(05-27-2023 10:36 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:13 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  That was an interesting interview.

He is clearly well connected but also pro B12. He even said “Go Big 12” during the interview.

One tidbit:

He said the ACC will make more money than the B12 for the next cycle at around mid $30 or even close to $40 while the B12 is going to make only $31.7 on average. I have been saying that the ACC would make at least $5 million more than the B12. At least he knows the facts.

McMurphy also said the B12 would surpass the ACC after the next cycle. I am not going to say it is impossible but to me that prediction sounds more like a wishful thinking.

Yes, Brett McMurphy does know the facts. His prediction of the big 12 potentially making more than the ACC after 2031 is not an uncommon expectation, but that was clearly a prediction and not presented as a fact, and it could be wrong.

Mid 30's to as much as $40m is $5-10m more than the big 12 through 2031, which is what we've heard from all reputable sources for 6 months now. The only people claiming otherwise are very loud and enthusiastic big 12 fans with no data to back up their boasting.

Let’s “re-slap” this right here for salty folk

(05-27-2023 10:49 PM)Acres Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:36 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:13 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  That was an interesting interview.

He is clearly well connected but also pro B12. He even said “Go Big 12” during the interview.

One tidbit:

He said the ACC will make more money than the B12 for the next cycle at around mid $30 or even close to $40 while the B12 is going to make only $31.7 on average. I have been saying that the ACC would make at least $5 million more than the B12. At least he knows the facts.

McMurphy also said the B12 would surpass the ACC after the next cycle. I am not going to say it is impossible but to me that prediction sounds more like a wishful thinking.

Yes, Brett McMurphy does know the facts. His prediction of the big 12 potentially making more than the ACC after 2031 is not an uncommon expectation, but that was clearly a prediction and not presented as a fact, and it could be wrong.

Mid 30's to as much as $40m is $5-10m more than the big 12 through 2031, which is what we've heard from all reputable sources for 6 months now. The only people claiming otherwise are very loud and enthusiastic big 12 fans with no data to back up their boasting.

Let’s “re-slap” this right here for salty folk

Are you saying McMurphy is wrong, based upon big 12 numbers with OUT , without the 4 g5 additions, and 3 years before the new deal kicks in? You need to come to the table with something a whole lot more convincing than that.

No salt here about the big 12, we left a long time ago and I have a healthy respect for the commissioner, the conference and schools there. But you guys aren’t going to out-earn the ACC before 2031, if then.

(05-27-2023 07:27 PM)Acres Wrote:  It was blown out of proportion. Dellenger reportedly saw some names that could have been written by anyone. Could have been schools that contacted the big12.

No disrespect but chances that big12 expands further with group of five schools is nil. They already have a deal through 2031.

Secondly, Baylor’s AD , said any further expansion, would need to bring an equivalent value to the new deal. He essentially eliminated all G5 schools as candidates.

Nah, the only G5 schools that still brings tv value better than Arizona and Colorado are Boise State, Army and Navy. The BYU and Boise State games are considered rivalry games. That along right there on a Big 12 top game of the week could draw the numbers. Army/Navy game could bring in 5 million + viewers. Colorado Vs Kansas could bring less than 1 millions viewers. The problem is some P5 schools are overvalued while some G5 schools are undervalued.

The Big 12 needs to keep their eyes on the prize and be patient. If the 24-team super conferences come to pass, the Big 12 is well positioned to be the lone survivor of the M3 and absorb the remnants of both leagues.

If the Big 10 takes 4 of the PAC 10, that leaves 6. Add those plus SDSU and put them with BYU and that’s your 8-team Western Division.

The ACC is bound to get hit hard too and the Big 12 should have their pick of 5 of the left behind to add with Cincy, WVU, and UCF for their East Division.

Boom! 3 x 8 = 24

(05-27-2023 06:44 PM)Usajags Wrote:  I just don’t understand why they would be interested in UConn.

Because your commish is a basketball guy with NE ties.

It's pretty simple.

Let me set this straight , UConn is a Basketball School, been very good at it for Years . They are exactly where They belong . The Big East . They had a couple of decent seasons in Big East Football but that was it. The only G5 schools that the Big 12 should look at are
Memphis
SDSU
SMU
USF
Bose State

(05-27-2023 10:49 PM)Acres Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:36 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:13 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  That was an interesting interview.

He is clearly well connected but also pro B12. He even said “Go Big 12” during the interview.

One tidbit:

He said the ACC will make more money than the B12 for the next cycle at around mid $30 or even close to $40 while the B12 is going to make only $31.7 on average. I have been saying that the ACC would make at least $5 million more than the B12. At least he knows the facts.

McMurphy also said the B12 would surpass the ACC after the next cycle. I am not going to say it is impossible but to me that prediction sounds more like a wishful thinking.

