(08-19-2021 08:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 08:24 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 08:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 08:02 PM)whittx Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 12:01 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  https://sicem365.com/s/10313/stop-the-sl...12-remains

Article breaks through the numbers and shows that the Big 12's remaining schools have been doing better than the AAC in TV numbers.

Keep in mind, you're comparing flagship land grants + Baylor/TCU to largely 3-4th public schools in their states. You're talking about schools that
(with the exceptions of TCU and WV) have the built in advantages of playing top level competition for decades before several of the American schools existed. You're talking about a conference that in one form or another has been around for over 100 years before the American was founded. Yet the Remaining 8 are barely ahead of the American. If you put schools like Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska with the power American schools and left Baylor, both Kansas schools and Texas Tech with East Carolina, Tulane, and Tulsa, the situation would be quite different.

That's kind of my thinking: Even if you screen out L8 games vs TX and OU, I think there's a good chance there's a halo effect that the L8 have gotten merely because their games were "P5" games, which carries more status, and have ramifications for things CFB fans regard as important, like a guaranteed berth in the Sugar Bowl and possibly a place in the CFP playoffs. The presence of TX and OU, which to me is what that power status was based on, casts an aura of "big time" over a TT - TCU game that is just absent when it is UCF vs ECU. Make UCF vs ECU an ACC game, or make TT vs Kansas State a Mountain West game, and I think ratings would be higher than they currently are for the former, and lower than they currently are for the latter, just on that basis alone.

So while I don't quarrel with the basic point - I do think that currently, L8 games draw higher ratings than AAC games - it's not really relevant, not a fair comparison.

I wonder how many people watching a random TCU v Kansas State game are Texas or OU fans consuming everything BXII? Will they still watch after they move to the SEC? This will be something that will have to be considered going forward.

Yeah, that could happen. It's still "your league". In my experience if you go to a Baton Rouge sports bar in the Fall, yes, the bulk of screens will have the LSU game on, of course, but after that, the pecking order is (a) any huge-brand OOC games, like say if Ohio State vs Penn State is on, and (b) other SEC games, even Kentucky vs South Carolina.

Exactly. The ESPN/ABC/CBS /Notre Dame and SEC Network games will be the default games in the sports bar.in SEC country (with Fox and FS1 in B12 and B10 included) You don't need to ask a bartender for the Baylor -Texas Tech to be shown like you would for Texas State-Houston, for example.

(08-20-2021 12:46 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Eh, maybe I am wrong, but the way I interpreted what the ISU AD said was more holistically. Yes, if Bowlsby is correct the L8 will earn about $14m per year, which is way more than the $4m or so a year the MW teams earn (it's also way, way less than what the P4 teams will be earning).

But the main point IMO was that without TX and OU, the L8 will fall from the ranks of the power leagues. Regardless of whether the payout is $17m or $7m, the L8 will no longer be regarded as in the same "power club" with the other four leagues. I predict it will lose the trappings of power, such as the Sugar Bowl bid (if contract bowls still exist after 2025) and in any new playoff scheme, it will get "G5 money" not the big cut that the P-conferences get. And the media and public will not view the L8 as a P-league either.

It's the hit in status, as much as the hit in money, that will be in effect.

I think the current formation of the "Alliance" among the ACC, PAC and B1G - with the L8 conspicuously absent - is another indicator of what is in store.

But hey, I've been wrong before.

And you're wrong again. The projected payout is $25 million, which includes the $14 million from media, plus hoops credits (currently 59) and other stuff. Which is only about $5-7 million less than the conference revenue distributions the ACC and Pac 12 currently earn. And way way more than L-USF's conference currently earns (which will also drop if raided).

So your main point is also wrong. The Big 12 will drop from the 3rd most financially viable conference to the 5th, but it will still be in the range of #'s 3 and 4 and way way above whoever is #6 (probably the MWC). And if it loses the Sugar Bowl, it will probably get the Cotton (or Fiesta) Bowl, if contract bowls remain. And, it will not negotiate it's CFP payouts with the G conferences and, hence, will not be at their level.

The Alliance is a PR move designed to form a voting bloc for the upcoming NCAA convention and to delay the CFP until it can be opened up for competitive bidding. It followed a similar meeting between the PAC and Big 12. L-USF wasn't included.

Wrong before, wrong again.

