The good news is the B12 has hired several outside firms to crunch the financial numbers of the perspective expansion candidates which indicates any B12 expansion will be a business decision. Also, Boren's comments clearly indicate the rapidly increasing financial divide between the network based conferences (BIG/SEC) and the B12 was a primary factor driving expansion. If there is a B12 expansion it will be for money reasons...not football reasons.
The average dumb fan bases his/her decision on what team should be added by asking "what team would I like to go watch my team play." TCU is a perfect example of a great football program which did nothing to financially help the B12. No disrespect to TCU, they should be proud of what they have accomplished but they were not a financial win for the B12. TCU is truly the anti-Rutgers. I think the B12 understands this lesson now and will not make the same mistake again.
If UConn financially adds more than our expansion competitors we will get the nod if there is expansion. The B12 may not be savable now even with expansion but they certainly cannot afford to pass on the teams which best allow them to make a network.
I truly believe the B12 is following the BIG model and not the ACC model. Fan votes, while insulting and frustrating, will not be the deciding factor. But I agree with your point that suddenly a ton of UConn critics seemed to have materialized. The nice thing about money is... it speaks for itself.
I just have just one comment on TCU.
Prior to its Big 12 invitation, TCU had more success as an athletic program than Texas A&M had as a Big 12 member. Remember, TCU was on its way to joining the Big East (which at that time was an AQ conference). ESPN saw TCU as an excellent replacement for Texas A&M without causing the conference to lose any revenue. The situation was basically a very good athletic program replacing one that was leaving.
As for what UConn or any of the other expansion candidates bring, that has been the on-going debate on Big 12 message boards. Fans of AAC schools seem to have no problem chiming in to defend their school. They have no problem claiming their school would be the best fit for the conference.
Our current 13 year, $2.6 billion contracts with ABC/ESPN and Fox are for a 10 school league. Those contracts are set to expire in 2024-2025.
With NCAA deregulation of CCG rules, the Big 12 can now have a conference championship game if it chooses to do so.
ESPN and Fox have given no indication the Big 12 contracts would be renegotiated if more schools are brought in. Therein lies the problem. That would mean the current members would have to agree to take a loss in revenue for the remainder of the contract period in order to subsidize the new members.
The discussion of having a Big 12 Conference network is just that at this point. Texas has given no indication that it is willing to give up its $300 million/20 year deal with ESPN and ESPN has already gone on record in saying that it has a special partnership with Texas and it doesn't see that changing. The Longhorn Network is expected to turn a profit this year.
The other thing that complicates the situation is the fact that Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech and Baylor have separate Tier 3 media deals with Fox. West Virginia, Kansas and Kansas State have monetized their Tier 3 rights in other ways. They would all have to wait until their contracts expire before a conference network could even be discussed or realized.
By the way, it is not likely the Big 12 would go beyond 12 if the administrators do decide to expand.