ESPN & FOX Agree To Start Early Big 12 Deal Talks

[Wild Turkey]

Reported by Brett McMurphy:

Basically so the Big 12 will have numbers to talk with members of the PAC 12 so they can evaluate if they are staying or going. The actual article is behind a paywall so I don't have many details but the jest is the Big 12 wants to be able to talk numbers with schools who are interested and they can compare them to the PAC deal minus USC & UCLA.

I'm not sure how they do that with the rumors of other schools going to the B1G like Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford but I'm betting if they are starting negotiations then schools like Utah, Arizona, ASU and Colorado are asking specific questions.

There are also rumors out there that the PAC is considering tiering their payouts so Oregon and Washington can get more of a cut and I'm betting that is pissing people off and making them interested in looking around. Oregon and Washington might just be killing off the PAC inadvertently because if just two more schools leave for the Big 12 everyone else will scramble to get in and the hope of keeping the PAC alive is dead.

 

[ralphiewvu]

here is the full article from ESPN:

The Big 12 plans to engage in discussions with Fox and ESPN about the league's next television contract, the conference announced Wednesday.

The conference said in a release that it would "be entering into discussions with its multi-media partners to explore an accelerated extension of its current agreements." Sources had previously told ESPN that the two networks had agreed to the talks.

"It is an exciting time for college athletics and given the changing landscape we welcome the opportunity to engage with our partners to determine if an early extension is in the best interest of all parties," Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark said in a statement. "The Big 12 has enjoyed a fantastic relationship with its multi-media rights holders, and I look forward to having these conversations."

The imminent opening of these conversations is significant, as they come more than a year and a half before the league's television contract calls for a formal, exclusive negotiating window with both current partners. This development allows the Big 12, which has a contract through the 2024 football season, to potentially get tangible future revenue numbers for both its member schools and potential additions.

The conversations could lead to contract negotiations on an extension, which would be a distinct advantage for the Big 12 as it navigates this uncertain moment in college sports.

There is no formal window on these conversations between the Big 12 and ESPN and Fox, which are expected to begin soon. If no deal is reached, the conference can still secure a deal through a more traditional timeline.

For the television networks, the discussions do not affect the formal negotiating window in the contracts. If nothing happens from these conversations, the networks maintain the formal negotiating window in February 2024. This opening of discussions essentially gives Yormark and the conference's television partners two chances to engage.

"[Yormark] is doing what he should be doing, trying to gain an advantage," an industry source told ESPN.

If the Big 12's talks with ESPN and Fox turn into negotiations, it would likely be for a short-term extension that gives the league clarity after the current deal expires following the 2024-25 academic year.

The willingness of the Big 12's television partners to come to the table could mitigate one big advantage the Pac-12 has in the conference television landscape. At Pac-12 media days, commissioner George Kliavkoff said the league was in "the enviable position of being next to market" after the Big Ten.

The Pac-12 has two years remaining on its television contract, and the league announced in July that its board of directors had authorized the conference to begin negotiations for its next media rights agreement. It's unclear how much that has helped the Pac-12.

Before the Big 12 planning talks, the Pac-12's advantage in the television landscape had been that the conference could give tangible numbers to its member schools and any potential additions. With the Big 12 having three years remaining on its deal, the prevailing thought had been that the conference could give only projected numbers, which would present a risk for any school considering joining the league.

The Big 12 and Pac-12 have been attempting to find an edge after taking significant member losses in the past year.


Last summer, the Big 12 lost Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC, a move that is scheduled to happen in 2025. This summer, the Pac-12 lost USC and UCLA to the Big Ten, which is scheduled for 2024. The losses have left the leagues attempting to cast new identities, with the Big 12 adding UCF, BYU, Cincinnati and Houston.

Yormark's comments about the Big 12 being "open for business" at media days were received coldly by Kliavkoff. At Pac-12 media days, Kliavkoff fired back: "With respect to the Big 12 being open for business, I appreciate that. We haven't decided if we're going shopping there or not yet."

