Possible Big 12 Invite rumors

[upstater]

Cut all non-revenue sports?

If they go pro, then I assume they are totally cut off anyway, so yes.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

We were collecting the name money too

They paid for the name by giving the tournament credits earned by the C-7 and their share of what was earned by schools that departed to the ACC.

 

[Bongo Fury]

Yeah,he did so well in his second run at UMass.

UMass is a different situation with less support. Their offense under Whipple was good, however more than not their opponents scored more points. They beat UConn though.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Normalize it by removing football revenue and then compare the two.

Why? We play football. We deserve football revenue. We need it. Do you take the football revenue out of the SEC?

 

[nadav]

Is UConn in the Big 12 yet?

Nope. We declined, Benedict decided that Cooley was for sure getting Gtown back in the top 10 and schoolboy Pitino will do the same. It'll be like 1985 all over again.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Why? We play football. We deserve football revenue. We need it. Do you take the football revenue out of the SEC?

You were claiming that the AAC was getting more broadcast revenue than the BE. If you include football (which the BE does not have) the revenue to the AAC exceeded the BE. This is not comparing apples to apples however.

If you were apartment hunting and apartment a was $75 per month cheaper for basically the same sq footage as apartment b but apartment a included utilities you would have to take that into account to determine which was actually cheaper.

 

[CL82]

The real cost there is simply the expenditure per student (overall budget / students), which is much higher than tuition but lower than out of state tuition at some places, higher at others. Depending.

I feel like this item would be more fairly characterized as out-of-pocket cost. At least for the revenue sports, I wonder if the marketing benefits of having D1 sports programs outweighs the cost of providing an education to the athletes. If we're going to deem costs from the academic side to the athletic department, wouldn't it be fair to also do it the other way?

 

[HuskyHawk]

You were claiming that the AAC was getting more broadcast revenue than the BE. If you include football (which the BE does not have) the revenue to the AAC exceeded the BE. This is not comparing apples to apples however.

If you were apartment hunting and apartment a was $75 per month cheaper for basically the same sq footage as apartment b but apartment a included utilities you would have to take that into account to determine which was actually cheaper.

It's apples to apples. Conferences have what they have. If they lack something then that conference is...lacking. Nobody does this for the B1G or SEC. The Big East is lacking. It's going to remain lacking and that limits it. This is the entire point of the thread.

In your analogy the Big East is cheaper because it's lacking something like heat or A/C and can never have it. So yeah, of course it's less.

 

[Billy Jack]

I don't think anyone was more opposed to the Pasqualoni hire than I was. Whipple would have ended up as the same story with different typeface.

I disagree. It would have been a different story here than it was at UMass Pas Deux.

 

[superjohn]

If they go pro, then I assume they are totally cut off anyway, so yes.

Agreed

 

[Billy Jack]

Something no one has mentioned is that a school takes a hit to its home attendance when it’s opponents are so far away because opponents aren’t traveling to games at our place. Just the opposite in the Big East where opponents’ fans do travel to our games and buy tickets.

It’s not just fans who travel from the opponent’s town but the fact that we have alums of other BE schools who live and work in CT, and we have local parents who’ve sent their kids to other BE schools and come to our games.

State universities not named Michigan, or Berkeley, or North Carolina, and a few others draw the vast majority of their students from their home state unlike private colleges (BE) which draw their students from hither and yon. I have never met or worked anyone from any Big XII schools, but I have met and/or worked with folks from other BE schools - including the Midwest members. The Big Ten is different. They have lots of alums in this part of the country.

So, when people talk about what we do or don’t have in common with Big 12 schools, that’s the biggest one fir me. We don’t really know them, none of them live here, and they won’t be attending any of our games.

I do think that accepting an offer if it comes is inevitable, but I won’t be happy about it. However, I don’t think it’s likely. Yormak is doing his due diligence, but it’s more likely that he picks off teams from the PAC 12.

 

[upstater]

I feel like this item would be more fairly characterized as out-of-pocket cost. At least for the revenue sports, I wonder if the marketing benefits of having D1 sports programs outweighs the cost of providing an education to the athletes. If we're going to deem costs from the academic side to the athletic department, wouldn't it be fair to also do it the other way?

Marketing benefits are the whole reason for it.

