I wouldn't sleep on the pac 12 now that athletes can profit off their image with things like jersey sales and the sort. They are in a lot of big markets that could generate a lot of revenue for athletes who are breakout stars.
The Big 12 weighs its next move: Expansion exploration, the Texas-Oklahoma problem and Bob Bowlsby’s future https://theathletic.com/2789067/202...xas-oklahoma-problem-and-bob-bowlsbys-future/ Now that the alliance between the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 is formally underway, it’s time once again to ask: What will the Big 12 do next? Sources in the conference continue to believe there’s a road to long-term survival for the Big 12. There are obstacles littered along the way, but the larger challenge going forward hasn’t changed much. It’s still a matter of getting all eight remaining members on the same page and arriving at the same conclusion about their future. Thanks to the three-conference alliance, it’s becoming more likely those eight Big 12 members are going to be stuck together for now. The pact doesn’t preclude those leagues from eventually deciding to add new members. But the main threat right now to the Big 12 is the Pac-12. By the end of this week, we’ll know whether it wishes to pursue expansion. While Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff has floated that possibility publicly, he also acknowledged on Tuesday that the formation of the alliance achieves “a lot of what we wanted” when his conference first began looking at expansion. He also preached the importance of bringing stability to the college athletics landscape. Raiding the Big 12 doesn’t accomplish that. “We want and need the Big 12 to do well,” ACC commissioner Jim Phillips said. “The Big 12 matters in college athletics. The Big 12 matters in Power 5 athletics.” Still, even the slightest possibility of the Pac-12 adding two or four schools gives hope to the members of the Big 12 that have been trying to explore potential exit strategies. It’s a door that hasn’t yet been slammed shut. They know if no other conferences expand, they don’t have other options. If the Pac-12 stays put — and the SEC stays away — then the remaining eight can either keep stalling or get serious about what it will take to establish a satisfactory future in the Big 12. Getting cut out of the alliance was another tough break for the Big 12, making the conference again appear to be a step behind. Big 12 leaders emerged from their first meeting regarding the Texas-Oklahoma rumors telling themselves the SEC exit wasn’t very far along. Within seven days, the Longhorns and Sooners had their SEC invites. Some spent the past week privately downplaying the importance and imminence of the alliance. They could be right that the “historic” partnership is overhyped, but it’s now official. The timeline on these matters keeps moving faster than anticipated. All this has left the Big 12 in an existential limbo that most agree is uncomfortable and disappointing. Here’s what we’re hearing about where things stand in the conference and the possibilities ahead. Exploring expansion Yes, Big 12 expansion has been a subject of internal conversation over the past month. The conference has already formed an expansion subgroup to lead the way, but that process is still in the preliminary stages. They recognize they must start figuring out who fits best if that’s the move to make. But there are several important dynamics at play here. A standard one is whether commissioner Bob Bowlsby and his Big 12 presidents and athletic directors will get aligned on the topic and targets. A more subtle one is how many of those leaders will be reluctant to fully embrace the process because some might still prefer to keep their own options open over the next few years. If their desired outcome is finding a home in another Power 5 league — however unlikely that might look today — then why go all-in on expansion, especially if it means binding yourself to the Big 12 beyond 2025? There’s no purpose in expanding if enough of the remaining eight aren’t looking to commit long-term right now. There’s also the still-valid viewpoint from the Big 12’s look into expansion in 2016: Why slice the pie more ways? If, as many assume, the Big 12 is having to settle for much less money on its next TV deal and adds more members, these eight would make even less on a per-school basis from the annual revenue distribution. That makes it tough to sell everyone on going to 10, 12 or even 14 members. Bowlsby can offer years of smaller payouts to new members as a condition of joining, but the financial stress remains for these eight: They need moves that make them whole. Sources say the Big 12 would also need a supermajority vote of eight out of 10 members in order to make these decisions. Texas and Oklahoma retain their voting privileges for as long as they’re in the conference. So what will it take to get all eight remaining schools moving in lockstep? In the weeks since the news of Texas and Oklahoma leaving for the SEC broke, a source said at least 15 schools contacted the Big 12 to express interest in joining, most of them coming from the American Athletic Conference and Mountain West. Even as the allegation of the AAC plotting to poach Big 12 members at ESPN’s direction was surfacing, there was still confidence internally the Big 12 would be the conference that’s importing and not exporting. Leaders and supporters at those schools are working hard to lobby for their inclusion. They want to be in a Power 5 conference. One sentiment among multiple sources is that the Big 12’s best approach to expansion, if it does stay together, is focusing on building the strongest football conference it possibly can. BYU, Cincinnati, UCF and Boise State would be logical targets if that’s the plan, and several more schools merit consideration. There still seems to be serious reluctance about engaging with Houston, which dates back to the conference’s unpleasant experience with UH board chairman Tilman Fertitta in 2016. Staying successful in men’s basketball is still viewed as important, too. Again, it goes back to financial needs. The Big 12 won’t add just because it can. Inviting members needs to serve the bottom line: the next TV deal, their Power 5/Autonomy 5 status and their share of CFP and bowl revenue and basketball tournament units. If the Big 12 does get moving on expansion, it should be a more deliberate process than in 2016. During that three-month exploration, Bowlsby and the conference sought applications, considered 18 schools and conducted a round of in-person interviews. At the time, Big 12 presidents were sensitive to the appearance of poaching other leagues. Another reason expansion can play out differently this time? Texas and Oklahoma wouldn’t get to dictate the outcome.
