PAC-ACC-BIG alliance announcement expected today

[PMWinSTP]

"Allow" bad word choice by me, better would be "make it easier for them to leave", ie what motivation does the Big XII have to do that? None.

UT/OU won't pay anything to leave early. Hence why they've declared they won't until 2025. If they do leave earlier, it's because ESPN paid for it.


I doubt there are recruits that are shocked by this. Or for K-State, or Oklahoma State for that matter.


All good points, and I agree with them.

I think they'll look to grab some number of schools from the AAC and live with the TV money that's deemed to be worth, as best they can.


I don't think they have to wait until 2025 to expand. They should revoke OU and UT's votes on that matter.

How do you do that and make them pay the exit fee?

 

[MplsGopher]

How do you do that and make them pay the exit fee?

They aren't paying an exit fee. Hence why they've already declared that they won't leave before 2025.

If they've already declared they're leaving the conference, why should they get to have any say in the future of the conference. They shouldn't care, right?

 

[bizzle22]

They aren't paying an exit fee. Hence why they've already declared that they won't leave before 2025.

If they've already declared they're leaving the conference, why should they get to have any say in the future of the conference. They shouldn't care, right?

I'd be shocked if Texas/OU stayed in the Big 12 that long. Can't think of a time where a school ever said they were leaving a conference and then stuck around for four more years. It's better for all involved if they leave sooner than later.

Taking away the Texas/OU voting rights would give them a legitimate legal argument that the Big 12 is violating their own bylaws. Then the lawyers get involved and it's much easier for Texas/OU to leave early without paying any exit fee. The Big 12 bylaws state a 75% vote is needed to make changes to conference membership so if the remaining 8 are all on board then the votes of Texas/OU don't matter. The 2 problems that arise then are:

1. Do they really want Texas/OU involved with any conversations surrounding future conference membership? Texas/OU will be privy to that information, and the Big 12 may not want a departing member to know inside information on future plans.
2. Can the Big 12 last 4 years where all remaining 8 conference members are on board in an uncertain environment? That's a long time for 8 schools to stay in lockstep. Especially at a time when any of the 8 would jump at a chance to join one of the remaining Power 4, and the league was just blindsided by the departure of it's anchors. If they lose one more they no longer have the 75% vote needed.

Here is an article about it: http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/tale-tait/2021/jul/28/ou-and-texas-should-pay-to-leave-the-big/

This pretty much sums it up: "But if the plan is for a revamped Big 12 to move forward with new members, then perhaps some kind of settlement so all parties can move forward more quickly is actually in the best interest of the Big 12 Conference.

After all, when the existing grant of rights contract expires and it’s time to negotiate new TV deals, stability will be your friend and uncertainty can cost you millions."

Texas and OU will be SEC members by the time football season kicks off in 2023 at the latest. Something will be worked out with the exit fee.

 

[MplsGopher]

I'd be shocked if Texas/OU stayed in the Big 12 that long. Can't think of a time where a school ever said they were leaving a conference and then stuck around for four more years. It's better for all involved if they leave sooner than later.

Taking away the Texas/OU voting rights would give them a legitimate legal argument that the Big 12 is violating their own bylaws. Then the lawyers get involved and it's much easier for Texas/OU to leave early without paying any exit fee. The Big 12 bylaws state a 75% vote is needed to make changes to conference membership so if the remaining 8 are all on board then the votes of Texas/OU don't matter. The 2 problems that arise then are:

1. Do they really want Texas/OU involved with any conversations surrounding future conference membership? Texas/OU will be privy to that information, and the Big 12 may not want a departing member to know inside information on future plans.
2. Can the Big 12 last 4 years where all remaining 8 conference members are on board in an uncertain environment? That's a long time for 8 schools to stay in lockstep. Especially at a time when any of the 8 would jump at a chance to join one of the remaining Power 4, and the league was just blindsided by the departure of it's anchors. If they lose one more they no longer have the 75% vote needed.

Here is an article about it: http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/tale-tait/2021/jul/28/ou-and-texas-should-pay-to-leave-the-big/

This pretty much sums it up: "But if the plan is for a revamped Big 12 to move forward with new members, then perhaps some kind of settlement so all parties can move forward more quickly is actually in the best interest of the Big 12 Conference.

After all, when the existing grant of rights contract expires and it’s time to negotiate new TV deals, stability will be your friend and uncertainty can cost you millions."

Texas and OU will be SEC members by the time football season kicks off in 2023 at the latest. Something will be worked out with the exit fee.

