(10-19-2020 04:33 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 04:13 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  Would any of the P5 conferences be able to earn more revenue, on a per-school basis, by adding UT and OU?

Only the network(s) paying can answer that question but if I were in charge I'd make it so, especially if I wouldn't have to pay or could pay the Big 12 a lot less money.

.

Perhaps, but it might not be feasible, since the ACC is the only conference that has signed their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tier-rights to a single network.

Even if it could be done, the Big 12 remnants could sue for a violation of anti-trust law, and could probably win.


.

BIG 12

First- and second-tier rights: $2.6 billion, ESPN/FOX, 13 years through 2024-25
Per-year average: $200 million
Per-school, per-year average: $20 million

PAC-12

First- and second-tier rights: $3 billion, ESPN/FOX, 12 years through 2023-24
Per-year average: $250 million
Per-school, per-year average: $20.8 million

SEC

First-tier rights: $825 million, CBS, 15 years through 2023-24 (negotiations ongoing)
Second-tier rights: $2.25 billion, ESPN, 15 years through 2023-24 (negotiations ongoing)
Per-year average: $205 million (negotiations ongoing)
Per-school, per-year average: $14.6 million (negotiations ongoing)

BIG TEN

First-tier rights: $1 billion, ESPN, 10 years through 2016-17
Second-tier rights: $2.8 billion, Big Ten Network, 25 years through 2031-32
Select basketball rights: (minimum of 24 games, men’s tournament semifinal and championship games): $72 million, CBS, six years through 2016-17
Football championship game: $145 million, FOX, six years through 2016
Per-year average: $248.2 million
Per-school, per-pear average: $20.7 million

ACC
First-, second- and third-tier rights: $3.6 billion, ESPN, 15 years through 2026-27
Per-year average: $240 million
Per-school, per-year average: $17.1 million

(10-19-2020 04:42 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 04:33 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 04:13 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  Would any of the P5 conferences be able to earn more revenue, on a per-school basis, by adding UT and OU?

Only the network(s) paying can answer that question but if I were in charge I'd make it so, especially if I wouldn't have to pay or could pay the Big 12 a lot less money.

.

Perhaps, but it might not be feasible, since the ACC is the only conference that has signed their 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tier-rights to a single network.

Even if it could be done, the Big 12 remnants could sue for a violation of anti-trust law, and could probably win.


.

BIG 12

First- and second-tier rights: $2.6 billion, ESPN/FOX, 13 years through 2024-25
Per-year average: $200 million
Per-school, per-year average: $20 million

PAC-12

First- and second-tier rights: $3 billion, ESPN/FOX, 12 years through 2023-24
Per-year average: $250 million
Per-school, per-year average: $20.8 million

SEC

First-tier rights: $825 million, CBS, 15 years through 2023-24 (negotiations ongoing)
Second-tier rights: $2.25 billion, ESPN, 15 years through 2023-24 (negotiations ongoing)
Per-year average: $205 million (negotiations ongoing)
Per-school, per-year average: $14.6 million (negotiations ongoing)

BIG TEN

First-tier rights: $1 billion, ESPN, 10 years through 2016-17
Second-tier rights: $2.8 billion, Big Ten Network, 25 years through 2031-32
Select basketball rights: (minimum of 24 games, men’s tournament semifinal and championship games): $72 million, CBS, six years through 2016-17
Football championship game: $145 million, FOX, six years through 2016
Per-year average: $248.2 million
Per-school, per-pear average: $20.7 million

ACC
First-, second- and third-tier rights: $3.6 billion, ESPN, 15 years through 2026-27
Per-year average: $240 million
Per-school, per-year average: $17.1 million

I believe the ACC deal expires in 2036-37.

But you can see the all of the other deals (not counting the BTN which is peanuts and it's not likely anyone's leaving the B1G anyway) are up for grabs by 2025 so that's where the window is open for one (or more) conference to invite Oklahoma and/or Texas. Once the GOR expires, OU/UT don't owe the B12 anything and the remaining B12 schools can't sue for anything. Maybe someone from Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, and/or Oklahoma State can pull some crap like Bob Bullock did and stop Texas and/or Oklahoma from leaving for a better conference but the conference won't be able to stop them if they want to leave the Little 8. The question is will they want to?

