(07-27-2021 12:34 PM)Ranger Wrote:  Scanning message boards, I get the sense that many posters (who fortunately are not the decision makers) believe that Rice adds little value. They discount the value of Rice's location for eyeballs and recruiting. They remark on Rice's almost non-existent of its fan base.

The key objection is that Rice will not bring in enough revenue to offset the cut the other schools will have to take by sharing with an additional member. I think it goes without saying that Rice must be willing to agree initially to a partial share of revenues, which rises over a period of time to a full share.

As far as strategy, I think that the worst thing for Rice is for the BIG and PAC to merge. Next worst is for BIG to cherrypick four or six PAC schools, in which case the remnants of the PAC and XII would join. If either happens, I see few options for Rice. The good news is, the BIG commissioner is apparently incompetent and may be unable to pull this off.

I do have to say I have been a little surprised to actually see Rice mentioned in both message posts and actual articles about what is going on more than I remember last time. Perhaps that's just my impression, but it does to me signal that the rules the last few realignments worked under may not necessarily apply to what is considered this time around. I still expect that if Rice moves anywhere better at all, that it will not be its own doing, but rather someone else reaching out and taking us despite ourselves because they see more value in us than our own leadership has or does.

(07-27-2021 12:44 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 12:34 PM)Ranger Wrote:  Scanning message boards, I get the sense that many posters (who fortunately are not the decision makers) believe that Rice adds little value. They discount the value of Rice's location for eyeballs and recruiting. They remark on Rice's almost non-existent of its fan base.

The key objection is that Rice will not bring in enough revenue to offset the cut the other schools will have to take by sharing with an additional member. I think it goes without saying that Rice must be willing to agree initially to a partial share of revenues, which rises over a period of time to a full share.

As far as strategy, I think that the worst thing for Rice is for the BIG and PAC to merge. Next worst is for BIG to cherrypick four or six PAC schools, in which case the remnants of the PAC and XII would join. If either happens, I see few options for Rice. The good news is, the BIG commissioner is apparently incompetent and may be unable to pull this off.

I do have to say I have been a little surprised to actually see Rice mentioned in both message posts and actual articles about what is going on more than I remember last time. Perhaps that's just my impression, but it does to me signal that the rules the last few realignments worked under may not necessarily apply to what is considered this time around. I still expect that if Rice moves anywhere better at all, that it will not be its own doing, but rather someone else reaching out and taking us despite ourselves because they see more value in us than our own leadership has or does.

Perhaps, but our name has to be out there so we are not forgotten about. And we do not want to be excluded because the powers assume we are not interested.

(07-27-2021 12:34 PM)Ranger Wrote:  Scanning message boards, I get the sense that many posters (who fortunately are not the decision makers) believe that Rice adds little value. They discount the value of Rice's location for eyeballs and recruiting. They remark on Rice's almost non-existent of its fan base.

The key objection is that Rice will not bring in enough revenue to offset the cut the other schools will have to take by sharing with an additional member. I think it goes without saying that Rice must be willing to agree initially to a partial share of revenues, which rises over a period of time to a full share.

As far as strategy, I think that the worst thing for Rice is for the BIG and PAC to merge. Next worst is for BIG to cherrypick four or six PAC schools, in which case the remnants of the PAC and XII would join. If either happens, I see few options for Rice. The good news is, the BIG commissioner is apparently incompetent and may be unable to pull this off.

While I'd be okay with a partial share or whatever, I think the above completely misses the boat and argument we should be making and obviously fail to make.

1) They don't need our fans at their games.
2) They can reach more of their fans at OUR games (they all have TONS of fans in Houston who don't attend their home games)
3) Our fan bases don't generally overlap in areas where we are not competitive. People are rarely fans of UT AND Rice football... and not of Alabama and Rice football... so we expand their potential fan base. Even if it is just marginally, it is more than are expanded by adding Tech or TCU or similar. For UT, we can help them appeal to that same 'high education/high football' fan that we would, IF we were any good, that schools like Tech or UH never could... and for PAC teams, we can introduce a whole new group of fans who have limited exposure to their teams. Can't attend UT/Tech (sold out) CAN attend UCLA/Rice.
4) In areas where we ARE competitive (Olympics), we still bring a different viewer.... and open a new marketing avenue as above. More important, we bring a viewer much more likely to support these other sports. Few people are both football AND women's soccer or T&F fans.

I know we don't bring 100,000 additional viewers to a UT game, but those guys will follow those teams... and not UT. They will buy the same advertising products that UT is already appealing to.... and they will compete directly with Alabama and everyone else for those eyes. We may only bring 20-40,000 eyeballs, but we would bring MORE from a bigger/more exposed conference AND they would be 40,000 fans who likely WON'T otherwise be watching Alabama.

