Big 12 Settles on Equal Revenue Sharing

The timing of the move today was to help the Missouri Board of Curators commit to the Big 12 long-term at their meeting on Tuesday.

I guess, but the move actually means less money for Mizzou as Mizzou got more revenue than the average Big 12 team. I think it was more a “this is all you’re going to get Mizzou – take it or leave it – statement.” If the Big 12 really does expand by bringing in a bunch of dogs, Mizzou would really prefer the old arrangement.

Does anybody have the latest payout?

I think it’s more ‘proof of stability’ that Missouri is looking for. Now that we’ve given them a sense of that, if/when they turn tail and head to the SEC they’ll look like the bad guys.

Missouri already looks like the bad guys, if you ask me. They started the re-alignment tremors before the Corn and the Buffs bolted.

srr, as you know, this was the next step since the Ad’s had already approved it back before Aggy announced they were considering leaving. The big and also expected news is that no one is getting their hand on anyone else’s third tier rights (LHN) and that TCU, thank heaven, wasn’t mentioned as a 10th team candidate. As I’ve said before, I like them in all ways except as a Big 12 member. I’ll be with my Big 12 buddy in Dallas this weekend and maybe I can get him drunk enough to get some war stories/predictions—-no promises.

In other news, Big East gave its approval to whomever they needed to to pursue expansion. One of the teams mentioned was SMU. There’s a certain symmetry to them being back together with TCU in an AQ conference. I admire what “the Junebug” has done at a school whose gameday football atmosphere is closer to Austin Westlake than to an FSB school. That said, if you know where to find them, there are some serious, high density cocktail driven tailgates and the eye candy is never in short supply if you dress preppy enough.

Missouri would get less money? Really?

I knew Oklahoma would and that is where I found the net result of this move puzzling from their point of view. They claimed “victory” yet will lose some financial payout as a result.

I just don’t think the beef is about equal revenue. Anyway, I don’t really know if this equal revenue thing proves stability and the signing over rights just makes me uncomfortable. Is stability something to strive for if Boren’s handcuffs are necessary to do it? Yikes.

My favorite realignment meme so far is that Missouri started it. I’d love it if Mizzou had such power and am flattered that this idea has taken off. The perception of relevance is so much more important than actual relevance.

Gavrilo Princip was not really powerful, but he certainly started something big.

Well, technically, I guess, the Big Ten started it, but when Delaney made his announcement circa first quarter 2010, Mizzou went all Horshak “Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Mr. Kotter! Pick me!!”

Here are the ’08-09 numbers:

Big 12 2008-09 Revenue Sharing
1. Oklahoma, $12.2 million
2. Texas, $11.8 million
3. Kansas, $11.5 million
4. Missouri, $10.4 million
5. Texas A&M, $10.2 million
6. Oklahoma State, $10.0 million
7. Colorado, $9.77 million
8. Nebraska, $9.73 million
9. Texas Tech, $9.2 million
10. Baylor, $9.1 million
11. Iowa State, $8.9 million
12. Kansas State, $8.4 million

Newy25 – after A&M, NU and CU left, yeah Mizzou’d be in the top half of the conference in TV appearances and losing money from revenue sharing. St. Louis is the largest non-Texas TV market in the conference.

As far as why OU and Mizzou would vote for that, well, they painted themselves into that corner.

The state of Missouri has a loud-mouth governor. He definitely went Horshak. Mizzou’s official line was “we are proud members of the Big 12,” which is silly because I get the feeling there are no proud members of the Big 12. We’re here because we have to be.

srr50 -

If Missouri joins the SEC and the Big 12 decides to stay at 8 members, can Texas broadcast all 5 out of conference games on the LHN?

Thanks, PS, wasn’t sure if there were later numbers out there.

OU’s big victory is being “shackled” to Texas for 6 years. Have to believe they are nervous about being left behind after all the big talk.

They lose close to 2 million, but they “hope it will be phased in”.

So, PS, what is the beef? Mizzou looks like they’re in the middle of the pack in football, which is what counts. The money is only slightly better — for that you throw over 100-year rivalries?

If that sounds familiar, I would say the same thing to Aggies.

They’re mad about the LHN. That’s what I hear.

I think the revenue sharing is about killing the meme that revenue sharing is somehow a part of conference stability as well as it not having anything to do with the break up the Big 12. The stupidity in the media on this topic is rather stunning.

Missouri’s flirtations were just an excuse used by Nebraska, A&M, and Colorado. Obviously, if the Big 10 wanted Missouri they would have earned their conference breaking badge. The reason they get to wear the scarlet letter is that while others were making their machinations behind closed doors Missouri was leaking their plans pretty aggressively to the media. I don’t think Nebraska or Colorado would still be in the conference regardless of what Missouri did, but having Missouri there for cover was certainly convenient.

Bob -

Taking off my Texas hat for a moment, it seems that the biggest fear is that Texas will strike out on its own (whether that be indy or Big Ten/Pac 12) once LHN is more established, and perhaps after other schools have created similar networks.

A successful LHN would allow Texas to do this, so A&M, then OU, now possibly Mizzou, are trying to get out ahead of it. It worked for A&M, failed for OU, and we’ll see for Mizzou. But the thought is that LHN could be huge and give Texas options in the future that other Big XII schools won’t have — options those schools have (or thought they had) right now.

Putting my Texas hat back on, I don’t get the “distrust” of Texas. Everything seems to have been above board (although somewhat agressive – re: HS games, etc.). Texas is also not looking to kill the conference. I think Texas would be pretty damn happy long term in the Big XII if it can get Notre Dame on an annual basis and a Pac 12 or SEC team plus a cupcake for its non-con each year. The Big XII doesn’t HAVE TO blow up in 6 years.

Why is Tulane never mentioned as a expansion possibility? Better academics than half the Big 12, great location in Athlete-rich Southern Louisiana, more TV sets than some of the losers mentioned for expansion, NEW ORLEANS, etc.

What am I missing? Take the fight to SEC territory!

Even though Missouri is currently in the top half of money-makers in the conference, I think this is less about making more money…and more about making the same at Texas and Oklahoma – to put everyone at a somewhat more “level” playing field. When the new Tier 1 contract is negotiated, the gap between everyone would have been magnified much more than it is now. The percentages may have been about the same, but the dollar figures would have skewed more and more heavily in the direction of the Red River gang.

I agree that the beef is not about revenue. The beef? I am not 100% sure aside from LHN’s content, bowl picking, and I’m sure other things. None of that seems like a huge deal to me. My main beef is what the conference is becoming. The future is not bright from a competition or revenue standpoint.

If Mizzou leaves, and while I now want them to I don’t expect them to, it could be about the SEC’s earning potential. There is news that an SEC Network is in the works for tier three rights that will certainly be lucrative. Further, the Big 12 is weakening – losing NU, CU, and A&M – and is about to dilute all over itself – BYU?, UL?, Cincy?, bleh. If the opportunity is there to leave for the SEC, Mizzou should take it. I think the opportunity’s there. I have a feeling Mizzou won’t take it. Tough decisions are hard to make.

The only rivalry I care about is the one with KU. We can still schedule them. If we don’t, that’s a bummer. Arkansas is basically Kansas with a couple extra letters. I’ll get used to it. Not that I’ll have to….

Why stop at Tulane? Let’s get Middle Tennessee State and Troy and really make a hard dent in SEC country.

MSS, I want Mizzou to stay if the Big 12 adds Memphis, Tulane, and UNLV. As far as I’m concerned, those road trip sites would make up for everything. Does Amsterdam have a college football team? Can they start one?

Missouri would be completely relegated to irrelevance in the SEC. With virtually no Texas recruiting to speak of and having to lock down Missouri and compete in the Southeast for recruits…..

Jesus why do fans wish seasons with many losses on their team? Is the secret SEC handshake that awesome?

Newy25,

You aren’t thinking big enough. USM, UAB and Memphis. We need to cripple C-USA while we still can.

Newy, just how relevant is Mizzou in the Big 12? I don’t see a whole lot of championship banners on campus.

If I’m the SEC, I’m not sure I am in a rush for the 14th team in the near term (before 2013 seasson). Unless MIzzou is that much more attractive than WVU (and maybe it is), I’d wait to see if there are any cracks in the ACC veneer over the next 12 months before just taking someone to take them right now.

Missouri has an overinflated opinion of itself. they have had some good years playing in the north when nebraska, colorado and kansas state were down. They should run to the sec for the money, but their football program will become even less relevant.

Kansas is not a rival they are a door mat. Arkansas would be a big step up the ladder as a rival, but do they consider missouri a rival??

A-Tex: Texas committed to the B12 (primarily because of the LHN, but did commit). They are going to do this six-year media rights deal (one year beyond an assumed another five-year term commitment). So, once that’s done, the only way out is if the league goes feet-first. I understand that people looked at the LHN and thought Texas would take the league down, but like you, I never got that impression, especially once I saw that the Pac would not permit UT to hang on to the LHN the way they wanted to.

Texas hasn’t done every single thing right, no question. But it has had to walk a fine line when it came to reining in ESPN — not really doable, based on the contract.

And, Phenomenal, not getting your case here, but it’s a familiar refrain… Texas is the issue, but nobody that has left or is considering leaving can say exactly what it is that makes them feel that way.

Those numbers posted by Phenom are a great example of why so much of this is buffoonery and posturing. You’d think that the difference between Texas/OU and ISU/Kansas St was 30 million and not 3.
 
We conceded a couple of million bucks from the conference mean and the couple of million gained by the also-rans is nearly irrelevant to their improved prospects. They’re still located where they are located and supported to the degree to which they’re supported.
 
The real disparities are intrinsic. Texas has a better hand of cards to play. There’s always going to be resentment about that. All this stuff has little to do with Texas. Longhorn fans who care about the publicity or national perception or whine about LHN are pussies who fear success.
 
It has to do with a lot of programs that don’t like what they see when they look in the mirror and feel some need to externalize blame or imagine some new romanticized landscape where everything will be different. It won’t. You’ll still be you. So be the best you you can be.

Phenom, the only rumor I’ve read or heard about an SEC network is a figment of Clay Travis’ very vivid imagination on OutkickTheCoverage.com. If you have seen anything else that makes you think the Floridas, LSU’s and Bamas (about $8mm each) would be easily persuaded to share third tier rights equally with the MSU’s (zilch) I’d love to see it. Not saying it won’t happen but as you say, someone needs to “show me”. Larry Scott probably wouldn’t have gotten the Pac 12 deal done if it hadn’t been for USC being on probation.

Hopefully, We’ll know what you guys plan to do by COB tomorrow. It would be nice for everyone involved if Mizzou can possibly make up its mind.

So does this make the Big 12 more attractive to other schools, like BYU? Any others?

Steel, I don’t buy that Missouri has an overinflated opinion of itself. At least not the Mizzou that matters – yes, some of the fans do, but that’s true for all fandoms. I don’t think anybody is more suprised that Mizzou has an opportunity to join the SEC than Missouri’s administration. In fact, I imagine that Alden or Deaton thought the call from Birmingham was a prank. I bet there was some “I’m sorry, Mike Slive? No really, who is this?”

When I speak of Kansas as a rival, I’m looking at the whole picture. From what I’ve read, the Jayhawks have a salty basketball team.

The whole football will become irrelevant thing doesn’t fly either. First, as I mentioned, it’s not like Mizzou was winning Big 12 championships. Second, yes, Mizzou wouldn’t compete well with LSU or Alabama this year. Neither would Texas. But, Mizzou can compete just fine with the Mississippis, Arkansas, and A&M. And, it’s all cyclical. Just a few years ago Alabama was playing in the Independence Bowl. LSU was awful for much of the ’90s. Just takes one bad hire to set a program back.

The SEC wants missouris TV sets and AAU membership.

Jake, Mizzou isn’t really dragging its feet here. Not on purpose. Something to do with state bylaws on when BOC can meet. Tuesday was the earliest possible meeting date. And, re SEC Network, I heard about it at a party Friday night. It may be hogwash. I would still say that the earning potential is better in the SEC if only because the Big 12 is probably going to dilute itself with inferiors.