I don't think any of this is wrong, to be honest.

Maybe it is a Mexican standoff, with Texas and OU doing whatever it can to prevent the Big XII from expanding in the next 4 years to increase their "pain" and maybe facilitate an easier deal to leave earlier?

Don't know what the bylaws say about expansion, if it requires unanimous votes. I know in the past when they were trying to add Houston, which Texas was trying to force through, the Oklahoma and Kansas schools were worried about having another Texas school and blocked it. Seems like maybe it would require just a supermajority or something like that, then just UT/OU wouldn't have the votes to block.

 

[noamfromm]

I don't think any of this is wrong, to be honest.

Maybe it is a Mexican standoff, with Texas and OU doing whatever it can to prevent the Big XII from expanding in the next 4 years to increase their "pain" and maybe facilitate an easier deal to leave earlier?

Don't know what the bylaws say about expansion, if it requires unanimous votes. I know in the past when they were trying to add Houston, which Texas was trying to force through, the Oklahoma and Kansas schools were worried about having another Texas school and blocked it. Seems like maybe it would require just a supermajority or something like that, then just UT/OU wouldn't have the votes to block.

You need 8 votes to do anything in the Big 12 -- i.e. everyone else needs to be in lockstep

 

[MplsGopher]

You need 8 votes to do anything in the Big 12 -- i.e. everyone else needs to be in lockstep

Everyone other than UT/OU, you mean.

Fair point, that could be difficult. Some might not want Cincy, some might not want Memphis, etc.

 

[noamfromm]

Everyone other than UT/OU, you mean.

Fair point, that could be difficult. Some might not want Cincy, some might not want Memphis, etc.

UCF, Houston, BYU, Cincinnati, Memphis, or Tulsa would all be good additions to the conference. All of the media markets are top 60 in the nation and each has a reasonable fanbase. I don't know if they would balk at BYU, but I think their national cache would help drive eyeballs to the games.

 

[MplsGopher]

UCF, Houston, BYU, Cincinnati, Memphis, or Tulsa would all be good additions to the conference. All of the media markets are top 60 in the nation and each has a reasonable fanbase. I don't know if they would balk at BYU, but I think their national cache would help drive eyeballs to the games.

I think BYU likes what they have, to be honest.

Tulsa, I don't think they need another Oklahoma school, but maybe. Not saying they're a bad candidate.

Like UCF, Houston, Cincy, Memphis.

Temple would be another one over by West Virginia, and another "original" Big East football school, not that they ever had any kind of big rivalry.

 

[Goldmember]

It's better for all involved if they leave sooner than later.

It would be better for TX, OK, ESPN and maybe the SEC. It isn’t better for the Big XII.

They would either want TX & OK to play-out their contract, or pay some amount well into the 9-figure range to get out of it. Why would the Big XII entertain any other scenario?

 

[noamfromm]

I think BYU likes what they have, to be honest.

Tulsa, I don't think they need another Oklahoma school, but maybe. Not saying they're a bad candidate.

Like UCF, Houston, Cincy, Memphis.

Temple would be another one over by West Virginia, and another "original" Big East football school, not that they ever had any kind of big rivalry.

I think BYU does well with this set up too. It makes sense that schools that can make a run at being an independent now have some supra regional tie -- that being religion or country in the sense of Army. Temple is a good option as well -- though I don't know what segment of the Philly market cares about Temple.

 

[Gopher_In_NYC]

I wonder how this will impact the smaller schools relay on traveling to P5 schools to supplement their athletic budgets - hate to see reduced schools playing and scholarships available for players.

 

[PMWinSTP]

They aren't paying an exit fee. Hence why they've already declared that they won't leave before 2025.

If they've already declared they're leaving the conference, why should they get to have any say in the future of the conference. They shouldn't care, right?

Big XII will be paid if TX/OK leave early. I seriously doubt the remaining teams are OK with it being painless for those two teams.

 

[MplsGopher]

Big XII will be paid if TX/OK leave early.

Absolutely. With ESPN footing that bill, if it happens.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

I wonder how this will impact the smaller schools relay on traveling to P5 schools to supplement their athletic budgets - hate to see reduced schools playing and scholarships available for players.

It's not clear that there will be fewer of those games.

I susupect the conferences might adjust the number of conference games... maybe.

 

[PMWinSTP]

Absolutely. With ESPN footing that bill, if it happens.

