Could the Big12 and PAC10 Combine?

[ABQCOWBOY]

Lots of talk about the Big 10 expanding, the SEC expanding and the Big 12 breaking up. Any of this or all of this could happen but I think that if it did, the big losers would obviously be the Big 12 and the PAC10. The key, IMO, is Texas. Whatever they decide to do is what is ultimately going to drive a lot of the decisions. I actually see the PAC10 as the best option for Texas. PAC10 means more money, more TV Market, more exposure, increased recruiting draw and better academics.

Consider a Super Confrence made up of the following:

Western Division:

USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Washington, Oregon and perhaps UNLV.

Eastern Division:

Texas, TAM, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, OU, Tech and OkSt.


That would capture Southern California, San Fran, Phoenix, Denver, Dallas, Vegas, and a good part of Mid America TV markets. I could see that happening. Expansion of the Big10 and the SEC could easily force this kind of move. This would be a way of protecting both conefrences and instantly making them one the most powerful, if not the most powerful conferences in the land. TV Share, draw, power teams in every sport, you name it and a deal like this would be very powerful.

Football: Texas, Nebraska, OU, USC, Oregan and Cal are all very good programs. Figure UCLA, TAM, Tech and OkSt. are all resurgent football programs.

Baseball: Texas, OU, OkSt, Az, Cal, USC and Stanford are all power teams.

Basketball: Texas, Kansas, UCLA, Az and UNLV are all high profile power teams. Any given year, Stanford, OU or Cal can be a power team.

With Dallas, L.A., Vegas or Phoenix as available host cities, the Bowl draws or NCAA Final Four draws would be outstanding.

That could be a very strong conference.

[Yeagermeister]

Just what we need.......bigger BSC conferences

[peplaw06]

If the Big 12 loses a team, they'll just plug TCU in and go from there like nothing happened. Lose Missouri eh? Good riddance.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Originally Posted by peplaw06

If the Big 12 loses a team, they'll just plug TCU in and go from there like nothing happened. Lose Missouri eh? Good riddance.

I don't think we would be talking about just one team. If the Big 12 doesn't find a way to land a more lucrative contract, chances are that the Big 10 will probably get Missouri, Nebraska and perhaps Texas. If Texas goes, that's it, the Big 12 is pretty much done as a power conference. OU would probably jump as well. Colorado will go to the PAC 10 as soon as it is offered and the PAC 10 probably offer Colorado either way because they want the Denver market for the TV revenue. I don't think just one team will jump from the Big 12 if the Big 10, SEC and PAC10 expand.

[Joe Rod]

I have been dizzy with all of the conference realignment lately. Central Florida is one of the fringe candidates for the Big East if Rutgers and ND go to the Big Ten, but who knows if that will happen (I obviously hope so, but Central Florida has been in this boat before so I'm not getting my hopes up too high). I had read that the Pac-10 and Big-12 were discussing a merging of a TV contract instead of merging conferences. That would still be a good deal for them and protect their interests.

[Biggems]

If there is going to be realignment, I would prefer they do so regionally.

I think it would be pretty cool to see all the Florida teams in the same conference, the Texas teams in the same conference, the California teams in the same conference.

There are 120 D1 schools right now in college football. If they add 8 more schools, UTSA being one of them, they can basically divide the schools into eight 16-team conferences. Each Conference has 2 divisions....You play all the teams in your division (7 games) + half the teams from the other division (4 games). The winner of each division play in the Conference title game. The winner of that game goes to the Elite 8 National Championship Tournament.

You could do it the other way where you have sixteen 8-team conferences. You play all of your conference (7 games) + 4 non conference games. The top 2 teams in the conference play, with the winner making the Sweet 16 National Championship Tournament.

Just an idea, dont crucify me.

[rkell87]

Texas isn't going anywhere, right now they have the lions share of everything in their big 12 contract. there is no way they will give up that kind of cush deal. there is little to no benefit for them to do anything but stay put.

[Joe Rod]

Originally Posted by Biggems

If there is going to be realignment, I would prefer they do so regionally.

I think it would be pretty cool to see all the Florida teams in the same conference, the Texas teams in the same conference, the California teams in the same conference.

There are 120 D1 schools right now in college football. If they add 8 more schools, UTSA being one of them, they can basically divide the schools into eight 16-team conferences. Each Conference has 2 divisions....You play all the teams in your division (7 games) + half the teams from the other division (4 games). The winner of each division play in the Conference title game. The winner of that game goes to the Elite 8 National Championship Tournament.

[View Full Quote]You could do it the other way where you have sixteen 8-team conferences. You play all of your conference (7 games) + 4 non conference games. The top 2 teams in the conference play, with the winner making the Sweet 16 National Championship Tournament.

Just an idea, dont crucify me.

I think that most conferences could be convinced, but the SEC and Big Ten make way too much money to want to change. The Big Ten conference, which makes the most money already, is trying to add extra teams to get to a conference championship game and they have their own network. The SEC makes a fair amount less per school, but they also make way more than the next conference in line. Neither group would want to let in smaller regional schools to get a piece of that pie.

