(05-07-2015 03:27 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  3. Texas can't go to the PAC until their contract with ESPN for the LHN expires because it precludes them from going to any Conference in which ESPN doesn't own. To add to that, Texas knows that two thirds of the population is in the eastern US. That's also where the bulk of the money is. Texas will either go independent or move to an eastern conference. The PAC is not a viable option unless the PAC allows Texas to keep the LHN which would break their model. However, they are in the process of revamping that model and the new one may in deed allow for Texas to keep the LHN. I don't know but, if the money is great enough, it could happen.

(05-07-2015 04:23 PM)YNot Wrote:  While I tend to agree that Texas will look eastward first, California and Texas are the top two population states in the US. Those two states together account for about 20% of the total US population. California (38.8 million population) is about the size of #3 Florida, #8 Georgia, and #9 North Carolina COMBINED.

The PAC 12 + Texas and Oklahoma would still cover about one-third of the US population and would OWN four of the top-10 US TV markets (#2 LA, #5 DFW, #6 Bay Area, #10 Houston). [And no college conference is going to own #1 New York, #4 Philly, or #7 Boston media markets].

And, an upper crust of USC, Oregon, Texas, and Oklahoma could be extremely attractive from so many perspectives.

And, ESPN could still end up owning part of the PAC 12 Network and the PAC 12 Tier 1 media rights.

So, don't write off Texas and Oklahoma to the PAC 12!

1, You missed the above in blue.

(05-07-2015 04:23 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 03:27 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  3. The SEC now has something they did not during previous rounds of expansion, A NETWORK!!! They will expand with New Markets and the larger the better in mind.

I absolutely agree. #9 North Carolina (9.9 million population - #24 Charlotte and #25 Raleigh-Durham media markets) and #12 Virginia (8.3 million population - near #8 DC media market) will look really attractive to the SEC as it looks to expand the SECN.

2. Agreed.

(05-07-2015 04:23 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 03:27 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  5. The teams left in the Big 12 when Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas are gone will not be viewed as marque teams. They will be viewed as have not's and that's why they were left over. They will not be able to bargain from a position of strength over the American. They will be in roughly the same boat. Sorry but, I just don't see them being able to pick off the American.

I agree that the Big 12 leftovers will not likely be viewed as marquee teams. If they are viewed as such, they will be gobbled up by one of the more powerful conferences.

However, they will not be anywhere near the same boat as the AAC. Do you really think that UCF, USF, and Houston would choose Tulsa and SMU over TCU and Baylor? Not a chance. Or Memphis and Cincinnati take Tulane and Temple over West Virginia and Kansas St.? No way.

So, it will still likely be the Big 12 leftovers driving the decision process. Now, depending on how many leftovers remain and who they are, the ultimate decision could be to align with the American - but it will not be the AAC schools calling that shot.

I do think the more likely scenario is the Big 12 leftovers calling upon BYU, Boise St. and several AAC teams to fill-in the pieces to create the most attractive conference from what is available.

3. What I meant was that the leftovers from the Big 12 will be devalued and will be close enough to the American's new contract that they will not be able to raid the American as people think. There just won't be that great of a divide.

(05-07-2015 03:44 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 12:43 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 12:25 AM)BoKnows Wrote:  They, nor Texas Tech, would draw more than 40K if they weren't in the Big 12. A big stadium would be to their detriment.

This is false. We averaged almost 40K our last 20 years in the SWC. In fact, we averaged over 40K 8x's from 1976-1995.

Over the years, our student enrollment has continued to grow which means our alumni base continues to grow. We don't need UT or OU to fill up our stadium.

While I agree you wouldn't have a problem with attendance the SWC was still Texas centric and the point he is making still stands.

I don't think you will be playing in an empty stadium but you could quite possibly see a dip in attendance.

Either way though Tech will be fine.

He compares us to TCU and Baylor. We went 4-8 and set a stadium attendance record in 2014. In 2013 we set an attendance record with a less than desirable home schedule.

Tech will be fine and we will find a P5 home. That said, I won't be upset if UH comes with us.