Scip, I agree. The way people talk you’d think there was some huge disparity in the revenue.

And what about this Nienas guy? His analogy re Mizzou was asinine. “Sometimes you see a pretty gal walk by and you think about going after her, but you alwasy come back to the gal who is tried and true.” Dude, if 1/4 of that tried and true gal just fell off, I’m chasing that pretty gal.

It is cyclical.

Florida wins the SEC East one year and UGA or Tenn wins it the other (18 or 19). Just like one of Bama, Auburn and LSU win the West every year (15 of 19).

Mizzou’s highwater mark in the SEC would be the same as it is in the Big 12, a Cotton Bowl bid once a decade

Folksy conference executives are the fucking worst.

Last Week, exactly what I’ve been saying.

I say this is all a “you’re a bigger school with more money than us” thing..

If we could have done the PAC-xx deal, we’d be grouped with larger, mostly state schools
more similar to UT.

THAT will always be the root of the problem. (see the SWC)

I still don’t think this Big 12 3.0 or whatever, will fix the root problem of jealousy.

It is THAT simple, IMO.

Woody, especially when they older than dinasour shit.

Phenom,

I agree not all missouri fans have an overinflated opinion, you s eem to be very realistic yet you say you would prefer to go to the SEC. Why? The Big12 is a better fit culturally and from a football perspective. I understand the B1G, but not the SEC.

Scip, been saying the same thing about the shared revenue since it became an issue. The difference is being able to pay a good basketball coach for a year. It’s not nothing, but it’s not a budget breaker, either.

So 8th place in the SEC is better than 3-4 place in the Big12? You think your bowl pick will be equal between those 2 scenarios?

I am not saying Mizzou wouldn’t have good years in the SEC, but they would have to beat more quality teams to get there = worse records, worse bowls and subsequently worse recruiting.

Steel -

The inward looking argument is the same as A&M. The move would be to a conference that isn’t going anywhere which means permanence regardless of how the final realignments shake out, a likely massive increase in revenue when/if the SEC negotiates/renegotiates the new contract, and, at least in the near term, a boost in alumni donations/season ticket sales.

I won’t begrudge Mizzou the move so long as if it leaves, it behaves like CU, and not NU or A&M on the way out. Hopefully, they stick around.

Steel, I had been anti-SEC until a couple weeks ago. Well, first, I didn’t think that was really on the table. It’s easy not to want something you can’t have.

I don’t really get or care about the culture argument. It’s not like I generate any pleasure from being culturally similar to KU or KSU. And, frankly, there’re not many cultural similarities between Mizzou and the Texas schools. Or are there? I just don’t know. And culture isn’t that important if you consider who the Big 12 is talking about adding.

The whole conference realignment business stresses me out and the Big 12 is never going to be a stable conference. There will always be Larry Scott out there eyeing OU or UT considering Independence or the ACC or whatever. There’s still the “16 team conference” push. That’s not going away. If Mizzou goes to the SEC, I’m done worrying about it. That’s one reason and seems like a good one to me. You take lesser sports schools like Wazzu and Vandy and they just sit back and watch all this nonsense. I wouldn’t mind that position.

Another is Boren’s handcuffs. I wouldn’t want to belong to a club that handcuffed me to a member so that I’d stay. I don’t want that to be necessary to create “stability.” Maybe that’s just an aesthetic thing for me – maybe I need to grow up and join the real world. Maybe. Still sucks.

Another is the prospect of adding BYU, UL, Cincy, etc. to the Big 12. Adding those schools further diminishes this “culture” argument I keep hearing. The Big 12 has an identity? A culture? Maybe once, but not anymore. It makes the Big 12 more like the Big East, which sucks. I like making fun of the Big East, but if the Big 12 starts taking on the leftovers from them, what’s that make me? I don’t want to think about it.

Neinas made some crack about expansion saying he couldn’t even get a plurality of agreement out of the Big 12 schools on what to do. Ha ha ha! That’s because these schools can’t get along and have such divergent agendas. I don’t see stability even with Boren’s handcuffs.

It also seems to me that OU and UT have the keys to the handcuffs as they can blow up the conference – if it doesn’t exist, nobody’s there to collect on the TV rights.

Another is Boren’s handcuffs. I wouldn’t want to belong to a club that handcuffed me to a member so that I’d stay.

You wouldn’t want to go to the B1G or the Pac, then. Both of them have gotten schools to sign over rights for about 20 years. (Of course, no B12 member would agree to such a commitment. There’s only so much faith to go around.)

And one more thing: I hate Boren. First, he arrogantly announces that OU will be considering leaving and will tell everyone in 72 hours to three weeks. What a jackass. What kind of time frame is that? Then, he brags about the options. Then, the rug is pulled out from under him and he has the gall to say he was just using it as a leverage ploy against Texas. He admitted that he put me through hell as a ploy. I mean, fuck you Boren. Luckily, Larry Scott and the Tulsa World prove that Boren is a big fat liar. No surprise there. Ok, so the Big 12 met and Beebe’s out and maybe everything’s good, so the chairman (who happens to be Mizzou’s chancelllor) calls a press conference at 6:45 to announce the result of the recent Big 12 discussions. What does Boren do? Schedules one for 6:30. You kidding me? In that press conference, he lies again saying the schools agreed to his fucking handcuffs. Mizzou has to go on the defensive and say “well, hold on there, we haven’t agreed to anything.” Turns out NOBODY had agreed to anything. Still, nobody’s agreed to it. I hate that guy.

I will say I went to the Mizzou/OU game in Norman and found the OU fans to be a delightful and welcoming lot.

If Missouri joins the SEC and the Big 12 decides to stay at 8 members, can Texas broadcast all 5 out of conference games on the LHN?

First of all the Big 12 is not a viable conference at 8 — it is DOA. The TV contracts would be down to nothing.

As for the hypothetical, no as a member of a conference our network partners would still have first dibs on our games and several of the 5 non-conference games would be picked up by our broadcast or cable partners.

Boren is a needy politician. His title change doesn’t change him. He’s a clown and most Sooner fans will readily admit that. Joe Castiglione has spent the last two weeks rubbing his temples and inhaling aromatherapy candles and trying not to stab Boren with a pair of scissors.

If Boren had simply shut his mouth and worked quietly to see what his options were we would not even be having this discussion. By airing his dirty laundry in such a public way he casted the conference as unstable. Now the Missouri administration is under pressure politically to do something to ensure they are in a stable conference.

Now he needs it stable because he has no where else to go. Good fucking job Boren.

Phenomenal Smith said:

October 3rd, 2011 at 2:01 pm

I agree that the beef is not about revenue. The beef? I am not 100% sure aside from LHN’s content, bowl picking, and I’m sure other things.[emphasis added] None of that seems like a huge deal to me. My main beef is what the conference is becoming. The future is not bright from a competition or revenue standpoint.

1. Big 12 & NCAA rules prohibit the LHN from broadcasting high school games.

Plus, for intraconference games to be televised on the LHN, the other participating school must approve (& gets compensated).

So, what’s the beef wrt the LHN?

2. I’ve heard Mizzou fans complain about the bowls for a long time now. It’s a terribly stupid complaint.

The bowls themselves pick the teams they want to invite. Want to go to a nicer bowl? Have your fans travel well.

3. The Big 12 negotiated a good contract w/ FSN last year. The contract w/ ABC/ESPN is up for renegotiating soon. If everyone sticks together, the Big 12 should be fine.

4. As you’ve admitted, Mizzou hasn’t been collecting many conference titles, so what’s the beef about “competition”?

5. Re: “and I’m sure other things” – Just say it. You don’t like how Texas has inequitable power/influence in the Big 12 b/c of its size, resources, & marketability. Don’t make up post hoc excuses like NU and A&M. It’s unseemly.

That would be a monumetal waste of a pair of scissors, IMO.

So 8th place in the SEC is better than 3-4 place in the Big12? You think your bowl pick will be equal between those 2 scenarios?

Re place in the conference, who knows. It’d fluctuate just like it does now.

Re bowl pick, two years ago Mizzou had the fourth best record in the Big 12 and a .500 ISU team got selected before the Tigers. In ’07 Mizzou beat KU and KU went to Orange Bowl. So, yeah. Mizzou gets screwed – probably get screwed in the SEC too (although they have rules to prevent ’09 fiascos).

I’m under no delusions that the SEC is the land of milk and honey. But, I think it is objectively better than the Big 12, especially a Big 12 without NU, CU, and A&M and with the jokers being considered. No worries, though, Mizzou isn’t going anywhere. It’s not in our nature to be bold.

Scipio hit it dead on the money…the difference between first and last in revenue sharing is minimal in the big picture of things. Anyone who says Texas couldn’t compete with the big boys in the SEC must have only watched last season because from what I can recall, Texas has been one of the MOST stable programs in the country. Add in new coaches who can actually COACH and look at what a bunch of freshman and sophmores are doing…I’d say by next year, Texas could take any SEC team on any given day. Sick and tired of people annointing the SEC like it is some sort of almighty conference who is outright unbeatable.

Now, if we can just get everybody to agree on equal revenue GENERATION, we’ll be in Fat City.

Joetx, your Texas-sized hubris makes me want to say you’re the reason I want out, but it’s not. I, in fact, have detailed the reasons I want out. Texas and third tier rights didn’t make the list.

Re LHN, high school content is still on the table. It’s just been stayed. Am I right? As I said above, this seems like small potatoes anyway.

Mizzou travels just fine to bowl games. And, would travel even better if not stuck in the shittiest bowl in the conference after having a very good year. It’s circular.

I say “I’m sure other things” because I’m not on the inside and don’t have specifics but I’ve watched 1/4 of the conference leave, so I’m guessing there are “issues” preventing stabiliity.

By “competition” I’m talking bringing in mediocrities to replace what we’ve lost. I’m looking forward. I like good football teams – if I didn’t, I’d be lobbying for C-USA. I like it when Mizzou plays good football teams. That makes for fun. I like fun.

If everyone sticks together, the Big 12 should be fine. But, why would it stick together? Should Mizzou stay just to see what happens when the 16 conference behemoths come forth or should it leave a crumbling conference for a designated seat at a top conference?

Anyone who says Texas couldn’t compete with the big boys in the SEC must have only watched last season because from what I can recall, Texas has been one of the MOST stable programs in the country.

If you’re referring to my comment, I said Texas would lose to LSU and Alabama this year. I still think that. I was saying that it’s cyclical, though, and right now LSU and Alabama appear to be the cream of the nation’s crop.

I also will say that in an email today discussing the OU/UT line, I said that in two years UT was going to win it all. That last recruiting class is just sick, especially considering the turmoil in Texas last year and early offseason.

Phenomenal – I’m starting to see your take on things. If you are going to get beat down, you might as well get paid and feel as though you are in an elite conference.

Srr50 – Thanks for your reply.

And to add, can’t say that I blame anyone for taking that road. Not picking on you, just an observation.

Quoting a fella who may or may not have been a Texan, “It ain’t braggin’ if ya really done it.”

6 years is enough time to see if my theory on big 12 recruiting holds water. I always thought the south was stronger because kids from Texas wanted there parents/friends to see them play. A north team would only play a few games over 4 years in the south. Now half their games will be played in the south with the round robin schedule. That should help all the former north teams get better recruits. Could be they will steal a few from A$M. We will know the answer in 3 or 4 years.

Phenomenal…I wasn’t referring to you. Your comment is dead on this year because we probably couldn’t. I was talking about the endless SEC love in the mass media outlets and other boards/sports sites. Especially when it comes from our haggletooth cousins to the northeast and our meth lovin’ neighbors to the north. Tired of hearing a whole lot of talk and nothing to back it up on the field.

Phenomenal, I’m with you. This 6 year grant troubles me, because I can’t figure out why ANY Big XII school would want to tether themselves to it for any defined period.

 I also share your thoughts about watering down this conference with Big East castaways. I could handle that IF we took enough teams to get to 16. Nothing short of that convinces me that the Big XII is anything more than a holding company.

