What's UT worth on their own? $40MM/Year? Split 16 ways that's $2.5MM per team. Totally not worth it.
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 part we want want to sweep under the rug
- Thread starter Liver
- Start date
What's UT worth on their own? $40MM/Year? Split 16 ways that's $2.5MM per team. Totally not worth it.
had it all come together as planned, we'd have ended up with the other ex big12 schools. i can't see how it would have worked differently, although there was lots of fan talk of zippers and pods.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
Given the Big 12 negotiated a new television contract with Fox on the back of Texas to the tune of $90 million per year, which doesn't include the $11 million+ Texas gets from the Longhorn network, I would say Texas is worth significantly more than $40 million per year.
Even using your value, $40 million is $2.5 million MORE per year.
CsquaredCC
Well-Known Member
A historical analysis is nice and I don't doubt that the PAC has the most championships. But I don't think anyone would argue that the PAC as it is currently situated is more "elite" than either the BIG10 or the SEC. All of the movement and exapansion is about situating a conference for a new era of college atheletics. OU and UT are the prizes. IMO.
Thanks for providing those numbers, which will help illustrate my point even better...
OK, 90 divided by 10 (10 teams in the B12) is $9MM per team, plus $11MM = $20MM that UT is worth on it's own. Add in another $10MM because Texas brings a lot of TV sets all on it's own, and you're at $30MM. Divided 16 ways that's $1.875MM extra per year. Totally not worth it. Even if it were $2.5MM/Year. It's not worth it at an extra $10MM/Year. Remember, we're already pulling in $30MM/Year. What's an extra $2.5MM, especially with all the problems that would come from it?
Fine, it is just as elite as the big10 or SEC and is given the same level of respect. After that, any argument over "the elite" is opinoin, unless you are just talking about football, and then facts are facts and it is the SEC.
Ultimately, it comes down to money and I don´t think it´s a coincidence the 2 conferences with the best TV contracts have dominated the college football landscape in recent years.
Unless you have a built-in advantage like Texas it´s extremely hard to compete with the money and exposure the SEC and B1G have gotten in recent years. Once the new money truly starts kicking in, the Pac will be on their level.
Unless you have a built-in advantage like Texas it´s extremely hard to compete with the money and exposure the SEC and B1G have gotten in recent years. Once the new money truly starts kicking in, the Pac will be on their level.
The SEC is a football machine. No doubt about it. The B10 isn't anything all that great. I wouldn't put them any higher on the pecking order than the Pac 12. Not by a long shot. I'd put them well below it, in fact.
The Big 10 has dominated media coverage, but they sure haven't dominated on the field. They have generally underperformed in interconference play and bowl games.
Would you rather rake in a guaranteed $30m/year for the next 20 years or get $35m/year for the next five with a chance it all goes to hell afterwards?
LONG - TERM - STABILITY
I´d rather bang the semi-hot chick for the rest of my life than bang the supermodel porn star for the next 5 only for my dick to fall off afterwards.
Ralphandler1
Member
Ok I didn't say UT was not a great football program (didn't mean to make it sound like they have only ever been good in the past decade) but I did say IN MY OPINION they do not fit in culturally with the schools of the PAC12. UT is def a better fit in SEC. There have been many articles posted from many sites stating that fact. Everything from facilities, fans and academics are much more in line with the SEC then PAC 12. And yes some of the state schools already in the PAC12 are not top universities..... but I don't think Stanford, Cal, USC, Washington and UCLA have much of a desire to allow academic bottom feeders like Tech, KSU, OSU etc into the Pac12.
And just for an outside perspective thought I'd share this....I actually moved to the NC a few years ago and have been talking with friends and coworkers out here (Duke, Wake and UNC grads and fans), and their unsolicited opinions have been quite interesting. They all see the PAC 10 (now 12) as the mecca of world class academics and research (literally the words of a DUKE PhD). And I have been asked by many people why the PAC 12 would even consider allowing schools like OSU, KSU or Tech in. Complete outsiders see that they do not belong in this conference. They are absolutely not a cultural fit. Just think about it.... Do students in Berkley, Boulder or Palo Alto have much similarity to students in Lubbock Texas or Manhattan Kansas? HELL NO. I am not trying to say UT, KSU, OU etc have anything wrong with them or anything terribly negative.... I just don't think they fit into the PAC 12.
Exactly. How does morality fit into college football? It was neither moral nor immoral for the corn and the buffs to leave the Big XII. We left because we believed it was in our interest to leave, we paid our penalty and moved on. The Aggies aren't immoral for leaving the Big XII. The Longhorn Network isn't immoral, Texas thinks it's in their interest to have it. Because of it, others believe it's in their interest not be in a conference with Texas. At most, one can argue that Texas is short sighted in its resistance to equal revenue sharing of tier 3 media rights within a conference, but it's not immoral to believe that the school that earns it should keep it.
