Football Articles
the ACC, Big 10, Big East and the Pac 10.
Heading into the 2009 football season, the Southeastern Conference is begining a 15-year deal with ESPN and CBS that makes the conference “A First Among Equals” in the BCS. While the numbers are staggering in terms of money flowing to SEC schools, the ramifactions of the contracts reach beyond the bottom line. But first and foremost, it is the money that catches your attention.
REVENUE
“Timing Is Everything”
While other leagues are talking about cost-cutting measures such as not publishing media guides, the SEC is opening its own private bank. The new TV contracts with ESPN and CBS which take effect this season, will bring in almost $3 Billion to the conference members over the next 15 years. ESPN will shell out approximately $2.25 Billion over the length of the contract, while CBS will pick up the rest of the tab.
The SEC negotiated their new contracts in early 2008, before the bottom fell out of the economy. It also didn’t hurt that the Big 10 Network reached an agreement with the major cable outlets (Time-Warner, Comcast, and Mediacom) to carry the channel, which made the bottom line for the Big 10 very respectable. That got ESPN’s attention, and they moved to lock up the SEC and keep that league from starting its own channel as well.
For the next 15 years, the SEC will collect over $205 million each year for its TV rights.
That $3 billion works out to each SEC school collecting $17 million per year from TV money alone. That means that Vanderbilt will collect over $8 million more a year in TV revenue than Notre Dame gets form its NBC pact.
What can SEC schools do with all that money, aside from being in prime position to deal with street agents?
They have more to spend on the nuts and bolts of a collegiate program — coaching, recruiting and facilities.
According to the Orlando Sentinal, the SEC has six of the Top 15 paid coaches in D-1, including three of the Top Five.
1. Pete Carroll, USC $4.4 million
2. Charlie Weis, Notre Dame 4.2 million
3. Urban Meyer, Florida $4.0 million
4. Les Miles, LSU $3.8 million (has a clause in his contract stating he will be the highest paid head coach in the SEC – so he is due for a raise).
5. Nick Saban, Alabama $3.8 million
It isn’t just the head coaches who are benefiting from the cash flow. At Tennessee Lane Kiffin will oversee a staff of assistants who will collect an unprecedented $3.3 million a year, including his dad, Monte, who will be paid $1.2 million as Defensive Coordinator.
Saban will pay his staff over $2.6 million for the coming year.
Gene Chizik begins his tenure at Auburn this fall with a 5-19 record as a head coach. He will be paid $2 million in 2009.
It isn’t just that the SEC schools now have larger bank accounts to hire the best, they also can make their mistakes go away more easily than other leagues. Which means that the pressure to win, and win now makes any 5-year plan laughable, and a 3-year plan seem long term.
The new flow of TV cash makes it easier for Auburn and Tennessee to accept that they will pay Tommy Tuberville and Phil Fulmer a combined $11 million for not coaching.
The cash flow that has opened up in the SEC allows the individual schools to decide what is important — and where to spend their money. And at Kentucky, that is basketball, where new coach John Calipari pulls down $4 million a year with a chance to bump that to $5 million through bonuses and perks.
Kentucky is paying John Calipari almost 3 times what football coach Rich Brooks makes.
There is one other key element to the SEC TV package. The conference will divide all the TV revenue generated by their new contracts evenly. Just like the NFL, the SEC has decided that revenue sharing makes the league stronger from top to bottom, and is good for the long-term survival of the conference.
EXPOSURE
Starting this season, every football game controlled by the SEC will be televised. CBS will get the first pick from the inventory of games on each Saturday, with ESPN owning every other contest. Most of those games will be placed on the WWL’s platforms (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPN.360 broadband, ESPN Classic). Games that aren’t covered by those outlets will be sub-contracted out to other outlets, such as Comcast/Charter Sports Southeast (CSS) or Fox Sports South.
Virtually every SEC football contest will be available on the internet at ESPN360.com.
ESPN has brokered deal to where ESPN.com will be available through Comcast.net, which means that is is available to over 41 million subscribers, almost two-thirds of the 66 million homes with broadband.
There will be more SEC contests in prime-time, and there could be more than one early game conflicting with at least a part of the CBS broadcast some weeks. ESPN learned that when ABC began their Saturday Night College Football package that the WWL’s ratings for their cable games actually went up as well.
CROSS PROMOTION
ESPN isn’t about to drop $2.5 Billion on a product and not promote it to the hilt. All national programming on ESPN will be branded as the “SEC on ESPN.”
Think Sportcenter might find more time for SEC highlights at the head of the show? Think College Football Today won’t find more time for SEC features?
This exposure for the SEC trancends all sports, and will bring added coverage for basketball, baseball, and the other “Olympic” sports as well. Fox Sports Net is a sub-contracter for ESPN and they have an agreement to broadcast a minimum of 91 athletic events. There are even provisions for programs about academics in the SEC.
ESPN’s new over-the-air syndication home for its SEC package is called “The SEC Network,” and it will reach into Big 12, Pac 10 and Big 10 media markets.
WHY THE DEAL MAKES SENSE FOR ESPN
While the economy may be in the doldrums, ESPN believes that the multi-billion dollar deal will be profitable almost from the start. That’s because ESPN has something the broadcast networks don’t — dual revenue streams. Ad sales will obviously be a major force, but affiliate fees gives the WWL a huge advantage when bidding for major products. For example, ESPN is expected to be able to demand $4 per subscriber from cable operators. That is the highest fee in the industry. Since ESPN is in more than 98 million homes that is an additional $4.7 Billion in revenue that broadcasters don’t have available to them.
But it is the other platforms in the ESPN family that have potential for growth with the SEC package.
The SEC TV package could double the revenue that ESPNU produces.
Currently, ESPNU is in a little over 30 million homes, and cable operators pay about 16 cents per subscriber per month. There are indications that distribution could double for ESPNU, and as the contract goes along, the subscription rate could also increase.
THE BCS FACTOR
The BCS switches over to ESPN in 2011 and the WWL will be primed to promote the series like March Madness — with the SEC as their crown jewel of college football product.
Unlike Fox, who treated the BCS as an afterthought, ESPN will promote the hell out of it on all its platforms. You can expect a primetime program for the weekly BCS standings. As the end of the regular season draws near, no doubt ESPN will have its own “Football Bracketology Specialist,” who will be all over the airwaves.
You don’t have to be paranoid to think that the SEC will have a public relations advantage over the other BCS schools on the WWL (Isn’t that right Pete Carroll?)
THE SEC VS OTHER BCS CONFERENCES: ADDITION BY SUBTRACTION
By making this deal with ESPN, the SEC made a preemptive strike against the other BCS conferences in getting new TV contracts. It forces the other leagues to look at other alternatives that are not as attractive.
Fox has shown no interest in making any real commitment to college football, NBC is perfectly happy with its small monetary package with Notre Dame, and CBS obviously is taken by the SEC as well.
Since Disney ownes both ESPN and ABC it is highly unlikely that ABC wants to spend the money to showcase any other league.
ESPN has given the ACC, Big 12 and Pac-10 assurances that the WWL would be “competitive” when the bidding for their TV contracts comes up in a couple of years.
Then there is the problem of air time. ESPN is already under contract to show every SEC football game and 25 Big Ten football games every year, and even with all the different platforms available, there is still a limited amount of air space.
