Does the Mizzou move force more expansion?
- Thread starter cyhawk55
- Start date
I bet WVU is in the Big 12 next year, no matter how much it will cost. They might be paying a butt load of money, but they'll be in the Big 12 next July.
According to what I have read, WVU will not be forced to stay in the Big East for 27 months. WVU may be forced to pay a double exit fee. Which might be $10 million. But they will be allowed to play in 2012. I have heard that Mizzou will have to pay at least $13 million and up to $28 million to exit.
Are Pitt and Syracuse being forced to stay in the BE for 27 months?
Are Pitt and Syracuse being forced to stay in the BE for 27 months?
I hope our league is smart enough to know the big picture is stronger with Louisville and BYU or Cincy as a 12th as opposed to sitting at ten.
There might be a short term tiny hit, but we need to get back to 12 and a title game ASAP for a multitude of reasons.
SEC has had one forever now and don't want to get rid of it. The next three most powerful conferences all made moves so they could have a title game. It's a good thing for the league as a whole. Get it done.
There might be a short term tiny hit, but we need to get back to 12 and a title game ASAP for a multitude of reasons.
SEC has had one forever now and don't want to get rid of it. The next three most powerful conferences all made moves so they could have a title game. It's a good thing for the league as a whole. Get it done.
ISU alone desperately needs the conference to get back to 12 teams and 2 divisions with an 8 game conference schedule. Our program is not sustainable long-term playing 9 conference games and only 3 non-cons.
The Big 12 is smart enough to know that the big picture is stronger with 10 teams right now. And move to 12 teams just before the ESPN contract gets negotiated. That is the prudent decision.
Moving to 12 teams ASAP is not the best move IMO.
The Big 12 internal debate (confirmed by various sources, including the commish just yesterday), is just that: 10 teams or 12?
The addition of a champ FB game, in and of itself, does not make up the lost revenue for dividing the pie by 12 vs dividing by 10.
The addition of a champ FB game, in and of itself, does not make up the lost revenue for dividing the pie by 12 vs dividing by 10.
I think this mentality hurts the Big 12 long term. Short term greed long term implications. There is no guarantee any teams will be available in a couple of years. What if KU and OU are in the SEC, ACC or Pac 12 at the time?
Exactly. The contracts are set......for now. The move to 12 teams will take place when the ESPN contract is being negotiated.
If the conference moves to 12 teams we will be forced to an 8 game conference schedule.
Wrong, its entirely possible (and probably likely) that we will play 9 conference games with 12 teams.
Lower revenue amounts for the first 4 years sure do though....As has been discussed several times before though, the Big 12 will NOT get additional money for a championship game until the new tier 1 contract comes up. The reason? ESNP/ABC allowed the Big 12 to keep the same payouts for 10 teams vs. the 12 team league/championship game that was previously given. I would prefer the Big 12 teams take a bit smaller in revenue per team until the new contract comes up by expanding to 12.
You guys are right. Absolutely possible. I was thinking 11 teams for some reason. I'll take my foot out of my mouth now.
I disagree. We would take a 20% hit in revenue. Times 4 years. That would be almost like losing an entire years worth of TV revenue. Foolish IMO. And for WHAT. We can expand at anytime. Big East teams are ready to give their 27 month notice at anytime. NO Problem.
What would be funny is if WVU wins their lawsuit to start Big12 play next season and then the other team(s) we want from the Big East give 27 month notice to align with our Tier 1 negotiations just to stick it to the Big East.
