We still don't know if it killed the Big XII or not. It started the path where we are now and if the Big XII doesn't survive then that move did kill the Big XII.Originally Posted by ajn2003
|
|
We still don't know if it killed the Big XII or not. It started the path where we are now and if the Big XII doesn't survive then that move did kill the Big XII.
Total Agreement
Status Quo = Sucks
Expansion = Sucks
Big 12 imploding = About Freakin Time
Congrat's OU fans, your home schedule now is, Sisters of the Poor I, II, and III, ISU, Baylor, Tech, Cincinnati, and TCU...wow that's excitment....now's where I hurl and quit donating to OU.
As I understand it the GOR in the Big 12 is a legal rental of the TV rights for the Big 12 conference from the individual schools. It lasts for the duration of the of the TV contracts. To break that or to get the GOR back, a school would have a few options (I'm not a lawyer, just thinking of the ways that makes sense to get back a rental contract).
1) Conference disbands. Thus no legal entity holding the rights. I believe this would take 3/4 vote, or 8 schools of the current 10.
2) Buy back the rights. This kills any financial benefits from moving conferences, but gets more realistic each year as the GOR years diminish.
3) Challenge in court: Show the conference isn't using the rights in the best interests or is damaging the future value of the TV rights of the school and/or the conference. Since the conference has solid TV contracts right now, I don't see how they can prove this. Tough to PROVE these.
So the best way will be to disband the conference. That's 8 schools that have to have a soft landing spot.
Let's look at this option of me just thinking out loud:
1) KU goes to the B1G, OU, OSU, Texas, Tech, TCU and K-state go to the PAC. WVU go to the SEC. That's 8. Iowa St and Baylor left out. (or you could have TCU to the SEC and the PAC gets another from say New Mexico, Hawaii, UNLV, etc)
And this is one reason, that I think some of the Big 12 Presidents are reluctant to expand. If you add more schools then you have to have more schools having to find a home. I mean, if the Big 12 were to add 2 Mid-majors just to get to 12 say....New Mexico and Colorado St for argument's sake, you now have to have 9 schools to vote to disband. And it was hard to get 8 Big 12 schools with upgrades, that extra school being a Mid-major is even harder.
So the real question for the PAC and for the Big 12 schools is when does the GOR become financially viable to buy back? with 5 years left? 3 years?
Sorry guys. After having read it, I'd suggest just skipping it.
I posted that link before I had read it, I just saw it linked over on shaggybevo. There is a whole lot of **** in it...especially considering they just allowed an admitted "fan" to participate (the FSU guy), one that didn't even bother to feign having inside sources. And Frank The Tank might know his B1G information but he only knows as much about the dynamics of the Big 12 as any dumb**** on the street. Which is to say, very little.
That and Dude showed his true hand. He's not trying to act important, I don't think.
He's just trying to prove (somehow) that the ACC made a mistake by not adding WVU.
I've thought this for awhile. He has admitted in the past that he has an agenda against the ACC. The crazy part of all of this, by him starting all these rumors and pointing out a fact of the ACC not making near the same money I think he started important people saying "Hey, we don't make enough money in the ACC....we DO have options!"
As for Frank the Tank...he hates the Big 12...or worse he totally dismisses the entire conference and everyone in it besides Texas and maybe Kansas. He has such a "Big 10 is the greatest ever, and the rest of the world sucks" mentality that nothing he writes or says makes sense.
What I did take away from the article is that Florida St and it's fans want NO part of the Big 12. Which means the Big 12 is on a death watch. It's just a matter of time.
The following users like this post: Spade1000
That doesn't mean anything really. No one reasonably thinks that the Big 12 is going to be the first conference to start stealing ACC schools during the next wave of conference consolidation. If the ACC gets gutted by the Big 10 and the SEC and FSU doesn't find a home in either of those conferences, they'll be begging to join the Big 12.
PAC has room for 4 and 4-only. Any more and you get too many "no" votes among the individual schools. Those 4 new schools have to be good enough for Arizona, ASU, Utah and Colorado to give up playing USC and UCLA every year.
We are reaching critical m**** and I don't think both the big12 and ACC will survive. I think it's either or. When I say survive, I mean as a "BCS" level conference where we have been. Of course, the loser could be the next conference USA, but is that really surviving?
