AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Conference Expansion - Big 12 is a tire fire
- Thread starter hokiehead
- Start date
SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
Deleted member 807
Guest
Inviting Texas into your conference is like inviting Heisenburg into your home.
Wealthy? Yes.
Entertaining? Yes.
Things breaking bad inside 6 seasons? Definately.
Wealthy? Yes.
Entertaining? Yes.
Things breaking bad inside 6 seasons? Definately.
Last edited by a moderator:
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
That's my point I guess. The only way they exists going forward is if they start to act in the best interest of the conference as a whole. Putting a couple more schools at the table is just more leverage, and they didn't force it. I would have thought every school would be looking at doing everything they can to check the balance of power.
Uterus cancer is what killed the BIG8
Despite the popular opinion that Texas is getting gobs of money for the LHN, they are a terrible deal right now compared to similar schools SEC and BT. The problem is the payment for LHN includes a payment from IMG College for multimedia rights to go along with the TV component. It's not analogous to BTN, SECN, or P12N because these schools get a TV network payment AND can negotiate with a multimedia rights parner (IMG or Learfield are the big players). These deals are typically in the $8-15 million range for a major school. To illustrate how bad Texas is getting UNDERPAID, consider UCLA just signed a Learfield deal for $15 million per year. Cal has one at $10 million.... and they would get P12N revenue on top of that. Schools like Bama, Ohio State, Kansas, Oklahoma, etc have their own deals for $8-15 million minimum. But consider the SEC and BTN also get $7-8 million from their conference net. So for instance Bama is getting $15 from Learfield + SEC net money to get up to $21-22 million.
They key is that Texas signed a deal where they'd make a ton more money when ESPN starts to make more money, so there was a huge upside. But distribution of LHN is so low, as is the monthly fee in market ($.29 according to this article), and like $.02/mo out of market where the majority of 'subs' are that ESPN report. Costs are quite high ($26 mil/yr) so the net barely makes a profit.
http://www.expressnews.com/news/loc...e-network-in-the-country-has-lost-6721906.php
Sound like ESPN lost ~$48 million on the venture in the first 5 years. Which means they have to make a whole lot more before Texas gets extra revenue.
http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/espn-big-12-regret-creation-longhorn-network.html
Basically, LHN is losing money for both ESPN and Texas. It's just so much dead airtime to fill with ownership of only 1 FB game a year. Probably a pain in the ass for any coach that works there. Too funny if you ask me.
I have to be honest with you guys - I don't think UT wants any part of the Pac-12.
Maybe they think they do, but only a little ways into negotiations, they're going to be uncomfortable as ****.
Here's a few reasons why: the conference offices aren't moving out of San Francisco. That's going to be a hard pill to swallow right there. That is going to be symbolic of UT's outsider status in the conference. I guarantee the arrogant ****s will put in a proposal to move the conference offices elsewhere, but it ain't going to happen.
The football CCG and the basketball tournament aren't moving to Dallas. Maybe they can get a rotation, but it won't be moving there in perpetuity, which will again be symbolic of UT's status as the non-leader of the conference.
UT will not be an 800 lb gorilla in the conference, nor will it be able to put together an all-powerful bloc like it did with the original Big 12. UCLA, USC, Stanford, Cal, Washington, and yes, Colorado will be able to counter UT's attempts to throw their weight around. If UT was to come into a Pac-14 with OU, there's one potential ally, but I'm not even sure OU is going to be UT's buddy anymore. Bring in two more Texas schools, and maybe they get a 4 school bloc, but that's not going to cut it. The AZ schools won't join them, the NW schools and Cali schools won't, and CU? Bwahahahaha.
Which brings us to the LHN. There is no reason - at all - for any conference to give any concessions which allow UT to keep their own network, regardless of what homer Horn fans think. UT will bring more to the table than almost any other school, true, but not enough - especially given their history - to allow them to have special rights as a member of a conference. I'm sure Larry Scott would entertain the notion of folding the LHN into the Pac-12 networks, given that it becomes Pac-12 Texas, and it operates just like every other Pac-12/14/16 network. Any other way isn't going to happen, but I don't think UT will accept that option, unless they feel like they had no other choice.
So in essence, it will come down to hubris. If UT could shed over a hundred years of ego and arrogance, maybe it could happen. But they won't, and so it won't.
I have always believed that the most likely outcome for UT, if the Big 12 does indeed implode, is independence. I see no reason to change that stance now.
Maybe they think they do, but only a little ways into negotiations, they're going to be uncomfortable as ****.