Yormark later expanded on his "open for business" comments, telling the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal: "It means that this conference is no longer going to be stagnant. We're going to be very proactive. We're going to explore and identify any and all opportunities that create value in every respect. Is expansion a part of 'open for business'? A hundred percent. But it's only a small piece."

 

[CorpRebel]

 

[outofyourmind]

 

[OlyDuck]

Are they going to be getting quotes for a bunch of different scenarios?
Big XII at 12
Big XII at 16 with 4 corners
Big XII at 18 with 4 corners and ORWA
an expansion that doesn't include Pac schools but does include other schools that might have been on the radar before like Boise and Memphis.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

lol ESPN, what kind of loser conferences negotiate with ESPN?

 

[Wild Turkey]

Are they going to be getting quotes for a bunch of different scenarios?
Big XII at 12
Big XII at 16 with 4 corners
Big XII at 18 with 4 corners and ORWA
an expansion that doesn't include Pac schools but does include other schools that might have been on the radar before like Boise and Memphis.

The networks and conference aren't going to discuss that outside of themselves but I imagine there will be scenarios and it's probable that the networks have more information than what has been reported in the media. For example, if the B1G is actually going to expand to more teams in the PAC then that is probably going to be known since they just went through the process with the B1G and are currently doing it with the PAC.

With discussions going on in the media about uneven revenue distributions in the PAC that could be a clue the B1G is not expanding and that might be why the Networks are having these discussions with the B1G. If Utah, Arizona, ASU and Colorado are going to get the same money if they stay in the PAC or the B12 however, if they stay in the PAC and Oregon and Washington earn more then I don't see any way they hang around as second-class citizens. It would be better to take an invite to the B12 with the assurance if Oregon and Washington get added everyone will be equal members.

There really only 3 scenarios at play for this negotiation and two will end in the death of the PAC:

1. The B1G expands with more PAC schools which folds the PAC and the B12 cherry picks.
2. The PAC stays together and the B12 is negotiating for its current teams
3. The PAC does something stupid like uneven revenue distribution and teams bolt anyway

Basically, the networks just have to give the B12 a number that will be split amongst its current members and give them a list of schools they would be willing to pay the same amount for if they joined and anyone outside the list would lower the revenue distribution. I don't think this is going to be overly complicated but I do think it will be a lengthy process as all network deals seem to be.

Honestly, I don't think the networks take this on if they thought the PAC was going to survive.

Special Note: I don't think any teams that haven't been on the radar are going to enter the conversation because schools like Memphis have been passed on. I'm not sure why the B12 didn't consider Boise State but they didn't and I don't think they are in a rush to now.

 

[fordman84]

Fox getting robustified.

 

[duckboy33]

Networks must know the PAC is folding soon. Makes sense for them to move this up. Big 12 can take the leftovers from the PAC after the Big Ten eats. Moving this up also allows OU and UT to join the SEC early

 

[CoalTrain]

Oregon/Oregon State, Washington/ WSU, Utah , the AZ schools & Colorado will be targets for the Big12 imo. I dunno if they want the headache of the state of California schools as the prime real estate in that state has been scooped up already by the BIG.
BiG might take em for their academics (they both fit) and keep em from looking like the bully that crushed the PAC after all (though they really did).

 

[ralphiewvu]

Networks must know the PAC is folding soon. Makes sense for them to move this up. Big 12 can take the leftovers from the PAC after the Big Ten eats. Moving this up also allows OU and UT to join the SEC early

Or the networks are preparing for Oregon and Washington‘s imminent move to the B12.

 

[fishinabarrel]

Obviously they are saving the most important talks with the PAC for last. Right @OregonDucks

 

[Wild Turkey]

Networks must know the PAC is folding soon. Makes sense for them to move this up. Big 12 can take the leftovers from the PAC after the Big Ten eats. Moving this up also allows OU and UT to join the SEC early

1. OU and TX aren't joining early as that wouldn't make any sense because there are still active contracts and the Big 12 isn't going to let them out.

2. You make the assumption that the B1G is going to "eat" but the reports of them "eating" are just as numerous as the reports of the PAC 12 considering uneven revenue sharing.

