dfwabel

They are not looking at it short term, they are looking long term. That may mean a new coach but also more interest in that the team is in the Pac-10 and a season with Pac-1- money. Football is driving the revenue, so baseball is not an issue since Oregon went without baseball for 26 years. The fact that they will play games in their same time zone or later will impact local ratings. Since Utah is leaving the MWC, what does that really bode for The Mtn. Network? Most programs seemed slanted to BYU or Utah regardless. Plus, their production value and on-screen talent is 50% better than cable access.

From the weekend: 1-With Utah's intent to play in the Pac-10 in the 2011 season, Colorado has told the Big XII that they intend to leave a year earlier along with Nebraska. Big XII officials say the penalty for leaving with one year's notice is an 80% forfeiture of TV revenue for two years. The total of forfeited TV money by both Nebraska and Colorado is expected to be about $40 million, sources said. Now, how will that money be distributed among the remaining schools and will Nebraska even pay them a dime? 2-On expansion, Dan Beebe said the following: "At this point in time, and based upon all the feedback from our membership, it's dead on both levels. The first level is there's no interest in looking at expansion. The second level is ? that in the remote chance we would consider expansion and that would be a few years in the future ? there seems to be no interest and really no motivation to look at expansion with institutions that are already within the five-state region."

The 16 team intent was to have the Arizona schools move, so those two are probably locks to join CU and Utah. The others set of teams may be dependent on number of flights to DEN and SLC, easy to know that LAX, SFO/SJC/OAK have flights so it may depend on the flights out of SEA and PDX.

This story blew up on some USF forums I visited yesterday. Problem is, there really has been no proof so far. Memphis is a good choice, probably the best "available" option, "available" in the sense that they'd probably accept. Central FL on the other hand I'm semi-questionable on. I know, I may sound biased as a USF fan, but I really think there are some better options to make a splash before inviting Central FL (Maryland, TCU, E. Carolina, Houston, Navy, Army - all are extreme stretches, but the worst they can say is NO) The Big East has some issues as they have only eight teams in football, but also need to protect the interest of the basketball schools. In addition, they have TV contracts all over the place with ESPN/ABC family, CBS, CBS college, and SNY. Overall, former NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue, who is now a consultant for the Big East explained their issues pretty well days following his hire. "Our assumption right now is, No. 1, we've got 16 members and we're looking at the common and collective interest of those 16 members. No. 2, the fundamentals are changing, technology is changing, the network arrangements are changing, the business models underlying those network arrangements are changing. Congress is going to be interested in all of this and so, within that kind of a framework, the [No. 3] assumption is, you're a hell of a lot better being proactive in shaping the future rather than reactive and just having it delivered to you by somebody else. You have 11 members of the Big East in nine of the top 30 or 35 largest media markets. You're talking about a section of the country which is 25 percent of the households in the country when you have schools in New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington, Pittsburgh, you have to put Hartford in there, which picks up a big chunk of New England. Then you say, OK we have those markets, how do we develop our product?"

I think that moving this would be my 7th choice (like how U of U was to the Pac-10).

Depends on the sport. I'm really not sure if Boise State is good at anything aside from football. Football, they are ok at basketball. We won't know until they actually leave the conference which is July 1, 2011.

The Fox Sports Net contract runs out in 2012, but the Sports Business Daily and that source again, Chip Brown, reports that FSN will renew that contract for four additional years at an increase of 200-250%. FSN Details

