Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[upstater]

There you have it. UConn will be added at a reduced rate. It’s a compromise that will make everyone happy. Yormack will win, the football heavy schools can justify it. UConn hoops and the NyC market is a gold mine. Hurley and Benedict to address it to the boosters on sat. It’s all lining up.

By reduced rate he means for the first several years. Not permanently.

This is normal.

 

[gsmooth]

IMO Heather Dinich's credibility took a hit after she was so easily duped by Kirk Shultz.

What happened with Kirk Shultz?

 

[upstater]

It obviously depends on how reduced it is. If it's $28mm vs $32mm then whatever. If it's $16mm vs $32mm then that's a different conversation.

??

50% is normal.

Its what ever the op schools took to join some of the P2s. But more on point, this is what the G5s took for the 1st year, and they are not fully paid until after the 3rd year.

Again, this is normal.

 

[tzznandrew]

I must admit, we sure picked a good time to dominate a ncaa tournament!

Even better time to make a bowl game, I think.

 

[upstater]

why not? half the battle here is P5 stability

UConn would be the only school in the NCAA so far that agrees to a permanent reduced rate. The only one. It would put them behind their conference brethren in terms of support.

Now, this might be a model for the future, but it's a horrible situation to put yourself there before any other school, to say the least

I can see entire conferences agreeing to differentials, but not just one school.

 

[HuskyAlum012]

We seem to be 4th in the pecking order.

 

[CL82]

That's about what we are actually worth. If another G5 school gets in ahead of us, the entire upper administration in the school and AD needs to be let go. If Arizona beats us to the punch, it is what it is. If Memphis, SDSU, or USF do, heads need to roll.

I agree 100%! Well, except that ESPN and Fox have decided that we are worth a full share of broadcast contract distributions. But I'm sure you know better than they do.

 

[CL82]

By reduced rate he means for the first several years. Not permanently.

This is normal.

Kind of. What those "reduced rates" have been is a buying for a share of the conference net work, as was the case in the big 10, or a payback for an advance, as was the case when Rutgers join the Big Ten. Neither of those would be applicable with a Connecticut worth join the big 12.

 

[CL82]

??

50% is normal.

Its what ever the op schools took to join some of the P2s. But more on point, this is what the G5s took for the 1st year, and they are not fully paid until after the 3rd year.

Again, this is normal.

If you're talking about the four G5 additions to the big 12, they took a reduced share because ESPN refused to pay for them. It lasts only until the next contract begins, when they will receive a full share. It isn't based on some type of generalized rule that says all new members must accept a reduced share for two years. There are specific facts and circumstances for each situation.

Keep in mind that ESPN and Fox have agreed to pay the big 12 a full share, not a partial share, for Connecticut. Accordingly, the same justification that was used to pay the last four additions a reduced share is not applicable to the addition of Connecticut, just as it is not applicable to the addition of Colorado.

 

[djct1999]

By reduced rate he means for the first several years. Not permanently.

This is normal.

Exactly

 

[upstater]

If you're talking about the four G5 additions to the big 12, they took a reduced share because ESPN refused to pay for them. It lasts only until the next contract begins, when they will receive a full share. It isn't based on some type of generalized rule that says all new members must accept a reduced share for two years. There are specific facts and circumstances for each situation.

Keep in mind that ESPN and Fox have agreed to pay the big 12 a full share, not a partial share, for Connecticut. Accordingly, the same justification that was used to pay the last four additions a reduced share is not applicable to the addition of Connecticut, just as it is not applicable to the addition of Colorado.

I'm talking about what is customary. The additions to the B1G took much longer to get full shares, including Penn State. The additions to the ACC did the same with their additions.

Who said it was a rule?

I didnt.

Nor is it based on when the next contract begins. It's just based on what conferences typically do. There's always a buy-in.

 

[upstater]

Kind of. What those "reduced rates" have been is a buying for a share of the conference net work, as was the case in the big 10, or a payback for an advance, as was the case when Rutgers join the Big Ten. Neither of those would be applicable with a Connecticut worth join the big 12.

The ACC did the same thing to BC. 16 years before they even established a network.

