OU Softball got screwed having to...

Do you have an alternative? The Big Twelve will be a disaster for OU. What options do you have?

How is the Big 12 a disaster for OU? The SEC isn't the only conference. If you take the SEC out of the equation, financially OU is probably in the best shape of all the other major conferences. Probably close to, or over, $30M per year. The PAC12 would be great academically for OU but the time zone difference and travel would be a big negative. Also, outside of a few schools and sports in the PAC12, there is really no fanaticism toward collegiate sports from those schools and they really don't care. Except for Stanford in women's basketball, who averages over 2 or 3 thousand fans a game?

The Big 12's biggest mistake IMO was allowing texas to bring 3 of it's buddies to create a voting block for power from the SWC. Adding to that, having Hypocrite U and later TCU (2 private religious schools) just adds to the disaster. The Big 12 is just a marketing tool for those schools and financially, they add absolutely NOTHING to the Big 12. Geographically, we are very limited with what we can do. texas has about 80-85 percent of the population (and thus TV market) of the Big 12 and can pretty much dictate because of that.

I want no part of being a member of SEC and outside of that, it really doesn't make much difference what conference we're in but to send our student athletes from one coast to another for athletic competition all the time makes no sense.
 
We have been watching a gradual decline in the Big Twelve in most aspects. The once "only" wrestling conference now can't even guarantee a slot in the NCAAs for its conference champions. Softball has only seven members. The football champion and runners-up weren't even considered for a final four slot. Men's basketball got decent seeds, but nobody actually put up much of a fight.

We've lost three allies that were associated with us for fifty, about ninety, and about eighty-five years in Colorado, Nebraska, and Missouri. We gained what: Texas and Baylor, neither of which are useful to us? Tech is dying. A&M is gone. Iowa State is content to be mediocre in most sports. Kansas State simply wants to be a nemesis. KU only recognizes men's basketball. OSU ---well, we seem to have difficulty getting rid of them since affiliating with them in 58. Where is the future in this? Are you depending on Texas and Baylor to lead this conference? TCU has never been consistent. Even the Big Twelve schools seem to be losing interest in the Big Twelve except when it comes to attendance for women's basketball, none of which got us a decent seed for finishing second in the conference.

The vine is dying. The healthy parts of the conference abandoned it for the Big Ten and Pac 10. We got stuck with the same decadent vines that caused the rot in the death of the SWC. There has never been an advantage, or safety, in an affiliation with Texas. It makes its own rules. Baylor sanctifies its own rules. You have to get away from this, or it will get you.

Five years ago, I was willing to use our advantage to solidify the Big East or ACC. I was willing to go to the Pac 10 or 16. I would reluctantly go to the Big Ten, 11, or 12 or whatever it is. I would prefer to destroy the SEC and burn the campuses. But, we must escape the vines that entangle us in the dying vines of a decaying vineyard.
 
How is the Big 12 a disaster for OU? The SEC isn't the only conference. If you take the SEC out of the equation, financially OU is probably in the best shape of all the other major conferences. Probably close to, or over, $30M per year. The PAC12 would be great academically for OU but the time zone difference and travel would be a big negative. Also, outside of a few schools and sports in the PAC12, there is really no fanaticism toward collegiate sports from those schools and they really don't care. Except for Stanford in women's basketball, who averages over 2 or 3 thousand fans a game?

The Big 12's biggest mistake IMO was allowing texas to bring 3 of it's buddies to create a voting block for power from the SWC. Adding to that, having Hypocrite U and later TCU (2 private religious schools) just adds to the disaster. The Big 12 is just a marketing tool for those schools and financially, they add absolutely NOTHING to the Big 12. Geographically, we are very limited with what we can do. texas has about 80-85 percent of the population (and thus TV market) of the Big 12 and can pretty much dictate because of that.

I want no part of being a member of SEC and outside of that, it really doesn't make much difference what conference we're in but to send our student athletes from one coast to another for athletic competition all the time makes no sense.

Actually, the Big 12 is behind in the money and dropping fast. The following is revenue from last year. All other conferences are gaining dramatically. The Big 12 came in at 25.2 this year per school and would be lower except for reduced shares for TCU and WVU. The Pac 12 was already over 30M last season and will be further this year. The SEC was over 30 not counting their bowl money distributions this year and that includes the startup costs on the SEC Network. The Big Ten will have record distributions this year. Only the ACC will be around the Big 12 for individual school distributions and they are growing.

I am still stunned that everyone is fired up for that weak home schedule in football.