Which is why there is talk among those three conferences about starting their own channel. They understand that someone is going to be left with limited money and limited time slots if they are all depending on ESPN to give them anything close to the SEC package.
With that, I am off to Vegas Wednesday armed only with Trips early college football betting lines.
Pray For Me.
Share This
85 Responses
Leave a Reply
Related Articles
-
46
ESPN, SEC to reach into Big 12 Territory…
By srr50 on July 22nd, 2009 -
8
Pac 10: “Getting our own network is inevitable.”
By srr50 on May 15th, 2009 -
35
SEC Now Has 2.5 Billion Reasons to Love ESPN
By srr50 on August 25th, 2008 -
22
Comcast’s Proposed Takeover of NBC: Why It Matters To You
By srr50 on October 20th, 2009 -
6
The SEC Trying To Restrict Media Coverage
By srr50 on August 13th, 2009
Activity
-
Texoz commented on the blog post A Wake Before The Funeral 4 minutes ago
Hey Damion, you also lost the Turkish Prison. No smack down defense for you now.
-
BigBoss commented on the blog post Want to plant my feet on Rampart Street… 6 minutes ago
I agreed this is a great draw for us. Notre Dame, from what I can tell is a solid well coached squad and we will have a hard time beating them. Our fans, for the most part, are overlooking them because they were somewhat on the bubble, but look what they did in
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
James commented on the blog post NFL Draft: A Mockery 1 hour, 44 minutes ago
Re: Claussen
Phil Rivers is a huge dickbag and he’s doing ok.
-
whiskey commented on the blog post NFL Draft: A Mockery 2 hours, 46 minutes ago
Patrick, from a personality standpoint Clausen isn’t exactly likeable. I think the perception of him having leadership or other intangible issues is really tied to the fact that many people just don’t like the kid. The same discussion went on to some degree amongst the ND fan base his 1st two seasons.
-
Nickel Rover wrote a new blog post: If we can stop Tim Duncan… 6 hours, 59 minutes ago
Basketball:
So Scipio did a great job on introducing us to our ACC counterpart and robbing me of an easy morning column. A great read though, it sounds like they are in Texas’ wheelhouse since it isn’t at Wake. You can see the whole bracket here.
Obviously Kentucky is the 2nd opponent and I don’t think there’s
-
Sean commented on the blog post NFL Draft: A Mockery 7 hours, 19 minutes ago
Wait…. Taylor Mays is Jewish?
-
Sailor Ripley commented on the blog post Want to plant my feet on Rampart Street… 7 hours, 53 minutes ago
but the pollsters have been far slower to hop on board.
Lazy humans and no brand to fall back on. I don’t think Duke is the third best team by any stretch but what are you going to do.
Tell your guys not to screw up my bracket.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
admin commented on the blog post Want to plant my feet on Rampart Street… 7 hours, 53 minutes ago
…but the pollsters have been far slower to hop on board.
Lazy humans and no brand to fall back on. I don’t think Duke is the third best team by any stretch but what are you going to do.
Tell your guys not to screw up my bracket.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
admin commented on the blog post Want to plant my feet on Rampart Street… 7 hours, 53 minutes ago
…but the pollsters have been far slower to hop on board.
Lazy humans and no brand recognition to fall back on. I don’t think Duke is the third best team by any stretch but what are you going to do.
Tell your guys not to screw up my bracket.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Sailor Ripley commented on the blog post Castille Day 8 hours, 21 minutes ago
Weird. At least he didn’t steal any laptops or TVs. Or did he?
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Patrick Bateman commented on the blog post NFL Draft: A Mockery 8 hours, 36 minutes ago
Good catch, Primetime. I’m fairly certain he just confused Rolle with DRC. Or maybe he confused Antonio Cromartie with DRC.
Whiskey,
I realize your a ND fan, but what makes you so confident in Claussen? He had a very good season, but what about his leadership skills or lack thereof?
-
Sailor Ripley commented on the blog post A Wake Before The Funeral 8 hours, 52 minutes ago
Smoke ‘em if you got ‘em. I’d like us to get the win. I think.
-
ursa major wrote a new blog post: Want to plant my feet on Rampart Street… 8 hours, 59 minutes ago
3 seed? New Orleans… to Houston?
As Dr. John so eloquently put it, we are going on down to New Orleans. (Yes, I realize that the song is going home to New Orleans…I don’t care.)
I was pretty nervous before the draw today. We’ve been undersold for about a month. The computers have had us in the
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
whiskey commented on the blog post The week in news- Bowl Bust, Anti Piracy and Barnstorming FedEx 9 hours, 4 minutes ago
The Cotton Bowl is a really cool venue. It was a bummer watching them play that game at Jerry’s house this year. I hope the new game comes to fruition. Nice counter on Bosworth. I never personally cared for “The Boz” persona but in retrospect I’ll say that was really pretty
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Sailor Ripley commented on the blog post Evan Turner is the Best Player in the Country 9 hours, 11 minutes ago
Definitely taking him in my player draft. Awesome. Need to study the brackets a bit more but Lighty also impressed me today.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Sean commented on the blog post NFL Draft: A Mockery 9 hours, 28 minutes ago
Rodgers-Cromartie is still on the Cardinals. He didn’t leave.
-
Scipio Tex wrote a new blog post: A Wake Before The Funeral 9 hours, 33 minutes ago
What happens when a stoppable force meets a movable object?
We’ll find out on March 18th. Meet Wake Forest.
This game will be watching drunks trying to brawl. Neither belligerent will land a punch, and it will be viewed by both fanbases with equal measures of horror, embarassment, and amusement.
-
skymonkeyhorn commented on the blog post Texas Basketball is Dangerous 9 hours, 41 minutes ago
Some one sent this quote from the Dallas Mornong News to me.
“I’ve had teams in the past that were just where we are right now mentally. And we got it turned around. I had a team in the exact same situation, and we ended up going to the Sweet 16 and ended up losing -
I.M. Hipp commented on the blog post Castille Day 10 hours, 3 minutes ago
He really screwed himself. We probably would have won two more games with him. He was more worried about the “devil’s lettuce” than developing into a solid back. Pathetic.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Kevin Berger commented on the blog post React-to-Ology: Early Look at the Madness 10 hours, 22 minutes ago
dick, thanks for the heads up on the east bracket. In my haste to get the post up I had a brain cramp on the bracket.
As for KU, when you compare their bracket to Syracuse you have to scratch your head. Even Self mentioned as much.
Scooby, you’re probably right about the 8/9.
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
skymonkeyhorn commented on the blog post Texas Basketball is Dangerous 10 hours, 30 minutes ago
I have been thinking that the team quit on Barnes some time during the last 14-15 games.
My brother in Michigan thought the the team fell apart after the 11-12th game of the season I think that it was atm @CC game.
I wonder if Barnes has health issues, he just looks bad on TV and -
dick commented on the blog post NCAA Basketball Tournament Lines 10 hours, 40 minutes ago
Marquette line really surprises me. I like Washington and normally I would be impressed with a conference tourney winner but that falls under the Pac 10 sucks rule to me. I would have liked to see Washington lined up against a different 6 seed.