So, let's leave morality out of it. All the arguments I read here are based on what the poster thinks is right for CU . . . wait, I just remembered, those ****ing baptist mother****ers from Baylor are immoral for their lying attempts to slime themselves into the PAC over CU. **** those mother****ers.
I'm pretty sure we're agreeing here. Right?
Ralphandler1
Member
That was the plan at some point last summer.... but no CU has been the plan for a LONG LONG time. UT to the PAC10/12 was new last year
i was referring to the 2 (undeserved?) MNC title game berths tOSU got there ...
We are. I was trying to add to your argument.
CsquaredCC
Well-Known Member
I disagree about the Big 10 especially when "blue bloods" like Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and now Nebraska are a part of the equation, but hey I grew up in Big 10 country so I know I am biased.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
The $90 million per team is just for the Fox contract. The Big 12 also has the ESPN/ABC contract which currently pays $65 million per year. That contract will be up for renegotiation soon. The Big 12 currently receives $155 million per year from it's television contracts. It equates to roughly $15.5 million per year, per team (although Texas gets more than that - because they have unequal TV revenue sharing)
By contrast the Pac-12 TV contract will be for $225 million per year - or $18.75 million per team.
I would venture an uneducated guess that adding OU, UT, OSU, and Tech to the Pac-12 conference would bring at least another $100+ in TV revenue. It would bring even more if UT agreed to tie the LHN into the regional network idea.
Even at an extra $6.25MM/Year - not worth it.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
I actually agree with you. Texas and OU to the SEC makes more sense when you look at the overall attitude towards sports and football in particular.
But OU and UT want the path of LEAST resistance. The last five (5) BCS champs have come from the SEC. OU and Texas want no part of that. They want as easy of a schedule as they can get, and if they get to choose between playing in the Pac-16 or playing in the SEC they will take the Pac-16, hands down.
Deleted member 807
Guest
I've been giving some thought about how to crack this Texas nut.
One principle of good investment is to buy low and sell high. Targeting UT is not an example of buying low to get into the Lone Star State.
The PAC likes good academic institutions, preferably those that are not secular.
It seems to me that Larry Scott could increase leverage by publically extending an exploritory committee to evaluate whether lowly little Rice University might make an attractive candidate to join with Oklahoma as numbers 13 and 14.
Rice is a AAU member and a strong research institution. It's a smart academically, kinda like the Stanford of Texas. Considering Stanford is a valuable P12 member with 6,800 undergrads, Rice might not be an impossible stretch. The committee needs to debate that. The beautiful Rice campus is adjacent to the Blue Bonnet bowl and close enough to Reliant, which means game day facilities are available for sizable crowds. Rice is adored in Houston, they create a nice Southern beachhead to complement OU's North Texas presence. And, ahem, Rice doesn't play insane politics.
And the Owls have a pretty good baseball program, too.
The threat of Rice being evaluated to join the P16 sends a very strong message to Oklahoma State and Texas Tech; 1) Academics do matter. 2) Big TV markets do matter.
It also sends a signal to Texas; Larry Scott is willing to enter the state of Texas and is willing to spend big dollars to further dilute UT's brand equity. By pouring a bunch of money and Pac exposure into brainy and well mannered little Rice, not all of the eyes in Texas will be upon Texas. All the conference teams would enjoy spending game week recruiting in Rice's neighborhood, too. And it takes one of UT's perennial cupcakes off the market.
Then let UT, KU, TT and Okie Light publically make their case for the remaining two available seats on the P16 bus. Congeniality is one of the deciding factors.
Pow. Buy low.
One principle of good investment is to buy low and sell high. Targeting UT is not an example of buying low to get into the Lone Star State.
The PAC likes good academic institutions, preferably those that are not secular.
It seems to me that Larry Scott could increase leverage by publically extending an exploritory committee to evaluate whether lowly little Rice University might make an attractive candidate to join with Oklahoma as numbers 13 and 14.
Rice is a AAU member and a strong research institution. It's a smart academically, kinda like the Stanford of Texas. Considering Stanford is a valuable P12 member with 6,800 undergrads, Rice might not be an impossible stretch. The committee needs to debate that. The beautiful Rice campus is adjacent to the Blue Bonnet bowl and close enough to Reliant, which means game day facilities are available for sizable crowds. Rice is adored in Houston, they create a nice Southern beachhead to complement OU's North Texas presence. And, ahem, Rice doesn't play insane politics.
And the Owls have a pretty good baseball program, too.
The threat of Rice being evaluated to join the P16 sends a very strong message to Oklahoma State and Texas Tech; 1) Academics do matter. 2) Big TV markets do matter.
It also sends a signal to Texas; Larry Scott is willing to enter the state of Texas and is willing to spend big dollars to further dilute UT's brand equity. By pouring a bunch of money and Pac exposure into brainy and well mannered little Rice, not all of the eyes in Texas will be upon Texas. All the conference teams would enjoy spending game week recruiting in Rice's neighborhood, too. And it takes one of UT's perennial cupcakes off the market.
