NCAA conference realignment

[Dakota rube]

Just in case anyone's wondering why these schools are hopping around:

Football TV contracts of six major conferences

SEC
ESPN: 15 years, $2.25 billion through 2023-2024
CBS: 15 years, $825 million through 2023-2024

Big Ten
Big Ten Network: 25 years, $2.8 billion (projected) through 2031-32
ABC/ESPN: 10 years, $1 billion through 2016

Big 12
ABC/ESPN: Eight years, $480 million through 2015-16
Fox Sports Net: Four years, $78 million through 2011-12

ACC
ABC/ESPN: Seven years, $258 million through 2010-11

Pac-10
ABC/ESPN: Five years, $125 million through 2011-12
Fox Sports Net: Five years, $97 million through 2011-12

Big East
ABC/ESPN: Six years, $200 million through 2013

Note these are "football" numbers. Add in basketball (NCAA $$), and then repeat after me, "It is all about the student-athletes".

 

[StephenHero]

Overall, it's a win-win for everybody in the Big 12.

-The Big 12 schools are going to get a big tv revenue increases to $15-17 mm per school (and $20-25 mm for UT) from FOX, which puts them right there with the Big Ten and SEC in revenue. Colorado always got horrible ratings and NU got slightly above average, so the remaining 10 members will pull larger than their previous audience shares.

-Colorado and Nebraska have to pay the Big 12 $10 mm fines each for leaving, to be dispersed among the 10 remaining teams. Colorado is almost broke so they'll be scrapping to put it together at the cost of their AD budget. Nebraska was under the assumption their leaving of the Big 12 would kill the conference so they never expected to have to pay the fine. That cancels out any short term gain in TV revenue from the Big Ten deal.

-Nebraska and Colorado lose access to the Texas recruiting pool, helping the non-Texas Big 12 schools more and leaving Nebraska wondering where they can get quality players from with such a lousy talent pool in-state.

-The Big 12 loses its two shittiest basketball programs.

-Oklahoma moves to the North division, evening up the league's power.

-The conference becomes more desirable for expansion of its own with that good tv deal.

 

[MrG]

Looks like Texas is staying put.

Texas will remain a Big 12 Conference member, the university announced on Monday.

University president William Powers Jr., men's athletics director DeLoss Dodds and women's athletics director Chris Plonsky will hold a news conference at 11 a.m. ET on Tuesday.

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe will also address the media on a teleconference at noon ET.

Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott confirmed that Texas has turned down an invitation to leave the Big 12 and join his conference.

 

[bdeuce22]

this **** is getting so confusing. i am going to go into a coma for a couple weeks and hopefully read an article that sums it allllll up.

 

[Cary Grant]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

Colorado always got horrible ratings and NU got slightly above average, so the remaining 10 members will pull larger than their previous audience shares.

"Average" share in college football was 2.0. Colorado averaged 2.02 and Nebraska 3.57 (Nielsen 2009)

Originally Posted by StephenHero

-Colorado and Nebraska have to pay the Big 12 $10 mm fines each for leaving, to be dispersed among the 10 remaining teams.

If they pay anything, it'll be a long ways down the road after it goes through at least one lawsuit, and Nebraska will have already made up the difference in a couple of years Big Ten revenue. It'll be lean for NU for a bit but this isn't about near-term cash. NU's boosters will readily make up the difference.
[/quote]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

-Nebraska and Colorado lose access to the Texas recruiting pool, helping the non-Texas Big 12 schools more and leaving Nebraska wondering where they can get quality players from with such a lousy talent pool in-state.

Not so much, maybe some. Nebraska recruits strongly in Florida, Texas and California. Now they'll also be pulling better in the Northeast. They've never relied too much on local kids due to what you say though it is fertile ground for one the country's strongest walk-on programs.

Originally Posted by StephenHero

-The Big 12 loses its two shittiest basketball programs.

No arguing that.

Originally Posted by StephenHero

-Oklahoma moves to the North division, evening up the league's power.


Won't be a North division until they expand back to 12. The NCAA requires min 12 teams for a conference playoff.

This will end up working better for everybody, probably. Texas gets to keep bossing the league like they've been doing and the rest of the new Big 12 will be happy to let them as long as the money comes in.

 

[Texasmade]

The big question is now does the Big XII expand to get 2 more teams and if so who do they get? I doubt they'll invite any more Texas teams since the 4 already in pretty much have the state covered. Utah, BYU, or Air Force?

 

[Cary Grant]

Originally Posted by Texasmade

The big question is now does the Big XII expand to get 2 more teams and if so who do they get? I doubt they'll invite any more Texas teams since the 4 already in pretty much have the state covered. Utah, BYU, or Air Force?

Probably nobody for a year or two... after the recent feeding frenzy, I think they'll cool their jets a bit.

If there is a crack in the Big XII it'll be Mizzou who wants out badly... but since being rebuffed by the Big Ten they'll sit on their hands.

There is interest in adding more Texas schools... TCU or maybe Houston... so that the Longhorn network can that much more clout/reach/revenue.