-
Farmer Ted commented on the blog post Quick Bracket Thoughts 10 hours, 41 minutes ago
Call me crazy but I would prefer to face OSU over any of the other three 2 seeds. They basically lost to Michigan (who truly sucks) on Friday, played Illinois even yesterday and beat an exhausted Minnesota team today. They aren’t exactly on fire. As for the other #2’s, I have no interest in playing
SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: ””, url: ”” });
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Texas Basketball is Dangerous 10 hours, 49 minutes ago
sky, it’s pretty crazy really. Barnes sounds like he’s mailing it in at this point.
-
whiskey commented on the blog post NFL Draft: A Mockery 10 hours, 50 minutes ago
Good discussion. The perception of Clausen is interesting. He might surprise you. Tate is a player that will contribute wherever he ends up. He’s serious.
-
Trips Right commented on the blog post Early NCAA Tournament Bets 10 hours, 53 minutes ago
Utah State can really shoot it. They’re the top 3 point shooting team in America. But they struggle against quicker athletes and can be banged inside. the big 12 isn’t getting a lot of credit so the line is short, imo
-
skymonkeyhorn commented on the blog post Texas Basketball is Dangerous 10 hours, 54 minutes ago
Is it just me or is Damo sounding a lot like Ricky?
Are they just providing some giggles for the rest of the teams? Or do they think this shit will fly even with the blue hairs ?
Will rick ever live down the quotes that will be recorded in Scipio vast mental vaults -
Trips Right commented on the blog post NCAA Basketball Tournament Lines 11 hours, 4 minutes ago
I posted my picks, but as you stated Richmond looks like easy money.
I think Purdue is a shell and Siena is experienced, athletic and talented. Saints roll.
I’m fading Gonzaga and St Mary’s. Zero athletes on those clubs.
I”m also fading Michigan State with NMSU. They’ll be able to get shots against
-
dick commented on the blog post NCAA Basketball Tournament Lines 11 hours, 8 minutes ago
I like UTEP and Wake to add to Trips bets, which I support fully.
Richmond = 4 units
Siena = 3 units -
dick commented on the blog post NCAA Basketball Tournament Lines 11 hours, 9 minutes ago
Just to try and keep it on the same thread, Trips likes:
New Mexico -9
Baylor -12
Louisville pk
Aggs -2
Richmond pk
NM St +12
Siena +4
FSU -1.5
Levander Williams said:
August 4th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Damn.
With limited options available for a single conference, what about a ‘codeshare’ agreement between conferences, like the Big XII and Pac-10? Similar to what they are doing (on a small scale with basketball), the conferences could agree to a specific number of non-conference matchups and structure a media deal with either 1) one of the networks, or 2) their own channel. It sure as hell would catalyze interest in the early-on matchups, and would build upon the recruiting opportunities that Scipio posted on a while back (look west, young man).
I tend to think that a combination of two major conferences – with focus toward a blend of west-coast and Texas markets – would be a more attractive package than a single conference alone, and I think it would be more compelling than a Big XII hybrid with either the ACC or Big East.
PatronSaint said:
August 4th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
I’m worried.
HenryJames said:
August 4th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
That was a depressing read.
srr50 said:
August 4th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
The joint-conference idea is out there but industry executives are skeptical that such a deal would work, because of the unprecedented level of cooperation that would be required.
This SEC/ESPN/CBS pact is why Texas ramped up its building of studio facilities in the North Endzone of DKR, and why they have been looking at making BEVOD more widespread.
The thought of being dragged into a Big 12 Network channel that was started basically out of desperation is not a happy thought over at Bellmont.
burntorangehorn said:
August 4th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
At the risk of sounding like a teabagger…anyone wanna secede? From the Big 12, that is? Maybe go find a one-team media contract worth having, or is Texas better off splitting media and bowl revenue with eleven other programs?
Ricky said:
August 4th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
These are the economic ramifications that have made me wonder if we again see independents coming into vogue. All Texas has to do is entice some network to broadcast its games at $300 million over 15 years and they come out ahead of the SEC teams (Alright, maybe easier said than done!). What’s $300 million for 12 games a year of a regional and national powerhouse when ESPN is dumping over $2 billion and has to broadcast games showcasing the likes of Vanderbilt and Mississippi State? Hell, if they can entice USC to go independent and work a two-fer for $750 million for 15 years they would each take in $25 million a season and make the SEC look like chumps. Loop in ND and Florida State or Miami and you have basically covered the main regions of college football fandom. Each of the teams could agree to play at least one home-and-home series against the other teams in the broadcast pool during the 15 year period and they could even guarantee that they will play 85% of their games against BCS conference schools (or perhaps some equation that includes teams that have averaged a Top 25 BCS position over a number of years) to ensure the network is getting only a few patsies (85% would equate to about 1 non-BCS school per team per season).
Of course, BCS eligibility would have to be negotiated, but heck they have already moved mountains to keep ND involved and they have shat the BCS bed since its inception, how hard would it be to negotiate similar concessions for these top regional powers?
burntorangehorn said:
August 4th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Ricky, I think the agreement between those top teams would be a pretty interesting idea. Lots of teams won’t schedule home-and-home series, opting instead to pay patsies to come in and get slaughtered. If the media contract would include a payout to offset that difference, well, I think everyone would be pretty happy. Both teams get as much or more money than they would from playing Directional Bayou A&M, the fans would love to see a featured matchup, and the network would get lots of viewers and likely good ratings.
srr50 said:
August 4th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
how hard would it be to negotiate similar concessions for these top regional powers?
Since ESPN is about to become the network of the BCS — very hard.
noteoam said:
August 4th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
ESPN is going to learn the hard way that outside of ND college football is a regional sport
No one outside of sports media and the bible belt gives a shit about the SEC.
The Midwest loves the Big 10. The NE doesn’t care about college football. The West Coast loves the Pac-10. The states in the Big 12 love their state school.
Jorvorskie Lane said:
August 4th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
“ESPN is going to learn the hard way that outside of ND college football is a regional sport”
I think you may learn (though not the hard way) that an entity with near-monopoly powers can make a large audience swallow what it’s fed.
noteoam said:
August 4th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
nah.
The Big 10 Network is available on HD throughout Big 10 country and the other conferences will do the same in their respective regions.
Go to a bar in Ohio and Purdue-Iowa on the Big 10 Network will always have preeminence over an equivalent SEC game. That phenomenon won’t change.
The SEC contract will only entrench OU, Texas, USC and Ohio State on the top of the college football landscape along with whoever emerges from the death trap that will be the SEC.
Gracie Supanoosinphone said:
August 4th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Time to go independent and join Notre Dame on NBC
Bob in Houston said:
August 4th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
We’ve been over this before. Going independent is (possibly) OK for football, but destroys basketball and baseball.
glenn said:
August 4th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
i could dig independent if it was done right.
scagnetti said:
August 4th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
crappy big12 network here we come!
All About Article » Blog Archive » Barking Carnival » Blog Archive » The SEC TV Contract – What it … said:
August 5th, 2009 at 12:30 am
[...] Read : Barking Carnival » Blog Archive » The SEC TV Contract – What it … Tags: archive, Article, college, events, football, other, recruiting, [...]
