(07-26-2016 01:29 AM)SMUleopold Wrote:  Yes, the Big XII would get an additional $23M per school per year for each new member. But there's a catch:

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...nt-revenue
The additional monies that would go to the conference would mostly be to cover the costs of the new members, not necessarily increase the current members wallets. If one of the members succeeded on the field or on the court, the current members may actually stand to make more money, but if the new members didn't live up to expectations it could actually cut into the current members revenue. I remember talking to some KSU fans before the Liberty Bowl who said their biggest concern about letting new schools in was that they may cut into their piece of an already unfairly cut pie.
But the idea that the individual conference members stand to make money by just bringing in new members isn't true, unfortunately.

It is going to cost the Big12 $50 or $100 million per year to absorb the new teams?

Yes. The whole point of being in a major conference is to share in the revenue.

Last year the Big XII handed out, on average, $23M per school.
$23M x 10 = $230M
$230M divided by 12 is $19.16M
$230M divided by 14 is $16.42M

So, based on ballpark figures, it would cost each school, on average, almost $4M to let in two schools and almost $6.5M to let in four schools, per year. And, of course, since UT and OU take the lion's share of the money to begin with it stands to reason that they would lose even more than that. Unless the TV contract is prepared to be increased to take in additional schools to avoid cutting the pie into smaller pieces.
So clearly the heads of both the conference and media have taken that idea into consideration. But there are those who maintain that the current members stand to make even more money off of the additional payout money that is to be offered if new schools are added, and most likely that isn't the case.

(07-27-2016 01:10 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  Yes. The whole point of being in a major conference is to share in the revenue.

Last year the Big XII handed out, on average, $23M per school.
$23M x 10 = $230M
$230M divided by 12 is $19.16M
$230M divided by 14 is $16.42M

So, based on ballpark figures, it would cost each school, on average, almost $4M to let in two schools and almost $6.5M to let in four schools, per year. And, of course, since UT and OU take the lion's share of the money to begin with it stands to reason that they would lose even more than that. Unless the TV contract is prepared to be increased to take in additional schools to avoid cutting the pie into smaller pieces.
So clearly the heads of both the conference and media have taken that idea into consideration. But there are those who maintain that the current members stand to make even more money off of the additional payout money that is to be offered if new schools are added, and most likely that isn't the case.

Not sure how you've missed it, but I thought that was the whole point. A clause in the current big 12 contract that says money will be added to the total for each new school added up to 4.

(07-27-2016 09:29 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(07-26-2016 01:29 AM)SMUleopold Wrote:  Yes, the Big XII would get an additional $23M per school per year for each new member. But there's a catch:

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...nt-revenue
The additional monies that would go to the conference would mostly be to cover the costs of the new members, not necessarily increase the current members wallets. If one of the members succeeded on the field or on the court, the current members may actually stand to make more money, but if the new members didn't live up to expectations it could actually cut into the current members revenue. I remember talking to some KSU fans before the Liberty Bowl who said their biggest concern about letting new schools in was that they may cut into their piece of an already unfairly cut pie.
But the idea that the individual conference members stand to make money by just bringing in new members isn't true, unfortunately.

It is going to cost the Big12 $50 or $100 million per year to absorb the new teams?

Yeah. I don't get the math. If you get 23 million per new school and the new schools take a reduced payout, everyone else gets the difference split between them.

Not trying to be difficult. My take on Binghampton Ned's post was that he thought the Big XII was stupid (or someone was) if it was going to cost them tens of millions if they took on new schools:

(07-27-2016 09:29 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  It is going to cost the Big12 $50 or $100 million per year to absorb the new teams? :wingedeagle

(07-27-2016 01:28 PM)Mtyler Wrote:  

(07-27-2016 01:10 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  Yes. The whole point of being in a major conference is to share in the revenue.

Last year the Big XII handed out, on average, $23M per school.
$23M x 10 = $230M
$230M divided by 12 is $19.16M
$230M divided by 14 is $16.42M

So, based on ballpark figures, it would cost each school, on average, almost $4M to let in two schools and almost $6.5M to let in four schools, per year. And, of course, since UT and OU take the lion's share of the money to begin with it stands to reason that they would lose even more than that. Unless the TV contract is prepared to be increased to take in additional schools to avoid cutting the pie into smaller pieces.
So clearly the heads of both the conference and media have taken that idea into consideration. But there are those who maintain that the current members stand to make even more money off of the additional payout money that is to be offered if new schools are added, and most likely that isn't the case.

Not sure how you've missed it, but I thought that was the whole point. A clause in the current big 12 contract that says money will be added to the total for each new school added up to 4.

Yep

(07-27-2016 06:43 PM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(07-27-2016 01:28 PM)Mtyler Wrote:  

(07-27-2016 01:10 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  Yes. The whole point of being in a major conference is to share in the revenue.

Last year the Big XII handed out, on average, $23M per school.
$23M x 10 = $230M
$230M divided by 12 is $19.16M
$230M divided by 14 is $16.42M

So, based on ballpark figures, it would cost each school, on average, almost $4M to let in two schools and almost $6.5M to let in four schools, per year. And, of course, since UT and OU take the lion's share of the money to begin with it stands to reason that they would lose even more than that. Unless the TV contract is prepared to be increased to take in additional schools to avoid cutting the pie into smaller pieces.
So clearly the heads of both the conference and media have taken that idea into consideration. But there are those who maintain that the current members stand to make even more money off of the additional payout money that is to be offered if new schools are added, and most likely that isn't the case.

Not sure how you've missed it, but I thought that was the whole point. A clause in the current big 12 contract that says money will be added to the total for each new school added up to 4.

Yep

It will bring eyeballs....

(07-24-2016 01:11 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 07:01 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(07-23-2016 06:22 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  If as reported that the B12 gets an incremental bump with each new, added school, then why not add 6 - as some have suggested is the end game (4 or 5 conferences with 16 schools each) of the power conferences anyway?

I'd guess they wouldn't want to be bigger than everyone else; 16 is harder to schedule, and they aren't that enamored with the candidates.

What is so hard about 16 teams. Two divisions.

Football Each school in your division 7 games. a permanent rivalry from the other divisions1 game and a rotating game from other side 1 game. Which leaves you three non conference games.

Easy...because if u are Iowa State or Kansa's or Texas Tech etc...you are guaranteed home games every other year vs Texas, OU, etc...

For many schools, that goes away when u expand to 16 teams in 2 divisions...as some teams will only host teams from other division once every 7 or 8 yrs, especially if they go back to 8 confirm games.

(07-23-2016 07:01 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  if Tx an Ou play every season then the championship. game would be a rematch

If you are the host stadium (Jerry's World) or the TV Network, that is your dream scenario....hence why those teams will be in opposite divisions AND be cross divisional confirm rivals that will continue to play every year at the Cotton Bowl.