(10-19-2020 04:13 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 01:37 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 01:23 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:46 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  Let's say UT/ou move on.. Houston, SMU, Tulsa and Tulane Would probably be good additions, no? If Tech goes with UT as well.. You could add UTSA or TS St.. but that may be too Texas centric.. so they then probably add BYU or Colorado St.

KU/KSU/ISU/WV/TUL/OSU in the North
BU/TCU/SMU/UH/TULANE/Tech in the South

or if Tech also leaves with UT.. Tulane doesn't get the invite. Tulsa and OSU move to the south and BYU, CSU are added to the North?

If only UT/OU move on, the Big12 still doesn't need any more Texas or Oklahoma schools. And Tulane is a competitive vacuum. So even though they bring a new state and a good media market, I think the B12 would look for more competitive schools in new markets.

South : TT, Baylor, TCU, OSU, Kansas, KS
National : ISU, WVU, Cincy, UCF, BYU, Boise St

This!!

If OU/UT move on, the Big 12 solidifies its standing by acquiring the best football brands...regardless of geography. Cincy and UCF from the east (sorry AAC) and BYU and Boise State from the west. The core remaining Big 12 members are nicely located to rebuild and would have significant advantages over the AAC.

True, but would any of the P5 conferences be able to earn more revenue, on a per-school basis, by adding UT and OU?

UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

This is true. However, the Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms. The Big Ten doesn't need Texas, they'll make a ton of money without them. Will they make more money if say they added Texas and Texas Tech? Probably. But they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited. If we lose them, we're still rich. The SEC can say the same thing. This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

The Pac-12 is the wild card. They don't have the bargaining power to demand anything from Texas/Oklahoma. They should take any baggage they need to in order to get UT/OU in the Pac-12. Pac-16? Pac-18? Whatever it takes!

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

You mean like how the Big East schools tried to sue the ACC? How did that work out for them? If Oklahoma and/or Texas want to leave the Big 12, the Little 8 aren't going to be able to sue them to stop them nor sue any network for anti-competitive practices.

(10-19-2020 07:57 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

You mean like how the Big East schools tried to sue the ACC? How did that work out for them? If Oklahoma and/or Texas want to leave the Big 12, the Little 8 aren't going to be able to sue them to stop them nor sue any network for anti-competitive practices.

Who suggested suing to "try to stop" Texas and Oklahoma from leaving the Big 12? That wouldn't be successful, as you've pointed out.

But the situation is entirely different from when the ACC invited the Big East schools to switch conference. That wasn't a violation of anti-trust law or an example of anti-competitive behavior by a large national broadcasting corporation.

What the remaining Big 12 schools could do would be to either threaten to sue (to block the proposal) or actually sue a network (after the fact) for pulling off a stunt as twisted as putting Texas and OU into a "primo" conference so that they could screw over the remaining Big 12 schools. If it were done blatantly, it would be a classic example of monopolistic, anti-competitive behavior, and it would cause tens of millions in damages to the remaining schools.

.

Whether or not they could or would sue to try to block such a deal, it would probably never get to that point.

Why? Because no single network controls both the Big 12 and either the SEC or Big Ten, and it seems unlikely that either conference will be inclined to sell their first and second tier rights to a single broadcaster, since they will have networks of their own to broadcast their conference games.

(10-20-2020 01:46 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:57 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

You mean like how the Big East schools tried to sue the ACC? How did that work out for them? If Oklahoma and/or Texas want to leave the Big 12, the Little 8 aren't going to be able to sue them to stop them nor sue any network for anti-competitive practices.

Who suggested suing to "try to stop" Texas and Oklahoma from leaving the Big 12? That wouldn't be successful, as you've pointed out.

But the situation is entirely different from when the ACC invited the Big East schools to switch conference. That wasn't a violation of anti-trust law or an example of anti-competitive behavior by a large national broadcasting corporation.

What the remaining Big 12 schools could do would be to either threaten to sue (to block the proposal) or actually sue a network (after the fact) for pulling off a stunt as twisted as putting Texas and OU into a "primo" conference so that they could screw over the remaining Big 12 schools. If it were done blatantly, it would be a classic example of monopolistic, anti-competitive behavior, and it would cause tens of millions in damages to the remaining schools.

.

Whether or not they could or would sue to try to block such a deal, it would probably never get to that point.