Eh, the Baylor fan i replied to mentioned TV valuations, so I was thinking in those terms, sorry I didn't make that clear, and to him if i misunderstood him. Something like the ACC, which I think gets the least among the Ps, probably gets about $24m per school in TV right now, Bowlsby says the L8 would get around $14m per school, while the MW is getting $4m with their new deal. So about a $10m TV gap between the L8 and the other two in both directions. Of course, the AAC gets more, something like $7m. But yes, add on top of that the other revenues and the L8 is likely to be in the $25m range in overall distributions - point taken.

In any event, I think my main point, which goes beyond money, remains:

I predict .... if the contract bowl system persists beyond 2025, the L8 (or L10 or L12, if they expand, so I'll call it the Lx, where x is a variable number) will not have a contract with any major bowl (Sugar, Fiesta, Cotton, etc.). There just won't be any interest on the part of a major bowl for that.

.... if we get an expanded playoff, after 2025 the Lx will not get "P" playoff money, they will basically get "G" money. I don't know how the negotiations will be carried out - I know AAC fans have said Aresco doesn't want the AAC to negotiate with the Gs either - but whether separate or together, the Lx money will basically be G-level.

.... the media and public will regard the Lx as a G conference. Sure, they will likely be regarded as the top-G, like the AAC is currently so-regarded, but it will be basically a G-level reputation. That's despite the fact that I expect the Lx to perform well on the field, often beating other Ps OOC, and be an exciting football league to watch. But without the big brand names, the reputation will be as a lesser league.

As for the Alliance, the media reports seem to indicate that despite the earlier L8/PAC talks, the L8 has been left out of that. IMO, that is telling, it signals to me that the L8 is already starting to be treated like the AAC and others Gs.

IIRC, a few weeks ago when the Baylor AD testified at the Texas Senate meeting, he implored the Senators for help because he doesn't want the three Texas schools to be "demoted". Because he said that right now, it feels like a demotion is happening.

I think he was right - I expect a demotion in overall perception and status from P to G.

But we shall see.

(08-21-2021 10:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 12:46 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Eh, maybe I am wrong, but the way I interpreted what the ISU AD said was more holistically. Yes, if Bowlsby is correct the L8 will earn about $14m per year, which is way more than the $4m or so a year the MW teams earn (it's also way, way less than what the P4 teams will be earning).

But the main point IMO was that without TX and OU, the L8 will fall from the ranks of the power leagues. Regardless of whether the payout is $17m or $7m, the L8 will no longer be regarded as in the same "power club" with the other four leagues. I predict it will lose the trappings of power, such as the Sugar Bowl bid (if contract bowls still exist after 2025) and in any new playoff scheme, it will get "G5 money" not the big cut that the P-conferences get. And the media and public will not view the L8 as a P-league either.

It's the hit in status, as much as the hit in money, that will be in effect.

I think the current formation of the "Alliance" among the ACC, PAC and B1G - with the L8 conspicuously absent - is another indicator of what is in store.

But hey, I've been wrong before.

And you're wrong again. The projected payout is $25 million, which includes the $14 million from media, plus hoops credits (currently 59) and other stuff. Which is only about $5-7 million less than the conference revenue distributions the ACC and Pac 12 currently earn. And way way more than L-USF's conference currently earns (which will also drop if raided).

So your main point is also wrong. The Big 12 will drop from the 3rd most financially viable conference to the 5th, but it will still be in the range of #'s 3 and 4 and way way above whoever is #6 (probably the MWC). And if it loses the Sugar Bowl, it will probably get the Cotton (or Fiesta) Bowl, if contract bowls remain. And, it will not negotiate it's CFP payouts with the G conferences and, hence, will not be at their level.

The Alliance is a PR move designed to form a voting bloc for the upcoming NCAA convention and to delay the CFP until it can be opened up for competitive bidding. It followed a similar meeting between the PAC and Big 12. L-USF wasn't included.

Wrong before, wrong again.

Eh, the Baylor fan I replied to mentioned TV valuations, so I was thinking in those terms, sorry I didn't make that clear. Something like the ACC, which I think gets the least among the Ps, probably gets about $24m per school in TV right now, Bowlsby says the L8 would get around $14m per school, while the MW is getting $4m with their new deal. So about a $10m TV gap between the L8 and the other two in both directions. Of course, the AAC gets more, something like $7m. But yes, add on top of that the other revenues and the L8 is likely to be in the $25m range in overall distributions - point taken.

