Big XII Expansion 2024+

[Kolumbo]

Avoid the temptation of


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.


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.

I don't understand how the numbers are set if people are constantly cancelling cable. Where is all this money coming from? If the big 12 and ACC are each getting half, why are they even getting that much if the GOR is keeping them hostage?

 

[Fishy]

I don't understand how the numbers are set if people are constantly cancelling cable. Where is all this money coming from? If the big 12 and ACC are each getting half, why are they even getting that much if the GOR is keeping them hostage?

I feel like you have a poor handle on this. The conferences have contracts that pay them for their broadcast rights. Those payments are fixed in the contract - the Big East gets a set amount of money from Fox no matter if one person or a million watches.

In order to sell these broadcast rights, some conferences have to sign a grant of rights so that the network partner has certainty of the conference’s make up during the contract period. In the ACC’s case, they all signed a grant of rights to induce ESPN into forming an ACC Network - they figured that would be their answer to the Big Ten network, but it has not worked out that way. They really thought their contract was amazing when they signed it.

And these people not canceling cable and moving to caves. They’re moving to streaming services, but those services are still acting as carriers. Like, I canceled Optimum, but I still pay YouTubeTV for television. There’s still money coming into ESPN and Fox….

 

[TheCatsLair]

The Big 12 is getting raided right now if they stayed at 8 teams instead of adding Cincinnati, BYU, Houston and UCF. The only reason the Big 12 is in position to grab the Pac-12 schools is because of their new TV deal and the Big 12 would not have gotten that deal if they expanded with the Four Corner schools to get to 12 because the Four Corner schools do not have the football cache of the incoming Big 12 schools nor the East Coast penetration.

 

[UConnJim]

And these people not canceling cable and moving to caves. They’re moving to streaming services, but those services are still acting as carriers. Like, I canceled Optimum, but I still pay YouTubeTV for television. There’s still money coming into ESPN and Fox….

ESPN subscribers on traditional cable carriers and services like YouTubeTV are included in ESPN's subscriber numbers. Households with ESPN peaked at 100.1 million and it is down to ~74 million today and still declining. How has ESPN managed to offset the subscriber declines? Price increases and the launch of ESPN+, although ESPN+ produces big losses currently.

 

[Kolumbo]

The Big 12 is getting raided right now if they stayed at 8 teams instead of adding Cincinnati, BYU, Houston and UCF. The only reason the Big 12 is in position to grab the Pac-12 schools is because of their new TV deal and the Big 12 would not have gotten that deal if they expanded with the Four Corner schools to get to 12 because the Four Corner schools do not have the football cache of the incoming Big 12 schools nor the East Coast penetration.

 

[Slasher]

Utah has been good. The other three have been mediocre (Az State) to awful (Arizona, Colorado.)

 

[Echo Hawk]

I'm amused by the useless eaters in these conferences who are there to be doormats not bell cows. (BC, Rutgers, Northwestern to name just a few). They play that role and get their cut year in and year out. None of this makes sense to me. The trick is to get the gig.

 

[TheCatsLair]

Over the last 20 years, Cincinnati has been to the Orange, Sugar, and Peach Bowl and the CFP, Houston has been to the Peach Bowl and recently beat Auburn in a Bowl game, UCF during that stretch has been to two Fiesta Bowl and a Peach Bowl and beat Auburn, BYU has a national championship in its history. All three have had nationally ranked programs at some point in the last 3 years.

Outside of Utah's recent run and Fiesta Bowl run, which is not any better, and arguably not as good, as Cincinnati's back-to-back years of a Peach Bowl and CFP as well as the Sugar and Orange Bowls, what have Arizona, Arizona State and Colorado done that makes you laugh and spit up your water? Colorado has the same number of national championships as BYU and both titles came in the same time span, BYU's in '84 and Colorado's in '90.

I think people look at conferences and just assume that those schools are better than the Big 12 schools because they see Pac-12 beside their name.

 

[TheCatsLair]

Over the last 20 years, Cincinnati has been to the Orange, Sugar, and Peach Bowl and the CFP, Houston has been to the Peach Bowl and recently beat Auburn in a Bowl game, UCF during that stretch has been to two Fiesta Bowl and a Peach Bowl and beat Auburn, BYU has a national championship in its history. All three have had nationally ranked programs at some point in the last 3 years.

