Sounds like they are close to saying bye bye. Well, maybe not close but they are in negotiations.
Football and their tv contracts have ruined everything
Printable View
Sounds like they are close to saying bye bye. Well, maybe not close but they are in negotiations.
Football and their tv contracts have ruined everything
Going to the Big XII in 2031. Lol. The college sports world will be completely different in 2031. I wouldn't get too excited if I were a UConn fan. They should continue to be great on the hardwood in the meantime.
Sorry, just saw the 2026 for other sports. Bizarre. Why would they want into the Big XII earlier without football?
Guessing the money in the big 12 is still more than what they are getting in the Big East regardless of football.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoMuskies
This would suck for the Big East. UConn fans are beyond obnoxious ( they have a right to be), but UConn is great for the league. Cant we just give the big 12, DePaul and call it good?
Yeah they apparently pitched it to the Big 12 presidents as a “here is what we are doing to get UConn football on par for big12 by 2031, here is how we can help boost it while doing so from 2026 on”.
Just appears to be the pitch to get them the invite they want. This feels different than last year. Last year the rumor was bball only, which never was happening. It would stink losing UConn, seems inevitable…As does the ACC falling apart and maybe then some of those teams come to the Big East.
Bummer. I've totally forgotten where we are with the BE media negotiations, but guess this might impact our own revenue.
I wonder if they’ll approach Ssudi Arabia for the capital for the required improvements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier
ESPN article says talks are going on, nothing firm yet, and that Yormark wants it and that UCONN is groveling for it.
There is still some number of conference schools that are against it.
Not good. I think we like to see the “blue” side of things, but the reality is that we don’t control our own future. We’ve found a way to band together with some other schools that are similarly situated to create a position that is bigger than the sum of the individual schools.Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
UConn is essential to the Big East, and the future of the members.
Not good. Also not much that we can do.
Yormark is the type of commissioner the big East needs, not the one that lives in the past. Been clamoring for that for a while now. For the big East to continue to be where they are, they must get aggressive and forward thinkingQuote:
Originally Posted by xudash
If UConn is out, the big East needs to throw the kitchen sink at a program like Gonzaga, at least for basketball.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHettel
Out of curiosity, did people feel like BE was dying before UConn joined? Never got that feeling but also wasn’t as deep into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHettel
I’d agree, go grab Gonzaga if UConn is out. Grab Gonzaga if UConn is in. But it won’t kill the conference regardless. What the NCAA will look like 6 years from now is anyone’s guess. UConn staying or going won’t make a big difference.
Count me on the no additions side of things. Personally the BE was kinda too big with 11 schools, but you do it for the right programs like UConn, or say Notre Dame. But not Gonzaga.
Or Duke.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xville
If you've ever seen UConn play a football game, there's no chance they will be Big 12 ready in 6 years. The talent gap is immense, as they are roughly the equivalent of a D2 program. It will also likely take resources away from hoops to bridge that enormous gap. Then you run the risk of having a mediocre football program, and a basketball program that you rip from the pinnacle of the sport.
Money talks, but they're never going to be a threat in the Big 12 in football.
Do you think that is their goal? To compete in the upper half of the B12? Or is it to just grab a seat in the never ending game of musical chairs.Quote:
Originally Posted by drudy23
They are not ND. They can't be independent in football. It's either go to a league with football or drop the sport, or do Pioneer.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHettel
Is part of it the B12 wanting presence in the NE, and trying to keep up with the SEC and B10?
THAT should be the real question and the primary focus here: WHAT IS THE TRUE NET VALUE OF SUCH A SEAT?Quote:
Originally Posted by MHettel
Let’s start with a key premise: successful sports ( i.e. football and basketball, primarily), provide a front porch for a University. Successful programs build brand and brand awareness, leading to more applications on the one hand and more contributions on the other.
So, what kind of investment is required in order to operate successfully here? Obviously, football is different from basketball. Look at how smaller, private schools, including a number of Catholic schools, have leveraged basketball to build national awareness; to build their brands. Yes, it’s all relative: football and bigger schools lead to bigger brands and more awareness, but that does not discount the fact that Xavier, in our case, has become a national university drawing from across the country, helped by its success in basketball.
Football gets a lot more complicated. In fact, I will submit that it has become unsolvable for any program outside of the SEC and B1G. We already know that there are about 20 programs in total that can be said to operate on a profitable (surplus) basis. They come from those two conferences, as well as South Bend, Indiana. There are even programs in those two conferences that move forward by the grace of their shares of lucrative media agreements.
