https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt...96899.html

Quote:As the Pac-12 burned to the ground, the Big 12 had the chance to invite two of its remaining members, Stanford and California.

According to Big 12 school officials, the conference contemplated adding the two elite Bay-area schools but were met with resistance from four members, namely Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Texas Tech.

Having already added Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah to the league starting in 2024, one Big 12 official said, “There is no more money.”

This from a column talking about how SMU to the ACC might affect TCU but we get some clarity on what was going on behind the scenes as PAC programs were scrambling after the Oregon and Washington news hit them like a ton of bricks. It could well explain why Oregon State and Washington State weren't invited, either.

(09-25-2023 10:20 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt...96899.html

Quote:As the Pac-12 burned to the ground, the Big 12 had the chance to invite two of its remaining members, Stanford and California.

According to Big 12 school officials, the conference contemplated adding the two elite Bay-area schools but were met with resistance from four members, namely Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Texas Tech.

Having already added Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah to the league starting in 2024, one Big 12 official said, “There is no more money.”

This from a column talking about how SMU to the ACC might affect TCU but we get some clarity on what was going on behind the scenes as PAC programs were scrambling after the Oregon and Washington news hit them like a ton of bricks. It could well explain why Oregon State and Washington State weren't invited, either.

It absolutely explains OSU/WSU. It also makes one wonder if the money is sustainable for the new Big XII when their next TV deal comes up? Everyone was praising Yormark for being a genius. However, It's overlooked that part of the reason ESPN extended their agreement with the Big XII was to help get OU/UT out of the Big XII sooner. That leverage is now gone. What happens in 5 years when it's time to renegotiate the Big XII TV deal? Are they still worth $31 million per school? It's not over yet.

I'll explain...

B12 DIDN'T WANT CAL AND STANFORD!!!

Quote:As the Pac-12 burned to the ground, the Big 12 had the chance to invite two of its remaining members, Stanford and California.

According to Big 12 school officials, the conference contemplated adding the two elite Bay-area schools but were met with resistance from four members, namely Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Texas Tech.

Very interesting combo. I would've guessed Texas Tech (revenge), Cincinnati, West Virginia, & UCF.

Thing is both Cal and Stanford would pay their own way - accept less payout

I actually think the B12 should have just added OSU/WSU/Cal/Stanford and gone to 20

4 5-team pods -
OSU, WSU, Cal, Stan, Utah
AZ, ASU, BYU, TTU, TCU
CO, KU, KSU, ISU, Ok St (old Big 8)
Hous, Bay, UCF, Cinc, WV

Those all contain some nice existing rivalries/ratings drivers

Football - play 4 from your pod every year, then 2 from the other 3 pods (10 games but works best that way)

Basketball - home and home within pod (8 games), everyone else once (12) - making a 20 game conf season -doable

The old Big 8 schools get to maintain their 100 year old rivalries, BYU-TCU get to play every year, the Pac NW group has decent travel

The B12 gets two more AAU schools in Cal and Stan, gives AZ some west coast recruiting access

Also, when ACC implodes, B12 can add Louisville, Pitt and find two more to get to 24 - guessing this configuration of the B12 is a near match to SEC and B1G football and basketball

Kudos to those 4 because there is no way Cal/Stanford would of have voted yes for those 4.

So if there was no more money, what exactly was being proposed?

Were Cal and Stan asking for equal shares of the existing pot?

So $31M x 16 /18 = $27M each for all 18 members.

Or were Cal and Stan offered 30% shares?

x = $31M x 16 / 16.6

= $30M each for 16 existing members
= $9M each for Cal and Stan

You would think if Cal an Stan were asking for equal shares, I could see why old Big 12 schools pushed back. If Cal and Stan were willing to take 30% shares, why would the Big 12 say no?

I dont see Cal and Stanford being good partners in the Big 12. It wouldn't have been a pleasant experience for any of the involved parties

(09-25-2023 10:56 AM)solohawks Wrote:  I dont see Cal and Stanford being good partners in the Big 12. It wouldn't have been a pleasant experience for any of the involved parties

(09-25-2023 10:26 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  

(09-25-2023 10:20 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt...96899.html

Quote:As the Pac-12 burned to the ground, the Big 12 had the chance to invite two of its remaining members, Stanford and California.

According to Big 12 school officials, the conference contemplated adding the two elite Bay-area schools but were met with resistance from four members, namely Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Texas Tech.

Having already added Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah to the league starting in 2024, one Big 12 official said, “There is no more money.”

This from a column talking about how SMU to the ACC might affect TCU but we get some clarity on what was going on behind the scenes as PAC programs were scrambling after the Oregon and Washington news hit them like a ton of bricks. It could well explain why Oregon State and Washington State weren't invited, either.

It absolutely explains OSU/WSU. It also makes one wonder if the money is sustainable for the new Big XII when their next TV deal comes up? Everyone was praising Yormark for being a genius. However, It's overlooked that part of the reason ESPN extended their agreement with the Big XII was to help get OU/UT out of the Big XII sooner. That leverage is now gone. What happens in 5 years when it's time to renegotiate the Big XII TV deal? Are they still worth $31 million per school? It's not over yet.

