally coming to terms with your place in all of this.

I mean you have literally no choice but to believe in insane realignment theories like “UT backstabs OU and throws away the RRR game in order to make sure Tech gets to tag along with them to the SEC”

But like I always say: go stand by the mail box and alert us the very second that Tech gets a P4 invite

Stick to the truth 10th. I didn't say they would throw away the RRR. Just that they would scoop OU's slot in the SEC for their own purposes camouflaged as helping Tech.

It is what Texas does best after all.

(07-30-2019 08:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 08:07 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(07-30-2019 07:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Or the simplest path

OU and UT ditch the Tagalongs and just come by themselves

If reducing competition and improving schedules is the goal then that does it

They only compete against one other in state program, all the others are demoted and their schedule has A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and OU every year.

I mean as long as we’re throwing out off season hypotheticals with no real basis in reality, why not?

I've accepted the tag along role and embrace it.

Well at least you are finally coming to terms with your place in all of this.

I mean you have literally no choice but to believe in insane realignment theories like “UT backstabs OU and throws away the RRR game in order to make sure Tech gets to tag along with them to the SEC”

But like I always say: go stand by the mail box and alert us the very second that Tech gets a P4 invite

Because ultimately no P4 conference has any objection to OU and UT ditching you and your okie counterpart to join up with them.

Have you come to terms with the fact your alma mater doesn't have a wagon to hitch to? It's nice to have friends.


Don't troll him personally. Stick to the conversation at hand.

LOL. It is crystal clear that neither Tech nor TCU are big players in realignment speculation unless we cling to UT as close as possible and luck out with them dragging us along somewhere. In fact, despite Tech's well-known drawbacks, they're still probably in a better position than the Frogs simply because of size, # of living alums, # of fans and the fact that Lubbock isn't completely and utterly dominated by the Dallas Cowboys the way the Metroplex is.

Moreover, sure, I'll buy the "TCU earned its way in" argument because I'm a Frog fan, but realistically, we were extraordinarily lucky that A&M left the Big 12 in a huff, the networks told the Big 12 that they wouldn't get ANY money unless they had 10 teams, the Big 12 was in the process of falling completely apart and we just happened to be available (with no transition period) after the Big East broke up, were the defending Rose Bowl champs and had a newly renovated stadium all ready to go. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

(07-31-2019 11:56 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  LOL. It is crystal clear that neither Tech nor TCU are big players in realignment speculation unless we cling to UT as close as possible and luck out with them dragging us along somewhere. In fact, despite Tech's well-known drawbacks, they're still probably in a better position than the Frogs simply because of size, # of living alums, # of fans and the fact that Lubbock isn't completely and utterly dominated by the Dallas Cowboys the way the Metroplex is.

Moreover, sure, I'll buy the "TCU earned its way in" argument because I'm a Frog fan, but realistically, we were extraordinarily lucky that A&M left the Big 12 in a huff, the networks told the Big 12 that they wouldn't get ANY money unless they had 10 teams, the Big 12 was in the process of falling completely apart and we just happened to be available (with no transition period) after the Big East broke up, were the defending Rose Bowl champs and had a newly renovated stadium all ready to go. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

Well said on most points but I think Tech and UT have a good relationship which will help in realignment discussions.

The fact that we TRULY are the 3rd largest supported University in a state the size of Texas helps tremendously as well. We aren't regional and have fans across the state.

Most Red Raiders can't stand the TCU fan base but I have no real issues with you guys. The rotten ones who root for the Big 12 to fail are misguided and do not represent the TCU fan base.

My wife graduated from a pretty good ACC school and I'm glad I don't have to live vicariously thru her alma mater to feel better about myself.

Jared, good luck this season minus Texas Tech weekend. Go Tech and Go TCU.

(08-01-2019 07:19 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  Well said on most points but I think Tech and UT have a good relationship which will help in realignment discussions.

The fact that we TRULY are the 3rd largest supported University in a state the size of Texas helps tremendously as well. We aren't regional and have fans across the state.

Most Red Raiders can't stand the TCU fan base but I have no real issues with you guys. The rotten ones who root for the Big 12 to fail are misguided and do not represent the TCU fan base.

My wife graduated from a pretty good ACC school and I'm glad I don't have to live vicariously thru her alma mater to feel better about myself.