Outside of Utah's recent run and Fiesta Bowl run, which is not any better, and arguably not as good, as Cincinnati's back-to-back years of a Peach Bowl and CFP as well as the Sugar and Orange Bowls, what have Arizona, Arizona State and Colorado done that makes you laugh and spit up your water? Colorado has the same number of national championships as BYU and both titles came in the same time span, BYU's in '84 and Colorado's in '90.

I think people look at conferences and just assume that those schools are better than the Big 12 schools because they see Pac-12 beside their name.

When looking at seasons ending with double-digit wins and a national ranking it is even more glaring. During that same stretch Arizona has had ONE double-digit winning season and ONE ranked season, the same with Colorado. Arizona State had four such seasons.

In comparison Cincinnati had 8 of those seasons (along with four 9 win seasons), BYU had 7 of those seasons, UCF had 6 double-digit winning seasons and five ranked seasons, Houston had 5 double-digit winning seasons with 3 of them finishing nationally ranked. Also keep in mind that besides for Cincinnati's early run in the Big East these were done in non-power conferences without power conference resources. Utah had 10 of those seasons and even then Cincinnati's run is still comparable to Utah's despite Utah spended twice as much time in a power conference as Cincinnati and Cincinnati spending more time in the AAC than Utah did in the Mountain West during this stretch.

 

[noeynox]

Over the last 20 years, Cincinnati has been to the Orange, Sugar, and Peach Bowl and the CFP, Houston has been to the Peach Bowl and recently beat Auburn in a Bowl game, UCF during that stretch has been to two Fiesta Bowl and a Peach Bowl and beat Auburn, BYU has a national championship in its history. All three have had nationally ranked programs at some point in the last 3 years.

Outside of Utah's recent run and Fiesta Bowl run, which is not any better, and arguably not as good, as Cincinnati's back-to-back years of a Peach Bowl and CFP as well as the Sugar and Orange Bowls, what have Arizona, Arizona State and Colorado done that makes you laugh and spit up your water? Colorado has the same number of national championships as BYU and both titles came in the same time span, BYU's in '84 and Colorado's in '90.

I think people look at conferences and just assume that those schools are better than the Big 12 schools because they see Pac-12 beside their name.

Wait a minute, you give BYU credit for having a national championship in their history but not Colorado and Arizona? And their's is more recent? You cherry picking here son.

 

[TheCatsLair]

Wait a minute, you give BYU credit for having a national championship in their history but not Colorado and Arizona? And their's is more recent? You cherry picking here son.

It says in my post, the one that you quoted, that Colorado and BYU have the same number of championships in the same time span and I even listed the years each school won their national championship. Arizona football has never won a national championship.

 

[UConnJim]

When looking at seasons ending with double-digit wins and a national ranking it is even more glaring. During that same stretch Arizona has had ONE double-digit winning season and ONE ranked season, the same with Colorado. Arizona State had four such seasons.

In comparison Cincinnati had 8 of those seasons (along with four 9 win seasons), BYU had 7 of those seasons, UCF had 6 double-digit winning seasons and five ranked seasons, Houston had 5 double-digit winning seasons with 3 of them finishing nationally ranked. Also keep in mind that besides for Cincinnati's early run in the Big East these were done in non-power conferences without power conference resources. Utah had 10 of those seasons and even then Cincinnati's run is still comparable to Utah's despite Utah spended twice as much time in a power conference as Cincinnati and Cincinnati spending more time in the AAC than Utah did in the Mountain West during this stretch.

I think the new schools going to the Big 12 will be in for an awakening as the competition will be much harder week in and week out. Don't get me wrong, the AAC was a good football conference, but clearly a step down from the P5 conferences. Part of the reason Cincinnati was so successful is that they didn't play many P5 teams. Look at the comparison of 2 schools we know well that had almost identical Sagarin ratings and ranks although one had a worse record:

Cincinnati ranked #48, Sagarin rating of 74.73, record 9-4, schedule rank = 73
West Virginia ranked #49, Sagarin rating of 74.44, record 5-7, schedule rank = 11

If Cincinnati played WVU's schedule do you think they would have finished the season at 9-4?