Last Year's numbers

1. Pac 12 - $374Ml/12 = $31.17 MI/school
2. Big Ten - $338.9M/14 = $24.21MI/school
3. SEC - $309.6M/14 = $22.11MI/school
4. ACC- $291.7M/14 = $20.84MI/school
5. Big 12 - $220.1/10 = $22.01MI/school
 
Actually, the Big 12 is behind in the money and dropping fast. The following is revenue from last year. All other conferences are gaining dramatically. The Big 12 came in at 25.2 this year per school and would be lower except for reduced shares for TCU and WVU. The Pac 12 was already over 30M last season and will be further this year. The SEC was over 30 not counting their bowl money distributions this year and that includes the startup costs on the SEC Network. The Big Ten will have record distributions this year. Only the ACC will be around the Big 12 for individual school distributions and they are growing.

I am still stunned that everyone is fired up for that weak home schedule in football.


Last Year's numbers

1. Pac 12 - $374Ml/12 = $31.17 MI/school
2. Big Ten - $338.9M/14 = $24.21MI/school
3. SEC - $309.6M/14 = $22.11MI/school
4. ACC- $291.7M/14 = $20.84MI/school
5. Big 12 - $220.1/10 = $22.01MI/school

Well, I'm pretty sure the other conferences include the 3rd tier numbers in that total. The Big 12's doesn't. So, if you add $5-7M for us and $15M for texas, that puts us in line or above everyone not named SEC. The SEC can't be the only conference.

As far as NCAA wrestling (and probably men's gymnastics), they are at death's door and probably won't survive another 5 years.

I also believe if the 2 top teams in Big 12 football last year were named anyone except Hypocrite U and TCU, the Big 12 would have had at least one and quite possibly two in the final 4 (especially if it were OU and texas).

You can't have 64 teams in the SEC.
 
When a wrestler wins the Big Twelve title in his weight division and is not even invited to the NCAA tournament, you have a problem. Ultimately, travel times will be a part of OU's future. The pac ten proposal of having Arizona and Arizona in a eastern division with the Big Twelve schools would have alleviated a lot of that.

When a wrestler wins the Big Twelve title in his weight division and is not even invited to the NCAA tournament, you have a problem. Ultimately, travel times will be a part of OU's future. The pac ten proposal of having Arizona and Arizona in a eastern division with the Big Twelve schools would have alleviated a lot of that.

Cody Brewer was ranked l5th and invited. Not sure what Tucker's ranking was but doubt based on his year it was too good and probably rightfully so.

Losses....Cornell, Rutgers, Missouri, Ok. State, N.Car. St., Iowa St., Oregon St., Wyoming, Ok. State, U. of Tenn.-Chatanooga

Wins...Shorter, American, Hofstra, W.Va.

tournaments...did not place at Reno where they placed wrestlers through 6
placed 4th at Aloha Promo
Brockport Invitational placed third
Won the B12 tournament

Do not think his record would rightfully give him a ranking for the NCAA tournament....Also, winning a 4 team tournament, even if a conference doesn't really qualify him and if you add more teams, by looking at his record, he probably would not have won the B12 tournament. We probably had better wrestlers who did not make it because OSU or Iowa St or W.Va. had a great wrestler at that weight. Wrestling as much as any sport is not going to depend upon a tournament but the body of work for a wrestler because his/her ranking is individual.

I don't believe that longer travel times have to be a part of OU's future. Also, an Eastern div. with AZ and Az state would have meant what as far as which teams they played and how many times? Plus, not sure that is good for AZ or Az state. It's not just about OU. Also, how about Iowa St?

Also, is this the ONE time that Coach Coale is not as smart as the posters here? No one jumping down people's throat for having a different opinion? Amazing! (not being hateful towards you, Syb, or anyone with this statement, but just pointing out the irony)

As far as money, we did better this year than last. How much is enough?

(also, this is partially responding to you and partially just addressing remarks made in the thread)
 
Last edited:
There was a time when a Big Twelve conference title was an automatic bid to the NCAAs, no questions asked. Is it acceptable that we have fallen that far? We are down to having to affiliate with other conferences in order to have a gymnastics "conference championship and wrestling championship." Doesn't that actually mean that the Big Twelve has lost something at which they are the best?

Do the Big Ten, Pac Ten, ACC, and SEC have to associate with other conferences in order to get enough teams for softball, wrestling, gymnastics, etc.? Why has this one gone down that far?

Sherri is a basketball coach, and a good one. She knows more about basketball than I ever will. But, does that mean that Sherri is a valid judge of what the future holds for the demographics of college sports? Various people have been predicting for years that we would see some expansion of conferences, that things would change. Even Notre Dame finally realized that it could no longer be an independent in everything. The ACC jumped in and got schools from the Big East and now extends from Miami to Boston to Syracuse. The Big Ten goes from Maryland to Nebraska. The SEC did push past the Mississippi to pick up A&M and Arkansas. The Pac Ten ventured east to pick up Utah and Colorado.