Why? Because no single network controls both the Big 12 and either the SEC or Big Ten, and it seems unlikely that either conference will be inclined to sell their first and second tier rights to a single broadcaster, since they will have networks of their own to broadcast their conference games.

This isn't official and negotiations were slow because of the pandemic but the rumors before the pandemic were ESPN taking over full rights to the SEC.

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/SB-B...2/SEC.aspx

Will the other networks follow suit? Who knows?

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

So you think UT or ou would be wary of the competition if they went to either the BIG or SEC? Seriously?

And the fans of those conferences/schools, wouldn't want to play Texas or ou? Are you kidding me? LSU fans drove the 8 hour trip and packed Austin a year ago. You don't think UT playing MN in MN wouldn't sell out that crowd?

As far as the lawsuits and stuff go.. They can't sue if they decide to leave as soon as the GOR expires. It's only 4 more years away but in '22, they both will be putting feelers out there just to check the temperature.

As I said before, as a UT fan, I really wouldn't want them to go to the BIG..even if ou agrees to go there. I'd rather take Tech in tow and play in the SEC.. where there is built in rivalries vs Ark and aggy.. and I'm pretty sure LSU will be the next. Travel will be less expensive than playing a BIG West division. RRS will remain in Dallas, and ou can re-unite with Nebraska with or without osu.

I really don't feel a Pac merger will really help either schools.. So if UT/ou move on.. maybe the PAC expands and grabs TCU/BU/UH..?

(10-20-2020 08:51 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

So you think UT or ou would be wary of the competition if they went to either the BIG or SEC? Seriously?

And the fans of those conferences/schools, wouldn't want to play Texas or ou? Are you kidding me? LSU fans drove the 8 hour trip and packed Austin a year ago. You don't think UT playing MN in MN wouldn't sell out that crowd?

As far as the lawsuits and stuff go.. They can't sue if they decide to leave as soon as the GOR expires. It's only 4 more years away but in '22, they both will be putting feelers out there just to check the temperature.

As I said before, as a UT fan, I really wouldn't want them to go to the BIG..even if ou agrees to go there. I'd rather take Tech in tow and play in the SEC.. where there is built in rivalries vs Ark and aggy.. and I'm pretty sure LSU will be the next. Travel will be less expensive than playing a BIG West division. RRS will remain in Dallas, and ou can re-unite with Nebraska with or without osu.

I really don't feel a Pac merger will really help either schools.. So if UT/ou move on.. maybe the PAC expands and grabs TCU/BU/UH..?

But if Oklahoma goes to the SEC and the SEC says to Texas you can come in and be #16 but Tech/Baylor/etc isn't welcome, would UT join the SEC on those terms?

I'm Big Ten first but from a college football standpoint I would want OU/UT in the SEC first because of the rivalries (UT with A&M and Ark, OU with Ala, LSU).

(10-20-2020 09:59 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-20-2020 08:51 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

So you think UT or ou would be wary of the competition if they went to either the BIG or SEC? Seriously?

And the fans of those conferences/schools, wouldn't want to play Texas or ou? Are you kidding me? LSU fans drove the 8 hour trip and packed Austin a year ago. You don't think UT playing MN in MN wouldn't sell out that crowd?

As far as the lawsuits and stuff go.. They can't sue if they decide to leave as soon as the GOR expires. It's only 4 more years away but in '22, they both will be putting feelers out there just to check the temperature.

As I said before, as a UT fan, I really wouldn't want them to go to the BIG..even if ou agrees to go there. I'd rather take Tech in tow and play in the SEC.. where there is built in rivalries vs Ark and aggy.. and I'm pretty sure LSU will be the next. Travel will be less expensive than playing a BIG West division. RRS will remain in Dallas, and ou can re-unite with Nebraska with or without osu.

I really don't feel a Pac merger will really help either schools.. So if UT/ou move on.. maybe the PAC expands and grabs TCU/BU/UH..?

But if Oklahoma goes to the SEC and the SEC says to Texas you can come in and be #16 but Tech/Baylor/etc isn't welcome, would UT join the SEC on those terms?

I'm Big Ten first but from a college football standpoint I would want OU/UT in the SEC first because of the rivalries (UT with A&M and Ark, OU with Ala, LSU).

