Expansion question:

[BJA 13]

Honest question that I don’t understand: 

 

Why is the Big12 so smug right now acting like they are the hunters and not the hunted regarding expansion?   

 

I get that the P12 just lost their premier school in USC, but shouldn’t the B12 be more afraid of 5he P10 raiding them vs the other way around?  

 

The P12 brings better brands, markets and destinations  (Oregon, Washington, Stanford, AZ schools vs Baylor, TT, Oklahoma St.).  

 

Obviously Larry Scoot and the president’s botched the past decade big time, but from my perspective is if he P10 took Oklahoma St and/or some Texas schools) they’d severely cripple the Big12 and be able to survive better in the long run.  

 

I don’t understand the TV piece so I guess that’s my question I guess.  Would any of those schools add enough revenue to make it worth it?

[Waybackutefan]

Is it the B12 thats smug and acting like the hunter? Or is it the dbags on boogerboard?

[ProudUte]

Yes.  Don’t believe everything you read on CB.

[PlainsUte]

I live in the Big-12 footprint and there is not a lot of talk about hunting for new teams.   There is an awareness, of course, of the threat of the updated Big-12 coming up short in the football TV negotations and a gap further opening between Big-Ten/SEC and Everybody Else.  

Thankfully I don’t see much TDS chatter, but what I have heard is based on the strength of the current Big-12, which, with respect to football, will drop considerably when Texas and Oklahoma leave for the SEC.   It will remain a decent D1 football conference and still strong in mens & womens basketball.

[radioUte]

Honest question that I don’t understand: 

 

Why is the Big12 so smug right now acting like they are the hunters and not the hunted regarding expansion?   

 

I get that the P12 just lost their premier school in USC, but shouldn’t the B12 be more afraid of 5he P10 raiding them vs the other way around?  

 

The P12 brings better brands, markets and destinations  (Oregon, Washington, Stanford, AZ schools vs Baylor, TT, Oklahoma St.).  

 

Obviously Larry Scoot and the president’s botched the past decade big time, but from my perspective is if he P10 took Oklahoma St and/or some Texas schools) they’d severely cripple the Big12 and be able to survive better in the long run.  

 

I don’t understand the TV piece so I guess that’s my question I guess.  Would any of those schools add enough revenue to make it worth it?

My response…

[radioUte]

You said it right in your post – The P12 brings better brands, markets, and destinations. When (and it is when, not if) the B1G completes its expansion, it will be taking teams with the better brands, markets, and destinations. That makes the P12 vulnerable, more so than the B12 teams.

So B12 teams are not going to the B1G. That leaves the potential for B12 teams to defect to the P12. And here is where I think the current political climate comes into play. Recent policy/admin decisions in the P12 have made life more difficult for the conference, and that isn’t attractive to B12 teams with a more “midwestern” lean. Assuming the financial payouts are similar between the two conferences, I think the B12 teams are comfortable with their current colleagues and none of them seem anxious to wade into more murky political/administrative situations.

Same could be said for the P12 teams. I’m sure they all would prefer to stay with like-minded schools in the Pac12 rather than moving to the Big12. But there is the issue of instability. I feel like each Pac12 team is currently at the negotiating table with the fingers of one hand crossed behind their backs, waiting for the next domino to fall that would send teams scrambling for the next best option.

[THEeyepatch]

There are zero schools from the Big XII that bring anything from an economic standpoint to the B1G; Now geographically, Kansas State and Iowa State would fit but obviously the B1G doesn’t want two more mouths to feed that don’t bring anything economically, they already have that with Rutgers and Maryland.

Money rules this modern college football era with Nick Saban already talking about having ‘tiers’ for lesser school’s (like Utah) to have to win their way into the tier-1 platform. I know there was an article about this a few years ago but I don’t remember who wrote it?

College football is going look a lot different in the next 10 years with Utah and a whole lot of other school’s on the outside looking in.

[EagleMountainUte]

Nick Saban wouldn’t want a tier system. I would love for only tier one teams to play each other. It would be a giant circle jerk with plenty of losses and injuries. Not sustainable long term. 

[krindor]

It’s about stability and downside.

Let’s say the two conferences are basically equivalent (or even put the PAC 5% ahead or whatever).

The issue is that the PAC has desirable teams – if the B1G takes Oregon and Washington (or UW, UO, Stanford and Cal) then the PAC is in a world of hurt and looking at Big 12 or MWC. So some of the less desirable of those (Arizona) may want to protect themselves by jumping now. Which also destabilizes things.

The worst realistic case for the PAC teams is to end up MWC, whereas the Big 12 doesn’t have that as a likelihood.

There’s a real chance that downside doesn’t manifest…but the lurking possibility is enough to make some teams nervous

[ALUF]

I’m seeing more and more stuff about the big ten going after the Bay Area teams along with Oregon and UW…I think we would want to join the big xii if that happens.

