Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Hard to have much leverage when everyone knows you're going to be raided by your bigger, stronger competitor to the south. I mean, if you were a good school in the Big East, say, West Virginia- why would you accept an invite to the ACC when you could either be raided in a couple of years or just get an invite to the SEC. Would, say, USF be interested? Sure. But any of the big powers (WVa, Pitt, etc) is in a better position waiting.

SI

I don't think people realize how huge the gap between the Big East and the rest of the BCS conferences is becoming. And I also think that the ACC has closed the gap considerably, financially, between itself and the SEC. I believe the ESPN deal the ACC just signed is good for $12-14 million per team or thereabouts. Not too bad compared to the SEC's $17 million. And the Big East is more like $3.5 million or so.

The SEC basically said that they didn't think a raid of the ACC was possible a lot recently in stories. Part of the issue could be that all of the likely targets have either in state SEC schools working against them or political ties that make it hard for them to leave (VT.) And in the end, it's just not a huge step up in money anyway, at least for the time being.

[DeToxRox]

A&M Rivals guys are reporting the conference sticking together is premature and that the A&M regents are going into their meeting right now. The feeling is they are going to still vote to go to the SEC but nothing is certain.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Logan

If it was okay to acknowledge that there were all these back-channel moves going around to solicit Missouri to the Big 10, why not acknowledge that the same people are likely making those statements you're looking for?

Well i dont think anyone in the Mizzou camp believes the rumors or so called leaks out there are coming from the any of the key players in the Missouri camp, for better or worse. While Chip Brown and the texas rivals site are getting fed information, the guys like Gabe at powermizzou(mizzou's rivals site) are having to cite information from other sources and rumors they heared 3rd hand. Maybe mbbf knows things the rest of us dont, but all information i have seen from mizzou people has been speculation because none of the reliable sources have said a thing.

[DeToxRox]

Heh, apparently A&M fans have been e-mailing everyone who is anyone at the school and letting them know that if the regents vote against going to the SEC they will stop donating to the school.

[Arles]

IMO, the key team in this whole thing is Oklahoma State. This new prevision gets Oklahoma, Texas and A&M a lot more money to keep them in the big 12 ($20ish mil). However, Missouri, OK St and Kansas are still going to stay in the $10 mil range at best.

OK St. figures to make $17-24 mil with the Pac 10 and Scott could simply offer OU-OSU and State would do everything they could to land in the Pac 10. Then, Texas would be forced to join the Pac or leave Tech hanging.

[DeToxRox]

And now Joe Schad is tweeting:

OSUs Board of Regents have scheduled an expansion-related meeting for Wednesday at 3 p.m.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

I don't think people realize how huge the gap between the Big East and the rest of the BCS conferences is becoming. And I also think that the ACC has closed the gap considerably, financially, between itself and the SEC. I believe the ESPN deal the ACC just signed is good for $12-14 million per team or thereabouts. Not too bad compared to the SEC's $17 million. And the Big East is more like $3.5 million or so.

The SEC basically said that they didn't think a raid of the ACC was possible a lot recently in stories. Part of the issue could be that all of the likely targets have either in state SEC schools working against them or political ties that make it hard for them to leave (VT.) And in the end, it's just not a huge step up in money anyway, at least for the time being.

Can't really dispute the second part. I don't know what the SEC is thinking at the moment. Why Texas A&M but not kick the tires on Oklahoma or Va Tech or West Virginia or something else? Their behavior so far hasn't made much sense to me.

To the first part, well, that's easier. The Big XII had a decent tv deal but as we've seen, if a team has, say $10M in the bank, they'd still rather break things up if they can get $15M elsewhere. That's the problem the ACC faces. No matter what you can offer, the SEC and Big 10 can offer more and they're both geographically positioned to pillage.

Not only that, but if you're a coveted candidate school (i.e. a domino that might fall) then you don't want to accept an ACC invitation if they're going to lose their strongest to one of those more powerful conferences. Getting out of a conference is just as hard as getting in, even if you're a big name school.

