Big XII Expansion 2024+

[TheCatsLair]

I don't believe that The Big 12 ever looked East because of the markets, but instead looked to where all of the movement was happening. First during the destruction of The BE2.0 by ESPN/ACC Raids they were able to grab WVU. They desperately needed a name football program to replace one of the 3 departing schools going to The SEC and B1G. The second time was after The B1G grabbed UMD and was pushing hard for UNC and UVA. The Big 12 believed, and maybe accurately, that FSU and Clemson might fall in their lap. We all know what happened with Louisville to The ACC and their eventual GOR.

Through all this time no one believed that The PAC was a potential target for realignment. They were viewed as safe due to their geography, homogeneous membership, and long history together. It took an 800 LB Gorilla with a chainsaw for a **** to destroy that narrative. Prior to The B1G cutting the heart out of The PAC, people discussed the idea of The PAC grabbing the best of The Big 12 to potentially go to 16 Teams and get TV Windows in another time zone. JMO but had The B1G preceded The SEC in making their move by grabbing USC/UCLA first, The 8 Team Big 12 would have likely approached the 10 Team PAC regarding a potential merger, scheduling agreement or one side or the other would have attempted to poach from the other. I know you disagree, but there is no chance in Hell that The Big 12 is taking UCF, Cincy, BYU, and UH if UA, ASU, CU, and UU were on the table.

You're wrong, because Fox told the Big 12 to take those schools because of these markets. They would have just told the Big 12 to also grab Arizona, ASU, Colorado and Utah because they wanted markets on the East coast to pair with the Big Ten. And the Big 12 schools wanted markets and geographical partners for West Virginia. Bowlsby has been saying that for years, that's why Cincinnati and UCF were always on their radar, and that's why the Big 12 never looked to expand West until Brett Yormark arrived. The Big 12 would be in a similar situation as the Pac-12 if they did not add Eastern markets and then lost West Virginia.

 

[HuskyHawk]

You're wrong, because Fox told the Big 12 to take those schools because of these markets. They would have just told the Big 12 to also grab Arizona, ASU, Colorado and Utah because they wanted markets on the East coast to pair with the Big Ten. And the Big 12 schools wanted markets and geographical partners for West Virginia. Bowlsby has been saying that for years, that's why Cincinnati and UCF were always on their radar, and that's why the Big 12 never looked to expand West until Brett Yormark arrived. The Big 12 would be in a similar situation as the Pac-12 if they did not add Eastern markets and then lost West Virginia.

That's nonsense. Nobody cares about markets anymore. It's functionally obsolete. They took them because they needed inventory and that was the best that was available. I'm sure Fox was consulted. Had the Big XII or Fox thought they could take ASU, UA, Utah and Colorado, those recent additions wouldn't have happened. Nobody takes BYU over Utah. The Big XII has wanted the Arizona schools for decades, and always wanted Colorado back. But the Pac schools were arrogant and believed that they were in a much better conference than the Big XII, so they'd never have considered a move.

 

[Rufus]

Nobody cares about markets anymore? I think the B1G would disagree with that statement.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Nobody cares about markets anymore? I think the B1G would disagree with that statement.

Then you misunderstand why they wanted USC and UCLA. It's about brands and national following. Which teams get people to watch when it isn't their team. That's the test. Do you watch Penn State vs USC when you find it on? Over on CBS you've got Bama vs Auburn. Only one of those four is in a big market but they all get people to watch. OU vs Mississippi won't bring any big markets, but it will bring more eyeballs than Houston vs Temple, which has two big markets.

They used to think markets, and made mistakes like Rutgers and Maryland.

 

[UCFBfan]

It doesn't need to be. As long as they can get a deal with ESPN for about 170 million per year for the league, Oregon and Washington can probably both snag about 33 million under unequal revenue.

This is the problem though. ESPN or any of the networks don't want to spend any cash on this conference. It's the late window with bad ratings. In a time when companies are shedding employees, why would ESPN throw money at the PAC? They could just let it die on the vine and see what comes next. I see zero reason for ESPN to do anything. They have massive money invested in the SEC and money in the ACC. Fox is all in on the B1G and Big 12. The PAC is praying a streaming service will pay but I just don't see the return. Streaming companies are starting to have to tighten budgets now as well. They missed the boat and there's no one out there to pay up. UCLA and USC saw this and got out of Dodge.

Like Fishy said, mayhem will likely ensue once the TV numbers are announced. No one in the PAC is going to want to look like the ACC and their undervalued deal.