Sagarin schedule rank over past 10 years:

Cincinnati = 80.3 (toughest = 67)
West Virginia = 25.8 (toughest = 8)

Some other metrics:

Cincinnati record over the past 10 years against current P5 schools excluding the new additions to the Big 12: 11-12

Cincinnati bowl record over the past 10 years: 2-6

Fickell knew that repeating his performance at Cincinnati over his tenure when they moved to the Big 12 would be very difficult and decided to move on.

UCF? 11-13 against the P5 in the last 10 years.

Houston? 10-9 against the P5 in the last 10 years.

 

[TheCatsLair]

I think the new schools going to the Big 12 will be in for an awakening as the competition will be much harder week in and week out. Don't get me wrong, the AAC was a good football conference, but clearly a step down from the P5 conferences. Part of the reason Cincinnati was so successful is that they didn't play many P5 teams. Look at the comparison of 2 schools we know well that had almost identical Sagarin ratings and ranks although one had a worse record:

Cincinnati ranked #48, Sagarin rating of 74.73, record 9-4, schedule rank = 73
West Virginia ranked #49, Sagarin rating of 74.44, record 5-7, schedule rank = 11

If Cincinnati played WVU's schedule do you think they would have finished the season at 9-4?

Sagarin schedule rank over past 10 years:

Cincinnati = 80.3 (toughest = 67)
West Virginia = 25.8 (toughest = 8)

Some other metrics:

Cincinnati record over the past 10 years against current P5 schools excluding the new additions to the Big 12: 11-12

Cincinnati bowl record over the past 10 years: 2-6

Fickell knew that repeating his performance at Cincinnati over his tenure when they moved to the Big 12 would be very difficult and decided to move on.

UCF? 11-13 against the P5 in the last 10 years.

Houston? 10-9 against the P5 in the last 10 years.

True, but their resources and recruiting will also increase greatly. You saw how it helped Cincinnati, TCU and Utah when they moved into power conferences. So I always felt that comparing the schedules of a G5 and a P5 was severely flawed. Would Cincinnati have a 9-4 record with West Virginia's schedule? Possibly, if you they had the Big 12 money and resources. Unlike West Virginia, Cincinnati is in the middle of an elite recruiting hotbed. Also you're missing the point of the original post. The four new Big 12 schools have strong football cache compared to the Four Corner schools. Bowl records really don't matter considering many players don't play and it is more or less an exhibition, and records against P5 when you're a G5 kind of proves the point. Those are pretty good records when your school is working on a 6 to 7 million dollar per year budget compared to a 40 million dollar budget.


Also from all reports Luke Fickell was a Big Ten guy so he likely left because it was a top Big Ten job. He actually signed an extension last year it just so happened that the Wisconsin job opened up. Cincinnati excelled when they moved into a conference like the Big East and even though it's stronger Cincinnati will likely excel in the Big 12 now that they can recruit Ohio with a P5 tag and resources, the same goes for Houston and UCF. But I think that the new schools will be fine because unlike most G5 schools they attempted to act like a P5 school and have a strong foundation to build on.

 

[dayooper]

True, but their resources and recruiting will also increase greatly. You saw how it helped Cincinnati, TCU and Utah when they moved into power conferences. So I always felt that comparing the schedules of a G5 and a P5 was severely flawed. Would Cincinnati have a 9-4 record with West Virginia's schedule? Possibly, if you they had the Big 12 money and resources. Unlike West Virginia, Cincinnati is in the middle of an elite recruiting hotbed. Also you're missing the point of the original post. The four new Big 12 schools have strong football cache compared to the Four Corner schools. Bowl records really don't matter considering many players don't play and it is more or less an exhibition, and records against P5 when you're a G5 kind of proves the point. Those are pretty good records when your school is working on a 6 to 7 million dollar per year budget compared to a 40 million dollar budget.