Didn't know that ou/ark was a thing tbh. Have no idea what would happen if the SEC used ou as leverage.. at that point, I see UT calling their bluff, forcing the SEC to take Kansas or oklahoma st to pair up with ou, while UT just goes independent. BIG is not for UT

(10-20-2020 09:59 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-20-2020 08:51 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 05:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin and OU are two of the most valuable athletic departments...up there with Ohio State, Michigan and Alabama. They would likely add to the revenue-per-school of any conference...even if they need to bring little brothers (such as TTU or OSU) to justify their move of conferences.

Not suggesting that UT or OU will change conferences, just explaining that they are the big fish in college athletics.

...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

So you think UT or ou would be wary of the competition if they went to either the BIG or SEC? Seriously?

And the fans of those conferences/schools, wouldn't want to play Texas or ou? Are you kidding me? LSU fans drove the 8 hour trip and packed Austin a year ago. You don't think UT playing MN in MN wouldn't sell out that crowd?

As far as the lawsuits and stuff go.. They can't sue if they decide to leave as soon as the GOR expires. It's only 4 more years away but in '22, they both will be putting feelers out there just to check the temperature.

As I said before, as a UT fan, I really wouldn't want them to go to the BIG..even if ou agrees to go there. I'd rather take Tech in tow and play in the SEC.. where there is built in rivalries vs Ark and aggy.. and I'm pretty sure LSU will be the next. Travel will be less expensive than playing a BIG West division. RRS will remain in Dallas, and ou can re-unite with Nebraska with or without osu.

I really don't feel a Pac merger will really help either schools.. So if UT/ou move on.. maybe the PAC expands and grabs TCU/BU/UH..?

But if Oklahoma goes to the SEC and the SEC says to Texas you can come in and be #16 but Tech/Baylor/etc isn't welcome, would UT join the SEC on those terms?

I'm Big Ten first but from a college football standpoint I would want OU/UT in the SEC first because of the rivalries (UT with A&M and Ark, OU with Ala, LSU).

Didn't know that ou/ark was a thing tbh. Have no idea what would happen if the SEC used ou as leverage.. at that point, I see UT calling their bluff, forcing the SEC to take Kansas or oklahoma st to pair up with ou, while UT just goes independent. BIG is not for UT

(10-20-2020 12:06 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-20-2020 09:59 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-20-2020 08:51 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  ...The Big Ten and SEC are valuable enough that they can dictate to UT and/or OU to come on their terms.

The Big Ten doesn't need Texas.

...they are strong enough to hold their ground and tell Texas that Texas Tech isn't invited...

The SEC can say the same thing.

Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.

(10-19-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  This is also where ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc. are involved. What do they want? I want Texas and Oklahoma in a conference so I don't have to pay the Little Eight. If Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State come along, I still have to pay them "super conference" rate. So I go to the SEC or Big Ten and tell them to invite UT/OU only for the most cost effective plan and it's in the best interest of the conferences as well.

There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

So you think UT or ou would be wary of the competition if they went to either the BIG or SEC? Seriously?

And the fans of those conferences/schools, wouldn't want to play Texas or ou? Are you kidding me? LSU fans drove the 8 hour trip and packed Austin a year ago. You don't think UT playing MN in MN wouldn't sell out that crowd?

As far as the lawsuits and stuff go.. They can't sue if they decide to leave as soon as the GOR expires. It's only 4 more years away but in '22, they both will be putting feelers out there just to check the temperature.

As I said before, as a UT fan, I really wouldn't want them to go to the BIG..even if ou agrees to go there. I'd rather take Tech in tow and play in the SEC.. where there is built in rivalries vs Ark and aggy.. and I'm pretty sure LSU will be the next. Travel will be less expensive than playing a BIG West division. RRS will remain in Dallas, and ou can re-unite with Nebraska with or without osu.

I really don't feel a Pac merger will really help either schools.. So if UT/ou move on.. maybe the PAC expands and grabs TCU/BU/UH..?

But if Oklahoma goes to the SEC and the SEC says to Texas you can come in and be #16 but Tech/Baylor/etc isn't welcome, would UT join the SEC on those terms?

I'm Big Ten first but from a college football standpoint I would want OU/UT in the SEC first because of the rivalries (UT with A&M and Ark, OU with Ala, LSU).

