(02-08-2021 03:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 03:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 03:01 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 10:49 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  

(02-08-2021 09:09 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  One consideration is this...

The closer we get to a situation where the Big 12 could actually bring down a decent contract, the more schools we will have to offer in order to get them to consider a different option.

2 is easier for us.

4 makes more sense from their perspective.

A while back, I proposed a strategy for cracking the nut. Instead of putting Oklahoma or Texas in a position of strength and allowing them to decide which offer they wanted, I said offer TCU first. TCU is a good product by itself and I don't think we would regret having them.

Back in 2011, I half expected TCU to be the other addition along with Texas A&M, but it's clear now the contract called for a second market.

Anyway, taking TCU puts a lot of pressure on both Oklahoma and Texas. They are a better addition than either Oklahoma State or Texas Tech. It would secure an SEC presence in DFW with all the media exposure that brings. It would be akin to having a school in Atlanta in a scenario where such a city is basic virgin territory. Not that we don't have fans in DFW now, but we are the minority party.

For TCU's part, I don't see why they wouldn't take that offer. Sure, they would probably play TX schools all the time if they had their preference, but they are financially insecure without the blessing of Texas and Oklahoma. If the Big 12 goes away then it will be hard for them to find a comparable home. The reason for this is not because they have a weak or poor program. The reason is purely logistical. In the SEC, they are safe and prosperous.

For the SEC, however, they are a solid product in a good market. They merit inclusion. Given the situation, I think it is worth the risk.

Take TCU and you alter the math. For one thing, the last thing Oklahoma or Texas want is another SEC school smack in the middle of DFW. At that point, either of those schools starts to look at the situation differently.

I like TCU and think you are right that having a school in DFW is a decent concept. That being said, Texas Tech brings some basketball prowess now that TCU doesn't. I still think Texas/Tech/OK/State are the most likely 4.

To me, those 4 work, but if the SEC is dead set on only moving to 16 then they're going to have to think outside the box.

We have some things to sort out if the pairing is not Texas and Oklahoma. If we don't land Oklahoma and Texas insists on a partner do we have he wiggle room to decide whether it is Baylor, Tech, or TCU? If it is Oklahoma do we have to take OSU to get them? If we can choose their travel companion then Kansas helps cement Missouri adds another state, gives us an AAU school, and addresses basketball. But T.C.U. with Oklahoma and A&M absolutely covers DFW.

You say we should think outside of the box, but the answers are inside the box. Texas gives us with A&M all of Texas. We don't really need a third Texas school. At that point the grand slam is Oklahoma, especially when sculping divisions comes into play.

OU/UT = Auburn/UGA, UT/A&M = Au/Al , UT/LSU = AL/TN, A&M/LSU = Fl/UGA

Those additions create a true balance between the 2 divisions.

Without that you can't move Auburn and Alabama to the East and Missouri to the West because it would result in too much power in the East. Oklahoma and somebody adds but not enough. Texas and somebody adds but not enough. And therein resides the issue. Even OU/KU don't balance out Aub/Ala to the East.

If we add 4 we could work 3 divisions of 6 but again achieving a competitive balance just is going to be tough.

From the perspective of who should we want, well that's easy. Texas and Oklahoma.

If making that move happen is as easy as inviting them and only them then the problem is solved.

I doubt it's going to be that simple though. It's possible, but I can't remember a time for any league where such a monumental acquisition was as easy as making the invite. If for no more reason than we could have simply done just that in 2011.

I don't know whether Texas is ready to call it quits. It appears they weren't in 2011. Oklahoma should be much easier to acquire, but Oklahoma State is probably necessary for the purpose of making it simple.

It also matters what ESPN wants. If they think they can get a better bargain out of the entire Big 12 contract than they can by paying for Texas and OU in the SEC then it's all moot. It will be the Florida State scenario all over again.

The Big 12's estimated 2019-20 revenue, which is yet to be reported, will be about 37 million per year per school. Their escalators for 2020-1, 2021-2, 2022-3, and 2023-4 should add another 6 million. That takes them to 43 million. Add a generous 15% bump (5% more than they are likely to get) and it takes them to the 49 million range. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas represent 45% of the total value of the Big 10. So in a contract worth 449 million the big 3 are worth 220.5 million of that. So by moving them to the SEC and paying them 70 million each it more fully monetizes Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas (not that Kansas deserves that much) and leaves 228.5 million for the other 7 schools. That's 32.6 million each. ESPN can promote the top 3 schools from the AAC to the Big 12 for the added cost of 60 million. And they save 10 million by moving the Big 3 to the SEC.

So for a cost of 20 million tops they build a better tweener conference out of the Big 12, the take the best of the rest of the G5 to refill the AAC and the G5 shrinks.

Texas is happy. for distancing themselves with the recruiting base. Oklahoma is happy to finally be on equal footing with Texas. Kansas is thrilled to be elevated. And the 20 million for the promotion of the AAC schools to the Big 12 is covered by the elimination of overhead for the LHN which is eclipsed by enough with SEC revenues to save ESPN the cost and the LHN becomes the SECW channel which is one of the 3 existing channels for the SECN.

Likely South Florida, UCF, Houston, and Cincinnati get the call up and West Virginia moves to the ACC, perhaps with Vanderbilt.

I don't see how it will be better for ESPN to continue to underpay Oklahoma while funneling more money to Texas through the LHN, and give all of the other 7 schools 17 million more per year than they are worth.