It's Like Some Sort Of Football Dream World!

Dr. Seuss · December 9, 2010

The only way I see Big 12 falling apart is if they cant get a TV prgram worked out. That is something that a lot of schools are looking to. Big 10 avg around 23 mill per team in just conference distribution and broadcasting(w/o conference championshipo) compared to big 12 avg around 12 mill per team with conference championship

Edited December 9, 2010 by Dr. Seuss

The Fake Lonnie Finch · December 9, 2010

Agree. But, it's just money. Notre Dame may be making money off of their TV contract, but it hasn't translated into an overwhelming amount of wins.

Texas makes more money than anyone in the country and they still went 5-7. At the end of the day, because it isn't professional, you still have to play the game with amateur kids whose heads may or may not be right with ball 100% of the time.

And, at some point, the facilities just become an overkill anyway. In fact, maybe the problem at Texas and Notre Dame from a competitive standpoint is that their players now have too much given to them and it translates into lazier, less "hungry" players.

I'm easily more impressed with TCU and Boise State (and, personally, Tulsa), to see where they have come over the past decade despite having a lot less than programs like Texas and Notre Dame.

Money can only do so much. You've still got to line 'em up and play the game.

VideoEagle · December 9, 2010

For all yall who dont know the ideal teams in each conference is 12, look it up. Reason being is because of competitive balance and conference championship payouts because the mininum amount of teams required for championship game is 12. The Big 12 will either come back with 12 teams or die and another conference will form. I HIGHLY doubt any conferences will have over 14-16 teams, it doesnt make since economically. If you think to disagree I would be happy to inform you

I don't think the Big XII is going to 12 anytime soon for a variety of reasons. They have found they will not have to drop their TV revenues even though they lost Nebraska and Colorado. Few mouths to feed means more more (or in the case of KU, KSU, Mo, OSU and Tech, no cuts to give the big two their extra) for the remainder.

None of the coaches ever liked the championship games - it is just one more loss for you number 2 team and a potential loss for someone in the hunt for the NC game. Beebe this a a press conference earlier this year.

The smaller schools all like the attendance bump they get from every other year visits by Oklahoma and Texas. Why go back to just getting those every four years?

Lastly, while 12 is definitely a good number, the Pac 10 and Big 10 both produced multiple national champions with fewer schools.

Yellow Snow · December 9, 2010

Probably true. The WAC tried 16 schools back in the day. It's too unwieldy. I hope for either a Big 12-2 invite. Or, joining up with the remaining Big 12ers once OU, Texas, and A&M bail out...which they will. Possibly this summer.

Texas surely isn't happy that they didn't get their way. They should do everyone a favor and just go independent. The problem is, being independent with their own TV deal hasn't helped Notre Dame be more competitive. And, it likely won't help BYU either.

The question is, where does Texas go for TV? It will have to be a BYU-like school controlled station because not enough people in America give enough of a crap about the Longhorns for them to sign with a network or even a major cable outfit.

So, Texas...put your money where your big, fat mouth is. Step off the ledge into the world of the totally delusional. You'll be in good company there with Notre Dame and BYU.

Texas isn't going to go anywhere (nor were they going anywhere). They have everything they want now. The new Big 12 TV deal will NOT prevent individual schools from creating their own tv networks. That is what Texas wanted from the beginning. The existing Big 12 tv deal doesn't allow this, so the re-negotiated contract (yet to be put forth) supposedly allows each school to distribute athletic events as the school sees fit. This is of course only allowed if the game ISN'T being televised by the network. Texas wanted to be able to do this AND KEEP the money they will generate by showing their own games. They didn't want to spit this revenue with the rest of the conference, nor should they have to. Florida has this same type of deal in the SEC. The tv money (coming from the network) will be spit up between all of the Big 12 schools. The money generated by each school's own networks will stay with each school. THAT is why there is such a money imbalance. The UT network will dwarf all of the others - so the income figures estimated for this all show Texas at the top of the heap. This isn't at any cost to the other schools. There is misconception out there that Texas screwed the Big 12, and that couldn't be more wrong. ALL of the schools benefited by flushing Nebraska, upping the shared tv money (about 10 million more per school) and gaining the ability to create their own networks. The Pac-10 thing was never going to happen because the Pac-10 won't let individual schools have their own tv distribution networks.

Texas bluffed Nebraska out of the conference. Now they have an easier path to the BCS, only have to split the money 10 ways and not 12, can form their own network, AND get to keep the Big 12 conference under their thumb. They'd be stupid to leave, and they were never going to leave anyway.

For the record, I'd love to see the Big 12 get back to 12 teams. Twelve teams is optimal. I'd vote for BYU and Notre Dame, but the Irish won't do it. In that case, I'd go with UNT and Houston. Then OU and Okie State could move to the north division.