In any event, I think my main point, which goes beyond money, remains:

I predict .... if the contract bowl system persists beyond 2025, the L8 (or L10 or L12, if they expand, so I'll call it the Lx, where x is a variable number) will not have a contract with any major bowl (Sugar, Fiesta, Cotton, etc.). There just won't be any interest on the part of a major bowl for that.

.... if we get an expanded playoff, after 2025 the Lx will not get "P" playoff money, they will basically get "G" money. I don't know how the negotiations will be carried out - I know AAC fans have said Aresco doesn't want the AAC to negotiate with the Gs either - but whether separate or together, the Lx money will basically be G-level.

.... the media and public will regard the Lx as a G conference. Sure, they will likely be regarded as the top-G, like the AAC is currently so-regarded, but it will be basically a G-level reputation. That's despite the fact that I expect the Lx to perform well on the field, often beating other Ps OOC, and be an exciting football league to watch. But without the big brand names, the reputation will be as a lesser league.

As for the Alliance, the media reports seem to indicate that despite the earlier L8/PAC talks, the L8 has been left out of that. IMO, that is telling, it signals to me that the L8 is already starting to be treated like the AAC and others Gs.

IIRC, a few weeks ago when the Baylor AD testified at the Texas Senate meeting, he implored the Senators for help because he doesn't want the three Texas schools to be "demoted". Because he said that right now, it feels like a demotion is happening.

I think he was right - I expect a demotion in overall perception and status from P to G.

But we shall see.

I dont think so. Unlike the the SWC members who scattered to the 4 winds when Texas/Aggie/Baylor/Tech left---or the old 2012 Big East that had only one long time P5 member remaining---the Big12 rump comprises most of the conference. It still has 8 remaining long time P5 members. All 8 are associated with the P5 through decades of playing in a power conference for as long as college football fans can remember. I suspect the B12 rump conference will be treated far more like the old post raid Big East after losing Miami. They still have 8 well known brands the public strongly associates with the P5---and they still have perhaps one of the top 2 or 3 basketball leagues in the nation. My sense is, if anything, the current B12 rump is actually closer to a full P5 conference than the old Big East was. My guess is they either will be treated as TRUE tweener league or as a lower end power league like the old post raid Big East (sans Miami). I dont think they will get the full G5 back of the bus treatment.

(08-21-2021 10:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-21-2021 10:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 12:46 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 12:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Eh, maybe I am wrong, but the way I interpreted what the ISU AD said was more holistically. Yes, if Bowlsby is correct the L8 will earn about $14m per year, which is way more than the $4m or so a year the MW teams earn (it's also way, way less than what the P4 teams will be earning).

But the main point IMO was that without TX and OU, the L8 will fall from the ranks of the power leagues. Regardless of whether the payout is $17m or $7m, the L8 will no longer be regarded as in the same "power club" with the other four leagues. I predict it will lose the trappings of power, such as the Sugar Bowl bid (if contract bowls still exist after 2025) and in any new playoff scheme, it will get "G5 money" not the big cut that the P-conferences get. And the media and public will not view the L8 as a P-league either.

It's the hit in status, as much as the hit in money, that will be in effect.

I think the current formation of the "Alliance" among the ACC, PAC and B1G - with the L8 conspicuously absent - is another indicator of what is in store.

But hey, I've been wrong before.

And you're wrong again. The projected payout is $25 million, which includes the $14 million from media, plus hoops credits (currently 59) and other stuff. Which is only about $5-7 million less than the conference revenue distributions the ACC and Pac 12 currently earn. And way way more than L-USF's conference currently earns (which will also drop if raided).

So your main point is also wrong. The Big 12 will drop from the 3rd most financially viable conference to the 5th, but it will still be in the range of #'s 3 and 4 and way way above whoever is #6 (probably the MWC). And if it loses the Sugar Bowl, it will probably get the Cotton (or Fiesta) Bowl, if contract bowls remain. And, it will not negotiate it's CFP payouts with the G conferences and, hence, will not be at their level.

The Alliance is a PR move designed to form a voting bloc for the upcoming NCAA convention and to delay the CFP until it can be opened up for competitive bidding. It followed a similar meeting between the PAC and Big 12. L-USF wasn't included.

Wrong before, wrong again.