We could form our own power conference with the best of big12/ACC but that would require eliminating osu, Baylor, WF, BC, etc. Thats not happening. So, I think it's going to be us or them, not both.
OU, KU, Tx, TCU or Tech would be a homerun for PAC. BUT...you know.
OR neither the Big 12 or the ACC survive. (unless the scraps of both is what you are saying is a "survivor")
I am learning towards this outcome, depending on the actions and or destination(s) of these schools: FSU, ND, UNC. those 3 schools are the 3 most valuable schools in play, and will determine how and if the ACC (UNC stays) survives in some form, and likewise the BIGXII-2(FSU JOINS)
I agree with you. There will be some remnants left behind that might keep the name ACC or Big12 but they'll be no better than a mid major conference.
I think "not survive" is a bit strong. It took a lot to kill the WAC and there wasn't even a lot of money involved in it. Conferences with television deals can always backfill instead of folding. Whether you want to watch their games is a whole other deal.
When I said they wouldn't survive, I mean as a "BCS" level conference. They can "survive" as a mid major. If they're ok with being like the big east or conf USA, fine with me. As long as OU ends up in one of the big 3 conferences, we'll be fine.
I doubt the television partners would be willing to pay the same amount of money for a gutted league devoid of any teams of value.
100% correct. If Oklahoma and Texas decide to leave, ESPN/Fox wouldn't want anything to do with remaining members. GOR protects nine schools against a single school bailing. If the two heavies decide to jointly leave, good luck with the remaining members seeing media partners fulfill their long term contract.
They may not pay the same amount, but that is different that being able to unilaterally walk away from the contract. The Big XII wouldn't get the same money if it lost its star teams, but it wouldn't just go away. My guess is it would grab as many MWC teams as it could (see ACC-BE relationship the last couple of decades) and try to limit the damage. The only conferences that are truly in danger of disappearing are the ones that don't have anyone else to steal from.
That's true. Have you seen what the new big east is getting? The big12 TV deal, without OU or tx, would look very similar to that deal.
Well, when we say "surviving" I mean in it's current form or close to it's currant levels. The Big East was gutted...but there is a conference with the name "Big East". For me, they didn't survive the cut down in conferences. Hell, there's a WAC still.
fify
I'm confused as to how the GOR is supposed to keep members in the conference. For example is OU, Texas, KU and forth member bolt for the PAC, who cares if the Big XII thinks they own the rights to the games. Doesn't the conference have to still pay out the TV money to that team even if they are in another conference? Plus the fact that on the field, uniform, court, helmet etc..would be PAC 16, so that's free advirtising. Then considering ESPN / Fox would immediately back out of the TV deal because OU and Texas wouldn't be playing the ISU, Baylor and Tech's of the world, that would be a plus for the bolting teams.
Ultimately, for the future of OU and Texas, it makes sense to break this thing up sooner rather than later. Why wait until every spot is taken and OU and Texas are stuck for the next 100 years in a subpar conference. Is David Boren, or Joe C paying any attention to anything???
No one cares what the Big XII thinks. People care what they actually legally own, and the point of the GOR is to make sure that the conference DOES own them.
I would ****ume the answer is no. I'm pretty sure the GOR works by having the schools sell their rights to the conference for a petty sum (e.g. $1), then the conference selling the collective rights to a network. The contract for revenue distribution is almost certainly tied to conference affiliation, not the sale of the rights.
Until they sue the schools using the loss of the television revenue as a quantifiable financial damage.
The Pac-12 is not going to expand without Texas, so every spot will not be taken.
I'm pretty sure there are only two ways to sue your way out of a GOR:
1)the conference fails in its fiduciary duty (that's not going to be a winning argument when you grant your rights to the conference at the same time the conference signs a television deal. That implies you are ok with the financial payout) or
2) something changes materially about the conference. (e.g. a change in the revenue sharing agreement, the addition of other members, etc.)
Basically, the only way for a school to get out is for the conference to vote to change something and for a member that wants to leave to vote no and then sue their way out of the conference. (If the change is something petty, the conference would just drop the issue)
I actually disagree with the Texas comment. While Texas is the absolute #1 priority for PAC, they do have a decent fallback option in TCU due to Dallas AND Fort Worth television markets and TCU wouldnt say no to a $25 mil+/year deal.