PSU joined the B1G in 1991. Well before a network.

This is all normal.

Hell, even the AAC did it.

 

[HuskyHawk]

 

[JMick]

I'm talking about what is customary. The additions to the B1G took much longer to get full shares, including Penn State. The additions to the ACC did the same with their additions.

Who said it was a rule?

I didnt.

Nor is it based on when the next contract begins. It's just based on what conferences typically do. There's always a buy-in.

Taking reduced shares made sense when growth looked exponential.

Now that is looks like there isn't any growth with these TV contracts, taking an initial hit makes much less sense than it did in the past. Especially if the conference is getting paid the full amount for your addition.

 

[uconnbaseball]

The big 12 would be silly to add us right this second until Oregon, udub, etc commit to the PAC. Then they can finish executing their plan. Hopefully that involves us.

 

[WestHartHusk]

The big 12 would be silly to add us right this second until Oregon, udub, etc commit to the PAC. Then they can finish executing their plan. Hopefully that involves us.

If they don't apply, the are effectively committing.

 

[CL82]

I'm talking about what is customary. The additions to the B1G took much longer to get full shares, including Penn State. The additions to the ACC did the same with their additions.

Who said it was a rule?

I didnt.

Nor is it based on when the next contract begins. It's just based on what conferences typically do. There's always a buy-in.

Yeah again, the way you're presenting it sounds as if there's some unstated rule that makes it the phasing of distributions a certainty, there isn't.

Again, additions to the big 10 are buying a share of the Big Ten network and do that via taking reduced distributions so that a portion of the distribution can be applied to their buy-in. On top of that, Rutgers took a loan from the Big Ten to pay for its exit fee and transitioning costs. The loan was repaid via a reduction of Big Ten distributions to Rutgers. I believe those have finally been completed in Rutgers now receives a full share.

Cincinnati, Houston, UCF and BYU to the big 12 is a unique situation whereby their media partners declined to pay for those additions. The other teams in the conference took a reduced share to pay for the addition of those four teams during the two-year period prior to the next contract being in place in 2025. Once the new contract begins those for schools will receive a full share.

The big 12 media partners have already said that Connecticut as an addition would be worthy of a pro rata share, or said differently, they will treat Connecticut as if we were a P5 addition. That is an entirely different situation than one described above.

So, no there is no imaginary rule that says it must happen. It might happen, but there would have to be a reason for it, just as there were in each of the other times you mentioned.

 

[CL82]

I trust Benedict and Maric to not negotiate themselves out of an invite. Ill leave it that.

 

[jostar1]

What's next? Pac-12 vs. Big 12 realignment saga rages on with Colorado's impending move
Ross Dellenger

The Big 12 pursuit
Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark, a New York businessman, has proved that he is calculating and aggressive in his pursuit of expansion.

So why would he stop now? He won’t.

The goal is to at least get to a 14th additional member, sources tell Yahoo Sports. Colorado is expected to receive a full share from the Big 12 as the league’s new television deal calls for a pro-rata for any Power Five additions (roughly $32 million in distribution a year).

While Yormark has targeted UConn as that expansion option, the preference is to add a Power Five program more in the geographic footprint. But does one exist?

Arizona, Arizona State and Utah were in a grouping, with Colorado, that Big 12 administrators identified as expansion targets during a meeting in May. While Arizona has long been thought as a more real possibility to leave, conversations between the Wildcats and the Big 12 have slowed to a crawl this summer, or outright stopped.

Will the discussions pick up again? A source at the school believes the program will wait until a Pac-12 TV deal is presented before it makes a decision.

That said, most thought Colorado would do the same before … well, you know.

Arizona State has shown little or no interest in leaving the conference. In an interview last month in Washington, D.C, Arizona president Robert Robbins addressed the potential issue of the Wildcats and Sun Devils competing in different leagues.

“We don’t have to do the same thing,” he said, “but [ASU] president [Michael] Crow and I are very tight. I think it’d be unlikely that we’d be split up.”