Eh, the Baylor fan I replied to mentioned TV valuations, so I was thinking in those terms, sorry I didn't make that clear. Something like the ACC, which I think gets the least among the Ps, probably gets about $24m per school in TV right now, Bowlsby says the L8 would get around $14m per school, while the MW is getting $4m with their new deal. So about a $10m TV gap between the L8 and the other two in both directions. Of course, the AAC gets more, something like $7m. But yes, add on top of that the other revenues and the L8 is likely to be in the $25m range in overall distributions - point taken.

In any event, I think my main point, which goes beyond money, remains:

I predict .... if the contract bowl system persists beyond 2025, the L8 (or L10 or L12, if they expand, so I'll call it the Lx, where x is a variable number) will not have a contract with any major bowl (Sugar, Fiesta, Cotton, etc.). There just won't be any interest on the part of a major bowl for that.

.... if we get an expanded playoff, after 2025 the Lx will not get "P" playoff money, they will basically get "G" money. I don't know how the negotiations will be carried out - I know AAC fans have said Aresco doesn't want the AAC to negotiate with the Gs either - but whether separate or together, the Lx money will basically be G-level.

.... the media and public will regard the Lx as a G conference. Sure, they will likely be regarded as the top-G, like the AAC is currently so-regarded, but it will be basically a G-level reputation. That's despite the fact that I expect the Lx to perform well on the field, often beating other Ps OOC, and be an exciting football league to watch. But without the big brand names, the reputation will be as a lesser league.

As for the Alliance, the media reports seem to indicate that despite the earlier L8/PAC talks, the L8 has been left out of that. IMO, that is telling, it signals to me that the L8 is already starting to be treated like the AAC and others Gs.

IIRC, a few weeks ago when the Baylor AD testified at the Texas Senate meeting, he implored the Senators for help because he doesn't want the three Texas schools to be "demoted". Because he said that right now, it feels like a demotion is happening.

I think he was right - I expect a demotion in overall perception and status from P to G.

But we shall see.

I dont think so. Unlike the the SWC members who scattered to the 4 winds when Texas/Aggie/Baylor/Tech left---or the old 2012 Big East that had only one long time P5 member remaining---the Big12 rump comprises most of the conference. It still has 8 remaining long time P5 members. All 8 are associated with the P5 through decades of playing in a power conference for as long as college football fans can remember. I suspect the B12 rump conference will be treated far more like the old post raid Big East after losing Miami. They still have 8 well known brands the public strongly associates with the P5---and they still have perhaps one of the top 2 or 3 basketball leagues in the nation. My sense is, if anything, the current B12 rump is actually closer to a full P5 conference than the old Big East was. My guess is they either will be treated as TRUE tweener league or as a lower end power league like the old post raid Big East (sans Miami). I dont think they will get the full G5 back of the bus treatment.

We shall see. But regarding the Big East, my recollection, as someone who had a team in that post-raid Big East, was that from 2005 - 2012 the Big East was not regarded by the media or fans as a real "power" conference. The term "Big Least" was often used, and there seemed to be constant calls for the Big East to be demoted, etc. And this was despite the fact that during that time, the Big East was in fact contractually a power/AQ league, with a guaranteed spot in a BCS bowl, full share of BCS money, etc. and also performed, in both hoops and football, as an AQ league as well. Despite all that - formal AQ status and performance in the two big sports to match - the Big East was basically an object of derision as not a real AQ league.

So I expect the Lx to suffer worse than the Big East did. I think it will be stripped of Power status in post-2025 contracts, and this will harm the perception of the league publicly as well.

That said, would it shock me if the Lx is in fact regarded as a tweener, and not given the "full back of bus" treatment in either contracts or public perception? No. As I said, I expect it to be regarded as the top G league, and that's something. The Lx will have more status than the current AAC does, and the current AAC does get a smidge of that tweener respect as it is, though it craves a lot more. So I won't be surprised if the Lx reputation is more of a tweener than a G, but I expect the latter.

(08-21-2021 10:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I dont think so. Unlike the the SWC members who scattered to the 4 winds when Texas/Aggie/Baylor/Tech left---or the old 2012 Big East that had only one long time P5 member remaining---the Big12 rump comprises most of the conference. It still has 8 remaining long time P5 members. All 8 are associated with the P5 through decades of playing in a power conference for as long as college football fans can remember. I suspect the B12 rump conference will be treated far more like the old post raid Big East after losing Miami. They still have 8 well known brands the public strongly associates with the P5---and they still have perhaps one of the top 2 or 3 basketball leagues in the nation. My sense is, if anything, the current B12 rump is actually closer to a full P5 conference than the old Big East was. My guess is they either will be treated as TRUE tweener league or as a lower end power league like the old post raid Big East (sans Miami). I dont think they will get the full G5 back of the bus treatment.

