(08-19-2016 07:53 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  The most valuable teams depends on who's perspective. ESPN may be OK with some, Fox wants others, Texas wants a third and OU could want a team not on any of those lists...

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

This is the most likely answer, they all want different (or no) teams and nobody wants to budge

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

(08-19-2016 08:01 PM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 07:53 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  The most valuable teams depends on who's perspective. ESPN may be OK with some, Fox wants others, Texas wants a third and OU could want a team not on any of those lists...

Sent from my HTC Desire 626 using CSNbbs mobile app

This is the most likely answer, they all want different (or no) teams and nobody wants to budge

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

1. The best bluffs are the most detailed and elaborate.
2. OU & UT already know what they want.

No news on expansion today from any well known CFB sportswriter.

Sounds like the Orangebloods message board speculation wasn't newsworthy.

I did see a great article on Houston from @SIPeteThamel

it is not like this is new news sports business journal already reported from "insiders" that ESPN and Fox do not want to pay for what is available and even travis clay parroted that

the only "new' stuff here is that espn will take it to court (that is not even really new as sports business daily said espn thought it was not for G5 schools)

or that UT and OU will leave which who knows if that is the case or not 9 years from now is forever and expansion was not going to prevent them from leaving in the future if they wanted to and they are not going to sign an extended GOR with no media deal of the same length and they are not getting a media deal extension and I am not sure that UT especially or even OU wants an extension of the current deal when so many others have their deals ending before the current Big 12 deal ends

the addition of teams is really not a factor in UT not leaving or even OU for that matter no matter what OU says and really the addition of teams could just as easily make it much more likely they leave in the future.....all that depends on future media deals and that will almost certainly not be decided until years from now

(08-19-2016 11:43 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  OB: Expansion close to collapsing/ESPN threatening suit..

Orangebloods.com @OBWire
WAR ROOM: Big 12 expansion close to collpasing? ESPN preparing a lawsuit to block new teams? http://rvls.co/2bsraNX

This speculation got 5 likes and 5 RTs on twitter.

https://twitter.com/OBWire

i.e. It drew a collective yawn, from a CFB fanbase that is rabid for realignment news. No major CFB reporter paid attention to it.

(08-19-2016 08:35 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  it is not like this is new news sports business journal already reported from "insiders" that ESPN and Fox do not want to pay for what is available and even travis clay parroted that

the only "new' stuff here is that espn will take it to court (that is not even really new as sports business daily said espn thought it was not for G5 schools)

or that UT and OU will leave which who knows if that is the case or not 9 years from now is forever and expansion was not going to prevent them from leaving in the future if they wanted to and they are not going to sign an extended GOR with no media deal of the same length and they are not getting a media deal extension and I am not sure that UT especially or even OU wants an extension of the current deal when so many others have their deals ending before the current Big 12 deal ends

the addition of teams is really not a factor in UT not leaving or even OU for that matter no matter what OU says and really the addition of teams could just as easily make it much more likely they leave in the future.....all that depends on future media deals and that will almost certainly not be decided until years from now

That's what I said when I saw this thread. The SBJ article...

The narrative has progressed from that point.

I'm certainly not an attorney, and I don't play one on TV. However, from where I sit, ESPN doesn't appear to have a leg to stand on here even if it does sue the B12.

The Big 12 is a 10-team conference that has decided it needs to expand to help improve its chances of landing a team in the poorly conceived four-team playoff.

Unfortunately for the Big 12, all of the current Power 5 programs are committed elsewhere and unavailable.

So what else are they supposed to do? Just accept their fate?

Eff that noise!

They signed a contract with ESPN where the WWL agreed to pay the B12 $20 million per team were they to expand. The Big 12 is merely exercising that option in their contract. And if they were to add say, Brigham Young and Cincinnati, those are perfectly legitimate choices and very much in line with the vast majority of current P5 programs.

Also, it's not like the Big 12 is expanding by eight or 10 teams. They are talking about adding two teams – four at the absolute maximum.

Personally, I believe that ESPN is bluffing here. If they lose this lawsuit, they risk opening the floodgates. In fact, if I were the Big 12 and ESPN sued me, and my side prevailed, I would immediately expand by two or four more teams. They're going to shove it right up your ass in 2025 anyway, so why not get every nickel you can from them in the interim?

(08-19-2016 08:49 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'm certainly not an attorney, and I don't play one on TV. However, from where I sit, ESPN doesn't appear to have a leg to stand on here even if it does sue the B12.

The Big 12 is a 10-team conference that has decided it needs to expand to help improve its chances of landing a team in the poorly conceived four-team playoff.