The one thing we know is that the Big 12 is doing this because they are getting inquiries from PAC schools that want to know what their cut would be so they can compare it to the PAC deal. We can assume that one or more of these schools: AZ, ASU, Utah & Colorado are the ones asking.

We can speculate with pretty good certainty that at least one of those schools is thinking about making the jump regardless and the probability is that it is multiple. If the money is the same then at least two probably make the move and the PAC is done.

What we don't know:
- Appetite for the Networks to add more schools to the B1G. Why would they pay 65 million plus for more schools at this point when they already have their prime time slots filled?
- The degree of pushback from other B1G schools as it has been reported that OSU is against further expansion.
- The only school that has been reported to have had conversations with the B1G is Oregon so if this was more serious wouldn't you think there would be reports of Washington, Stanford, and Cal having meetings as well? It's not like those schools are going to defer to Oregon to do all the heavy lifting for them. I'm betting these meetings are taking place because Phil Knight has strongly requested them and the B1G is doing it as a courtesy for Nike since they are a massive sponsor of many of their schools.

If we are playing the probability game it is more probable that the networks are more interested in consolidating as many of the PAC and Big 12 teams into one conference and locking that conference up in one contract. I think the probability is that the B1G will not reach a consensus on expansion before the new contract numbers come in and schools in the PAC are going to be making a choice based on available information and not speculation.

The one thing I do know is that as long as Oregon and Washington push for B1G membership, refuse to sign long-term GORs and there is speculation of uneven revenue splits then the probability of defections goes up.

 

[Thiefery]

1. OU and TX aren't joining early as that wouldn't make any sense because there are still active contracts and the Big 12 isn't going to let them out.

2. You make the assumption that the B1G is going to "eat" but the reports of them "eating" are just as numerous as the reports of the PAC 12 considering uneven revenue sharing.

The one thing we know is that the Big 12 is doing this because they are getting inquiries from PAC schools that want to know what their cut would be so they can compare it to the PAC deal. We can assume that one or more of these schools: AZ, ASU, Utah & Colorado are the ones asking.

We can speculate with pretty good certainty that at least one of those schools is thinking about making the jump regardless and the probability is that it is multiple. If the money is the same then at least two probably make the move and the PAC is done.

What we don't know:
- Appetite for the Networks to add more schools to the B1G. Why would they pay 65 million plus for more schools at this point when they already have their prime time slots filled?
- The degree of pushback from other B1G schools as it has been reported that OSU is against further expansion.
- The only school that has been reported to have had conversations with the B1G is Oregon so if this was more serious wouldn't you think there would be reports of Washington, Stanford, and Cal having meetings as well? It's not like those schools are going to defer to Oregon to do all the heavy lifting for them. I'm betting these meetings are taking place because Phil Knight has strongly requested them and the B1G is doing it as a courtesy for Nike since they are a massive sponsor of many of their schools.

If we are playing the probability game it is more probable that the networks are more interested in consolidating as many of the PAC and Big 12 teams into one conference and locking that conference up in one contract. I think the probability is that the B1G will not reach a consensus on expansion before the new contract numbers come in and schools in the PAC are going to be making a choice based on available information and not speculation.

The one thing I do know is that as long as Oregon and Washington push for B1G membership, refuse to sign long-term GORs and there is speculation of uneven revenue splits then the probability of defections goes up.

lol better pucker up.. we are joining the SEC early and getting off easy wins vs you and your lameduck coach that you have no balls to fire.. back to the basement you go

 

[duckboy33]

- The only school that has been reported to have had conversations with the B1G is Oregon so if this was more serious wouldn't you think there would be reports of Washington, Stanford, and Cal having meetings as well?

That’s one of the many errors in your post

 

[duckboy33]

Or the networks are preparing for Oregon and Washington‘s imminent move to the B12.

Doubt. PAC 10 isn’t likely to fold unless they lose more members to the Big Ten. Networks are anticipating that IMO

 

[Wild Turkey]

That’s one of the many errors in your post

So that was reported yesterday and you’re giving me shit?

I find it interesting that Brett McMurphy is the sole person breaking these “meetings” and all the other buzz is just using him as the source.