SI

[Galaxy]

Is West Virginia the most attractive school in the East that isn't in the ACC, SEC, or Big Ten?

[sterlingice]

Random note. I was listening to Kansas City 810 this morning on the web and Soren Petro had someone from CNBC on talking about the money figures that are being thrown around. There were some interesting salient points

1) If you're making a deal with another network (say, Fox or ESPN), you care only about teams that bring you ratings. Yes, pulling in, say, the Denver market with Colorado is kindof substantial but at the end of the day, it's not that big of a number- sure, you've added maybe 300K buffs fans there but that's a drop in the bucket unless it's a national profile team (read: Texas, Notre Dame).

2) If you're making your own network (Pac-10, Big 10) then you care about markets you can get into for subscriber fees. I suppose that's why Rutgers is coveted but, realistically, unless you can get the Rutgers fanbase to get so riled up to get the Big 10 Network included on the major New York providers, they're kindof useless. He thought it was unlikely Rutgers fans have that clout. It's something slightly perplexing about the Nebraska deal to him, tho they play the part of a team from point 7 below (not increase subscribers but increase ratings so you can collect more per subscriber).

3) The Big XII pretty much has to be done. Even if they get this deal from Fox that Beebe is trumpeting and, frankly, he doesn't think the dollars are there. Maybe it's a deal where Texas gets $20M and everyone else gets $5M but no tv exec can figure out where these numbers are coming from so he thinks they're just made up for posturing.

4) Similarly, the numbers being bandied about by the Pac 10 are similarly fictional. There are startup costs and this was the first year the Big 10 Network made money, 4 years in, and it's nowhere near the amount people are throwing around. Basically, the Pac 10 Network numbers are grossly inflated and/or made up. It's not because the right collection of teams couldn't get $20M per for a network once it's up and running. But there's no way you're getting $20M per for 16 teams for quite a while and especially not right off the bat.

5) Soren argued back that the Big XII has a $150M deal per year right now and that means that no only is there someone willing to pay $150M but to get to $150M, there had to be someone bidding against them at, say, $140M to get it up to $150M. The possible wild card in all this could be Comcast and Versus as ESPN is already lined up and Fox is who is putting together the possible cash for the Big XII-2 deal, which leaves no real players out there. He contended that if the Big XII imploded, that cash has a home somewhere so that's where the additional cash would possibly come from.

6) This is why Texas is willing to listen to the Fox deal for the Big XII-2. Everyone knows the conference is going to implode, sooner or later, but Texas thinks that they'll still be coveted this badly in a few years so let everyone get their ducks in a row (Big 10 keep courting Notre Dame, Pac 10 start their own network, SEC make their possible moves) so they don't have to assume any of the monetary risk and can reap whatever reward they want.

7) Basketball is getting pretty ignored in all this and there could be some bargains out there. For instance, he talked about how the Big 10 network had a couple of dozen mostly lower tier football games but over 120 basketball games. If they wanted to add some ratings and thus hope to increase the subscriber fees they could collect, they might want to add a big basketball program or two (read: Kansas).

8) Texas A&M to the SEC is pretty baffling to him. Why do it now? You have one more mouth to feed with no real value added to the league. That said, he also thought only Delaney really had an eye on the concept that each added team adds one more split and that he didn't think the Pac 10 or SEC commishes had their eye on this important part of the ball. They were looking mainly to increase their standing but

I didn't buy everything that the guy was selling but it was an interesting look at some of the "lesser covered" angles of this story, if there are any of those left.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Is West Virginia the most attractive school in the East that isn't in the ACC, SEC, or Big Ten?

I would have thought Va Tech but I see W Va talked about more. I'm not really sure, tho.

SI

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Is West Virginia the most attractive school in the East that isn't in the ACC, SEC, or Big Ten?

Not to the Big Ten. There's speculation that they could be the most attractive Eastern option to the SEC, but it's just speculation to this point.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Is West Virginia the most attractive school in the East that isn't in the ACC, SEC, or Big Ten?