What the Big Twelve got out of all of this was leftovers: West Virginia and TCU. You want to keep Iowa State? Well, I wanted to keep Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado. When they left, the future of this conference should have been obvious. At some point, Texas will finally discover that they are operating at a disadvantage to A&M, and they will look for greener pastures. Will they be looking to help OU? What, exactly, would the Big Ten, SEC, Pac Ten or ACC gain if they were to take OU and OSU? Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, OU and OSU are in flyover states with minimal population to attract more of a television viewership. I think we really hurt ourselves by not going to the Pac Ten. The result may be a conference with Baylor, Tech, OSU, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, TCU, West Virginia, and Tulsa or Wichita State, maybe Colorado State. Where is the attraction?

Our lack of football success has damaged our brand name. We are no longer the team that would entice several million viewers because we are THE team. Without that, what exactly, is the attraction of OU?

There are those who will lead the conference realignments, and those who will falter because they didn't move rapidly enough. I fear that we may have waited too long already.
 
There was a time when a Big Twelve conference title was an automatic bid to the NCAAs, no questions asked. Is it acceptable that we have fallen that far? We are down to having to affiliate with other conferences in order to have a gymnastics "conference championship and wrestling championship." Doesn't that actually mean that the Big Twelve has lost something at which they are the best?

Do the Big Ten, Pac Ten, ACC, and SEC have to associate with other conferences in order to get enough teams for softball, wrestling, gymnastics, etc.? Why has this one gone down that far?

Sherri is a basketball coach, and a good one. She knows more about basketball than I ever will. But, does that mean that Sherri is a valid judge of what the future holds for the demographics of college sports? Various people have been predicting for years that we would see some expansion of conferences, that things would change. Even Notre Dame finally realized that it could no longer be an independent in everything. The ACC jumped in and got schools from the Big East and now extends from Miami to Boston to Syracuse. The Big Ten goes from Maryland to Nebraska. The SEC did push past the Mississippi to pick up A&M and Arkansas. The Pac Ten ventured east to pick up Utah and Colorado.

What the Big Twelve got out of all of this was leftovers: West Virginia and TCU. You want to keep Iowa State? Well, I wanted to keep Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado. When they left, the future of this conference should have been obvious. At some point, Texas will finally discover that they are operating at a disadvantage to A&M, and they will look for greener pastures. Will they be looking to help OU? What, exactly, would the Big Ten, SEC, Pac Ten or ACC gain if they were to take OU and OSU? Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, OU and OSU are in flyover states with minimal population to attract more of a television viewership. I think we really hurt ourselves by not going to the Pac Ten. The result may be a conference with Baylor, Tech, OSU, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, TCU, West Virginia, and Tulsa or Wichita State, maybe Colorado State. Where is the attraction?

Our lack of football success has damaged our brand name. We are no longer the team that would entice several million viewers because we are THE team. Without that, what exactly, is the attraction of OU?

There are those who will lead the conference realignments, and those who will falter because they didn't move rapidly enough. I fear that we may have waited too long already.

So is it football that is the cause of all this? If so, I believe it is the coaching staff and has nothing to do with the conference.
 
Andy Staples
Si.com
May 29

Wild success of SEC Network creating Titanic Two of conference finances

DESTIN, Fla. — I can’t remember exactly how I worded the question, but I remember Mike Slive’s reaction. It was May 2011, and the SEC commissioner was rolling his work materials through the Hilton Sandestin while moving from one meeting to another. I asked if the SEC, which had made a 13-year, $3 billion deal with ESPN and CBS two years earlier, could do anything to close the gap on the Pac-12’s then-new media rights deal, which sold far fewer football games for the same amount of money in one fewer year. “Why would you ask that?” Slive retorted. The only answer he offered was obvious aggravation.

Friday, the outgoing commissioner offered a definitive answer to that question. Yes, the SEC was working on a solution. And it turned out to be a monster.

Thanks in major part to the contributions of its nine-month-old cable television network, the SEC distributed $435 million to its member schools, up $292.8 from last year. (The total revenue figure is actually higher, but the SEC office receives a one-fifteenth share to fund its operations.) That’s $31.2 million per school, up $10.3 million from last year.

With less than 10 months of SEC Network money on the books and in spite of a host of one-time startup costs, the venture with ESPN is already fully distributed within the geographic footprint, nearly fully distributed nationwide and exceedingly profitable. For comparison’s sake, the Big Ten Network needed five years and some serious carriage fights with major cable providers to become profitable. (Of course, the Big Ten Network also helped pave the way for the SEC Network from a distribution standpoint.)

