All Nebraska/Colorado Buyout Money Going Only to Texas/A&M/Oklahoma

[MadBadger]

No wonder Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri etc wanted out. This conference has a class system that is basically recognized by the conference.

Things must have been real bad for the "little schools" to give up all this money. Shame on Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, and Dan Beebe.

http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2010-06-15/big-12s-big-three-reportedly-paid-stay

[fishwax]

1. I don't think it would be better for the other schools if those three had left

It's not as though they came back to the table against the others' will. They could have made a ton of money jumping to the Pac 10 and leaving the other schools to fight for a spot in the Mountain West or Conference USA. And as it stands, if the projections are correct, they'll still make more money than they have in the past.

Also, one quick correction--I could be wrong, but I think that KU, KSU, Mizzou, ISU, and Baylor are giving up their shares of the money, and that is what is going to the Big 3. But Texas Tech and OSU won't be surrendering their share, so it's not the case that all the buyout money is going to those three.

The uneven money sharing has always been a point of contention, though, and was part of the reason that schools have been expecting Missouri to look elsewhere almost since the conference formed. Ironically, Nebraska left instead of Missouri--they were thrilled with the revenue sharing agreement when the Big 12 was formed--back when they were on top of the college football world, and they were appearing on television every week.

[Condem]

2. Texas Tech not on board yet?

http://www.hawkeyenation.com/forum/football/11660-m-still-isnt-board.html Hmmmmmm. Could some school with some balls actually stand up to the Horns?

[JonLP24]

3. Where is the source?

All I see is a posting on a blog.

[Condem]

4. Give it time, Jon.

It'll turn up.

[fishwax]

7. I always go to hawkeyenation.com for my Texas Tech news. Incidentally, Tech has already announced

that they're staying: http://www.kcbd.com/global/Story.asp?s=12653986

[Condem]

8. I thought there was a glimmer of hope that one of the little nine would stand up.

Shoots that to shit.

[fishwax]

10. lol -- stand up to what? Most of the "little nine" are expecting to double their revenue

There are two schools that are not getting a relatively great deal out of this particular band-aid: Texas Tech and Oklahoma State. They're promised more money, just like everyone else in the conference, but moving to the Pac-1x would have been a bigger boon to their profile than it would have for Oklahoma and Texas. But, quite frankly, I'm not sure that either of those schools had offers that weren't contingent on a package deal.

As for Texas A&M, they didn't want to go to the Pac 1x anyway, otherwise the deal probably wouldn't have fallen through--it would have been politically difficult (if not impossible) for UT to go without the Aggies.

As for the other schools, they benefit greatly from the new arrangement, temporary though it will likely be. Certainly the leftover schools--Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Iowa State--are better off now than they would have been scrambling for admission to the Mountain West and Conference USA.

[Condem]

11. Where is this money coming from, fish???

And what if it doesn't??

[fishwax]

12. from what I'm reading, a big chunk is coming from

networks that agreed to overpay for the Big Xii because that was the only way to hold off a chain reaction of expansion that would have cost them exponentially more. Compared to the money they would have to shell out for a Pac 1x conference that covered 9 of the country's top 20 television markets, to say nothing of the fact that they would then have to renegotiate television contracts with the SEC, ACC, etc. (because those conferences would attempt to expand to keep up, thus triggering renegotiation clauses in their current contracts), bumping up the money they give to the Big Xii is small potatoes. Of course, the revenue need only be divided ten ways now instead of 12, so a contract only has to be about two-thirds bigger in order to double everyone's revenue.

Plus, Nebraska and Colorado have to pay penalties to get out of their Big XII contracts. This will amount to up to 20 million dollars off the top (most of which will go to OU, Nebraska, and A&M, since the five schools that would have been left out have agreed to forgo their share). And, finally, the Big Xii is apparently entitled to a substantial share of CU's and NU's revenues for the next couple of years--meaning that the remaining schools will divvy up most of CU's/NU's share of not only the Big XII contract next year, but also their share of the Pac-10/Big 10 money the year after that.

Of course, the money may not shake out like projected. As I've said, I'm skeptical. If it falls substantially short of that, then clearly some schools (Texas included) have made a very bad decision. UT/OU/A&M have some insurance in the form of the guaranteed money from the NU/CU buyouts.