 And I don’t buy the argument that UT will have better landing spots later once LHN is established. I think LHN will be a bigger problem for conferences later when it’s strong, rather than now, while it’s weak. Especially if every conference but the ACC has a shared 3rd tier model. But most of the BC audience is convinced otherwise. It’s not that I think they’re wrong, I just don’t understand the assumption.

“And one more thing: I hate Boren. First, he arrogantly announces that OU will be considering leaving and will tell everyone in 72 hours to three weeks. What a jackass.”
— Agreed, Boren was just being a bombastic buffoon by flapping his jaws and then trying to tie a happy face flag onto Oklahoma’s tucked tail as his team slunk back in from the West Coast.

“Another is Boren’s handcuffs.”
— It’s ironic that equal revenue sharing will hurt both OU and Mizzou, the two (current) B12 schools which have suffered the worst cases of conference wanderlust. The only benefit of equal revenue sharing is that it serves as a financial pacifier providing “in-case-our-team-goes-into-the-crapper-at-least-our-payout-is-assured” insurance.

I’m hard pressed to see how Mizzou would benefit by jumping to the SEC. It would be far easier, IMO, for the Tigers to finish consistently in the top half of a 10-team Big 12 than in the top half of a 14-team SEC. Yes, the SEC television contracts pay more, but when you factor in Big 12 exit fees and increased travel distances/expenses for the student-athletes, I think the (short-to-intermediate term) financial benefit becomes tenuous. Switching conferences is the equivalent of the seven-year itch.

“Phenomenal, I’m with you. This 6-year grant troubles me, because I can’t figure out why ANY Big XII school would want to tether themselves to it for any defined period.”
— The 6 year deal seems to be member schools’ way of cutting themselves and making a blood oath about committing to the conference for the longer term, at least through the next TV contact negotiation. Unless one of the member schools is still suffering from wanderlust (Mizzou?), a 6-year deal is a way of voting with your pocketbook. If every school signs onto it, then that should have its intended effect of dampening future defections.

“And I don’t buy the argument that UT will have better landing spots later once LHN is established. I think LHN will be a bigger problem for conferences later when it’s strong, rather than now, while it’s weak. Especially if every conference but the ACC has a shared 3rd tier model. But most of the BC audience is convinced otherwise. It’s not that I think they’re wrong, I just don’t understand the assumption.”
Your comment presupposes that the Big 12 is not permanently viable and that UT will have to jump ship to a superconference later on. Texas is big enough of a state (and university) that I don’t think that’s a given. Some people see the glass as half empty, while others see it as half full. I see it as [UT having a glass which is] 90% full PLUS another side glass of LHN which is 50% full.

Nick, as Poofy said, the 6-year deal is show of support for the league. If it somehow collapsed, everyone would be free.

As to the LHN, people may be thinking differently if there is a reason to move. The Big Ten, for example, may well recognize that the one-channel concept won’t work when more inventory comes on line. If Texas went there, the B1G might be willing to incorporate the LHN and allow Texas the flexibility to show the events it likes, while contributing the revenue to the B1G’s pot.

Phenomenal, I think I understand your point, but I don’t understand why someone like you would want to join a conference with the type of dirty laundry the SEC has. I realize that all conferences have their ‘playas’, but the SEC has more than it’s fair share. When that is considered, along with Mizzou’s academic reputation, the SEC doesn’t seem like a good fit.

I realize the Big 12 may be a short term solution, but at least Miizzou wouldn’t be forever handcuffed to, for the most part, inferior academic institutions when the Big 10 eventually expands.

Just my thoughts.

Does anybody really think that the Big 12 is a better league than the SEC? In any way?

Just looking at it from the outside. Say you weren’t part of a league and you had an option of being in either league, which would you pick? All that anybody can come up with pussified reasons like “they cheeeee-eeet” or “it’s too haaaa-ard” or “you might looooo-oose”.

In every important category, the SEC is superior. Better and more historic road venues, check. Better competition, check. Better TV coverage, check. Better bowls, check. Bigger spotlight, check. More money, check.

Dude plays the muni track every Saturday, has made a boat load of frenemies in his years playing. Somehow gets the means and the invite to the country club. He’s supposed to pass that up because as he’s signing the membership check some hobo from the muni course offers him some extra beer?

Phenomenal strikes me as trying to be as rational and honest as his Missouri bias will allow him. Something our emotional Longhorn fans should appreciate.

As far as the Big 12 is concerned – who can say what constitutes stability?

Had it not been for the insidious cheating in the SWC, it would have been every bit as stable as the SEC. My point here being that only time will tell how “stable” a conference really is.
We know the reasons that NU and CU left the conference – and Texas A&M has a history of bad decisions. They are like the petulent teenager that wants to run away from home because they didn’t get to go to the big party. This time, however, they have pooped in their own mess kit.

Missouri can show the leadership , or not, that A&M lacked. It can do this by being proactive and announcing with definitive authority that it will do everything possible to preserve the Big 12. Standing up and beating this drum would, frankly, diminish the regal positions of both UT and OU – at least in the eyes of the public and maybe even in the membership. This is what the aggies were incapable of doing nor did they have the foresight to see the ramifications of this kind of leadership.

UT lost any incentive it possesed, in the arena of PR, when it refused to address the bad pub with the truth and more authority. Here is where the arrogance or indifference has hurt us. Certainly a school as powerful as UT has many highly placed “friends” in the media that could have mitigated the firestorm that erupted.

I would understand Missouri’s position on the SEC better if their take was an easier road to basketball conference titles. From the football side I am not sure what the benefits are except that the conference is currently the top dog and the payout is currently bigger. There is nothing that says either of those things will continue. There is also nothing that says the revenue will continued to be shared equally either.

If I were a Missouri fan, I would want to hold out for the Big 10 superconference. The ACC has pretty much guaranteed its survival by taking Pitt and Syracuse, two teams that would have been potential pick ups for the Big 10 if they wanted to look East. Who else can the Big 10 take if ND is truly not interested in them and they won’t take Texas along with Tech? Missouri and KU are their best options to the West. Missouri could compete over the long term in the Big 10 in both football and basketball and they get the tangible added benefit of CiC membership.

Maybe it doesn’t happen with the Big 10, but I would say a move to the SEC now is incredibly shortsighted for Missouri. For A&M, its a move that at least makes some regional sense and I think the Aggies secretly like the rogue, cheating image of the SEC.

Charley,
But what if the venues are so far away you never get to go to them, the competition is strong enough that you never get to any of those better bowl games, and you can’t get any decent recruits because your boosters either have too much integrity or don’t have enough of their fortune they are willing to shell out on 17-year-olds? All so you can gain 10% in total AD revenue and get one more game on TV? There’s a reason the SEC is mostly looking at teams like A&M, Missouri, and WV rather than the better teams within in their footprint. Its the best way to bring more certain wins for their power teams and by expanding outside their footprint, these teams are actually paying most of their entrance fee to pasty-dom.

Ricky, I think I was clear that they only reasons you could possibly think of that would not favor the SEC are pussified, and thanks for re-inforcing my point.

Phenomenal is one of the most rational folks posting around here that obviously wants his school to move on, and I get most of his reasons for wanting to make the move to the SEC. I have yet to see one agricultural fan express himself with as much common sense.

What I don’t get is ANYONE thinking the Big XII is anything more than a bus stop of a BCS conference. It shouldn’t be surprising that there’s no harmony in the conference, there’s never been…the Big XII has always been nothing more than a shotgun wedding, and it’s about run its’ course.

UT has some reasons for wanting the Big XII to be propped up by bubble gum and bailing wire for three or four more years. After that, the last one out needs to cut the lights off. I’ve said for over a year that you can’t replace Nebraska and Colorado with BYU and keep on truckin’…that certainly holds true now that agricultural’s headed east. There simply are NOT any significant schools located within a thousand miles of the Big XII footprint that would make up for what the conference has lost, AND would be willing to switch conferences. Notre Dame ain’t coming through the door, and arkie, LSU, or anybody else you care to name are pipe dreams too.

I don’t disagree that the LHN is going to represent a perpetual problem for UT in getting into another conference, but when the time comes, some concessions will be made on both sides, and ultimately, UT will have a much more permanent, and hopefully more neighborly conference home. I wish I could offer up a solid reason for Mizzou to stay with the Big XII, but if they really do have the chance to jump to the SEC, they should. Anything else would be betting with your heart instead of your head.

I don’t think BYU is coming to the big 12, BYU is way overrated in stature. Most people that watch BYU is watching the team they are playing. I would think Air Force would be a great fit, would bring Colorado into the fold. National audience comes with them, along with the beloved triple option.

Had it not been for the insidious cheating in the SWC, it would have been every bit as stable as the SEC.

No it would not. It was doomed simply because it was too inbred, too centric, and there was no way the SWC as constituted could have survived the TV revolution. Just no way. The rampant cheating sped up the process, but it was not the main driver of its demise.

And yes, the Big 12 has little chance of surviving more than a few years because it too hasn’t enough TV gravitas and there is still no real trust among the members.

Charley, from reading your caustic, name calling troll rants, pussified is clearly no worse than stupified—-a point you reinforce every time you post.

Now run along and think up some catchy BuckleVision stuff that came to you Saturday night when you were staring longingly at a cowboy’s package in a gay bar.

Thanks, Charley, for offering your well-crafted post contributing absolutely nothing to the thread, and then responding to Ricky’s very legitimate response with a one-sentence cop-out which, again, added absolutely nothing to the thread.

Heroic effort. SEC grad, IMO.

Naw, Charley would be SEC Fan, who outnumbers SEC Grad by about 100,000 to 1.

We’re fans, right? Shouldn’t we take the perspective of fans rather than the perspective of the university presidents and athletic directors who seem more concerned about revenue than anything else?

Some of us like to denigrate NU, CU, and A&M for leaving the conference. As far as I can tell, the fan bases of those three schools are absolutely thrilled about their new conference homes. Their elation has nothing to do with additional revenue and everything to do with identity and status. Apparently, the Big 12 lacks that “it” – the glue-like thingamajig that could have kept all the schools together. It was and is a hodgepodge. The rumored reasons for leaving such as Texas’ overwhelming influence, the ever-widening tentacles of the LHN, revenue-sharing inequities and the like were all pretexts that the departing schools used to minimize any damage to their reputations when they bolted.

How is the LHN going to enhance the typical fan’s experience? Given the way the Big 12 has been going, I guess some of us will be able to watch 20 hours of football practice on the LHN as the Horns prepare for their game against Podunk U. Oh yeah, I know – the LHN will bring beaucoup cash into the UT coffers. I guess this will allow the university to correct some grievous pay inequities and up Mack’s salary to 8 million and Barnes’ to 5 million.

I know…I know, I’m being a tad bit cynical here. However, I do believe that the interests of the UT fan base need to be represented somehow in all of this. The first step is to honestly think about what you want instead of what will make Dodds happy.

In every important category, the SEC is superior.

From a Texas perspective, there’s no way in hell we want to be associated academically with the SEC. There’s a reason the Big XII has a different PQ policy.

I’m torn in two directions on the whole question of conference affiliation for the Longhorns.

Admittedly, I’ve NEVER been a fan of the Big XII. It’s always felt like a Bandaid for Bevo after the demise of the SWC. I’ve never cottoned to the idea that somehow the old Big 8 “saved” UT, agricultural, Tech, and Baylor by merging with the useable parts of the SWC. Other than a history of playing Tech, Baylor, and aggy, UT really only had things in common with OU. UT had virtually nothing in common with the rest of the conference, and nothing developed over the last fifteen or so years.

All of that being said, I wish there was a way to create a cohesive and powerful conference in the heartland that includes UT. However, as is usually the case, wishing does NOT make it so. The Big XII never has been the answer, and too many relationships have now been fractured by other schools using UT and the LHN as a “whipping boy” excuse for their bolting the conference.

I do NOT blame Nebraska, Colorado, and agricultural for moving on, for the real reasons they did it. I think a couple of those exits could have been handled with a lot more class, but that’s a subject for another post.

I actually envy fans of those three schools…their favorite teams are now part of three substantial conferences where the various members DO get along, and where the teams know the conference will be there, and be strong, for decades. I want the same thing for the Longhorns, and as just a fan, and not a connected one, and one who does not get the LHN, I don’t want the network to force UT to go the independent route. Even Notre Dame is finding that doesn’t work any more.