But what do those marketing benefits actually get you? Like, you can advertise all you want, but how does it help you?

Plus, when I've looked at the budget breakdowns, I've always noticed that facilities have rarely if ever been built by the AD. The bonds are sold by the university. The university pays for the debt service, not the schools. And even in the case of a private donor giving money for facilities (ex. T Boone Pickens at Oklahoma State) the school ends up counting the donation as AD revenue and then it bonds out the facility anyway.

I've always said, schools are not trying to hide athletics revenue from the athletes. They are instead trying to hide expenditures from the parents of students.

The facilities question is the #1 problem for the enterprise going pro. I can easily see a deal where a team rents a school's brand for, like, $1, just to keep with the pretense that the pro team represents the students. But who pays for facilities? What school is going to invest a huge amount of money when these entities become distinct? It would be crazy to do so. How is the institution going to service the debt? U Michigan and U Texas are going to be in the hole for half a billion soon.

 

[CL82]

But what do those marketing benefits actually get you? Like, you can advertise all you want, but how does it help you?

Well, it gives you name recognition, right? High school kids are going through looking at dozens of colleges and immediately they react to the big sports schools. Why? They know the name. The value of that is considerable since getting kids in the front doors how do universities make money. Secondly, it keeps alumni feeling connected to the school and alumni make contributions to the school. Thirdly, it makes, in the case of state schools, the legislature connected to the school and that is a major source of revenue to the school not only on the income side but also for capital expenditures.

As to whether the athletic department directly funded a particular building or not, whether it be through income or donation, that's a moot point. Since the chargeback is for current expenses. For what it's worth you could make the same argument about every single academic building, because I'm sure except in a rare instance not one of them were paid for by that particular athletic department.

 

[mussels]

Something no one has mentioned is that a school takes a hit to its home attendance when it’s opponents are so far away because opponents aren’t traveling to games at our place. Just the opposite in the Big East where opponents’ fans do travel to our games and buy tickets.

It’s not just fans who travel from the opponent’s town but the fact that we have alums of other BE schools who live and work in CT, and we have local parents who’ve sent their kids to other BE schools and come to our games.

State universities not named Michigan, or Berkeley, or North Carolina, and a few others draw the vast majority of their students from their home state unlike private colleges (BE) which draw their students from hither and yon. I have never met or worked anyone from any Big XII schools, but I have met and/or worked with folks from other BE schools - including the Midwest members. The Big Ten is different. They have lots of alums in this part of the country.

So, when people talk about what we do or don’t have in common with Big 12 schools, that’s the biggest one fir me. We don’t really know them, none of them live here, and they won’t be attending any of our games.

I do think that accepting an offer if it comes is inevitable, but I won’t be happy about it. However, I don’t think it’s likely. Yormak is doing his due diligence, but it’s more likely that he picks off teams from the PAC 12.

On a similar bent, more UConn grads end up working in the NY, NJ, Philly, Washington area than in big12 territory. Playing in the Big East allows those fans to go see games. Don’t live in Connecticut and over the years, I’ve watched probably 10 time's the number of away games than home games.

 

[businesslawyer]

It's apples to apples. Conferences have what they have. If they lack something then that conference is...lacking. Nobody does this for the B1G or SEC. The Big East is lacking. It's going to remain lacking and that limits it. This is the entire point of the thread.

In your analogy the Big East is cheaper because it's lacking something like heat or A/C and can never have it. So yeah, of course it's less.

Why are you dying on this hill? One doesn't just have football. One pays boatloads of money to have football. Making $5M and not having football bills is very different than making $5M and having football bills in terms of what it allows you to spend on hoops.

You really don't get that?

 

[Ratso]

every top 1 “country “ conference wants this

 

[upstater]

Well, it gives you name recognition, right? High school kids are going through looking at dozens of colleges and immediately they react to the big sports schools. Why? They know the name. The value of that is considerable since getting kids in the front doors how do universities make money. Secondly, it keeps alumni feeling connected to the school and alumni make contributions to the school. Thirdly, it makes, in the case of state schools, the legislature connected to the school and that is a major source of revenue to the school not only on the income side but also for capital expenditures.