Strictly football/basketball wise, yes. But academically and financially, I'd say Pitt, Rutgers and Syracuse are all ahead of them in the Big East.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I would have thought Va Tech but I see W Va talked about more. I'm not really sure, tho.

SI

Virginia Tech has a real political problem and probably couldn't go anywhere without UVA, who wouldn't want to go anywhere without Duke and Carolina.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Apparently it's coming out of Big 12 North schools that the conference has been saved. We'll see soon enough I guess.

Mike Alden is meeting with the coaches of the MU athletic programs at 4:00 CDT to update them on the current situation.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Mike Alden is meeting with the coaches of the MU athletic programs at 4:00 CDT to update them on the current situation.

Is he going to finally tell them that he called the Big XII offices and resigned Missouri's membership last week?

[TroyF]

the Big 12 staying together would be a mistake for everyone involved. We know it is blowing up, just get it over with.

I'm just looking at the conference if it stays at ten and looking at football:

1) Texas
2) Oklahoma

3) OSU
4) A&M
5) Missouri

6) Texas Tech

7) Kansas State
8) Kansas
9) Baylor
10) Iowa State

That's brutal. Texas/OU winner is the champion 95% of the time.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Strictly football/basketball wise, yes. But academically and financially, I'd say Pitt, Rutgers and Syracuse are all ahead of them in the Big East.

Even strictly football/basketball wise, Pitt may be WVU's equal, especially looking forward (and there financials definitely play a big part).

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Random note. I was listening to Kansas City 810 this morning on the web and Soren Petro had someone from CNBC on talking about the money figures that are being thrown around. There were some interesting salient points

1) If you're making a deal with another network (say, Fox or ESPN), you care only about teams that bring you ratings. Yes, pulling in, say, the Denver market with Colorado is kindof substantial but at the end of the day, it's not that big of a number- sure, you've added maybe 300K buffs fans there but that's a drop in the bucket unless it's a national profile team (read: Texas, Notre Dame).

2) If you're making your own network (Pac-10, Big 10) then you care about markets you can get into for subscriber fees. I suppose that's why Rutgers is coveted but, realistically, unless you can get the Rutgers fanbase to get so riled up to get the Big 10 Network included on the major New York providers, they're kindof useless. He thought it was unlikely Rutgers fans have that clout. It's something slightly perplexing about the Nebraska deal to him, tho they play the part of a team from point 7 below (not increase subscribers but increase ratings so you can collect more per subscriber).

3) The Big XII pretty much has to be done. Even if they get this deal from Fox that Beebe is trumpeting and, frankly, he doesn't think the dollars are there. Maybe it's a deal where Texas gets $20M and everyone else gets $5M but no tv exec can figure out where these numbers are coming from so he thinks they're just made up for posturing.

4) Similarly, the numbers being bandied about by the Pac 10 are similarly fictional. There are startup costs and this was the first year the Big 10 Network made money, 4 years in, and it's nowhere near the amount people are throwing around. Basically, the Pac 10 Network numbers are grossly inflated and/or made up. It's not because the right collection of teams couldn't get $20M per for a network once it's up and running. But there's no way you're getting $20M per for 16 teams for quite a while and especially not right off the bat.

5) Soren argued back that the Big XII has a $150M deal per year right now and that means that no only is there someone willing to pay $150M but to get to $150M, there had to be someone bidding against them at, say, $140M to get it up to $150M. The possible wild card in all this could be Comcast and Versus as ESPN is already lined up and Fox is who is putting together the possible cash for the Big XII-2 deal, which leaves no real players out there. He contended that if the Big XII imploded, that cash has a home somewhere so that's where the additional cash would possibly come from.

6) This is why Texas is willing to listen to the Fox deal for the Big XII-2. Everyone knows the conference is going to implode, sooner or later, but Texas thinks that they'll still be coveted this badly in a few years so let everyone get their ducks in a row (Big 10 keep courting Notre Dame, Pac 10 start their own network, SEC make their possible moves) so they don't have to assume any of the monetary risk and can reap whatever reward they want.