I trust DeLoss Dodds to make the best decisions for the future of the UT athletic program, but there’s a part of me that worries that he is overplaying his hand, and painting the Horns into a competitive corner over the LHN. He won’t read my post, and even if he did, it wouldn’t register with him, but I seriously hope no “100 year” decisions are being made that will strip the Longhorns of our main competitors and leave the team out in the cold concerning conference affiliation. Even “the prettiest girl at the dance” eventually grows old.

As A&M will find out, once you’re in the SEC, the pressure to lower your standards will be tremendous. Perhaps they can show the resolve of Vanderbilt…but I doubt it, because they won’t accept the competitive result. They NEED this move to be a success on the field. As soon as it proves not to be, the FedEx machine will get cranking again.

Good talk people. Just to touch on a couple points brought up since I last had my computer on – I meant to jump on last night but got wrapped up in Justin Verlander. Love watching him deal.

SEC cheats – yes. That’s one of the reasons I was anti-SEC until a couple weeks ago. That’s a problem, but not a big enough one for me to want to stay in the Big 12.

SEC academics suck. No more so than the Big 12’s academics suck. Losing NU, CU, and A&M really hurt the conference’s overall academic appeal. If UL, Cincy, and god forbid Boise State are added, then the Big 12 academic rep will really take a fall. Plus, if Mizzou were to join the SEC it’d have more AAU schools than the Big 12 (I think).

I haven’t seen this sentiment too much here, but it’s ridiculous to suggest that Mizzou would be the bad guy if it did move on to the SEC. We’re just doing what’s best for us. UT seemed to be taking a hard look at Big 10, ACC, and Pac. I didn’t begrudge them that – change is rampant. You all were in favor of UT doing what’s best for UT.

UT and, to some extent, OU, hold the keys to the conference. Mizzou can leave and the conference would survive.

A lot of you have done this, but for a second put yourself in my shoes. Would you want to stay in the Big 12 knowing that three teams have already scampered and the two heavy hitters have wandering eyes and, very likely, attractive suitors? When the Big 12 does blow, who’s to say the SEC or Big 10 will be there for Mizzou? Who’s to say Mizzou won’t be looking to a Big East “savior” like last year? That makes me sick to think about.

Might know today. I put it at 75/25 Mizzou stays. Just a WAG.

If I were a Missouri fan, I would want to hold out for the Big 10 superconference.

Oh yeah, this. Absolutely. I am sure many phone calls have been made to the Big 10 in the last week from Mizzou asking if there was even the slightest chance. Who knows, maybe there is. Maybe Mizzou says no to the SEC now for a shot at the Big 10 later. I’d prefer the Big 10. But, seriously, Mizzou has been turned down by the Big 10 three times, and once quite publicly, so perhaps that ship has sailed. I think they might hate us.

pressure to lower your standards

don’t make me laugh. what standards they actually have have been pushed to the railings for months now. if they aren’t already jetsam they are being hoisted as we espeak.

this whole move has been mostly about regaining the only consequence a living aggie can remember, and they know how they achieved their moment in the sun. what they may not be taking enough into account is how poorly their fedex guy fared at the other mississippi state. of course, they are saying to themselves and to each other, jackie didn’t have the state of texas to pick plums like they do. they know they can’t prosper with the staff they presently have (unlike six weeks ago when they thought they could), and they are beating the drums to overspend again to bring in a witch. ok, where does the money come from? fans? they’d better dig deep because they’ll be paying their present loser (whatever his name is) for another five years and this conference is in no mood to cut them any slack on exit fees.

i think they have aimed straight into an iceberg and are expecting something good to come of it.

Phenomenal Smith,

If the Big 12 goes to 12 teams again, with a championship, then Missouri would have an excellent chance of winning a north division every year and playing in the Big 12 title game. That alone would really put Missouri on the map and help recruiting.

SEC = irrelevance forever
Big 12 = possible top 2 contender year in and year out

Easy decision to me.

Jake, you see a one sentence reply because the thought of turning down membership in a conference – because you are afraid of the possible upgrade in competition – is so incredibly weak, it takes no more than a single sentence to point out the absurdity of it.

The SEC is superior to the Big 12 in every single way. If you really want to see stupid – reference a Big 12 member turning down an SEC offer. Now that would be stupidity of the highest order.

The SEC is the highest profile athletic league in the country after the NFL. The SEC is the richest league in college football. The SEC has the last 5 national champions residing therein. A Big 12 member’s application for SEC membership being accepted would be akin to a community college student getting accepted at Harvard.

Wow, that’s the first time I’ve ever seen “SEC” and “Harvard” in the same sentence. Of course you had to violate both the English language and any semblance of logical thought to get it done. I congratulate you on a valiant effort.

Phenomenal, I think there is a very good chance that DeLoss Dodds is explaining to the Missouri AD just how the Tigers will be able to get into the Big 10 in a few years. Step 1: stay in Big 12 now. Step 2: Keep doing what you’re doing. Avoid crazy basketball coaches. Schedule Notre Dame, in all sports applicable. Step 3: When super-conference formation begins, join ND/KU package (assuming KU can separate from KSU).

sec people like to throw around words like ‘harvard’. they consider it guilt by association.

So granted phenomenal smiths numbers include Nebraska and CU, but i get an average of 10.1 million dollars/ school. So essentially we are giving up less than 2 million dollars a year and OU is giving up 2 million/per from the network contracts. K-State, will make an additional 1.7 million based on those admittedly old numbers. This whole thing is a red hearing.

Meanwhile the LHN is bringing in 15 million/year and OU is emphatically not in charge.

Now, the more interesting point is that without UNL, ATM and CU, K-state and Mizzou etc. have a higher chance of being on TV more frequently. Take the 2:00 game this Saturday for example. Would K-State/Mizzou have been on ABC this weekend prior to the departure of NU? It seems to me that some of these smaller programs have a great opportunity to increase their exposure on national TV since the conference has lost, or is losing, a few of the bigger names.

The cadaver may be old, but the man can coach some football. I see K-state taking full advantage of the opportunity.

by the way, happy ‘good buddy’ day to all but the sec dweeb.

Remember, the Big 8 invited Texas to the conference to increase TV money. It should be no surprise that when…
a) TV dynamics change and Tier 3 revenue becomes a significant contribution nationally to athletic department revenues
b) Texas chooses to keep that revenue instead of sharing it

…that Texas would then outlive it’s usefulness to the ex-Big 8 schools that have options and they would start jumping ship. You are seeing this with every ex-Big 8 school with options save OU. OU has a weird combination of Texas dependency, Stoops fear of SEC competition, and a boat anchor of little brother in OSU that is somehow temporarily keeping them from moving.

Wow! How did Charley the troll end up in out little corner of the interweb?

I have found one good source for hard numbers regarding college sports, that being http://businessofcollegesports.com/. They did an interesting piece on the finances of various conferences. http://businessofcollegesports.com/category/conference-finance-series/

An interesting point is that the average SEC team spends roughly $20mil to run their football programs. Texas spends about $25 mil, a&m about $16mil. Assuming helmets and uniforms cost the same and that travel expenses are roughly equal, the major difference in expenses (outside of fees to Willie Lyles and Cam Newton’s dad) has to be salaries for coaches and assistants.

How a&m intends to compete in the SEC when they are spending 20% less than the average SEC team and 40% less than the leading programs escapes me. We all know having a quality stable of assistant coaches is hugely important during the season as well as for recruiting. To be even competitive in the SEC, a&m will have to spend $30mil in exit fees, another $10mil to buy out the Sherminapper and an extra $4mil/ year just to hire and retain an average coaching staff. How those numbers make sense with an additional $4mil/ yr in tv revenue also escapes me. Amortizing the exit fees/ buyout costs over 10 years and adding the additional costs to field an average SEC team will require a&m to increase their football budget by 50% just to remain average. I wish them luck.

As for the Big 12, the average cost of putting a program on the field is $15.8mil. The teams that spend above the average tend to do markedly better than the teams that spend below the average. The average Big 10 program costs more than the average Big 12 program, so added tv revenue in the Big 10 isn’t all it seems.

My point here is that difference between tv revenue and average program costs for the SEC and the Big 12 are roughly equal. The key seems to be the willingness (or the ability) of the school to spend roughly $10 mil over tv revenues to hire quality coaches. $13 mil above tv revenues seems to be the upper level one needs to spend to compete in major football conferences.

With shared revenues, the incremental cost for schools that were receiving less than average payouts comes down, the reduced tv revenue for schools like Texas means profits will dip. Texas can pay $13mil over tv revenue to compete. OU sold its Tier 3 rights, so they seem to be able to spend $13mil more than tv revenues.

At the end of the day, it seems to come down to a choice of business model for each school. The willingness of the school to spend $10mil over tv revenues is the starting point for creating the staff necessary to build a competitive program. If a school isn’t willing or able to do it, they can’t expect better long term results than the programs that are.

Remember, the Big 8 invited Texas to the conference to increase TV money. It should be no surprise that when…
a) TV dynamics change and Tier 3 revenue becomes a significant contribution nationally to athletic department revenues
b) Texas chooses to keep that revenue instead of sharing it

Just like the SEC.

A Big 12 member’s application for SEC membership being accepted would be akin to a community college student getting accepted at Harvard

Only an SEC fan would compare the SEC to Harvard! Also surprising he would compare the ‘inferior’ Big 12 to a community college when all sources point to CC being his high water mark in education. Have some pride buddy…..

Charley,

Please read Big Al’s post, then reread it, then read it again. There might be a few big words in there, but there are dictionaries online now, even if you look up every other word it shouldn’t take you more than a week or two. When you finally understand the difference between a quality post like Big Al’s and the stupid inflammatory stuff you keep submitting, please come back and post again.

BYU may be overrated (or not), but they have behind them the vast fan base that is the LDS church. You obviously get major markets in Utah and Colorado, but a huge chunk of the rest of Pac-12 territory as well, including the West Coast.

I’m not sure what kind of fan base Air Force has, apart from AF service members. Are the military academies really that much of a draw anymore when it comes to athletics? I know Army-Navy has sentimental-historical value, but I don’t see Air Force as bringing much to the Big XII apart from an excellent academic reputation and average athletic achievement.

Also, I’m not clear why some folks do not want TCU in the Big XII. Any help remedying my ignorance and helping me understand this would be much appreciated.

“Also, I’m not clear why some folks do not want TCU in the Big XII. Any help remedying my ignorance and helping me understand this would be much appreciated.”

Scipio has addressed this on numerous occasions, but essentially, they don’t bring any markets that Texas/Tech/Baylor don’t already bring and more importantly, we don’t want to be handcuffed to yet another Texas school when the musical chairs start playing again.

we don’t want to be handcuffed to yet another Texas school

the texas legislature has probably made it to where a state of texas school will never again join a conference in which texas is a member. i wonder if they intended to have that effect.

another thing. i wonder if the fans and alums of schools ‘attached’ to other schools realize to what extent people around the country laugh at them. i thank the sweet lord that i chose a school that will never have that awful mark against its name. and i thank my smart kids for doing likewise.

RE: TCU

Adding another school means splitting the revenue from the TV contract to another school. If that school cannot help us increase the total pie it only lessens the amount we all get individually.

BYU brings the Mormons and more money.

Taylor, you’ve got this thing figured out, which is exactly why I think Mizzou opts to stay the course with the Big XII.

Comparing the SEC to Harvard??? I want some of what he’s smoking…otherwise Charley, go away until you can come back here with something even remotely interesting.

I’m not a businessman per se, but Big Al’s dollars and cents post makes sense. (Pardon the pun…) As I stated in an earlier post, I think it makes sense for UT to try to keep the Big XII together a few more years until the RIGHT move can be made. That move is obviously not to the west at this time.

TCU to the Big XII COULD happen, but somehow, I don’t think so. BYU makes a lot more sense right now. The Cougs aren’t an exact replacement for agricultural, but about as close as there is out there right now. I could see the conference getting back to twelve, but I doubt it goes above that. I’m also not sure what AFA would add to the conference.