Look at the TV ratings for non-OUT Big 12 teams over the past decade. Sicem360 has great writeup on it:

https://sicem365.com/s/13048/how-many-vi...am-attract

Factor that in, then look at the past few years of Big 12 Title Games and overall ratings (with neither OU nor UT not at their peak), and, if anything, the Big 12 was underpaid relative to the ACC in order to secure their long term future. Last fall, ESPN was able to justify paying the ACC more money, but what happens in 2031 if the ACC can't start getting more than 3m people to watch their CCG and Clemson hasn't turned it around b/c Dabo keeps hoping the transfer portal will just go away? Also, 8 years down the road, who knows if ESPN is still the 800 lb gorilla? My gut says that live sports will continue to increase in value, CFB will continue to grow in popularity, and the B1G, then Big 12, then SEC will all get to take advantage of that continued growth AGAIN before the ACC finally goes back to market in 13 long years.

(09-25-2023 10:56 AM)solohawks Wrote:  I dont see Cal and Stanford being good partners in the Big 12. It wouldn't have been a pleasant experience for any of the involved parties

The ACC is going to have their hands full with those two.

It all worked out for everyone.

Big 12 got their 4C
ACC got their SMU, Stanford and Cal

All is right in the world.

(09-25-2023 10:56 AM)solohawks Wrote:  I dont see Cal and Stanford being good partners in the Big 12. It wouldn't have been a pleasant experience for any of the involved parties

It's a very complicated situation. If the money had been there to add them at the same payout as the 4c then they'd probably have gotten in, but as it wasn't, there were enough hard feelings over their decades of snobbery and extreme foolishness that the money issue was a good excuse to vote against them. If they'd actually had to remain in the 4Pack and help rebuild it, they might have gotten an invite in 2031 or 2036.

(09-25-2023 10:40 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  Thing is both Cal and Stanford would pay their own way - accept less payout ...

The thing is, Stanford probably prefers to be in the ACC if they have to enter either the ACC or the Big12 at a reduced payout.

And you may well retort that it would be the height of arrogance for Stanford to just assume they can talk their way into the ACC but, (1) this is Stanford we are talking about, and over the past few decades, there would have to be more people who've lost bets on the under side regarding how high their arrogance goes, and (2) they might have held onto the offer to join the Big12 at a reduced payout as their Plan C, but they didn't have to turn to Plan C because their Plan B worked out.

(09-25-2023 10:26 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  

(09-25-2023 10:20 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt...96899.html

Quote:As the Pac-12 burned to the ground, the Big 12 had the chance to invite two of its remaining members, Stanford and California.

According to Big 12 school officials, the conference contemplated adding the two elite Bay-area schools but were met with resistance from four members, namely Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Texas Tech.

Having already added Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah to the league starting in 2024, one Big 12 official said, “There is no more money.”

This from a column talking about how SMU to the ACC might affect TCU but we get some clarity on what was going on behind the scenes as PAC programs were scrambling after the Oregon and Washington news hit them like a ton of bricks. It could well explain why Oregon State and Washington State weren't invited, either.

It absolutely explains OSU/WSU. It also makes one wonder if the money is sustainable for the new Big XII when their next TV deal comes up? Everyone was praising Yormark for being a genius. However, It's overlooked that part of the reason ESPN extended their agreement with the Big XII was to help get OU/UT out of the Big XII sooner. That leverage is now gone. What happens in 5 years when it's time to renegotiate the Big XII TV deal? Are they still worth $31 million per school? It's not over yet.

Is it ever over? You have schools from the ACC and the Big 12 who will be courting B1G and SEC invites hard.

Cal/Stanford/Utah/Colorado/Kansas/Virginia/Virginia Tech/UNC/NC State/Duke/Clemson/FSU/Miami.

You could even thrown in the Arizonas/Pitt/WVU/TCU.

Some of those schools WILL get picked up, and the rest will have to make do where they are.

The best you are going to get in this environment is the current deal and then reassess at the next media deal. The Big 12 should be okay in that it has already outlasted the PAC. The Big 12 will be able to offer games in every single time slot for potential partners. It has the reach to East or West and centrally anchored.

Regardless of any turmoil, the conference will survive in some form or other.

(09-25-2023 11:19 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-25-2023 10:56 AM)solohawks Wrote:  I dont see Cal and Stanford being good partners in the Big 12. It wouldn't have been a pleasant experience for any of the involved parties

It's a very complicated situation. If the money had been there to add them at the same payout as the 4c then they'd probably have gotten in, but as it was, there were enough hard feelings over their decades of snobbery and extreme foolishness that the money issue was a good excuse to vote against them. If they'd actually had to remain in the 4Pack and help rebuild it, they might have gotten an invite in 2031 or 2036.