7) Basketball is getting pretty ignored in all this and there could be some bargains out there. For instance, he talked about how the Big 10 network had a couple of dozen mostly lower tier football games but over 120 basketball games. If they wanted to add some ratings and thus hope to increase the subscriber fees they could collect, they might want to add a big basketball program or two (read: Kansas).

8) Texas A&M to the SEC is pretty baffling to him. Why do it now? You have one more mouth to feed with no real value added to the league. That said, he also thought only Delaney really had an eye on the concept that each added team adds one more split and that he didn't think the Pac 10 or SEC commishes had their eye on this important part of the ball. They were looking mainly to increase their standing but

I didn't buy everything that the guy was selling but it was an interesting look at some of the "lesser covered" angles of this story, if there are any of those left.

SI

Interesting stuff, and I agree with a lot of it. I'd dispute the contention that the Pac-10 doesn't understand the split of the pie concept - it's been hammered home repeatedly throughout this process by the conference that they're only going to expand if it makes sense financially to do so.

I would definitely agree that the TV numbers Beebe is throwing out there right now are fiction, and the wild numbers I've seen in the last couple of days for the Pac-16 are similarly fictional (up to $30M per team?). That said, I'd also be surprised if the Pac-16 didn't pull a better TV deal, perhaps significantly so, than the weakened Big-"12".

Definitely agree about basketball, and I'd be shocked if Scott didn't extend an invite to Kansas if the Pac-16 happens for precisely that reason.

Good points too about even if the Big-"12" survives, it may just be temporary, and Texas is willing to wait things out a little longer so long as they are also taken care of in the near term (which is what Beebe is trying to do). That allows them to evaluate what kind of TV deal the Pac-12 can pull and see if they can get a Pac-Network going without having to pitch in for the initial start-up costs.

Right now, I'm rooting hard for A&M to jump to the SEC, as that will almost assuredly kill the attempts to keep the Big-"12" on life support, force Texas and Oklahoma to the Pac and open a spot up for Kansas to come along with them.

[sterlingice]

I know in my heart of hearts that scenario is probably the best thing for Kansas (short of, I suppose, the Big 10 coming calling for KU and MU over the giant number of well qualified candidates they have for reasons I can't fathom) but it doesn't mean I like it.

SI

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Even strictly football/basketball wise, Pitt may be WVU's equal, especially looking forward (and there financials definitely play a big part).

Actually WVU has a 15-20% bigger athletic budget than Pitt (probably because people go to WVU football games.) Pitt is potentially more financially attractive to a conference because it's in a large TV market, but their sports do not do as well as WVU financially as things are, so that wouldn't be a competitive advantage for them. If they land in a better conference than WVU that could change, of course.

[MJ4H]

Couple of things. 1) I'm starting to pick rumblings that VaTech has accepted a preliminary offer to the SEC. 2) This is fucking awesome:

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Apparently it's coming out of Big 12 North schools that the conference has been saved. We'll see soon enough I guess.

No chance -- those schools are all as tight-lipped as they come!

[Swaggs]

Now that it looks like the Big 12 has worked things out, it would be awesome if the Big Ten started to flirt with Missouri again.

[sooner333]

The Pac 10 plane never made it to KC yesterday. It flew back to California this afternoon.

Also, I'm disappointed if the conference stays at ten. I don't feel very solid with the TV promises and I don't trust Beebe. I wanted to keep things together at 12, but when two left, I'd rather just go to the Pac Ten than not really being sure what's going to happen for years on end.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Can't really dispute the second part. I don't know what the SEC is thinking at the moment. Why Texas A&M but not kick the tires on Oklahoma or Va Tech or West Virginia or something else? Their behavior so far hasn't made much sense to me.

You seem to assume that they haven't, simply because there isn't as much smoke around the water cooler about them doing so. I wouldn't be so sure about that.