I’m not crazy about the Big XII, but if it benefits the Horns to help keep it going for a few more years, then so-be-it…

First of all, pretty sure KU and KSU are governed by the same BOR, so separation of the two would be difficult – maybe not impossible if KSU can find a soft landing spot, but much more challenging than other situations.

Secondly, we can apply logic and rationality all day to combat the Charley Atkins of the world, but the problem is that all of these decisions are not necessarily being made with decision trees and bounded rationality. I get the sense from family members that went to Mizzou that the President and AD are ambivalent at best about going to the SEC – though they are not necessarily thrilled with the Big 12 either. But it is the Board of Curators who are enthralled with the idea of making the move because they know it will be popular with the fanbase.

Problem is that what might be popular today will start looking a lot less popular tomorrow when you are getting your teeth kicked in, have lost your major recruiting base, and are dealing with a bunch of big brothers that don’t play fair and don’t give two shits about what you think. Don’t like UT and DeLoss doing what they want? Try Baton Rouge and Auburn, AL on for size. They will do what they want, only it won’t be above the board – at least we came out and told you we were going to build our own network and we were not going to share with you.

coolhorn -

The sheer hilarity of the conference getting rid of a fake military school in exchange for a real military school is reason enough to bring AFA into the family. Great location for a road game, some exposure to the Denver market, having Big 12 games also broadcast on the Armed Forces Network (the network where the aggies are never shown) are also strong reasons.

al, i’d never really thought about that. those are good reasons to vector in the air force.

Fyi -

2009-10 Big 12 payouts
(total payouts for all sports)

Kansas $12,116,857
Texas $12,048,365
Oklahoma $11,214,630
Okla. St. $10,692,725
Missouri $10,395,893
Baylor $10,228,970
AVERAGE $10,136,406
Texas Tech $9,689,068
K-State $9,428,315
Nebraska $9,334,548
Texas A&M $9,265,582
Iowa State $8,896,242
Colorado $8,325,680
TOTAL $121,636,875
Sources: Tulsa World, IRS Form 990

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/03/3185173/a-look-at-revenue-sharing-in-the.html#storylink=omni_popular#ixzz1ZpvwQ9uu

I’m not saying those numbers above are correct, I’m just saying those payout numbers are being published. They look to be suspicious to be, if for no other reason, the $121 mil total seems way off.

Srr50 -

Sorry to hit you with all of these questions at once, but you’re the answer man when it comes to conference realignment. Maybe these are some topics you can address in a future article.
 
1) Instead of scheduling Notre Dame for Thanksgiving, would it be better to schedule every Thanksgiving game in Austin and rotate Texas Tech and Baylor as Thanksgiving day opponents? The Dallas Cowboys play a different opponent every Thanksgiving, but the game is always at Cowboys Stadium. Why not always shine the Thanksgiving spotlight on Austin and DKR Memorial Stadium?

2) Assuming Notre Dame vs Texas becomes an annual event, would the last weekend of the season be the best date for scheduling that game? Would Texas vs Notre Dame be good counter-programming for all of the conference championship games?
 
3) Assuming that the Big 12 can’t attract an elite team to join the conference, would it be better to expand the recruiting territory of the conference and invite schools like Central Florida, South Florida, and San Diego State that are located in recruiting hotbeds?

4) Or would it be better for the Big 12 to target the Big East and take enough of their teams to cause a dissolution of the Big East conference? Louisville, Cincinnati, and UConn to the Big 12 for football and basketball; Notre Dame, Marquette, Depaul, and one more team to the Big 12 for basketball; West Virginia to the SEC; Pitt and Syracuse to the ACC. Could a simple majority of Big East schools vote to dissolve the conference and relinguish the AQ BCS bid?
 
5) How important is it for the Big 12 to add schools with major airports nearby? Central Florida is located in Orlando. South Florida is located in Tampa. San Diego State is in San Diego. Would proximity to major airports make up for the increased travel distance?
 
6) If the Big 12 doesn’t have a championship game does that mean that every school in the conference can schedule 13 games instead of 12 games?
 
7) Assuming that the Big 12 expands back to 12 teams without adding any elite programs, would the conference be better off playing a round robin schedule with 11 conference games and 1 or 2 out of conference games? Would a Big 12 TV package featuring an 11 game round robin schedule generate more revenue than a Big 12 TV package featuring 8 conference games, 4 ooc games, and 1 championship game?
 
8) Does Texas need to schedule a game in Houston every year to protect our Houston recruiting base from the SEC schools? Would a neutral site game at Reliant Stadium against a Big 12 opponent (or other BCS conference opponent) be better for Texas than playing UH or Rice in Houston?

Problem is that what might be popular today will start looking a lot less popular tomorrow….

This is the disconnect here. “Tomorrow” there won’t be a Big 12. Having a spot today in a major conference not called the Big 12 is valuable.

Does anyone think the Big 12 will survive another decade? There’s a post above where it’s suggested the Big 12 invite UCF, USF, and SDSU…. For godsake. Who wants to live in a conference like that? Talk about dilution. BYU makes me sick enough.

From the article linked above:

SEC, $205 million a year

•Sharing: Equal

•First- through third-tier rights: ABC/ESPN and CBS ($3.075 billion total, both expire in 2024)
-——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
I believe this is incorrect and each school in the SEC negotiates it’s own third-tier rights – like the Big 12.

Lots of questions above- I will answer 6 and 6 only b/c it’s the only thing I can be definitive about:

No- the big 12 teams cannot schedule a 13th game. 13th games are only available as conference championships, or to induce a team to travel to Hawaii (I.E. if you play Hawaii out of conference at their place you get to add a 13th game).

Bama did this a few years back, the Oregon schools have done it and I think USC as well

Some of what we call 3rd tier rights are actually 4th tier rights in other conferences. I know this for a fact in the case of tOSU and other B1G schools. SEC might have 3 tiers of revenue and they keep whatever they have beyond that- I’m not certain

I agree with dilution argument. I have no problem with BYU – good TV following, team has history, great fanbase loyalty. But some of the other stuff is getting flat out silly.

And for what it is worth Phenomenal, I don’t disagree with any of your points. I don’t think the Big 12 is anyone’s ideal conference. I know as a UT fan, I routinely think about how much nicer it would be to join another conference that didn’t include piles of shit like Kansas State and Baylor. And I don’t care about where these teams are ranked, those schools are piles of shit.

However, the idea that joining the SEC is a great choice for Mizzou is not that clear to me. If you are going purely on stability, then I suppose it is certainly a safer choice than staying. The SEC has plenty of problems for any team that joins that go beyond how well Mizzou can compete.

Hmmm, I hadn’t seen San Diego mentioned as an expansion target, that.s an excellent idea. When all the alignment crap has been talked about, it’s always based on what schools are today. But if you look at a school like San Diego State, including them in a BCS conference could do wonders for their football recruiting. Maybe we should be looking a bit more at what a school could become given the right set of circumstances. Given the rather woeful state of FBS football in So Cal (I’m talking about you UCLA) SDSU might have a real shot at becoming a decent counter weight to USC.

Now, that said, I have no idea what kind of facilities SDSU has or what the school is like, I just would rather go to San Diego than Manhattan (Kansas)

I have revised my list of expansion candidates

1.) BYU
2.) Air Force (good for Big 12 probably not so goo for Air Force though also good for me so I can see the Horns in Colorado every few years).
3.) San Diego State—Road Trip baby!

Thanks Wulaw Horn

mc:

1. I doubt the teams involved (and the conference) would let Texas have that kind of schedule — it would be exhibit A for all of those yelling that Texas runs the league for their own personal benefit, not good for trust and stablity.

2. I will be interested to see where the ND-Texas game is slotted. Right now Notre Dame has USC or Stanford at the end of the season and I don’t know if they want to mess with that.

3. Recruiting is secondary in expansion — again its about media attractiveness and how they fit in.

4. Aside from Notre Dame (and perhaps BYU) there are no ideal expansion candidates out there, so I guess picking a couple off from the Big East makes as much sense as anthing else. They are all bandaids and merely slow the eventual process down.

5. You can get to Boise with one stop in Dallas. I really don’t think travel (for football, which again is what we are talking about) is really an issue for any potential candidate.

6. Nope, 12 game schedules (with exotic exceptions like playing in Hawaii. )

7. You will never see any conference with an 11-game schedule. Too many road games, not enough chances to bring in OOC rummies that will leave with a check and a loss. Besides the networks would hate it.

8. I tend to believe that the SEC teams that want to have already established strong inroads into Houston, so my first impression is that we don’t need to have an annual game in Houston, but it bears watching to see just how the A&M inclusion affects recruiting in Texas.

Phenomenal, that was the exact thing I said about Missouri back when I found we were joining with the Big 8 rather than getting to go to the Pac-10! Of course, I understood that taking Missouri was a condition of getting Nebraska and OU. Not all additions are about getting quality programs or quality locations, if that were the case then Missouri should have revoked its place at the table decades ago! Missouri has been decent in football over the past several years (largely by getting Texas recruits), but BYU would have been a better option than Missouri back in 1998 both in terms of location and quality.

Big Al -

USA Today also has a searchable database online (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ncaa-finances.htm) that can give at least a broad idea as to sources of income and destinations of expenses. On the revenue side, A&M suffers on the contributions front far more than any other line-item. On the expenses front, while coaching salary differential is there ($22M for Texas, $13M for A&M and $15M for LSU), the main line-item that jumps out is facilities/maintenance, where both Texas and LSU spend roughly $10M per year than A&M. Maybe A&M is banking on keeping facilities costs relatively flat?

“On the revenue side, A&M suffers on the contributions front far more than any other line-item. "

Which is why I think the SEC move was a no-brainer (although a myopic one) for the powers that be in B-CS. They have seen a pretty marked spike in donations and season ticket interest since the announcement of the move was made. Wouldn’t be surprised if MIzzou saw a similar bump which might be attractive to its Board of Museum Managers.

“CharleyAtkins said: October 4th, 2011 at 7:23 am

Jake, you see a one sentence reply because the thought of turning down membership in a conference – because you are afraid of the possible upgrade in competition – is so incredibly weak, it takes no more than a single sentence to point out the absurdity of it."

Nah I read all your antagonistic tough guy bullshit. The fact that A&M actually thinks they’ll be more competitive over there is what is absurd. And the idea that Texas is afraid of SEC competition is what’s weak. We like it where we are; in our home state without your newest retard cousin. We’re Texas and we reside in a conference based in our home state. The SEC has nothing to offer to us that we don’t already have; other than a huge proliferation of meth labs and incest, but OU will suffice for that now.

Now go fondle your sister (brother) or get busy culling out a sow (boar) to cuddle up with tonight.

Charley’s World:

Byrne: Hey Loftin you know what?

Loftin: What’s that?

Byrne: I’m not afraid of the SEC. NOT AT ALL!

Loftin: Neither am I, Billy. Neither am I.

Byrne: Well, let’s go to the SEC then! That’ll show everyone that WE ARE NOT AFRAID. (man face)

Loftin: YAAAAAH! Let’s do it! (man face)

meanwhile…

Powers. Gosh DeLoss that SEC is spooky.

Dodds: Yup. It’s so scary I peed myself. (girl face)

Powers. We’re just gonna stay in the Big 12. The SEC is too mean. (girl face)

Dodds: Uh-huh.

(imagine all of this played out with stick figures, and you’re approaching Charley’s powers of cognition)

tx2step -

The ags can’t expect facilities costs to stay flat. They haven’t made any significant capital expenditures to upgrade their football stadium since 1999 ($36mil then). The electrical infrastructure badly needs an upgrade and they have to do major structural renovations. They had a plan in the works that would have reduced (yes, REDUCED) the number of seats in the stadium, but that under review.