Edit: Hate to be an ahole but the UAB fan has bigger problems on his plate. The State of Texas isn't killing off Texas Tech football.

(05-07-2015 05:10 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 03:27 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  3. Texas can't go to the PAC until their contract with ESPN for the LHN expires because it precludes them from going to any Conference in which ESPN doesn't own. To add to that, Texas knows that two thirds of the population is in the eastern US. That's also where the bulk of the money is. Texas will either go independent or move to an eastern conference. The PAC is not a viable option unless the PAC allows Texas to keep the LHN which would break their model. However, they are in the process of revamping that model and the new one may in deed allow for Texas to keep the LHN. I don't know but, if the money is great enough, it could happen.

(05-07-2015 04:23 PM)YNot Wrote:  While I tend to agree that Texas will look eastward first, California and Texas are the top two population states in the US. Those two states together account for about 20% of the total US population. California (38.8 million population) is about the size of #3 Florida, #8 Georgia, and #9 North Carolina COMBINED.

The PAC 12 + Texas and Oklahoma would still cover about one-third of the US population and would OWN four of the top-10 US TV markets (#2 LA, #5 DFW, #6 Bay Area, #10 Houston). [And no college conference is going to own #1 New York, #4 Philly, or #7 Boston media markets].

And, an upper crust of USC, Oregon, Texas, and Oklahoma could be extremely attractive from so many perspectives.

And, ESPN could still end up owning part of the PAC 12 Network and the PAC 12 Tier 1 media rights.

So, don't write off Texas and Oklahoma to the PAC 12!

1, You missed the above in blue.

(05-07-2015 04:23 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 03:27 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  3. The SEC now has something they did not during previous rounds of expansion, A NETWORK!!! They will expand with New Markets and the larger the better in mind.

I absolutely agree. #9 North Carolina (9.9 million population - #24 Charlotte and #25 Raleigh-Durham media markets) and #12 Virginia (8.3 million population - near #8 DC media market) will look really attractive to the SEC as it looks to expand the SECN.

2. Agreed.

(05-07-2015 04:23 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 03:27 PM)USFRamenu Wrote:  5. The teams left in the Big 12 when Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas are gone will not be viewed as marque teams. They will be viewed as have not's and that's why they were left over. They will not be able to bargain from a position of strength over the American. They will be in roughly the same boat. Sorry but, I just don't see them being able to pick off the American.

I agree that the Big 12 leftovers will not likely be viewed as marquee teams. If they are viewed as such, they will be gobbled up by one of the more powerful conferences.

However, they will not be anywhere near the same boat as the AAC. Do you really think that UCF, USF, and Houston would choose Tulsa and SMU over TCU and Baylor? Not a chance. Or Memphis and Cincinnati take Tulane and Temple over West Virginia and Kansas St.? No way.

So, it will still likely be the Big 12 leftovers driving the decision process. Now, depending on how many leftovers remain and who they are, the ultimate decision could be to align with the American - but it will not be the AAC schools calling that shot.

I do think the more likely scenario is the Big 12 leftovers calling upon BYU, Boise St. and several AAC teams to fill-in the pieces to create the most attractive conference from what is available.

3. What I meant was that the leftovers from the Big 12 will be devalued and will be close enough to the American's new contract that they will not be able to raid the American as people think. There just won't be that great of a divide.

Your #3 is a pipe dream. If Texas, Texas Tech, OK, and OSU leave, every current AAC member will jump at a chance to join the leftovers in the Big 12. I think that the first to go would be Houston and Memphis, as they'd join BYU and Boise in the new Big 12. If the MWC then added UTEP to get back to 12, then things may not change too much. If instead the MWC went for broke and decided to move into Texas by growing to 16 members, then all hell may break out. They'd probably try to get UTEP, UTSA, SMU, Rice, and Tulsa. If they were successful, it would devastate the western divisions of both the AAC and CUSA. At that point, the G5 might very well become the G4 as CUSA would add at least two new western members, and the AAC would have to replace four. The end result would be the end of the Sun Belt Conference and the beginning of a new G4.

