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!
THE BIG 16 in the Athletic
- Thread starter slystone
- Start date
slystone
Well-Known Member
no one predicted ND to the ACC either
some excerpts:
Between now and when the Pac-12’s media rights deal — and accompanying Grant of Rights agreement — runs out in spring 2024, the Big 12 needs to invite USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Arizona and Arizona State. The Big 12 needs to do to the Pac-12 what the Pac12 tried to do 10 years ago to the Big 12. It needs to do it unapologetically. If we learned anything from the previous rounds of conference realignment, this is a kill-or-be-killed business. The Pac-12 took its shot in 2010 and missed. The Big 12 can secure its long-term survival by ensuring it doesn’t.
Last year, the Big 12 distributed an average of $38.8 million per school. The average distribution by the Pac-12 for the 2017-18 school year was $31.3 million per school. In the same fiscal year, the Big 12’s full distributions ranged from $33.6 million to $36.6 million. But that doesn’t paint the entire picture.
Because Big 12 schools can sell their third-tier rights individually, they can make millions more. Texas makes about $15 million a year from the Longhorn Network. Oklahoma makes about $7 million a year for its third-tier deal. Pac-12 schools’ third-tier rights are bundled to program the Pac-12 Network. That money is included in the conference revenue figure. Jon Wilner of the Bay Area News Group reported last year that the per-school contribution from the network in 2018 came out to about $2.7 million.
Now it is Scott’s league that faces the existential crisis. And the drivers for realignment have changed. It makes no sense for the Big Ten or SEC to expand again. There is no one other than Texas and Oklahoma that either league would want, and Texas and Oklahoma seem content being the primary muscle in the Big 12. Meanwhile, cord-cutting has rendered territory acquisition for the sake of higher cable network subscriber fees, the raison d’etre for the last round of realignment, a fool’s errand. If there is another major round of realignment — and the move being suggested here probably is the only inciting action that would inspire another round — it will be driven by brand names that can draw viewers from across the country. USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington fit that description. Arizona and Arizona State, meanwhile, are a geographic fit for the league in a fast-growing state that could make the territory valuable for football recruiting and for brand purposes. USC especially would appreciate the ability to negotiate a separate third-tier deal. The Trojan Network might not command as much as the Longhorn Network, but it would bring USC a hell of a lot more money than the Pac-12 Network does. Meanwhile, the Trojans’ new conference would be headquartered in quite reasonable confines in Irving, Texas, instead of bleeding money paying for space in pricy San Francisco. Should Oregon and/or Washington protest that they can’t come without Oregon State and/or Washington State, Big 12 officials can simply say “Fine. Then stay where you are.” They could stay content at 14, or they could look in a different direction — perhaps toward UCF and Cincinnati — to create a truly nationwide league. (In sports other than football and basketball, teams could be grouped geographically to limit extreme travel.) They also could approach Stanford and Cal. An association with such academic powerhouses likely would appeal to the other Big 12 presidents. The problem is that neither could draw the kind of
some excerpts:
Between now and when the Pac-12’s media rights deal — and accompanying Grant of Rights agreement — runs out in spring 2024, the Big 12 needs to invite USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Arizona and Arizona State. The Big 12 needs to do to the Pac-12 what the Pac12 tried to do 10 years ago to the Big 12. It needs to do it unapologetically. If we learned anything from the previous rounds of conference realignment, this is a kill-or-be-killed business. The Pac-12 took its shot in 2010 and missed. The Big 12 can secure its long-term survival by ensuring it doesn’t.
Last year, the Big 12 distributed an average of $38.8 million per school. The average distribution by the Pac-12 for the 2017-18 school year was $31.3 million per school. In the same fiscal year, the Big 12’s full distributions ranged from $33.6 million to $36.6 million. But that doesn’t paint the entire picture.
Because Big 12 schools can sell their third-tier rights individually, they can make millions more. Texas makes about $15 million a year from the Longhorn Network. Oklahoma makes about $7 million a year for its third-tier deal. Pac-12 schools’ third-tier rights are bundled to program the Pac-12 Network. That money is included in the conference revenue figure. Jon Wilner of the Bay Area News Group reported last year that the per-school contribution from the network in 2018 came out to about $2.7 million.