Yes, Brett McMurphy does know the facts. His prediction of the big 12 potentially making more than the ACC after 2031 is not an uncommon expectation, but that was clearly a prediction and not presented as a fact, and it could be wrong.

Mid 30's to as much as $40m is $5-10m more than the big 12 through 2031, which is what we've heard from all reputable sources for 6 months now. The only people claiming otherwise are very loud and enthusiastic big 12 fans with no data to back up their boasting.

Let’s “re-slap” this right here for salty folk

I am cool with the fact that the conference which UT and OU are in distributes more money than the ACC.

Do you still believe the B12 would make more than the ACC for the NEXT CYCLE?

(05-28-2023 07:49 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:49 PM)Acres Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:36 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:13 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  That was an interesting interview.

He is clearly well connected but also pro B12. He even said “Go Big 12” during the interview.

One tidbit:

He said the ACC will make more money than the B12 for the next cycle at around mid $30 or even close to $40 while the B12 is going to make only $31.7 on average. I have been saying that the ACC would make at least $5 million more than the B12. At least he knows the facts.

McMurphy also said the B12 would surpass the ACC after the next cycle. I am not going to say it is impossible but to me that prediction sounds more like a wishful thinking.

Yes, Brett McMurphy does know the facts. His prediction of the big 12 potentially making more than the ACC after 2031 is not an uncommon expectation, but that was clearly a prediction and not presented as a fact, and it could be wrong.

Mid 30's to as much as $40m is $5-10m more than the big 12 through 2031, which is what we've heard from all reputable sources for 6 months now. The only people claiming otherwise are very loud and enthusiastic big 12 fans with no data to back up their boasting.

Let’s “re-slap” this right here for salty folk

I am cool with the fact that the conference which UT and OU are in distributes more money than the ACC.

Do you still believe the B12 would make more than the ACC for the NEXT CYCLE?

Like I said they're deluded.

(05-27-2023 10:36 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:13 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  That was an interesting interview.

He is clearly well connected but also pro B12. He even said “Go Big 12” during the interview.

One tidbit:

He said the ACC will make more money than the B12 for the next cycle at around mid $30 or even close to $40 while the B12 is going to make only $31.7 on average. I have been saying that the ACC would make at least $5 million more than the B12. At least he knows the facts.

McMurphy also said the B12 would surpass the ACC after the next cycle. I am not going to say it is impossible but to me that prediction sounds more like a wishful thinking.

Yes, Brett McMurphy does know the facts. His prediction of the big 12 potentially making more than the ACC after 2031 is not an uncommon expectation, but that was clearly a prediction and not presented as a fact, and it could be wrong.

Mid 30's to as much as $40m is $5-10m more than the big 12 through 2031, which is what we've heard from all reputable sources for 6 months now. The only people claiming otherwise are very loud and enthusiastic big 12 fans with no data to back up their boasting.

ACC will make more until 2031, Who knows from then until end of
ACC deal. Key for B12 is to have another fairly short deal in 31. 5 to 7 years so it can hopefully keep pace.

If basketball can be fully monetized (as JRsec has been posting), then the Big 12 would be foolish not to assess UConn — and UConn would be misguided to not at least consider and invitation. This does not mean the Big 12 should invite or that UConn should accept if invited. The Big East is perfect for UConn men's hoops, no question. But there is a big picture element to this that involves forecasting the future of college athletics. Both parties are wise to have had discussions (as we know they have).

(05-28-2023 10:54 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  If basketball can be fully monetized (as JRsec has been posting), then the Big 12 would be foolish not to assess UConn — and UConn would be misguided to not at least consider and invitation. This does not mean the Big 12 should invite or that UConn should accept if invited. The Big East is perfect for UConn men's hoops, no question. But there is a big picture element to this that involves forecasting the future of college athletics. Both parties are wise to have had discussions (as we know they have).

That assumes that the Big East would not be involved in the future forecast of college athletics, which would be surprising to say the least.

(05-28-2023 11:03 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(05-28-2023 10:54 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  If basketball can be fully monetized (as JRsec has been posting), then the Big 12 would be foolish not to assess UConn — and UConn would be misguided to not at least consider and invitation. This does not mean the Big 12 should invite or that UConn should accept if invited. The Big East is perfect for UConn men's hoops, no question. But there is a big picture element to this that involves forecasting the future of college athletics. Both parties are wise to have had discussions (as we know they have).

That assumes that the Big East would not be involved in the future forecast of college athletics, which would be surprising to say the least.

My fumble. I meant to type:

the future of college athletics specifically related to all-sports autonomous leagues.

If the B12 doesn't get any PAC schools then I think it would be wise for them to stay in their bread basket and add Memphis and maybe Colorado St. if they want to add any schools at that point.

(05-28-2023 07:46 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Let me set this straight , UConn is a Basketball School, been very good at it for Years . They are exactly where They belong . The Big East . They had a couple of decent seasons in Big East Football but that was it. The only G5 schools that the Big 12 should look at are
Memphis
SDSU
SMU
USF
Bose State

Replace SMU with UTSA? Than that is a deal. TCU will make sure SMU does not join.