There was a story flying around that they had $100mil from a mystery donor for stadium upgrades, but that has been proven to be b.s. Michigan spent $250mil to upgrade their stadium and their electrical to handle the newly installed lights ( Kyle Field was built the same year as the Big House – 1927). Texas spent $150 mil for our recent upgrades. I don’t see how aggie does upgrades to Kyle Field for any amount less than $50mil. ( http://www.chron.com/sports/aggies/article/A-amp-M-notebook-More-seats-in-the-works-for-2194160.php )

So far, aggie is spending $30 mil in exit fees, will have to take their spending on football from the current $16 mil/ yr up closer to $22 mil to $25 mil, just to be competitive, the buyout to dump the Sherminapper (who, incidently, is three years YOUNGER than Mack) will be another $10mil, add in an extra $1mil/ yr in travel costs for sports teams (this is what Neb budgeted for their mover to the Big 10) and then add in at least $50mil for stadium upgrades (my guess is that $150 would still be under budger) and you have one hell of a bill to pay, just to get another $4mil or so in tv revenue.

I think the costs of moving from the Big 12 to the SEC are going to really hurt a&m. Missou has to be looking at those numbers and wondering if its worth it.

Dagga,

Wonderful! I saw it more played out with action figures. Sort of like the scene in Spaceballs where Dark Helmet is playing out his fantasies with Spaceballs action figures.

Oh, and what happened to ‘Mondays in the Humidor’? I understand not getting (nor do I want) an update on practices from the Asset…I want to be surprised by what we roll out this weekend.

I prefer either a misinformation piece or total radio silence out of them this week.

What else can be said by anyone this week other than “OU SUX!”

Srr50 -

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. I hope you don’t mind answering a few more.

1) How would you rank Central Florida and South Florida as expansion candidates?

a) Central Florida is located in Orlando the 19th largest media market, has no pro football team, and had 56,337 students in 2010.

b) South Florida is located in Tampa the 14th largest media market and had 47,122 students in 2009.

c) By comparison St Louis is the 21st largest media market and Kansas City is the 31st largest media market. University of Missouri had 33,318 students in 2011.

2) In your opinion, would it be better from a revenue standpoint for the Big 12 to stay at 9 teams, or to expand to 10, 11, or 12 with band-aid teams?

Big Al -

Well, one thing that seems worth remembering is that these are 2009/10 numbers, which IIRC came before the new Fox deal for tier 2 in B12. That’s roughly $11M assuming equal sharing across 10 schools, and equal sharing of the ESPN deal at tier 1 is worth another $6M per year, for a total conference payout of $17M. IF the SEC deal is to bring another $4-5M additional, then that gives them some room to move. That said, it seems safe to say that they weren’t exactly expecting a replace-your-coach season in 2011. If it goes that way, then it sure seems you’re right that exit fees, coach buy-outs and facility upgrades put them in a position of sorely needing a T. Boone like benefactor for this to make financial sense. Speaking of, didn’t A&M kick T Boone off of their basketball team back in the day?

MC

I would answer them all by saying I believe the best scenario is 10 teams — take BYU and be done with it.

That’s what we would like, but the rest of the league apparently wants to get back to 12 and have a championship game.

Shared conference revenues for TV rights are a small part of any major school’s overall budget. In Texas’ budget it is almost rounding. There is far too much emphasis placed on this item. Ditto for equal vs. unequal sharing of conference revenue. Ticket prices/contributions are a much bigger number. One issue that A&M has there is that Byrne has already raised ticket prices substantially. Since it is hard to break out ticket sales and contributions here are the combined totals:

A&M – 53M
Alabama – 53.7M
Auburn – 54.4M
Arkansas – 46M
Georgia – 46.5M
USC – 44M

Granted, those aren’t in the ballpark of UT (93.8M) or LSU (70M), but A&M will never be Texas. I just don’t see much room for growth there. A&M couldn’t even sell out their Arky game in Dallas. A&M was promised (and selfishly accepted) $20M from the Big 12. The SEC paid out $18M last year and their contracts aren’t up for renewal until 2023/24. ESPN has said that they will increase the revenue for the Tier 2 contract (that is where the money is) sufficiently so that the schools wouldn’t be diluted (i.e., they will still get their $18M even though they are splitting 13 ways). Don’t expect much upside beyond that. Simplistic Aggys that do not under stand the term “binding contract” project huge increases in revenues from renegotiated TV contracts. That simply will not happen since they will be negotiating with ESPN and only ESPN. In 2024? Well all bets are off then. Big increase.

tx2step-

My assumption about needing to buy out the Sherminapper is based on the observation that they flat got outcoached during their last two losses. I didn’t like Sherman when he was hired and I don’t think he is the answer to their problems now. 21-21 so far in his tenure at farmville doesn’t make me think he is going to be a good long term fit and I think they are waking up to that (check out the Shermtracker http://shermtracker.com/). If DeRuyter starts playing younger guys to find some answer to their secondary problems, I think the overall lack of depth is going to show and it could get ugly in what is arguable the best year for the Big 12 in a while.

Texas will pay Mack $5mil this year and another $3.6 to the assistants. 6 of the 12 head coaches in the SEC make $3mil or more. The ags didn’t get a coach to take them to the promised land when Fran left because a) they weren’t willing to pay up and b) there was HUGE resistance to having a black head coach amongst the big money alums (Sumlin was the choice to replace Fran, but he was vetoed in favor of Lowry’s choice which was the Sherminapper).

Playing in the SEC requires a school to enter into an arms race for facilities and for coaches (a&m will have the 8th largest stadium in the SEC. For the record, UT’s is the 6th largest in the NCAA and the 9th largest non racing stadium in the world.). Recruiting against SEC schools with subpar facilities is tough. Not having a successful head coach makes recruiting VERY tough unless you are a flagship state university and have kids who have grown up wanting to attend your school. Missou in the SEC will not find many kids from Florida or Louisiana wanting to go to Missou. Okies and Texans aren’t going to pick Missou over home state flagship universities because Missou is now in the SEC.

ESPN has a good article up on the Texas high school coaches take on a&m jumping to the SEC.( http://espn.go.com/college-sports/recruiting/football/story/_/id/7058128/texas-high-school-coaches-frown-move ). My favorite quote is “I coached Von Miller and Cyrus Gray in high school [at DeSoto, Texas]. If this would have happened in the middle of their careers, I would have been irritated. I think this is going to cheat some of the kids out of history and tradition. Some say this will give our kids a chance to play in the SEC. I think we’ve got players who already have those chances.”

Missou spends $14mil/ yr on its football program. Spending $2 mil less than the average school in the conference is a bit different than spending $7mil less than average and being 11th of 14 teams in program spending. Again, the average SEC school spends $20mil. Add buyout fees, facilities upgrades, added program costs and no real bump in recruiting and ask yourself why Missou wants to be in the SEC if the Big 12 looks to be stable at least until the next round of conference realignment.

The big question in this is what happens if Congress gets involved and starts forcing college football into a playoff. If that happens, no one knows how it will affect conference structures. Also, the BCS is going to have to make a decision on lifting the 2 schools per conference rule for BCS games. If they don’t, then why go from a 12 team AQ into a 16 team AQ?

a&m would have been much better off spending an extra $8mil over 4 years to bring in a top name coach and see how that affected their fortunes. Trying to compete with UT and OU while offering a coaching staff half of what they could get elsewhere doesn’t land you a good staff. That is the crux of aggie’s problem.

srr50 – Thanks

Is there any chance of a compromise where Texas agrees to a loosening of the partial qualifiers rule in exchange for the conference allowing Texas to behave in ways that maximize our recruiting advantage? For example – allowing Texas to broadcast high school games on LHN and to schedule whomever we want on Thanksgiving.

It seems like a compromise could be a win-win for the entire Big 12 and that the only losers would be the $EC teams who recruit in Texas.

“Had it not been for the insidious cheating in the SWC, it would have been every bit as stable as the SEC.

No it would not. It was doomed simply because it was too inbred, too centric"

I beg to differ – the SWC went 82 years as a conference just fine. In fact, longer than the SEC. Furthermore, how inbred do you consider the SEC – Figuratively and actual?

Jabba T Hug, there is no vast fan base of Mormons, This is 2001 numbers,1.3 percent of the adult population identifies themselves as Mormon. Compare to Baylor with 16.3 % of the population being Baptist. 33 million folks in 2001 if your counting heads or SMU with 14.2 million Methodist. And don’t even think about comparing BYU to Notre Dame, no contest. Even TCU has more built in fan base than does the Mormons. As for Air Force, they do have a national following, mainly because the Armed forces are a major part of America, and football fans being patriotic for the most part have lots of respect for the Armed Services.
Plus Air Force being hand cuffed as it is puts out a good product. Watching BYU is like watching paint dry.

Snide Aside -

Darrell Royal explained the break-up of the Southwestern Conference in these terms: When pro football arrived in Dallas and Houston, college attendance for the Houston and Dallas teams went into the toilet. When the conference dissolved in 1994 SMU, TCU, UH, and Rice were averaging about 20,000 fans in attendance. The four teams that left the SWC for the Big 12 were the four teams with the highest attendance figures.

The whole story is in a book available on Amazon. Here’s the link if you want to buy it:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_1_13?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=darrell+royal&sprefix=darrell+royal

Monty, I’m Baptist and I wouldn’t walk across the street to watch Baylor if they aren’t playing us (or Aggy this year). Not an apples to apples comparison. Those Mormons all watch one team and it’s a team that is a) independent in football, b) has its own network and c), will bring in additional viewers from a different geographic region which includes Salt Lake City. The firs makes them mobile as a potential partner over the long haul. The second makes them a lot like us politically in the conference and the third distinguishes them from TCU who doesn’t draw flies and brings nothing new to the table marketwise. That said, I wouldn’t mind Air Force if we go to 12, but at 10, BYU seems like the best option.

ND is not like any of those schools except for football independence. It’s just ND, period and that’s why I believe we will do everything we can to keep them on our schedule as long as possible.

Phenom, any word on the Mizzou Board of Curators meeting?

“I beg to differ – the SWC went 82 years as a conference just fine. In fact, longer than the SEC. "

Yes the SWC lasted for 82 years, but most of those years included Arkansas, and were prior to the big money TV deals. I can assure you, no one outside of Texas (and surprisingly few people in Texas) want to watch Texas play a slate of Rice, Houston, Baylor, Tech, SMU and Aggie. It sucked back when I was in school and it would suck even worse now.

I would think that the empirical evidence on this subject would be beyond dispute. Apparently it is not.

If Missouri doesn’t go SEC, the fans will burn down the internet. Get your posts in now!

The SWC was a one-trick pony in terms of TV sets, and even with Arkansas it would have been picked apart one by one when we entered the expansion era.

As mentioned earlier, the Dallas Cowboys and the Houston Oilers killed college football in their markets — and therein lies the difference with the SEC.

College football is THE game throughout the South. Even in Atlanta where the Falcons have had some success both Georgia and Georiga Tech are very popular. The SEC also had smart leaders who saw the pro football growth across the country and worked very hard to create a conference brand before the pros could get any kind of foothold in their territory.

The SEC has always had a much better survival instinct than just about anyone else, certainly more than the SWC, which was so into fighting among themselves that the league
had no shot at surviving.

The SWC tried to save itself by adding UH, thinking it might help stem the tide in Houston, but it was and is a commuter school which means it made little dent into the TV market.

Why would a Missouri fan make fun of the Big East schools? I don’t believe they are AAU members academically, but it appears Smith was considering athletics alone.

From an athletic standpoint, the Big East schools being considered for expansion are a close match to Mizzou. All parties, though not your tradition rich powerhouses, have shown the ability to field poll-ranked football teams and bring competitive basketball programs to the table as well. I think they’d fit right in with the former north division schools; the difference being Mizzou has a head start in recruiting Texas high schools to augment their intrastate talent.