Didn't know that ou/ark was a thing tbh. Have no idea what would happen if the SEC used ou as leverage.. at that point, I see UT calling their bluff, forcing the SEC to take Kansas or oklahoma st to pair up with ou, while UT just goes independent. BIG is not for UT

I meant to say Texas with A&M and Arkansas and Oklahoma with Alabama and LSU. I'm sure many of the more western SEC schools would love to play both Texas and Oklahoma.

UT wants to "call the SEC's bluff"? They can enjoy a lot less money. Then watch the Sugar Bowl go to SEC/ACC and/or the CFP go to four conference champions. You want to do all of this for Tech?

(10-20-2020 01:53 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-20-2020 12:06 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-20-2020 09:59 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(10-20-2020 08:51 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-19-2020 07:33 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  Agree, and this is one of the reasons why Texas and OU wouldn't be thrilled to switch conferences.

Another reason is that the competition with the top SEC or Big Ten schools would be tougher in FB and BB. Few schools perform as well after they switch conferences.

Further, even if the SEC or Big 10 would make a little more $$ per school by adding Texas and OU, the fans of most conference teams would be unhappy about losing even more conference games than they already do, due to having to play OU or Texas every season.


There are two main reasons why this would be unlikely to happen.

First, no network would be in a position to do this, because none of the P5 conferences except the ACC has their first and second tier broadcasting rights controlled by a single network.

Second, even if there were a network that could do it, they could be taken to court by the remaining Big 12 schools for engaging in anti-competitive practices under anti-trust law.

So you think UT or ou would be wary of the competition if they went to either the BIG or SEC? Seriously?

And the fans of those conferences/schools, wouldn't want to play Texas or ou? Are you kidding me? LSU fans drove the 8 hour trip and packed Austin a year ago. You don't think UT playing MN in MN wouldn't sell out that crowd?

As far as the lawsuits and stuff go.. They can't sue if they decide to leave as soon as the GOR expires. It's only 4 more years away but in '22, they both will be putting feelers out there just to check the temperature.

As I said before, as a UT fan, I really wouldn't want them to go to the BIG..even if ou agrees to go there. I'd rather take Tech in tow and play in the SEC.. where there is built in rivalries vs Ark and aggy.. and I'm pretty sure LSU will be the next. Travel will be less expensive than playing a BIG West division. RRS will remain in Dallas, and ou can re-unite with Nebraska with or without osu.

I really don't feel a Pac merger will really help either schools.. So if UT/ou move on.. maybe the PAC expands and grabs TCU/BU/UH..?

But if Oklahoma goes to the SEC and the SEC says to Texas you can come in and be #16 but Tech/Baylor/etc isn't welcome, would UT join the SEC on those terms?

I'm Big Ten first but from a college football standpoint I would want OU/UT in the SEC first because of the rivalries (UT with A&M and Ark, OU with Ala, LSU).

Didn't know that ou/ark was a thing tbh. Have no idea what would happen if the SEC used ou as leverage.. at that point, I see UT calling their bluff, forcing the SEC to take Kansas or oklahoma st to pair up with ou, while UT just goes independent. BIG is not for UT

I meant to say Texas with A&M and Arkansas and Oklahoma with Alabama and LSU. I'm sure many of the more western SEC schools would love to play both Texas and Oklahoma.

UT wants to "call the SEC's bluff"? They can enjoy a lot less money. Then watch the Sugar Bowl go to SEC/ACC and/or the CFP go to four conference champions. You want to do all of this for Tech?

I would do it if it were up to me, but UT wouldn't agree if the SEC commish told them.. Either you alone join with ou or you are out and we will get KU/osu to take your place. UT will say, oh really? and move on.. For better or worse, they won't get an ultimatum.. Larry Scott tried doing that and it ended poorly for him

It's very doubtful that Texas and Oklahoma could do much better in the SEC or Big Ten.

They're sitting pretty, right where they are.

Texas, in particular, has a great arrangement, since they're generating a lot of revenue through the Longhorn network.

(10-21-2020 10:02 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  It's very doubtful that Texas and Oklahoma could do much better in the SEC or Big Ten.

They're sitting pretty, right where they are.

Texas, in particular, has a great arrangement, since they're generating a lot of revenue through the Longhorn network.

I agree with this. Texas and Oklahoma like being the 900 and 800 pound gorillas of the Big 12. Even Texas would not have nearly as much power in the B1G or SEC.

