Texas To The Big 10?

[VideoEagle]

This blog has some interesting takes on why this isn't as far-fetched as some (myself) have thought... and why it would in fact be mutually beneficial for both parties.

It is a blog quoting a column that quotes a single un-named source in a newspaper in Lawrence, Kansas, discussing things things that are not occurring in Kansas. Furthermore, the point of the article in the Kansas newspaper appears to be the Big 10 is interested in Texas and NOT Missouri. UK, located in Lawrence coincidently, would be hurt far worse by losing their number one rival Missouri than losing Texas so it is in their interest to push anyone other than Missouri for Big 10 expansion.

And according to the article, Texas benefits by getting revenue from the Big 10 network. But it also points out Texas in interested in starting it's OWN network from which it would get even more revenue.

[LoveMG]

And according to the article, Texas benefits by getting revenue from the Big 10 network. But it also points out Texas in interested in starting it's OWN network from which it would get even more revenue.

the big programs have turned into whores. it is no longer about the fans and rivalries only money. texas will propose their own netowrk, whornes tv.

Edited February 15, 2010 by LoveMG

[forevereagle]

I heard yesterday on PTI that Nebraska has said that they would listen if the Big 11 calls. That is a move that makes a lot more sense than TU does.

Edited February 16, 2010 by forevereagle

[VideoEagle]

I heard yesterday on PTI that Nebraska has said that they would listen if the Big 11 calls. That is a move that makes a lot more sense than TU does.

With the academics at Nebraska, they will be waiting a long time for that call! Nebraska has been a consistent supporter of partial qualifiers going to University. That stand is not going to win any friends in the public Ivy Big 10.

Combine that with the entire state of Nebraska having a population of about 1.78 million and thus not many TV households and you have a less than ideal candidate for the Big 10.

[Mean Green 93-98]

I heard yesterday on PTI that Nebraska has said that they would listen if the Big 11 calls. That is a move that makes a lot more sense than TU does.

That will never happen. Nebraska in the Big 10 would be like Ohio State in the Ivy League.

I do kind of wonder if the Big 10 is flirting with Texas just to kind of "shake the sugar tree." If Notre Dame feels like they always have an open invite to the Big 10, which they pretty well do right now, there is no pressure on them to jump. But if they ever see the door closing, they might be more likely.

[yyz28]

I think Texas leaving the Big XII is about as likely as North Texas winning a National Title next year.

[forevereagle]

I think Texas leaving the Big XII is about as likely as North Texas winning a National Title next year.

So you're saying there's a chance!

[Arkstfan]

I don't think Texas will move (reason later) but here is why they'd be nuts to not consider it. First, it is a guaranteed increase in revenue of roughly $10 million if Big 10 revenue grows the 9% needed to not change the distribution. In truth more than that.

The Big 10 Network charges a reported 10 cents per month to cable and a satellite providers in non-Big 10 markets per household. There are roughly 8 million TV households in Texas, roughly half (very old numbers) have cable or satellite so that's 4 million. Figure half have Big 10 Net (probably high percentage wise but makes up for old numbers regarding cable penetration), so that is 2 million. That means Big 10 Net makes about $200,000 a month or $1.2 million a year from subscribers in Texas without selling any ads. If they add a team in Texas, the rate goes to a reported $1 per month. That takes annual revenue to $12 million per year in Texas without adding any subscribers. If there is just a 25% increase in the number of subscribers that revenue now goes up to $15 million per year. Viewership also rises so do ad prices.

Remember also that Texas represents the bulk of the value of the Big XII tv contract. The Big XII receives a reported $60 million per year. Conservatively I'd estimate that Texas represents $15 million to $20 million of that when it was negotiated and is worth easily double that (remember Vandy's share of the SEC contract is $17 million).

Now why won't they go?

Politics. In 1990 when Arkansas announced its departure, Texas was given a no leave mandate. It took a few years to soften it up into a partial leave and it required setting the stage for that. A bolt out of the blue won't cut it. But Texas also go concessions from the SWC to keep it patched together.

If you are AD at Iowa State you might not like the idea of giving up part of your revenue in a new revenue sharing scheme that provides greater reward to schools for BCS appearances, NCAA appearances, and television appearances but the reduction in income pales in comparison to losing key home games and losing access to the best TV opportunities when you are playing well. Texas is going to hold the Big 12 hostage and take a larger cut of the pie. It will narrow their league revenue gap compared to Ohio State and Alabama and let them keep their local schedule. Texas Tech may not like having their check look like what Louisiville is getting from the Big East but its better than backfilling with MWC schools.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Arkstfan

[GrayEagle]

[Aquila_Viridis]

This will make perfect sense when the University of Texas moves to its new home in St. Louis.

[NT80]

DMN writer thinks Texas to the Big 10 is possible...follow the revenue...