Both cable channels should be cash cows for their leagues’ members in the future, but the early impact of the SEC Network is nothing short of stunning*. By the same token, the success of the Big Ten Network and SEC Network—combined with the new media rights deal the Big Ten will negotiate for its first- and second-tier rights next year—will create in the next few years a new class within the class system that just got created. The Power Five conferences (the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC) have built a wide revenue gap between themselves and everyone else, but the Big Ten and SEC are about to build their own gap between themselves and the rest of the Power Five. They’re the Titanic Two, and everyone else is looking up at them on the balance sheet.
*Full disclosure: I did some freelance work for the SEC Network last football season that involved me eating some extremely fatty food. Based on the numbers you’re about to read, I should demand more ribs and sandwiches if I do more this season.

Some quick math should explain why SEC athletic directors and presidents are so giddy about the numbers the network is pumping out. The difference in revenue between this year and last year isn’t strictly the result of the network; this also was the first year of the College Football Playoff and several more lucrative bowl deals. According to the CFP, the SEC would have received about $34 million last year from the BCS in its final season. Based on the CFP distribution model, the SEC should have received $87.5 million this year from the playoff and its affiliated bowls. Since the league office also gets a share of all of this to fund its operations, each SEC school gets roughly an extra $3.6 million from the playoff. If each school got an extra million from the SEC’s other bowl deals, which is a fairly generous guesstimate, that would mean each school got an additional $5.5 million from the SEC Network. More specifically, each school would get that amount during a year in which the network has been on the air for less than 10 months and the league and schools had to cover startup costs.

That means the number will get a lot bigger next year, which should be increasingly frustrating for the ACC, Big 12 and Pac-12, which have no obvious mechanisms to raise more money in the immediate future.

Slive said Tuesday that the SEC Network is in 65 million homes. This is not the meaningless “available in” number that some throw out with regard to its network. What matters is how many people check the box on the digital tier and lock themselves into the monthly fee for the network. According to an industry source, 30 million of those subscribers live in the SEC footprint and pay $1.40 a month. The other 35 million live outside and pay 25 cents a month. Using those numbers, a full year of the SEC Network should generate $609 million for the SEC and ESPN—before the first advertisement is sold.

We don’t know how that money is divided, but we do know the network is not co-owned. The Big Ten, for example, owns a little less than half of its network. It could make a huge pile of cash if it ever sells its stake. The SEC doesn’t have that option. ESPN owns the network and pays the SEC a rights fee based upon the revenue the channel produces. The Year One performance far exceeded expectations, meaning the most popular people at ESPN parent company Disney are probably Elsa, Anna and Nick Saban.

It’s not as simple as dividing that revenue total by two. First, the network will make more from advertisements. Second, because ESPN assumes all the risk and must pay taxes on the revenue, it’s tougher to judge the split. As expected, no one at the SEC would reveal the split or even the amount the network brought in this fiscal year. “You can’t have the most successful launch of a television network in cable history and not have an expectation of some revenue to go along with it,” Slive said.
The arrangement between the SEC and ESPN is similar to the one between ESPN and the University of Texas that produced the Longhorn Network. In that deal, Texas receives a minimum cash guarantee but also retains 70 percent of the profit (not gross revenue) once ESPN recoups its initial $295 million investment. Because of serious carriage issues, the Longhorn Network could take a while to recoup that investment. The SEC Network, because it was almost fully distributed immediately, would recoup a similar up-front investment much more quickly.

The smartest play the SEC made was waiting to start its network. When it signed its deal with ESPN and CBS in 2009, the U.S. economy had just cratered. So, betting the economy would begin to creep up from its nadir, Slive and TV consultant Chuck Gerber opted to leave the network option on the table and watch the other leagues. This time allowed the SEC to add Texas A&M and Missouri, which only increased the potential value of the network. The Big Ten’s early struggles and eventual success were informative. So was the Pac-12’s big bet. The other part of that Pac-12 deal in ’11 involved that league using the games it didn’t sell to ESPN and Fox to start its own network. A big push by NBC drove up the price on that ESPN/Fox deal, and it left the Pac-12 with a ton of inventory and flexibility to create its own network. League leaders opted to create a wholly owned network rather than partner with an established network. This meant that the Pac-12 would receive all of the money but also would take all of the risk.

SEC to begin using independent medical observers in 2015 season
The SEC will begin using independent medical observers to watch for players who may have sustained head injuries during the upcoming football season. The observers would have the ability to signal down to the officiating crew, who could stop play to remove an injured player.

Where the Pac-12 faltered was a failure to understand how much (or how little) its schools’ fans cared about watching the product. While Big Ten and SEC fans were willing to switch cable or satellite providers if it meant missing even one game, Pac-12 fans were far more apathetic. That automatically meant a lower subscriber fee. In its last available tax return (2013-14 school year), the Pac-12 listed 11 million subscribers in the footprint paying 80 cents a month.