Unfortunately for the Big 12, all of the current Power 5 programs are committed elsewhere and unavailable.

So what else are they supposed to do? Just accept their fate?

Eff that noise!

They signed a contract with ESPN where the WWL agreed to pay the B12 $20 million per team were they to expand. The Big 12 is merely exercising that option in their contract. And if they were to add say, Brigham Young and Cincinnati, those are perfectly legitimate choices and very much in line with the vast majority of current P5 programs.

Also, it's not like the Big 12 is expanding by eight or 10 teams. They are talking about adding two teams – four at the absolute maximum.

Personally, I believe that ESPN is bluffing here. If they lose this lawsuit, they risk opening the floodgates. In fact, if I were the Big 12 and ESPN sued me, and my side prevailed, I would immediately expand by two or four more teams. They're going to shove it right up your ass in 2025 anyway, so why not get every nickel you can from them in the interim?

the reality is that it is not the addition of teams that improves the chances to get in the playoffs it is the reduction in conference games

bowlsby has commented on this at about 23 minutes into the media day presser from back in May when specifically ask about the CCG and playoff chances and that was when the Big 12 was adding a cCG apart from any talk of expansion

the addition of teams would help in an extremely limited amount if they still played 9 conference games because the only "help" is teams not playing each other possibly

what actually helps more is the reduction in conference games because there again you have teams avoiding playing each other and as a simulation on the PAC 12 showed you actually improve strength of schedule with fewer conference games and that was dropping one random conference game and each team replacing that conference game with an OOC game equal to their WEAKEST OOC game.....so dropping a PAC 12 game and adding a game against a D1-AA level team or a low level G5 game

all but WSU and Oregon State IMPROVED their strength of schedule in that situation

and even with the addition of new teams the "maths" of those additions is really statistics ignoring reality....it is ignoring the fact that a conference will still need a team to go 11-1 or 12-0 and win a CCG (if they have a CCG) go make the playoffs and the addition of teams does not help that much at all

especially the pretend "more teams more chance one of them does that" which is just a false reality

the reduction in conference games is what matters the most and you do not need to add teams to accomplish that

Sorry but you are saying that a team replacing a mid level conference game- and replacing that with an OOC game equal to their WEAKEST OOC game- would IMPROVE their SOS??? Sorry, but you are absolutely clueless if you really believe that. So instead of playing say a #30 West Virginia you play a #120 team. And that's going to improve the SOS? NO chance in hell.

Here's a source that matches the credibility of Ketchum. Of course, I'd give the ISU President's comments the most weight. MHver3 seems to have at least figured out why an ESPN suit is 'problematic' to say the least. I'll give him that.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
So I'm here to simply say: don't believe this crap-Our media partners are not mad at us, not suing us, and not blocking expansion.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
And let's be honest, BYU,UC, Uconn, and UH-all 4 are much better product then Rutgers and Terps.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
Didn't expect to be awakened from my slumber so soon but info is flowing and it is my duty to share.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
Specifically this nonsense about ESPN threatening to file suit against B12 for expansion.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
And my source tells me it is absolute hogwash.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
For one, ESPN doesn't want to open that can of worms as it would leave them open to countless counter suits.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
Counter suits from B12 members, from former BigEast schools-hell, pretty much the entire G5

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
ESPN will honor the contract they wrote the language to.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
No ones mad at the B12 for expanding except a few people in Texas who haven't gotten over A&M and NU.

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
ESPN benefitted nothing from the last B10 expansion-they actually ended up paying far more for UMD and RU then they were already paying

MHver3
‏@MHver3 
And then they had to share those rights with Fox so they actually got half the content for way more $$ out.

ESPN has the AAC contract. It pays the teams about 2mil per... Why would ESPN want to pay 20mil per, for two teams it's currently paying 2 mil?

(08-19-2016 09:57 PM)Bull Wrote:  ESPN has the AAC contract. It pays the teams about 2mil per... Why would ESPN want to pay 20mil per, for two teams it's currently paying 2 mil?

They did so with Rutgers and Louisville.

They did so with TCU.

We all know how it works. Value is relative to conference affiliation. It's the schedules that drive the market. The stories that get told within the structure of P5 vs G5.

It's just a different product altogether.

As you pointed out, ESPN clearly has a conflict of interest here... They are trying to manipulate value because they got an advantageous deal when a power conference collapsed. BYU as well is worth more when put into a power gauntlet versus playing on their own for nothing.

(08-19-2016 08:49 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'm certainly not an attorney, and I don't play one on TV. However, from where I sit, ESPN doesn't appear to have a leg to stand on here even if it does sue the B12.

