Big Xii - Pac 10 Ad's Hold Joint Meeting

[MeanGreen61]

Pac 10 & Big XII AD's hold joint meeting

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/05/06/1930098/big-12-athletic-directors-meet.html

Big XII & PAC 10 look at alliance

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/05/06/1929542/big-12-pac-10-look-at-alliance.html

Edited May 7, 2010 by MeanGreen61

[NT80]

All well and good about their joint meeting but if the Big10 or SEC come calling the invitees will leave the Big12. $$ and security of a SuperConference make it too good to pass up. Besides, who wants west-coast game times and lost media?

[forevereagle]

All well and good about their joint meeting but if the Big10 or SEC come calling the invitees will leave the Big12. $$ and security of a SuperConference make it too good to pass up. Besides, who wants west-coast game times and lost media?

Who says this isn't planning a Super Conference?

[NT80]

Who says this isn't planning a Super Conference?

"to discuss collaborating in a future sports landscape and possibly working together on television contracts."

More like an ally in a war. Not the same country, but friends. A SuperConference is a single entity with one Commish, one Champion, shared revenues. If Nebraska and/or Mizzou is offered a spot in the Big10(16) they will take it despite any "gentlemens agreement" the PAC10 and Big12 may have.

Edited May 8, 2010 by NT80

[CMJ]

From the way I understand it- The Bog XII and Pac-10 are discussing trying for joint contracts for TV. The idea is that they share the TV money equally, most of the OOC scheduling involves playing the other league, but they remain seperate entities.

A two pronged conference that has TV markets including LA, SF, Seattle, STL, and all the TX ones -- that would get a helluva contract I'd think. Even more than that SEC deal signed a year or two ago.

On the other hand it might be even more unweildy than 16 team superconferences -- which I personally doubt will last long if/when they come to fruition.

Edited May 7, 2010 by CMJ

[LoveMG]

can't see a baylor vs washington state game exciting very many tv executives.

[CMJ]

Nah, but Texas versus USC or Oklahoma vs Oregon would.

[LongJim]

FWIW:

****************************************************

"The Pac-10 has been in contact with Texas, which is why I've said over and over to consider any discussion in the media about Texas not being interested as nothing but a pure smoke screen. Texas largely has 4 ideas as far as how to play their cards: join the Big Ten (if offered), join the Pac-10, create an alliance/new conference with the Pac-10/Mt. W/Big XII, or stay in the Big XII (w/ aid from a new Longhorn Sports Network).

The Pac-10 angle is the least favorite, as I've been told, b/c of travel. So, we asked the Pac-10 to drop Washington State, then bring us & Aggy in. That'd make 12. And, if they wanted to expand further with Colorado, Kansas, Utah & another team, that's fine by us. But, we don't want to be traipsing up to Washington & Oregon multiple times a year in every sport. Plus, WSU is dead weight of the lowest caliber. WE DID NOT ASK THEM TO DROP 3 TEAMS. We asked them to DROP DOWN to 3 northern teams. Our preference: Washington, Oregon & Oregon State stay.

Texas does not want any part of TCU, SMU, Baylor or Houston. The point is that we want to prop them up and put them in a good position b/c we may work with them to carry their games on the Longhorn Network. As it stands, Texas by itself isn't that attractive to DirecTV, etc. But, adding in the aforementioned, whose games are never carried, would bolster the network's attractiveness to the cable/satellite companies.

As I've said repeatedly.......we WILL listen to the Big Ten if they offer us a spot. Money talks. Plus, travel is better w/in the Big Ten than the Pac-10. The money's better, the academics are better. Our preference w/ the Big Ten would be to take us, Aggy, Nebraska & Missouri, and be joined by Notre Dame. That'd improve travel and keep some familiarity. But, that is probably unlikely b/c only the decay of the Big East would push Notre Dame to make a move (though if the dollars are enough, they could move for that alone.....as in $30M/year).

The Big East is dead man walking if the Big Ten snatches 2-3 teams from them. They couldn't even field a football conference b/c they won't have enough teams. Even if they expand by grabbing East Carolina and others, they're 100% guaranteed to lose their BCS qualifier status.

Believe it or not, but there is talk that the Big Ten could grab Pitt, Syracuse & Rutgers to force Notre Dame to join the Big Ten. That'd leave only 1 team left, which will probably be Missouri over Nebraska. If Nebraska is spared, that may spare the Big XII. But, it'd still leave us with about 1/3 the earning power of the Big Ten, which is NOT a position we want to be in.

As to the reported "Western Alliance", if we go that direction, it will be a totally new conference. It won't be us joining the Pac-10. And if we do it, Washington State absolutely will be left out. They are worse than Baylor. The alliance is an idea with legs, but the Pac-10 members need to decide they WANT to compete w/ the Big Ten and SEC. They are a very slow to adapt conference, and they may decide they're fine being the new Big East."

[NT80]

we asked the Pac-10 to drop Washington State, then bring us & Aggy in. That'd make 12. And, if they wanted to expand further with Colorado, Kansas, Utah & another team, that's fine by us. But, we don't want to be traipsing up to Washington & Oregon multiple times a year in every sport.

Typical. uT wants to control the world.

[GrayEagle]

Typical. uT wants to control the world.

According to what I'm reading this is merely an alliance to acquire a lot more media dollars than each conference would alone.

The two conferences contain seven of the top 16 markets which should be very attractive to a network. They actually have teams in all but DFW and Houston and the Big 12 could add TCU and Houston to assure that more than two live games would be played there.

The network could then select the best two games each week reach more households than any other single conference which would be a boon for sponsors. They could still divide the much higher revenue on a participation formula with some teams maybe still only getting $5-7M but the top teams could get $25M or more....sort of a win/win situation.

It could even mean that the Pac-10 might not have to add any teams. Number 28 San Diego and #31 Salt Lake City are the only other Top 40 markets not already having a team in or near without FBS competition. In addition, we are talking about the two largest states and both are important hotbeds for college football.

As to demanding teams being removed; leave that to each conference. Get over yourself. UT has too much going for it to play a heavy in these negotiations. You receive enough revenue now to cut tuition substantially. Why be that greedy?

Edited May 8, 2010 by GrayEagle