Of course nobody knows what is going to happen when the current TV network contracts are renegotiated and/or renewed in about 4-5 years.
For example, UT and OU could negotiate/demand a 25% share each (50% in total) with the other Big12 members in order to remain in the Big12; and then they would be making much, much more $$$ than anyone else in the college FB world.
Of course, the U.S. Congress could also decide to step in and begin taxing college FB programs since they are now making such huge profits - say $50-75 million/year. And, then there is also the current pending pay-the-players legal proceedings which could soon force other changes for big-time college FB and BB.
Who in their right mind thinks that schools like UT and ATM should be able to build 100,000+ seat stadiums and take in $200+ million/year in broadcast rights and ticket sales, and then spend $10-15 million/year on coaching staffs but so very little on the athletes themselves. That is not an amateur athletic endeavor and shouldnât be exempt from income tax on such unseemly profits!
Good points, the only thing Iâd mention is that they donât want to spend more on us than theyâve proven they can spend. Redirecting attention from a diminished big 12 to the AAC really just means they would try to bring the big 12 down to our level rather than bring AAC up to their level as a replacement. How long would that fly, given that 8 new schools would be on the G6/getting fâed in the b side of the voting equation, and their ability to maintain an unbalanced access system?
I wonder what the conditions of the big 12âs contract with the Sugar Bowl are, in the scenario of UT and OU leaving early. Do they hang on for the duration of the current CFP contract, the way the Big East got one more year as a BCS AQ? If so, then it is an obvious choice to accept an invitation, if we think we can maintain any of our current capability, because even if they minimize the conference and leave the winner out of the playoff (like is happening with the Pac 12 now), thatâs still several years of automatic Sugar Bowls if we win the conference. Now, if they stay until the end of the current CFP contract, then all bets are off there.
the number to look at is BIG GOR , which expires in 2023. They should make their move a year earlier. It is close enough to Big 12 GOR that Texas and OU could make a smooth transition move thereâŠand there wont be any waiting till 2025 to do all this, either. It will happen sooner than that. There is NO reason to think Texas and OU are going to stay and make LESS money in a less well thought of Big 12. Whatever happens after that is likely up to ESPN and FOXâŠ
âBy committing to stay in the AAC, those schools sacrifice the opportunity to jump to a more lucrative arrangement if a power five league like the Big 12 decides to expand.â
Thereâs not going to be any big 12 expansion unless that conference gets raided first. And thatâs probably not going to happen unless the PAC 12 or ACC somehow overtakes the B12 in the pecking order of per-school payout amounts.
they shouldnt have! Breaking a fundamental rule to allow that dumbass league a championship game never should been allowedâŠ
This is a war between FOX and ESPN and FOXâs B1G dog is WAY bigger than ESPNs Big 12 dog, which they only share with FOXâŠ
Well weâre not going to have to wait until 2023 to find out. The network deal and school movements will be known by then because they usually start negotiating 1 to 2 years before it expires. In 2021 we will start hearing about network deals and possible expansion.
I suppose Texas and OU will be the first to go if they are offered a lot more money. I can see the B12 counter offering UT and OU with a bigger cut of the pie.
âŠB1G already pays so much more money than Big 12 it isnt funnyâŠand the disparity is only going to GROW, not shrinkâŠTexas and OU wish to be members of the biggest, richest, most academically prestigious and most influential conference in the country. That is the B1GâŠDoes anyone seriously think a school like Texas is going to continue to associate with schools they deem their inferior in every respect when they can join the B1G??
Monte, I donât understand UTâs financial incentive for wanting to bolt anywhere, except perhaps to become an independent like ND, where they donât have any headaches about sharing with anyone. Is it realistic to think that any P5 will accede to UTâs demand to keep the LHN? OU is different, and they certainly appear to have an incentive to bolt. Except they just found their way back into the CFP amongst the weakest P5 conferences (maybe debatable this year.) I would think they would be first choice for either the SEC, B1G or PAC.
OU is the point on which all of this mess will pivot, not UT. UT is fine with things as they are, LHN and all. Erosion of the B12 due to the LHN has OU hanging on by a thread.
OU may bolt with or without UT. UT can do any number of things but I canât see them being a small fish in the B10 plus I think Nebraska would blow a gasket if they were conference mates with the Whorns again. Maybe the Pac?