Here's a few reasons why: the conference offices aren't moving out of San Francisco. That's going to be a hard pill to swallow right there. That is going to be symbolic of UT's outsider status in the conference. I guarantee the arrogant ****s will put in a proposal to move the conference offices elsewhere, but it ain't going to happen.
The football CCG and the basketball tournament aren't moving to Dallas. Maybe they can get a rotation, but it won't be moving there in perpetuity, which will again be symbolic of UT's status as the non-leader of the conference.
UT will not be an 800 lb gorilla in the conference, nor will it be able to put together an all-powerful bloc like it did with the original Big 12. UCLA, USC, Stanford, Cal, Washington, and yes, Colorado will be able to counter UT's attempts to throw their weight around. If UT was to come into a Pac-14 with OU, there's one potential ally, but I'm not even sure OU is going to be UT's buddy anymore. Bring in two more Texas schools, and maybe they get a 4 school bloc, but that's not going to cut it. The AZ schools won't join them, the NW schools and Cali schools won't, and CU? Bwahahahaha.
Which brings us to the LHN. There is no reason - at all - for any conference to give any concessions which allow UT to keep their own network, regardless of what homer Horn fans think. UT will bring more to the table than almost any other school, true, but not enough - especially given their history - to allow them to have special rights as a member of a conference. I'm sure Larry Scott would entertain the notion of folding the LHN into the Pac-12 networks, given that it becomes Pac-12 Texas, and it operates just like every other Pac-12/14/16 network. Any other way isn't going to happen, but I don't think UT will accept that option, unless they feel like they had no other choice.
So in essence, it will come down to hubris. If UT could shed over a hundred years of ego and arrogance, maybe it could happen. But they won't, and so it won't.
I have always believed that the most likely outcome for UT, if the Big 12 does indeed implode, is independence. I see no reason to change that stance now.
From the above link:
I think the majority of fans at all of the Big 12 schools that left (maybe minus Colorado) will tell you they miss being in the Big 12
No maybe about it, pal.
Interesting. UT fans claim to all want to go to the Pac. But I agree with your assessment, when I think about it, that there is no conference that will be more resilient to Texas' need to control things, and ultimately that won't sit well with the burnt orange faithful.
UT fans that I know used to want the Pac, but since they got ****ty they haven't been so eager.
Independence is the most logical unless the NCAA says Notre Dame and Texas have to join a conference and if that happens all of the points you made apply to every other conference. Which is somewhat awesome that probably the biggest program in the country would lose a ton of it's power if the conferences consolidated.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
ND can't join anything aside from the ACC as a full football member until 2030 I believe, FWIW
SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
Maybe my ass. I don't miss anything at all about the Big 12.From the above link:
I think the majority of fans at all of the Big 12 schools that left (maybe minus Colorado) will tell you they miss being in the Big 12
No maybe about it, pal.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
Nebraska belongs playing OU and KSU. Getting away from recruiting TX has to hurt. The B1G money and being in the B1G version of the XII-North has its appeal, though. A weak OOC nearly guarantees 9 wins and a shot at the CCG even when they suck. NW, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue is their current run of games. Weakest you could find in a P5.
Mizzou may be riding their early SEC success, but reality of their standing is hitting now...and this with the East the weakest it'll ever be. They have to miss easy road trips and KU rivalry on some level, though.
Mizzou may be riding their early SEC success, but reality of their standing is hitting now...and this with the East the weakest it'll ever be. They have to miss easy road trips and KU rivalry on some level, though.
assuming the GoR is as legally solid as some claim (which I won't believe until one of them get's challenged in court)
On the subject of "Notre Dame geography" -- their "geography" is much different than any other school. No other P5-caliper school has alumni so widespread across the US. No other school outside of the southeast gets so many non-alumni fans "for free", and no other school gets so many non-alumni/non-local fans "for free". No other school lacking BCS championships over the last two decades travels anywhere near as well as the Irish -- and not just in football. The only geographical impediment Notre Dame has is the burden on the rest of the conference traveling to South Bend. This burden is significant, but only one part of "Notre Dame geography".
And for that matter, South Bend is closer to Boulder than Palo Alto, Seattle, Pullman, Eugene, Corvallis or Berkeley and negligibly further than LA.