 

[CL82]

Then you misunderstand why they wanted USC and UCLA. It's about brands and national following. Which teams get people to watch when it isn't their team. That's the test. Do you watch Penn State vs USC when you find it on? Over on CBS you've got Bama vs Auburn. Only one of those four is in a big market but they all get people to watch. OU vs Mississippi won't bring any big markets, but it will bring more eyeballs than Houston vs Temple, which has two big markets.

They used to think markets, and made mistakes like Rutgers and Maryland.

Respectfully, when Rutgers and Maryland were taken, markets did matter. Respectfully, when Rutgers and Maryland were taken, markets did matter. They may still to a certain extent, but the biggest prizes are now off the table.

 

[UCFBfan]

Then you misunderstand why they wanted USC and UCLA. It's about brands and national following. Which teams get people to watch when it isn't their team. That's the test. Do you watch Penn State vs USC when you find it on? Over on CBS you've got Bama vs Auburn. Only one of those four is in a big market but they all get people to watch. OU vs Mississippi won't bring any big markets, but it will bring more eyeballs than Houston vs Temple, which has two big markets.

They used to think markets, and made mistakes like Rutgers and Maryland.

At the time of Rutgers and Maryland joining, it wasn't a mistake to play the markets game. At the time it was all about cable boxes and Rutgers brought a ton in. The B1G network was added to a ton of homes. So back then it was a shrewd move.

In today's world, your first paragraph is spot on.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Respectfully, when Rutgers and Maryland were taken, markets did matter. Respectfully, when Rutgers and Maryland were taken, markets did matter. They may still to a certain extent, but the biggest prizes are now off the table.

At the time of Rutgers and Maryland joining, it wasn't a mistake to play the markets game. At the time it was all about cable boxes and Rutgers brought a ton in. The B1G network was added to a ton of homes. So back then it was a shrewd move.

In today's world, your first paragraph is spot on.

Yes, but shrewd people already knew that they soon would matter a lot less, even then. The writing was on the wall. I don't think the conferences were very tech savvy then. They are now.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Markets also matter in the sense that the big ones bring lots of alums. Lots of alums bring more donations and activation. There's a reason UConn likes to activate NYC - because it has lots of alums there. Can you imagine how many B1G alums live in Southern California? TONS! Now, most of the biggest markets are off the table, but I bet there are lots of B1G alums in FL (and other hotspots/growing markets). Markets do matter and the beauty of the way the B1G is set up, it can play the short game in some markets and the long game in others. It's good to be the king, eh?! The B1G is playing chess while the others play checkers.

 

[CL82]

Yes, but shrewd people already knew that they soon would matter a lot less, even then. The writing was on the wall. I don't think the conferences were very tech savvy then. They are now.

Yeah, I’m going to disagree with you. The addition of the NYC and DMV DMA’S was brilliant and lucrative. I suspect if Rutgers was unavailable for whatever reason that Connecticut might’ve gotten the call up. Rutgers also bordered the lucrative, Philadelphia DMA and has 9 million citizens compared to Connecticut’s 3 million citizens. In any event, the addition of Rutgers gave the Big Ten credit for 2 million of the 3 million Connecticut citizens since Fairfield county is a part of the New York DMA.

 

[Fishy]

Markets still matter.

Anyone who says otherwise is lost in space.

There’s a line of thought that streaming has made markets irrelevant, but no one has figured out how to make money through streaming and linear television is still paying the bills.

That’s why the Big Ten targeted Los Angeles and why the PAC12 is looking at San Diego State and not Boise.

 

[Rufus]

There are still millions of cable subscribers in California that will now have BTN on their basic cable lineup.

 

[Exit 4]

Markets still matter.

Anyone who says otherwise is lost in space.

There’s a line of thought that streaming has made markets irrelevant, but no one has figured out how to make money through streaming and linear television is still paying the bills.

That’s why the Big Ten targeted Los Angeles and why the PAC12 is looking at San Diego State and not Boise.

There is that on the top line.....and then somewhere also hovering over this is the fact that the core of the PAC still views itself as academically elite and ergo remains rather dismissive of lower schools like Boise. SDST is apparently a much better academic match as well as a better market.

The reason I think the PAC-ACC merger will at least get some serious evaluation by many on both coasts is because schools like Cal/Stanford/Washington like the idea of associating with UVA/Duke/UNC/GT much more than TCU/Kansas St/Iowa St. etc.

Now it might never come together for a host of reasons like Washington refusing to sign a GOR (when its waiting on the B1G) and ESPN not willing to write the check, etc etc. But I think the idea of it being a better collective academic profile fit will have many giving it a deep look.