Also from all reports Luke Fickell was a Big Ten guy so he likely left because it was a top Big Ten job. He actually signed an extension last year it just so happened that the Wisconsin job opened up. Cincinnati excelled when they moved into a conference like the Big East and even though it's stronger Cincinnati will likely excel in the Big 12 now that they can recruit Ohio with a P5 tag and resources, the same goes for Houston and UCF. But I think that the new schools will be fine because unlike most G5 schools they attempted to act like a P5 school and have a strong foundation to build on.

Everything in college athletics is coach related. If you find and keep top coaches, you will do well. Alabama was not as an elite program before Saban. OSU has dropped a little since Meyer left. Florida, FSU, USC, Oklahoma, Notre Dame and Michigan are all traditional football schools and can’t do squat without a great coach. Texas hasn’t had a great coach since when and they haven’t done anything in how long?

Even the non blue blood schools that have had a bit of success over the past decade have done so with a coach that fits their culture and stays. Okie State, Mich State all has/had great success (MSU winning the Big10 and even making the playoffs) but how long does it last? MSU is starting to struggle without Dantonio and how will Okie St do when Gundy calls it quits?

I really like Cinci and hope they do well. They do have challenges, though. While I understand that Cincinnati is kind of a separate entity apart from the rest of Ohio, they will never replace or even come close to OSU as top dog in the state. They are stuck in between the Big10 and SEC regions and are entering a league that just lost their top dogs as far as name recognition and draw.

The biggest issue Cinci has to overcome is how will they replace Fickle (arguably the best coach they have ever had). If they can replace him, they will do very well. If not? No amount of recruiting hotbeds and income will help and they will find the going much tougher in the Big12 than the AAC.

 

[TheCatsLair]

Everything in college athletics is coach related. If you find and keep top coaches, you will do well. Alabama was not as an elite program before Saban. OSU has dropped a little since Meyer left. Florida, FSU, USC, Oklahoma, Notre Dame and Michigan are all traditional football schools and can’t do squat without a great coach. Texas hasn’t had a great coach since when and they haven’t done anything in how long?

Even the non blue blood schools that have had a bit of success over the past decade have done so with a coach that fits their culture and stays. Okie State, Mich State all has/had great success (MSU winning the Big10 and even making the playoffs) but how long does it last? MSU is starting to struggle without Dantonio and how will Okie St do when Gundy calls it quits?

I really like Cinci and hope they do well. They do have challenges, though. While I understand that Cincinnati is kind of a separate entity apart from the rest of Ohio, they will never replace or even come close to OSU as top dog in the state. They are stuck in between the Big10 and SEC regions and are entering a league that just lost their top dogs as far as name recognition and draw.

The biggest issue Cinci has to overcome is how will they replace Fickle (arguably the best coach they have ever had). If they can replace him, they will do very well. If not? No amount of recruiting hotbeds and income will help and they will find the going much tougher in the Big12 than the AAC.

I agree, I look at Cincinnati as being in a similar situation as Michigan State in Michigan. The difference is Cincinnati has done well without Ohio State and the Big Ten. Still, name recognition aside, the Big 12 signing a huge deal with great exposure and putting a team in the national championship game negates a ton of that issue. Coaching hasn't been an issue at Cincinnati, during that 20 year stretch they have had Mark Dantonio, Brian Kelly, Butch Jones and Luke Fickell. Even Scott Satterfield is a really good coach, he had Louisville ranked in the Top 25 last season. The Big 12 will be interesting to say the least. It is the only "blue collar" P5 conference.

 

[Rufus]

Cincinnati has a lot working against it. If you look at football historically, it’s not a top program. The Bearcats were founding members of the MAC and played MAC level football for decades. In fact, Miami (Ohio) is still to this day an annual rivalry game and UC plays every other year at Miami’s small MAC stadium.

UC has a weak Olympic sports program. One of the worst, if not the worst, in the P5. They have had great basketball teams, but outside of that and a recent stretch in football, they have no legacy.

Fans in the state of Ohio don’t really care about UC outside of the immediate Cincinnati area. Granted, they had the most interest the last few years, but only because Ohio State’s darling Luke Fickell was the coach. He’s gone now. Ohio State will never see UC as competition. In fact, you never even see the teams play home and home. Once in awhile, OSU sends UC money to come play at the Shoe just like MAC teams, but that’s it. OSU basketball never plays at UC.