TaylorTRoom said:
August 5th, 2009 at 4:39 am
Great post. First thought- there is absolutely zero chance that the Big 12 can be shamed into calling holding the same way that other conferences do. High powered offenses are the Big 12’s trademark, and are the reason the Big 12 dominated last November’s ratings. To be clear- loose holding regulation is only part of the Big 12’s offensive output. Innovative offenses is the other component.
Going forward, I would not be surprised to see the rest of college football swallow whistles on holding, too, in order to gain ratings.
TaylorTRoom said:
August 5th, 2009 at 5:06 am
2nd thought- Check out the national AD revenue ranks. Before this contract, the average SEC AD had revenue of $71 million, $5 million less than the average Big 10 school (yes, I divided by 11), and $5 million more than the average Big 12 school. This new contract (and the Big 10 network) changes everything. Let’s play a game. The SEC contract gives each SEC school an extra $12 million per year. The Big 10 contract gives each Big 10 school an extra $9 million per year. Let’s assume the other conferences can squeeze an extra $2 million from their current structure in renegotiation. Here’s the before and after average revenues:
Conference Old Ave. rev. New Ave. Rev.
Big 10 76M 85M
SEC 71M 83M
Big 12 66M 68M
PAC-10 59M 61M
ACC 54M 56M
So, the ACC schools go from averaging 76% of SEC revenue to 67%. The Big 12 is in decent shape…unless the schools have to compete with the SEC for recruits and coaches.
So, how do we expect the Big 12 to respond?
jinx said:
August 5th, 2009 at 5:10 am
This makes living in SEC country that much worse.
Levander Williams said:
August 5th, 2009 at 5:21 am
So, out of the options laid out here:
1. Attractive Big XII deal with existing network: unlikely since most of the major networks have deals in-place with other conferences.
2. Collaboration with another conference: unlikely due to the cooperation required, and could dilute the revenue too much among 20+ teams
3. Move to independent status: unlikely due to potential loss of a seat at the BCS table; concern about appeal outside the region
4. Big XII gets its own cable/sat deal (like the Big 10): possible, since precedent is already out there; but, we’re late to the game, so there may be dwindling interest
5. UT sets up its own deal to compliment the Big XII deal: this seems the most likely, based on known moves, comments from people with industry knowledge (srr50), and the financial presence / resources to make such a deal happen.
I have no problem with 5, and frankly would like to see UT distance itself from some of the other relatively dead-weight in the conference and take care of their own. No sense in sharing revenue with others that don’t contribute to the deal (I’m looking at you Iowa State and Baylor).
burntorangehorn said:
August 5th, 2009 at 5:40 am
There is the concern about Texas exposure outside the region, but really, am I the only one who really enjoyed the hell out of the TBS contract with UT? I’d love to see a whole lot more of that type of partnership. It wouldn’t bring international banks to their knees, but I would think it could be potentially lucrative, even if it were with one or more major cable networks.
Flamingmonkeyass said:
August 5th, 2009 at 5:56 am
Fuck the ACC and replace them with the Big East, combined with the Pac 10. What you lose in football with Florida you gain in basketball in the northeast. That’s a set of eyeballs that includes New York, California, and Texas. That package would be almost irresistable. A channel comprised of those three I think would work. I think you could work out the revenue sharing to the Big XII’s advantage as well as I believe the other confrences would jump at the chance to get some exposure in Texas. As another poster said, perhaps there could even be some agreed upon intersectional matches not just in football but in basketball and baseball as well that could help sell the appeal.
Art Vandelay said:
August 5th, 2009 at 6:11 am
This may be a silly thought…. but how about dragging HBO into College Football?
TaylorTRoom said:
August 5th, 2009 at 6:11 am
There is a point in cooperating with the other Big 12 schools in revenue sharing, even if we give more than we receive. We should consider that if the other Big 12 schools drop the UT envy and Lillipution attitude towards UT’s Gulliver, as seen in the recent tie-breaker vote, and blind eye to recruiting regulation. The Big 12 will be great for UT if we are full partners with shared visions as institutions. If the Big 12 doesn’t share UT’s goals as an institution, the marriage will continue to weaken.
BatesHorn said:
August 5th, 2009 at 6:46 am
We’ve alluded to it before, but this arrangement also COMPLETELY disincentivizes any reason to clean up the dirty recruiting in the SEC.
Yeah, WLL is going to put a front page lead on possible irregularities at Bama or have Linda Cohen talk with Kirk Herbstreit about a brewing scandal at Tennessee. That should really help with the sale of advertising.
Even if a Mack Brown decides to turn LSU or whomever in, will ESPN really cover the story? Moreover, it’s directly counter to the NCAA’s financial interest to investigate.
In effect, the Will Lyles of the world just went into business informally with ESPN.
This is going to get HORRIBLY messy.
Ag_in_TX said:
August 5th, 2009 at 6:51 am
I presonally believe the nuclear option is called for – complete realignment that creates a superconference that demands to be dealt with.
Remember, the Pac 10 is in the same boat as the Big XII. That is very likely where the future lies.
Ricky said:
August 5th, 2009 at 6:54 am
I don’t think going independent in football would preclude us going independent in basketball or other sports. ND already does it. The Big East is a completely different basketball conference than football conference.
If the little 11 that remain of the Big 12 don’t want us in the conference for other sports, then why not move to one of the weaker conferences and become another Memphis? We would win 30-games and get a 1 or 2 seed in the NCAA tournament every year just for having played a patsy conference schedule. Or why not join Memphis in Conference USA and give it another elite team?
I also think the BCS will fall into line no matter who broadcasts the games because the BCS bowls themselves would throw a fit if USC or Texas were no longer possible selections. It would also kill the BCS champion as THE champion since the AP would have just cause for saying their champion was voted in by including all the powerhouse teams not just those in the BCS.
I am still very ambivalent about the whole going independent idea, but I just raise it as a potential solution for rich programs weighed down by media crappy conferences. I like the idea of UT securing its own media representation alongside that of the conference, rather than going independent.
Houstonearlers said:
August 5th, 2009 at 7:40 am
Why not drop two of the moochers from the Big 12 (ISU and KSU) — our revenues will go up because the deal is split 10 ways instead of 12.
Then we could get rid of the crappy divisions and conference title games.
We would have better games every year too as everyone would play everyone else once — so you get OU, Texas, Tech, Okie Lite, and Aggy playing Neb, CU, Mizzou, and KU every year — most of those would be good matchups so in theory we have more good games and thus a better product to sell.
Misterserious7 said:
August 5th, 2009 at 8:09 am
^^^^^^ This. How many television sets do ISU and KSU bring to the table anyway?
Dan Beebe said:
August 5th, 2009 at 8:12 am
“So, how do we expect the Big 12 to respond?”
I have some great ideas. Now where’s my sammich?…
Orangechip said:
August 5th, 2009 at 8:33 am
While we are dreaming… After we kickout KSU & ISU… why not kick out Baylor and add TCU or some other team that can add something. Maybe the mormons?
TaylorTRoom said:
August 5th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Nobody is getting kicked out. We just need to look at the schools, and their needs, to see what will happen next. UT, TAMU, NU, OU, and KU do not have revenue problems (TAMU’s problem is on the expense side, not the revenue side). The other schools need more revenue to stay strong in D-1A. Trouble is, as SRR pointed out, the SEC has grabbed a bunch more of the available channels, and the remaining channels aren’t willing to pay top dollar. What to do?