I-State

K-State

Kansas

Mizzou

Oklahoma

O-State

Texas

Tech

A&M

Baylor

Houston

North Texas

That'd work for me...

Edited December 9, 2010 by Yellow Snow

GrayEagle · December 9, 2010

Let's say that happens, and UNT takes it's rightful place as the king of the conference you envision.

Let's also say that UNT delivers the largest TV market in the conference, has the biggest fan base, travels well to out of town games--providing sellouts to those programs in the process--sells the most tickets, merchandise, and leads the conference in revenue earned.

Should UNT split it's earnings in proportion to what it makes for the conference, or should it share equally with programs that don't pull the weight that UNT does?

In UNT's case I'd split the earnings with programs that don't pull their weight proportionately with the others. Sometimes pulling your weight is a cyclical thing. If Texas had a ten year drought in bowl appearances should they still command the lion's share of the revenue?

For now, I wouldn't mind Texas and OU getting extra revenue but I don't know exactly how it should be formulated. None of the others pull equal shares but how do you go about instilling a program that has to be recalculated each year?

If we were fortunate enough to be added to the Big 12 I wouldn't want to rock the boat for a long time.

Dr. Seuss · December 9, 2010

Agree. But, it's just money. Notre Dame may be making money off of their TV contract, but it hasn't translated into an overwhelming amount of wins.

Texas makes more money than anyone in the country and they still went 5-7. At the end of the day, because it isn't professional, you still have to play the game with amateur kids whose heads may or may not be right with ball 100% of the time.

And, at some point, the facilities just become an overkill anyway. In fact, maybe the problem at Texas and Notre Dame from a competitive standpoint is that their players now have too much given to them and it translates into lazier, less "hungry" players.

I'm easily more impressed with TCU and Boise State (and, personally, Tulsa), to see where they have come over the past decade despite having a lot less than programs like Texas and Notre Dame.

Money can only do so much. You've still got to line 'em up and play the game.

Absolutely, You can have all the money but if you cant play you cant play. But as for Nebraska, they will make avg 10 mil more a year, and play closer to home with the same caliber, sounds like a win win.

I wouldnt go in and say that their lazy, and less hungry. My sister dated on of the UT football players for 3 years and now hes in the pros and UT was in the National Championship last year. They just had a bad season, what did they do to fix i: #1 recruiting class rated by rivals. I would say that Texas has done better in the 2000 than the 1990, compared to ND and Nebraska. You cant deny the success that TCU and Boise have had, im just ready for them to jump into the AQ's and see how they do week after week.

Dr. Seuss · December 9, 2010

Texas isn't going to go anywhere (nor were they going anywhere). They have everything they want now. The new Big 12 TV deal will NOT prevent individual schools from creating their own tv networks. That is what Texas wanted from the beginning. The existing Big 12 tv deal doesn't allow this, so the re-negotiated contract (yet to be put forth) supposedly allows each school to distribute athletic events as the school sees fit. This is of course only allowed if the game ISN'T being televised by the network. Texas wanted to be able to do this AND KEEP the money they will generate by showing their own games. They didn't want to spit this revenue with the rest of the conference, nor should they have to. Florida has this same type of deal in the SEC. The tv money (coming from the network) will be spit up between all of the Big 12 schools. The money generated by each school's own networks will stay with each school. THAT is why there is such a money imbalance. The UT network will dwarf all of the others - so the income figures estimated for this all show Texas at the top of the heap. This isn't at any cost to the other schools. There is misconception out there that Texas screwed the Big 12, and that couldn't be more wrong. ALL of the schools benefited by flushing Nebraska, upping the shared tv money (about 10 million more per school) and gaining the ability to create their own networks. The Pac-10 thing was never going to happen because the Pac-10 won't let individual schools have their own tv distribution networks.

Texas bluffed Nebraska out of the conference. Now they have an easier path to the BCS, only have to split the money 10 ways and not 12, can form their own network, AND get to keep the Big 12 conference under their thumb. They'd be stupid to leave, and they were never going to leave anyway.

For the record, I'd love to see the Big 12 get back to 12 teams. Twelve teams is optimal. I'd vote for BYU and Notre Dame, but the Irish won't do it. In that case, I'd go with UNT and Houston. Then OU and Okie State could move to the north division.

I-State
K-State
Kansas
Mizzou
Oklahoma
O-State

Texas
Tech
A&M
Baylor
Houston
North Texas

That'd work for me...

Everyone hears that they'll make more but what make the big 10 unique is that it is almost as good as espn2. Quite the network they have. Why Nebraska, they havent done anything in the past 15 years. The only time they were dominating was mid 90's, isnt that when the freshman this year were born?? I dont know why texas would want them to leave its not like they were OU or anything??

I would want to start off in CUSA first. I dont want to be like Baylor and get killed every game, i wanna compete and win!!

