Oh think they absolutely care as $80M each isn't exactly chump change. Sure they are not solely relying on it and would find a way to pay it rather than stay in a dead man walking Big 12 for the next 4 seasons Wondering what is better for the TV partners as they could very well determine what happens. Do they want to rework deals with the PAC/BIG or a mutated Big 12/AAC?
Spoiler Of all the colorful words and descriptions used to sum up Texas and Oklahoma within Big 12 circles over the past six days, here’s a creative one offered by an administrator: arsonists. “They set the house on fire,” he said, “knowing there were eight of us in it.” Ever since the covert scheme between the Longhorns and Sooners to depart for the SEC first leaked last Wednesday, their conference peers have felt engulfed in uncertainty. Texas and Oklahoma have now followed through as expected and delivered their exit notices, formally setting a contentious divorce process in motion. As for the Big 12’s eight remaining schools, what future awaits them? They can stay to fight the fire. Or they can choose to run like hell. The fate of the conference comes down to an element that has been historically elusive over its 26-year existence, something its two powerhouses just shattered: trust. Can these eight schools stick together and operate with a shared belief that staying aligned puts more options on the table? Or does self-interest eventually win out, leading them to go off on their own and do whatever they can to find a secure new home? The every-man-for-himself mentality is understandable. The decision-makers at Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech and West Virginia must feel a sense of urgency to establish an escape plan as fast as possible in case the conference collapses. Their nervous fan bases expect bold leadership. Their board members will apply pressure. These athletic directors have to do their job and see what’s out there. The potential cost of inaction is legitimately scary. But sources inside and outside the Big 12 agree the more prudent course of action for these schools, at least right now, is banding together and focusing their efforts on plotting a path to long-term survival for their Power 5 league. In their first substantive discussions about moving forward without Texas and Oklahoma last Thursday night, Big 12 presidents and ADs agreed on that imperative. The hard question is knowing how many of them meant it. Can they maintain confidence in each other amid the flurry of rumors and dubious reports about certain Big 12 schools engaging in talks with other conferences? “The thing we have to do as a league,” one source argued, “is the eight of us have to not panic when we see these rumors. We have to just do everything we can to stick together and go at this collectively as best we can.” If they can do that, they can rebuild their scorched house. They can pursue expansion and work to reach consensus on the right combination of two, four or maybe even more new members to help resolve the massive vacancy created whenever Oklahoma and Texas do leave. If they can make the right moves, sources hope that could ideally keep them in ACC territory when it’s time for their new TV deal in 2025. The ACC distributed more than $30 million to each of its members in 2019-20, with about $23.8 million coming from TV revenue. Big 12 schools each received $37.7 million for that year plus their third-tier rights revenue. Others believe that’s far too optimistic an aim given what they’re losing. The Big 12 could go in a few directions to expand, but beyond making an appeal to Arizona and Arizona State to leave the Pac-12, there are few clear Power 5 options to poach. There are plenty of candidates worthy of consideration in the AAC, starting with UCF, USF, Cincinnati and Houston. It’s too early to know what criteria will matter most to commissioner Bob Bowlsby and the league’s board of directors, but the usual factors — alumni base, market size, football competitiveness — are a safe bet. Presidents and chancellors tend to want prestige and research institutions in these situations. They didn’t seem to take these Group of 5 schools seriously in 2016. They don’t have the luxury of being overly picky anymore, not as they fight for survival. Those four schools would add value, and there are many more out there worth exploring. If you grant them the opportunity and the resources of a Big 12 school, recent history suggests they’ll evolve and succeed. Just ask TCU. But there are other ways. The Big 12 could pursue more creative solutions, like a Pac-12 scheduling alliance. Less likely would be a merger with that league, sources say, but ADs in the conference are throwing around all sorts of ideas these days in search of smart solutions to their predicament. By sticking together, they can also enjoy the substantial sums of money Texas and Oklahoma will owe and the revenue shares those two won’t receive. Big 12 sources still firmly believe Texas and Oklahoma aren’t leaving until 2023 at the earliest. There’s no point in projecting how the exit negotiations will play out, but as one source reminded, “It’s gonna cost them a **** ton of money.” And if the rest choose to stay together, they should be able to retain the Big 12’s Autonomy 5 status in a time of intense unpredictability for the future of college athletics. You don’t want to be on the wrong side of that divide. The AAC aiming to add Big 12 members is an admirable ambition. Their revenue payout to their football members for 2019-2020 averaged just under $5 million. It’s hard to imagine any current Big 12 member can get by on that kind of money, not without drastically slashing budgets and staff. Beyond that, who besides Texas and Oklahoma can even afford to break the Big 12 grant of rights contract and pay massive financial penalties? “You can’t rush and make stupid moves along the way,” one source said. So the view inside the Big 12 is, while they’re not going to sit back idly, they have time to solve these problems before 2025. But not without cooperation. “It’s not like there’s infighting among these eight,” one source said. “But I’m not saying in six months that might not become an issue.” These presidents and ADs surely won’t wait that long to explore alternatives. But they’re probably not going to be thrilled by what they find out. What value would these remaining schools bring to the Pac-12, Big Ten or ACC? That’s a tough question that will seriously test whether internal perception is in line with reality. West Virginia pursuing a more natural fit and trying to get into the ACC would certainly make sense. There’s an argument to be made that the rest should throw themselves at the ACC and Pac-12, pitching the value of planting their flag in the Texas market. The ACC is incentivized to make a