The Big 12 needs to sell more content, and be prepared to do so through more technically advanced means. Selling games through the internet bypasses the need to have a critical number of viewers in any geographic region. If 3,000 households in the pacific northwest are willing to pay to watch a UT/KU football game, the web can deliver it to them. If 300 households in the pacific northwest are willing to pay to watch a UT/KU volleyball game, the web can deliver it to them. The Big 12 needs to get that going.
UT has invested in the facilities to broadcast every sport. The other schools ned to do the same. As SRR alludes to, healthy conferences share revenue, and unhealthy conferences (like the SWC) cater revenue distribution to the most powerful programs. I don’t know if there is enough trust in the Big 12 to be healthy right now.
Mike said:
August 5th, 2009 at 9:08 am
Versus might be an option, it can’t possibly be worse than Fox Sports Net. They already broadcast a limited number of Big 12 (our Wyoming game being one), Pac 10, Mtn West and Ivy League games.
They, according to their site, reach 73 million homes and they broadcast in HD. Do they want to step up and try to compete a little more with ESPN?
bob said:
August 5th, 2009 at 9:34 am
Going independent or cutting a separate deal may sound good in theory but how well do you think that will play at the Capitol? Remember what happened last time we thought about ditching the farmers and bible thumpers?
How much outrage do you think our state’s chief aggie will work up over UT having it’s own deal and leaving everyone else to fend for themselves?
Boddicker Is Clutch said:
August 5th, 2009 at 10:07 am
I seriously doubt Vs. Hockey and Drag Racing viewership in any sense of the word “competes” with ESPN’s NFL, MLB, and NCAA offerings.
Levander Williams said:
August 5th, 2009 at 10:21 am
“Going independent or cutting a separate deal may sound good in theory but how well do you think that will play at the Capitol? Remember what happened last time we thought about ditching the farmers and bible thumpers? ”
I think the independent route is a dead end.
Hopefully I understand your comment correctly, but I don’t see how the Legislature can have much impact on how UT markets any of their sports that aren’t already covered by the Big XII contract.
Right now, it’s an untapped asset, and UT is under no obligation to share revenue generated by marketing of uncontracted programming/events with anyone – least of all a bunch of coat-tailing schools who can’t sell their own brand. This is what I see UT ultimately doing, since the Big XII can’t seem to do what it takes to get any sort of compelling media package done with the major networks.
BatesHorn said:
August 5th, 2009 at 10:31 am
From my untrained perspective, it seems UT and OU are the two premier football brands in the conference, with Nebraska (and Colorado, if they could get their shit together) coming in a pretty distant second. Tech is only as good as their ability to keep Somalia from outbidding them for Mike Leach’s services, and the rest of the conference are either more basketball powers (Kansas, Missouri) or at best second rate teams (OSU, A&M) one extended losing streak away from fading into obscurity. I won’t bother with the rest of the conference.
As such, as BC has adroitly pointed out, Texas’ options lie in a Super conference to the West, to form a counterweight, in tv terms, to SEC. That’s the PAC-10, their the only ones with the namebrand that make us look good. Us in the Mountian West or Conference USA is silly. Colorado makes a good partner for us to take along, but A&M sticks out like a sore thumb in any expanded PAC-10 situation.
To me, OU future lies to the east, in the SEC, given their academics and general assclownery.
kenneth said:
August 5th, 2009 at 10:35 am
Has anyone thought about the notion of UT doing what ND does: independent in football but remain in the Big 12 in all other sports? That would enable Bellmont to negotiate its own FB contract.
Absent that, the conference desperately needs to change this North/South zone concept when negotiating a new TV contract. Iowa State vs. Kansas is just not compelling from a national standpoint. They need to have OU, UT, NU & possibly CU play each other every year (like the Big 10).
Scipio Tex said:
August 5th, 2009 at 10:45 am
kenneth –
The Big 12 wouldn’t be very pleased to accomodate us in the other sports if we took away our football from them.
Ag_in_TX said:
August 5th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Bateshorn,
You are confusing on-field competitiveness with desirability in a conference. The root cuase that drives all things is money. We have shown previously that there are four big money schools in the Big XII – y’all, A&M, OU and NU. Those are the schools that bring the Tv sets with them.
BatesHorn said:
August 5th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
I see your point. I know A&M commands a loyal fanbase, they just seem very, well, un PAC-10. But my grandfather said there ain’t much in the way of hurt feelings that money can’t fix.
Either way, the current conference system simply can not stand.
Colin said:
August 5th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
I was also a fan of our games on TBS, much better than versus. What happened with the tbs deal?
Ricky said:
August 5th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
The problem with the Pac 10 is that they generate even less revenue that the Big 12. Going to the Pac 10 only hurts UT’s revenue. A super conference would entail something along the lines of taking USC, UCLA and say, Arizona to add some additional basketball muscle from the west and get UT, A&M, OU, Nebraska, Missouri, Colorado, and Kansas from the Big 12. You would have a good balance of TV viewers and traditional football and basketball powers to make compelling viewing. If you had to go to 12 you pick up Stanford to get your private school benefits plus some additional academic muscle (Isn’t it that having a private school means all the conference’s finances can be kept out of the public eye?), and choose OkieSt or Tech to round things out.
I am not saying I like this sort of set up, but it would be better than UT joining the Pac 10. And dropping two teams from the Big 12 doesn’t solve the problem either, since you would still be dividing basically non-existent media revenue. There is just too much population dead-zone to our North even with ISU and KSU out to get the conference a great TV deal. If you drop them you also lose your one big TV event…the craptacular Big 12 Championship game.
Scipio Tex said:
August 5th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Ricky -
No, no, no. A thousand times no.
A Pac 10 with Texas upgrades Pac 10 competitiveness and revenue beyond just what we bring to the table. Which would be massive.
Football is a learned culture and just as one couldn’t find an Oregon or USC fan anywhere in the 90s, you can’t throw a rock in SoCal or the Pacific NW without hitting one now. These things ebb and flow with the tides, but a massive influx of prestige, money, tv sets, and facility envy would have a significant impact.
These things aren’t static, and everyone who discusses these questions acts as if they are. Look at the fortunes of Washington – that was a legitimate football school with real fan fervor and passion and real accomplishments. It died. The converse is also true.
Kansas, Missouri, OSU all somewhat mattering in football is a direct result of their ability to access Texas talent with the lure of conference affiliation and the kindling in their alums that, hey, this football shit is pretty fun too. So facilities are upgraded, attention is paid, culture is built.
If we went to the Pac 10, it would have an incredibly energizing effect on the whole league, most notably the Pac 10 South: UCLA, Arizona, Arizona St, Cal. The quality of Pac 10 sports would massively improve within two years.
Believe it. This is an underserved market. And dominating the two most populous states in America – one the key entertainment/media market in the world – flanked by the fast growing Sunbelt states, is what they call a Very Good Thing.
TaylorTRoom said:
August 5th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Arizona and Arizona State are run of the mill programs because they each need 20 D-1A athletes per year and their state generates 15 max per year. Their competitive survival depends on recruiting California primarily and Texas secondarily. Unfortunately for them, they are not a top draw to Texas schoolboys. If Texas were in the Pac-10, that would change dramatically. They would be significantly better off.