Big 12 and ACC programs? IMHO, a brutal outlook for them long term. The COSTS required to make that seat valuable are high and getting higher and they don’t go away. Those conferences are guaranteed one seat each in the new 12-team playoff system. That’s it. You don’t make it through a conference championship game, then welcome to the weed-eater bowl. What is the value of that “front porch“ overtime considering the amount of investment required to even give your program a chance of operating at that level?
Having noted that, there is no doubt that you get to say that you are in the game and that you have a seat. It’s just more likely that certain programs - actually, a large number of programs by mathematical reality - will find themselves operating in the middle of the pack or the bottom end of these conferences. Looking at this objectively, and using UC as an example, I cannot see where they are well positioned to compete for a Big 12 conference championship moving forward. I see them finding it hard to operate above .500 seasons year in and year out. What might attendance look like at Nippert in 2030, following years of middling performance?
If I haven’t put you to sleep yet, let’s now bring UCONN into the conversation. UCONN makes UC look like a juggernaut. How much money will it take to enable the Huskies to go to Provo in seven years to keep from losing by four touchdowns to Utah?
The seat will only be valuable if it is accompanied by winning!
Yet UCONN leadership is hell-bent on obtaining the seat. They already operate from a substantial deficit position. The amount of money that is going to be required to get them to even a respectable level is substantial. Hurley cannot possibly be happy about this idea.
Cost:Benefit. The costs are rather staggering. The benefit isn’t exactly clear, and it will or will not come in a period of flux and instability, and it may very well damage UCONN’s true flagship sport.
F UCONN, the Beast allowed them back in only to say thanks but now
We are leaving you. College sports is OOC. Paying the players only going to get worse. I say in the next 5 years there will be a lot less fans of the over 40 crowd. I’m getting pretty sick and tired of where this is heading.
Agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
When UC flipped the script to football, it put the basketball program in no man's land for a decade. They went from having a great national basketball brand, to having two relatively average programs today. It probably worked out for them from a $ perspective, but likely not significantly as both programs are still both middle of the pack in each respective sport. And they were in a much more favorable spot than UConn is with football. It would take UConn 10+ years to even get them to relevancy in football.
It simply amazes me that most fans seem to focus in on conference/media payouts without considering the rest of the income statement that comes along with these athletic businesses ...... er, athletic programs for student-athletes. I go back to the point that there are truly only about 20 of these large all-sports athletic departments that operate on a net surplus basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by drudy23
THE SIMPLE FACT IS THAT IF YOU WANT TO PLAY "COLLEGE FOOTBALL" AT THIS LEVEL, YOUR EXPENSES ARE GOING TO GO UP, AND RATHER DRAMATICALLY. I'm talking about operating expenses here. Capital expenditures/improvements are an entirely different matter, and can really send an athletic department into "orbit."
Think about UC's new indoor football practice facility. About $140 million. I have no doubt that it will be a nice facility. What I don't get is that it is parked close to a stadium that only seats about 40,000 people. Pumping money like that into a program that has such game day revenue limitations kind of baffles my mind. Of course, they believe they HAVE TO DO IT. They have to stay in the game, because their academic world will come to an end if they can't play football well. They'll continue to pump on student fees to help fund the department, and they'll continue to pump on alumni donations to help with NIL, etc.
But what happens when it goes into full employment / revenue sharing mode? We'll have to put up with that, too, but without the ball and chain of non-SEC/B1G football around our necks.
Even a university that has grown to 41k students only has so much fundraising bandwidth. $70 million into Nippert. $140 million into the new practice facility. 5.3 Arena received its lipstick on a pig renovation. I wonder where Wes Miller's practice facility for hoops stands at this point.
Then you have UCONN, which is facing a $175 million facelift to their crappy off campus stadium, or a new build on campus that will be a hell of a lot more than that.
All of this in order to where a badge on your chest that says you are a member of the distant 3rd best conference in the United States. Nice.
But they have to do it. You know, because of the REVENUE.
I'm beginning to think the University of Chicago, Sewanee and Holy Cross were brilliant to largely get out this game early on.