(05-08-2015 05:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  Your #3 is a pipe dream. If Texas, Texas Tech, OK, and OSU leave, every current AAC member will jump at a chance to join the leftovers in the Big 12. I think that the first to go would be Houston and Memphis, as they'd join BYU and Boise in the new Big 12. If the MWC then added UTEP to get back to 12, then things may not change too much. If instead the MWC went for broke and decided to move into Texas by growing to 16 members, then all hell may break out. They'd probably try to get UTEP, UTSA, SMU, Rice, and Tulsa. If they were successful, it would devastate the western divisions of both the AAC and CUSA. At that point, the G5 might very well become the G4 as CUSA would add at least two new western members, and the AAC would have to replace four. The end result would be the end of the Sun Belt Conference and the beginning of a new G4.

You thinking that once Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma St leave, that the Big 12 contract will be worth the paper it's written on is a dream.

Also, Kansas has more of a shot at landing in a Major conference then either Texas Tech or Oklahoma St.

(05-08-2015 08:33 AM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 05:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  Your #3 is a pipe dream. If Texas, Texas Tech, OK, and OSU leave, every current AAC member will jump at a chance to join the leftovers in the Big 12. I think that the first to go would be Houston and Memphis, as they'd join BYU and Boise in the new Big 12. If the MWC then added UTEP to get back to 12, then things may not change too much. If instead the MWC went for broke and decided to move into Texas by growing to 16 members, then all hell may break out. They'd probably try to get UTEP, UTSA, SMU, Rice, and Tulsa. If they were successful, it would devastate the western divisions of both the AAC and CUSA. At that point, the G5 might very well become the G4 as CUSA would add at least two new western members, and the AAC would have to replace four. The end result would be the end of the Sun Belt Conference and the beginning of a new G4.

You thinking that once Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma St leave, that the Big 12 contract will be worth the paper it's written on is a dream.

Also, Kansas has more of a shot at landing in a Major conference then either Texas Tech or Oklahoma St.

Yes because fox still needs content. Even if they get the b1g

(05-08-2015 08:33 AM)USFRamenu Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 05:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  Your #3 is a pipe dream. If Texas, Texas Tech, OK, and OSU leave, every current AAC member will jump at a chance to join the leftovers in the Big 12. I think that the first to go would be Houston and Memphis, as they'd join BYU and Boise in the new Big 12. If the MWC then added UTEP to get back to 12, then things may not change too much. If instead the MWC went for broke and decided to move into Texas by growing to 16 members, then all hell may break out. They'd probably try to get UTEP, UTSA, SMU, Rice, and Tulsa. If they were successful, it would devastate the western divisions of both the AAC and CUSA. At that point, the G5 might very well become the G4 as CUSA would add at least two new western members, and the AAC would have to replace four. The end result would be the end of the Sun Belt Conference and the beginning of a new G4.

You thinking that once Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma St leave, that the Big 12 contract will be worth the paper it's written on is a dream.

Also, Kansas has more of a shot at landing in a Major conference then either Texas Tech or Oklahoma St.

This post and your position on Oklahoma is why I cant take your position. I grew up in Big10 country and no some of the larger donors... the Big 10 would not take Oklahoma. The Presidents make the final decision and since they would not be worthwhile addition to the collective research co-op, there is no way. Oklahoma adds some worth, but like ive said repeatedly, there arent many that have enough of a market to increase over the money they already get.
Oklahoma is a name, which is amazing, but it doesnt automatically get the Big 10 into any markets. Rutgers and Maryland suck. They cant even scratch Oklahomas balls and yet they got invited. Its markets, and not brands that will drive the B10.

As far as Texas Tech, do some reading over on Orangebloods. The Texas legislature has essentially tied Texas and Tech together. Texas could go indy without them but they arent going to a conference without them. Techs power is the fact that Texas will take them along. Tech will get a better landing spot than Kansas.

Kansas is hamstrung by the same market issue. The SEC doesnt need them, they have Missouri. Too much overlap. The Big 10 wont get nearly enough tvs out of it in order to make it worthwhile and even if they decided to go for it, there is no clear cut #16.