Then let UT, KU, TT and Okie Light publically make their case for the remaining two available seats on the P16 bus. Congeniality is one of the deciding factors.
Pow. Buy low.
Last edited by a moderator:
that is 100% wrong, false, incorrect, and untrue.
let me try again and use smaller words: in roughly 1994 (that would be roughly SEVENTEEN years ago), the pac 10 extended offers to CU and ut. together. not CU only. they have been interested in texas for as long as they have been interested in CU.
revisionist history going on here.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
Uhm, not quite. It wasn't that uTerus was content with their trailer park existence back in the 90's. What happened, tho, was that they were told that if they left, they had to take atm with them.
That makes things that much more funny, now. atm is bolting for the $ec and uTerus is left holding bevo's bags.
this may become a new AllBuffs term of endearment
that is somewhat true -- ut was encouraged to take atm. but ut didn't push it because they were quite content with their position at the time. it is also true however that the p10 didn't want atm at the time.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
We've seen the same kind of "encouragement" lately. It's just that the more recent version has been more vocal, and more immediate (thank the interwebz).
Politicing, wrangling, slurrin', you name it. There was some of it going on in '94.
Oh, and I agree -- the PAC didn't want atm in '94, so it kinda surprised me that they did in 2010.
Liver,
Did you drink a large glass of stupid? CU has always been the Pac-XX's #1 choice even above UT it was in 1994 when we almost went last time and it was again last year. just look at the history man. Trying to get UT now is all about them playing defense for the super conference era, this is a begrudging move - a late night hook-up to break a dry-spell if you will; not a 20 year love affair like they have had with CU.
Did you drink a large glass of stupid? CU has always been the Pac-XX's #1 choice even above UT it was in 1994 when we almost went last time and it was again last year. just look at the history man. Trying to get UT now is all about them playing defense for the super conference era, this is a begrudging move - a late night hook-up to break a dry-spell if you will; not a 20 year love affair like they have had with CU.
The more I see of this the more I think Sacky is on to the right answer. Stick with 12.
If other conferences want to go to 14 or 16 let them. When it all washes out we are not going to have a 4/16 set-up unless the conferences let it happen. I don't see the Big10 getting bigger unless they get ND (and potentially UT.) Even then they don't have to go past 14. The SEC is at 13 but again having trouble finding a #14 they like much less adding two more past that.
I think initially the idea of 4/16 sounded great on the surface. Dig a little deeper though, which the Presidents are or will do beyond what the ADs tell them, and there are some serious questions to be ask about the whole thing. You start talking about dividing conference revenues with schools who don't neccessarily bring in coresponding revenues, you create questions about traditional rival games, about losing or giving other schools access to games in favored recruiting areas, about losing road games to areas where school have strong alumni bases.
In the end I think there will be a sorting out of the conferences and of the schools who get to participate at the highest level. I am not convinced that the 4/16 model will be the answer that comes out. I can very easily see a model with 5 conferences between 12/16 schools each. This allows one extra school to claim a conference championship every year along with the alumni support and donations this brings, it allows one extra confernce championship game. If you keep the bowl system you have an extra bowl getting a conference champion and justifying 3 wild card schools. If you go playoff (which I don't want but may be the end result) you get an 8 school playoff again with 3 wildcards. All of this means more money and better feelings for the schools, the reason they have football programs.
If other conferences want to go to 14 or 16 let them. When it all washes out we are not going to have a 4/16 set-up unless the conferences let it happen. I don't see the Big10 getting bigger unless they get ND (and potentially UT.) Even then they don't have to go past 14. The SEC is at 13 but again having trouble finding a #14 they like much less adding two more past that.
I think initially the idea of 4/16 sounded great on the surface. Dig a little deeper though, which the Presidents are or will do beyond what the ADs tell them, and there are some serious questions to be ask about the whole thing. You start talking about dividing conference revenues with schools who don't neccessarily bring in coresponding revenues, you create questions about traditional rival games, about losing or giving other schools access to games in favored recruiting areas, about losing road games to areas where school have strong alumni bases.
In the end I think there will be a sorting out of the conferences and of the schools who get to participate at the highest level. I am not convinced that the 4/16 model will be the answer that comes out. I can very easily see a model with 5 conferences between 12/16 schools each. This allows one extra school to claim a conference championship every year along with the alumni support and donations this brings, it allows one extra confernce championship game. If you keep the bowl system you have an extra bowl getting a conference champion and justifying 3 wild card schools. If you go playoff (which I don't want but may be the end result) you get an 8 school playoff again with 3 wildcards. All of this means more money and better feelings for the schools, the reason they have football programs.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
I kinda like your Rice idea, Skiddy. Wonder how the PAC feels about the Owls?
This is getting stupid. People are talking about Rice? ****ing RICE? It is a food, not a football school.