Grow the pie.... by a portion that has few options than us... and not just fight for a marginally larger share of the same pie.

(07-27-2021 12:44 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I do have to say I have been a little surprised to actually see Rice mentioned in both message posts and actual articles about what is going on more than I remember last time. Perhaps that's just my impression, but it does to me signal that the rules the last few realignments worked under may not necessarily apply to what is considered this time around. I still expect that if Rice moves anywhere better at all, that it will not be its own doing, but rather someone else reaching out and taking us despite ourselves because they see more value in us than our own leadership has or does.

How much of this is just stubbornness from the conferences? Not much about the AAC has changed in the past few years: it's all the same arguments about markets (not enough fans) and quality (few tick the athletic boxes, fewer tick the academic ones, and none really hit both). If we are fixated on the actions of the B1G, PAC, and ACC, and we know the first two are at least playing hard to get with the XII leftovers, what chance do the traditional candidates from the AAC and MWC have of attracting a major bid? It's not a lot of thought to find that the XII remnants have few apparent options except to stick together, and the XII is likely the ceiling for the traditional candidates from the AAC and MWC. When the writer dismisses all the traditional candidates, and a significant portion of them are disqualified over academics, they've gotta reach for a curveball proposal to hit word counts. If the PAC and B1G wants academics, well, here's Rice, Kansas, Tulane, and Buffalo. Do with them as you will.

Can someone familiar with these things share what upgrades we need and the probable cost?

(07-27-2021 02:17 PM)franklyconfused Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 12:44 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  I do have to say I have been a little surprised to actually see Rice mentioned in both message posts and actual articles about what is going on more than I remember last time. Perhaps that's just my impression, but it does to me signal that the rules the last few realignments worked under may not necessarily apply to what is considered this time around. I still expect that if Rice moves anywhere better at all, that it will not be its own doing, but rather someone else reaching out and taking us despite ourselves because they see more value in us than our own leadership has or does.

How much of this is just stubbornness from the conferences? Not much about the AAC has changed in the past few years: it's all the same arguments about markets (not enough fans) and quality (few tick the athletic boxes, fewer tick the academic ones, and none really hit both). If we are fixated on the actions of the B1G, PAC, and ACC, and we know the first two are at least playing hard to get with the XII leftovers, what chance do the traditional candidates from the AAC and MWC have of attracting a major bid? It's not a lot of thought to find that the XII remnants have few apparent options except to stick together, and the XII is likely the ceiling for the traditional candidates from the AAC and MWC. When the writer dismisses all the traditional candidates, and a significant portion of them are disqualified over academics, they've gotta reach for a curveball proposal to hit word counts. If the PAC and B1G wants academics, well, here's Rice, Kansas, Tulane, and Buffalo. Do with them as you will.

Some BIG posters think UH will be AAU by 2024.

Allegedly high-ranking UT sources confirmed that Kevin Eltife, the Chairman of the University of Texas System Board of Regents, wants to see Texas in the SEC for the 2022 football season.

“Texas and Oklahoma are aiming to enter the league in 2022, with 2023 as a backup plan.”

According to the source, Eltife is a big Texas football fan. “He believes getting into the league for the 2022 season would help Texas from a recruiting and branding standpoint, and quicken the university’s ascent back to the top of the sport.”

The buyout for Texas and Oklahoma to leave the Big 12 before the year 2025 is reportedly $150 million, but sccording to the same the same source Eltife, “has the buyout money lined up to make this happen quicker. Even if their entry is delayed past 2022, there’s no way they will wait around until 2025.”

It is believed that the buyout money could come from the remaining amount on UT’s contract with the Longhorn Network.

In reading what ESPN stories have been put out, it does appear thay are working to actively implode the BigXII in order to avoid paying out all the money. They succeeded in causing panic with the clandestine negotiations and the surprise leaks and then the announcement.

I did see one thing out there that would be pretty funny, but I doubt it would really happen: A&M goes back to the BigXII and helps rebuild it as an FU to UT. Of course, the money in the SEC is too great to leave, but it's fun to think about.

But mostly they see this as a way to kill rather than be killed. To survive in the increasingly mercenary world of college football. If you’re trying to figure out what will happen next in college football, just ask “what will make schools and television networks more money?” The answer is that. More money will happen. A revamped 16 team SEC could pay its members north of $65 million annually in television revenue. That’s over 50% more than the still huge $40 million the Big XII was distributing.

(07-27-2021 05:09 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  If you’re trying to figure out what will happen next in college football, just ask “what will make schools and television networks more money?” The answer is that. More money will happen.