The Big 12 is a 10-team conference that has decided it needs to expand to help improve its chances of landing a team in the poorly conceived four-team playoff.

Unfortunately for the Big 12, all of the current Power 5 programs are committed elsewhere and unavailable.

So what else are they supposed to do? Just accept their fate?

Eff that noise!

They signed a contract with ESPN where the WWL agreed to pay the B12 $20 million per team were they to expand. The Big 12 is merely exercising that option in their contract. And if they were to add say, Brigham Young and Cincinnati, those are perfectly legitimate choices and very much in line with the vast majority of current P5 programs.

Also, it's not like the Big 12 is expanding by eight or 10 teams. They are talking about adding two teams – four at the absolute maximum.

Personally, I believe that ESPN is bluffing here. If they lose this lawsuit, they risk opening the floodgates. In fact, if I were the Big 12 and ESPN sued me, and my side prevailed, I would immediately expand by two or four more teams. They're going to shove it right up your ass in 2025 anyway, so why not get every nickel you can from them in the interim?

Agree. In addition, Fox seems to be okay with the additions, so it's going ahead.

(08-19-2016 04:35 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 04:16 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 04:03 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 03:54 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 03:43 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Possibly. I always get a kick out of the idea ESPN is mad they will have to pay an AAC team more money but they had no problem giving TCU, Utah, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville and WVU similar raises (TCU and Utah were making ~$1m a year. The Big East schools were making $3-4M/year). Why the outrage all of a sudden?

There is a difference. ESPN was willing to upgrade the Big East contract to 13 mill per team before the conference voted it down. Paying the AAC teams only 2 mill per year is a big difference.

So by that logic they would have no issue upingp the pay for Cincinnati, UConn and/or USF for the Big 12 since they were part of the conference they were going to pay $13M for.

Not all teams are worth the same.

How is UConn not worth the same? They've won more MBB Championships than anyone in recent history. Are you saying Syracuse football is the x factor?

Fact is, the entire structure is arbitrary beyond the 10-15 most recognized brands.

ESPN has a clear conflict of interest because they own the BYU/AAC contracts. The value of those teams goes up considerably in an autonomy conference. (it doesn't stay the same... ESPN is paying for a different product)

I'm sure that ESPN would be perfectly fine with paying less per year than they do for Syracuse, too.

(08-19-2016 06:18 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Maryland and some others are not worth it. Many G5 schools are a much better draw on tv than many P5 schools.

You still have NO clue how this works, do you? Maryland and Rutgers are more than worth it for the Big 10

(08-19-2016 08:49 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'm certainly not an attorney, and I don't play one on TV. However, from where I sit, ESPN doesn't appear to have a leg to stand on here even if it does sue the B12.

The Big 12 is a 10-team conference that has decided it needs to expand to help improve its chances of landing a team in the poorly conceived four-team playoff.

Unfortunately for the Big 12, all of the current Power 5 programs are committed elsewhere and unavailable.

So what else are they supposed to do? Just accept their fate?

Eff that noise!

They signed a contract with ESPN where the WWL agreed to pay the B12 $20 million per team were they to expand. The Big 12 is merely exercising that option in their contract. And if they were to add say, Brigham Young and Cincinnati, those are perfectly legitimate choices and very much in line with the vast majority of current P5 programs.

Also, it's not like the Big 12 is expanding by eight or 10 teams. They are talking about adding two teams – four at the absolute maximum.

Personally, I believe that ESPN is bluffing here. If they lose this lawsuit, they risk opening the floodgates. In fact, if I were the Big 12 and ESPN sued me, and my side prevailed, I would immediately expand by two or four more teams. They're going to shove it right up your ass in 2025 anyway, so why not get every nickel you can from them in the interim?

ESPN will destroy the Big 12 before they pay million of dollars to teams they don't feel deserve it. And if you need an example just look at what they did to Big East Football.

(08-19-2016 09:18 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Sorry but you are saying that a team replacing a mid level conference game- and replacing that with an OOC game equal to their WEAKEST OOC game- would IMPROVE their SOS??? Sorry, but you are absolutely clueless if you really believe that. So instead of playing say a #30 West Virginia you play a #120 team. And that's going to improve the SOS? NO chance in hell.