This is where it gets interesting. Kansas, is a valuable commodity that could be a player in this game that most people dont know. Yeah they dont bring in the football revenue but their top tier basketball program AND their AAU status makes them a VERY valuable target. I wouldnt be a bit suprised if B1G is talking to them also. However, I believe in order for them to do such thing, the B1G would also have to be talking to OU to further "materially change" the Big12 due to these two defecting. My ****umptions for both OU and KU pitches are to add on both little brothers into the B1G which Delany would not be happy about.
Another theory which I think is more realistic and the reason why we are in a stand still is the state of Texas tv exposure. Neither B1G nor Pac12 have any whatsoever. Texas being the Mecca of that spot is currently content with their position. Why? They BELIEVE that they are in the most beneficial spot that they could be in. Otherwise, the landscape would be drastically different. Both B1G and PAC12 want Texas. Who doesnt? They're the most valuable not only on the market, but in the country on a D1 level.
I firmly believe that the B1G would love to have OU come on board. But in order to have this, they want more exposure to Texas How would they do this? Convince Texas or settle for TCU (which I believe they would be content with). However, if OU goes there, so does KU.
Just my 2 cents
If you think the Pac 12 wants TCU you haven't been paying attention.
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
No need. TCU is a valuable hotspot
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
If the Pac-12 wants to take a Texas school that doesn't carry the state, I cannot see why they'd take TCU over Houston. Comparable market (6 million people versus 6.5 million) but much better fit. (arbitrary publication rankings say TCU is a better school, but Houston is a very high research university according to the Carnegie foundation and that probably matters more)
The Pac needs 4 schools for any kind of a move to occur (anything less creates internal problems among the schools that result in 4 "no" votes). Even going over 16 has problems as to how the conference will be divided. That is going to have to be decided before the presidents are willing to vote.
OU and UT are obvious. The last two spots the Pac would probably prefer to be Texas schools, but you have arguments that might work for OSU as well.
Texas
Texas Tech
Oklahoma
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (I don't know if they have an American football team, but you find a way to make it work)
OU
Texas
Texas Tech
KU (basketball here)
Bias aside, what makes TTU more attractive to the PAC than OSU?
UT
When Fox supported the Big 12, it meant ACC's future as a major conference was doomed. Big 12 ain't going anywhere folks. ESPN could not stop the Big 10, which is Fox's hammer, from inflicting loss on the ACC.
More of the tx TV market and a 2nd school in tx.
The following users like this post: MadMex
[IMG]img.bleacherreport.net/img/images/photos/002/041/574/uspw_6757212_crop_exact.jpg?w=650&h=440&q=75[/IMG]
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
Then why not TCU (DFW and Recent BCS bowl wins/appearances)
is pretty attractive too
Texas recruiting over Oklahoma recruiting.
See bolded.
Of course, now that idiot x97 is going to come out of the woodwork and rail against the bigotry of the Pac-12...
The following users like this post: OSULadyCowboy
The number of hot chicks per capita at TCU compared to TTU should gain them favor with the Pac, I would think.
The following users like this post: Pardner
IF they could actually get UT, the PAC-12 would want Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and whoever...in that order. Period.
And because of the politics, Kansas would be added first. That's the lesson learned from last time.
And one of OSU and TTU would then be squeezed out. (read: OSU)
So it's not about making a choice between OSU and TTU. It's about getting the 3 new markets, with two AAU schools, two football powers and a basketball titan. And then basically giving UT what they want, which I would guess might be TTU. Otherwise, if Larry Scott could draft 4 (no politics involved) he'd take UT. OU, KU (in that order) and then find a new 4th market for those new networks.
The following users like this post: OU812
Great. The West Virginia hillbillies are now whining about travel after having been in the B12 only 6 months or so.
MORGANTOWN — West Virginia University’s athletic department and the Big 12 Conference have agreed to attempt to make some travel changes to accommodate the problems the Mountaineers faced during their first season in the league.
Athletic Director Oliver Luck says the league offered no guarantees because “scheduling is always a challenge” but the league has agreed to attempt to make life on the road easier in a number of areas when it can.
WVU geographically is out of place in the Big 12, with every trip not only being of 1,700 miles round trip or more but fighting a time zone change which costs them an hour returning to Morgantown.
http://www.exponent-telegram.com/spo...a4bcf887a.html
This message is hidden because x97 is on your ignore list.