I live among the Buckeyes; a mile from the west Campus and maybe 2.5 miles from Ohio Stadium. I have never liked OSU and the BIG.

But now, I am developing a degree of respect for them. Thus far, they seem to be placing respect for academics and integrity ahead of the dollar. They are not willing to brazenly screw over associates for a few (million)dollars more.

Here's hoping that the Whorns get their comeuppance in the $EC and finish 4-8 or so the next several years.

One of the things that all these schools forget is that even though they believe it is their birthright to win each and every national championship that someone needs to lose (it is a zero sum game) and that if it ends up whittled down to 12 schools or whatever, that someone is going to be in last.

(07-27-2021 01:02 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  4) In areas where we ARE competitive (Olympics),

I wish that were true! But by which metric are we competitive in Olympic sports?

We have three student/alumni athletes in the Olympics -- one for the U.S. team (Ari Ince/javelin); one for Iran (Arselan Kazemi/basketball) and one for Nigeria (Erica Ogwumike/basketball) -- and one in the Paralympics (Ahalya Lettenberger/swimming).

Looking just at the Pac 12, USC has 65 athletes competing in the Olympics (students/alums for all countries, not counting alternates/coaches), followed by Stanford (53), Cal (47), UCLA (39), Washington (31), Arizona St. (23), Arizona (21), Oregon (21), etc. (https://pac-12.com/article/2021/07/20/pa...okyo-games)

Rice has three.

Counting just the U.S. Olympic team, the Top 5 college contibutors are Stanford (32), UCLA (21), UTexas/Cal-Berkeley/USC (16 each). (https://www.businessinsider.com/10-us-co...020-2021-7)

Rice has 1.

There is a lot of knowledge and enthusiasm on the board. We could harness it.

Is there anything to be gained by a number of us, particularly those who do not live in the Houston area, to write to Leebron, JK, and/or BOT expressing our keen interest in upgrading conferences. If so,

1. To whom should we write?
2. What points should we make?

(07-27-2021 06:10 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 01:02 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  4) In areas where we ARE competitive (Olympics),

I wish that were true! But by which metric are we competitive in Olympic sports?

We have three student/alumni athletes in the Olympics -- one for the U.S. team (Ari Ince/javelin); one for Iran (Arselan Kazemi/basketball) and one for Nigeria (Erica Ogwumike/basketball) -- and one in the Paralympics (Ahalya Lettenberger/swimming).

Looking just at the Pac 12, USC has 65 athletes competing in the Olympics (students/alums for all countries, not counting alternates/coaches), followed by Stanford (53), Cal (47), UCLA (39), Washington (31), Arizona St. (23), Arizona (21), Oregon (21), etc. (https://pac-12.com/article/2021/07/20/pa...okyo-games)

Rice has three.

Counting just the U.S. Olympic team, the Top 5 college contibutors are Stanford (32), UCLA (21), UTexas/Cal-Berkeley/USC (16 each). (https://www.businessinsider.com/10-us-co...020-2021-7)

Rice has 1.

Just to bring some context to what you've alleged - here are the sports in which Stanford's athletes will compete at the Olympics: Swimming, artistic swimming, water polo, sailing, rowing, beach volleyball, volleyball (court), gymnastics, cycling, soccer, fencing, track & field.

Of the 12 sports listed, Rice competes in 4. Rice does well in Olympic sports - the ones they have.

(07-28-2021 01:17 AM)WRCisforgotten79 Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 06:10 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 01:02 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  4) In areas where we ARE competitive (Olympics),

I wish that were true! But by which metric are we competitive in Olympic sports?

We have three student/alumni athletes in the Olympics -- one for the U.S. team (Ari Ince/javelin); one for Iran (Arselan Kazemi/basketball) and one for Nigeria (Erica Ogwumike/basketball) -- and one in the Paralympics (Ahalya Lettenberger/swimming).

Looking just at the Pac 12, USC has 65 athletes competing in the Olympics (students/alums for all countries, not counting alternates/coaches), followed by Stanford (53), Cal (47), UCLA (39), Washington (31), Arizona St. (23), Arizona (21), Oregon (21), etc. (https://pac-12.com/article/2021/07/20/pa...okyo-games)

Rice has three.

Counting just the U.S. Olympic team, the Top 5 college contibutors are Stanford (32), UCLA (21), UTexas/Cal-Berkeley/USC (16 each). (https://www.businessinsider.com/10-us-co...020-2021-7)

Rice has 1.

Just to bring some context to what you've alleged - here are the sports in which Stanford's athletes will compete at the Olympics: Swimming, artistic swimming, water polo, sailing, rowing, beach volleyball, volleyball (court), gymnastics, cycling, soccer, fencing, track & field.