you are the one that is clueless

http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/201...en-big-acc

there is the article

the reason it works is because when your conference plays 8 conference games which is 66% of your schedule when you can get a number of those teams to bump up in strength of schedule based on getting an additional win that matters a great deal more than one team dropping down on your schedule

you are building up 66% or so of your schedule just slightly while you are dropping down only 8.3% of your schedule

plus not every team that you might avoid is #30 SoS WVU you could just as easily avoid horrible KU

plus you are not even looking at it properly your strength of schedule is barely based on the overall strength of schedule of the team you play it is much more based on the actual strength of the team you play.....if KU has the #1 SoS and they lose 100% of those 12 games they are not a #1 SoS team on YOUR schedule they are a horrid 0-12 team on your schedule that happened to lose to a lot of good teams

for a team to matter on YOUR strength of schedule that team actually has to WIN GAMES no matter what their SoS is.....so you are not even clued in to how it works......a team that is #120 on the SoS and that is 11-1 looks a hell of a lot better on YOUR strength of schedule than a team that has the #1 SoS and that is 0-12

there is NO STRENGTH of SCHEDULE ON "GOOD LOSSES" by the teams on your schedule there is only WEAKNESS in losses and while there are "better wins" there will NEVER be a loss that will be better than even the worst win.....the team that plays you has not helped you by the fact that they lost to Alabama as much as they would have helped you if they beat Portland State and that just builds and builds as the losses or wins pile up

the only teams it does not work for are the very weakest teams in the conference that are not as likely to get an additional win against their weaker OOC opponent Vs a stronger conference opponent....they still LOST

for the SoS of a team that YOU PLAY to matter on YOUR SoS those teams have to actually WIN a lot of those games....otherwise they are just a LOSER on YOUR SoS

(08-19-2016 10:34 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 08:49 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'm certainly not an attorney, and I don't play one on TV. However, from where I sit, ESPN doesn't appear to have a leg to stand on here even if it does sue the B12.

The Big 12 is a 10-team conference that has decided it needs to expand to help improve its chances of landing a team in the poorly conceived four-team playoff.

Unfortunately for the Big 12, all of the current Power 5 programs are committed elsewhere and unavailable.

So what else are they supposed to do? Just accept their fate?

Eff that noise!

They signed a contract with ESPN where the WWL agreed to pay the B12 $20 million per team were they to expand. The Big 12 is merely exercising that option in their contract. And if they were to add say, Brigham Young and Cincinnati, those are perfectly legitimate choices and very much in line with the vast majority of current P5 programs.

Also, it's not like the Big 12 is expanding by eight or 10 teams. They are talking about adding two teams – four at the absolute maximum.

Personally, I believe that ESPN is bluffing here. If they lose this lawsuit, they risk opening the floodgates. In fact, if I were the Big 12 and ESPN sued me, and my side prevailed, I would immediately expand by two or four more teams. They're going to shove it right up your ass in 2025 anyway, so why not get every nickel you can from them in the interim?

ESPN will destroy the Big 12 before they pay million of dollars to teams they don't feel deserve it. And if you need an example just look at what they did to Big East Football.

Let me get this straight... if Texas and Oklahoma decide they want to expand the Big 12 conference ESPN will destroy the conference? How?

(08-19-2016 10:56 PM)sherekhan Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 10:34 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(08-19-2016 08:49 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I'm certainly not an attorney, and I don't play one on TV. However, from where I sit, ESPN doesn't appear to have a leg to stand on here even if it does sue the B12.

The Big 12 is a 10-team conference that has decided it needs to expand to help improve its chances of landing a team in the poorly conceived four-team playoff.

Unfortunately for the Big 12, all of the current Power 5 programs are committed elsewhere and unavailable.

So what else are they supposed to do? Just accept their fate?

Eff that noise!

They signed a contract with ESPN where the WWL agreed to pay the B12 $20 million per team were they to expand. The Big 12 is merely exercising that option in their contract. And if they were to add say, Brigham Young and Cincinnati, those are perfectly legitimate choices and very much in line with the vast majority of current P5 programs.

Also, it's not like the Big 12 is expanding by eight or 10 teams. They are talking about adding two teams – four at the absolute maximum.

Personally, I believe that ESPN is bluffing here. If they lose this lawsuit, they risk opening the floodgates. In fact, if I were the Big 12 and ESPN sued me, and my side prevailed, I would immediately expand by two or four more teams. They're going to shove it right up your ass in 2025 anyway, so why not get every nickel you can from them in the interim?

ESPN will destroy the Big 12 before they pay million of dollars to teams they don't feel deserve it. And if you need an example just look at what they did to Big East Football.

Let me get this straight... if Texas and Oklahoma decide they want to expand the Big 12 conference ESPN will destroy the conference? How?

You can play dumb as chit all you want but ESPN will get their way contract be damn because the Big 12 needs them. Texas and OU wants more money and they don't care how they get it as long as they get it. A middle ground will be found between the three parties.