How little could/should UConn accept from the Big 12?

[SubbaBub]

I don't think that the viable candidates are offering AAC money only, but your premise is sound. Subba's analogy to a one-on-one negotiation is lunacy. There are multiple bidding parties and the alternatives to getting an invite are so unsavory that you can guarantee that the bidding will be aggressive.

But all candidates are not equal, if they were then they'd just pick them at random. Do you really think there are more than 4 viable candidates that can get 8 votes? Sure, the XII might be self destructive. The first rule of negotiation is being able to walk away from a bad deal. Now, what we currently have is beyond a bad deal, so we can take a lot, but this isn't a one time transaction. The XII doesn't want a team that is going 0-12 every year in both revenue sports, they can't pick teams that their media partners don't want if they want to maintain their relationships for later.

If your school is one of the four, then the XII has already invested in you. Maybe the last spot is a toss up, but I doubt it. BYU is a go/no based on other factors. UH is a go/no go based on what UT needs out of them politically. Cincy, UConn are the two most valuable properties, UCF/USF are trading academics for location. Memphis is not a serious candidate. Those are the six options for four spots (two isn't happening for all the reasons stated). Would the XII looking for the best academic, brand, media, value programs trade them for a measly $1M? No, the wouldn't.

You don't enter the room with your take it or leave it offer. This isn't a transaction. It's a relationship. You talk about anything and everything but the numbers. You talk about things you know you agree upon. You build that relationship. By the time you get to the numbers, they want to keep you happy as long as you are within their take it or leave range.

Remember, a partial share to start is the market benchmark. But, for how long? What other revenue avenues are left? What about new revenue sources? What about things that we care about that they may not care so much about. What kind of transition assistance can we expect, the B10 learned a lot from its PSU expansion. The XII isn't looking for Mad Max blood bag.

We may not even have to negotiate nor want to. But the idea of a zero or minimal revenue share isn't worth it. P5 or no P5. The GOR runs another 8 years. If the XII won't allow us the opportunity meet our P5 potential before the next round in 2024, then why bother? Don't misunderstand, we are willing to eat a lot of dirt but, this can't be a predatory relationship.

 

[SubbaBub]

I say flip the switch. Preserve the brand. Go public by stating that UConn would only consider a full share because we are their equal. This way, when the Big 12 doesn't pick us we have a legitmate reason.

This is a surefire kick waiting to happen. The market has set a partial share entry arrangement. This is also fair as we contributed nothing to the current XII organization or brand. We are talking about a supportive deal vs. a predatory reverse auction.

 

[djct1999]

This is a surefire kick waiting to happen. The market has set a partial share entry arrangement. This is also fair as we contributed nothing to the current XII organization or brand. We are talking about a supportive deal vs. a predatory reverse auction.

I was being sarcastic.

 

[1husky]

The biggest mistake anyone here will make is assuming we know who the viable candidates are.

You have to remember who the buyers are. Presidents at UT, OU, KS, IA State and others do not want to partner with a Memphis or their agent at FedEx. It's beneath them. There are really only a couple of viable candidates. We have value.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Just get in and worry about the tv money later.

 

[whaler11]

It's silly to say that the money is needed to be competitive. BYU, UConn, BYU and Houston wouldn't be bad in either revenue sport and that's recruiting from a position of weakness.

Giving a team a third instead of a half of the television money is not going to matter in their win loss record.

It's not like the schools we are talking about aren't paying Tuberville, Diaco, Hermann, Cronin, Ollie.

If UConn gets more money they are going to decrease the subsidy - don't see how you'd sell anyone that would improve your win/loss record.

Subba if they walk away from a Big 12 offer over financial negotiations then the administration should be tarred, feathered and then drawn and quartered.

Acting like this is a done deal and schools like Memphis aren't candidates is the absolute biggest mistake that could possibly be made.

If the Big 12 expands by 4 and UConn isn't included - there won't be an FBS football program in this state in 2024.

 

[whaler11]

You have to remember who the buyers are. Presidents at UT, OU, KS, IA State and others do not want to partner with a Memphis or their agent at FedEx. It's beneath them. There are really only a couple of viable candidates. We have value.

Yeah and the ACC will turn up their noses at Louisville I bet!

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Yeah and the ACC will turn up their noses at Louisville I bet!

Absolutely perplexing that people would play the academic card given what's occurred in the past.

