Post by the so-called Cincy insider, MSMoose:
2 hours ago
To expedite the resolution of expansion candidates for the Big 12, Oklahoma proposed voting blocks, consisting of (4) blocks of any number of member institutions. This would ensure member interests could best be accommodated without extended debate per candidate. These voting blocks in Oklahoma’s eyes and Commissioner Bowlsby’s ensured a fair process.
The blocks were developed in open discussion when considering member institutions top preliminary expansion choices.
This process is what I referred to yesterday as the Oklahoma Compromise!
The voting blocks were as follows, with their top candidates in order;
Block 1 – Texas Tech\Texas\Baylor
Candidates = BYU-UH-UC-UCF\USF
Block 2 – Iowa State\Kansas\Oklahoma
Candidates = UC-BYU-UCONN-CSU-Memphis-UCF\USF
Block 3 – Kansas State\Oklahoma State
Candidates = Memphis-CSU-UC-UCONN
Block 4 – West Virginia\TCU
Candidates = UC-UCF\USF-Memphis-UCONN
Note, the members within blocks have changed as the process has unfolded, however I believe the above to be most accurate as of this morning.
In fact, the Big 12 Board has sent a contingent of Big 12 Commissioners, etc., to specific candidates. These visits were at times followed by visits from voting blocks of Presidents, and others from Big 12 institutions. All information has been shared with all Big 12 members. A very open process, however very thorough as well. The visits have wrapped up now, and the Big 12 is in deliberations, so to speak.
- 2 hours ago
Before I have to leave for a meeting, I want to mention the Big 12 negotiations with its television providers.
The negotiations are very complicated, those who make light of them simply have no clue how the negotiations work.
First, renegotiation has to happen, as expansion adds more volume, which affects scheduling windows. Divisions affect scheduling and 1st and 2nd rights. A CCG has to be negotiated, etc. and so on. Point is renegotiation would occur, even if expansion didn't occur. However, expansion is occurring and that complicates renegotiations. While the media portrays these renegotiations as volatile, they are in most cases not. Conferences and television partners talks weekly, and for the most part work together very well.
ESPN obviously wants to protect its properties so to speak, and does not feel G5 candidates are worthy of Big 12 Pro Rata monies. Fox Sports feels differently. So this is the starting point for a resolution that is agreeable by all. While Pro Rata is part of the Big 12 contract, the Big 12 is not necessarily toeing the line on it, they are willing to work with the television partners on compromises. Negotiations have been going very well, I was told, and as stated to me the framework for a new deal is far enough along that final agreements with candidates will or have begun already.
Texas wants an extension of the GOR until 2031, concurrent with the expiration of its agreement with ESPN for the LHN. Texas wants to ensure expansion is solidifies the conference, yet also protects it from realignment at the termination of the current Big 12 contract. Oklahoma and others agree, however they want concessions from Texas on the LHN. Texas has worked with the conference on concessions, however has hit so roadblocks with ESPN. Work remains in progress on this front.
From another poster:
o with that in mind, as of this morning, the schools listed with each candidate is as follows:
Cincinnati: 10 (All ten schools)
UCF/USF: 8 (Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor, West Virginia, TCU, Iowa St., Kansas, Oklahoma)
Memphis: 7 (Iowa St., Kansas, Oklahoma, West Virginia, TCU, Kansas St., Oklahoma St.)
UConn: 7 (Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Kansas St., Oklahoma St., West Virginia, TCU)
BYU: 6 (Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor, Iowa St., Kansas, Oklahoma)
CSU: 5 (Iowa St., Kansas, Oklahoma, Kansas St., Oklahoma St.)
Houston: 3 (Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor)