They will stay where they are unless circumstances compel them. What are compelling circumstances? We saw one of them emerge in 2015, when Oklahoma was convinced that without a CCG, the Big 12 was at a structural disadvantage in making the playoffs. That was solved by getting the rules changed to allow them a CCG. So access to playoffs is one thing.

The other of course would be money. If the dust settles on a new round of TV deals in 2025 and it is clear that the Big 12 is and will continue to fall dramatically behind the B1G and SEC, that could prompt them to move as well, either to one of those conferences, the PAC, or to go independent.

(10-21-2020 10:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-21-2020 10:02 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  It's very doubtful that Texas and Oklahoma could do much better in the SEC or Big Ten.

They're sitting pretty, right where they are.

Texas, in particular, has a great arrangement, since they're generating a lot of revenue through the Longhorn network.

I agree with this. Texas and Oklahoma like being the 900 and 800 pound gorillas of the Big 12. Even Texas would not have nearly as much power in the B1G or SEC.

They will stay where they are unless circumstances compel them. What are compelling circumstances? We saw one of them emerge in 2015, when Oklahoma was convinced that without a CCG, the Big 12 was at a structural disadvantage in making the playoffs. That was solved by getting the rules changed to allow them a CCG. So access to playoffs is one thing.

The other of course would be money. If the dust settles on a new round of TV deals in 2025 and it is clear that the Big 12 is and will continue to fall dramatically behind the B1G and SEC, that could prompt them to move as well, either to one of those conferences, the PAC, or to go independent.

Can y'all fill me in on the power in conference talk? Don't get the they lose the power talk if they moved to the BIG or SEC. If UT was in the SEC, what will magically disappear that they have right now in the Big12? The only difference is the path to the CFP.

Is it because the Big12 title game is in Dallas? And they would be playing in GA for the SEC CCG? Or if Jerry throws out money to have it rotated then, is that UT using it's "power"?

I think it's an overrated narrative tbh.

I think it's more likely that the B12 successfully poaches a couple or more PAC schools than the other way around. The PAC is in a nose dive on all fronts.

(10-21-2020 11:21 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(10-21-2020 10:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-21-2020 10:02 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  It's very doubtful that Texas and Oklahoma could do much better in the SEC or Big Ten.

They're sitting pretty, right where they are.

Texas, in particular, has a great arrangement, since they're generating a lot of revenue through the Longhorn network.

I agree with this. Texas and Oklahoma like being the 900 and 800 pound gorillas of the Big 12. Even Texas would not have nearly as much power in the B1G or SEC.

They will stay where they are unless circumstances compel them. What are compelling circumstances? We saw one of them emerge in 2015, when Oklahoma was convinced that without a CCG, the Big 12 was at a structural disadvantage in making the playoffs. That was solved by getting the rules changed to allow them a CCG. So access to playoffs is one thing.

The other of course would be money. If the dust settles on a new round of TV deals in 2025 and it is clear that the Big 12 is and will continue to fall dramatically behind the B1G and SEC, that could prompt them to move as well, either to one of those conferences, the PAC, or to go independent.

If UT was in the SEC, what will magically disappear that they have right now in the Big12? The only difference is the path to the CFP.

Is it because the Big12 title game is in Dallas? And they would be playing in GA for the SEC CCG?

I think it's an overrated narrative tbh.

Other than in 2018, and prior to 2010, Texas has been a second tier FB school in the Big 12. The Longhorns would rarely - if ever - be able to contend with Alabama, LSU, and Auburn for the SEC West Division championship.

Texas would probably be a lower-to-middle tier SEC West Division school. Over time, this would do a great deal of harm to their program and its earning potential through the Longhorn Network.

(10-21-2020 01:03 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  I think it's more likely that the B12 successfully poaches a couple or more PAC schools than the other way around. The PAC is in a nose dive on all fronts.

That may well be the case. The PAC "needs" Texas and Oklahoma the way a kangaroo needs a subscription to Netflix.

That being said, it's hard to think of a PAC team that would be better off in the Big 12. Colorado would be the best fit, but they were unhappy in the Big 12 and would be unlikely to return. Utah seems to be doing just fine in the PAC - - "if it ain't broke, why fix it?"

That would probably leave just AZ and AZ State. Would they have anything to gain from switching to the Big 12?