Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 754 | The Boneyard
.-.

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

Kowalski said:
No one wants us for FB only at this point.

A MW / Pac-2 merger is an opportunity for them to put together a great basketball conference, & add sizzle to a conference that would be only so-so in FB. Like Yormark kept saying - basketball is undervalued.

The geography’s not ideal, but adding SD State, Memphis & Uconn for all sports & Gonzaga & Wichita State for
BB would make a merged conference an immediate BB power. And Uconn & Gonzaga alone might be enough to attract other BB schools ( think Creighton & Marquette, who aren’t geographic
fits in the BE either.)

Given that UConn’s only options now are to wait & hope, I think it’d be a legit proactive move with a potential pathway to P4. We need something out of the box.
Expand ...
Yea no thanks
 
Beachview said:
The great thing is.. the cheaters can’t cheat anymore
Expand ...

The Chase Love GIF by ABC Network
 
Drew said:
Expand ...

I thought the big news about the original BXII expansion was they had prorata increases built in to pay for BYU, Cincy, Houston, and UCF. This makes it sound like the original BXII schools are paying $7 million each to fund the $18m going to the 4 additions.
 
ESPN paid for two of the four additions to get the Big 12 to 16 teams. The Big 12 will lose members by 2030 to the other P4 conferences. That will be our next opportunity to get into the Big 12.
 
.-.
Rufus said:
The Big 12 has no teams that the B1G or SEC want. Meanwhile, the ACC does.
Expand ...
The BXII has teams the ACC may want. If the Big XII is paying for expansion out of their own pockets, I’m thinking the differences in payouts between the Middle 2 could cause some turmoil when the Big XII contract ends in 6 years. Kansas, Ok State, TCU, would help with scheduling partners as well as shore up if any defections come.
 
noeynox said:
I agree with you on sentence one. Sentence two, both of them have accomplished much more than us to that point and since as well. However that had nothing to do with why they were added. We were c-blocked, and Warde and Sue did not navigate that era so great.
Expand ...
Sorry for the late response. Respectfully, I challenge you to put forth what the hell SU has accomplished. They won only one Natty ever in football during the Eisenhower administration. They have won only one Natty ever in BB during the Bush II (Shrub) administration. As an academic institution, it is quite simply the most overrated, over priced second tier private college in the NE. Nothing more, nothing less...

Regarding LV - it has had some athletic success of note - by no means exemplary though. However, as an academic institution, the only requirements for admission is a pulse and being able to find your ass if it's itchy... That will catch up to them. The world already has enough simpletons.

If I seem to be somewhat pejorative with my assessments, it is only because the ACC, taking either of those schools over UConn, was dead wrong! That conference will not succeed in the long run - you'll see...
 
Loved how he took Corso to task. What Dickert said isn’t wrong, but we’ve already seen indifference to how the original Big East was gutted by alignment. No media outrage then. Sucks for OSU & WSU, but they’ll get through it. Hell, how long has UConn’s demise been going on, yet we’re still here.
 
JeepCSC said:
The BXII has teams the ACC may want. If the Big XII is paying for expansion out of their own pockets, I’m thinking the differences in payouts between the Middle 2 could cause some turmoil when the Big XII contract ends in 6 years. Kansas, Ok State, TCU, would help with scheduling partners as well as shore up if any defections come.
Expand ...
Why would anyone leave the B12 for the ACC? You'd be joining a conference that is on the verge of losing its 3 most valuable properties -- FSU, Clemson, UNC.
The ACC leftovers is much weaker than the B12.
 
Vowelguy said:
Why would anyone leave the B12 for the ACC? You'd be joining a conference that is on the verge of losing its 3 most valuable properties -- FSU, Clemson, UNC.
The ACC leftovers is much weaker than the B12.
Expand ...
The contracts involved. It sounds like the Big XII had to pony up the money themselves for the AAC expansion because ESPN/Fox didn’t rate them. If the cable trend continues, who knows what the money will be like in 2030 when the Big XII will be asking companies to pay $80+m for the state of Utah. At that point the ACC contract plus the ACCN money may look fairly good.

But obviously there is a bunch of unknowns. We don’t know if that blurb about the ACC contract staying intact even with 3 leaving is true. We don’t even know if the leavers could get out of the GOR (it sounds like Texas and OU didn’t, and will have no primary media deal next year). Tons of unknowns.
 
Last edited:
.-.
KryHavok said:
Loved how he took Corso to task. What Dickert said isn’t wrong, but we’ve already seen indifference to how the original Big East was gutted by alignment. No media outrage then. Sucks for OSU & WSU, but they’ll get through it. Hell, how long has UConn’s demise been going on, yet we’re still here.
Expand ...
Still alive but we're barely breathing...
 
JeepCSC said:
The BXII has teams the ACC may want. If the Big XII is paying for expansion out of their own pockets, I’m thinking the differences in payouts between the Middle 2 could cause some turmoil when the Big XII contract ends in 6 years. Kansas, Ok State, TCU, would help with scheduling partners as well as shore up if any defections come.
Expand ...

No one from the Big 12 is jumping to the ACC. The ACC approached them last summer and they shot it down. Why on earth would they want to go to the ACC now!? The Big 12 IS NOT paying the new schools with money out of their pockets, Oklahoma and Texas are paying for it via a smart part their payouts and their exit fee. The exit fees alone pay forthe Cincinnati, BYU, UCF and Houston payouts in 2023 and 2024. And it is only for TWO YEARS. After that everyone gets a full payout. For some reason you and others have twisted this into the Big 12 paying for the new members for the life of the contract. Everyone gets a full payout which is why the Big 12's per team payout is higher than the ACC's.
 