This is, after all, a conference whose current commissioner negotiated a $2.5B TV deal last year, in addition to a separate $825m deal with another network. They also ended up with a branded "SEC Network" that reaches almost double the B10N households (via syndication) while getting someone else to foot the bill, deal with the admin, and worry about the sales.

His predecessor spearheaded the formation of the BCS and navigated the waters of college football's first championship game sized expansion.

Think what I might about the overall academics of the SEC, I have no qualms about the ability of the conference administrators to handle this current tremor. I'd say anyone selling them short does so at their own (conference) peril.

[MJ4H]

hahahaha no way I believe this for a second but:

1049 The Horn tweet (Radio station in Austin)

Looks like Big12 will be back to 12. BYU and Air Force will be invited to replace NU and CU by Wed. Texas/Okla schools are all on board.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

Actually WVU has a 15-20% bigger athletic budget than Pitt (probably because people go to WVU football games.) Pitt is potentially more financially attractive to a conference because it's in a large TV market, but their sports do not do as well as WVU financially as things are, so that wouldn't be a competitive advantage for them. If they land in a better conference than WVU that could change, of course.

Would WVU carry the Pittsburgh market? Does Pitt draw better locally, but does WVU sell better nationally?

[Passacaglia]

Big Ten debates divisional alignments in expansion - AnnArbor.com

Big Ten football will have a different look when Nebraska begins play in 2011.

There’ll be a championship game, one that generates lots of money and keeps the league relevant into early December. And the conference will split into two six-team divisions, with the potential for those divisions to grow should the Big Ten decide to expand again.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said the league will adhere to three principles when it sets its divisions, likely sometime later this summer.

“First priority’s competitive fairness to me,” Delany said last week. “Second priority is maintenance of rivalries, some of them are very important. They’re part of who we are and they’re not treated lightly. And then I think the third is what factor, if any, does geography play?”

While university presidents will ultimately decide how the Big Ten aligns, Delany said associate commissioner Mark Rudner will outline a handful of divisional options for school athletic directors in the coming weeks.

During the Big Ten Network’s expansion coverage on Friday, analyst Gerry DiNardo laid out three possibilities. Two involved splitting the conference geographically (along north-south and east-west lines), while the third sought to split up traditional football powers Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Nebraska into “Bo” and “Woody” divisions.

DiNardo’s suggestions:

• Using the state of Indiana as a dividing line, Michigan would play in the East Division along with Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan State, Indiana and Purdue. The West would be: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois and Northwestern.

• In a north-south split, the North Division would feature Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Minnesota and Northwestern. The South: Ohio State, Penn State, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois and Purdue.

• Under the Bo and Woody plan, Michigan headlines the “Bo” Division, named after former Wolverines coach Bo Schembechler, along with Nebraska, Michigan State, Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois. The “Woody” Division (after former Buckeyes coach Woody Hayes) includes Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana and Northwestern.

“I would say forget about geography, make it as equal as possible, keep your rivalries, take your four historic powers” and split them into two divisions, DiNardo said.

Delany, appearing a few minutes later, said, “I sort of agree with Coach. I think it’s really important to work on the competitive fairness. That’s a great initial principle.”

There are issues to debate with each plan, but all three appear viable.

With an east-west alignment, the Big Ten risks being too unbalanced, like the old Big 12, with its traditional football and basketball powers consolidated mostly in the East. In the north-south and Bo-Woody plans, travel is more cumbersome, especially for non-revenue sports, and rivals like Michigan and Ohio State are in opposite divisions.

Delany said most rivalries (i.e., Michigan-Ohio State and Michigan-Michigan State) will be protected, though he admitted on the Big Ten Network “not all rivalries are equal.”

He also said he expects to have a 2011 schedule in place sometime later this summer.

“This is not going to the moon, this is creating some football and basketball schedules and some championship formats and selling some media rights,” he said. “I think it’s a challenge, but eminently doable."