Jake , I would be willing to bet most Mormons dont even watch football. You are one Baptist who doesnt like to watch Baylor,so what. There is a Mormon out there just like you, Im Church of Christ, i crossed the tracks to marry. My wife and her side of the family out number you,they love Baylor, and because of that i watched one of the most entertaining games of the year, Baylor / TCU. You like watching paint dry, watch BYU.Texas will not draw one dime of BYU ’sTV rights. so i could give a crock about the Mormon channel or Utah tv sets.BYU is nothing like Texas politically or any other Big 12 school. Their kids are several years older than ours, they get 2 extra years to bulk up on missionary work, and Texas is not and will not go independent, no need for it to. If BYU is so great why dont they stay independent? Sounds like they need us more than we need them. Its BYU that brings nothing. Jake one other thing, Salt lake city population is 181,743 in 2011. the whole state only has 2.9 million people. Compare that to Colorado springs and Colorado.

srr, i bet the general knowledge of conference marketing was so primitive when houston was brought into the swc that the conference was surprised when it turned out not to make much difference. the insight these days is much more acute, though i’m sure there are still some wrinkles of misconception.. i’m speaking on the conference level, not the school level, necessarily. it’s pretty clear the ags have no clue what they are doing.

I’d prefer 12 simply because that would allow for an extra OOC game.

Monty – The situation with BYU and Mormons really is different than Baylor and Baptists. The great mass of Baptists go to a school selected on the basis of things other than their religion and as such have no real attachment to Baylor.

With Mormons though it really is different. The vast majority of Mormons that go to college at least want to go to BYU even if they don’t. As such, the vast majority of Mormons really do identify with BYU. I’ve worked in a company with a strong Mormon connection and knew many of them. Almost across the board they were BYU fans.

As an aside, I can also say they were really fine people and a pleasure to work with. You may disagree with the their religious views, but as far as good citizens who are likable fans of another team they don’t get any better. I’d be pleased to have them in the Big12 and I think they would be an asset in every way.

Missouri curators grant authority for Tigers to go elsewhere:
 
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7060457/missouri-tigers-curators-vote-consider-leaving-big-12

Does this affect our choice of new conference members? Which 2 teams would be the best replacements for A&M and Missouri?

No good ones. Just best available.
 
BYU tops the list.

Looks like Mizzou is gone. Hard to believe. It should be noted that as a Mizzou fan I’m waiting for the kick in the nuts.

Of course, any joy I might feel has been countered with the Cards stranding dozens of runners and Laurence Bowers – a super nice guy in addition to being a good basketballer – is out for the year with a torn ACL.

This is the Big 8’s revenge on Texas. Accepting the SWC 4 meant compromise on a lot of issues that pissed off Big 8 members. If Missouri does bolt it will force our hand before we really want to show it.

Should we tear a page out of the Big East’s book and try to add schools that are strong in basketball as well as football?

For example – Louisville and Cincinnati for football and basketball. Depaul, Marquette and perhaps Notre Dame for basketball (unless of course Notre Dame decided to join for football too).

Would killing the Big East benefit the Big 12?

Can we add BYU and rough it with 9 conference members until it’s time to show our hand?

Good luck to Mizzou. No one should grudge them (or aggy) the opportunity to improve their place in the world of college sports. The Big12 will never be able to replace NU, CU, a$m or Mizzou with comparable universities.

srr50
What is our hand? How confident are you that we have any viable contingency plan for this kind of thing? I bet we believed that a$m would stick with us just like ou. Well, be stuck with us just like ou.

I honestly do not know what is in the minds of the administrations of UT and ou, but
ou must be horrified that the conference they so easily dominated on the football field is disappearing up its own ass hole leaving them no choice but to go to some place where winning will never be so easy again.

I never really trusted the idea that Mizzou was solid with the recent Big 12 developments to begin with. They, by all accounts, were the ones who started looking elsewhere in the first place, only to have the Big Ten take Nebraska instead.

They tried to mend fences w/ the rest of the league when it looked like they had no other options. Once the SEC inquired, that opened the door for them to leave again.

What’s interesting is that Mizzou was the one griping about equal revenue sharing, only to leave once they finally got it.

Everyone may blame Texas for NU, CU, and A&M leaving, but Mizzou going has to rest squarely on Boren and OU. If they just hang tight with the Big12 after A&M left and focus on expansion and strengthening the conference I don’t think Mizzou feels they have to bail. But when it looked like OU wasn’t going to go it was clear that would kill the conference and leave Mizzou to fend for themselves.

In Mizzou’s mind, if OU played that hand once there’s no reason to think the conference will survive more than another 4 or 5 years. The SEC may be a bad fit culturally and Mizzou may get beat up, but at least they are assured a seat at the Superconference table when the next round of musical chairs occurs. If they’d stayed till the Big12 dies they have no absolute guarantee there will be a spot.

In general I’ve thought Phenomenal Smith has been pretty reasonable and realistic in what he’s been saying. In their shoes I’m not sure I don’t make the same decision.

My theory is that we believed that we had until the next round of mega TV negotiations (2015-16) to establish the LHN and be at a position of strength when the Big 12 finallyl imploded and everyone went their own way.

As I have said in the past, I believe there are a lot of smart people in a lot of BCS programs were pretty much of the same mind, and all of them were working on having a top shelf plan that would serve their best self interests.

Then ESPN threw $300 million at us — along with the full weight of their marketing power.

That made a lot of people queasy, and it made A&M jump. We are experiencing the aftershocks and if Missouri does bolt, the game of musical chairs may not stop.

Once again I’m going to counsel patience with the Mizzou situation. I’m not sure if the SEC would prefer them over other options (or wants to engage the Big 12 members again), and the Big 10 may not be ready to expand.

And before anyone says “butbutbut, why would they go this far if it wasn’t already in the bag?” let’s revisit the OU situation. OU may not have been able to jump to another league but they did wring some (modest) negotiation leverage out of the deal, just by looking ready to follow through with it. Mizzou might’ve looked at that outcome, said “why the hell not?” and followed suit. After the last few months it’s a no-lose deal for them to be aggressive. Worst thing they can get out of this is more leverage on the media rights issue.

sr50,
It cannot stop. No one can afford to be left our of one of the 4 super conferences. Even ND is in danger of being left out of the resulting playoff system and the GIANT tv money those 4 SCs will surely reserve for themselves. The playoff will drive the tv contracts for SC regulars season games to new heights.

One question I do have about Mizzou and the SEC is whether they will get an invite, at least without the legal liability clearance. A&M leaving didn’t ultimately cause a problem because the TV networks had already assured the Big12 that their contracts would be OK if A&M left. If Mizzou leaves too though I wonder if the TV networks will finally balk. Even if the Big12 doesn’t implode, if the TV networks balk it may involve major loss of revenue to the remaining members. This in turn could result in suits against Mizzou and the SEC for the damages. Mizzou might not get an invite until the networks decide their stance.

Tx, I don’t think Mizzou was going on about equal revenue sharing. Anyway, that was just a bone thrown to the masses.

nunna, I agree re OU and Boren. If all that hadn’t happened, I bet Mizzou is right there with everyone else trying to add BYU, etc.

Dagga,
As much as I would like to agree with you, ou and Mizzou are apples and oranges. The reality is that ou to the PAC would be a place they could still win big while they would not do so well in the SEC. Same for UT. Hence, the PAC does not want ou AND Texas. That is too much horse power to add and only one of them brings a real tv market.

If srr50 is right about UT’s grand plan then it has truly blown up in our faces. Actually, it blew up when NU and CU left.

nunna, my thoughts are that Mizzou had such an egg-on-its-face experience last year that it wouldn’t have gone through this unless there was something solid in the works. Everyone in SEC country says the SEC is waiting for us. Everyone who covers Mizzou says the SEC is waiting for us. I want to believe that was a done deal before tonight’s meeting.

That said, I have been a Mizzou fan since James Wilder and Phil Bradley were in the backfield so I have seen a lot of Mizzou failures. Maybe we come back to the Big 12 and claim we didn’t want the SEC anyway, a la OU. Maybe we make a play for the Big 10, get shut out AGAIN, go to the SEC who say “no, we prefer WVU.” Then we come back to the Big 12. I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop….

The SEC’s ADs are meeting tomorrow, scheduled after the Mizzou BOC meeting was scheduled. We’ll see.

My last thought is that I bet ou will jump into this now and take the SEC spot so coveted by Mizzou. Recall that Boren still has the authority granted by his BOR. Something even Powers did not get.

srr50 -

Do any other members of the Big 12 have options? Missouri seems to be the last Big 12 school other than Texas which has a better option.

Phenom – I agree Mizzou probably has an informal offer and are serious about this or they wouldn’t be doing this. My only thought was that an unforseen complication might occur.

If the networks say to the Big12 “oh, by the way, those tv contracts you with us. Well those are gonna be invalid if Mizzou also leaves. We’ll have to renogiate, probably for a lot less.”

Suddenly there’s a whole lot of potential financial damages to the remaining schools. Does the SEC still offer a formal invite if they know there’s a good chance of lawsuits for the damages? Do they issue an invite with the same restrictions A&M had? If so, the damaged Big12 schools will almost certainly not only refuse to waive their right to sue, but probably promise to sue if Mizzou leaves.

Flash – I think the SEC would rather have Mizzou than OU. More TVs and also less threatening on the field to the existing SEC powers. Also, OU is tethered to OSU and the SEC doesn’t want to be forced into taking both.

There were reports from usually reliable sources that West Virginia was to be the 14th member of the SEC.

WTF?

Of course Missouri is a much better alternative, and it is a very smart move for the Tigers in light of the swiftness and uncertainty surrounding college football.

That should tell you all about how we are at a point where events are controlling the actions of a lot of very smart people at BCS programs, when they thought it was the other way around.

srr50,
I think we already showed our hand. When everyone saw we held 5 aces our fate was sealed.

If BYU turns down a Big XII offer, all hell is going to break loose. Dodds and TBP might literally fly to Norman and kick David Boren’s ass. Castiglione will give them they key to the good senator’s office.

Would it screw up Deloss’ plans if we expand to 12 teams for football and 16 teams for basketball? We could kill the Big East and preserve the Big 12 until 2015-2016. Who cares if the Big East members know that the arrangement is temporary? Those schools have no place to go. They would enjoy at least 5 more years in a BCS conference.

Here is a scary thought. What if the PAC, SEC, BIG and ACC have already colluded to limit the four super conferences to only 14 teams each for the next 20 years?

Paranoia LOL

If Deloss had a plan such that he thought every other program and conference in college football would dance to our tune and let us lead, I want some of what he’s smoking. I’ve been saying I didn’t like the passive aggressive manner in which we’ve handled our business regarding realignment, and I like it less now. Maybe the Big Cigar will show up and laugh at us some more, and tell us it’s all going to be ok, but I think the time to move is NOW, and be damned to other considerations.

Nunna Yo Bizness I agree with you on almost everything you said, they are fine people, And i have absolutely nothing against them, would take them in the conference, just not my first choice. I apologize to anyone who thinks i meant to run them down. Roger Staubach is a Mormon, and as great as he was as a Cowboy , he is a better Man. Obviously they have done a bang up job promoting themselves, and i salute them. My original Point was me thinking as a football fan there are other teams that provide better entertainment with the same or better revenue production. We gain nothing off the BYU TV network which is fine, but its not a plus or minus to the league. People seem to think thats a plus, i think it doesnt matter. Im old school in that i love watching the triple option. Air Force is in a state with over twice the television sets of Utah and that is my preference, I know one thing, It will benefit BYU in recruiting at some fine football player producing schools such as Euless Trinity. As far as Baylor goes, The Baptist have not put them front and center on a network, if they marketed Baylor Football like the Mormons Market BYU football it would be a juggernaut,simply because of the number of pockets in church.

srr50 – When you say Mizzou leaving would “force our hand”, do you mean it will force us to make a move? I’m not sure I see that as the case. Who else in the Big12 besides Mizzou has a better desitination available right now? No one to my knowledge. The PAC doesn’t want OU/OSU (at least not without us), and no one else in the Big12 is coveted by the other major conferences.

So if no one else has a place to go, and we don’t want to go, what forces us to make a move?

That said, I wish something would finally force the situation, because I’m really not looking forward to watching 3-5 years of a diluted Big12.

Roger Staubach is a Mormon, and as great as he was as a Cowboy , he is a better Man.

Steve Young is Mormon. I believe Danny White is Mormon. The last time I looked Roger Staubach was Catholic.

Monty – Just a couple of comments on what you said.