Jared, good luck this season minus Texas Tech weekend. Go Tech and Go TCU.

Well, in the battle as to who can suck up to UT-Austin the best, TCU has a ringer in the game in that UT's AD - CDMFC - is our ex-AD, who is still close to our current AD, that Donati guy. CDMFC is fairly familiar with us, having set our schedule for the next decade, raised the money to redo our stadium and pay Coach P and his assistants etc...

He also presided over the various conference realignment changes which resulted in raising our annual TV revenues from the roughly $3.1 million in the last year of the MWC to roughly $40 million today - all in only 8 years, which is probably the fastest rate of increase of all schools nationally.

With CDMFC down there, it's not the same situation as when DeBoss Dodds was running things.

I've rethought how this is likely to play out after evaluating the exit fees and the LHN payouts. Texas has $109.2M coming from the LHN for the final 6 years of 2025-31, or $18.2M per year average. Even a $20M gap to the SEC or B1G is not sufficient, especially when you consider that the B12 would withhold $30-60M in payouts for an exit fee. Texas would be be under water with such a move for at least 7 years, or until 2032. There is also the uncertainty of the LHN buyouts, who pays who and how much. The ACC seems overly complicated as well, since their ESPN deal is all tiers (similar in that respect to the American), so their is no easy way to incorporate Texas. The Pac-12 is probably the easiest to work, but such a move doesn't work logistically for Texas.

So I now think the odds are closer to 85% that Texas stays put in 2025.

Oklahoma doesn't have the LHN, and the financial numbers say that even paying $50M to exit the B12 that they would be ahead in 6 years moving to the SEC and perhaps as few as 4 or 5 years moving to the B1G (the SEC likely will be even or ahead of the B1G with it's next bump, but then the B1G will likely shoot up again in 2023), and then of course just rolling in extra money after that. So I think the pull is just too much for OU to stay.

That is where the other 15% comes from for Texas. They will certainly be in discussion with Oklahoma about coordinating their actions, be it keeping the Red River rivalry going as non-conference foes in the future, or moving together as a package to the B1G or SEC. This is the one scenario where Texas might be willing to forgo the end of the LHN and be underwater a bit for a few years to preserve the Oklahoma relationship. Conversely I put the odds at 5% that Texas can convince Oklahoma to stay put.

So I revise my vote to say Texas stays put, with the non-trivial chance they may move with Oklahoma to a conference.

I revise my odds of TCU moving down to 1-2%, Kansas also at about 1-2%, everyone else essentially 0% chance.

15% OU and UT leave together, 80% OU leaves alone, 5% both stay.

B12 replacements: 20% nobody (includes 5% chance nobody leaves), 55% BYU, 35% somebody else
// adds up to 110% because B12 may decide to go beyond 10 to make up for losing OU or both OU and UT

There is no longer a "Tech Problem".

(08-02-2019 02:23 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Oklahoma doesn't have the LHN, and the financial numbers say that even paying $50M to exit the B12 that they would be ahead in 6 years moving to the SEC and perhaps as few as 4 or 5 years moving to the B1G (the SEC likely will be even or ahead of the B1G with it's next bump, but then the B1G will likely shoot up again in 2023), and then of course just rolling in extra money after that. So I think the pull is just too much for OU to stay.

The "financial numbers" say that OU is making more than all SEC schools are now and if the Big 10 and the SEC are expecting a bump, then so will the Big 12, a likelihood which you are yet again ignoring.

OU doesn't have the LHN but they do have their own deal that pays $7 million for their own Tier 3 stuff and they just got a $2.3 million bump from the ESPN/Big 12 deal, which included both the monies from the 3 CCG's that Fox (not CBS) declined to exercise their options for as well as Tier 3 retained rights stuff for the remaining Big 12 schools. Just as with the Tier 1 deals, both of those will likely be bumped up in the next round too.

Further, OU is NOT AAU, which has heretofore been a prerequisite for the Big 10 to add members. You are ignoring that as usual too.

The step you are missing is that both OU and UT will watch the SEC and the Big 10's negotiations and then negotiate with the networks themselves. They will then get an idea of what the other conferences are making and compare it to what the networks are offering them. Then, and only then, will they make their decisions. You are comparing an expected bump for the SEC and Big 10 to a static analysis of the Big 12. Why?