Now having said all of that, none of it matters. UC won because they are in the Big 12 now. They caught lightning in a bottle with Luke Fickell and ended up in the best conference they ever could hope for. Maybe they can improve competitively with more money. Maybe not. It really doesn’t matter because UC is a winner in the game of conference realignment and that’s all that matters.

 

[dayooper]

I agree, I look at Cincinnati as being in a similar situation as Michigan State in Michigan. The difference is Cincinnati has done well without Ohio State and the Big Ten. Still, name recognition aside, the Big 12 signing a huge deal with great exposure and putting a team in the national championship game negates a ton of that issue. Coaching hasn't been an issue at Cincinnati, during that 20 year stretch they have had Mark Dantonio, Brian Kelly, Butch Jones and Luke Fickell. Even Scott Satterfield is a really good coach, he had Louisville ranked in the Top 25 last season. The Big 12 will be interesting to say the least. It is the only "blue collar" P5 conference.

Michigan and Michigan State a very unique dichotomy in the state. U of M is the flagship school and the most recognized brand nationally (and internationally as well) MSU has more alumni living in Michigan. Only 25% of the student population at Michigan is actually from the state of Michigan while just short of 75% of MSU students are instate. In the large suburban populations of SE Michigan, MSU has more fans than Michigan does. Almost all of MSU alumni would never root for Michigan and vice versa. We are rivals to the core.

I could be wrong, but I would guess that there isn’t the hatred between OSU and Cinci. I would go further and say that many Cinci alumni are also OSU fans and many OSU alumni/fans don’t put Cinci on their radar. Honestly, after Michigan, I couldn’t tell you who is OSU’s rivals. I don’t think it’s Cinci, though.

As far as coaches go, you have had some good coaches, but they all have gone on to bigger things. In fact, every one has gone on to either the Big10, SEC or Notre Dame. You have to keep those coaches and not let them get away.

 

[dayooper]

@TheCatsLair I think you should be excited and predicting you could compete for the Big12 championship/more! I would if I were in your shoes. I believe Cinci does belong in the Big12, more so than many schools steady in the P5.

 

[Slasher]

I think the new schools going to the Big 12 will be in for an awakening as the competition will be much harder week in and week out. Don't get me wrong, the AAC was a good football conference, but clearly a step down from the P5 conferences. Part of the reason Cincinnati was so successful is that they didn't play many P5 teams. Look at the comparison of 2 schools we know well that had almost identical Sagarin ratings and ranks although one had a worse record:

Cincinnati ranked #48, Sagarin rating of 74.73, record 9-4, schedule rank = 73
West Virginia ranked #49, Sagarin rating of 74.44, record 5-7, schedule rank = 11

If Cincinnati played WVU's schedule do you think they would have finished the season at 9-4?

Sagarin schedule rank over past 10 years:

Cincinnati = 80.3 (toughest = 67)
West Virginia = 25.8 (toughest = 8)

Some other metrics:

Cincinnati record over the past 10 years against current P5 schools excluding the new additions to the Big 12: 11-12

Cincinnati bowl record over the past 10 years: 2-6

Fickell knew that repeating his performance at Cincinnati over his tenure when they moved to the Big 12 would be very difficult and decided to move on.

UCF? 11-13 against the P5 in the last 10 years.

Houston? 10-9 against the P5 in the last 10 years.

This is a super lazy narrative. G5 schools are typically on the short end of the stick when it comes to games against P5. Most of them are on the road and typically they're schools with huge fanbases/resources because you're a buy game.

Who did Cincinnati play in that 11-12 record?
@ Arkansas, Indiana, @Indiana, @NotreDame, UCLA, @UCLA, @Ohio State (x2), @Michigan, @Purdue, Purdue, @Illinois

Bowl games: Boston College (W), Virginia Tech (W), Georgia (L), Alabama (L), Louisville (L)

So Cincinnati played 9 true road games and had 3 home games. They've played at the two B1G heavyweights at Notre Dame and at Arkansas. How many teams win a lot of those games?