Yellow Snow · December 10, 2010

Everyone hears that they'll make more but what make the big 10 unique is that it is almost as good as espn2. Quite the network they have. Why Nebraska, they havent done anything in the past 15 years. The only time they were dominating was mid 90's, isnt that when the freshman this year were born?? I dont know why texas would want them to leave its not like they were OU or anything??

I would want to start off in CUSA first. I dont want to be like Baylor and get killed every game, i wanna compete and win!!

Texas didn't specifically want Nebraska gone, Nebraska just blinked first.

The existing Big 12 TV deal is crap. Texas wanted to launch BevoTV or some such thing and the Fox deal wouldn't allow it. The Longhorns said fine - we're leaving and taking everybody else with us. Fox caved and said they'd renegotiate a new deal mid contract if Texas and everybody else stayed. Meanwhile, Texas is saying they are goners if they don't like the deal. Nebraska didn't want to wait around not knowing what Texas was going to do.

Nebraska actually had ultimatums on the table from the Big 12 and the Big 10 at the same time. The Big 12 "reaffirmation pledge" would have needed to have been made before they knew if Texas liked the new TV deal. Nebraska went with the Big 10 offer. Ironically, they will be making less in the Big 10 from the Big 10 Network now than they would have made under the new Big 12 TV contract. Too bad for them...

Dr. Seuss · December 10, 2010

I don't think the Big XII is going to 12 anytime soon for a variety of reasons. They have found they will not have to drop their TV revenues even though they lost Nebraska and Colorado. Few mouths to feed means more more (or in the case of KU, KSU, Mo, OSU and Tech, no cuts to give the big two their extra) for the remainder.

None of the coaches ever liked the championship games - it is just one more loss for you number 2 team and a potential loss for someone in the hunt for the NC game. Beebe this a a press conference earlier this year.

The smaller schools all like the attendance bump they get from every other year visits by Oklahoma and Texas. Why go back to just getting those every four years?

Lastly, while 12 is definitely a good number, the Pac 10 and Big 10 both produced multiple national champions with fewer schools.

isnt ironic that their going to 12??

LongJim · December 10, 2010

In UNT's case I'd split the earnings with programs that don't pull their weight proportionately with the others. Sometimes pulling your weight is a cyclical thing. If Texas had a ten year drought in bowl appearances should they still command the lion's share of the revenue?

No, and that's the reason the revenue sharing was structured the way it was: the first 50% WAS split evenly. The second 50% was split using a formula taking into account TV appearances, playoff appearances (basketball), and bowl games. The whole tempest in a teapot over revenue stemmed over a difference (in the year 2007-2008) between Texas and Iowa State, of a whopping $3.1 million bucks.

For now, I wouldn't mind Texas and OU getting extra revenue but I don't know exactly how it should be formulated. None of the others pull equal shares but how do you go about instilling a program that has to be recalculated each year?

I think you go with something similar to the above. But, I really don't care. I think if UNT bring's the lion's share, it should get the lion's share. That way, the other schools don't get to play crummy schedules, leave their programs fallow, and show up for their check, leaving UNT to do the heavy lifting. That's what needs to be taken into account. Too many of these programs are not serious about competing, and simply field a team to collect the money--figuratively.

forevereagle · December 10, 2010

Texas didn't specifically want Nebraska gone, Nebraska just blinked first.

The existing Big 12 TV deal is crap. Texas wanted to launch BevoTV or some such thing and the Fox deal wouldn't allow it. The Longhorns said fine - we're leaving and taking everybody else with us. Fox caved and said they'd renegotiate a new deal mid contract if Texas and everybody else stayed. Meanwhile, Texas is saying they are goners if they don't like the deal. Nebraska didn't want to wait around not knowing what Texas was going to do.

Nebraska actually had ultimatums on the table from the Big 12 and the Big 10 at the same time. The Big 12 "reaffirmation pledge" would have needed to have been made before they knew if Texas liked the new TV deal. Nebraska went with the Big 10 offer. Ironically, they will be making less in the Big 10 from the Big 10 Network now than they would have made under the new Big 12 TV contract. Too bad for them...

I am going to disagree here. Nebraska wanted out as soon as they discovered that UT is a bunch of divas that kill conferences. UT only wants things to go a way that benefits them and only them. Nebraska just wanted a deal that was fair to everyone and UT wanted a deal that was fair to them. Nebraska got out at the first good opportunity.

houstonmeangreen · December 10, 2010

I am going to disagree here. Nebraska wanted out as soon as they discovered that UT is a bunch of divas that kill conferences. UT only wants things to go a way that benefits them and only them. Nebraska just wanted a deal that was fair to everyone and UT wanted a deal that was fair to them. Nebraska got out at the first good opportunity.

This is a great deal for Nebraska...and as time goes on, it will be better. The Big 12 in now the Big 12-2 and will take another step down maybe sooner rather than later. UT is only interested in UT...this is true, but sad.