I wonder what ESPN will be like in five and ten years...something just offered on Disney+? Also the RSNs, although consolidated somewhat under Sinclair, what do they look like in 5 and 10 years...

 

[bizzle22]

It would be better for TX, OK, ESPN and maybe the SEC. It isn’t better for the Big XII.

They would either want TX & OK to play-out their contract, or pay some amount well into the 9-figure range to get out of it. Why would the Big XII entertain any other scenario?

Because they need to have things figured out before 2025 when to negotiate their new media contract, and having Texas/OU stick around for those conversations isn't going to help them. The best realistic case for the Big 12 right now is to add the best fit 2-6 Group of 5 schools, take as much money as they can get from Texas/OU, negotiate a new media rights deal, and move on. The quicker they can do it the better. Letting Texas/OU stick around until 2025 means the remaining 8 don't get the extra buyout fees. Might as well get that while they can. The remaining schools are going to take a financial hit either way.

 

[noamfromm]

Absolutely. With ESPN footing that bill, if it happens.

ESPN can just take the check they send to Texas for the Longhorn Network and pay the Big 12 with it. I am not sure how OK's buyout would be financed.

 

[bizzle22]

Absolutely. With ESPN footing that bill, if it happens.

Depending on what kind of number Texas/OU could negotiate the buyout number down to it may make financial sense for them to either pay it themselves or split it with ESPN.

 

[Goldmember]

Because they need to have things figured out before 2025 when to negotiate their new media contract, and having Texas/OU stick around for those conversations isn't going to help them.

I think the BigXII is in a position to add any schools they want from the MWC, American or CUSA. And I think they can now do this whether TX and OK leave or not, or whether they agree to it or not. The other 8 are going to be happy to vote against them.

I think Bowlsby will add the best 6 or 8 teams available, create a North and South Division and make TX and OK play in the South Division together for four years. Given their current mediocrity, neither may win the conference. And it would build the brands of the teams that are staying along the way.

The Big XII shouldn’t agree to anything less than they are contractually owed. And even if they stick around for the duration, The Big XII should still sue both of them, along with ESPN and the SEC, to see what additional $ it can get. Granted, they would probably eventually drop the suit as part of a media rights deal and scheduling agreement with those entities.

 

[bizzle22]

I think the BigXII is in a position to add any schools they want from the MWC, American or CUSA. And I think they can now do this whether TX and OK leave or not, or whether they agree to it or not. The other 8 are going to be happy to vote against them.

Would schools like UCF or Cincinnati see the watered down Big 12 as much of a step up? The AAC and the remaining Big 12 teams have the same number of CFP appearances between them. I wouldn't say the Big 12 is in a position of strength at the moment. We sure all 8 are 100% committed to staying?

I think Bowlsby will add the best 6 or 8 teams available, create a North and South Division and make TX and OK play in the South Division together for four years. Given their current mediocrity, neither may win the conference. And it would build the brands of the teams that are staying along the way.

Again, I don't think it is a given that they can just add whoever they want from the Group of 5. And the Big 12 will have to be very careful when it comes to how they treat Texas/OU -- anything they do that is clearly not in the best interest of Texas/OU could be used as ammo in a lawsuit about not paying/lowering the buyout or leaving early. If the scenario you outlined occurs if I'm Texas/OU I leave for the SEC and say I'm not paying the buyout because you drove me out. Doesn't mean it would work, but they could drag it out for years if they wanted. And some of those remaining Big 12 schools might really need the money.

Also, I wouldn't call OU mediocre. They've won the last 4 conference championships.

The Big XII shouldn’t agree to anything less than they are contractually owed. And even if they stick around for the duration, The Big XII should still sue both of them, along with ESPN and the SEC, to see what additional $ it can get. Granted, they would probably eventually drop the suit as part of a media rights deal and scheduling agreement with those entities.

They are going to need some pretty damning evidence. If they don't any lawsuit probably wouldn't be worth it, because none of those entities are going to roll over for them.

 

[highwayman]

I do not see expansion with this alliance.

Yes, there is no need or added value.

 

[MplsGopher]

Would schools like UCF or Cincinnati see the watered down Big 12 as much of a step up? The AAC and the remaining Big 12 teams have the same number of CFP appearances between them. I wouldn't say the Big 12 is in a position of strength at the moment.

It's a fair point, maybe it doesn't seem like it.

But ask Houston, for example: would they rather be in a league with TCU, Baylor, Tech, and Oklahoma State, or with Tulsa, SMU, Wichita State, and East Carolina?