People talk about how the ACC is so vulnerable but people need to realize that the president have to want to change. UNC doesnt want to move. The big 10 was wanting them when they took Rutgers and Maryland...they didnt go. UNC is the big fish in a little pond and really for no reason. In the Big 10, they will be just another member. Might the SEC be interested, sure, but the president of UNC is not going to take his prestigious school into the low ranking SEC. The ACC is currently the highest rated academic conference in the nation and those blue blooded idiots love to stick their nose up at it.
The SEC will make close to $40 million in the next few years... the ACC will be closer to $30 million once they are done with their network. $10 million is alot, but not when you have to pay a $50 million exit fee and then cover a GOR. It would take years to recover and then they lose their research sharing that the ACC does, along with the prestige association.

It aint happening. There are so many more factors then just money.

I forgot to mention OSU... You have a multi Billionaire who gives millions to local polticians as an alumni. You really think the legislature is going to let Oklahoma make a move and not take OSU? Again, it isnt happening. Plus, the SEC network is based on having two strong schools within the same state. The exception is Utah and Colorado.

Turning the money losing Longwhore network into a regional channel, giving Texas a kickback for operating it for them and then putting the content of texas, Tech, Ok and OSU on it would make so much sense.

Kansas is the better add than OSU and Tech... neither of their academic really matches up with the Pac12 but the political fight is what made Larry Scott offer those two.

(05-08-2015 08:33 AM)USFRamenu Wrote:  You thinking that once Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech and Oklahoma St leave, that the Big 12 contract will be worth the paper it's written on is a dream.

Also, Kansas has more of a shot at landing in a Major conference then either Texas Tech or Oklahoma St.

1st: Texas Tech and Oklahoma St would overtake ECU at league attendance leaders despite the drop in "schools"

2nd: Where was Kansas during the last round of Big 12 realignment rumors. I like Kansas. They have real beer, like Texas but the fact remains they did NOT have a landing spot if the Texoma 4 left.

3rd: Curious as to what Texas Tech, Okla St etc make on their 3rd tier TV rights compared to schools in the G5? Look at G5 conference TV revenue compared to Tier 3 rights for Big 12 members and I hope you get the idea. We aren't paid that money to broadcast a premier matchup between Big 12 schools--- we get that money by playing a G5 school on our turf. So who is more valuable?

(05-08-2015 02:05 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  This post and your position on Oklahoma is why I cant take your position. I grew up in Big10 country and no some of the larger donors... the Big 10 would not take Oklahoma. The Presidents make the final decision and since they would not be worthwhile addition to the collective research co-op, there is no way. Oklahoma adds some worth, but like ive said repeatedly, there arent many that have enough of a market to increase over the money they already get.
Oklahoma is a name, which is amazing, but it doesnt automatically get the Big 10 into any markets. Rutgers and Maryland suck. They cant even scratch Oklahomas balls and yet they got invited. Its markets, and not brands that will drive the B10.

As far as Texas Tech, do some reading over on Orangebloods. The Texas legislature has essentially tied Texas and Tech together. Texas could go indy without them but they arent going to a conference without them. Techs power is the fact that Texas will take them along. Tech will get a better landing spot than Kansas.

Kansas is hamstrung by the same market issue. The SEC doesnt need them, they have Missouri. Too much overlap. The Big 10 wont get nearly enough tvs out of it in order to make it worthwhile and even if they decided to go for it, there is no clear cut #16.

People talk about how the ACC is so vulnerable but people need to realize that the president have to want to change. UNC doesnt want to move. The big 10 was wanting them when they took Rutgers and Maryland...they didnt go. UNC is the big fish in a little pond and really for no reason. In the Big 10, they will be just another member. Might the SEC be interested, sure, but the president of UNC is not going to take his prestigious school into the low ranking SEC. The ACC is currently the highest rated academic conference in the nation and those blue blooded idiots love to stick their nose up at it.
The SEC will make close to $40 million in the next few years... the ACC will be closer to $30 million once they are done with their network. $10 million is alot, but not when you have to pay a $50 million exit fee and then cover a GOR. It would take years to recover and then they lose their research sharing that the ACC does, along with the prestige association.

It aint happening. There are so many more factors then just money.