In bowls they played Georgia and Alabama, beat BC and VT and lost to Louisville with no coaches.

 

[UConnJim]

True, but their resources and recruiting will also increase greatly. You saw how it helped Cincinnati, TCU and Utah when they moved into power conferences. So I always felt that comparing the schedules of a G5 and a P5 was severely flawed. Would Cincinnati have a 9-4 record with West Virginia's schedule? Possibly, if you they had the Big 12 money and resources. Unlike West Virginia, Cincinnati is in the middle of an elite recruiting hotbed. Also you're missing the point of the original post. The four new Big 12 schools have strong football cache compared to the Four Corner schools. Bowl records really don't matter considering many players don't play and it is more or less an exhibition, and records against P5 when you're a G5 kind of proves the point. Those are pretty good records when your school is working on a 6 to 7 million dollar per year budget compared to a 40 million dollar budget.


Also from all reports Luke Fickell was a Big Ten guy so he likely left because it was a top Big Ten job. He actually signed an extension last year it just so happened that the Wisconsin job opened up. Cincinnati excelled when they moved into a conference like the Big East and even though it's stronger Cincinnati will likely excel in the Big 12 now that they can recruit Ohio with a P5 tag and resources, the same goes for Houston and UCF. But I think that the new schools will be fine because unlike most G5 schools they attempted to act like a P5 school and have a strong foundation to build on.

Look, it's great that Cincinnati got a ticket out of the AAC to the Big 12, but you are not correct.

First, we'll start with spending. Cincinnati is like UConn - high institutional subsidies. In FY 2020 and FY 2021, Cincinnati had institutional subsidies of $30.4 million and $27.1 million respectively. And, that is with underfunding Olympic sports. So, the $20 million increase in revenues from the Big 12 and the increase in travel costs will still leave Cincinnati requiring institutional subsidies. It's not clear how much additional funds are going to be available for investing unless they continue the high subsidies.

We have two recent examples of schools moving from the G5 to P5, Utah and TCU and one example of a school that moved to the Big 12, West Virginia. All three were doing well before moving conferences. Their first 2 season conference records? Utah: 4-5 and 3-6. TCU: 4-5 and 2-7. WVU: 4-5 and 2-7. Expect some rough first seasons.

And you say the 4 new adds to the Big 12 have more "football cache" than the Four Corner schools? Here are the all time football winning percentage ranks and all-time top 25 rankings:

Four Corners:
24. Arizona State (17)
27. Utah (11)
44. Colorado (20)
56. Arizona (7)

Four Big 12 adds:
34. BYU (19)
52. UCF (5)
63. Houston (15)
74. Cincinnati (8)

When I look at the list of schools, I would rank the top 4 football schools as Arizona St., Utah, BYU, and Colorado which is 3 of the 4 Corner schools.

 

[Kolumbo]

Over the last 20 years, Cincinnati has been to the Orange, Sugar, and Peach Bowl and the CFP, Houston has been to the Peach Bowl and recently beat Auburn in a Bowl game, UCF during that stretch has been to two Fiesta Bowl and a Peach Bowl and beat Auburn, BYU has a national championship in its history. All three have had nationally ranked programs at some point in the last 3 years.

Outside of Utah's recent run and Fiesta Bowl run, which is not any better, and arguably not as good, as Cincinnati's back-to-back years of a Peach Bowl and CFP as well as the Sugar and Orange Bowls, what have Arizona, Arizona State and Colorado done that makes you laugh and spit up your water? Colorado has the same number of national championships as BYU and both titles came in the same time span, BYU's in '84 and Colorado's in '90.

I think people look at conferences and just assume that those schools are better than the Big 12 schools because they see Pac-12 beside their name.

The 4 corner schools are better schools and better brands. They may not have had the same recent success (I haven't looked up their records) and I give AAC programs all the credit in the world, but to say the AAC programs have cache while the 4 corners don't is just silly. They've been playing in the PAC 12 against USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington. Whatever the difference, there was a difference between P5 and G5. The PAC 12 top to bottom is much better than the AAC.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Look, it's great that Cincinnati got a ticket out of the AAC to the Big 12, but you are not correct.

