Big XII Expansion 2024+

[CTFAN4LIFE]

My new bet is the four corner schools bolt to the Big 12, and Oregon and Washington make a Pac-8 with the leftovers and SMU and SDSU (and probably St. Mary's and Gonzaga in basketball) where the two big boys get to keep an unhealthy percentage of a TV deal with ESPN.

That just doesn't feel like must-see TV.

 

[noeynox]

The PAC12 is in huge trouble.

They’re not getting a deal without a GOR and no one is signing a GOR for a streaming deal or a low-ball linear deal.

I think we are on the verge of mayhem. If you thought UConn in the American was a weird fit, wait and see what happens to Stanford and the like.

I think Stanford ends up in the B1G.

 

[Kolumbo]

Pepperdine is available.

I keep thinking about Kansas, being the only state flagship in the big 12, well, other than WVU, and being AAU to boot. Maybe Arizonas come to the big 12. It really is crazy how suddenly the big 12 is the place to be and the likes of stanford could be left flying solo. It just seems like the current pac 12 programs should be able to make it work somehow. Stanford and Cal in the Mountain West. Nice.

 

[Kolumbo]

speaking of Kansas

LOOK: Kansas football announces images of new upgrades to football facility

Construction on the upgraded facility will begin this spring.

247sports.com

 

[shizzle787]

That just doesn't feel like must-see TV.

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.

 

[Kolumbo]

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

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.

Time will tell on all of that, but there'd be minimal amounts of ratings wins due to the fact that they'd be on streaming platforms and or undesirable timeslots even if on the networks/ESPN. Not a lot of compelling content no matter how you spin it.

 

[Kolumbo]

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.

 

[Drew]

Agree they are in bad shape for getting a good deal. I contemplated a western Ivy situation, Stanford, Cal, Rice, Tulane but I ran out of other schools. Pac was always arrogant and this is what comes of it.

It would have to be a “mix” of bigger schools with less academic prestige and a higher football ceiling along with the smaller private academic schools

Stanford
Cal
Oregon State
Washington State
San Diego State
SMU
Fresno State
Rice
Tulane
Tulsa
UNLV
Boise State

Or something along those lines. But yeah- not great.

And if for some absurd reason they decided to go to 16

Memphis
UTSA
New Mexico
Colorado State

I actually think UTSA, SMU, SDSU, Fresno, UNLV could do great with the ”elevated” profile. But it means zilch to Stanford/Cal or anyone that remotely cares about academics (minus SMU).

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Sure. Considering an eastern wing goes from Maine to Miami.

Morgantown is over 500 miles away
Cincy is 700+ miles
UCF, is well, central Florida

The B1G goes from LA to NJ
its 2023 There are no true major. regional conferences
The even the “alleged “ regional Big East goes from RI to Nebraska with people lobbying for a Washington state team.
However my personal opinion is if it looks like the B12 will add us
The ACC won’t let that happen. So we should be lobbying one publicly with a back channel to the other.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

It would have to be a “mix” of bigger schools with less academic prestige and a higher football ceiling along with the smaller private academic schools

Stanford
Cal
Oregon State
Washington State
San Diego State
SMU
Fresno State
Rice
Tulane
Tulsa
UNLV
Boise State

Or something along those lines. But yeah- not great.

And if for some absurd reason they decided to go to 16

Memphis
UTSA
New Mexico
Colorado State

I actually think UTSA, SMU, SDSU, Fresno, UNLV could do great with the ”elevated” profile. But it means zilch to Stanford/Cal or anyone that remotely cares about academics (minus SMU).

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

 

[Drew]

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

Tulsa is more than palatable and does enough research (top 35 nationally) to be acceptable. They are significantly better academically than UNLV, Boise, et al

None of them are getting in so it doesn’t matter. But athletically speaking - UNLV, Fresno, Boise, Memphis have a higher ceiling than any of the remaining teams at that point IMO.

 

[HuskyHawk]

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

Assuming they lose Washington and Oregon, the question is what they do next. Is it better for UA, ASU, Colorado and Utah to join the Big XII? Probably. But that leaves Stanford and Cal on the sidelines. That's why I was thinking about a western Ivy type league of schools with huge endowments.

If UA, ASU, Colorado and Utah stay, then I think Tulane is the next best addition given the prestige and recent success at football. Is SMU a done deal?

 

[UC1995]

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

 

[Samoo]

Fresno would be an interesting addition along with Boise

Clownzano, as he is known in Portland...

 

[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