Agreed as to your main point. Assuming the PAC 12 doesn't expand (and potentially include TCU and Houston, as is being speculated), the remaining Big 12 schools will almost certainly be regarded at least as well as the post-Miami/Va.Tech/BC Big East both in terms of money and performance. However, there is one school in the remaining 8 that doesn't precisely fit your "decades in P5" definition; in fact, that 1 school spent 16 years in the non-BCS/non-AQ/G5 wilderness and then got elevated for 9 years into the Big 12. But I agree that the wilderness period is now largely forgotten - that 1 school has 8 top 10 AP finishes in the past 15 years and that has a way of changing perceptions. (Houston's 25 years in the wilderness could similarly change).

Money-wise, they'll be a new paradigm. The SEC and Big 10 will be the new P2 - with estimates of at least $75 million per school per year payouts. Then, they'll be 3 tweeners - the PAC, the ACC and the Big 12 - which will make between $25-$35 million per school per year. And then, the rest, which will make less than $10 million per school per year. The media doesn't now recognize those three tiers, but it will over time. They *might* still use a P5 definition they *might* not. But it'll be clear enough to all.

Perception of performance will depend upon actual performance. Losing OU will hurt, but losing middle-of-the-pack UT won't. It'll be like Miami leaving the Big East, but not Virginia Tech or BC. Remember, the Big East was only the 6th best conference and still maintained power status. The Big 12 will be at least 5th best and my guess is that, in some years, it'll be 3rd or 4th. New champions will emerge - perceptions will change. If it's in the Top 2-3 in hoops and the Top 3-5 in football, it'll be regarded as a power conference. Especially if it, as anticipated, gets its champ and possibly its runner-up into the new playoff system. In the past 25 years, both TCU and KState would have made a 12-team playoff 8 times; Baylor and Oklahoma State are just right behind that; West Virginia too. With OU off the schedule, that'll only increase.

(08-21-2021 02:26 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  ... Money-wise, they'll be a new paradigm. The SEC and Big 10 will be the new P2 - with estimates of at least $75 million per school per year payouts. Then, they'll be 3 tweeners - the PAC, the ACC and the Big 12 - which will make between $25-$35 million per school per year. And then, the rest, which will make less than $10 million per school per year. The media doesn't now recognize those three tiers, but it will over time. They *might* still use a P5 definition they *might* not. But it'll be clear enough to all. ...

If the top two tiers both have "P5" OOC game quotas, then there's a change the "Power Five" term will be used, but if it does, the meaning people attach to the term will weaken. It will be a "Big Two, Next Three, and Little Five".

(08-22-2021 06:08 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-21-2021 02:26 PM)Jared7 Wrote:  ... Money-wise, they'll be a new paradigm. The SEC and Big 10 will be the new P2 - with estimates of at least $75 million per school per year payouts. Then, they'll be 3 tweeners - the PAC, the ACC and the Big 12 - which will make between $25-$35 million per school per year. And then, the rest, which will make less than $10 million per school per year. The media doesn't now recognize those three tiers, but it will over time. They *might* still use a P5 definition they *might* not. But it'll be clear enough to all. ...

If the top two tiers both have "P5" OOC game quotas, then there's a change the "Power Five" term will be used, but if it does, the meaning people attach to the term will weaken. It will be a "Big Two, Next Three, and Little Five".

Indeed. And, if the PAC 12 decides to pull the trigger on expansion, it wouldn't change all that much. The Big 10 and the SEC would still be P2, the Pac-16(?) would be at $40+ million, the ACC between $30-35 million and the Big 12/AAC/Best of Rest at $15-20 million. And the remainder below $10 million. And actual performance would determine power perception. If teams from the Next Three actually performed above their brand and money weight and rank, they would be regarded as "power" conferences even if they didn't make nearly so much money. And conference revenue payouts are only a part (1/3rd?) of overall school athletic budgets - individual schools could still raise and spend money based on their own choices, which might have actual performance results.