And really we could just split the PAC now; Washington/Oregon/Cal/Stanford/Utah to the ACC as a new pod, the rest to the B12. And then its done- the P5 melted into the P4 as we all thought would happen eventually.

 

[CL82]

There is that on the top line.....and then somewhere also hovering over this is the fact that the core of the PAC still views itself as academically elite and ergo remains rather dismissive of lower schools like Boise. SDST is apparently a much better academic match as well as a better market.

The reason I think the PAC-ACC merger will at least get some serious evaluation by many on both coasts is because schools like Cal/Stanford/Washington like the idea of associating with UVA/Duke/UNC/GT much more than TCU/Kansas St/Iowa St. etc.

Now it might never come together for a host of reasons like Washington refusing to sign a GOR (when its waiting on the B1G) and ESPN not willing to write the check, etc etc. But I think the idea of it being a better collective academic profile fit will have many giving it a deep look.

And really we could just split the PAC now; Washington/Oregon/Cal/Stanford/Utah to the ACC as a new pod, the rest to the B12. And then it’s done- the P5 melted into the P4 as we all thought would happen eventually.

I can’t see why anyone would pay more by virtue of the merger when you could get both pieces of it for less money now without a merger.

 

[Exit 4]

I can’t see why anyone would pay more by virtue of the merger when you could get both pieces of it for less money now without a merger.

Yep- a good reason why the talk will go nowhere or it ends up with the pac schools taking a lower payout

 

[Fishy]

Yep- a good reason why the talk will go nowhere or it ends up with the pac schools taking a lower payout

Basically, yep.

Something will have to give….everyone will have to sign a GOR and settle for $22-23M or some teams refuse and some schools bail for the B12 and maybe something crazy like the ACC takes in some number of PAC schools and hopes that reopens their own deal.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Yeah, I’m going to disagree with you. The addition of the NYC and DMV DMA’S was brilliant and lucrative. I suspect if Rutgers was unavailable for whatever reason that Connecticut might’ve gotten the call up. Rutgers also bordered the lucrative, Philadelphia DMA and has 9 million citizens compared to Connecticut’s 3 million citizens. In any event, the addition of Rutgers gave the Big Ten credit for 2 million of the 3 million Connecticut citizens since Fairfield county is a part of the New York DMA.

Sure it still matters. It just isn't the driving factor it was. Not because cable is dead, its not, but because they got smarter about who matters in those markets. You take Rutgers not because it matters, but because the B1G has a huge alumni base in metro NY and so Michigan and Ohio State matter more there if they play locally. I also believe that the B1G schools wanted Maryland and Rutgers to increase the flow of wealthy, high SAT undergrads from those regions. It worked. Applications to schools like Indiana and Purdue from the northeast rose significantly. Ultimately, the AD is marketing. It exists to make the school attractive to applicants. BC saw a huge increase in applications from the south when they joined the ACC, and ACC schools have seen a bump in applications from New England.

I actually think one of UConn's selling points is the strong pool of good high school students with money. I guarantee you that Georgia Tech wishes more of them would consider coming to Atlanta.

 

[Rufus]

Conspiracy Theory……

What if the B1G was waiting for the proposed PAC media rights contract to be announced in order to know the flat rate they would need to pay Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal upon entering the conference? If the PAC offers 22-23 million, then the B1G knows it can offer them 24 million in the first year and sell a media rights package that includes the late night time window as long as none of the 16 current members lose any money over the duration of the contract, which is essentially the buy in period to become a full member.

 

[Exit 4]

I also believe that the B1G schools wanted Maryland and Rutgers to increase the flow of wealthy, high SAT undergrads from those regions. It worked. Applications to schools like Indiana and Purdue from the northeast rose significantly. Ultimately, the AD is marketing. It exists to make the school attractive to applicants.

I agree with this- it is working. A lot of kids here in lower FF county see B1G schools as their back up plan if they miss on their first and second choice with Ivies and sub Ivies. The conf brand for academics is on the rise. Indiana and Michigan are certainly getting plenty of kids from down here in particular.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I agree with this- it is working. A lot of kids here in lower FF county see B1G schools as their back up plan if they miss on their first and second choice with Ivies and sub Ivies. The conf brand for academics is on the rise. Indiana and Michigan are certainly getting plenty of kids from down here in particular.

My friend in Westport had his daughter graduate from IU last year. Even here in Mass I see loads of kids applying to ACC schools, Clemson is wildly popular. SEC schools on the rise too.