(08-02-2019 03:00 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  Further, OU is NOT AAU, which has heretofore been a prerequisite for the Big 10 to add members.

Just as with Notre Dame, the Big Ten would be willing to overlook the AAU issue for a football blueblood like OU.

(08-02-2019 02:23 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I've rethought how this is likely to play out after evaluating the exit fees and the LHN payouts. Texas has $109.2M coming from the LHN for the final 6 years of 2025-31, or $18.2M per year average. Even a $20M gap to the SEC or B1G is not sufficient, especially when you consider that the B12 would withhold $30-60M in payouts for an exit fee. Texas would be be under water with such a move for at least 7 years, or until 2032. There is also the uncertainty of the LHN buyouts, who pays who and how much. The ACC seems overly complicated as well, since their ESPN deal is all tiers (similar in that respect to the American), so their is no easy way to incorporate Texas. The Pac-12 is probably the easiest to work, but such a move doesn't work logistically for Texas.

So I now think the odds are closer to 85% that Texas stays put in 2025.

Oklahoma doesn't have the LHN, and the financial numbers say that even paying $50M to exit the B12 that they would be ahead in 6 years moving to the SEC and perhaps as few as 4 or 5 years moving to the B1G (the SEC likely will be even or ahead of the B1G with it's next bump, but then the B1G will likely shoot up again in 2023), and then of course just rolling in extra money after that. So I think the pull is just too much for OU to stay.

That is where the other 15% comes from for Texas. They will certainly be in discussion with Oklahoma about coordinating their actions, be it keeping the Red River rivalry going as non-conference foes in the future, or moving together as a package to the B1G or SEC. This is the one scenario where Texas might be willing to forgo the end of the LHN and be underwater a bit for a few years to preserve the Oklahoma relationship. Conversely I put the odds at 5% that Texas can convince Oklahoma to stay put.

So I revise my vote to say Texas stays put, with the non-trivial chance they may move with Oklahoma to a conference.

I revise my odds of TCU moving down to 1-2%, Kansas also at about 1-2%, everyone else essentially 0% chance.

15% OU and UT leave together, 80% OU leaves alone, 5% both stay.

B12 replacements: 20% nobody (includes 5% chance nobody leaves), 55% BYU, 35% somebody else
// adds up to 110% because B12 may decide to go beyond 10 to make up for losing OU or both OU and UT

The calculations on the pay bumps is probably a bit optimistic if you think the Big 10 is going to shoot up after 6 years and with the numbers that they have. I'm thinking they will get a about a 5% bump when the new FOX contract comes up. The SEC's lowest lauded estimation is for 250 million per year from CBS but with the contract immediately ending the present one. That puts the SEC at about 56 million per school payout plus the tailing escalators. The Big 10 is at 54 presently and no valuations on the Big 10N have been released in 2 years. The last time they were released there was a substantial decline in value of 170 million which equaled payouts to the schools (the year prior to the new FOX contract) of around 11 million to the 11 oldest members at that time and reduced payouts to the other 3 plus Delany's big bonus.

I say that to highlight that none of us can be sure of what our T3 networks will be pulling in. Clearly last year the SECN was flat.

Texas made 38.7 million plus around 15 million more for the LHN last year so they were at 53.7 million. Whether the SEC is at 56 and the Big 10 at 54 plus escalators at the time of the its new contract I think your estimation of the LHN is off base as a deterrent to their movement.

Here's why. If they leave the Big 12 at the end of the GOR by giving a two year notice in 2022 they will effectively leave for the last year's TV revenue which the Big 12 would withhold. There would be no penalty for the GOR which has to be resigned in 2024. If I'm off a year on the GOR it still doesn't change anything, just bump it back a year.

I think it's safe to assume that their payouts would be in the low 40's at that time.

So the obstacle for Texas is their contract on the LHN which expires in 2031. That's where one has to consider how such things are handled. It's not the big problem that you would assume.

For instance if they joined the SEC ESPN would renegotiate the value added to the SEC by their inclusion. That's been estimated before as being between 2.5 million per school in payouts to 3.5 million. Let's just assume the lower amount. So if they joined the SEC for the 2025 season each SEC school would get a 1 million dollar bump in pay with the difference of 1.5 per school going to buy out the remaining 6 year of the LHN. ESPN could choose to match that amount to pay it off in 3 years and to secure that property in a conference to which they hold majority rights.