To your point, the school isn't going to all of a sudden start spending millions of more dollars. Any incense in TV revenue will and should just be taken out of our subsidy.

If UConn wants to play any meaningful FBS games in their future, you offer whatever it is the Big 12 wants. Period .

 

[AZHuskiePop]

It's silly to say that the money is needed to be competitive. BYU, UConn, BYU and Houston wouldn't be bad in either revenue sport and that's recruiting from a position of weakness.

Giving a team a third instead of a half of the television money is not going to matter in their win loss record.

It's not like the schools we are talking about aren't paying Tuberville, Diaco, Hermann, Cronin, Ollie.

If UConn gets more money they are going to decrease the subsidy - don't see how you'd sell anyone that would improve your win/loss record.

Subba if they walk away from a Big 12 offer over financial negotiations then the administration should be tarred, feathered and then drawn and quartered.

Acting like this is a done deal and schools like Memphis aren't candidates is the absolute biggest mistake that could possibly be made.

If the Big 12 expands by 4 and UConn isn't included - there won't be an FBS football program in this state in 2024.

The Texas governor's announcement has insured this is not really an evaluation and it is more of a patronage interview.
We are out of out lesgue dealing with these folks and
I"m making the assumption we will not be picked .
If I were the UConn leaders I would be working on plan B
Or how do we survive.
I think it's difficult but doable.

 

[UConnNick]

The Texas governor's announcement has insured this is not really an evaluation and it is more of a patronage interview.
We are out of out lesgue dealing with these folks and
I"m making the assumption we will not be picked .
If I were the UConn leaders I would be working on plan B
Or how do we survive.
I think it's difficult but doable.

I don't understand why you indicate "we are out of our league dealing with these folks." If that's the case, then we are never going anywhere, since I assume by "folks" you're talking about the school presidents.

I really don't see this process degenerating into an episode of the old game show "Let's Make a Deal." I don't think the candidates are going to submit sealed bid offers of just how much garbage they're each willing to eat. They'll pick their two or four teams, dictate to them what the financial details will be, and that's it.

 

[1husky]

Yeah and the ACC will turn up their noses at Louisville I bet!

Memphis is not Louisville but I hear what you are saying. I agree with Subba. Anyone who goes into a negotiation knows there has to be a win-win at the outcome to move on together. You can't spend 8 years with a "partner" who is angry at how you ripped them off. We have value. And it's worth more than just the baseline of getting in to the B12. You have to start with that premise. Are we at a disadvantage? Yes. If we walk away we are screwed forever. Everyone knows that. Beyond that there has to be a mutually satisfying outcome on both sides.

 

[Stinger92860]

I am surprised ESPN would structure a contract in a way that would encourage a league to bottom feed for new members to rip off ESPN.

This is likely the next step for the larger schools and a scenario which drives p5 contraction. Why is Wake making same or similar money to FSU will be the dialogue in a few years.

 

[billybud]

I believe that it was an unintended consequence...of several things working together.

...of having a contract that authorized the addition of teams at a pro rata distributions from the network

...the lack of interest by ESPN/Fox in negotiating higher fees for a league that has had poor TV ratings

...the only way for current members to receive a bump is to take money from new members...(aka a Ponzi scheme)

...the only hope of maybe a future network is to expand the limited Big 12 footprint and the only way to do that without taking a pay cut is on the back of the barbershop.

 

[Hoophound]

The issue is that the big schools need someone to play. FSU is worth more in the sense that they would have more value as an individual entity but these aren't pro sports franchises. FSU needs someone to play against. Yes, you could make super conferences and just have FSU playing Michigan and Texas etc. but you'd lose the interest of half the population.

Conferences provide a platform for each school to play on. Ultimately, the schools will need to have more control of selling their own rights and agents working for them to hash out deals. However, conferences with a wide variety of states and fanbases represented seem hard to discard.

 

[billybud]

A conference is a mix...some heavyweights, midweights, and some bottom feeders....and these may move around some from time to time (Wake did play in a CCG recently)

Moreover, as the seasons change, the weights change...as basketball rolls around, FSU & Clemson step back and UNC and Duke step up. Soccer has a different set of team weights, etc.

While football currently drives TV audiences, basketball is not too far behind (depending on the conference). And with more non revenie sports to be televised, there might be a jump in watching interest as fans find their way to how to watch them.

 

[IMind]

Absolutely perplexing that people would play the academic card given what's occurred in the past.

