(08-05-2022 04:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 04:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-05-2022 03:49 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  .

There has been a lot of chatter about the possibility that the Big XII schools may receive less than $20 million per year in broadcasting revenue, due to the departure of OU & Texas.

This would represent a substantial revenue cut, in the range of $10 to $15 million/year less than what the Big XII schools are currently receiving from the broadcasters.

Yet those who argue that the PAC will stay put with only 10 schools seem to have the impression that their broadcasting revenue streams will be relatively unaffected by the departure of USC and UCLA.

Question: Why would the departure of OU and Texas have a devastating impact on the Big XII remainers' broadcasting revenue, while the departure of USC and UCLA would have only a trivial impact on the PAC remainers?

.

Its only coming from message board posters who have absolutely nothing to base it on, but they "feel" the Big 12 should get less than now. If they say that, they are someone who should probably be ignored on the topic. And are pretty ignorant about TV ratings and the relative strength of the conferences on the field (which has some influence on TV ratings).

That may be so. What's mystifying to me is why there was so much of a hubbub about the huge revenue cuts the Big XII would receive, yet complete silence about revenue cuts for the PAC.

It's especially baffling when one notes the fact that the Big XII is reloading (adding Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, and BYU), while there are no signs that the PAC will replace USC or UCLA. One would think that the conference that has announced it's reloading would be viewed as protecting its revenue stream to some extent, and that the conference that doesn't reload would be expected to take a greater revenue hit.

.

The Pac-12 is getting a cut. They were supposed to get 500 million for 12 teams and now they are looking at 300 million for 10.