3 users like Camel at Sea's post: lauderdaleOU, Mephistopheles, OU812
It only works if everyone does it.
The following users like this post: krock918316
When Larry Scott tried to make the Pac-16 the first time, Baylor wasn't included for a reason. Small private schools that arent blue bloods don't have a seat at the table in major conferences, especially ones with religious ties when concerning a left coast conference. BCS Bowl wins have absolutely zero to do with realignment. Mizzou and Texas A&M are in the SEC, and Slive wouldn't have touched TCU with a ten foot pole. It just doesn't offer anything.
Texas A&M - 1997, 1998, 2010, 2012 Big 12 Champs*
So we're making fun of West Virginia whinning about travel, but alot of Sooners fans are all excited about joining the PAC 12 and playing alot of games two time zones away?????? I maybe crazy but I can but I can kinda see their point but its their old buddy Delross Dodds fault, Big 12 couldn't had Louisville.....
The following users like this post: MikeLucky
Part of their problem was their own doing... this year they had back-to-back games in Lubbock and Austin. I'm sure that was done by the conference to help with this very thing... yet, what did WVU do? They drove their equipment truck from Morgantown to Lubbock... then after the game BACK to Morgantown... then back to Austin... Don't have any idea why they would do that. I'm sure there was somewhere between or IN Lubbock or Austin that they could have done some laundry and regrouped the equipment to save the double trip.
I think it's funny that West Virginia is whinning simply because they desperately wanted to leave the sinking ship called the Big East to go ANYWHERE, and of course the lowly Big 12 took them in, and now they complain. Granted they are on an island, and they shouldn't even be in the Big 12, much less there shouldn't even be a Big 12.
It's different for the PAC because OU would have for example Texas, KU, and Tech as close mates in the new league. In a Pod system they would only travel out West two or three times per year max. If a Pod system existed, the schedule might be ( Texas / KU / Tech / UCLA / Colorado / Stanford / Washington / Arizona / Utah ). Take out going to Colorado, since we did that in the Big 8 for many years anyways, then you only travel West two to three times per year.
Even if OU were to have to travel West say four times per year, I'd be out there for two or three of those games, and I live in the Midwest. I'd much rather go to the West Coast vs. Waco, Ames, Manhatten or Morgantown.
Bring on the PAC 16
Define "alot" of games. If OU/UT/OSU/Tech joined the PAC 16, that would lead to two 8 team divisions, one coastal (PST) and one CST/MST. 7 divisional games, 2 cross divisional games, 1 of which would be on the road. We would alternate playing the AZ schools on the road every year in division, alternate playing Utah/CU on the road, leading to 2 road games in the MST and 1 in the PST every year. That's 3, at the most, "wild" road games for OU or any other CST team in the PAC 16.
West Virginia, on the other hand, plays ALL of their road games in the CST. So when its the 4 home 5 away conference schedule rotation...that is five road games 1500+ miles away, with many Big 12 land grant schools hours removed from any major metro area for convenient fan travel (contrasted with Tuscon, Denver, Salt Lake, and Phoenix in the Western Division of a PAC 16). There isn't a comparison between WVU's situation and a hypothetical PAC 16. WVU probably has some buyers remorse after seeing Louisville going to the ACC. If they waited, they could have been added to the ACC in Louisville's place (WVU probably would have won the Big East this year), thus rekindling natural rivalries with Pitt, UVA, and Va Tech.
But travel is a concern, whether its OU to the PAC or FSU to the Big 12. That's why FSU and Clemson won't join. It's why FSU, Clemson, Miami, and Ga Tech won't join. But it's why FSU, Clemson, Miami, Ga Tech, UNC, and Duke very well MAY join, because it softens the travel burden to have a large party of members in the same time zone.
It's perfectly reasonable for WVU to ask for some travel concessions, especially in basketball. How hard would it be to schedule WVU Saturday/Monday games for their trips to Oklahoma and Kansas? They could play the Sooners on the road on Saturday and then hit Stillwater for Big Monday a couple days later. Do that, and they've knocked out both road games in one trip. They could do the same for the KU/K-State games, too.
I didn't get the sense that Luck was whining about the travel, though. He was just pointing out some things the league could do to save them money.
Posting Permissions