What a bunch of crap. Bo and Woody divisions? Okay, there's a little humor in being the Woody Division champs, but that idea is so so stupid.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

hahahaha no way I believe this for a second but:

1049 The Horn tweet (Radio station in Austin)

Looks like Big12 will be back to 12. BYU and Air Force will be invited to replace NU and CU by Wed. Texas/Okla schools are all on board.

Air Force?

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Would WVU carry the Pittsburgh market? Does Pitt draw better locally, but does WVU sell better nationally?

I really have no idea in terms of ratings. I know WVU has had some pretty highly rated ESPN primetime games, but that's it.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Is West Virginia the most attractive school in the East that isn't in the ACC, SEC, or Big Ten?

Hmm ... after pondering that seemingly simple question for a bit I've come to the conclusion that the best answer is "it depends". Mostly on the eye of the beholder in question.

For the SEC, yeah, I'd say probably so.
For the B10(+x), probably not.

"Most attractive" in this situation is kind of like the whole blondes/brunettes/ redheads question I think. There's not a universal standard of "beauty" you can apply to answer the question.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Air Force?

The only possible thing i can think of is holding onto the denver market in some way, but it makes 0 sense to me to take Air Force...hell, BYU makes little sense to me as well.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

The only possible thing i can think of is holding onto the denver market in some way, but it makes 0 sense to me to take Air Force...hell, BYU makes little sense to me as well.

While I don't think this report is even remotely believable, even hypothetically it would be largely a case of finding any port(s) in a storm rather than some detailed marketing strategy.

They probably make more sense than adding two random schools from Texas or non-football schools from elsewhere in the midwest, so beyond that what realistic criteria could they really apply when selecting replacements?

[timmynausea]

Couple of new tweets following up the Air Force/BYU talk:

We apologize, but it seems like someone had access to the account that shouldn't have.

104.9 The Horn DID NOT report that Air Force and BYU would be two new Big12 teams.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

While I don't think this report is even remotely believable, even hypothetically it would be largely a case of finding any port(s) in a storm rather than some detailed marketing strategy.

They probably make more sense than adding two random schools from Texas or non-football schools from elsewhere in the midwest, so beyond that what realistic criteria could they really apply when selecting replacements?

Well if they are actually committed to staying I dont think they need or should get replacements. Their not going to get a bigger offer for anyone they can add right now, so why cut up the pie two more ways.

Hypothetically if they did, I think you have to look to strengthen your northern ties. The southern players would still be in place, but you lost two teams geographically on the far northern and western borders of the conference. Hypothetically, i think you have to look there...look at a Utah, a New Mexico, someone who offers a nice TV market. And also one who wouldnt challenge the status quo of southern power, because Texas wouldnt stick around if it didnt get more then its fair share.

[molson]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

Couple of new tweets following up the Air Force/BYU talk:

We apologize, but it seems like someone had access to the account that shouldn't have.

104.9 The Horn DID NOT report that Air Force and BYU would be two new Big12 teams.

LOL, that's all it takes to get the message boards and the college football world buzzing - an radio station intern with a twitter password.

[dawgfan]

So if Texas and Oklahoma are satisfied with the plan that Beebe has put together, is that regardless of what A&M does? Do they really think that a Big-"12" that is missing Nebraska, A&M & Colorado is going to bring in enough revenue to resist going to a Pac-16? Do they not think that the league will lose a lot of prestige and suffer accordingly when it comes to rankings, BCS assignments and bowl affiliations?

I buy the idea that the Big-"12" survives (for a little while at least) if A&M stays, but if they don't?

And are the rest of the remaining Big-"12" programs going to be happy with a revised conference that is even more unequal in revenue between the haves (Texas, Oklahoma) and the have-nots?

I think there's still room for Larry Scott and the Pac-10 to tip this back in their favor, especially if A&M jumps to the SEC.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

And are the rest of the remaining Big-"12" programs going to be happy with a revised conference that is even more unequal in revenue between the haves (Texas, Oklahoma) and the have-nots?