That said, I don’t see the Big 12 breaking up, although such a break up wouldn’t sadden me. Remember, most of these BCS conferences have been partners for almost 90 years. The Big East seems to be the least stable- youngest, least revenue in the BCS.
Bob in Houston said:
August 5th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
“I was also a fan of our games on TBS, much better than versus. What happened with the tbs deal?”
TBS dropped college football for major league baseball.
Scipio Tex said:
August 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Taylor –
Did you have a chance to watch any Big 10 media days stuff? That is one tight knit conference. They had a televised banquet luncheon where each coach got up to speak and the conference espirit de corps was palpable. Not so much at the Big 12 Media Days.
shockthenation said:
August 5th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Isn’t the Big Ten the conference that has been rumored to possibly look to expand and add a 12th team or is that just Paterno being senile? Would Texas not be a nice fish to catch for their network?
Bob in Houston said:
August 5th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
shock: Oh, if you read between the lines, there was pretty good evidence that they talked last year.
But, like the Pac-10, there are insoluble problems where Texas is concerned. Doesn’t mean they wouldn’t do it some day… but I think they agreed to disagree for now.
shockthenation said:
August 5th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Interesting. Thanks.
Levander Williams said:
August 5th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
“Not so much at the Big 12 Media Days.”
I’ll bet the esprit de corps was not too bad among the coaches from OU, KSU, KU, NU and TT. I think it’s just that our guy is on the outside of that group.
coolhorn said:
August 5th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
The Horns find themselves headed back to the bad old days of the SWC, courtesy of the new SEC tv deal.
We have better resources than all but a couple or three schools, but over time, those resources will erode because of the competitive disadvantage the Horns are in vis a vis SEC teams.
Going independant is not the way to do it…I don’t see an NBC sugar-daddy out there willing to throw Notre Dame type money at the Horns.
Staying in the Big XII isn’t gonna cut it either. Unless the league makes nice with the PAC 10 and perhaps the Big 10 to command a big deal from somebody, the XII is gonna become virtually irrelevant, other than probably us and the Sooners in college football. The ACC’s been talked about as part of a package deal, but I don’t see them currently bringing much to the table in rankings and markets, other than south and central Florida.
Texas and Colorado could bolt for the PAC 10, which would make that a much more interesting league…but interesting enough more to get an SEC-style deal from one of the networks? I doubt it.
Texas could hold its’ nose and whisper in the ear of the SEC. The Horns bring a lot to the table, but the SEC prefers doing a lot of its’ business under the table. This would have to be a last option.
There aren’t any real good answers out there, but perhaps something from among the suggestions above will eventually be attractive enough to the Horns to get them to act. I don’t see inaction as a option, unless UT’s willing to fall way behind the teams east of us.
CloseToJumping said:
August 5th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I am not sure how things don’t come to a head in the near term, meaning ahead of the BCS shift back to the evil empire. We’re not happy. We know our relative strength and value. We understand the shortcomings of our current partners and they resent our power. It’s like working in the same office with a bunch of women that you’ve slept with and are no longer seeing. Everyone is tired of everyone else’s shit and you know there is better action elsewhere.
The PAC-10 with the additions of Texas, ATM, CU, Utah, BYU, BSU, OU, and OSU, or some group of those teams besides just Texas, makes a ton of sense. The travel is a nuisance, so be it. Everything else fits if the 2 big Texas schools made a move. That gives that conference the kind of power across all sports that could challenge the other two big bad conferences. Win, fucking win.
anonymous said:
August 5th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Yes, it has to be the Pac 10. And you bring a bunch of the big 12 south with you to offset the travel difficulties and maintain some regional ties. Unless you can get the Pac Ten to cut off its Oregon and Washington schools, you probably have to form some sort of 16 team leviathan with the Big 12 south schools and arizona schools in the southern division. I think this is a more promising route than adding schools like Utah or BYU or Boise that don’t really add anything from a revenue perspective. I would go for dropping Baylor for Colorado.
Deloss's Lobotomy said:
August 5th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
burntorangehorn – what do you think Texas has to offer on it’s own? UT v. Abby Christian? UT v. Rice? The much anticipated UT v. UTEP on Thanksgiving? Playing on the road in San Angelo? That kind of thinking and resulting isolationism is what killed the SWC. On Arky left, nobody outside Texas cared about the SWC. That means no TV contract for UT. Oh yeah, cable 73 in The Woodlands will carry the game tape delayed every Sunday night at 11, but forget about exposure outside the state. I know Jerry Jones ego says everything is bigger and better in Texas, but even he couldn’t conjure up money enough to save the Longhorns if they’re solo.
TaylorTRoom said:
August 5th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
To be clear, this SEC contract doesn’t affect UT. UT has enough revenue as it is, and still isn’t maximizing revenue (the way Bellmont allocates tickets, giving priority for longevity rather than contribution, leaves millions on the table per year). The contract affects the smaller schools, who will struggle to keep up with the richer SEC and Big 10 schools. That is what will cause the pressure on the Big 12.
That’s an interesting observation on the Big 10, Scipio. The Big 10 and SEC have one thing in common- each conference has unanimous agreement about what the conference is for, and how it supports university goals. The Big 10 consists of very good research universities that want good athletics. The SEC consists of colleges that want badass football programs (and a badass basketball program at Kentucky). The Big 12 has a few schools that would fit in a Big 10-like conference, and others that would fit an SEC-like conference (if they only had SEC-like talent and support). The lack of harmony in the Big 12 is a result of lack of common goal.
the Bobs said:
August 5th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
man, the lobotomy wasn’t DeLoss’…
Arky leaving brought down the SWC??? When Arkansas left, they left a footprint in a bucket of water… nobody knew they were gone.
The problem ran a whole lot deeper, and was a whole lot easier to diagnose than you seem to think.
coolhorn said:
August 5th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
The SWC reference was to the time when the Horns were in a highly-localized conference (A one state conference after arky bolted to the SEC.) and couldn’t get the national exposure needed to compete at a championship level.
Yep, I know we were having coaching problems, and aggy’s sweetheart deal with Fed-Ex was working out, but for a school with huge resources, the Horns were like a medium big frog in a small pond.
The Big XII served Texas’ need for a bigger stage, but now, it’s time has come and gone, courtesy of that league east of Texas. There won’t be an immediate big dropoff in performance and recruiting, but if the Horns don’t find some way to get SEC-like exposure and paydays, eventually they’ll become much less significant in the BCS championship chase. That’s true of just about every powerhouse program out there that’s not in the SEC, so it’s not like Texas doesn’t have company.
The idea of a new super conference needs to be looked at seriously. It couldn’t happen very quickly, but the sooner it does get considered, the sooner an antidote might be found to the SEC’s mega-tv deal.
I’m not one to cry that the sky’s falling, and it’s not…yet. I’d just love to see Dodds and company do something to negate the effect of ESPN’s sweetheart deal with the SEC.
Ricky said:
August 6th, 2009 at 5:52 am
I am still not sold on the Pac 10 idea. I just don’t think our move there does anything more than shift the recruits going out of state to much more enticing locations than the Midwest. I don’t think we end up anywhere near SEC or Big 10 media money. If you don’t have any games in the Central Time Zone you are pretty much ceding a broad majority of potential viewers in the country.
