(09-16-2021 07:07 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  The B1G and the existing members had the magic P5 card...Rutgers I understand had no leverage. Nebraska and Maryland were already in the club. Those two should have received better terms. When Cuse, Pitt and Louisville
came into the ACC they received a full share right away. That is how you treat partners.

The B1G teams were greedy AF with the three newbies...Nebraska brought brand and Rutgers and Maryland brought cable boxes. Maryland brought some brand too especially with basketball. I'm not saying the existing school's shouldn't get some ROI for the BTN...it just seems they extorted the new schools.

Yes, IIRC, the SEC did the same thing with Mizzou and TAMU, full partners with full shares from day one. That's the way it should be, IMO.

And who knows? This treatment may have put off TX and OU, could have factored in to their thinking as to whether to contact the SEC or B1G (because let's face it, those were likely the two conferences they thought about contacting once they decided the Big 12 was not for them anymore).

The SEC is seemingly a lot easier/friendlier to join than the B1G, if they want you. No long protracted milking phase-in years where you are paid a relative pittance while the established members reap huge payouts.