2011 Conference Realignment

Prove that somehow. Sucker.

 

I was trolling with that comment. As long the Aggies make more more money in the SEC, more power to them. From a football point of view, its a lateral move at best. At least ATM had chance in the Big 12 when OU and Texas were in a down year. There is less of a chance of that happening in the SEC.

 

I think major has posted the numbers, and each school is receiving more than they were previously in the Big 12.

There isn't any doubt that the SEC and Big 10 bring more exposure to NU and A&M. Though Colorado shackling itself to the Pacific timezone is a mixed blessing.

More representation and authority within their respective conferences.

 

More institutional control in the SEC and B1G? More exposure for CU in the Pac12? And you're calling others "severly uninformed?"

I hope you don't think I'm trolling you but you're really throwing out some misinformation over there. You're obviously biased against UT/Big 12 which is fine. But even when the Big 12 decides to add another Texas school, which seemed to be your biggest itch earlier on, you completely turn onto something else.

 

By "institutional control" I mean representation within their conference (i.e. their vote and voice). Not NCAA sanctions, etc.

I think, for CU's sake, the Pac 12's tv deal will give them more exposure, although it will be obviously confined to the west coast, which is both a blessing and a curse at times.

And undoubtedly the SEC/Big 10 provide more exposure than the Big 12.

I said I was happy that they decided to relent and add another Texas school, I said I was happy for TCU, what else do you want from me?

 

Ok, I will concede better exposure, which is ironic since if I'm better "exposed" to the SEC then I would have known that I could watch all of their games no?

Here are the TV schedules for the two conferences, I'm still not sure if it's as big of a deal you make it out to be. It likely wouldn't affect A&M, as most of their games would be on TV regardless of conference affiliation. Would A&M trade this perceived increased exposure to have all their games within the same region and in the same timezone? And of course, we are just talking about football exposure here too.

SEC TV schedule
http://scores.espn.go.com/college-f...d=8&seasonYear=2011&seasonType=2&weekNumber=6

Big 12 TV schedule
http://scores.espn.go.com/college-f...d=4&seasonYear=2011&seasonType=2&weekNumber=6

 

The ACC, Pac, SEC, and Big10 all make more money on their tier1 deals because they are all newer than the Big12 tier1 deal. When the Big12 deal expires in 2016(?) you will see similar money. In any case, UT makes more money than any 1 school so neener neener suckers.

 

With A&M, NU, CU, and Mizzou gone with TCU and Louisville replacing them, I kind of doubt it.

Yes, you certainly do. For your sake, I hope it was worth it.

 

Do you see anyone from UT complaining? lol

 

Texas is the Cowboys/Yankees/ManU of college football. I'm glad that at least one of my teams has the upper hand.

 

Texas has more championships than any other program?

 

Money!!!!

 

Actually, yeah, I see quite a few UT alums irritated with how this was handled, and unhappy with the result. The mouth-breathing, chest-thumping fans, though, don't seem to mind.

 

I agree that in a general sense, the later the deal, the better. But between the Big12 and SEC, the SEC will generate far more money if negotiated at the same time. The Big 12 (with NU/A&M/CU/Mizzou - the #3,4,5 and 6 most valuable schools in the Big12 on a TV basis) vs SEC/Big10/etc:

Tier 1 Rights

Big 12: $5 million per school per year, starting 2009
SEC: $4.6 million, 2010
Big 10 (at 11 schools): $9.09 million, *2007*

Tier 2 Rights

Big 12: $9 MM, 2013
SEC: $12.5M, 2010
Big 10: $10 MM, 2008 - though this is connected with TV households carrying the B10 Network, so it's more variable

So the Big12 slightly out-gained the SEC and did so 1 yr earlier in Tier 1, but the Big10 ran circles around both of them away back in 2007. In Tier 2, the SEC blew the Big12 away, and they did it 3 years earlier. It will be interesting to see whether the SEC re-opens their deals, and how the Big12 & Big10 do with its next Tier 1 deal in 2016.

On a side note, I don't have the separate Pac12 Tier 1 and Tier 2 deals, but combined, they total $20.8MM, starting in 2013. That was the most recent TV deals, as a comparison point.

 

Well I guess you made your point Donny, GG

On to other news, if Big12 were to add TCU and BYU with Mizzou and A&M leaving, I would make the argument the Big12 is better off from a football standpoint.

 

In response to this post, I would ask what's the bottom line? A conference makes an extra $2-3 mill or so for each school? (This is a guess, I don't care to crunch the numbers myself)

Given the option, A&M would rather play all their games in or around Texas. They would rather put their kids on buses than planes.

And I believe Pac12 has a combined tier 1, 2 AND 3 deal. This was the source of contention for UT and this is why UT to Pac12 was never going to happen. As an aside, SEC does the same thing - Florida doesn't share its tier 3 money.

 

The next 100 years of getting ass whoopings is evidence enough