Should FOX determine that their value in the Big 10 would be 3.5 to 4.5 million per school (which is different because the SEC already has a bump via A&M for the market value in Texas) then a similar situation could happen. Even if there was a penalty for voiding the ESPN contract early the Big 10 schools could opt for the 1 million in increase and defray the 3 million to cover the last 6 years of the LHN contract value to Texas, and to pay any penalty they might have incurred by leaving ESPN early.

What is not recoverable is that last year's TV revenue from the Big 12 but boosters prorated over 6 years could easily cover that as well.

In past moves boosters have raised the money lost for departure fees for several schools and conferences sometimes loan a portion which is withheld in earnings for future years.

Either way if Texas moves the schools who will receive a bump in their new conference home need only take a small bump until the LHN is covered and then they realize on the 7th year of the Horns membership in their conference the full bump from their joining.

Oklahoma would realize an immediate bump by moving and with donors covering their last year's TV revenue they have no obstacle to making the move.

(08-02-2019 12:02 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(08-01-2019 07:19 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  Well said on most points but I think Tech and UT have a good relationship which will help in realignment discussions.

The fact that we TRULY are the 3rd largest supported University in a state the size of Texas helps tremendously as well. We aren't regional and have fans across the state.

Most Red Raiders can't stand the TCU fan base but I have no real issues with you guys. The rotten ones who root for the Big 12 to fail are misguided and do not represent the TCU fan base.

My wife graduated from a pretty good ACC school and I'm glad I don't have to live vicariously thru her alma mater to feel better about myself.

Jared, good luck this season minus Texas Tech weekend. Go Tech and Go TCU.

Well, in the battle as to who can suck up to UT-Austin the best, TCU has a ringer in the game in that UT's AD - CDMFC - is our ex-AD, who is still close to our current AD, that Donati guy. CDMFC is fairly familiar with us, having set our schedule for the next decade, raised the money to redo our stadium and pay Coach P and his assistants etc...

He also presided over the various conference realignment changes which resulted in raising our annual TV revenues from the roughly $3.1 million in the last year of the MWC to roughly $40 million today - all in only 8 years, which is probably the fastest rate of increase of all schools nationally.

With CDMFC down there, it's not the same situation as when DeBoss Dodds was running things.

I'm fully aware of Del Conte's former employer but realignment decisions will be made by more important people than the AD.

IMHO, I do not think the 3rd largest supported University in a state the size of Texas will be left behind.

(07-30-2019 07:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Or the simplest path

OU and UT ditch the Tagalongs and just come by themselves

If reducing competition and improving schedules is the goal then that does it

They only compete against one other in state program, all the others are demoted and their schedule has A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and OU every year.

I mean as long as we’re throwing out off season hypotheticals with no real basis in reality, why not?

That assumes they decide to go to the SEC, despite viewing that as slumming it.

Since Texas can go where they want to, the question is what is their highest priority. I don't have a line to that ... a plausible case can be made for going to the SEC, going to the Big Ten, going Independent with a scheduling agreement with the ACC, and staying as the kingpin in the Big 12, which is why this particular thread could still be going in 2026.

One thing is sure, though ... since it will be people making the decision, emotions will definitely enter into it. The problem with simplistic "Texas feels this way, so they will do this" is that (1) emotions are complex and (2) we don't actually know which people will be making the decisions that decides Texas' 2026 home. There will be turnover between now and then, but knowing who will be replacing whom is pure working time machine territory.

This thread looked different last night.

(07-29-2019 10:38 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think Texas and Oklahoma will be in the Big 12 that year.

The Big 12 is perfect for them, as they are the 900 and 800 pound gorillas of that conference. The Big 12 offers them the kind of dominant power that they couldn't have in any other P5 conference.

This^^^

The truth is that Texas and Oklahoma don't need the SEC or the B1G to make money. In fact either conference might actually limit their ability to grow their own income.
The SEC or the B1G would love to have either because it would lift the income of all of their own schools while limiting to opportunities of other conferences. Greed, pure and simple.