 

[Exit 4]

Conspiracy Theory……

What if the B1G was waiting for the proposed PAC media rights contract to be announced in order to know the flat rate they would need to pay Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal upon entering the conference? If the PAC offers 22-23 million, then the B1G knows it can offer them 24 million in the first year and sell a media rights package that includes the late night time window as long as none of the 16 current members lose any money over the duration of the contract, which is essentially the buy in period to become a full member.

Not a bad theory. Fits with the “the B1G didn’t want to be the ones that killed the PAC.” The PAC dies on its own and they they jump back in to get two more schools- albeit at a discount.

Of course the B1G really did have a very large hand in killing the PAC- just did it in an indirect manner.

 

[CL82]

Sure it still matters. It just isn't the driving factor it was. Not because cable is dead, its not, but because they got smarter about who matters in those markets. You take Rutgers not because it matters, but because the B1G has a huge alumni base in metro NY and so Michigan and Ohio State matter more there if they play locally. I also believe that the B1G schools wanted Maryland and Rutgers to increase the flow of wealthy, high SAT undergrads from those regions. It worked. Applications to schools like Indiana and Purdue from the northeast rose significantly. Ultimately, the AD is marketing. It exists to make the school attractive to applicants. BC saw a huge increase in applications from the south when they joined the ACC, and ACC schools have seen a bump in applications from New England.

I actually think one of UConn's selling points is the strong pool of good high school students with money. I guarantee you that Georgia Tech wishes more of them would consider coming to Atlanta.

The Big Ten took Rutgers because it gave them the opportunity to get premium pricing for every single customer in the New York City DMA. That is a huge number.

Does the Big Ten have a lot of NYC metro alumni? I’m confident it does, but that was a collateral benefit and not the driving force of the Rutgers addition. Additional collateral benefits were a state of New Jersey population total of 9 million people and overlap into the Philadelphia market.

Pretty sure the same analysis applies to Maryland and the DMV. That is what drove those additions. Does that mean that that will be the driving force behind every addition from this point forward? Of course not.

Eventually, I would imagine what’s going to be the driving factor will be the potential for additional subscriptions to the Big Ten network. That’s an area where I think Connecticut with shine. Our fans travel and are passionate. It’s very likely that they would pay a monthly subscription fee in order to get access to Connecticut sports. We would also give Big Ten schools the ability to access their alumni base in the NYC/Boston metroplex, but that’s not a driving factor.

I strongly doubt that we get picked up by the Big Ten, though, it’s possible. I think eventually we end up in an east coast best of the rest league that may, or may not, be called the Atlantic Coast Conference.

 

[Kolumbo]

Found this at a UCF site

 

[GoConn]

Big 12 in contact with Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah as Pac-12 media rights future remains uncertain

The "Four Corners" schools may be looking elsewhere with the Pac-12 in the midst of contentious media rights negotiation

www.cbssports.com

If this does happen, the Pac 12 is done. I also think it would greatly lowers the chances of the Big 12 going after any Big East schools for basketball only as previously rumored.

I think if UConns ultimate goal is the ACC, this would help in a major way. The ACC would easily be the worst of the new P4 conferences and they would HAVE to make some sort of move - giving UConn a really really good shot.

 

[Fishy]

Would love to see us do a partnership with some of the pac 12 teams that remain if they break up. Games against Stanford and Cal would be great. Give them east coast visibility and us prestigious named schools on the schedule. Until we are in a conference we should explore all partnerships with all major conferences

Avoid the temptation of

First, I don't believe the numbers being thrown around by the B1G or SEC. Second, why should the Big 12 pay anything nominally more than the ACC at this point? It can't match the big boys. The Pac 12 is kaput. The acc is locked in at below market rates.

The numbers are set. The numbers you see are the numbers.

Sports rights fees are still strong. Networks will pay…but instead of paying six conferences as they did 15 years ago, all of it is going to essentially three conferences now. Bigger pie split three ways….and the third slice is split in half by the Big 12 and ACC.

The PAC views itself as the top academic conference
Stamford , Cal ,and Washington are some of the top Schools in the World .
Utah , Colorado , and the Arizona schools are all rising in academic importance. Even Oregon is AAU
UNLV
Boise
Tulsa
Fresno
Memphis
i don’t so

Tulane and Rice are better fits
SMU got taken because it’s a top academic school that also values athletics

Honestly, you would probably see the PAC 12 add as few teams as possible. There’s nothing in that group that is additive. If they remain intact and need inventory, SDSU and SMU. If they lose four teams, probably add UNLV and, if they have to, Fresno or Boise.