To your point, the school isn't going to all of a sudden start spending millions of more dollars. Any incense in TV revenue will and should just be taken out of our subsidy.

If UConn wants to play any meaningful FBS games in their future, you offer whatever it is the Big 12 wants. Period .

I'm assuming you meant increase.

Honestly I doubt UConn drops their subsidy very much unless they're getting a ton of friction from the student body. People are already paying it and UConn has record levels of applications. They're more likely to plow the cash increase into coaching staffs and adding scholarships to those sports that aren't at the Big 12 level.

I mean reducing the subsidy might be the right thing to do, but it's probably not going to happen.

 

[noeynox]

We will take 3 hots and a cot damn it.

 

[WestHartHusk]

We will take 3 hots and a cot damn it.

You must not have read this thread...we have all the leverage and the Big12 is a rational actor.

 

[UConnNick]

We will take 3 hots and a cot damn it.

That's where we currently are. We aspire to stay at a Holiday Inn Express, preferably with a restaurant, bar and room service.

 

[sportsart]

If they paid us in pumpkin bites I'd say yes.

 

[billybud]

There is no negotiating position for G5 teams wanting into the P5....

The gap between is too vast, the consequences of not making the cut too damning and thus the schools too needy.

Schools will do whatever it takes...take less money? Oh yes indeedy. With a grin on our faces and dancing in the streets.

 

[dwalks93]

I don't understand this entire thread. The Big12 will select the teams and then lay out the financial terms. This is not an episode of "The Shark Tank" where the teams pitch their wares and the "sharks" make financial proposals. There is no way "financial payouts" will be discussed prior to the expansion teams being selected.

Yes the new teams will receive a drastically reduced initial payout. But it will be far larger than what they are currently making and it will be "fair." If the Big12 is building for the future it needs partners and you don't build a relationship by permanently screwing your partners over. The Big12 has a vested interest in loyalty and insuring their new additions flourish thus helping the conference.

UConn need to get selected and then worry about the terms

 

[SubbaBub]

I don't understand this entire thread. The Big12 will select the teams and then lay out the financial terms. This is not an episode of "The Shark Tank" where the teams pitch their wares and the "sharks" make financial proposals. There is no way "financial payouts" will be discussed prior to the expansion teams being selected.

Yes the new teams will receive a drastically reduced initial payout. But it will be far larger than what they are currently making and it will be "fair." If the Big12 is building for the future it needs partners and you don't build a relationship by permanently screwing your partners over. The Big12 has a vested interest in loyalty and insuring their new additions flourish thus helping the conference.

UConn need to get selected and then worry about the terms

There are several misunderstandings in this thread

1. This is not shark tank, it is a marriage. A shotgun marriage for sure, but a marriage. The party with leverage (XII) does have a material interest in choosing the best candidate not the just the one who will accept the least. This isn't pawn stars either. The XII does not have an unlimited number of options.
2. No one assuming the G5 teams can set terms. The XII will set the terms but, this isn't new ground. Every other P5 conference has brought in new members recently. There is a pool of information available to both sides. This pool sets the parameters of negotiation. If the G5 demand a full share plus the Texas AD welcoming the new members with a curtsy, then ya, the XII will move on. Likewise, if the XII demand the G5 take less than they are making now or not providing a path to equal membership then the G5 schools will not sign on.
3. If the XII doesn't add credible programs, the it dies. Certain people at the XII may or may not realize this, but I guarantee some do. This is the G5 leverage. Is it worth a lot, no. But it is worth being treated with respect and being offered a fair deal in line with past deals and making sure there is something in it for the new members. Just like a FB locker room, relationships and morale matter a lot.

The XII can't be seen as humiliating it's new members. Therefore, the idea that this will be a low bid proposition is completely false.

Assuming the rumor of a 10 year buy in and limited voting rights is true, (it isn't). Then that would not be in line. The correct deal in exchange for a GOR is full vesting at the end of the current agreement. The starting percentage and rate of escalation is negotiable. Whether it be 50%, 50, 50, 75, 75, 75,100; or 33, 33, 50, 50, 75, 75, 100; or some other schedule doesn't really matter. Those are just dollars that neither side had coming before the deal. The relationship will be based on respect and that means a say on future league matters. It's OK to exclude new members on old business or from certain committees, but remember when the ACC took UL. They consulted with Pitt and Cuse, even though they didn't have a formal vote.