Now it is Scott’s league that faces the existential crisis. And the drivers for realignment have changed. It makes no sense for the Big Ten or SEC to expand again. There is no one other than Texas and Oklahoma that either league would want, and Texas and Oklahoma seem content being the primary muscle in the Big 12. Meanwhile, cord-cutting has rendered territory acquisition for the sake of higher cable network subscriber fees, the raison d’etre for the last round of realignment, a fool’s errand. If there is another major round of realignment — and the move being suggested here probably is the only inciting action that would inspire another round — it will be driven by brand names that can draw viewers from across the country. USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington fit that description. Arizona and Arizona State, meanwhile, are a geographic fit for the league in a fast-growing state that could make the territory valuable for football recruiting and for brand purposes. USC especially would appreciate the ability to negotiate a separate third-tier deal. The Trojan Network might not command as much as the Longhorn Network, but it would bring USC a hell of a lot more money than the Pac-12 Network does. Meanwhile, the Trojans’ new conference would be headquartered in quite reasonable confines in Irving, Texas, instead of bleeding money paying for space in pricy San Francisco. Should Oregon and/or Washington protest that they can’t come without Oregon State and/or Washington State, Big 12 officials can simply say “Fine. Then stay where you are.” They could stay content at 14, or they could look in a different direction — perhaps toward UCF and Cincinnati — to create a truly nationwide league. (In sports other than football and basketball, teams could be grouped geographically to limit extreme travel.) They also could approach Stanford and Cal. An association with such academic powerhouses likely would appeal to the other Big 12 presidents. The problem is that neither could draw the kind of
USC is obviously the big fish. Washington and Oregon are pretty good draws as well. But I do find it funny that Staples thinks adding Arizona, Arizona State, Cal or Stanford would increase the profile of the conference. If those four schools attracted eyeballs and got people in the stands the Pac-12 would have about 0 issues right now. Instead Cal has a pretty awful fan base, Arizona state shrunk the size of their stadium and has trouble filling up for football and basketball games despite being in a huge city, Stanford is a joke and Arizona is the Kansas of the conference.
An intense hatred of Texas and Baylor?
....and a view of the Flatirons.
Jack Kroll
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
He’s such a C-UNT!
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
I don’t understand the logic behind these writers thinking the wave of the future is taking every team and making conferences with 14+ teams. But, okay I guess. I just don’t see what that solves? Do they think CBS/ESPN/NBC has endless amounts of money to pay them? There will be a point where they say no to their demands. This **** is getting out of control anyways.
If, and it's highly unlikely that this is anything more than off-season click fodder, the B12 were to do this the logical step would be for them to simply move to dissolve the conference and build a new one from scratch. By doing so they could cut ties to the schools that don't add much value from either conference.
Iowa State, the Kansas schools, Baylor, TTU, TCU would all be looked at as potentially being replaced by Stanford and Colorado. With a growing market Utah might even end up in the mix.
Iowa State, the Kansas schools, Baylor, TTU, TCU would all be looked at as potentially being replaced by Stanford and Colorado. With a growing market Utah might even end up in the mix.
slystone
Well-Known Member
the sad fact is that in the last 10 years, the SEC and Big10 have buried the pac, big12 and ACC when it comes to lining their pockets.For example, Alabama football has donated $$ to the engineering school which has allowed the engineering school to recruit a ton of engineering students from northern states whom have traditionally gone to illinois, purdue, etc for engineering. Imagine if CU could do that ! It is ironic that Bohn seems to be one of the leaders in either getting the pac 12 to get it in gear or possibly blow it up. Schools like cinncy and memphis have benefited from strong leadership and are working to position themselves as viable candidates in the eyes of the P5. People snickered when the big 10 grabbed maryland and rutgers...both schools have stumbled in football but in hoops..maryland is #1 in the conference and rutgers is in the middle of the pack ahead of michigan, purdue and indiana....the pac presidents have to sack up and jettison larry scott...the dude has f'ed up the whole conference....