As to whether the athletic department directly funded a particular building or not, whether it be through income or donation, that's a moot point. Since the chargeback is for current expenses. For what it's worth you could make the same argument about every single academic building, because I'm sure except in a rare instance not one of them were paid for by that particular athletic department.

Schools without D1 athletic programs have sky high applications and brand / name recognition.

You can even look at state schools like Vermont, and they have the same kind of high applications that UConn does.

It's a dynamic going on everywhere.

As long as schools maintain the same in-state / out-of-state balance that they do (80/20), there is little benefit. In terms of branding, yes. Athletics will sell more sweatshirts. But by and large, the kids going to the top publics would go there regardless, since so many students are limited to going in-state.

As for who pays for a particular building, in many cases it is the departments. So many facilities are built with research grant funding. In fact, at my school, our department owns parts of the building because we purchased it with our money. If someone wants it, we rent it out. We operate as a collective with other departments who also own their own classrooms and office space. We pay for any tech enhancements, we pay for upkeep. The actual college only owns maybe 5 rooms on 10 floors of this building.

I run a university program that uses a performance space (a music hall) in town, precisely because the person who owns it (a well known singer) lets us use it for free. If I wanted to run our stuff at the music hall on campus, the school of the arts would want a huge rental fee from our program, because they built it with their own money.

Going back to Oklahoma State, remember this story? Pickens’ Huge Donation for Oklahoma State Athletics May Be Wiped Out

It ended up that OSU faculty won a $400m research grant that required a new building for the research. But the school could not bond the building because their credit rating was impacted by the high debt from going forward with the building of the stadium despite the very high losses in their endowment and the money that Boone promised but could not immediately provide. After OSU could not bond the research building, the faculty actually lost the grant.

Pickens came through several years later in 2012 and provided the funding to finish the building (which was counted as athletics revenue) but in the meantime, OSU had lost the biggest research grant in its history. These grants do indeed pay for buildings.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

It's apples to apples. Conferences have what they have. If they lack something then that conference is...lacking. Nobody does this for the B1G or SEC. The Big East is lacking. It's going to remain lacking and that limits it. This is the entire point of the thread.

In your analogy the Big East is cheaper because it's lacking something like heat or A/C and can never have it. So yeah, of course it's less.

What was Whichita State's share of revenue from the AAC and how did that compare with what BE schools were receiving from the BE's contract?

The point is that claiming the AAC had a better initial TV deal by adding in money used to buy the name and then comparing conference broadcast revenue when the contract includes football with conference broadcast revenue with a contract that is not paying for football is out and out ridiculous.

1 - at best, the two initial deals were substantially similar (although I do remember reading the breakaway BE claiming they were getting more revenue from Fox than the would have received if the conference continued and they were part of the deal the AAC signed).

2 - a lot of the same people who claimed KO sunk the program are also claiming the AAC sunk the program. Pick a stance and stay with it. (My opinion is that we would have been fine in men's basketball if KO didn't drop the ball but a rebuild would have taken a bit longer in tha AAC).

3 - if Aresco didn't think there was nothing wrong with taking our tier three rights and using that revenue to claim he brokered a great deal (while screwing us for the benefit of the remainder of that conference) we would still be in the AAC today.

If you want to make believe that getting 25 cents on the dollar just so we can play Creighton instead of Kansas and DePaul instead of Baylor you have that right. I have the right to look at things from a different perspective,one that cares about the university as a whole, not merely whether we get a home and ho e with Setin Hall, St John's or PC.

 

[John]

Something no one has mentioned is that a school takes a hit to its home attendance when it’s opponents are so far away because opponents aren’t traveling to games at our place. Just the opposite in the Big East where opponents’ fans do travel to our games and buy tickets.

It’s not just fans who travel from the opponent’s town but the fact that we have alums of other BE schools who live and work in CT, and we have local parents who’ve sent their kids to other BE schools and come to our games.

State universities not named Michigan, or Berkeley, or North Carolina, and a few others draw the vast majority of their students from their home state unlike private colleges (BE) which draw their students from hither and yon. I have never met or worked anyone from any Big XII schools, but I have met and/or worked with folks from other BE schools - including the Midwest members. The Big Ten is different. They have lots of alums in this part of the country.

So, when people talk about what we do or don’t have in common with Big 12 schools, that’s the biggest one fir me. We don’t really know them, none of them live here, and they won’t be attending any of our games.