However if the residual Pac-12 stays together and we pull in 4 solid programs then we should stay no doubt

[Uphoric]

This is interesting. . .  I saw podcast a couple of weeks ago by a prognosticator who said the BiG 10 commissionor held a news conference stating the BiG would like to obtain the pacific west television market, they have So. Cal.

The BiG only needs Cal or Stanford to obtain the market (kind of like Utah, TDS).  The host of the podcast might be right. 

Here’s the interesting part of what he the prognosticator said everyone missed;  the commish also said they want the markets in west and mountain west time zones.  The guy talking said if this is true, the easiest and best choice is Utah over Colorado.

The information today confirms they are not done yet and who knows, perhaps the Utes are in consideration.

[Central Coast Ute]

Take it for what it’s worth, I heard Michelle Bodkin on Jake and Ben last week say people she knows that are in the know, say Utah will be one of the haves and not one of the have nots when it’s all said and done. That could be years from now though. Personally, I won’t believe anything until I see it. There is so much crap being thrown out there right now it’s hard to know who is right and who is just throwing it out to see what sticks.

[krindor]

Regarding the presence in Mountain Time, he stated that they have presence in all 4 time zones, not that they will have it. That could be referring to the 30k in western Nebraska who are already in the mountain time zone. Or it could be referring to Utah/Colorado.

And being one of the haves could mean B1G. But it could also mean Big 12 or PAC. Or even (to other teams) being FBS.

Bottom line, hard to read too much into anything

[PhiladelphiaUte]

That’s a good question, and I’ve been asking that myself.  The biggest draw for the Big XII, is that it’s not at risk for being poached, because nobody wants those teams.  They want Pac-12 and ACC teams.  So the Big XII remains the “more stable” league.  But that doesn’t answer why the Pac-12 isn’t interested in going after Okla St and a couple of Texas teams.  Because if we did, and the BigTen raided us again…

…we’d still have stability, on account of us already having the best teams from the Big XII.  And while the 4 corner schools will have the option to joining the Big XII if the BigTen raids us again, I don’t see how that would be an improvement over us taking those aforementioned teams.  The Big XII had already been watered down by adding a quartet of midmajors, whereas the Pac-12 had not.  So I say, grab those schools to solidify our league, and ensure we don’t wind up having to join a watered down league.  And we certainly won’t get any objections from Wazzu and Ore St, because they’re the programs who’d be the most interested in the survival of the Pac-12.

I think the problem we’re seeing here is Pac-12 presidents and chancellors demonstrating an unwillingness to play the long game.  They appear to be all about the short-term gains.  Because a Pac-10 would most likely be worth a little bit more per school than a Pac-14, due to less mouths to feed.

[UteFanatic]

Their smugness is because they have fully embraced the mantra of “stability through mediocrity” (i.e. nobody wants any of the Big12 schools). They think the Pac’s demise is inevitable because the top teams will eventually leave and the Big12 will be the one standing when the dust settles. 

If the ten remaining Pac schools actually stick together, it is a viable conference. After all, the two best brands between the Pac and Big12 are Oregon and UW.

[Mark]

Here’s what I would do if I’m Utah, Colorado, Arizona State, and Arizona. This is of course if they want to make this work in the PAC 12 and not go to the Big 12.

They go to Oregon, Cal, Stanford, and Washington and tell them that they will sign a grant of rights for x amount of years in this next TV negotiation and not waiver from that. If they don’t sign a grant of rights then we are bolting for the Big 12.

Yes, Oregon, Cal, Washington, and Stanford may end up getting into the Big 10 eventually, but in the meantime they’re going to be sitting through Mountain West conferences schedules until that happens.

This was from a Utah sports radio guy who suggested this idea and I actually agree with him. No one’s going to be left high and dry more if those Big 10 targets in the Pac-12 leave then Utah, Colorado, ASU, and Arizona on the next TV deal, so play a little hardball with them.

Tell them we’ll leave first and you guys can mire in the bad schedule until you’re picked up. Hopefully it doesn’t come to that, but just in case, have that strategy in mind.

Like many of you, my preference is to stay in the PAC 12. I’d rather not go to the Big 12, but taking this strategy head on, we’ll know where their heart is and if this marriage with the rest really is going to work.

It will also reveal if they do have something secret happening behind closed doors. If they’re not fazed by that ultimatum then we know that they’re talking to the Big 10 and is getting really close to joining. If they do bulk at the ultimatum and do sign the grant of rights then we know talks have not really began or started. It would be a shrewd tactic, but an effective one if done well.

[AlaskaSteveUteAlum]

The main factor nobody is talking about is how those sixteen+ team conferences will fare. The available history indicates that they will break up, because of scheduling hurdles and athletic egos demanding more money and exposure. I would stand pat on expansion, and see what happens to the SEC and Big Ten. Sure, there might be schools that get nervous and bolt, but those schools are just as likely to see that this expansion is just a “house of cards.”