I haven’t seen those meetings reported anywhere else. Also, you can forget ND joining until the ACC GOR is challenged so that part is definitely clickbait.

I stand by what I wrote. The B1G isn’t taking 4 more PAC teams especially if one of them is Cal. The only thing that could possibly change that is if it makes sense on the academic side due to AAU grants. I still don’t see networks coughing up 65 million more each for Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington. The networks are about to get them literally for half that amount. We are talking a 130 million a year swing in network dollars.

 

[Wild Turkey]

That’s one of the many errors in your post

Big Ten AD Pours Cold Water On Further Expansion Hopes

Iowa's AD Gary Barta indicated he's against further expansion. Will the Big Ten add more teams to the conference?

www.outkick.com

“I feel like when we added the two that we added, it made sense. It had a lot of momentum behind it. I’ve not yet heard anything that would get me at Iowa — I’m just speaking for Iowa — excited to say, ‘Let’s continue to expand more.’ So, I don’t feel like it’s a hot button. But that’s one person’s opinion. I won’t speak for the conference,” Barta said Thursday when talking about the subject, according to The Athletic.

The Iowa AD also made it clear it’s a money game at the end of the day, and anything that cuts into Iowa’s cashflow is a hard no.

“Whatever upside Iowa will receive from the new TV contract, I’m certainly not going to be interested in supporting additional expansion, if that means Iowa would get less. That’s just one criteria, but that’s an important one,” Barta further explained.

Iowa - No
Ohio State - No

I don't know what the criteria in the B1G is for expansion but in the SEC two teams being against it would stop it and that's just two that have been reported on as I can't see Nebraska, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland, Illinois, Indiana or Purdue wanting to load up the conference and making it that much harder.

I don't see further expansion happening anytime soon as the current schools aren't going to see the value. The only thing that could flip it is if the presidents really wanted it for AAU reasons and no one took a hit on money.

 

[Thiefery]

Big Ten AD Pours Cold Water On Further Expansion Hopes

Iowa's AD Gary Barta indicated he's against further expansion. Will the Big Ten add more teams to the conference?

www.outkick.com

“I feel like when we added the two that we added, it made sense. It had a lot of momentum behind it. I’ve not yet heard anything that would get me at Iowa — I’m just speaking for Iowa — excited to say, ‘Let’s continue to expand more.’ So, I don’t feel like it’s a hot button. But that’s one person’s opinion. I won’t speak for the conference,” Barta said Thursday when talking about the subject, according to The Athletic.

The Iowa AD also made it clear it’s a money game at the end of the day, and anything that cuts into Iowa’s cashflow is a hard no.

“Whatever upside Iowa will receive from the new TV contract, I’m certainly not going to be interested in supporting additional expansion, if that means Iowa would get less. That’s just one criteria, but that’s an important one,” Barta further explained.

Iowa - No
Ohio State - No

I don't know what the criteria in the B1G is for expansion but in the SEC two teams being against it would stop it and that's just two that have been reported on as I can't see Nebraska, Minnesota, Rutgers, Maryland, Illinois, Indiana or Purdue wanting to load up the conference and making it that much harder.

I don't see further expansion happening anytime soon as the current schools aren't going to see the value. The only thing that could flip it is if the presidents really wanted it for AAU reasons and no one took a hit on money.

i get what you are saying but.. quoting a Iowa AD like he is important? Ehh he would be out of the loop when it came down to the real discussions happening.

Not sure where the whole "everyone has an equal voice" rhetoric came from.. but Iowa isn't one of those schools

 

[Wild Turkey]

i get what you are saying but.. quoting a Iowa AD like he is important? Ehh he would be out of the loop when it came down to the real discussions happening.

Not sure where the whole "everyone has an equal voice" rhetoric came from.. but Iowa isn't one of those schools

That’s exactly how it works. You’re used to the Big 12 where you had superior pull but in the SEC Mississippi State will have the same weight to their voice as you do. The Mississippi State president is representing the SEC right now in the playoff expansion meetings.

The B1G office can’t decide to expand and not get the buy-in from the individual schools. Plus Iowa is a very respected member of the B1G so I’m not sure where you’re getting that garbage.