Now a merger with the southern five or six of the Pac-10 and the six or seven best pieces of the Big 12 would be a different story. You would have a more regionally-balanced conference that would have more national appeal than Texas, the 3 West Coast states, and Arizona. I imagine losing the states of Washington and Oregon are made up by bringing in Colorado, Missouri, and/or Kansas.
The problem is what to about Nebraska. They are a traditional football power, but are in No-Man’s land and suck at basketball.
BatesHorn said:
August 6th, 2009 at 6:25 am
Nebraska is a dinosaur. Poorly located, with a non existent talent base, faced with declining demographics, their longterm future is bleak, regardless of Pelini’s efforts
Again, I can see us, A&M, and colorado going west. I can’t understand the PAC-10 seeing even an iota of reason to get in bed with any of the other schools in the Big 12 other than possibly OU, for which they’d probably feel like they were having to hold their nose. I still think OU’s future lays in the SEC.
Missouri and Kansas would probably be far more comfortable in either the Big 10 (What a power basketball conference) or joining Memphis in Conference USA.
I do think it’s worth it for us to talk to the big 10, as we academically share more in common with them than virtually any other conference.
The rest of the schools in the Big 12 need to start reexamining what they want and get out of big time athletics. Much the way the Ivy’s did in the 40-50s.
anonymous said:
August 6th, 2009 at 6:38 am
Bates,
The Pac Ten already contains such paragons of academic and clean-living virtue as Arizona State. Plenty of their schools have had NCAA trouble in the (recent) past. Assuming they are interested in a super-conference type arrangement, I don’t think we need to worry about who they would get in bed with.
I agree that the midwest Big 12 schools don’t pose any problem to this arrangement. In fact, they are the problem with the current conference, and they should be dropped. With prejudice.
BatesHorn said:
August 6th, 2009 at 6:45 am
I will admit that having an annual OU-USC or OU-Oregon game every year, combined with a Texas-USC and Texas-UCLA game is pretty enticing from an money perspective.
Major Cult said:
August 6th, 2009 at 8:16 am
The states of California and Texas in the same conference? Wow. I’d be like an infant with Salma Hayek and Scarlett Johansson as wet-nurses.
coolhorn said:
August 6th, 2009 at 10:26 am
The PAC 10 isn’t gonna cut the Oregon and Washington schools loose, so the only way to go that makes any sense is to bring in two more schools and divide into two six team conferences. The two logical schools are us and Colorado. If Texas were to make the jump, we’d still play okie and aggy every year…that’s pretty much a given, and they’re really the only two significant “rivalry” games for us in the Big XII right now.
Sorry Tech, Baylor, okie lite, and the Big XII north…it’s been fun playing you, but it’s time for Texas to move west. Philosophically, I’d love to see us consider membership in the Big 10, but that makes much less sense than moving to the PAC.
The one thing Texas cannot afford to do is sit still in the currently constituted Big XII and hope to remain relevant in the national championship race in years to come. Money talks, and you know what walks. Right now, the money’s headed to the southeastern schools, and since the Horns want nothing to do with the SEC, they’d better be looking west.
Ricky said:
August 6th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
“The one thing Texas cannot afford to do is sit still in the currently constituted Big XII and hope to remain relevant in the national championship race in years to come. Money talks, and you know what walks.”
This is the problem with going to the Pac 10. The Big 12 generates more revenue than the Pac 10 and that is with all those schools out in BFE. Adding just us doesn’t make the whole conference attractive enough for us to see any revenue gains.
I would think us going to the Big 10 makes much more sense. They need one team to get to 12, and while we aren’t regionally proximate it is no worse than us going to the Pac 10 and actually has less time zone implications. They already reap major dollars and adding Texas could make the conference the king of hill in college football when it comes to pure profit.
I think the Big 10 teams wouldn’t be quite as attractive for our recruits like the California teams would be, so it might help us retain even more talent than if we start having the West Coast sucking it out and it might limit OU’s take as well.
Ultimately our problem is that we will have a hard time getting loose of our neighbors. We were already stuck taking Baylor in the Big 12 and if A&M and Tech are also left behind the idiots running the state will vote against us like Art Briles voting in the Coaches Poll.
coolhorn said:
August 6th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
I can buy the Big 10 argument for a couple of reasons. I was in Columbus a couple of years ago when there was a lot of talk about Texas possibly becoming the 12th Big 10 team. That idea seemed to sit well with folks in that part of the country, at least based on what I read and heard on sportstalk shows up there. I’ll also concede that UT has a lot more in common with the Big 10 teams than those in any other conference, including the PAC 10. Travel is travel, and it wouldn’t be any harder to get to Columbus, Ann Arbor, etc. than it already is to get to Columbia, Boulder, etc.
If Texas heads north or west, aggy will find a way to get into the SEC. That was gonna happen just before the Big XII came into being, and the political landscape in Texas has changed enough that this time, I don’t see legislators playing power games to keep us and aggy in the Big XII. Texas would still play aggy and okie, just not as conference games.
Something like this is gonna have to happen for the Horns to remain relevant in the championship chase in years to come. I still think the PAC 10 option is a better one, but either it or the Big 10 option beats doing nothing. We’re talking about this here…I hope there’s some discussion going on also in Bellmont Hall.
Bob in Houston said:
August 6th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
I’m not sure the SEC wants A&M without Texas. I agree they’d fit, though.
coolhorn said:
August 6th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Agricultural was virtually in the SEC before Bob Bullock and Ann Richards put the squeeze on them to join up in the new Big XII. In police parlance, you could almost say A&M to the SEC is profiling. Of course, some cops would say that just because it’s profiling doesn’t mean it’s wrong. The Ags would bring a lot to the table in a league that’s not too fastidious to look the other way when under the table dealings are going on…they’d make a good replacement for…oh…say…Vandy.
The General said:
August 7th, 2009 at 5:13 am
A Big 10 conference schedule with OOC games against A&M and Oklahoma would keep us from scheduling too many West Central Louisiana Tech’s, which would be nice.
Texasholdem said:
August 7th, 2009 at 7:01 am
The ideal solution seems to be to move to a two conference system, where Football, Men’s & Woman’s basketball plays in the Big 10, while the rest of sports play in something like a revived Southwest Conference which would be strong in sports like baseball, track, tennis, golf, etc….
BatesHorn said:
August 7th, 2009 at 9:53 am
The question is whether the Big 10 coaches want us. Do they really want a team in a nice warm sunny place with tons of gorgeous talent rolling into to Ohio and Illinois every year for a game, then showing up in the spring to cherry pick their best players? But then again, it’s all about the benjamins…
If A&M joins the SEC, we may never see another recruit from East Texas go to UT ever again.
coolhorn said:
August 7th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Texas is far and away the best option as the Big 10’s 12th team, geography notwithstanding.
Notre Dame ain’t walkin’ through the door for those guys, no matter how much wishful thinking goes on in the upper midwest.