Pressed about a Pac-12 deal and the prospects of leaving for the Big 12, Robbins said, “Everybody remembers the line from Jerry McGuire, ‘Show me the money.’ ”

And what of Washington and Oregon, arguably the Pac-12’s most valuable remaining brands? The two schools were somewhat high on an expansion list that former Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren and company created last year.

However, there is a sense that the league is not interested in adding more schools, something new commissioner Tony Petitti reiterated during Big Ten media day on Wednesday.

But what if Oregon and Washington, twisting in the Pac-12 winds, are in such an urgent situation that they would accept a partial share of Big Ten distribution to join? Some are asking the question.

If the Big Ten doesn’t crack the expansion door, do the Huskies and Ducks look to the Big 12?

“What if they are just out there for the taking?” asks one Big 12 source. “It would be hard not to take them.”

What's next? Pac-12 vs. Big 12 realignment saga rages on with Colorado's move

"Is this when the dominoes start to fall?" The Pac-12 is reeling and searching for answers with Colorado voting on leaving for the Big 12.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[HungryHuskies]

Hoping this week we get the key tweet of all key tweets

Then does this mega thread get deleted for good?

 

[upstater]

Yeah again, the way you're presenting it sounds as if there's some unstated rule that makes it the phasing of distributions a certainty, there isn't.

Again, additions to the big 10 are buying a share of the Big Ten network and do that via taking reduced distributions so that a portion of the distribution can be applied to their buy-in. On top of that, Rutgers took a loan from the Big Ten to pay for its exit fee and transitioning costs. The loan was repaid via a reduction of Big Ten distributions to Rutgers. I believe those have finally been completed in Rutgers now receives a full share.

Cincinnati, Houston, UCF and BYU to the big 12 is a unique situation whereby their media partners declined to pay for those additions. The other teams in the conference took a reduced share to pay for the addition of those four teams during the two-year period prior to the next contract being in place in 2025. Once the new contract begins those for schools will receive a full share.

The big 12 media partners have already said that Connecticut as an addition would be worthy of a pro rata share, or said differently, they will treat Connecticut as if we were a P5 addition. That is an entirely different situation than one described above.

So, no there is no imaginary rule that says it must happen. It might happen, but there would have to be a reason for it, just as there were in each of the other times you mentioned.

I don't know how else to say it when I already said it isn't a rule, but you keep on saying I'm saying it is a rule. This then becomes a really weird discussion.

I think I already made my point about the conference networks and the delayed full share. Penn State got a delayed full share decades before the network even existed. In BCs case, they got a delayed share 16 years before the ACCN came into being. So the regular or normal occurrence of these delayed shares happened long before the advent of conference TV networks.

 

[upstater]

Taking reduced shares made sense when growth looked exponential.

Now that is looks like there isn't any growth with these TV contracts, taking an initial hit makes much less sense than it did in the past. Especially if the conference is getting paid the full amount for your addition.

The B12 is going to have $50m payouts. Let's say UConn takes $25m and then $35m for the 1st 2 years. Then $350m over the next 7 years of the contract. That's $410m.

As opposed to the maybe $70m they'd make in the BE.

That's a difference of $340m. That does make sense.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

The B12 …..…. That's a difference of $340m. That does make sense.

Fiduciary responsibilities matter

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Fiduciary responsibilities matter

The B12 is going to have $50m payouts. Let's say UConn takes $25m and then $35m for the 1st 2 years. Then $350m over the next 7 years of the contract. That's $410m.

As opposed to the maybe $70m they'd make in the BE.

That's a difference of $340m. That does make sense.

We definitely should not take any reduced rates. We might offer to play some home games at the Yankee stadium or Foxboro against B12 teams, but we should not take any reduced rates. This will help the B12 with exposure, and also help build UCONN brand in those areas.

 

[NowInStorrs]

Perception is a stupid fickle thing. We started football in a power conference. The other schools (except USF) around us have gone to other power conferences. We got left behind and suddenly we're not considered a power conference school, even though we already have been and we did quite well in a power conference. Our struggles have come when we were in weaker conferences. Nobody seems to care though. We've been slapped with the non-p5 label for some reason even though our AD is clearly p5 level. Hopefully none of that will matter shortly but it's really annoying and honestly a very lazy way of viewing things by the media.