Of course not, its blatantly clear now that the entire big 12 north was unhappy with how things were. If what they say about the new deal is true, its going to get even more unequal. The problem these schools face is they hold no leverage. Beyond being big and having a following, Texas can say either take it or i go to the pac 10 and you are left with nothing. So no, schools like K-state and mizzou would not at all be happy with the deal, but until they have alternative options it remains the best option for them.

[timmynausea]

Chip Brown tweets: Sources say a TV deal that will hold the B12-Lite together is done. A formal announcement soon.

He followed that up to announce the UT press conference tomorrow at 10 am. Also apparently the ESPN scroll says Texas has turned down the Pac 10 offer.

[Chief Rum]

It's on the UCLA boards that Larry Scott has confirmed Texas has turned down the Pac-10 offer, which of course means none of the schools are moving over. All contingent on Texas A&M staying, but they have also apparently been satisfied with the deal being negotiated, and are wrapping up their meeting to confirm this.

No word on what the Pac 10 does, but I assume they invite Utah and call it a day.

I would guess that this arrangement is a bandaid. The remaining north schools will be even more unhappy with this deal, as noted, and the conference is probably going to lose its conference championship game, which is a money hit that works against the deal (even if the coaches might be happy about that).

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

II would guess that this arrangement is a bandaid. The remaining north schools will be even more unhappy with this deal, as noted, and the conference is probably going to lose its conference championship game, which is a money hit that works against the deal (even if the coaches might be happy about that).

Yeah, just seems like this is delaying the inevitable. There's no question the Big-"12" has been weakened by losing Nebraska - national perception of the conference will drop, and that will end up hurting Texas and Oklahoma in the polls and the BCS seedings. You also have to wonder if the bowls currently affiliated with the conference are going to be balking at the current arrangement of the league, and if Fox is going to be doing a face-palm move in a few years for the money they are throwing at the league to stay intact. Add in the resentment within the league, and you just wonder how long they can hold out before imploding...

You know that the Pac-12 and Big Ten aren't going to stop wooing Texas...

[timmynausea]

It seems like there is some confusion about who came through on this Big 12 TV deal. Many are suggesting that ESPN outbid Fox. I guess ESPN's Joe Schad did just tweet this:

The survival of the Big 12 is in the best interests of fans, coaches and players. Best for the sport.

[DeToxRox]

Texas and A&M are both confirming they will be back in the Big 12.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

It seems like there is some confusion about who came through on this Big 12 TV deal. Many are suggesting that ESPN outbid Fox. I guess ESPN's Joe Schad did just tweet this:

The survival of the Big 12 is in the best interests of fans, coaches and players. Best for the sport.

But not for his career as a reporter with the scoop?

[dawgfan]

So for those dogging Chip Brown - sure seems like he was right a lot more often than he was wrong in this whole deal.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow on June 11th

I may be naive, but I think the musical chairs is over (for the most part). The only other defection will be Utah to the PAC 10, to create the PAC 12 (which is the new conference name said by both Colorado and PAC 10 officials in their press conferences). The Big 10 would then become the Big 12, and the Big 12 would become the Big 10.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

It seems like there is some confusion about who came through on this Big 12 TV deal. Many are suggesting that ESPN outbid Fox. I guess ESPN's Joe Schad did just tweet this:

The survival of the Big 12 is in the best interests of fans, coaches and players. Best for the sport.

Since when has anything in college football been done for the best interest of fans, coaches and players? That's pretty f'ing hilarious. If ESPN bid that much (I've heard as much $163 million per year), it's just to keep their sparkly new BCS contract worth something more than scrap paper.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by molson

LOL, that's all it takes to get the message boards and the college football world buzzing - an radio station intern with a twitter password.

I would of figured Colorado State would be more attractive than Air Force.

I think the ACC has a great chance to go for 16 teams if they really wanted too.

[Noop]

How the hell did ESPN find all that money? The ACC is obsolete as a football conference and I hope Florida State leaves it for the SEC.

[Swaggs]

If Utah or BYU leave, the MWC won't be able to score high enough for a BCS bid. I wonder if Boise St. will be pissed off if both leave?