This guy (MSMoose) claims to have some sort of insider access.
http://cincinnati.247sports.com/Boa...Realignment-Thread-43339748?Page=13#M43510794
Feb 5, 12:19 PM
Interesting how the Big 12 Expansion Committee proposes a Conference Network versus how the PAC 12, Big Ten, and SEC are operated. Each is different in its own right from the PAC 12 owning 100% to the Big Ten split ownership with FOX Sports, to ESPN owning the SEC. The Big 12 proposed network is join venture, similar to the Big Ten, however with a few differences;
The Big 12 Network ownership would be split three ways, between Network of choice, Texas, and the Big 12. This allows Texas to be made whole, after exiting the LHN, with the ability to increase revenue long term. Granted certain contractual agreements within would not allows Texas profits to increase at a higher percentage than the remainder of the Big 12. Interesting proposal which takes the burden off of the Big 12 members, yet allows Texas to be made whole. ESPN would also benefit as a minority partner in a joint venture with the primary network owner. More to follow on this later.
As for expansion, the I dig into it the more the intent of the Big 12 Expansion Committee is to balance the Big 12 versus the SEC, while leaving room to grow. Granted market size, academics, research, history, and five million other things play a part on this, the primary point is the Big 12 will be sure to protect its close relationship with the SEC. The two conferences have a great relationship in the form of the Sugar Bowl agreement, as well conference basketball challenge, and scheduling. The two conferences also agree on Autonomy issues, and general direction of college athletics. So as I have stated in the past, the optimal end game for the Big 12 is 14 members, for a host of reasons;
Divisional split is easier.
Continuation of rivalries is easier.
Level playing field with the Big Ten and SEC.
More market size for a conference network.
Better matchups with the SEC for cross-sports challenges.
Reduction of travel issues.
Cincinnati, UCONN, and USF all fit the Big 12 profile. Granted UConn needs to elevate its football program, however UCONN has a strong argument that inclusion in the Big 12 would do this, not to mention offer opportunities for games in New York. USF for its sake has created quite a plan for facilities with some being contingent on Big 12 invite. All three are strong Academically, and R1 Research Universities, with great growth plans, and strong markets.
The 14th spot is of interest. BYU has a strong case, but in the end how does BYU help the Big 12? Yes, they are a national brand, but their inclusion causes a range of issues, travel, Sunday play, etc. Memphis lacks the Academic and Research prowess to entice Big 12 Presidents, the same goes for UCF. Temple is interesting, strong academically, R1 Research University, major market, fits geographically, but has cut athletics, and is struggling with facility upgrades. Temple could make a case similar to USF in that if included we will do A+B+C+D, etc. Then the argument comes back to UCF, large market with tremendous potential, can the Big 12 grow them? UCF alleviates leaving USF on an island. However, does UCF inclusion hurt USF in terms of being so geographically close? Some like Tulane, but are they committed to growing athletics? Tulane academically and research wise fits.
Who will be the 14th member? This I believe is why the Big 12 will take a two pronged approach to expansion, by expanding to 12, then later to 14. Wait and see what happens with the ACC and the ACCN, maybe the ACC dissolves? Expand to 12, build the network, add the CCG, and then wait.
http://cincinnati.247sports.com/Boa...Realignment-Thread-43339748?Page=13#M43510794
Feb 5, 12:19 PM
Interesting how the Big 12 Expansion Committee proposes a Conference Network versus how the PAC 12, Big Ten, and SEC are operated. Each is different in its own right from the PAC 12 owning 100% to the Big Ten split ownership with FOX Sports, to ESPN owning the SEC. The Big 12 proposed network is join venture, similar to the Big Ten, however with a few differences;
The Big 12 Network ownership would be split three ways, between Network of choice, Texas, and the Big 12. This allows Texas to be made whole, after exiting the LHN, with the ability to increase revenue long term. Granted certain contractual agreements within would not allows Texas profits to increase at a higher percentage than the remainder of the Big 12. Interesting proposal which takes the burden off of the Big 12 members, yet allows Texas to be made whole. ESPN would also benefit as a minority partner in a joint venture with the primary network owner. More to follow on this later.
As for expansion, the I dig into it the more the intent of the Big 12 Expansion Committee is to balance the Big 12 versus the SEC, while leaving room to grow. Granted market size, academics, research, history, and five million other things play a part on this, the primary point is the Big 12 will be sure to protect its close relationship with the SEC. The two conferences have a great relationship in the form of the Sugar Bowl agreement, as well conference basketball challenge, and scheduling. The two conferences also agree on Autonomy issues, and general direction of college athletics. So as I have stated in the past, the optimal end game for the Big 12 is 14 members, for a host of reasons;
Divisional split is easier.
Continuation of rivalries is easier.
Level playing field with the Big Ten and SEC.
More market size for a conference network.
Better matchups with the SEC for cross-sports challenges.
Reduction of travel issues.
Cincinnati, UCONN, and USF all fit the Big 12 profile. Granted UConn needs to elevate its football program, however UCONN has a strong argument that inclusion in the Big 12 would do this, not to mention offer opportunities for games in New York. USF for its sake has created quite a plan for facilities with some being contingent on Big 12 invite. All three are strong Academically, and R1 Research Universities, with great growth plans, and strong markets.
The 14th spot is of interest. BYU has a strong case, but in the end how does BYU help the Big 12? Yes, they are a national brand, but their inclusion causes a range of issues, travel, Sunday play, etc. Memphis lacks the Academic and Research prowess to entice Big 12 Presidents, the same goes for UCF. Temple is interesting, strong academically, R1 Research University, major market, fits geographically, but has cut athletics, and is struggling with facility upgrades. Temple could make a case similar to USF in that if included we will do A+B+C+D, etc. Then the argument comes back to UCF, large market with tremendous potential, can the Big 12 grow them? UCF alleviates leaving USF on an island. However, does UCF inclusion hurt USF in terms of being so geographically close? Some like Tulane, but are they committed to growing athletics? Tulane academically and research wise fits.
Who will be the 14th member? This I believe is why the Big 12 will take a two pronged approach to expansion, by expanding to 12, then later to 14. Wait and see what happens with the ACC and the ACCN, maybe the ACC dissolves? Expand to 12, build the network, add the CCG, and then wait.