The Texas and Oklahoma problem There’s one giant, inconvenient domino in the Big 12’s situation that gives decision-makers pause about how they’re supposed to proceed. Nobody can say with certainty when it will fall. Texas and Oklahoma continue to claim they’re content to stay in the Big 12 until the summer of 2025. The SEC says it has no problem with that plan. Few people in the Big 12 believe that’s genuine. But the defecting members have not given notice that they’re leaving early. The Big 12’s bylaws require a departing member to give 18 months’ notice in addition to the hefty buyout fee that’s expected to be nearly $80 million. The leadership at Texas and Oklahoma would need to give notice by the end of December if their actual wish is to join the SEC on July 1, 2023. They can also wait it out and hope the Big 12 implodes before 2025, making exit fees unenforceable. On the other side of this impasse are Bowlsby, his board and his ADs. They’re still incredibly angry at Texas and Oklahoma. They’re not looking to compromise for less than what they’re owed. And if that means the now-hated powers stay four more years, so be it. “I think it’ll be really hard for them to leave before 2025,” one AD said, “after (Texas president) Jay Hartzell kept repetitively talking about how thoughtful he was to us all because he’s giving us four years.” But setting that pettiness aside, not knowing when Texas and Oklahoma are out does create uncertainty about their own next steps. Can the remaining Big 12 be proactive on expansion? Or must they wait until after those two are gone? “That’s a question we have to continue to try to wrap our minds around,” a second AD said. “There’s not an answer to it yet. It’s the right question to ask. I’m not sure any of the eight ADs or presidents could tell you the answer to it right now.” Then there’s the other timetable of when new members would be allowed to join the Big 12. The AAC, for example, required 27 months’ notice and a $10 million fee when UConn chose to exit for the Big East in 2019. Within a month, UConn was able to negotiate that down to 12 months in exchange for giving up $17 million. If some of the AAC’s most valuable members attempt to leave, don’t expect that same courtesy. For those in the Big 12 who aren’t yet sold on the value add of expansion, Texas and Oklahoma not departing until 2025 gives them cover to say there’s still a long runway and no need to rush into anything. The members who want to keep their options open can argue a lot can change over the next few years. “Our boards are asking for answers and we don’t have answers right now,” a third AD said. “We may not have answers six months from now. And it could be, a year from now, we still don’t have answers. Let’s not panic and just start adding schools to add schools. I think that will end up harming us in the long run.” If Texas and Oklahoma do decide on an early withdrawal, the massive sums they’d fork over could help fund the distribution of incoming members. But even that is not the easiest sell to the presidents and ADs who are rightfully concerned about the dramatic, painful budget cuts they’d be facing in a few years in a less-valuable Big 12. For these reasons, perhaps things could begin to quiet down a bit in the Big 12 in the months ahead. The semester and fall sports are underway. Pandemic-related issues are back on the agenda. If the Pac-12 and other conferences stand pat and Texas and Oklahoma stay silent about their actual intentions, what else can the remaining eight do right now? They’ll all have to get more comfortable with being uncomfortable. Bowlsby’s support Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren had lots of nice things to say about Bowlsby on Tuesday, calling him a “great leader” with an “incredible, successful history” for whom he has the “utmost respect.” Phillips added, in a later conversation with The Athletic, that the three commissioners feel strongly about doing “whatever we can to try to help” during this turbulent period. But help isn’t coming in the form of a partnership in their alliance. Phillips said there’s just too much uncertainty with the state of the Big 12 right now. In fairness, why would they do a deal with this Big 12? The leaders of the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12 have surely received countless calls from reps of the eight remaining schools inquiring about membership over the past month, making it easy for them to question the league’s future stability. A 41-school agreement is enough in their eyes to influence and achieve change. They had to know, though, that the decision to