I wonder if, beyond the ESPN/Fox TV money, if adding two more schools outside the current footprint wasn't palatable, given that would have put the league with 7 Pacific/Mountain time zone schools, exacerbated travel problems, and further made WVU, UCF, and Cincy outliers? Particularly given that Calford would bolt the Big XII for a B1G invite in a heartbeat when the B12's short GOR is up, whereas the ACC has them locked in for another 13 years with the GOR.

(09-25-2023 10:26 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  I'll explain...

B12 DIDN'T WANT CAL AND STANFORD!!!

Well the article says the Big 12 didn't want Cal and Stanford when they didn't bring any money with them. The ACC had a pro rata deal. The Big 12 had already used theirs and the networks didn't want to pay more for Cal and Stanford.

(09-25-2023 11:37 AM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(09-25-2023 10:26 AM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  

(09-25-2023 10:20 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt...96899.html

Quote:As the Pac-12 burned to the ground, the Big 12 had the chance to invite two of its remaining members, Stanford and California.

According to Big 12 school officials, the conference contemplated adding the two elite Bay-area schools but were met with resistance from four members, namely Iowa State, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Texas Tech.

Having already added Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah to the league starting in 2024, one Big 12 official said, “There is no more money.”

This from a column talking about how SMU to the ACC might affect TCU but we get some clarity on what was going on behind the scenes as PAC programs were scrambling after the Oregon and Washington news hit them like a ton of bricks. It could well explain why Oregon State and Washington State weren't invited, either.

It absolutely explains OSU/WSU. It also makes one wonder if the money is sustainable for the new Big XII when their next TV deal comes up? Everyone was praising Yormark for being a genius. However, It's overlooked that part of the reason ESPN extended their agreement with the Big XII was to help get OU/UT out of the Big XII sooner. That leverage is now gone. What happens in 5 years when it's time to renegotiate the Big XII TV deal? Are they still worth $31 million per school? It's not over yet.

Is it ever over? You have schools from the ACC and the Big 12 who will be courting B1G and SEC invites hard.

Cal/Stanford/Utah/Colorado/Kansas/Virginia/Virginia Tech/UNC/NC State/Duke/Clemson/FSU/Miami.

You could even thrown in the Arizonas/Pitt/WVU/TCU.

Some of those schools WILL get picked up, and the rest will have to make do where they are.

The best you are going to get in this environment is the current deal and then reassess at the next media deal. The Big 12 should be okay in that it has already outlasted the PAC. The Big 12 will be able to offer games in every single time slot for potential partners. It has the reach to East or West and centrally anchored.

Regardless of any turmoil, the conference will survive in some form or other.

I suspect if the ACC GOR lasts until the late 2030s, there will be enough of the ACC left to survive and they will trade with Stanford/Cal realizing the cost of their arrogance and WVU and UCF getting reduced travel costs in the ACC, with renewed rivalries for WVU. Not sure if the Big 12 would be willing to trade Cincinnati for SMU, though.

The article doesn't change the broader narrative...

1) ESPN offered pro-rata media payouts if the B12 expanded with up to 4 additional power conference teams. The B12 chose Colorado, Arizona, ASU, and Utah...the B12 got their targets.

2) If the PAC couldn't negotiate an acceptable media deal, Washington, Oregon, Cal & Stanford were simultaneously lobbying for B1G expansion. In addition, the ACC was reportedly vetting Washington, Oregon, Cal & Stanford...this scenario was their fail-safe to maintain power conference membership. Washington & Oregon jumped at an offer to the B1G, with reduced media payouts. Cal & Stanford were financially squeezed by the ACC, but they maintained their power status.

The article is speculating about whether the B12 should have made overtures to Cal & Stanford. After the 4C moves, the B12 didn't have more media revenue to fund further expansion. Maybe TCU would benefit if SMU isn't competing as a power conference program. It's a good story to hype interest in the TCU-SMU rivalry.

(09-25-2023 10:40 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  Thing is both Cal and Stanford would pay their own way - accept less payout

I actually think the B12 should have just added OSU/WSU/Cal/Stanford and gone to 20

4 5-team pods -
OSU, WSU, Cal, Stan, Utah
AZ, ASU, BYU, TTU, TCU
CO, KU, KSU, ISU, Ok St (old Big 8)
Hous, Bay, UCF, Cinc, WV

Those all contain some nice existing rivalries/ratings drivers

Football - play 4 from your pod every year, then 2 from the other 3 pods (10 games but works best that way)

Basketball - home and home within pod (8 games), everyone else once (12) - making a 20 game conf season -doable

The old Big 8 schools get to maintain their 100 year old rivalries, BYU-TCU get to play every year, the Pac NW group has decent travel

The B12 gets two more AAU schools in Cal and Stan, gives AZ some west coast recruiting access

Also, when ACC implodes, B12 can add Louisville, Pitt and find two more to get to 24 - guessing this configuration of the B12 is a near match to SEC and B1G football and basketball

Doesnt say when that occurred. It may be that Cal and Stanford were not wiling to take half shares at that time. However, if they were---then the rejection indicates the B12 could not make money off of that expansion even at half price.