move that lets them reopen the 20-year deal with ESPN that threatens to create a serious financial gap for the conference. At the moment, though, industry sources believe the Big Ten is skeptical of the value these remaining Big 12 schools provide or that their presidents would consider them academically suitable institutions. There’s already a fear among the remaining schools, too, that the Pac-12 won’t look to add them either due to similar academic standards. That’s not to say those conferences can’t change their stance in the months and years ahead. Maybe the threat of the SEC becoming even more powerful does set off a domino effect of some kind for their anxious Power 5 peers. But if those conferences don’t wish to step in to rescue these Big 12 members beyond the logical West Virginia-ACC pairing, that puts them in a desperate position. They’re going to have to fight an underlying fear, too, at least in football: If the Big 12 does stay intact and calls up a few Group of 5 schools, will it be good enough? The hard thing will be anticipating and confronting how much they will have lost in terms of reputation, respect and revenue once Oklahoma and Texas are officially gone. Sure, the conference can gain some of it back by getting its champion into 12-team College Football Playoffs and winning on that stage. But it’s difficult to forecast things like how much the next TV deal truly sets them back or how recruits will perceive this new-look league. So suppose TCU has an opportunity in the Pac-12 or the Big Ten becomes enamored with Kansas basketball. Can any of these schools really afford to say no? This tricky dynamic is sort of like the prisoner’s dilemma: Acting in their own interest is unlikely to yield the optimal outcome for all, but they don’t know that. And this is eight decision-makers having to cooperate, not two. There are so many possible outcomes — and ways this can go poorly. The hope among Big 12 sources is that, unlike past rounds of realignment, nobody concludes this is doomed and panics. In these tense times, we’ll see how long the fragile trust can endure. Each of the eight eventually has a decision to make: Do you grab the extinguisher or the flamethrower?
Maybe I'm mis-remembering, but I feel like in most cases of expedited conference exits over the last 20 years that the buyouts have been negotiated down significantly in most instances. Maybe the Big 12 has far more leverage in this case against UT/OT. In either case, I think UT/OU are banking on getting out early, one way or another. I think ESPN is really interested in keeping the AAC/B12 around, at least for now. They want someone to fill their less-than-desirable days and timeslots with programming. Having a B-league is fairly useful to them. Of course that B-league becomes pointless once ESPN captures the top 50~ programs and just creates their own federation, but for now weeeeeeeeeeee! My personal favorite scenario for the Big 12 is for nothing else to happen and they backfill with Cinci, Houston, UCF, USF and to split into North/South divisions.
I'm not sure how offended the North would be, being soft-locked out of Florida and Texas, but logistically and culturally it all seems to flow much better. The South has a lot of potential in football, while the North would be just a total asskicker in hoops. If the whole KU/ISU > B1G and WVU/CINCI > ACC things comes to pass then all bets are off and they'll be lucky to get back to 10 teams (probably Memphis, Tulane, etc). If the PAC gets involved then it's probably lights out entirely.
There has never been this long-term grant-of-media-rights thing before. It was introduced by the ACC when the Big12 was falling apart to prevent the poaching of its own members and lock everyone in for the long-haul. Then the B12 adopted it for the same reason. But until now, no one has ever tried to get out of one of these agreements - which were specifically designed to prevent schools from leaving.
I haven't been following this too closely other than reading the threads here, but has there been any talk about how they would divide up the teams and do scheduling?
Just speculation. This has made the rounds the most but there are rumblings that the SEC may not be done. Don't think we'll get anything definitive for a a while.
The SEC? There's a lot of "pod" chatter going on. With 16 teams, the SEC could go outside the box and go with a pod system. The conference would create four pods with four teams in each. Each program would play the other three teams in the pod every year and match up against two programs from each of the other pods to create a nine-game conference schedule. This system allows every program to host each team once every four years. Pod A: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina Pod B: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt Pod C: LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Team X Pod D: Team Y, Team Z, Oklahoma, Texas TBD assignments would be TAMU, Arky, and Mizzou Arkansas will want to stay with LSU, making Pod D "Big 12 redux", but ARK/TAMU/UT/OU would be pretty dope.
"We were living in a house two of the tenants owned and they kept bringing in cans of kerosene, dynamite and fireworks. They'd threaten to blow it up every once in a while but we didn't think they'd actually do it."
More like, we have been living rent free at our rich friends house. They even share their food with us. They keep telling us, they will probably sell the place at some point, but we thought it would never happen.
If I'm A&M, I'm loving this move. They look like the clear-headed leaders in this situation, while UT looks desperate and aimless. The Aggies now get more money and they get to play UT again (which they not so secretly wanted anyway). I view this as an absolute win for them.
These pods feel short-sighted. LSU & Florida should be in the same pod. LSU should continue to play Bama ever year. TAMU/UT/OU should all play each other every year.
Not sure how close you are following but can you tell this is almost the exact opposite of how most A&M fans feel. They want no part of Texas being in the SEC and A&M administration admitted that clear as day when the news broke. https://www.si.com/college/2021/07/24/texas-am-cant-escape-sec-shadow-longhorns
As I see it, FLA/GA; Bama/Aub; Miss/MSt; UT/OU are the teams that have to be grouped together. Everything else is pretty flexible. eta: also UT/TAMU
You can't break out into 4 divisions like this without having to make some sacrifices. Only the most core, tenured rivalries will be preserved. Recent flareups like LSU/Bama/Florida are merely nice to have's.
Like I said, this is my own view of it. I'm sure maroon blooded aggies are melting down all over the place. As an impartial observer, I think this settles the matter that they "won" the breakup.
