I am still wondering how the heck WV is considered a better fit for the Big 12-2 than UH! I have always thought it as Deloss Dodds going out of his way to snuff UH and eliminate a real threat that UH could present to UT that WV can never do! That is also one of the reasons why the Big 12-2 refused to expand a few years ago since nearly every expert had UH as the #1 school to be the best fit for the Big 12-2!
We really don’t know what advice the Big 12 got from the consulting company it hired. They only thing that came out publicly was that the conference needed a 13th data point game to improve its chances of getting into the playoffs. At the time it was thought this meant expansion was essential as you could not have a CG with just 10 teams. Once NCAA allowed a CG with just 10 teams, the Big 12 got its 13th data point.
The “experts” who said UH/UCF made perfect sense where journalists. Boren (OU president) made some statements to the effect that there were programs that moved the financial needle but could not get the required 8 votes. Given all the dirt that’s come out about his tenure as President, and how he was contradicted by Bowlsby who said none of the programs considered moved the needle sufficiently, I lean towards not believing anything Boren had to say about expansion.
Then there is also the role played by ESPN/Fox. Ultimately they were the final arbiters of expansion. If they had supported expansion with certain programs (UH or someone else), it would have happened. You don’t ignore demands of the people writing the big checks.
I don’t think it was as simple as everyone believes. I doubt even if UH had UT support it would be in the Big 12 if ESPN had not supported expansion with UH. Conversely even if UT didn’t want UH in the Big 12, if ESPN had wanted it, it would have happened.
Btw here is the latest from Greg Flugaur.
I think Dodds just picked who he liked. Del Conte at TCU went out drinking with him and voila. Next few days TCU is invited. Not saying the rest of the Big 12 would have stood still for, say, New Mexico State or Louisiana Tech, but it’s not as if Baylor, Kansas State, etc. had much say in the matter or could have cared all that much as long as they got to remain in a P5 after hearing that Texas, OU, Tech, and OSU were off to the PAC 12.
1 Like
This statement is a Lie. I would not believe anything that came out of that jerks mouth…Mr. Bowlsby, that is. We are talking about a bunch of untrustworthy politicians, and he is king!
Probably. But I still believe ESPN had more to do with blocking Big 12 expansion than any disagreement between Big 12 members.
I would assume ESPN told them if you expand you will have to take a revenue cut and all the schools said we’re ok with 10 teams.
1 Like
Most likely that’s what happened. And it made no sense for the Big 12 to expand under those conditions. I mean why expand only to earn less money?
1 Like
And you would be incorrect.
The B12 contract called for their tv partners to increase there payout by enough to cover the payments for up to 4 teams. To stop expansion there tv partners paid them the two team expansion amount to not expand.
3 Likes
So they had 2 options:
-
expand with 2 and pay the added programs but no increase in payout for current members
-
not expand, keep the extra money networks paid to increase payout of current members.
1 would have financially benefitted the added programs but not the original 10, 2 financially benefitted the 10 members. Really there was only 1 choice for the conference.
What’s the point of expanding if the original members don’t benefit financially?
The extra money was an extra $2-3 mil per school, barely a drop relatively. They traded not expanding for not extending the GORs. Hence the perception that this is a dead conference walking
1 Like
The point is that they were ready to expand until espn stepped in and offered them money not to expand.
That was my point to begin with. That ESPN blocked expansion.
1 Like
Expansion was always about money. No extra money = No expansion, at least that’s the position that UT and OU. The smaller programs may have wanted expansion even it was revenue neutral. But UT and OU will never see any benefit in a revenue neutral expansion.
The B12 was ready to expand to get to twelve teams and close the perceived disadvantage of a 10 team conference gutted by exodus. It was the networks who did not want to pay the pro-rata for the two new schools. The networks did not see any expansion candidate worth that money and paid the conference the extra $2-3 million to each respective existing B12 school would have gained had they went ahead with expansion. In exchange, the GORs were not extended and expansion was killed.
Why wouldn’t ESPN block the Big 12 expansion? They had (and have) a good thing with the AAC. The top teams in the AAC were underpaid.
4 Likes
ESPN did not want to pay an extra $60-80 million/yr for the two new schools that they viewed did not carry the same value as the rest of the conference schools.
1 Like
ESPN lie too…you cant tell me WACO is more valuable than Houston!!!
3 Likes
It’s not, but they’re already in the club. So is Manhattan, KS and Ames, IA. Once again proving that being in the club is a better situation 10 out 10 times than not being in the club.
3 Likes
Like '85 said, once they’re in the club, they’re in and considered as part of the value of the conference as a whole. ESPN would probably have had the same reaction if Baylor was trying to get in from the outside, but they were lucky to be in.
2 Likes
I do not know much about Aresco and how we got into these give-away contracts in which we are paid a minute fraction of what we are worth. What gives?
1 Like