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/021910dnosposheronline.12e21ebb0.html

[buff64]

Article in the Austin American Statesman this morning , states that for several reasons the Big Ten is not even a consideration for UT. Travel expenses in the non-revenue sports , loss of games ( rivalery) with A&M and Oklahoma, not much in common with the Big Ten schools.

[pollock]

Rhetorical questions, for some of the posters in this thread:

Where are you getting this impression that Big 10 academics are so great, and OU/Nebraska academics are so bad?

Where is it written that A&M and Texas have to be in the same conference?

Question for UT fans:

Why the hell would you want to go to the Big 10?

Arkstfan is the realignment guru and is making complete sense, as usual. I can't see Texas bolting for the Big 10 - at least not being the first to leave.

What I would believe is the Pac 10 pulling Utah and Colorado. If that happens, chaos time.

Pitt seems like the best fit for Big 10 expansion, assuming Notre Dame will never stoop to that level.

[Mean Green 93-98]

Rhetorical questions, for some of the posters in this thread:

Where are you getting this impression that Big 10 academics are so great, and OU/Nebraska academics are so bad? . . .

Question for UT fans:

Why the hell would you want to go to the Big 10?

From the article linked above:

Texas likes its national standing and Tier 1 status and has always looked around at other possible fits. Before the Big 12 was brokered, the Horns were on their way to the Pac-10.

The Big Ten not only offers more TV sets than the Pac-10, all of its members are Tier 1 universities. The league’s Committee on Institutional Cooperation directs research that helps make it one of the most prestigious academic conferences in the nation, a factor Texas envies.

See also http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/compare/items+1739+1775+2565+3184+3658+3895+6965+9092

[NT80]

This is a numbers game that most likely still see a few historic powers left out in the cold. There is just not enough spots left in the expanding conferences for everyone. It used to be the prestigious teams with the long standing history where the ones selected for conferecne expansion. Now it is all predicated on media footprint, tv coverage maps and revenue.

Good post. Another article made mention that the prime candidate schools for movement, ie Texas, don't want to get left behind in the next major reshuffle. They may pull the trigger early if they get an offer just to stay ahead of the pack, especially if a Super Conference forms. It will be a feeding freenzy if some big dominos (again Texas) start to depart.

I still believe a "historical power" has value beyond just TV market size. They draw fans as opponents = revenue. A Nebraska or Oklahoma may not have as many TV's in their area but they will draw a crowd in multiple sports.

Edited February 20, 2010 by NT80

[untjim1995]

Good post. Another article made mention that the prime candidate schools for movement, ie Texas, don't want to get left behind in the next major reshuffle. They may pull the trigger early if they get an offer just to stay ahead of the pack, especially if a Super Conference forms. It will be a feeding freenzy if some big dominos (again Texas) start to depart.

I still believe a "historical power" has value beyond just TV market size. They draw fans as opponents = revenue. A Nebraska or Oklahoma may not have as many TV's in their area but they will draw a crowd in multiple sports.

Your are dead on about that last part concerning a historical power--in both football and basketball. OU, Nebraska, and Kansas may be smaller states in population, but their programs are national names that get attention, even when they are down. The teams in the Big XII that will be fine even if the conference implodes will be UT, A&M, OU, CU, KU, MU, and NU. I would then guess that teams like KSU, ISU, OSU, Baylor, and Tech could get left behind in a realignment of a new BCS. Tech and OSU have a few advantages in that Tech does have Texas market appeal and decent size of student and alumni, while OSU has T. Boone. It will definitely be interesting if Baylor and Tech got left behind in all of this if they would "stoop" down to be in a conference with TCU, UH, SMU, Rice, and UTEP. They may not have a choice.

[Side Show Joe]

Your are dead on about that last part concerning a historical power--in both football and basketball. OU, Nebraska, and Kansas may be smaller states in population, but their programs are national names that get attention, even when they are down. The teams in the Big XII that will be fine even if the conference implodes will be UT, A&M, OU, CU, KU, MU, and NU. I would then guess that teams like KSU, ISU, OSU, Baylor, and Tech could get left behind in a realignment of a new BCS. Tech and OSU have a few advantages in that Tech does have Texas market appeal and decent size of student and alumni, while OSU has T. Boone. It will definitely be interesting if Baylor and Tech got left behind in all of this if they would "stoop" down to be in a conference with TCU, UH, SMU, Rice, and UTEP. They may not have a choice.

With the economy being what it is, these schools endowments are taking a beating. It could take several years before those endowments return to pre-resession conditions. It is in their best interest to strike the most profitable deal they can. Schools like TT and Baylor may feel it beneith them to aline with UH, TCU, SMU, UTEP, Rice, and NT, but if the Big 12 comes crashing down, they will.

