Big 12 + Pac 10?

[husker B-rent]

Just saw this and thought it worth posting. its not a bad idea if we dont go big tening. however, i still think the big 10 is the way to go if we get the invite.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/9790/expansion-what-about-a-pac-10-big-12-partnership

[kansas husker]

I found an similar article here.

 

orlando sentinel

 

Seems like they are just trying to make there confrences more apealing, the big 12 to retain the pac 10 to expand.

 

Its been said many times before it all comes down to $$$.

[whateveritis1224]

It's a good idea, especially if they're able to wrestle a contract from NBC, the only major network that doesn't have a viewing contract with a BCS conference (only ND).

 

Now if this is going to be a network similar to the one that the Big 10 has set up, then the biggest obstacle would be Texas. Just how much do they want in revenue sharing and things like that.

[kansas husker]

It's a good idea, especially if they're able to wrestle a contract from NBC, the only major network that doesn't have a viewing contract with a BCS conference (only ND).

 

Now if this is going to be a network similar to the one that the Big 10 has set up, then the biggest obstacle would be Texas. Just how much do they want in revenue sharing and things like that.

 

That brings up another question, you would asume the conferences would split the tv deal 50/50? So with the way the Big 12 splits up its revenue (50% equally the other divided by the amount of t.v. appearences).

 

How big would that contract half to be to bennifit the big 12's smaller schools? Logically it would atleast have to be double what the current deal is just to break even.

 

On the other hand if tthe deal was even slightly bigger, it would bennifit the bigger schools (namely) Texas tremendously.

[Nexus]

Not sure how this would work, but here are a couple of questions:

 

The Big 12 and Pac-10 already have agreements with Fox Sports Network (FSN). Both of their FSN contracts expire in 2012. If this so-called alliance is referring to their FSN contract, then it's really nothing new since both conferences have been sharing the network for the past 2 years. The only thing I could see coming out of that is asking for more $ by strengthening each conference's non-conference schedules by pitting Big 12 vs Pac-10. But even then, I don't see FSN giving them much more $ than they already make in their current contracts.

 

Here is the present FSN deal for both conferences.

 

Big 12 - 4 years $78 million through 2011-12

Pac-10 - 5 years $97 million through 2011-12

 

So does this so-called joint alliance only refer to the FSN deal since both conferences will be renegotiating new deals starting next year? If so, then it's nothing new.

 

Which brings me to my next question. Both conferences have ABC/ESPN deals, but their contracts end at different times. Here is the current ABC/ESPN deal for both conferences.

 

Big 12 - 8 years $480 million through 2015-16

Pac-10 - 5 years $125 million (Football) and $52.5 million (Basketball) through 2011-12

 

How can they negotiate a joint TV alliance with ABC/ESPN if both of their contracts end at different times? This makes me think that this so-called TV alliance only refers to the FSN deal since both end at the same time. If this is the case, then I don't expect anything groundbreaking to come out of this since it's not exactly new. Even if it becomes a true alliance where both conferences agree to distribute the FSN $ evenly, you're talking about slicing the pie 22 ways.

 

For the sake of guessing what a new joint FSN deal might look like, let's just say $200 million is the best FSN could offer. That would mean each school would receive $9 million. That's still less than what the Big 10 schools would receive, even if it went to 16 teams.

 

Here is the current Big 10 TV deal.

 

Big Ten Network - 25 years $2.8 billion through 2031-32

ABC/ESPN - 10 years $1 billion through 2016

CBS - 10 years $20 million for Basketball through 2018-19

 

Source for current TV deal figures

[irafreak]

Spanning two times zones might be a bad idea. Unless they keep the games where 2 west coast teams can only play at that late slot and the 11 central spot can only be played by two central teams...

[huKSer]

Spanning two times zones might be a bad idea. Unless they keep the games where 2 west coast teams can only play at that late slot and the 11 central spot can only be played by two central teams...

Or three - Pacific, Mountain(AU, ASU and CU) and Central