Interesting take from The Big Lead is probably CSU's only hope for joining a "major conference." http://thebiglead.com/2016/10/18/bi...-could-reignite-texas-and-oklahoma-to-pac-12/
In sum, the article predicts UT, TT, OU and OSU to the Pac-16. Remainder of Big XII adds Houston, SMU, BYU, CSU, Memphis, Cincinnati, East Carolina, UCF, USF, UConn. What a smattering of crap. But imagine this comes to pass and Boise State gets the nod over CSU.
In sum, the article predicts UT, TT, OU and OSU to the Pac-16. Remainder of Big XII adds Houston, SMU, BYU, CSU, Memphis, Cincinnati, East Carolina, UCF, USF, UConn. What a smattering of crap. But imagine this comes to pass and Boise State gets the nod over CSU.
It probably comes down to success, but also a feeling of "belonging" where they are.
I think we have all felt at home in the Pac-12, even when we sucked. It just makes more sense, culturally and geographically, for us to be in a western conference than a midwestern conference. I don't know if that has always been the case with CU - I know that I have heard a few old-timers get reminiscent of the old days of playing in the Big 8 - but it is now. We didn't fit in the Big 12, we do fit where we are.
I would guess that A&M doesn't really miss the Big 12, either. They would probably rather play UT still - especially because they would kick their ass right now - but they are successful, and while they might not mesh exactly on a cultural basis, they don't necessarily mesh with most Big 12 schools either.
The nubs probably are torn. As someone said before, they're in a weak-ass division in a top-heavy, east-heavy conference, and they get to feast on a lot of cupcakes. A bowl game and 9 wins every year feels pretty good, I would guess. The cultural thing is probably a little wonky though. Sure, NU is a midwestern school and the B1G is a midwestern conference, but I think we all would agree that "midwestern" or not, there's a big difference between west of the Missouri and east of the Mississippi. We'll call Iowa a transitional state, lol.
Missouri is a joke in the SEC. One could argue that a move to the SEC West would help, but not really. Missouri is just not a southern school. Plus most of the conference games are probably nowhere near their alumni base. As was mentioned before, they happened to land in the SEC East at the right time, but things are changing fast, and they're going to very soon find themselves with a ceiling of 3rd in the division, and a floor of probably 5th (thank God for Kentucky and Vanderbilt, I guess). They have to be hankering to return to the Big 12, but I don't blame them for sticking with the SEC $$$$ while they see what happens.
Barf
HA! After a 3 month review period.
By the way, I did think yesterday was a good time to bring up Pac 12 expansion given the B12 announcement, but I smiled to myself as I wrote my post knowing full well the conversation would unfold this way.
The only knew thing I learned is there are some UT games interested in the idea - that was worth it!
The only knew thing I learned is there are some UT games interested in the idea - that was worth it!
This would be ideal
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
BYU
The reasons I wouldn't mind Texas are these, to kick their ass and I could talk more **** to my brother, which I've been doing quite a bit lol. Second, they are a brand with $ attached to it. Otherwise, I don't care really. I just know expansion is gonna happen with one conference and it'll be a domino effect.
I would imagine a great deal of turmoil is going on. Especially from schools like ISU, KSU, bailer, TCU who are likely to get left out of the picture when OU, UT and probably OSU and TT head for greener pastures.
The big boys, by not expanding, pretty much cast the die that they are going to leave when the TV deal is up. The ACC and B1G and SEC are all at 14. If 16 really is the magic number, some combo of UT, ND, OU, OSU and maybe bit players like KU and TT get into those three power 5's. I am not sure the P12 absorbs the four that fell through last time around.
The leftovers probably cobble together some Sanford and Son type heap of crap as a new conference, and the P12 is left with no real options to get to 16. Aside from BYU, there is nobody in the west to add, and BYU is , well, quirky.
The above scenario looks pretty crappy for everyone not named UT and OU in the B12. OSU and TT probably get a ride on the coattails of their respective big brothers, everybody else gets the shaft.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
Afternoon radio was interviewing a FOX sports journalist (Radigan?) who said the conference commish issued a memo to member schools.
The main jist of it was that schools were to say there was "unanimous" agreement to table expansion, even tho that's not true.
The memo went into "do's and don'ts" when discussing this with the media. It also said schools shouldn't say the conference is at a competitive disadvantage without expansion.
The memo has been leaked, but I didn't hear where or to whom.
The main jist of it was that schools were to say there was "unanimous" agreement to table expansion, even tho that's not true.
The memo went into "do's and don'ts" when discussing this with the media. It also said schools shouldn't say the conference is at a competitive disadvantage without expansion.
The memo has been leaked, but I didn't hear where or to whom.