I think it's still at least a half-step upward. But we'll see.

We sure all 8 are 100% committed to staying?

Each would leave for one of the other P confs in a nanosecond.

That's not their issue. Their issue is that those invites apparently aren't coming.

 

[bizzle22]

It's a fair point, maybe it doesn't seem like it.

But ask Houston, for example: would they rather be in a league with TCU, Baylor, Tech, and Oklahoma State, or with Tulsa, SMU, Wichita State, and East Carolina?

I think it's still at least a half-step upward. But we'll see.

Sounds like Houston has wanted in the Big 12 for some time. They'd probably take a spot if offered. Though I've read that Tilman Fertitta really ticked off a lot of the Big 12 schools with his comments after Houston was not invited previously. So it may not be a slam dunk that they get an invite. Plus I'm guessing the Big 12 already does ok in terms of TV viewership in the Houston market so I'm not sure how much value they add.

Have seen tweets (so take it fwiw) that the Big 12 is looking seriously at UCF and BYU. Those two would make a lot of sense, but I don't think it's 100% that either prefers being in the watered down Big 12 to their current situation.

Either way the Big 12 has to add at least a school or two in the next four years if they plan to stay as their own conference. Only playing seven conference games in football just isn't going to work. With every other conference playing 8 or 9 conference games (plus the "Alliance" scheduling, which all but shuts the Big 12 out of playing the B1G/Pac-12/ACC) there just won't be enough quality non-conference opponents available to fill the other 5 games.

Each would leave for one of the other P confs in a nanosecond.

That's not their issue. Their issue is that those invites apparently aren't coming.

No invites are coming right now, and I don't think the SEC/ACC/B1G will ever have any interest in the remaining 8. Still think the Pac-12 could possibly look to add a couple in the next few years. I know the Pac-12 released a statement saying they won't be expanding soon, but I wonder if that will be revisited in the next couple years. Breaking into the Texas market could be a nice move for them both in terms of TV market and recruiting landscape. One thing I've seen pointed out about the "Alliance" is that the Pac-12 is still at 12 schools while the B1G/ACC have more. To make the scheduling part of the "Alliance" truly work out the Pac-12 might need to add a couple schools.

 

[MplsGopher]

Sounds like Houston has wanted in the Big 12 for some time. They'd probably take a spot if offered. Though I've read that Tilman Fertitta really ticked off a lot of the Big 12 schools with his comments after Houston was not invited previously. So it may not be a slam dunk that they get an invite. Plus I'm guessing the Big 12 already does ok in terms of TV viewership in the Houston market so I'm not sure how much value they add.

Have seen tweets (so take it fwiw) that the Big 12 is looking seriously at UCF and BYU. Those two would make a lot of sense, but I don't think it's 100% that either prefers being in the watered down Big 12 to their current situation.

Either way the Big 12 has to add at least a school or two in the next four years if they plan to stay as their own conference. Only playing seven conference games in football just isn't going to work. With every other conference playing 8 or 9 conference games (plus the "Alliance" scheduling, which all but shuts the Big 12 out of playing the B1G/Pac-12/ACC) there just won't be enough quality non-conference opponents available to fill the other 5 games.

No invites are coming right now, and I don't think the SEC/ACC/B1G will ever have any interest in the remaining 8. Still think the Pac-12 could possibly look to add a couple in the next few years. I know the Pac-12 released a statement saying they won't be expanding soon, but I wonder if that will be revisited in the next couple years. Breaking into the Texas market could be a nice move for them both in terms of TV market and recruiting landscape. One thing I've seen pointed out about the "Alliance" is that the Pac-12 is still at 12 schools while the B1G/ACC have more. To make the scheduling part of the "Alliance" truly work out the Pac-12 might need to add a couple schools.

Lots of good points here.

Texas tried to push through Houston. Some were claiming it was to help with getting a UT Houston (medical) campus approved or something like that. Who knows if true.

OU shut that down, with help from the other Big 8 schools. They didn't want another Texas school taking away Texas recruits in football.

Texas Governor declared any Big XII expansion was dead if it didn't include Houston. Was a mess.


Now though, seems like an obvious add, in terms of everything other than market stuff. Not sure how much that will play into effect in the decision, because it's already just known that their next contract will be closer to what the AAC has now than what the Big XII has now.



I guess PAC thinks have their 12 teams each getting a game every year (assuming home/home each year as much as possible) in the Central and Eastern timezones against the Big Ten/ACC is good enough. For now. Yes, we will see how it all works out.