exclude the Big 12 — after Bowlsby had just met with Kliavkoff to discuss a strategic partnership — would make their fellow commissioner’s job tougher. “I’m confident that under Bob’s leadership, he will do what’s best for his conference,” Warren said. The difficult question now, within the Big 12, is how much confidence still exists that Bowlsby can get this fixed. There are, unsurprisingly, conflicting viewpoints on this. Sources say several Big 12 presidents are frustrated and anxious, while others believe key supporters haven’t lost faith in Bowlsby and that putting all the blame on him for the Big 12’s current state is unfair. “He’s been in this business for nearly 45 years and has always been a very honest, up-front businessperson,” one AD said in his defense. “And now he’s gotten stabbed in the back twice in the last month by people that were supposed to be his friends.” The Texas-Oklahoma exit plan and the formation of the alliance both caught the Big 12 by surprise, so those setbacks evoking some discontent and finger-pointing is to be expected. But going forward, Bowlsby must continue to convince his presidents and ADs in a compelling way that he’s the right person to put together a new Big 12. The current chairman of the Big 12’s board of directors is Texas Tech president Lawrence Schovanec. Even if he were to decide he wanted Bowlsby out, some question whether Schovanec could rally enough support from his peers. If it someday comes to that, Bowlsby would need respected, level-headed allies in the room to keep backing him. What’s also unclear is whether such a change is even feasible. In 2017, the board extended Bowlsby’s contract through June 2025. It was a logical move to keep the commissioner in charge through the end of the league’s grant of rights. The terms of the deal were not released. One source suggests his buyout is considered prohibitively expensive. USA Today reported last summer, citing tax returns, that Bowlsby made just over $4 million for 2019-20. He reportedly took a 20 percent salary reduction last year during the pandemic. There are also legitimate concerns about the optics. If Big 12 decision-makers pushed the 69-year-old Bowlsby out after nine-plus years on the job, out of a sense that a more exciting commissioner is needed to navigate these scary times, they’d just be creating more chaos. Bowlsby stepping down would arguably make the conference look even more out-of-control at a time when many members are still trying to appear as desirable as possible. One source said they’d be “absolutely shocked” if Bowlsby isn’t given the time needed to guide the Big 12 through this and warned that, if he’s ousted, “the next two to three years would just be crazy.” All of this underscores how vitally important the Big 12’s next steps will be. If other conferences aren’t expanding, few alternatives remain. The remaining members would need to work together. Bowlsby needs to build consensus. And they’ll all need to find a way – despite all the uncertain factors, competing interests and obvious tensions – to make this work.
Yeah, that's a big wtf from me too. The PAC is sitting on a double edged sword. The protection and comfort that their geography affords them also handicaps their growth. They're perfectly content to sit around and wait for a big fish (UT) to fall into their lap on their own terms. The only thing that will change that is if there is consolidation in eastern and central markets. If there's two or three "super" conferences (16+ members) East of the Rockies, that puts the PAC squarely in the "why should anyone care" category and will threaten their status at the big boy table, which might prompt them to jump into the expansion fray. My gut feeling though is that they are just too comfortable with the status quo and will wait until it's too late to make any moves.
Meant going further east as in Texas, not all the way to the east coast which would be an absolute scheduling nightmare. But yes believe expanding past their current footprint would be much more beneficial than adding another California school and UNLV. But at the end, don't think the PAC will be expanding and not sure why their commissioner is still floating the idea.
worth posting his follow-up tweet to put in perspective just how much (little) this guy knows about anything
Didn't the Big 12 get mad at the AAC for trying to poach their teams? Now the Big 12 is trying to poach AAC teams? AND at the SAME TIME, those same Big 12 teams that are crying about poaching, and also trying to poach, are ALSO trying to leave. Pure madness? Fknlulzt Live look at the Big 12 war room.