Really curious on the wording in the new Big East media agreement with Fox/NBC on losing a member/members. This quote from Big East commissioner from August is interesting. "These are contractual relationships. If a school wants to leave, conferences provide for that. ... So you try to protect yourself a little bit with an exit fee that will help make up for whatever revenues might be lost because a team is leaving, and thatÂ’s what we have with UConn and everybody else".
https://www.newstimes.com/sports/uco...k-19719636.php
If the Big 12 invites UCONN ( still not 100% sure it happens) then Fox/NBC might dictate expansion to offset. That is where it will get very interesting.
I have deeper thoughts on where College Basketball might be heading with SEC,Big Ten and Big 12 power leading to a change in the Tournament and other changes. I will save those thoughts for a different time. In the meantime I hope the UCONN situation gets resolved either way quickly.
Separately, Big 12 Commissioner is probably the biggest threat to the current Big East. I hope he moves onto another job in the next couple years because he really values Basketball properties.
You mean like Tulane and the SEC?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoMuskies
Sewanee got out of the SEC and never looked back. Tulane got out and has been chasing it ever since. Very different.Quote:
Originally Posted by X-band '01
If UCONN leaves, then the Big East obviously will lose available content - televised UCONN games - that have otherwise been factored into the new media agreement(s).Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavgrad08
$7.3 million per school per year will go down, but would hopefully settle at a figure that would still be better than the per school payout when the deal was originally put together in 2013 by Fox. In other words, even with the loss of UCONN, will the Big East, back to its "original" 10 from the 2013 reset, be deemed to be a more valuable property than when it reset back then?
Now you get to the question of expansion. I will submit for the nth time that expansion HAS TO BE ACCRETIVE TO THE EXISTING (REMAINING) MEMBERS. The Big East will have no desire to bring in a new school that dilutes the annual per team payout. I would think that Fox would not directly care, as they'll end up picking up UCONN on the flipside with their Big 12 programming - they'll be able to fill their viewership windows otherwise. They won't want to hurt their own property by making it make less money.
The cocktail napkin sketch for all of this to me, where the emphasis is on both cosmetic and financial objectives, fleshes out to involving the Big East finding a way to bring in Gonzaga. Cosmetic in the sense that the Big East lands a basketball-centric power to replace UCONN. Financial in the sense that such a replacement will at least be sum zero or mildly accretive (assumed).
Bringing in Gonzaga is fraught with issues and risks, but they at least would be absolutely aligned: Catholic/Jesuit and basketball first.
EDIT: It will absolutely suck to go under $7 milion for the annual payout, but it is what it is.
I feel it's remarkable when a large state university can't field a quality football program.
UConn falls into this category.
They have no business playing football in the Big 12.
The rest of their programs (baseball, men's and women's basketball, soccer, etc.) are also better off in a league like the Big East.
If they want to leave, it's a shame but the BE will be fine.
Is that accurate? I have heard anecdotally it's not accurate so take that for what it's worth, and this is USA today so again who really knows for sure but here's the link.Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This is a fun site:
https://www.sportico.com/business/co...te-1234646029/
A Few notes:
I don't think schools are in the business of losing money, nor making moves to where they are not going to make money. IMHO UCONN would definitely benefit from going to the Big 12, and with Yomark at the helm, I completely disagree that that conference has a bad long term outlook. Let's be honest, winning is secondary...if UCONN football can just be mediocre in that conference, most likely it's a financial windfall compared to where they are now.
Louisville had possibly the worst two year span in the history of big time college basketball athletics and I know for a fact they still made money the last two years.
Lastly, I understand that this is operating rev/exp and capital is a whole different matter, but just a hunch that a lot of those dollars are student/donor driven and the athletic programs pump in a small amount.
Your USA Today link does not work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xville
What are you saying isn't accurate: that there are only a handful of programs that operate at a surplus? You need to consider the revenue line item that reads "Direct Institutional Support." That, I believe, is funding coming from student fees, in most cases. From my way of looking at it, I strip that out, because student fees could otherwise be used for something like, well like something having to do with education, since that is what these places are primarily in the business of providing. That line item is a subsidy, and there is no other way of looking at it.
Now consider when revenue sharing / direct compensation comes into play. That is going to blow up a lot of these schools.
I believe there are a lot more than 20 currently that operate at a surplus, I believe it's probably more like 40-50. I understand what you mean by the line item though...even though for a school like Clemson they are operating athletically at a profit even taking into consideration that line item. (I do wonder what all that line item encompasses.)Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
As far as rev share/ direct compensation, I agree it will hurt a lot of schools. However, I'm sure that for the P4 and probably the big east, they will just add it to the cost of the tickets/donations and be just fine. In the end, as others have said here previously, we will be the ones paying for it, not the schools. However, at least we'll get some entertainment out of it i guess.