[untjim1995]

With the economy being what it is, these schools endowments are taking a beating. It could take several years before those endowments return to pre-resession conditions. It is in their best interest to strike the most profitable deal they can. Schools like TT and Baylor may feel it beneith them to aline with UH, TCU, SMU, UTEP, Rice, and NT, but if the Big 12 comes crashing down, they will.

I hope you're right about that last part, but then again, I thought the current situation would have amde some of that consolidation already occur. It just amazes me how much some of these schools look down on others that really would help them on a lot of fronts. I think about the obvious ones, such as Baylor and Tech looking down on TCU, while TCU looks down at SMU, who looks down on us. But UTEP wants nothing to do with New Mexico State and La Tech wants nothing to do with ULM. If these scholls and alums could just see past some of this, you could have some very good conferences that are aligned more appropriately. I guess TV sets is the big driver these days, though. And I guess TCU and SMU are more closely aligned in football with the DFW media then we are. We have big improvements over the last 15 years, but there are lots of hurdles still in the way for us to be in the conference that would benefit UNT the most.

[Arkstfan]

Pitt won't make the Big 10. It brings no new revenue for the Big 10 Network and little new revenue from Emperor Disney.

I keep thinking that unless CU is ready to move, the Pac-10 expansion falls apart and I'm not totally convinced the Pac-10 is willing to add Utah though they fit the profile of the northern schools in many ways.

[Side Show Joe]

I hope you're right about that last part, but then again, I thought the current situation would have amde some of that consolidation already occur. It just amazes me how much some of these schools look down on others that really would help them on a lot of fronts. I think about the obvious ones, such as Baylor and Tech looking down on TCU, while TCU looks down at SMU, who looks down on us. But UTEP wants nothing to do with New Mexico State and La Tech wants nothing to do with ULM. If these scholls and alums could just see past some of this, you could have some very good conferences that are aligned more appropriately. I guess TV sets is the big driver these days, though. And I guess TCU and SMU are more closely aligned in football with the DFW media then we are. We have big improvements over the last 15 years, but there are lots of hurdles still in the way for us to be in the conference that would benefit UNT the most.

I just can't concede the DFW market to TCU and SMU. As a teacher in Fort Worth I can tell you most of my students are very indifferent to TCU. They feel TCU is a school most of them are excluded from having any chance of attending. They see North Texas everywhere in my room, and many prefer to support our large public school, even though we have been struggling. I think much of the population in Dallas probably feels the same way. We must do more to become more visable in DFW.

[forevereagle]

I just can't concede the DFW market to TCU and SMU. As a teacher in Fort Worth I can tell you most of my students are very indifferent to TCU. They feel TCU is a school most of them are excluded from having any chance of attending. They see North Texas everywhere in my room, and many prefer to support our large public school, even though we have been struggling. I think much of the population in Dallas probably feels the same way. We must do more to become more visable in DFW.

I agree. Having grown up in FW, I had very little attachment to TCU. They just don't work real hard to appeal to anyone but alumni and the wealthiest in FW. There always were a handful of folks who thought they were great, but I was never really able to associate with the school.

[Eagle1855]

Another thing I hadn't thought of that was brought up in one of the papers here is UT Baseball. Garrido didn't sound enthusiastic in the least of playing in the colder climates, the travel, etc. Which I think is a valid concern. Granted, one sport does not a program make, UT Baseball is a bit of an institution.

[VideoEagle]

Another thing I hadn't thought of that was brought up in one of the papers here is UT Baseball. Garrido didn't sound enthusiastic in the least of playing in the colder climates, the travel, etc. Which I think is a valid concern. Granted, one sport does not a program make, UT Baseball is a bit of an institution.

I had not thought about baseball, but you are right. It is VERY important to most UT alums that I know.

[NT80]

Another thing I hadn't thought of that was brought up in one of the papers here is UT Baseball. Garrido didn't sound enthusiastic in the least of playing in the colder climates, the travel, etc. Which I think is a valid concern. Granted, one sport does not a program make, UT Baseball is a bit of an institution.

It sounds like football and academics are driving this Big 10 expansion bus. These top conferences (BCS) were formed based solely on a school's football and the TV marketability of that football. Basketball is also a consideration, but baseball, although very good at Texas, is considered a minor conference sport in the Big 10 and thus very little voting power or consideration.

[Mean Green 93-98]

It sounds like football and academics are driving this Big 10 expansion bus. These top conferences (BCS) were formed based solely on a school's football and the TV marketability of that football. Basketball is also a consideration, but baseball, although very good at Texas, is considered a minor conference sport in the Big 10 and thus very little voting power or consideration.

I think 1855 was looking at it from UT's perspective, not the Big 10's. While a move to the Big 10 would boost UT's academic credentials, and wouldn't hurt their football program, it doesn't seem like it would be very good for UT baseball to go to a conference where baseball is "considered a minor conference sport."