TIGERCITY
Hall of Famer
Posts: 19,975
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation: 453
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
|
Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(This post was last modified: 07-22-2016 10:49 PM by TIGERCITY.)
|
|
07-22-2016 10:47 PM |
|
Atlanta
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13,372
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 935
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Metro Atlanta
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
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?
|
|
07-23-2016 06:22 AM |
|
Latilleon
Git Buck.
Posts: 21,611
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 473
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(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.
|
|
07-23-2016 07:01 AM |
|
Atlanta
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13,372
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 935
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Metro Atlanta
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(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.
Implications from the B12 are it's all about the money......16 schools gets them the most money, if the incremental TV contract obligations are correct. That would be 6 schools the B12 could short for a number of years, putting more $$$ in the current membership collective pockets.
|
|
07-23-2016 07:24 AM |
|
Latilleon
Git Buck.
Posts: 21,611
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 473
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(07-23-2016 07:24 AM)Atlanta Wrote: (07-23-2016 07:01 AM)Latilleon Wrote: (07-23-2016 06:22 AM)Atlanta Wrote: If as reported that the B12 gets an incremental bump with each new, added school, then why not add 6 - as some have suggested is the end game (4 or 5 conferences with 16 schools each) of the power conferences anyway?
I'd guess they wouldn't want to be bigger than everyone else; 16 is harder to schedule, and they aren't that enamored with the candidates.
Implications from the B12 are it's all about the money......16 schools gets them the most money, if the incremental TV contract obligations are correct. That would be 6 schools the B12 could short for a number of years, putting more $$$ in the current membership collective pockets.
But the contract is for only 7 or 8 more years and it's a gamble the money will stay up, so they can't dilute the brand. That is the argument to only add two.
|
|
07-23-2016 08:58 AM |
|
hsvtiger
All American
Posts: 4,716
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 254
I Root For: Tina
Location: 22milesouttaPasadena
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(07-23-2016 07:24 AM)Atlanta 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.
Implications from the B12 are it's all about the money......16 schools gets them the most money, if the incremental TV contract obligations are correct. That would be 6 schools the B12 could short for a number of years, putting more $$$ in the current membership collective pockets.
I somewhat agree. If they can get the same incremental increases, give the new schools much less than a full share, then the current schools get more. If you think about it, it is the perfect time to do it as the new schools will have 7-8 years to ramp things up to achieve their full worth before the next TV contract.
I think that scheduling is easy for 16 - Two eight team divisions, with 7 division games per year, plus two (or maybe 3) crossover games. For basketball, play home-and-home vs division and one game vs non-division for a total of 22. (Or, you could do 4 pods with home-home within pod and one game with other 12 for a total of 18.)
Lot's of things to consider...but, hey, whatever includes Memphis.
|
|
07-23-2016 09:10 AM |
|
BinghamptonNed
Hall of Famer
Posts: 23,096
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 878
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Germantown
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(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?
|
|
07-23-2016 09:34 AM |
|
80sTiger
Why Am I Stuck on 'Water Engineer' ?
Posts: 8,745
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation: 527
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Collierville
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
They will have enough trouble agreeing on the extra 2 in the +4 scenario ... I'm not sure they could every agree on the last 2 in a +6 situation.
|
|
07-23-2016 10:37 AM |
|
Atlanta
Hall of Famer
Posts: 13,372
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 935
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Metro Atlanta
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(07-23-2016 09:10 AM)hsvtiger Wrote: (07-23-2016 07:24 AM)Atlanta 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.
Implications from the B12 are it's all about the money......16 schools gets them the most money, if the incremental TV contract obligations are correct. That would be 6 schools the B12 could short for a number of years, putting more $$$ in the current membership collective pockets.
I somewhat agree. If they can get the same incremental increases, give the new schools much less than a full share, then the current schools get more. If you think about it, it is the perfect time to do it as the new schools will have 7-8 years to ramp things up to achieve their full worth before the next TV contract.
I think that scheduling is easy for 16 - Two eight team divisions, with 7 division games per year, plus two (or maybe 3) crossover games. For basketball, play home-and-home vs division and one game vs non-division for a total of 22. (Or, you could do 4 pods with home-home within pod and one game with other 12 for a total of 18.)
Lot's of things to consider...but, hey, whatever includes Memphis.
And the idea of concerns over dilution are ridiculous given it wouldn't happen for 8 yrs. That's an eternity in a conference life & UT/OK would always have alternatives. If it's $$, go for the $$ while they are there. Fun to talk about but I'm not so sure this incremental structure is as fixed contractually as we hear. Just think about the $$ lost on such an idea if not implemented.