I'm really ambivalent about joining the Big 12. If it happens, OK. If they join the AAC, that's also a big whatever. There's no lifeboat on the horizon for anyone. Our macaroni dinner is already cooked. Whether it's served on a plate or bowl doesn't really matter.
“The Big 12 Conference demands that ESPN immediately cease and desist all actions that may harm the Conference and its members and that it not communicate with the Big 12 Conference’s existing Members or any other NCAA Conference regarding the Big 12 Conference’s Members, possible conference realignment, or potential financial incentives or outcomes related to possible conference realignment.” Less than a month later…”Can we talk to you about realignment and potential incentives and outcomes?”
Have a hard time believing the Pac 12 not being in favor of expansion with the least number of appearances out of the P5. Seems like Gee is going scorched earth here, the reasoning doesn't line up. So the Big 12 could've just negotiated a buy-out with Texas/OU and gotten into the alliance? Instead they decide to stick it to them and will be going to the negotiation table with the Big 12 remnants + 2 or 4 AAC teams?
Now that the Pac-12 has popped the balloon on the best hope the eight Big 12 members not named Oklahoma or Texas had of joining one of the remaining power conferences, it’s time to start pondering what the conference should do next. With no rescue on the horizon, the eight that will be left in the league when the Sooners and Longhorns decamp to the SEC need to start considering what their conference will look like in its next iteration. They’re still very early in this process, but Big 12 sources tell The Athletic there’s one school they’re already seriously discussing: BYU. Assuming they would rather not join individually or merge with the American Athletic Conference — a move that seems distasteful to the Big 12 members — the best move probably is to squeeze as much money out of Oklahoma and Texas as possible before they leave and then add members who can help the next version of the league maximize its football reputation and television revenue. So what would that next league look like? Would the remaining members add two schools to stay at 10? Would they add four to go back to 12? Would they go all the way to 16? Now that the Pac-12 possibilities are off the table, it’s time for Big 12 presidents, chancellors and ADs to start getting more serious about expansion. The Big 12 has already formed an expansion subgroup that includes Texas Tech AD Kirby Hocutt, Baylor AD Mack Rhoades, Iowa State president Wendy Wintersteen and Kansas chancellor Douglas Girod. On Thursday, Hocutt told the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal the group will meet Friday morning to explore the topic with Big 12 presidents and chancellors. He said their ADs are set to meet in-person next week, too. The television numbers suggest that the subgroup should look west. Given the grave concern about lost revenue with the departures of Oklahoma and Texas that could potentially cost schools $10 million to $15 million a year in media rights revenue, it might be best to stay small and nimble. And it probably would be best to only add schools that would enter near the top half of the league in budget and TV drawing power. BYU could be a potential solution. Between 2015 and ‘19, the median audience Big 12 teams (minus games involving Texas and Oklahoma) drew for 36 games broadcast on ABC, Fox or ESPN was 1.786 million viewers. BYU’s numbers were comparable; the Cougars’ median audience in 16 games broadcast on those channels was 1.64 million. For 104 games broadcast on ESPN2, ESPNU, Fox Sports 1 or Fox Sports 2, the remaining Big 12 schools drew a median audience of 482,000. BYU* drew a median audience of 682,000 from 20 broadcasts on those networks. More impressive? BYU drew better numbers on those traditionally less-watched channels despite 15 of those broadcasts kicking off at 10 p.m. ET or later. None of the broadcasts involving Big 12 teams kicked off later than 8:30 p.m. ET. In other words, adding BYU would allow the Big 12 to open a new TV window, a possibility that provides greater value in a media rights negotiation. *We limited our examination of TV ratings data to 2015-19 because numbers were generally down across the board in 2020 due to the pandemic. But it should be noted that ESPNU’s broadcast of the Dec. 5 BYU-Coastal Carolina game put together on three days’ notice drew an audience of 1.425 million across TV and digital platforms. It drew 1.212 million viewers on ESPNU, the largest audience for a game on that channel since 2015 and the fifth-largest audience in the channel’s history. Those numbers suggest a version of the Big 12 that included BYU would bring in more money for every school in the league than one that didn’t. “The last time we went through an exercise, that’s the one school the consultants were saying added value to our current TV contracts,” one Big 12 AD told The Athletic. Plus, as a football independent, BYU doesn’t have to worry about giving notice or paying a massive exit fee the way a current American Athletic Conference or Mountain West member would. BYU, which reported about $75 million in athletic department revenue for calendar year 2019 to the U.S. Department of Education, currently has a football media rights deal with ESPN that is believed to pay the school between $6 million and $10 million a year. Presumably, a share of media rights revenue from a Big 12 that included BYU would surpass that. Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby told a Texas state senate committee earlier this month that each Big 12 school received about $28 million in conference media rights money in the 2020-21 school year. But that number will drop dramatically when Oklahoma and Texas depart. The Cougars’ other sports are parked in the West Coast Conference. A logistical issue for various leagues that have either had BYU as a member or considered the Cougars is that the school — which is run by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — does not play sports on Sundays. That wouldn’t be an issue for the Big 12 if BYU joined only in football. BYU’s men’s basketball program is quite good and could add quality to what would remain a strong basketball league, but football is the driving force here. And even if this were football-only membership, the Big 12 would still be aligning with an athletic department whose success is certainly on par with the eight remaining members. BYU just finished 17th in the Learfield Directors’ Cup standings for 2020-21, its third-best finish in school history. Its average finish since 2015-16 has been 30th, which would rank second-best among remaining Big 12 members behind Oklahoma State (24th). If the College Football Playoff expands to a format that includes automatic bids for the six highest-ranked conference champions, it would behoove the Cougars to forgo independence for conference membership. They have virtually no chance of making the Playoff as an independent, even if the Playoff is larger. But their 81-48 record in football over the last decade suggests that they might stand a chance to make an expanded Playoff as a conference champ. Their winning percentage over that period would put them third-best among these Big 12 programs behind Oklahoma State (90-38) and TCU (80-46). Big 12 membership combined with BYU’s drawing power as a nonconference opponent could strengthen the Cougars’ schedule on an annual basis. Prior to the decision by Oklahoma and Texas to depart the Big 12, BYU’s best bet appeared to be a reunion with the Mountain West. But now that the other eight Big 12 members could be seeking new partners, perhaps BYU will emerge as a stronger candidate than it did when the Big 12 had Group of 5 schools and independents hold a three-month beauty pageant of sorts in 2016 to audition potential new members. BYU’s candidacy was met with opposition from LGBTQ+ advocacy groups over the school’s honor code. In the end, the Big 12 decided to remain at 10. Half of the Big 12’s board members have been replaced since then, so we’ll see how this particular group of presidents and chancellors perceives these issues. One Big 12 source argued BYU’s candidacy could be strengthened this time simply by the departure of Oklahoma and Texas. “The people who didn’t want BYU before,” the source said, “are leaving the conference.” So how do BYU’s TV numbers stack up against other potential expansion candidates? From 2015-19, UCF drew a median audience of 1.44 million in 11 games on ABC or ESPN. The Knights drew a median audience of 247,000 in 21 games broadcast on ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNews and Fox Sports 1. During the same period, Cincinnati drew a median audience of 1.63 million in 11 broadcasts on ABC and ESPN and a median audience of 169,500 in 14 broadcasts on ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPNews. Houston, meanwhile, drew a median audience of 1.421 million in 15 broadcasts on ABC, Fox or ESPN. Houston drew a median audience of 356,000 in 17 games broadcast on ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPNews. It’s more difficult to make an apples-to-apples comparison with Boise State, which didn’t appear on ABC or Fox from 2015-19. The Broncos drew a median audience of 1.18 million in nine broadcasts on ESPN. They also drew a median audience of 470,000 in 29 games broadcast on ESPN2, ESPNU or ESPNews. Like BYU, Boise State played a significant number of games that kicked off at 10 p.m. ET or later. Among Big 12 decision-makers, there are still conflicting opinions on what comes next, the proper timetable for pursuing expansion, how many additions would make financial sense and which schools would fit best. Achieving consensus is probably not going to be easy. But as this process begins, it’s BYU that appears to be the option that can add value.