The other mistake was a deal with Dish Network to be the exclusive satellite partner of the league. That ticked off DirecTV, the nation’s largest satellite provider. DirecTV dug in its heels and refused to carry the network, and it likely won’t carry it until after its proposed merger with AT&T goes through the regulatory wringer. Meanwhile, the Dish deal also angered the Pac-12’s cable partners, which were understandably upset that games featuring signage advertising a major competitor were showing up on their systems.

This is why the Pac-12 stands to be driven into the Power Five middle class after sitting atop the hill only a few years ago. Last week, Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News acquired the Pac-12’s 2013-14 school year tax return through a records request. The numbers are a year old—the Pac-12 doesn’t release revenue figures like the SEC does, and probably with good reason—so they don’t account for the revenue bump from the playoff. Last year, the 10 longest tenured members of the Pac-12 actually received more from the league than SEC schools received from theirs. That probably won’t be the case this year. One reason is that because the Pac-12 assumed all the costs of the network startup, it is still trying to pay for a facility built in America’s most expensive real estate market (the Bay Area). So last year, the Pac-12 had to keep 33 percent of league revenues to help defray those costs. By comparison, the Big Ten and SEC keep less than 10 percent.

The SEC’s decision to partner with ESPN required the league to give up some potential cash, but it also allowed it to avoid all the distribution pitfalls the Pac-12 Network faced. ESPN has considerable leverage with cable companies. (So does Big Ten Network partner Fox.) To help speed along the process, ESPN assigned senior vice president Justin Connolly to run the SEC Network. Connolly’s entire job had consisted of wrangling with cable and satellite providers. He knew the players, and he knew the market. And because ESPN has been in the college football business for a long time, network officials knew how passionate SEC fans are. They weren’t hoping Alabama, LSU and Tennessee fans would threaten to burn down their cable companies if they didn’t carry the SEC Network. They were counting on it.
And they were correct. Cablevision in New York (2.8 million video subscribers) is the only provider that doesn’t offer the SEC Network in any form. Connolly has already been promoted at ESPN. The master plan hatched by Slive and Gerber worked better than anyone had hoped. “We were not only surprised,” South Carolina president Harris Pastides said. “I personally was blown away by how quickly so many diverse parts of the country signed on.”

So with the SEC Network positioned to kick out even more cash in the coming years and the Big Ten about to do a primary deal that will reset the market, the financial future looks bright for those leagues. Meanwhile, the rank-and-file members of the ACC, Big 12 and Pac-12—Texas and Oklahoma will always be fine—will realize that they aren’t exactly peers with the rank-and-file members the Big Ten and SEC.

It also means that anytime someone affiliated with the Big Ten or SEC says they would have to cut sports if forced to pay football and men’s basketball players more, that person is a lying liar who lies. It means that person is peddling more bovine excrement than the fine folks at Black Kow, whose core business is the sale of cow manure. This new money will allow the Big Ten and SEC to easily pay full cost of attendance scholarships, but all the schools in the Power Five leagues should be able to easily afford that.

The federal courts probably will force the schools to pay the athletes more on top of that, and for a legitimate reason. The schools decided to become the sellers of television programs when they sued the NCAA in 1981, and while that has allowed them to enjoy the spoils of the TV business, they soon will learn what other programmers have learned: Eventually, you have to give the performers a raise or somebody will bury you in court.

Athletic directors will claim their programs don’t make money, but that’s also a lie at most Power Five schools. They would make money if they weren’t giving their coaches huge raises and putting gold-plated waterfalls in their locker rooms. Do not confuse an inability to manage money with a lack of money, and don’t believe people who just got $10 million more when they say they can’t pay for the programs they were already funding with $10 million less.

The key month to remember is October, when Jenkins v. NCAA is scheduled to have its class certification hearing. That case, spearheaded by famed sports labor lawyer Jeffrey Kessler, seeks to obliterate the business model in major college sports and create a completely open market. As you’ve read above, the dollar figures in major college sports are too large to simply walk away. So something will happen if the class gets certified. Either the wealthiest leagues in college sports will cut a deal with their athletes or they will roll the dice and go to court.

A loss would result in a radically different landscape. A deal collectively bargained with the athletes would keep the money flowing and probably allow for an antitrust exemption that stops the lawsuits. And the athletes wouldn’t ask for much. They’d probably take 10-15 percent of athletically related revenue right now. Go to court, and a judge or jury might treat these college sports leagues that make money selling television programs just like the other sports leagues that make money selling television programs. The NBA’s collective bargaining agreement gives players 47 percent of basketball-related income. The NFL’s gives players 55 percent of television money, 45 percent of NFL Properties money and 40 percent of locally generated revenue. Suddenly, 10 percent sounds like a bargain.
What does all this court-related discussion have to do with the SEC’s celebration of its network haul? Everything. The leagues realized their people could get rich by diving headfirst into the television business, and now they’re reaping the rewards and the consequences. But for two leagues, the rewards are going to be far greater.