Of the 12 sports listed, Rice competes in 4. Rice does well in Olympic sports - the ones they have.

This. I also said we are competitive in them. Stanford is excellent in them. My point is that the math for Olympic sports, both for athletes and fans suits well our demographics... as does baseball more than basketball or football.

It would be a heck of a coup for schools like OU or most other p5 schools to even sniff breaking even in these non-rev sports, and if marketed correctly, I believe we could bring a demographic to them that they cannot easily touch. Much of Stanford's millions for these non-rev sports come from alums and fans who aren't themselves in to the big three. iirc, Phil Knight was a track guy who built his own shoes to run track... and that has turned into I suspect hundreds of millions for Oregon sports.

I was in Baton Rouge in 2018 as the women's tennis team was playing LSU. There was an astounding article in the Baton Rouge newspaper indicating of the $210MM in income generated by the athletic department in FY2017, football (and the SEC benefit) accounted for approximately $193MM (i.e. approximately 92%). All sports except football and baseball lost money (including an astounding amount in gymnastics).

Hearing that UH season ticket sales are rising based on hopes that they will join the Big 12. Long odds IMO that the Big 12 will be around much longer.

If nothing else, if the 12-team playoff with top six conference champions eventually comes to fruition, the Oklahoma States and Iowa States of the world will have a much easier shot getting into the playoff than with OU in the Big 12 fold. Absent OU and Texas, the remaining eight are, IMO, a small amount better than the AAC, so the Big 12 is still a top five conference. Oklahoma State could even end up hosting Oklahoma in a playoff game.

(07-28-2021 01:16 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  If nothing else, if the 12-team playoff with top six conference champions eventually comes to fruition, the Oklahoma States and Iowa States of the world will have a much easier shot getting into the playoff than with OU in the Big 12 fold. Absent OU and Texas, the remaining eight are, IMO, a small amount better than the AAC, so the Big 12 is still a top five conference. Oklahoma State could even end up hosting Oklahoma in a playoff game.

Only a small amount better than the AAC in football, but would continue to be vastly superior in both basketball and baseball.

(07-28-2021 03:43 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(07-28-2021 01:16 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  If nothing else, if the 12-team playoff with top six conference champions eventually comes to fruition, the Oklahoma States and Iowa States of the world will have a much easier shot getting into the playoff than with OU in the Big 12 fold. Absent OU and Texas, the remaining eight are, IMO, a small amount better than the AAC, so the Big 12 is still a top five conference. Oklahoma State could even end up hosting Oklahoma in a playoff game.

Only a small amount better than the AAC in football, but would continue to be vastly superior in both basketball and baseball.

They'll only continue to be vastly better in those sports if they continue to invest in them. I have no doubt that a big portion of Baylor's basketball success was financed by the XII football payout that's taking a significant shave in the next few years. All of their sports are going to take a budget cut, but if the choice is between a football assistant and a better baseball head coach, which are they going to pay for?

(07-28-2021 04:26 PM)franklyconfused Wrote:  

(07-28-2021 03:43 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(07-28-2021 01:16 PM)westsidewolf1989 Wrote:  If nothing else, if the 12-team playoff with top six conference champions eventually comes to fruition, the Oklahoma States and Iowa States of the world will have a much easier shot getting into the playoff than with OU in the Big 12 fold. Absent OU and Texas, the remaining eight are, IMO, a small amount better than the AAC, so the Big 12 is still a top five conference. Oklahoma State could even end up hosting Oklahoma in a playoff game.

Only a small amount better than the AAC in football, but would continue to be vastly superior in both basketball and baseball.

They'll only continue to be vastly better in those sports if they continue to invest in them. I have no doubt that a big portion of Baylor's basketball success was financed by the XII football payout that's taking a significant shave in the next few years. All of their sports are going to take a budget cut, but if the choice is between a football assistant and a better baseball head coach, which are they going to pay for?

??? The Big12 basketball has TV contracts, too...and schools such as Kansas, OSU and West Virginia-- all with long-standing basketball history-- will continue investing in basketball. I'd be very surprised if basketball is well above breakeven financially at those 3 schools.

tweet
Pete Thamel

Breaking: The Big 12 has sent a "cease and desist" letter to ESPN. The letter demands ESPN end "all actions that may harm the conference and its members and that it not communicate with the Big 12 Conference's existing members....
or any NCAA conference regarding the Big 12 conference's members, possible conference realignment or potential financial incentive or outcomes related to possible conference realignment."

SI also reporting that ESPN reached out to one other Big 12 member about it switching conferences