NOCoog, I think you missed a lot of previous discussions on what Rutgers adds to the B1G. B1G did not add Rutgers just because they are AAU. Their objective was to make more money by adding Rutgers because they are in the New York market. I think they succeeded with a whopping $51M per school payout.
Do you think they would have added Rutgers if they were located in Montana? Absolutely not. They added Rutgers so the Big Ten Network can make millions in New Yorkers cable subscriber fees.
The metropolitan population of New York is 20M but I’m sure viewership is less than half of that but still, that is a lot of cable subscription fees the B1G is raking in even though Rutgers is awful in football.
That is why I think UH would add value to a P12, ACC or even the B1G since they would be able to charge premium rates for the Big Ten Network in Texas.
It may be a pipe dream but come on B1G. Let UH be your next Rutgers.
At the time the Big 12 needed a 10th body. They could have selected any G5 program. They picked TCU because Del Conte had his lips glued to DeLoss ass!
2011 was an unusual time, i doubt any conference will ever have so much discretion to add members the way the Big 12 had in 2011.
Sad reflection of our society imo. Rutgers sucks on the field but is great for bringing in more money. And all of us college football fans that just want to see great football games suffer from it and at the same time condone it through our subscriptions to espn. Competition is what makes football great, hopefully a few more tainted championships will bring a change.
Good write-up Ron but could the B10 convince cable/streaming companies that we carry weight in the entire state? That people in El Paso and Abilene are in our media footprint? That’s a tall order. I’m not sure how they convinced the companies that Rutgers mattered in NYC.
Technically it was the networks that killed expansion because of the GORs. B12 was ready to cash those in until the networks put the brakes on it, for the reasons you describe. They paid off the B12 for no expansion and OU and UT did not renew their GORs past '23 (or whenever they expire)
That unofficial rule in the SEC is common knowledge when dealing with realignment. It has nothing to do with one’sschool affiliation. It was one of the first things mentioned consistently when realignment discussions first came up all those years ago.
I would love that too - just let ANY P-5 conference invite us, followed immediately by an invitation from the Little-12, and tell the latter to drop dead, with our compliments!
At this time the Big 12 presence in the Houston media market comes down to one school - UT. No other B12 program has so much as a blip on the media rankings. And, yes, the SEC is almost certainly stronger in this market than the B12. That’s due largely to A&M. You got a little carried away trying to make your point but you are in the ring.
And then there is UH. I have posted many comments from media ratings sources showing with real numbers that UH is a major player in this market. When UH-UCONN has higher ratings than UT-OU then you can rest assured that B12 bluster notwithstanding UH is a dominant presence in the Houston and SE Texas media market.
As for “other fans” in the Houston, area I have been watching UH sports for over 50 years. One thing that has become very clear to me is that every major program in the USA seems to have a fan base in this city.
Michigan and Ohio State are ignoring their many Houston area fans when they refuse to play a home and home with UH. Even when we offer to play at NRG. Just count the fans when programs from Southern to Mississippi State come here to play. Remember making all those Mississippi State fans drop those idiot cow bells into the can? Sweet.
Don’t get too carried away here. There are advantages to playing in the Big 12, ASSUMING we negotiate our membership. But just taking any terms they throw at us is certainly a no go.
Wasn’t just Switzer. I know at least KK and Gundy did, too, and I think more than that. As far as I know athletics directors did not (which along with the TCU add is why I don’t think that’s why they passed on us) but it made the conference look bad and I have no recollection of that sort of talk from any other conference. But perhaps most damning is that it seems to accurately portray a lot of the attitudes involved. Again, attitudes I just don’t see on public display in the other P5 conferences.