Where the Pac-12 faltered was a failure to understand how much (or how little) its schools’ fans cared about watching the product. While Big Ten and SEC fans were willing to switch cable or satellite providers if it meant missing even one game, Pac-12 fans were far more apathetic. That automatically meant a lower subscriber fee. In its last available tax return (2013-14 school year), the Pac-12 listed 11 million subscribers in the footprint paying 80 cents a month.

The other mistake was a deal with Dish Network to be the exclusive satellite partner of the league. That ticked off DirecTV, the nation’s largest satellite provider. DirecTV dug in its heels and refused to carry the network, and it likely won’t carry it until after its proposed merger with AT&T goes through the regulatory wringer. Meanwhile, the Dish deal also angered the Pac-12’s cable partners, which were understandably upset that games featuring signage advertising a major competitor were showing up on their systems.

This is why the Pac-12 stands to be driven into the Power Five middle class after sitting atop the hill only a few years ago. Last week, Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News acquired the Pac-12’s 2013-14 school year tax return through a records request. The numbers are a year old—the Pac-12 doesn’t release revenue figures like the SEC does, and probably with good reason—so they don’t account for the revenue bump from the playoff. Last year, the 10 longest tenured members of the Pac-12 actually received more from the league than SEC schools received from theirs. That probably won’t be the case this year. One reason is that because the Pac-12 assumed all the costs of the network startup, it is still trying to pay for a facility built in America’s most expensive real estate market (the Bay Area). So last year, the Pac-12 had to keep 33 percent of league revenues to help defray those costs. By comparison, the Big Ten and SEC keep less than 10 percent.

The SEC’s decision to partner with ESPN required the league to give up some potential cash, but it also allowed it to avoid all the distribution pitfalls the Pac-12 Network faced. ESPN has considerable leverage with cable companies. (So does Big Ten Network partner Fox.) To help speed along the process, ESPN assigned senior vice president Justin Connolly to run the SEC Network. Connolly’s entire job had consisted of wrangling with cable and satellite providers. He knew the players, and he knew the market. And because ESPN has been in the college football business for a long time, network officials knew how passionate SEC fans are. They weren’t hoping Alabama, LSU and Tennessee fans would threaten to burn down their cable companies if they didn’t carry the SEC Network. They were counting on it.

And they were correct. Cablevision in New York (2.8 million video subscribers) is the only provider that doesn’t offer the SEC Network in any form. Connolly has already been promoted at ESPN. The master plan hatched by Slive and Gerber worked better than anyone had hoped. “We were not only surprised,” South Carolina president Harris Pastides said. “I personally was blown away by how quickly so many diverse parts of the country signed on.”

So with the SEC Network positioned to kick out even more cash in the coming years and the Big Ten about to do a primary deal that will reset the market, the financial future looks bright for those leagues. Meanwhile, the rank-and-file members of the ACC, Big 12 and Pac-12—Texas and Oklahoma will always be fine—will realize that they aren’t exactly peers with the rank-and-file members the Big Ten and SEC.

It also means that anytime someone affiliated with the Big Ten or SEC says they would have to cut sports if forced to pay football and men’s basketball players more, that person is a lying liar who lies. It means that person is peddling more bovine excrement than the fine folks at Black Kow, whose core business is the sale of cow manure. This new money will allow the Big Ten and SEC to easily pay full cost of attendance scholarships, but all the schools in the Power Five leagues should be able to easily afford that.

The federal courts probably will force the schools to pay the athletes more on top of that, and for a legitimate reason. The schools decided to become the sellers of television programs when they sued the NCAA in 1981, and while that has allowed them to enjoy the spoils of the TV business, they soon will learn what other programmers have learned: Eventually, you have to give the performers a raise or somebody will bury you in court.

Athletic directors will claim their programs don’t make money, but that’s also a lie at most Power Five schools. They would make money if they weren’t giving their coaches huge raises and putting gold-plated waterfalls in their locker rooms. Do not confuse an inability to manage money with a lack of money, and don’t believe people who just got $10 million more when they say they can’t pay for the programs they were already funding with $10 million less.

The key month to remember is October, when Jenkins v. NCAA is scheduled to have its class certification hearing. That case, spearheaded by famed sports labor lawyer Jeffrey Kessler, seeks to obliterate the business model in major college sports and create a completely open market. As you’ve read above, the dollar figures in major college sports are too large to simply walk away. So something will happen if the class gets certified. Either the wealthiest leagues in college sports will cut a deal with their athletes or they will roll the dice and go to court.