Last edited:
JeepCSC said:
The contracts involved. It sounds like the Big XII had to pony up the money themselves for the AAC expansion because ESPN/Fox didn’t rate them. If the cable trend continues, who knows what the money will be like in 2030 when the Big XII will be asking companies to pay $80+m for the state of Utah. At that point the ACC contract plus the ACCN money may look fairly good.

But obviously there is a bunch of unknowns. We don’t know if that blurb about the ACC contract staying intact even with 3 leaving is true. We don’t even know if the leavers could get out of the GOR (it sounds like Texas and OU didn’t, and will have no primary media deal next year). Tons of unknowns.
Expand ...

The Big 12 only had to pony up money for 2023 and 2024. Everyone gets 100% payout (31.7 million) starting in 2025 when the new TV deal kicks in so ESPN/Fox did rate them. The Pac-12 schools got a pro rata because they were already in the P5. And why would the Big 12 be asking for 80+million for Utah? It seems like you're digging here.
 
Last edited:
.-.
JeepCSC said:
The contracts involved. It sounds like the Big XII had to pony up the money themselves for the AAC expansion because ESPN/Fox didn’t rate them. If the cable trend continues, who knows what the money will be like in 2030 when the Big XII will be asking companies to pay $80+m for the state of Utah. At that point the ACC contract plus the ACCN money may look fairly good.
Expand ...
But that would only hold for a few years. Ultimately a watered down ACC is a much weaker product. They cant keep making outsized $$ forever.
 
Vowelguy said:
But that would only hold for a few years. Ultimately a watered down ACC is a much weaker product. They cant keep making outsized $$ forever.
Expand ...
The strongest product would be gutting the weak links from both (BC, Wake, Syracuse, Kansas State, Iowa State, the AAC adds).
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGB
TheCatsLair said:
The Big 12 only had to pony up money for 2023 and 2024. Everyone gets 100% payout (31.7 million) starting in 2025 when the new TV deal kicks in so ESPN/Fox did rate them. The Pac-12 schools got a pro rata because they were already in the P5. And why would the Big 12 be asking for 80+million for Utah? It seems like you're digging here.
Expand ...
BYU/Utah would be getting two shares for one tiny state.

Also the USA Today report says 10 schools are paying $7m each to cover the AAC additions this year. Apparently the new additions are getting $18 m each paid for by the schools this year. OU and Texas will lose their distribution next year after the leave ($40 million each). That could presumably pay for the AAC schools in 2024-2025 until the new contract kicks in the year after. Either way, more mouths means the additional money (NCAA tourney credits, the bowl money) will be divided more ways regardless.

Regardless, the next BXII contract looks to average $31.6m until 2031. The ACC in 2022 was getting $30.5m in media rights ($443m to be exact). Escalators and ACCN payouts should keep make the gap that much bigger over the next decade (even ignoring the bizarre Calford deal). In the end a few million advantage to the ACC shouldn’t matter. But then the PAC just broke up when they refused a deal nearly identical to the one the Big XII got. When you aren’t in the Power 2, sometimes conference stability can come down to a couple million annually.
 
Last edited:
So my big caveat, if the ACC contract is intact in 2030, I think Duke and Miami would have an easier time courting Kansas and Oklahoma State to a conference with a better contract. They might not, time will tell.

But again, the USA Today story supports the idea the GOR has not been solved by OU and Texas. They were just fortunate their leaving coincided with the end of the contract so one missed year without a primary media deal won’t kill them. I’ll believe UNC and FSU are leaving before 2035ish when it happens and not a second sooner.
 
JeepCSC said:
BYU/Utah would be getting two shares for one tiny state.



.
Expand ...

It is not tiny. It’s got 3.4M people (30th) and is typically top 5 in growth. It is larger than Iowa, Miss, and KS, all of which have two teams. It’ll pass CT in the next year or two.

And in terms of young people it is much higher.

Plus BYU is a national brand.
 
TheCatsLair said:
No one from the Big 12 is jumping to the ACC. The ACC approached them last summer and they shot it down. Why on earth would they want to go to the ACC now!? The Big 12 IS NOT paying the new schools with money out of their pockets, Oklahoma and Texas are paying for it via a smart part their payouts and their exit fee. The exit fees alone pay forthe Cincinnati, BYU, UCF and Houston payouts in 2023 and 2024. And it is only for TWO YEARS. After that everyone gets a full payout. For some reason you and others have twisted this into the Big 12 paying for the new members for the life of the contract. Everyone gets a full payout which is why the Big 12's per team payout is higher than the ACC's.
Expand ...
But it's not higher, the ACC is still under it's original contract that includes the Raycom games which ends in 2027. So the 19-24 million tier 1-2 content value people throw around is based on the 2012 contract not the 2016 extension that includes the ACC network
 
.-.
JeepCSC said:
The strongest product would be gutting the weak links from both (BC, Wake, Syracuse, Kansas State, Iowa State, the AAC adds).
Expand ...
One could say that about every conference. But that’s not how realignment works. There’s not a central planner. Instead it’s a series of discrete moves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
375
Guests online
5,792
Total visitors
6,167
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,515
Messages
4,482,683
Members
10,358
Latest member
wynela


Top Bottom