Like any new partnership, it is expected that things will go slowly at first. A good negotiator will steer the conversation toward subjects of mutual agreement. When the more difficult subjects come up, both sides are more likely to be amenable to the others needs. It's not certain to work, but it does most of the time.
.

 

[huskypantz]

One thing I can't comprehend is the idea that the B12 would ask schools to give them a suggested percent share and then they'd use that as criteria for the decision. The solution that makes sense is for the B12 to assign the same share schedule to all schools and let the schools decide whether it would be agreeable and they want to be in the running. And as others have stated, if the B12 is going to handicap schools financially then they're never going to reach full potential.

 

[SubbaBub]

One thing I can't comprehend is the idea that the B12 would ask schools to give them a suggested percent share and then they'd use that as criteria for the decision. The solution that makes sense is for the B12 to assign the same share schedule to all schools and let the schools decide whether it would be agreeable and they want to be in the running. And as others have stated, if the B12 is going to handicap schools financially then they're never going to reach full potential.

I agree this discussion happened before deciding on the schools. If one of the primary goals is a $$ bump for existing members, then they would have discussed a target number knowing how much their current contract generates by adding members. They know what the other P5's are gettting and will make a judgement as to how much of the pro rata increase they want to keep for themselves. This shouldn't be their primary concern, though. There primary concern should fall into two camps. Maximizing their next media rights deal (this is mostly where UT and OU live), so that they are in shouting distance of the BiG and SEC. UT wants to be near the top of all individual schools. OU wants to be close enough. The other group, the L8, wants desperately to assure the survival of the XII as a P5 conference, ideally by keeping UT and OU in the fold and making the CFP every year, but as a backup they want to assure P5 status (and $$$) should UT and OU leave.

I'm sure what they will offer will be acceptable to new members, but I will be watching the vestment terms before deciding if this league has a future.

 

[billybud]

"
Since joining the Big 12 prior to the 2012-2013 school year, West Virginia has seen its team travel expenses increase by an average of about $3 million per year. In West Virginia’s first three years in the Big 12, the university’s athletic department spent an average of $7.55 million on team travel. During the previous three years in the Big East, West Virginia’s team travel expenses cost an average of $4.79 million dollars.

Revenue is on the rise as well, however.

During its first three years in the Big 12, West Virginia’s average yearly revenue was $82.36 million dollars. During the previous three years in the Big East, West Virginia’s average yearly revenue was $67.51 million dollars. And the Mountaineers didn’t even receive a full share of the Big 12 money during those first three years, with 2016 as the first year the school will receive a full share since joining the conference after receiving partial shares since becoming a member.

Big 12 move bumps up travel time, costs for West Virginia

 

[Jimdish255]

A vesting schedule was always in the cards as there is recent precedent for it within other leagues. However the idea of a "haircut" or excessive skimming off the top was discussed as the pretext for making UT whole in exchange for transition or dissolution from the LHN framework towards a B12 Network. In the absence of that the league does need to treat it's new members as partners. To the extent they devalue them contractually they also devalue the public perception of the league as a whole.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

A vesting schedule was always in the cards as there is recent precedent for it within other leagues. However the idea of a "haircut" or excessive skimming off the top was discussed as the pretext for making UT whole in exchange for transition or dissolution from the LHN framework towards a B12 Network. In the absence of that the league does need to treat it's new members as partners. To the extent they devalue them contractually they also devalue the public perception of the league as a whole.

You're kidding right ?
This is a conference that in all likelihood will not exist when this contract exspires
Short term maximization of current member revenue is the only force driving expansion.

 

[Jimdish255]

You're kidding right ?
This is a conference that in all likelihood will not exist when this contract exspires
Short term maximization of current member revenue is the only force driving expansion.

There's that also. Just pointing out how the original speculation began but we know enough about the B12 not to try to define what a partnership might look like.

 

[J187Money]

USA TODAY Sports

(the link above has a table to athletic department revenue by school for years / broken down by category)

Mostly I just don't want to backwards. We will never be a top 20 team in terms of revenue / spending. But we need to be able to spend about where we are now (in the 40-50 range) to be relevant / competitive. Some good stuff in the data.

For instance, even though we are SOOOO much better than Louisville - they have about $30M in ticket revenue v. $10M for us. Our peak was $15M in the data.

They also get more than $20M a year more in "contributions"...

On the rights/licensing - we have historically out-earned them.

The biggest problem we have to date is the lack of financial support from our fanbase, both in the way of ticket sales and donations.