There is still an issue beyond 2016, but the have-nots, like Baylor, just doubled what they were getting previously. The MWC does not even have a current contract in place to give them what they were receiving 48 hours ago. Some of those schools are dancing all the way to the bank and not that concerned about Texas/OU/aTm getting $6 million more than they are. What did they have to give up to double their take? Only loyalty to the conference, which they wanted to maintain anyway. I would have thought you would have caught on to this, but this newfangled Big XII deal doesn't officially exist in contractual form either. All they have are assurances from Dan Beebe. The numbers could end up being pure fiction and everything could once again blow up in a couple of weeks. There is no dobut that he he assuming that his deal will go up since the ACC's doubled. He admitted that in his white paper to schools. Beebe's letter to the schools which was critical of both the Big Ten and Pac-10 may haunt him as long as he keeps this job. From USA Today: John Mansell, a sports media consultant based in Great Falls, Va., specializing in the valuation of regional sports networks, believes the Big 12 schools could see those projections being reached because of ESPN/ABC's and/or Fox's desire to not have to compete with a Big 12 Network and because "there are many more players than there were 10 years ago" seeking high-profile sports programming. He cited Comcast-owned Versus, which made a bid for NFL games and carries NHL games; the NFL Network, which has carried college football; and Turner Broadcasting's TBS and TNT, which will be involved in the new NCAA men's basketball tournament contract.

Leave here and use your Google machine to read about it.

There is still an issue beyond 2016, but the have-nots, like Baylor, just doubled what they were getting previously. The MWC does not even have a current contract in place to give them what they were receiving 48 hours ago. Some of those schools are dancing all the way to the bank and not that concerned about Texas/OU/aTm getting $6 million more than they are. What did they have to give up to double their take? Only loyalty to the conference, which they wanted to maintain anyway.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU. Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added. If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers. They actually get a significant decrease in revenue by not adding Mizzou. They will still get the KC/St. Louis market, but they would get a bigger cut of the pie if they had a school in Missouri. Illinois already gave them STL. Nebraska lobbied that they could still provide KC as well as either KU or Mizzou. As I have already stated... According to BTN contract, the Big 10 gets 70% revenue from a state if they have a school in that state = Missouri/Mizzou. The Big Ten only receives around 30% of the revenue from households in state where a University is not located = Nebraska/Illinois picking up the St.L and KC markets. So... would you rather have an additional 40% or no? The contract gives a much greater income from within state, but those cities are still border towns to ILL and KS, so the households are split anyway. Plus there is no greater likelihood that a cable carrier will have BTN on a expanded basic tier there, than in a one team state like Nebraska. The conference did their research and Nebraska was seen as a better fit, academically and economically.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU. Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added. If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers. They actually get a significant decrease in revenue by not adding Mizzou. They will still get the KC/St. Louis market, but they would get a bigger cut of the pie if they had a school in Missouri. Illinois already gave them STL. Nebraska lobbied that they could still provide KC as well as either KU or Mizzou.

Maybe they do but they went after Texas and grabbed a handful of Colorado which has a weak football team, a phantom basketball program and no baseball at all. Selling a Pac-whatever network would be better with Texas than with CU. Since both the Big Ten and Pac-10 went after Texas as the primary target with Notre Dame as a sole target for Big Ten, I think that both really won. Big Ten got Nebraska and the KC market and the Pac-10 still for Denver and possibly Utah; please see the TV markets in size listed above. In essence, The Mtn. Network may go away since Utah could leave and more moves from that conference to be added. If Colorado possessed no value to the Big XII as they claimed, that does not mean that it has no value to the Pac-10 and their suppliers.

Why does this matter to a conference anymore? It's out in the open now that it's all about money and competitiveness. That's not a bad thing. In fact it's good that they're no longer living a lie. Also, back to my earlier question - what happens to Villanova, Georgetown, ODU, et al who are essentially basketball only schools if these super conferences just go ahead and form their own playoff system? Certainly they wouldn't let the A-10 or Little East join in... right? It matters in terms of being associated to research schools. Large research dollars make TV annuals deals look like chump change as they assist in keeping many more people on staff and have a longer lasting impact. Now we have to go back to the 1980s. In 1984, when SCOTUS ruled the NCAA no longer could control college football telecasts, and the CFA began negotiating contracts to televise games for its members. The CFA was doing well until 1994 when the SEC moved to CBS (or that is Texas's side as they never want to be seen as the instigator). Final Days of the SWC...Hello Big XII

No changes are needed. You fail to realize the ill will which will be seen in the loss of a 100 year old brand, like the Big Ten. Wait, especially when a company moves a logo, which gets mocked here.