The other viable candidates? Pitt. West Virginia. Maybe Mizzou. Get the picture?…if UT wants to pursue Big 10 membership, we’ll find a receptive audience. The question is…Big 10 or PAC 10. I don’t see us going wrong either way when we’re ready to depart the Big XII.
scmutiger said:
August 8th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Here’s a novel idea… how about Texas, and the rest of the former SWC teams just leave? The Big 8 was doing just fine without all of this Texas drama. OU was dominating your teams in non conference games, and the rest of us in the Big 8 didn’t have to pay any attention to your drivel (nobody outside of Texas gave a rat’s ass about Texas or their football teams). If you can’t see that revenue sharing is what has helped the SEC move up to the top notch collectively, well…..never mind…you are idiot if you can’t see that
Sincerely,
Mizzou Fan
coolhorn said:
August 9th, 2009 at 8:15 am
If it makes you happy to believe that miz-fan, enjoy. The Big 8 didn’t have the tv markets, and with one or two exceptions, would have been headed to about the same relevance as the current Mountain West. You may not like it, but the Big 8 needed Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin as much as we needed out of a dying SWC. It was a marriage of convenience, and like most such unions, it’s run it’s course. Be careful what you wish for Big 8 fan…you might get it sooner than you think.
trkhorn said:
August 9th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Us and the Ags should join the SEC West, which would also require two schools to join the East(Florida State and Louisville for example). This would create a super-conference juggernaut for the ages, and unlike the Pac 10/Big 10 scenarios, the geography makes sense. Not to mention renewing a traditional rivalry w/the dreaded pigs as well as beginning new but very logical ones w/LSU and Alabama. OU would go back to being our premier non-con game. Let’s say you only play one SEC East team per year, and of course keep the CCG in place. I cannot imagine a better scenario for us.
Major Cult said:
August 9th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Not a bad idea, trk. Much more in common with the gulf coast states and we’re only talking one time zone travel. But what would the SEC appetite be for that? I just don’t see us mixing with the Big 10. Not that I care, but what about Sooner? What are they thinking? Somehow if we are headed to a ’super conference’, I see us in the same conference as Sooner. Packaged together (oh and throw in Aggie – why are we always tied to Aggie?) that would be quite some sweet jewelery for a conference.
Woody Bombay said:
August 9th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
scmutiger,
If the Texas schools leave the Big 12 – or, more specifically, if Texas leaves – Oklahoma will be heading for the door next. The sooners will not want to play Snow White to the rest of the Big 8’s dwarfs. As mentioned above, Nebraska is in trouble, Kansas can’t be relied on to provide a consistent football product, and trust me: There is no one saying “show me” Mizzou football outside of your state.
Without UT and OU the conference is the WAC. So enjoy that.
Major Cult said:
August 9th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Hey mizzou fan, what moved the SEC up to top notch was great football, great competition, the growth of the gulf coast states and Nick Saban (just kidding). The product drove the revenue, it wasn’t that revenue sharing produced a superior product. Sorry, but your football team is like the comet Kohoutek. You are relevant about once every 75,000 years and when you do show up you are a spectacular dud.
scmutiger said:
August 9th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
When you do leave the pathetic Big 12 for the SEC, be sure to let them know that y’all are THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, and that they are sooooo lucky to have you. Be sure to let them know who the boss is. The first thing you need to do is to move the CCG from ATL to Dallas. The next thing you should do is do away with their revenue sharing model, and replace it with your hugely successful SWC/Big 12 example. Next, demand that they replace Vandy with Baylor since it’s common knowledge that Vandy has no business in the SEC, and all things Texas are superior. Let’s see how well that works out for ya….
Yes, it has been about a decade since we beat your vaunted team in football, but last I checked Mizzou was playing in the Elite 8 this past basketball season. The former SWC teams didn’t exactly pull their weight this past March.
The Big 12 could be so much better. Texas has enough D1 talent to supply half of the Big 12 North teams rosters. Texas already supplies OU with better players from Texas than what UT gets. Missouri, and Colorado have enough home grown talent to field decent teams when we get the rest from places such as Texas, Florida, and California. I will admit that Kansas, Iowa, and Nebraska aren’t exactly recruiting hot beds, but with all that Texas HS football talent available, they should be able to put quality products on the field too. Wake up UT! Share the wealth before the have-nots get fed up, and leave for greener pastures.
srr50 said:
August 9th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Wake up UT! Share the wealth before the have-nots get fed up, and leave for greener pastures.
And just where, pray tell, would that be?
Woody Bombay said:
August 9th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
scmutiger,
Do you really think it’s about something as fleeting as last season’s March Madness, or even a single football game last last year’s ass-stomping UT put on Mizzou and its booger-eating QB who Mack didn’t recruit? It’s bigger than the Norm Stewart-sized chip on your shoulder. We’re talking Big Picture here.
I’m sorry, but Texas and Oklahoma — and, sadly, probably their little-brother rivals OSU, Tech and aTm — are going to dictate the future of this conference. Nebraska may somehow get a foothold, too. That’s iffy.
Now, go home and get your fucking shine box.
Woody Bombay said:
August 9th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Sorry, forgot my smiley face: ;-)
TaylorTRoom said:
August 10th, 2009 at 4:03 am
SRR makes a great point- the strongest leagues (NFL, SEC) share revenue. That creates a situation where the little guys can support strngthening the game for all, even if it helps the big guys more than them, because they’ll get their share of the loot.
Why did the dying SWC lessen the revenue sharing? Because the little guys decided they would rather hold the big guys down than maximize profits for all. The little guys in the Big 12 are going to decide where this conference goes, and unfortunately there are three big guys that want two different things. OU would be fine if the Big 12 went to a SEC model. Texas wants a Big 10 model. TAMU could be convinced either way. The smartest thing the little Big 12 programs (Baylor, ISU, KSU) could do would be to support the league going in a Big 10 direction (more regulation of recruiting, more athletics support of the academic mission). That would make Texas happy, and OU would learn to like it (they’re not going anywhere first, anyway). Moving the Big 12 in the SEC direction (no-rules recruiting, lessening of academic standards) will drive UT away.
Ricky said:
August 10th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Revenue sharing can work, but the problem for Texas is still that they are attached to a conference that covers a lot of dead zones, which will leave it sharing a much smaller pie that its competitors in other conferences. The Big 12 covers the lowest total population of any BCS conference by more than 10 million people.
TV skews everything in that it doesn’t matter that Nebraska fills its stadium every Saturday. They have great fan support but even Syracuse could probably negotiate a better TV deal because they are surrounded by major population centers while Nebraska is surrounded by empty space.
On a macro level the Big 12 just can’t hang with the other conferences in the long run and it demise will be accelerated if these enormous TV deals start going to the other conferences and the Big 12 can’t score something similar. I think it is already the SWC story writ larger (not that much larger…the state of Texas has over 55% of the total population in the Big 12).
Major Cult said:
August 10th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Found this old article from OregonSU:
http://media.barometer.orst.edu/media/storage/paper854/news/2007/01/18/Sports/A.TexasSized.Mistake-2652668.shtml
I wonder if Stanford would still block our entry to PAC-10.
Key Quote:
“With Texas in the Pac-10, the conference would have become an absolute juggernaut, not only in athletics, but in the realm of academia. For with the addition of their outstanding sports programs, the university is also one of the nation’s leading research institutions, is home to nearly 70,000 students and boasts an endowment of $5.5 billion. Oregon State’s endowment, for example, is around $350 million. A Pac-10, with Texas as a colleague, would most certainly be the most acclaimed academic group in the country.”