The Big Ten's expansion is about one thing only and that is cash. Heck, they are targeting Rutgers solely because that University would give them a foothold in the New York City market, no other reason.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Originally Posted by rkell87

Texas isn't going anywhere, right now they have the lions share of everything in their big 12 contract. there is no way they will give up that kind of cush deal. there is little to no benefit for them to do anything but stay put.

I would not be too sure about this. Right now, Texas is making a good 10 million less then any school in the Big 10, per seasons, where revenue is concerned. That's not going to stand. The larger the Big Super Conferences get, the more BCS slots they hold. If the Big 12 doesn't expand, they could see themselves on the outside looking in.

[StanleySpadowski]

Originally Posted by rkell87

Texas isn't going anywhere, right now they have the lions share of everything in their big 12 contract. there is no way they will give up that kind of cush deal. there is little to no benefit for them to do anything but stay put.

Therein lies the problem. Texas is taking the lion's share, which is hurting the revenue at other Big 12 schools. Texas may stay where they are but no one else will stay with them if they get offered anything.

Nebraska, Missouri, heck even Oklahoma would bolt if someone offered them a fair share.

If the Big 10 expands to 16 teams, the SEC will look to do the same. There's only a few teams from the ACC or Big East that would be an option so the SEC will look towards the Big 12 also.

Texas is either going to have to learn to share or they may be left out in the cold.

[Biggems]

From what I understand, the Big 12 divides revenue evenly amongst the 12 schools....I could be wrong, but I believe this was the agreement when the conference was made....it was done so like this so that the Conference could be strong no matter who was on top.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Originally Posted by StanleySpadowski

Therein lies the problem. Texas is taking the lion's share, which is hurting the revenue at other Big 12 schools. Texas may stay where they are but no one else will stay with them if they get offered anything.

Nebraska, Missouri, heck even Oklahoma would bolt if someone offered them a fair share.

If the Big 10 expands to 16 teams, the SEC will look to do the same. There's only a few teams from the ACC or Big East that would be an option so the SEC will look towards the Big 12 also.

Texas is either going to have to learn to share or they may be left out in the cold.

Texas could join any Conference, Big 10, SEC, PAC10, I think any of them would like to have them. If Texas decided to stay in the Big 12, I think they would still be OK but I don't think they would. The truth is the TV deal needs to be more lucrative IMO. If the Big 12 wants to stick around, the TV revenue needs to be a bigger deal. If Missouri and Nebraska jump, I think that the Big 12 could probably add Utah and TCU without too much trouble. The problem is a TV contract. They need more viewers. The real problem for the Big12, IMO, is Colorado. If Colorado goes to the PAC10, then you lose a big audience in Denver. That would be a real problem.

[StanleySpadowski]

Originally Posted by Biggems

From what I understand, the Big 12 divides revenue evenly amongst the 12 schools....I could be wrong, but I believe this was the agreement when the conference was made....it was done so like this so that the Conference could be strong no matter who was on top.

It's not divided equally.


The Big 12 pays different for bowls and national TV appearances. The Big 10 shares evenly. For 09-10 Baylor receives approximately 1/2 the money that Texas did. Northwestern or Indiana received the same dollars that Ohio State or Michigan did.

In the Big 10, with the BigTen Network, each school is receiving approximately 23 million that projects to go upwards of 40 million in 5 years depending on expansion. (and that is without a football championship game) By comparision, almost all the Big 12 teams except Texas will receive less that 10 million.

Missouri is a huge target for the Big 10 because they would get the in market rate of .70 per household rather than .10 in both Kansas City and St. Louis for the BTN.

Rutgers would be their dream invitee just to get 'in market' rates in NYC and NY.

[Biggems]

Originally Posted by StanleySpadowski

It's not divided equally.


The Big 12 pays different for bowls and national TV appearances. The Big 10 shares evenly. For 09-10 Baylor receives approximately 1/2 the money that Texas did. Northwestern or Indiana received the same dollars that Ohio State or Michigan did.

In the Big 10, with the BigTen Network, each school is receiving approximately 23 million that projects to go upwards of 40 million in 5 years depending on expansion. (and that is without a football championship game) By comparision, almost all the Big 12 teams except Texas will receive less that 10 million.

Missouri is a huge target for the Big 10 because they would get the in market rate of .70 per household rather than .10 in both Kansas City and St. Louis for the BTN.

Rutgers would be their dream invitee just to get 'in market' rates in NYC and NY.

NYC doesnt even have a college market for football...except maybe Syracuse. They love their college basketball though. I honestly do not see the addition of Rutgers doing all that much for TV revenue in the Big 10. NYC is a pro town....Giants, Jets, Knicks, Nets, Yankees, Mets, Islanders, Rangers....

[StanleySpadowski]

Originally Posted by Biggems

NYC doesnt even have a college market for football...except maybe Syracuse. They love their college basketball though. I honestly do not see the addition of Rutgers doing all that much for TV revenue in the Big 10. NYC is a pro town....Giants, Jets, Knicks, Nets, Yankees, Mets, Islanders, Rangers....

Whether anyone in NYC cares about Rutgers or not, under agreements between cable/sattelite providers and the BTN, they would get .70 per subscriber in most of northern NJ and the greater NYC area.

Getting an extra .60 per month from say 5 million households is an extra 36 million a year. That does something for their TV revenue.