 

[StephenHero]

"Average" share in college football was 2.0. Colorado averaged 2.02 and Nebraska 3.57 (Nielsen 2009) I'll try to find the numbers, but there was some data about Colorado not pulling it's weight by a considerable margin. If they pay anything, it'll be a long ways down the road after it goes through at least one lawsuit, and Nebraska will have already made up the difference in a couple of years Big Ten revenue. It'll be lean for NU for a bit but this isn't about near-term cash. NU's boosters will readily make up the difference. No chance of them getting out of that. I don't know why they'd bother with a lawsuit. They agreed to the contract. Not so much, maybe some. Nebraska recruits strongly in Florida, Texas and California. Now they'll also be pulling better in the Northeast. They've never relied too much on local kids due to what you say though it is fertile ground for one the country's strongest walk-on programs. NU averages about 5-8 Texas recruits a year. For the same reason the SEC can't get into Texas, Nebraska won't be able to stay in Texas. They'll need the midwest, but the midwestern states with Big Ten teams have more local loyalty. I don't see them being as successful as their think they will be. They also won't have as easy a time getting to a BCS game with Wisconsin, and Iowa in their division. When Zook is gone at Illinois they will be an up and coming program again as well. It was still a good move to leave for academic and stability, but I'm not sure it improves their product. [/quote]

 

[Texasmade]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

"Average" share in college football was 2.0. Colorado averaged 2.02 and Nebraska 3.57 (Nielsen 2009)

I'll try to find the numbers, but there was some data about Colorado not pulling it's weight by a considerable margin.



If they pay anything, it'll be a long ways down the road after it goes through at least one lawsuit, and Nebraska will have already made up the difference in a couple of years Big Ten revenue. It'll be lean for NU for a bit but this isn't about near-term cash. NU's boosters will readily make up the difference.No chance of them getting out of that. I don't know why they'd bother with a lawsuit. They agreed to the contract.





Not so much, maybe some. Nebraska recruits strongly in Florida, Texas and California. Now they'll also be pulling better in the Northeast. They've never relied too much on local kids due to what you say though it is fertile ground for one the country's strongest walk-on programs.

NU averages about 5-8 Texas recruits a year. For the same reason the SEC can't get into Texas, Nebraska won't be able to stay in Texas. They'll need the midwest, but the midwestern states with Big Ten teams have more local loyalty. I don't see them being as successful as their think they will be. They also won't have as easy a time getting to a BCS game with Wisconsin, and Iowa in their division. When Zook is gone at Illinois they will be an up and coming program again as well. It was still a good move to leave for academic and stability, but I'm not sure it improves their product.


[/quote]

I don't think Nebraska actually cuts the Big XII a check. The Big XII just won't pay out Nebraska next year, so the conference won't have to worry about not getting the money from them. I think they officially become a member of the Big 10 in July 2011 so they'll have to suffer a 50% paycut for next season. To top it off, they're going to be the most hated member of the conference since everyone else stayed (Colorado doesn't count since no one gives a crap about them).

 

[Benzito]

Biggest losers in all of this are the Pac-10 schools. Smarty-pants commissioner who didn't have any college sports background took this thing like a hostile business takeover and now the Pac-10 is f*cked - why compete with 10 or 11 teams instead of 9? That conference championship game frequently ends up knocking a top team OUT of contention for the NC, not boosting them up. And that assumes Utah wants to go to the Pac-10 instead of staying in the relatively easier confines of the MWC.

Enough of that bitching . . . you know the real culprit behind of this? Wait for it . . . Notre Dame. If those jerks would have just joined the Big Ten years ago, there wouldn't be this domino effect to snag teams from weaker conferences to get to an even twelve.

 

[tj100]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

NU averages about 5-8 Texas recruits a year. For the same reason the SEC can't get into Texas, Nebraska won't be able to stay in Texas.


I think the 'Texas recruiting' factor is way overplayed. The best players in Texas will almost always stay in Texas (and play for UT or A&M). There are a couple of exceptions every year, but for 2010, 15 of the top 20 Texas recruits are going to Texas or A&M.

Nebraska is going to be in the same situation they're in now - convincing high school kids from Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Illinois to make the jump to Lincoln. That can't be any more difficult than getting kids from Texas to choose the Huskers over UT, A&M, LSU, and Oklahoma.

 

[tj100]

Originally Posted by Benzito

Biggest losers in all of this are the Pac-10 schools. Smarty-pants commissioner who didn't have any college sports background took this thing like a hostile business takeover and now the Pac-10 is f*cked - why compete with 10 or 11 teams instead of 9?

The Pac-10 was teetering on the verge of irrelevance, with its one national contender facing a new coach, lost scholarships, and a bowl ban. It finished last year with just two teams in the top 25, and none in the top 10. The Pac-10 had to do something, and they are.

Realistically, they didn't have a whole lot of options. Colorado should help their TV ratings, and gate $$$ for a few years, as California more CU alumni than any state except Colorado.

 

[Benzito]

The Pac-10 had one bad year in ten . . . ignoring USC's dominance over the past several years, don't forget that UO went to two BCS bowls, OSU went to one (and is regularly ranked and heads to mid-level bowls), Cal has done well, and UA is finally coming around.

I agree that these 11 and 12 member leagues that send any team with a pulse to a bowl game may garner more media attention. Remember also, however, that the current TV deals were set a while back. At the time, the Pac-10 deal was one of the better ones (now it is one of the lowest - just like rookie contracts getting larger every year).

Anyway, having to do something and doing THIS are two different things. Unless they were certain that UT and OU were headed out west, they shouldn't have taken the risk and settled for half-ass. If you're right - Still irrelevant, but with less money.

 

[Cary Grant]

Originally Posted by StephenHero

No chance of them getting out of that. I don't know why they'd bother with a lawsuit. They agreed to the contract.


They'll argue that the break-up of the conference was imminent and therefore moot. The February Texas emails and confirmed calls (re: The "Tech" problem) will help in that argument.

 

[StephenHero]

. Well whose fault is that?