(05-27-2023 06:45 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I think Memphis is the top G5 they want. SDSU not a priority if 4C available, unless Zonas wants them in order to join. SDSU and UNLV could be slightly higher priority than OSU/WSU, but I’d expect remaining PAC teams to join a conference with those programs anyhow.

I honestly dont think they want any G5's at this time. There is too much potential that P5's with great geography could be available options sooner or later---with later being within a 5-to-10 year window. If that doesnt pan out----then maybe the B12 would reconsider some of the more attractive G5 targets at that time---assuming such targets would increase the payout for the existing members. If not---then I suspect there would be little interest even in the near future.

(05-28-2023 05:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 06:45 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I think Memphis is the top G5 they want. SDSU not a priority if 4C available, unless Zonas wants them in order to join. SDSU and UNLV could be slightly higher priority than OSU/WSU, but I’d expect remaining PAC teams to join a conference with those programs anyhow.

I honestly dont think they want any G5's at this time. There is too much potential that P5's with great geography could be available options sooner or later---with later being within a 5-to-10 year window. If that doesnt pan out----then maybe the B12 would reconsider some of the more attractive G5 targets at that time---assuming such targets would increase the payout for the existing members. If not---then I suspect there would be little interest even in the near future.

100% this

(05-28-2023 08:15 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:36 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 10:13 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  That was an interesting interview.

He is clearly well connected but also pro B12. He even said “Go Big 12” during the interview.

One tidbit:

He said the ACC will make more money than the B12 for the next cycle at around mid $30 or even close to $40 while the B12 is going to make only $31.7 on average. I have been saying that the ACC would make at least $5 million more than the B12. At least he knows the facts.

McMurphy also said the B12 would surpass the ACC after the next cycle. I am not going to say it is impossible but to me that prediction sounds more like a wishful thinking.

Yes, Brett McMurphy does know the facts. His prediction of the big 12 potentially making more than the ACC after 2031 is not an uncommon expectation, but that was clearly a prediction and not presented as a fact, and it could be wrong.

Mid 30's to as much as $40m is $5-10m more than the big 12 through 2031, which is what we've heard from all reputable sources for 6 months now. The only people claiming otherwise are very loud and enthusiastic big 12 fans with no data to back up their boasting.

ACC will make more until 2031, Who knows from then until end of
ACC deal. Key for B12 is to have another fairly short deal in 31. 5 to 7 years so it can hopefully keep pace.

I suspect the ACC will continue to out earn the Big12 as long as its current group is together. Worst case, the Big12 might find a way to marginally exceed the ACC's current configuration in the next deal (which is before the ACC gets to renegotiate)----but thats probably about it. Either way---regardless of current contracts----as a media product, the current ACC is more valuable than the Big12---its just unlikely the current ACC configuration will stay intact once the current GOR expires or is unlocked.

(05-28-2023 05:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-27-2023 06:45 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  I think Memphis is the top G5 they want. SDSU not a priority if 4C available, unless Zonas wants them in order to join. SDSU and UNLV could be slightly higher priority than OSU/WSU, but I’d expect remaining PAC teams to join a conference with those programs anyhow.

I honestly dont think they want any G5's at this time. There is too much potential that P5's with great geography could be available options sooner or later---with later being within a 5-to-10 year window. If that doesnt pan out----then maybe the B12 would reconsider some of the more attractive G5 targets at that time---assuming such targets would increase the payout for the existing members. If not---then I suspect there would be little interest even in the near future.

It sounds like the plan might be if the PAC holds together for another media cycle then the Big 12 could bring in some G5s now. That would allow those schools to build their value sooner for the next contract.

It's so strange thinking Colorado could return to the Big 12. They left when the Big 12 still had Nebraska, Missouri, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Texas. Now that all those schools are gone, which were arguably the Big 12's strongest assets, Colorado is like, "Okay, now it's time to come back."

It's not that simple, but interesting to think about.

(05-28-2023 07:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Big 12 needs to keep their eyes on the prize and be patient. If the 24-team super conferences come to pass, the Big 12 is well positioned to be the lone survivor of the M3 and absorb the remnants of both leagues.

If the Big 10 takes 4 of the PAC 10, that leaves 6. Add those plus SDSU and put them with BYU and that’s your 8-team Western Division.

The ACC is bound to get hit hard too and the Big 12 should have their pick of 5 of the left behind to add with Cincy, WVU, and UCF for their East Division.

Boom! 3 x 8 = 24

In a 3 x 24 scenario, that means 3 or 4 more g5 call ups (depending on ND as always). Who are the call ups?

Memphis
SDSU
UConn
SMU
USF
Boise

Pick 3-4 of those. I wonder if the call ups will be different if Phillips is making the selections instead of Yormark?