First, we'll start with spending. Cincinnati is like UConn - high institutional subsidies. In FY 2020 and FY 2021, Cincinnati had institutional subsidies of $30.4 million and $27.1 million respectively. And, that is with underfunding Olympic sports. So, the $20 million increase in revenues from the Big 12 and the increase in travel costs will still leave Cincinnati requiring institutional subsidies. It's not clear how much additional funds are going to be available for investing unless they continue the high subsidies.

We have two recent examples of schools moving from the G5 to P5, Utah and TCU and one example of a school that moved to the Big 12, West Virginia. All three were doing well before moving conferences. Their first 2 season conference records? Utah: 4-5 and 3-6. TCU: 4-5 and 2-7. WVU: 4-5 and 2-7. Expect some rough first seasons.

And you say the 4 new adds to the Big 12 have more "football cache" than the Four Corner schools? Here are the all time football winning percentage ranks and all-time top 25 rankings:

Four Corners:
24. Arizona State (17)
27. Utah (11)
44. Colorado (20)
56. Arizona (7)

Four Big 12 adds:
34. BYU (19)
52. UCF (5)
63. Houston (15)
74. Cincinnati (8)

When I look at the list of schools, I would rank the top 4 football schools as Arizona St., Utah, BYU, and Colorado which is 3 of the 4 Corner schools.

Not sure why you are brining subsidies into this? The bottom line is that the schools moving into the Big12 have better positioned themselves on and off the field. As said above, if they have the right coaches, they can compete very nicely. They will make more money in the long run. A very nice cycle of positivism. We all wish UConn was in a similar situation.

 

[WestHartHusk]

It must suck so much to be UNM and hear about the “4C” schools.

 

[Slasher]

Look, it's great that Cincinnati got a ticket out of the AAC to the Big 12, but you are not correct.

First, we'll start with spending. Cincinnati is like UConn - high institutional subsidies. In FY 2020 and FY 2021, Cincinnati had institutional subsidies of $30.4 million and $27.1 million respectively. And, that is with underfunding Olympic sports. So, the $20 million increase in revenues from the Big 12 and the increase in travel costs will still leave Cincinnati requiring institutional subsidies. It's not clear how much additional funds are going to be available for investing unless they continue the high subsidies.

We have two recent examples of schools moving from the G5 to P5, Utah and TCU and one example of a school that moved to the Big 12, West Virginia. All three were doing well before moving conferences. Their first 2 season conference records? Utah: 4-5 and 3-6. TCU: 4-5 and 2-7. WVU: 4-5 and 2-7. Expect some rough first seasons.

And you say the 4 new adds to the Big 12 have more "football cache" than the Four Corner schools? Here are the all time football winning percentage ranks and all-time top 25 rankings:

Four Corners:
24. Arizona State (17)
27. Utah (11)
44. Colorado (20)
56. Arizona (7)

Four Big 12 adds:
34. BYU (19)
52. UCF (5)
63. Houston (15)
74. Cincinnati (8)

When I look at the list of schools, I would rank the top 4 football schools as Arizona St., Utah, BYU, and Colorado which is 3 of the 4 Corner schools.

You lost me at "travel costs." Have you looked at the AAC?

Cincinnati plays in Houston, Dallas, Oklahoma, Philadelphia, two cities in Florida, Louisiana, Memphis.
In the Big 12 they play in Houston, Dallas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, one city in Florida, Kansas and Iowa. Not sure how that is worse at all. Very occasionally they'll play in Utah. Conference tourney in KC instead of Fort Worth (KC is a lot closer.)

 

[UConnJim]

Not sure why you are brining subsidies into this? The bottom line is that the schools moving into the Big12 have better positioned themselves on and off the field. As said above, if they have the right coaches, they can compete very nicely. They will make more money in the long run. A very nice cycle of positivism. We all wish UConn was in a similar situation.

Why bring in subsidies? Because people are saying that Cincy will be able to invest more in athletics when the administration is saying they want to reduce the subsidy. Thus, how can Cincy invest more in athletics if the conference money goes to reducing the deficit?