01Buff
Well-Known Member
Someone should email integrations of this to all the regents. Frequently...
slystone
Well-Known Member
methinks change is gonna happen sooner rather than later....the $$ gap ;between the big 10 and sec has gotten way too large.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
USC + 4 to the Big XII makes sense in some respects. I wonder mostly what will happen to those who would be left.
We assume USC and UCLA would be the first taken.
Assuming only 4 more would be taken by the Big XII, that means that OSU, WSU, and four more from CU/ UU/ UW/ ASU/ UA/ Cal/ Stanford aren't joining the Big XII.
So what happens to those schools? 4-6 schools become a western arm of the B1G? Regroup to form a smaller conference, potentially adding a couple of schools, for a still high (but not as high) payday?
If a Big 16 happened, it seems like 2-4 pretty high quality schools, at a minimum, aren't included.
We assume USC and UCLA would be the first taken.
Assuming only 4 more would be taken by the Big XII, that means that OSU, WSU, and four more from CU/ UU/ UW/ ASU/ UA/ Cal/ Stanford aren't joining the Big XII.
So what happens to those schools? 4-6 schools become a western arm of the B1G? Regroup to form a smaller conference, potentially adding a couple of schools, for a still high (but not as high) payday?
If a Big 16 happened, it seems like 2-4 pretty high quality schools, at a minimum, aren't included.
The only thing CU has going for it in a scenario where the Pac 12 dissolves (instead of the Big 12) is the Denver market that is growing rapidly. If the Big 12 wasn't interested in bringing CU back, would have to hope the BIG would want to expand West.
I quit reading when it listed AZ as one of the top teams in the PAC-12
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Well that was a rather silly reason to excuse yourself from reading a decent article. AZ is a very attractive option for the Big XII, and is regularly discussed in Big XII circles. It's a large school, many alumni, new market, great basketball tradition, makes geographic sense if you're bringing in USC, strong-ish academics/ AAU.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Several things with Staples' idea:
1) Washington and Oregon won't get split from WSU and OSU respectively unless the Pac 12 gets raided to the point of dissolution first.
2) California-If those four are attached enough to each other to demand that the football round robin remains in place (to the detriment of the league as a whole), there's no way the Big 12 takes USC and UCLA only and gets away with it.
3) I think there's enough history between the eight members of the Big 12 who were in that league for the idea of us coming back to be pretty popular (Our move wasn't anywhere near as messy as Nebraska's was).
If this becomes reality and CU doesn't get invited back-the B1G probably comes back and takes what they want out of the Pac 12's leftovers-most likely CU, Utah, Oregon, and Washington.....and goes to 18 teams.
Last edited:
WarBuff
Club Member
Why wouldn't the Big XII dump ISU and take CU in that scenario (not sure they could, but just wondering).
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
The Big XII wouldn't jettison a member if they're raiding the PAC. Coming together and making a single vision puts them in the position of strength to move forward and make an offer. First voting to disband the conference (needs 8 votes) then trying to sort through what a potential new media deal could be in order to then try and woo some PAC members... just wouldn't work.
Besides, ISU gets a bad rap, but they're a quality school. Solid basketball, 3rd highest football attendance (higher than SC as of late), AAU school.
WarBuff
Club Member
Just thinking that if there were to be a merger of the two conferences, not every current member would be desired. Maybe there is just a group of schools that leave both conferences and start a new one with the members that they want. The reason I picked ISU is TV markets.
1. Geographic sense is completely pointless in terms of this discussion based on how ****ed everything would be.
2. Arizona and Arizona state are part of the issue in the pac 12 in terms of engagement and increasing revenue so no they aren’t really attractive to a conference that is currently paying out more per member.
3. Basketball is sort of irrelevant in this conversation.
The big 3 are usc, Washington and Oregon. Then you have to pick three out of asu/Arizona, Utah, Colorado, UCLA and possibly cal although they don’t appear to be a very attractive option at the moment.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
If you're the B1G, why not trying to get to 16 now via CU and Iowa State?
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
In theory I agree. For example, a conference of UO/ UW/ USC/ UCLA/ OU/ UT/ KU and maybe a couple more probably maximizes per-school earning. But a merging of super-brands or whatever will always maximize value, it's just not how things ever play out.
WarBuff
Club Member
Start drinking now and this will make sense in a few hours