[Condem]

13. But it all has to come from advertising revenue....

...which is how the BTN exploded. Again. Besides the state of Texas, how many TV sets here? Good points all around. Like you said. Skepticism.
Man. Depending on the $$ from Colorado and Nebraska? This is why? For one, maybe two years?

[fishwax]

14. the lack of advertising revenue may be the networks' problem

They might be willing to bite that bullet in order to avoid the huge payouts they'd have to give an expanded Pac 10 and SEC. They may just not want to shell that kind of cash out in the current environment. It also seems reasonable to me that the commitment UT/OU/A&M have made is contingent upon the networks actually coming through with those numbers in the next couple of years. David Boren and Joe Castiglione aren't complete suckers, and neither, presumably, are DeLoss Dodds and William Powers, so presumably they wouldn't sign away all their leverage simply on a promise--if a couple of years from now the networks haven't made those numbers official, this house of cards could threaten to fall apart again.

Also, while it's true that the buyout money is only for two years, it's also immediate. So at OU we'll double our money next year, without (a) having to wait until the Pac 1x got underway in 2012 or (b) having to potentially pay out a huge buyout of our own. (It may have been possible to avoid that if seven teams left, but that would have involved a huge legal battle with the remaining five schools--basically the Big XII charter says that it takes nine votes to dissolve, but the conference is a Delaware Corporation, so a simple majority would have been enough to dissolve the corporation itself. Then the legal battle would ensue, fighting over whether or not the original provision still applied.) Anyway, bottom line is OU goes from getting a solid payout from TV revenue last year to making Big 10 money this year ;).

One other thing that many people might not be aware of--out of the 12 Athletic Directors and 12 University Presidents who were around to be involved in the formation of the Big XII back in the 1990s, there are only three who were still around to be involved in this process--OU President David Boren, OU AD Joe Castiglione (who was AD at Mizzou at the time) and Texas AD Dodds. That's not to say that they wouldn't bolt for a better situation somewhere else, but they have a personal investment in the conference as well.

Also, I've got to say that, while I can see plenty of upside for Oklahoma in this deal, I would've loved to see the Pac 16 thing happen (for a variety of reasons -- football, academic, and otherwise). If the coalition crumbled tomorrow and OU, et al, went west, I'd be pretty psyched :)

[Condem]

15. fish. That is beautiful. And it lasts one year.

The whole deal around Big Ten expansion (yes, this is what this is all about) was a 12 to 18 month time frame. The Big Ten acted on Nebraska because we were forced to. Now, Mr. Delaney has bought himself some time with the Tex 10 staying together. But by no means is he done. We're still headed to the same place. It's just taking a little longer to get there.

[Redbear]

5. From the Texas Tech website

http://today.ttu.edu/2010/06/texas-tech-university-statement-regarding-big-12-conference/

*

Texas Tech University

As we’ve said during this period of instability in conference alignments, our goal has been to preserve the Big 12 Conference. We are proud to announce that this has been done and that we are recommitting to our status as a member of the Big 12 Conference.

We worked carefully through this process in consultation with our colleagues in the Big 12 South and have come to the conclusion that remaining in the Big 12 is best for Texas Tech University from the perspectives of revenue, rivalry and the welfare of our student-athletes.

The Big 12 is a tremendous fit for Texas Tech both academically and athletically. Remaining in the Big 12 will allow us to play our traditional rivals and maintain those competitive associations we have developed with the Big 12 North members.

[happyiowan]

6. Damn

no stones, huh?

[Condem]

9. Why Redbear. I saw your post down the line.

I want to hear that this deal wasn't done for dear ol' Texas. BTW. The Big Ten wanted no part of Texas' shit.

[Redbear]

16. Now they are saying the money will be evenly split.

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/13493/clarifying-the-distribution-of-withdrawal-fees

[Condem]

17. Wouldn't be surprised if the Big Ten paid Nebraska's fee.

Or at least contributed. Be interesting to see the reaction at road games of the Huskers this final go-around.

[Angleae]

18. I wonder what Texas' response in 2011 will be

when they realize there is no longer a Big-12 championship game (and the big money it provides).