We gain nothing off the BYU TV network which is fine, but its not a plus or minus to the league. People seem to think thats a plus, i think it doesnt matter.

You’re right in that we don’t benefit financially. I think what people are seeing as the positive in this is that it brings another team into the conference that has an LHN type arrangement. It adds credibility to pushing ahead with the LHN and creates a conference situation friendly to other schools that might want to do a similar type arrangement.

Air Force is in a state with over twice the television sets of Utah and that is my preference

I agree that the state of Colorado is a worthwhile market to pursue. My preference though would be Colorado State. It’s a decent sized school with a good alumni base. It’s not as big as Colorado, but I think they are bigger sports and football fans as CSU. Air Force is worth considering though.

The Baptist have not put them front and center on a network, if they marketed Baylor Football like the Mormons Market BYU football it would be a juggernaut,simply because of the number of pockets in church.

Absolutely right. One thing I don’t know about that may be a factor. I know Baylor is very expensive which tends to slant a lot of people’s view (even many Baptists) of them as being spoiled rich kids. I don’t know about BYU, but I wonder if maybe they are more affordable which also encourages more kids to go that have an interest and doesn’t create a stigma of them being rich kids.

Nunna, that’s what I can’t get past. Those who advocate staying in A watered down Big XII apparently believe there are no negative consequences for Texas in doing so. I don’t believe that to be the case. Which is why I say, get now while the getting is good.

srr50, you are right, thanks for refreshing my memory . Danny was the Mormon, and he once said Roger would make a great Mormon.

Nunna yo Bizness, You are right, Baylor is very, very expensive by my wallet. Over the years as friends and acquaintance’s children have grown up i have know several that got into Baylor on full ride scholarships, non of them athletic i might add. Everything from Music, religion, History, i think all of them went on mission trips as part of the deal.They seem to give out alot of scholarships or the churches do, sorry to say none went to my kids, and they didnt go to Baylor. The ones that had to pay their on was very well could be spoiled rich kids.

Texan Nick, as long as Texas can have a track to a BCS championship game via the big 12 there is no reason to go elsewhere. I personally think the Big 12 power ratings will improve with the round robin schedule, the former north teams will have a easier time recruiting south kids because half the games will be played down here in front of family. May even get a few aggie recruits. i dont think the SEC is going to help Aggie recruiting in the long run. Nobody wants to play for a loser.

TexanNick, what are the negative consequences? We continue to play most of our games in state, we continue ‘rivalries’ with Tech and Baylor giving us even more games in state, and we get OU as our continued foil and consistent power program to go along with the fact we play them in Dallas every year. Are we really going to lose recruits because we don’t play Mizzou anymore? Losing Nebraska and Colorado, much less 5-7, didn’t keep us from snagging a Top 5 recruiting class.

TCU and BSU have been knocking on the MNC door for the past several years and they don’t face three teams like Tech, Baylor, and OU in their regular season. If we continue to up the competition in our OOC slate then we will still have a credible SOS. Either way, the conference is still guaranteed its Fiesta bowl spot so the SOS argument only comes into play when we are looking for an MNC. I still don’t see any major downside beyond the fact that OU could still jump and that would be a problem for us if we stay put for any length of time.

What will kill the conference long term is that the conference won’t bring in the revenue necessary to keep it viable with only us and OU as the breadwinners. We will both bail at some point should superconferences come to the fore, unless the BCS replacement sets up a playoff and gives guaranteed access to more than 4 superconferences. At which point we may actually look smart in being in a slightly weaker superconference since our path to the playoffs could be considerably easier than in other conferences.

I haven’t compared, but CSU might have the worst average attendance of a “State” school in the nation. 22,400 last year? That is not B12 worthy.

Ricky, I get what you’re saying. The negative consequence I see is relevance. Sorry, but putting a crappy Notre Dame team on the OOC schedule isn’t going to dramatically punch it up, if at all. It’s a marquee name, but not a marquee program.

You say TCU and Boise have been knocking on the door… Guess what? They’re NEVER getting in playing a MWC schedule, which is essentially what we’re signed up for. So unless you’re thrilled at the prospect of losing MNC spots to undefeated or even 1 loss SEC/B1G teams, while we content ourselves with Fiesta Bowls…

SOS is hard to figure and schedule for to begin with, because even a name program can have a bad stretch when you’re scheduling home and homes 4-7 years out. Notice we’re not getting much love for BYU or UCLA. Add in the fact that expanding conferences will, at least in the short term, create less scheduling flexibility, and the fact that marquee programs aren’t going to want to schedule Texas frequently, and it’s just not hard to figure we’re playing a MWC/WAC schedule after October.

Not getting much love for UCLA/BYU? Texas is top 10 right now.

OU, OkSU, and Tech will be plenty strong. As far as “name” OOC programs – most of the Pac-12, OhSU, PSU, UTenn, Miami, FSU, ND, are willing to take all comers. And there are plenty of mid-level BCS and upper echelon non-BCS schools that would love the TV exposure, ticket sales, and game day check that comes from playing UT.

You don’t have to play the entire top 10 to get to the big game.

In 2009, Texas only played 3 top 25 teams, with OkSU the highest ranked at game time (13).

In 2005, Texas also only played 3 top 25 teams, with OhSU ranked 4.

In 2008, Texas played 3 TOP 6 teams plus #11 Mizzou, and didn’t make the big game.

An undefeated Texas with a decent non-conference schedule (just decent), will always be in the running for the title game.

TexanNick -

How many times has an undefeated team from a BCS conference been shut out of a national championship? Just once and it was an SEC team. In 2004, Auburn had the strongest schedule among itself, USC, and Auburn; and the Tigers didn’t even get a share of a championship.

Playing a more difficult schedule is no guarantee that Texas will be in the national championship just as playing a softer schedule is no guarantee that Texas will be shut out of the national championship. Smart people play the percentages and hope for the best. You win some, you lose some, but you keep fighting.

As far as Notre Dame goes, the Irish score high TV ratings even when they suck. We don’t want to play Notre Dame for strength of schedule. We want to play Notre Dame for TV ratings.

Texas still has a strong poker hand, even without Missouri and A&M. No guts, no glory. Let the chips fall where they may.

Nimrod and Maroon, I hear ya. But I don’t want undefeated Texas teams to be in the running. I want them playing in that game. I think the best way to assure that is to play in a stronger conference. If I had to trade fewer undefeated seasonsnfor a near guarantee that when undefeated we WILL play in MNC, I’d make the trade right now. But you guys are convincednwe can have both?

TexanNick -

Nothing in life comes with a guarantee. In 2004, Auburn played the most difficult schedule in the most difficult conference and they still didn’t get to play in the national championship game. Texas is more likely to make the national championship game in the Big 12 than another conference. We’ve done it twice in the last 7 years, and it would have been 3 times, if not for goofy Big 12 tiebreaker rules that had nothing to do with our conference affiliation.

If you don’t think an undefeated Texas team in the Big 12 without Missouri has just as much of a chance to play for it all as an undefeated team with Missouri (and A&M) in the big 12, then I don’t really know what to say to you.

Srr50 -
 
Can the Big 12 buy another 5 years by forcing the dissolution of the Big East?

If the Big East dissolves, the TV networks would have fewer BCS conference content options. Wouldn’t each of the remaining BCS conferences become more valuable to the networks based on the reduced supply of BCS conference content?
 
The Big 12 could offer UConn and Rutgers membership for all sports, and offer St. John’s, Seton Hall, Georgetown, Providence, Villanova and Notre Dame membership for basketball.
 
The ACC would probably intercede and take all of these schools into their conference. Either way the Big East would dissolve, indirectly increasing the value of the Big 12 to the TV networks by default. Notre Dame would maintain football independence and still be available as a partner for Texas when the next realignment wave hits.
 
If the ACC didn’t intercede and take all of these schools into their conference, would the increased basketball revenues make up for the dilution of Big 12 football revenues? Imagine Texas playing in a conference basketball tournament at Madison Square Garden against Georgetown, Notre Dame and UConn.

It’s a perception game Jake. I just don’t think the Big XII will be considered a power conference going forward. I’d have long term concerns about maintaining AQ status, beyond the current contract. Five year survival? Sure, I think it can SURVIVE… Is that the goal?

Yes, I think a weakened Big XII could hurt us. Will it necessarily keep us out consistently? Probably not. But let’s take this year as an example. Presume we go undefeated the rest of the way. Are the polls or computers going to reward us over say, Wisconsin? Could happen, could come short. Will probably depend on what OU/OSU versus Nebraska and Michigan, do the rest of the way. Presume that undefeated Bama or LSU are locks, so who’s #2?

What I’m saying is that a program like Texas should be playing in a conference worthy of itself, not artificially propping up an otherwise CUSA or MWC type field.

The perception aspect I worry about is what recruits think. I saw firsthand in the final years of the SWC that if the kids start to perceive the conference as crap then they won’t go to any of the schools; they go OOC which creates a bigger credibility problem which makes more kids go elsewhere and so on. And don’t try to sell me on how A&M did OK during the last years of the SWC. They were cheating like hell, and when they played OOC it showed that they had been simply beating up on a putrid SWC schedule.

If the Big12 starts having to fill out with teams like Louisville, Cincinatti, UConn, etc. the product is going to start smelling like crap to the kids. They want to be on TV. When Texas games start getting relegated to 2nd and 3rd tier TV because of the crap conference teams we have to play, the kids are going to notice that the country is watching other teams in other conferences. Simply having Texas isn’t going to make TV networks want to show our game nationally if it’s against a crap team the country doesn’t give a flip about.

Bill Self apparently has come out and said that the Border War may die if Mizzou leaves. So the Mizzou hoops world could lose the 2 KU match-ups a year and the Big 12 tourney in KC. That would be a tough pill to swallow for the Mizzou culture, but football rules.

Missouri won’t be outspending LSU or Alabama for football championships, and Kentucky has the best “amateur” basketball players money can buy. If the Tigers desire any sort of relevance in revenue producing athletics, the SEC is not their best bet. Other than their administrators’ propensity for trying to flag down other conferences for membership, I happen to like Missouri. I’d definitely favor a Big XII expansion with Big East schools if I were running the show in the Show Me State, but good luck to the Tigers should they depart.

Comparing our current situation to the SWC is sort of like comparing Arky’s move to the SEC and A&M’s. There are some nuggets of wisdom to consider but the situations are different. The late 90s SWC was more putrid than the MWC is today and much, much worse than the current Big East. Adding Louisville or Cincy or BYU obviously doesn’t replace Nebraska, Missouri, or A&M, but its not like a death penalty SMU, a late 90s TCU, or any modern era Rice team. Yes, perception is going to be an issue if the conference lasts for more than 6 years and if no one outside of us and OU is consistently strong, but I doubt it matters that much. The conference has been maligned as being weak since its inception but then every other year the media puts out their ‘wow, the Big 12 is the second best conference in the country!’ article.

test
a
test a

It’s really a nice and helpful piece of information. I’m glad that you shared this helpful information with us. Please stay us up to date like this. Thanks for sharing.

What region plays what region in the final 4?

Hi there, I discovered your website via Google while searching for a similar subject, your web site came up, it seems to be good. I’ve bookmarked to favourites|added to my bookmarks.

I believe that is one of the such a lot significant info for me. And i am glad studying your article. But should statement on few common issues, The web site style is great, the articles is truly great : D. Good job, cheers

We are a group of volunteers and starting a brand new scheme in our community. Your web site offered us with helpful info to work on. You have done a formidable job and our whole community will be thankful to you.

I’ve been browsing on-line greater than 3 hours nowadays, but I by no means found any attention-grabbing article like yours. It is beautiful price sufficient for me. In my view, if all webmasters and bloggers made excellent content material as you did, the net can be a lot more helpful than ever before.

Normally I don’t learn post on blogs, however I wish to say that this write-up very compelled me to check out and do so! Your writing style has been amazed me. Thanks, quite nice post.

I have learn some excellent stuff here. Definitely price bookmarking for revisiting. I wonder how so much attempt you set to make the sort of great informative web site.

great issues altogether, you just won a new reader. What would you suggest about your put up that you just made some days ago? Any certain?