Why would the networks want to do that? They have 4 years left on their current contracts, it is not in their best interests to renegotiate unless they could get the rights for less than their current contracts and there is no way the B12 would do that.
So, the author thinks conference realignment is getting ready to start.
Mike,
I think you’re spot on. And why would B12 initiate this negotiation?
Four years is a long time, I didn’t realize it was this far off. I guess we
can look forward to 4 more years of speculation about where OU and
ut are going though.
I honestly think the big 12 was trying to do something before the pac12 so they don’t miss out on teams like us. It’s their nightmare if we go to the pac12.
The PAC 12 isn’t inviting Houston (if it ever does) until Texas is off the table for them.
The Big 12 must think they’re in the same class as the SEC and Big Ten.
Texas IS off the table for them…
PAC doesnt pay enough, pure and simple… Texas can go to any other P5 and get more money…
But they can’t take Tech and Oklahoma with them.
Texas wants to have some form of “control”. The BIG has already stated that Texas has a “Tech” problem. They can’t (due to optics) follow Texas A&M to the SEC.
They could go still go to the above, or go Indy or to the ACC or a scheduling alliance but the PAC is the only conference in which Tech/Oklahoma can both go with them (obvs could schedule OOC but not ideal).
That said, my only point is that the PAC won’t make any decisions in until they know that for sure (which they might by now, I have no inside info lol).
First, I really don’t know if UT can go to any other P5. They have a reputation that teams that left the B12 and SWC have spread to their new conferences. That rep is not one as a kid that plays well with others.
Second, I don’t think they want to give up their status as the big dog in the conference. Let’s face it, in the SWC they would be just another member that has won a championship years ago. They will never have the same clout as Alabama, Georgia, Auburn, Tennessee, LSU, or Florida. They would just be the new kid. Same with the B1G with Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan.
Re: your first point, as much as former conference mates might complain, as the old saying goes, money talks and something else walks. Texas is the most lucrative program in America, and no conference would be stupid enough to turn that down.
Re: your second point, you might be right that Texas enjoys being a big fish in a small pond, but it might be worth noting that the only B1G team to win a title (or even play a playoff/championship game) since the New Millennium is Ohio State.
Yes, UT makes a ton of money; but that hasn’t spilled over to the rest of the B12. UT has one Natti this century and hasn’t been in the CFP since it started.
UT has the ND problem in that they either think they are big dog or are. They don’t want to go to a conf where it’s equal sharing bc as the saying goes, they can and they earn more in a lesser conf by demanding to keep the LHN etc.
Has it not? Do you think that Tech, TCU, Baylor, OkSt, KU, KSU, ISU, and WVU would be making anywhere near as much if they didn’t have UT’s and OU’s backs to ride on? Frankly, I’d wager that UT and OU are the only media properties worth what they’re getting in that conference.
The Big 12 has renegotiated a TV deal with ESPN in the past and also did so with Fox
The Big 12 tier 1 TV deal was set to expire in 2016-15, but in September of 2012 the Big 12 signed a new TV deal with ESPN and slightly modified their Fox tier 2 deal.
So the Big 12 with 2 fewer teams, no CCG, and replacing Missouri and A&M with WVU and TCU was able to renegotiate their tier 1 TV deal with ESPN 3 years early and get about $40 million per year more.
And they were also able to get Fox to pay a bit more because Fox was able to get better picks of games from ESPN in the overall deal. So ESPN watched Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri, and A&M leave the Big 12 along with the CCG and still paid $40 million more while giving Fox better picks after WVU and TCU joined. And there was also the provisions for more TV money for expansion and an increase in payments for the CCG coming back.
All of that kept the Big 12 even in conference money with the Big 10 and SEC until the recent deals were signed with those two conferences.
ESPN also agreed to pay a 10 team Big 12 $40 million dollars per year (two out of three years) to play the SEC top team outside of the playoffs in The Sugar Bowl which is the same money the SEC gets with 14 teams and is more money than a 14 team ACC gets ($27.5 million) for playing in The Orange Bowl against either the #2 Big 10 or #2 SEC team after those conferences place a team in the playoffs (if they do) and after they meet their Sugar and Rose Bowl obligations.
So the Big 12 has been treated well by ESPN and they have in fact renegotiated a contract 3 years early with ESPN. And slightly renegotiated a Fox contract that was only one year old at the same time.
This does not mean it will happen again, but the facts show that ESPN had a lot of interest in keeping the Big 12 together in the past and worked with the Big 12 to keep their conference revenues about even with the Big 10 and SEC until recent contract and network deals happened and still keeps the Big 12 above the ACC and PAC 12.
I don’t know what may happen with realignment, but I do know competition in the broadcast media business is changing with additional major players than the last realignment cycle. Any company that has added subscribers in the last 5-10 years and wants to continue to do that is going to have a need for content. I think it’s going to be very interesting.
Plus don’t forget the LHN that ESPN pays I think an additional 15 million/year. So UT is
Getting $55 mil/yr, plus the additional exposure from the exclusive network, and an easy
path to CFP. What is their motivation for rocking the boat again ?
Do they get equal share with UT? I don’t think so.
That could be said about any conference though. The sad thing is that the Vanderbilts, Northwesterns, Oregon States, Iowa States, Kansas States of the world are all grandfathered in even though Ohio State, USC, Michigan, Alabama, Texas are what make the money.
New additions have to actually bring that value which is why any G5 additions to a P5 conference are quite low at this point.
Like Aldine mentioned in a post, we’re willing to pay a lot to get in when the opportunity is there bc our admin is spending a lot in subsidies now so we could cut a deal of getting less for 5 or 10 yrs if it’s the pac just to get in then attn etc rises to off set it later plus recruiting and then UH becomes a destination school with applications rising. We have Tillman , Pez and RK when the time arises. We don’t initially need the 25 or 40 mil. We can be a growth stock so the concept of us having to be worth 25 or 40 mil on day one is negated and I think it’s what Tillman will do bc he’s a good businessman.