A loss would result in a radically different landscape. A deal collectively bargained with the athletes would keep the money flowing and probably allow for an antitrust exemption that stops the lawsuits. And the athletes wouldn’t ask for much. They’d probably take 10-15 percent of athletically related revenue right now. Go to court, and a judge or jury might treat these college sports leagues that make money selling television programs just like the other sports leagues that make money selling television programs. The NBA’s collective bargaining agreement gives players 47 percent of basketball-related income. The NFL’s gives players 55 percent of television money, 45 percent of NFL Properties money and 40 percent of locally generated revenue. Suddenly, 10 percent sounds like a bargain.
What does all this court-related discussion have to do with the SEC’s celebration of its network haul? Everything. The leagues realized their people could get rich by diving headfirst into the television business, and now they’re reaping the rewards and the consequences. But for two leagues, the rewards are going to be far greater.
 
Well, I'm pretty sure the other conferences include the 3rd tier numbers in that total. The Big 12's doesn't. So, if you add $5-7M for us and $15M for texas, that puts us in line or above everyone not named SEC. The SEC can't be the only conference.

As far as NCAA wrestling (and probably men's gymnastics), they are at death's door and probably won't survive another 5 years.

I also believe if the 2 top teams in Big 12 football last year were named anyone except Hypocrite U and TCU, the Big 12 would have had at least one and quite possibly two in the final 4 (especially if it were OU and texas).

You can't have 64 teams in the SEC.

That is the Texas/OU mentality of we are still getting ours despite sharing more revenue equally with the other conference members. The other conferences work jointly for the betterment of the conference, not to accomodate the two conference powers. This has resulted in the growth of the Pac-12, B1G, SEC and ACC. For certain their conference leaderships had a better vision of the direction their conference should take. Dodds and Boren were very short sighted in their perspective of what the B12 should do and now thanks to the media rights contracts of all conferences we must live with it for the foreseeable future.

Accomodating Texas and doing what they wanted is the mentality that destroyed the Southwest conference, the real B12 conference and in time will do the same to the B12/10 conference. The minor sports in the present day B12 are not flourishing in most sports and those like wrestling with ISU, OSU and OU as traditional national powers may soon affiliate with another conference relationship.

Conferences are really all about football and the B12 position within the national spectrum of college football was illustrated by the results of Baylor and TCU with regard to the playoffs. This opinion is not likely to change when you only have ten teams in your conference, do not have a championship game and most of the conference members want to play a cupcake not conference schedule.

Syb is absolutely correct when OU did not take the opportunity to join the Pac-12 a few years back and our only probable salvation is sometime in the next ten to fifteen years the major conferences go through another realignment that allows OU to position itself more favorably. Being a big fish in the small B12 pond will not get it done on a national scale.

Boren and Castiglione made a strategic mistake wanting to stay aligned with Texas at all cost. Texas is a parasite that eventually sucks their peers, which they care nothing about, to near death before abandoning them for other opportunities.
 
It is very rare for Spock and I to agree on anything, and I can assure you that we approach the subject with different perspectives and by taking different paths. But, we do agree on one thing. We have been longtime OU fans who have been through the various stages of development of various sports at OU. We have seen the changes in the NCAA world, both now and in the past. There is always something new of concern. But, we both want what is best for OU, although we may disagree on exactly what we think is best for OU.

From our very divergent backgrounds, beliefs, and approaches, it is very interesting that we have very similar observations about the past and future of the conference and OU's place in it.
 
That is the Texas/OU mentality of we are still getting ours despite sharing more revenue equally with the other conference members. The other conferences work jointly for the betterment of the conference, not to accomodate the two conference powers. This has resulted in the growth of the Pac-12, B1G, SEC and ACC. For certain their conference leaderships had a better vision of the direction their conference should take. Dodds and Boren were very short sighted in their perspective of what the B12 should do and now thanks to the media rights contracts of all conferences we must live with it for the foreseeable future.

Accomodating Texas and doing what they wanted is the mentality that destroyed the Southwest conference, the real B12 conference and in time will do the same to the B12/10 conference. The minor sports in the present day B12 are not flourishing in most sports and those like wrestling with ISU, OSU and OU as traditional national powers may soon affiliate with another conference relationship.

Conferences are really all about football and the B12 position within the national spectrum of college football was illustrated by the results of Baylor and TCU with regard to the playoffs. This opinion is not likely to change when you only have ten teams in your conference, do not have a championship game and most of the conference members want to play a cupcake not conference schedule.

Syb is absolutely correct when OU did not take the opportunity to join the Pac-12 a few years back and our only probable salvation is sometime in the next ten to fifteen years the major conferences go through another realignment that allows OU to position itself more favorably. Being a big fish in the small B12 pond will not get it done on a national scale.

Boren and Castiglione made a strategic mistake wanting to stay aligned with Texas at all cost. Texas is a parasite that eventually sucks their peers, which they care nothing about, to near death before abandoning them for other opportunities.