(This post was last modified: 07-23-2016 10:41 AM by Atlanta.)
|
|
07-23-2016 10:40 AM |
|
ncrdbl1
Legend
Posts: 27,231
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 487
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Horn Lake
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(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.
|
|
07-24-2016 01:11 AM |
|
MonsterTigerBlue
Heisman
Posts: 9,143
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 237
I Root For: Tigers!!!!!
Location:
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
Tulane , ECU, UCF
|
|
07-24-2016 01:36 AM |
|
holyterror
Hall of Famer
Posts: 16,927
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1079
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(07-23-2016 10:37 AM)80sTiger Wrote: They will have enough trouble agreeing on the extra 2 in the +4 scenario ... I'm not sure they could every agree on the last 2 in a +6 situation.
"These things have a way of working out."
Dollar Bills. They'll get their minds right.
|
|
07-24-2016 05:48 AM |
|
BinghamptonNed
Hall of Famer
Posts: 23,096
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 878
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Germantown
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(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.
It will be 8 conference games, 7 divisional one crossover game, there will be no rivalry games since there are no existing rivalries inter-divisionally
|
|
07-24-2016 05:52 AM |
|
geosnooker2000
I got Cleopatra in the basement
Posts: 25,269
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 1358
I Root For: Brandon
Location: Somerville, TN
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(07-24-2016 05:52 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote: (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.
It will be 8 conference games, 7 divisional one crossover game, there will be no rivalry games since there are no existing rivalries inter-divisionally
With respeck... you are going on the assumption of your earlier post about a legends division and a newcomers division. I question the idea of eliminating the possibility (a probability in their minds) of a Texas/Oklahoma championship game, and other legend matchups in the championship as well. I could just as easily see them putting Texas in the South and Oklahoma in the North, and picking your division "playground style."
|
|
07-24-2016 02:55 PM |
|
BinghamptonNed
Hall of Famer
Posts: 23,096
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 878
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Germantown
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(07-24-2016 02:55 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote: (07-24-2016 05:52 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote: (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.
It will be 8 conference games, 7 divisional one crossover game, there will be no rivalry games since there are no existing rivalries inter-divisionally
With respeck... you are going on the assumption of your earlier post about a legends division and a newcomers division. I question the idea of eliminating the possibility (a probability in their minds) of a Texas/Oklahoma championship game, and other legend matchups in the championship as well. I could just as easily see them putting Texas in the South and Oklahoma in the North, and picking your division "playground style."
if Tx an Ou play every season then the championship. game would be a rematch
|
|
07-24-2016 03:42 PM |
|
kabluey
Heisman
Posts: 8,080
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 200
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
If any conference hits 16, look for them to consider the pod system the PAC likely would have implemented had they succeeded in their raid on the Big 12 lo those many years ago. 4 pods of 4 rotating around in 2 8 team divisions to ensure all schools had similar access and exposure to CA and TX talent.
|
|
07-25-2016 02:21 AM |
|
AlonsoWDC
Hall of Famer
Posts: 10,639
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 935
I Root For: Memphis
Location: East Memphis
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
The WAC had a 16-program superconference in the mid-to-late 1990s after they got all those SWC teams and others. It was what led to the MWC split, but they worked on a pod system.
Nobody liked it obviously.
|
|
07-25-2016 03:18 AM |
|
geosnooker2000
I got Cleopatra in the basement
Posts: 25,269
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 1358
I Root For: Brandon
Location: Somerville, TN
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
(07-24-2016 03:42 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote: (07-24-2016 02:55 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote: (07-24-2016 05:52 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote: (07-24-2016 01:11 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote: (07-23-2016 07:01 AM)Latilleon Wrote: 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.
It will be 8 conference games, 7 divisional one crossover game, there will be no rivalry games since there are no existing rivalries inter-divisionally
With respeck... you are going on the assumption of your earlier post about a legends division and a newcomers division. I question the idea of eliminating the possibility (a probability in their minds) of a Texas/Oklahoma championship game, and other legend matchups in the championship as well. I could just as easily see them putting Texas in the South and Oklahoma in the North, and picking your division "playground style."
if Tx an Ou play every season then the championship. game would be a rematch
True, but isn't that the case with Alabama and Tennessee?
|
|
07-25-2016 07:10 PM |
|
SMUleopold
1st String
Posts: 2,018
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation: 189
I Root For: Guess, genius..
Location:
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
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.
|
|
07-26-2016 01:29 AM |
|
memphisike
Heisman
Posts: 9,827
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 320
I Root For: memphis tigers
Location:
|
RE: Big 12 TV money -- adding 0, 2 and 4 teams
BIg 12 needs to add MEMPHIS and cinncinatti, word on the street is ECU headed to ACC
|
|
07-27-2016 07:06 AM |
|