I understand and get what you've written. Honestly if I were building the B1G, I'd go after Missouri and Vanderbilt. The problem is that I'm not building the B1G.

Quite frankly, many moves that have occurred in realignment have befuddled me. The only reason why I bring Oklahoma up for the B1G at all is they are a football Blue Blood. They are one of the few schools to remain consistently good over the decades. Are they consistently great? No but, they are good year in and year out. They are also a historical rival of Nebraska. The B1G needs someone with marque football cred after their recent adds. Ohio St winning the National Championship helped quiet the continual drone of B1G football sucks chants but that's last year, if tOSU does poorly this year, those chants will return.

Kansas is a Basketball Blue Blood and would be taken by the B1G for just that. They would use them to offset the adds of Louisville and Syracuse.

I would remind you that all of this is speculation as none of us are in the know. So you saying that you can't take my position seriously is irrelevant. I take no one's position here seriously. Although I do react to Trolls and people trashing schools for no reason.

this entire thread presumes Texas is going west - and as a long time Texan with lots of contacts in AUSTIN - i just don't think it will happen. Will they flirt around - sure - but UT is not a great partner. They don't share. THey know they bring the value and they want to be recognized for it - ever when their team kind of blows. They cannot control the PAC - but they control the big 12. I say after all of this it stays together - and would not be surprised to see them add 2 since they will be tempted to go for the dough on the conference tourny.

Also - TT and OSU are not givens to go with anyone to anywhere. TV markets control this thing and they are both in the hinterland. Politics change over time and OSU's billionaire is not going to be around much longer. PAC is not going to take lesser teams because of red state politics - they will just pass.

I personally think UT may end up not having a choice. UT is slowly looking like that aging singer who thinks they are still a Diva but the record label is getting real sick of their ****.

A recent article came out stating that they believe that the Longhorn network has lost tens of millions at this point... Disney may love Tejas but sooner than later, they will force a move or cut the cord.


I also want to address what some have said on here and remind them of the history of the Big 12 breakup.

Last time that it "almost" happened, the forgotten four (ISU, KSU, Kansas, and Baylor) were looking at joining the Big East.... because they didnt have a choice. There were not original teams left to keep the conference from dissolving.

Most people on here are assuming that Texas/OK and their two sidekicks will go to the Pac12. Well this is WAY different than last time. Now you have 6 out of 10 teams left. There wouldnt be enough votes to dissolve the conference. The remaining 6 are looking at some decent payouts from exit fees and they would legally have grounds to keep the Big12 name (which also owns Big 14 and Big 16 btw).

Now some say they wouldnt be a big draw. TCU has more BCS/Playoff wins then the entire AAC. Add in WVU and now they are way ahead. Some have said they wont be able to recruit without Texas and OK.... um, I belive that TCU did pretty well winning both BCS games while in the MWC and WVU won while in the Big East.

Lets be really honest about what we are a part of. Were in the American, which all 12 of us combined unfortunately has less national interest than the remaining 6 Big 12 teams. Perception will be that they are the stronger conference and they will indeed be the ones rebuilding.

There will be schools that will get an immediate invite and I think we all know who they are. If Uconn isnt taken by the ACC, then they are in. Uconn vs Kansas in basketball is worth its weight in gold. Cinci is in and so is BYU. I dont think anybody can dispute those three. So thats 9 teams.

The real question is how many would they take. I tend to belive that ESPN would push for USF and UCF. 110,000 students only 80 miles apart in two of the top 18 DMAs... I like our chances. If they go to 12, then there is only 1 spot left. Hopefully they go to 16.

in the end, I expect the Pac, Big and ACC to all be at 16. I honestly dont think the Big 10 or SEC will expand beyond 14.

16 will be a sweet spot being that the competition will get stiffer (Especially if Big12 pulls a trigger for some AAC schools/BYU). The bottom dwellers that were cool with not spending as much as TEXOKLAHOMAState would attempt to finally become a big spender like Baylor just did, especially if they see UCF, USF, Cincy already becoming competitive.

From a Financial Standpoint, Florida is growing so I can't see a conference NOT coming in and grabbing at least one of the schools left out.