I don't believe they are staying aligned with texas. We are more aligned with osu. The reason we didn't take the opportunity of joining the PAC12, which we were willing to go without texas, is that the PAC12 would not take osu with us. While Boren could have gone ahead and joined the PAC12 alone, it would have been a disaster for the University. What little funding we receive from the state now (and decreasing each year) would have dried up as these moronic legislators in Oklahoma right now would have cut even more drastically OU's share of higher ed funding for leaving little brother all alone. OU would have to increase tuition at a much higher rate that it is now to maintain the education level now and little brother would have enjoyed a much lower tuition (because they would receive most of the funding that OU would lose thereby allowing them to keep tuition much lower than OU) which would give them a huge advantage in attracting high school students, not only from Oklahoma but Texas and other states as well. So, as our enrollment would decline, there's would increase exponentially whether they were in a Power 4 or 5 athletic conference or not.

Boren was taking OU to the PAC12, with or without texas but his hands were tied with taking osu. The PAC12 didn't want osu, nor would the B1G take osu, or the ACC or the SEC. So, we're left in the Big 12. We have to survive.

The biggest mistake in the whole Big 12 mess was essentially being forced to take Tech and Hypocrite U in 96 when the Big 12 was formed. Even though texas and A&M were pretty much forced to take the other two in order to allow themselves to leave the SWC, it also added to texas voting bloc in helping them to swing the power in their direction so quickly. Tech and Hypocrite U were/are on their knees thanking the good Bevo for their salvation. They would be in WAC/American/ or with North Texas (where they belong!) had they not been tied to texas and A&M joining the Big 12. TCU was another horrible mistake.
 
I don't believe they are staying aligned with texas. We are more aligned with osu. The reason we didn't take the opportunity of joining the PAC12, which we were willing to go without texas, is that the PAC12 would not take osu with us. While Boren could have gone ahead and joined the PAC12 alone, it would have been a disaster for the University. What little funding we receive from the state now (and decreasing each year) would have dried up as these moronic legislators in Oklahoma right now would have cut even more drastically OU's share of higher ed funding for leaving little brother all alone. OU would have to increase tuition at a much higher rate that it is now to maintain the education level now and little brother would have enjoyed a much lower tuition (because they would receive most of the funding that OU would lose thereby allowing them to keep tuition much lower than OU) which would give them a huge advantage in attracting high school students, not only from Oklahoma but Texas and other states as well. So, as our enrollment would decline, there's would increase exponentially whether they were in a Power 4 or 5 athletic conference or not.

Boren was taking OU to the PAC12, with or without texas but his hands were tied with taking osu. The PAC12 didn't want osu, nor would the B1G take osu, or the ACC or the SEC. So, we're left in the Big 12. We have to survive.

The biggest mistake in the whole Big 12 mess was essentially being forced to take Tech and Hypocrite U in 96 when the Big 12 was formed. Even though texas and A&M were pretty much forced to take the other two in order to allow themselves to leave the SWC, it also added to texas voting bloc in helping them to swing the power in their direction so quickly. Tech and Hypocrite U were/are on their knees thanking the good Bevo for their salvation. They would be in WAC/American/ or with North Texas (where they belong!) had they not been tied to texas and A&M joining the Big 12. TCU was another horrible mistake.

I concur with you that our alignment with OSU has been detrimental to OU. I do think that had Boren taken OU to the Pac-12 the legislature could not and would not have deprived the major university of the state their needed funds not with Boren's politcal clout with the legislature. I think it was an idle threat.

I know and the facts verify that Boren was with Texas in allowing them to form the Longhorn network with ESPN because he saw that as having more money for OU as well despite the fact that the other 8 schools were being financially deprived. Had he taken the opposite positon Texas would not have gotten their network from the Pac-12, SEC, B1G or ACC. Going independent was the only way they would get their network and they knew they could not do that and be successful. They essentially had tied themselves to the B12 and we had the opportunity to take their big stick out of their hands and force them to talk softly. Had we done so the Big 12 would have a lot more to sell to the nationally media and we would have been well compensation for it.

Had we said no to Texas then solicited Louisville and Cincinnati or both S. Florida and Central Florida we would have added the necessary TV sets with either Ohio and Kentucky population or the Florida population to the B12 sets. There would be more money, a conference playoff and an easier entry to the playoffs. In fact had we reacted at the first indication of conference realignment Clemson and FSU could have been viable additions to our conference.

We chose to be passive instead of aggressive regarding conference realignments and we will pay the price for the next 10-15 years and the result will be a B12 conference that is at the bottom of the power 5 conference in most all sports and the lowest conference payout to its members of any conference.

We made our bed and we will have to sleep in it. OU position in all sports is set to dwindle in its recognition nationally. Except for gymnastics if it remains a recognized NCAA sport with a national championship.

Our disagreeing is moot. Look at the B12 in 2020 and the answer will be easy to see.
 
Back
Top