I do think that accepting an offer if it comes is inevitable, but I won’t be happy about it. However, I don’t think it’s likely. Yormak is doing his due diligence, but it’s more likely that he picks off teams from the PAC 12.

Yes we'd lose out on all those Creighton Butler DePaul Xavier and Marquette alumni and fans visiting the XL and GP if we go to the Big 12.

 

[CashewCrew]

It's apples to apples. Conferences have what they have. If they lack something then that conference is...lacking. Nobody does this for the B1G or SEC. The Big East is lacking. It's going to remain lacking and that limits it. This is the entire point of the thread.

In your analogy the Big East is cheaper because it's lacking something like heat or A/C and can never have it. So yeah, of course it's less.

Just chiming in to say this is the worst post in this thread.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Why are you dying on this hill? One doesn't just have football. One pays boatloads of money to have football. Making $5M and not having football bills is very different than making $5M and having football bills in terms of what it allows you to spend on hoops.

You really don't get that?

That isn't even the argument being made. UConn has football. UConn had two choices, one conference paid more than the other. We weren't dropping football so the fact that we could is pretty much irrelevant. The American paid more at the start. By quite a bit. Then the AAC deal went to hell, and UConn made a different choice, which made sense. UConn couldn't evaluate the NBE in 2013 the way the C7 did, because we could get football money. And did. It's the same situation now if the B12 calls.

 

[HuskyHawk]

What was Whichita State's share of revenue from the AAC and how did that compare with what BE schools were receiving from the BE's contract?

The point is that claiming the AAC had a better initial TV deal by adding in money used to buy the name and then comparing conference broadcast revenue when the contract includes football with conference broadcast revenue with a contract that is not paying for football is out and out ridiculous.

1 - at best, the two initial deals were substantially similar (although I do remember reading the breakaway BE claiming they were getting more revenue from Fox than the would have received if the conference continued and they were part of the deal the AAC signed).

2 - a lot of the same people who claimed KO sunk the program are also claiming the AAC sunk the program. Pick a stance and stay with it. (My opinion is that we would have been fine in men's basketball if KO didn't drop the ball but a rebuild would have taken a bit longer in tha AAC).

3 - if Aresco didn't think there was nothing wrong with taking our tier three rights and using that revenue to claim he brokered a great deal (while screwing us for the benefit of the remainder of that conference) we would still be in the AAC today.

If you want to make believe that getting 25 cents on the dollar just so we can play Creighton instead of Kansas and DePaul instead of Baylor you have that right. I have the right to look at things from a different perspective,one that cares about the university as a whole, not merely whether we get a home and ho e with Setin Hall, St John's or PC.

I agree with most of this. I'm arguing for the Big XII. I don't have any remaining nostalgia for the Big East as it is now. The main benefit to me is road games at PC are close to me. We had the opportunity to get more money in a league that had football and we took it. When they payout wasn't good enough on renegotiation, and we couldn't get T3 rights for the WBB team, we bailed. It was the right move both times. I agree, for a hoops only school like WSU, the Big East was better than the American even in 2013. No doubt. We aren't one, so it was irrelevant to UConn what the basketball payout was.

Same situation now. Even if the Big XII's actual "basketball" payout is less than the Big East's (it could be, who knows), it doesn't matter because we can get the football money. If both leagues wanted Gonzaga, then that would be relevant.

 

[ElGreco]

That’s not looking likely to happen, it’s a long time til 2036

We’re fine now and I expect our football will settle in someplace-possibly on its own.

 

[Billy Jack]

On a similar bent, more UConn grads end up working in the NY, NJ, Philly, Washington area than in big12 territory. Playing in the Big East allows those fans to go see games. Don’t live in Connecticut and over the years, I’ve watched probably 10 time's the number of away games than home games.

There’s also the time zone difference, which affects broadcast times. Only 3 of the new Big XII members are in the Eastern time zone. The rest are in the Central time zone except for BYU in Mountain Time. Try staying up for those games and then having to get up for work in the morning.

 

[Billy Jack]

Yes we'd lose out on all those Creighton Butler DePaul Xavier and Marquette alumni and fans visiting the XL and GP if we go to the Big 12.

There actually are some.There aren’t any from the Big Dust Bowl Conference.