Pac-10 is going network. Their top three people have TV experience: Larry Scott, Kevin Weiberg, and Chris Bevilacqua. A Pac-10 Network would have potential exposure in these markets: 2 Los Angeles, CA 6 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose, CA 12 Phoenix, AZ 13 Seattle-Tacoma, WA 16 Denver, CO 20 Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto, CA 22 Portland, OR 28 San Diego, CA 31 Salt Lake City, UT 42 Las Vegas, NV 55 Fresno-Visalia, CA The markets of Big XII-Lite are: 5 Dallas-Ft. Worth, TX 10 Houston, TX 21 St. Louis, MO (split with Illinois) 32 Kansas City, MO (split with Nebraska) 37 San Antonio, TX 44 Albuquerque-Santa Fe, NM (from Tech) 45 Oklahoma City, OK 48 Austin, TX 61 Tulsa, OK I still think that the Pac-10 wins. EDIT: The new TV deal, if true and signed, will not allow for schools to transfer conferences for X years. The MVC is out of an AQ until the requirement is recalculated. Contracts can still be broken though, so the lessers could still try to make a better deal.

He just must wait until 2016 when Texas/OU can move from the Cotton Bowl (unless there is a buyout before then).

Are you looking towards us for news? Just use your "Google machine" and read stories from those whose job it is to cover college sports.

The Big XII-Lite did just become a much tougher basketball conference since the two worst teams have left.

Larry Scott Confirms Texas Declines Pac-10 Invite There is a lot which make me very curious with this Big XII-Lite (10 teams). 1-Where did the additional $6-9M/team come from for a new TV package when their footprint becomes even more regional and after you lose Colorado and Nebraska? Colorado was billed to add no value to the conference. 2-There still is a difference in the have/have-nots in terms of income which Mizzou was already crying about. If I was IA State, I would be happy to double my income, but I still would be p*ssed that three teams will get more (UT. OU, aTm) 3-Adding a team like TCU does little for additional viewers since there more Texas Exs and former A&M students in the DFW marketplace. The only reward would be at the gate as TCU would finally have sellouts. (However, TCU is also has a capital campaign to renovate Amon Carter Stadium; reduce capacity at first to 40K, but add suites and have the capability to expand to 55K). 4-If it all about money, when why expand anymore? 5-Is News Corp. (Fox/Fox Sports) really prepared to have a Pac-12 and Big XII-Lite channel(s)? I think that ESPN/ABC forces this deal more than Fox.

They have been so passive/aggressive during all of this in basically placing conditions on their staying.

A 10 team Big 12 with no more changes within?

They would go after Utah, but not BYU. If the Cal and Stanford have issues with Baylor (Baptist), then they will have issues with BYU (LDS Church). TCU may face the same issue as they have an affiliation to the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), but they are not govern by them.

I've know I've seen on ESPN.com that the Big Ten's tv contacts for football are the biggest of any of the conferences, and that's even without the revenue from BTN. projected Revenue (After the SEC/ESPN contract was signed)

It may not be sliced smaller because of the additional ad revenue which might be seen from the SEC on ESPN Network. If you do not have this game, it was formerly known as the "Jefferson-Pilot SEC Game of the Week". It is the televised 12:30 (Eastern) game(s). The current nine state SEC footprint only has 18% of the USA's population, and the network currently includes 14 out of market states in syndication or on cable including VA, TX (all 3 major cities), IL (Chicago), MI (Detroit), IN, NC, NYC, Phoenix, and Pittsburgh. If specific schools are added, the footprint will grow and so will ad revenue. Getting UT, aTm, or OU will increase the ad revenue in syndication, or combined with the possible demise of a Big XII game of the week at the same time, more regional sports networks will pick up the SEC package over the ACC or Big East