Take X for example...27 home games is that right? average 10k a game....10 dollar "NIL surcharge" 2.7 million dollars....probably another million a year or so in private donations etc and X is where they need to be.
Regardless, all im saying is that UCONN is on its hands and knees because they believe they can make more money in the big 12, and having an average/medicore football team. I agree with them.
27 home games? That's more like 17 or 18, no?
I’m an idiot. Yes. So 1.7 and then 2.7-3 respectively after some private donations. Nothing is transparent in nil but from what I gather 3 mil is about where we are at.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoMuskies
I'm looking at it from the vantage point of GENERATED REVENUE and expenses - allocated revenue is really nothing more than subsidies coming from sources other than a sport that is directly generating revenue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Xville
https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/res...vExpReport.pdf
I note here that the data are from 2020, but I imagine this analysis is still reasonably representative of the current situation.
Generated revenues exceeded expenses in 2020 at 20 institutions – five fewer than in 2019. The median net positive revenue for those institutions was $7.4 million.
NCAA institutions across all three divisions reported total athletics revenues of just over $18.7 billion dollars in 2020.
Of that amount, approximately $8.5 billion (45%) was allocated revenues from government and institution support and student fees; $10.2 billion (55%) was generated by the athletics departments. Think about that: almost half (45%) of revenue is from sources - allocated revenues - not directly tied to the on field / on court product.
I agree that the consumer will share in this fun moving forward.
UCONN is on its hands and knees, chasing more money. I get it. My contention is that they may not be sufficiently focusing on the expense side of the equation here as things settle out over time (lawsuits, revenue sharing, et al).
Making more money in the Big 12 requires not allowing expenses to exceed the amount of increased revenue. The outlook for expenses in this carnival is rather staggering. They are in a position where they have to go deep into CAPEX before they even can begin to see what they can accomplish with their football P/L. This is a reach any way you look at it.
If Yormark weren't such an aggressive, creative commissioner who happens to be focused on go-forward basketball value, this effort with UCONN wouldn't even be taking place. I'm shaking my head over this if I'm one of the 4-corner schools. They haven't even played their first game in this conference yet and they're having to deal with this.
Mike Gundy from OK State:
We’ve been competing against teams that pay a ton of money, and we’re not paying a ton of money,” Gundy said in a discussion with a small group of reporters following his first weekly press conference of the season. “We only paid $2.7 million last year, and there was 25 teams that paid over $15 million — we know that for a fact — and maybe more than that.
“In my opinion, you’re not gonna be able to compete anymore on a low budget. You just won’t be able to do it. You won’t have any players.”
The head football coach of arguably one of the best programs in that conference admitted that he is in hell.
T Bone's foundation dropped $120 million on the school in June.
Maybe they can find some more.
While I think gundy is less full of shit than other college coaches, I still think he’s full of shit. Maybe he’s right, but the “for a fact” stuff is most likely complete nonsense. There is zero transparency with this stuff which I think is one of the major problems with it. How does he know for a fact? Because some agent told him what x,y,z player is getting? I’m sure they aren’t bumping that number up in any way. Insert eye roll.Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
I do think a lot of this needs to be regulated, but I’m a little sick of very very very rich coaches whining about it.
Thank you! I needed this!Quote:
Originally Posted by xudash
Mike Gundy is a funny guy!!!
Oklahoma State was one of the first schools, if not THE first, to have an NIL coordinator. I know who that person is. It's Barry Hinson, who's a former basketball coach. I don't want to overstate it and say we're great friends or anything, but I VERY much believe that the actua dollar amount is...well...MORE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xville
Now, to be fair, he may have actually been directed to say this in an attempt to stir up more potential donors.
And, this has nothing to do with UConn leaving. I don't want to sidetrack the thread. This just made me laugh on a morning when I really needed it! Nothing more. Carry on!
Let's say Gundy is full of it and that Okie State is paying more than $2.5 million. If he isn't full of crap about the "25 teams paid over $15 million" part of the quote, then the point stands, because I seriously doubt that OSU was able to payout anywhere close to that figure. The gap between 2.5 and 15 would have to be closed significantly in order for his point to be invalid. I still believe he has to be feeling the pressure of not being a part of the SEC or B1G, especially given that OU made it to the SEC, and that is with someone like T. Boone Pickens behind the school.
Oklahoma State can and will survive all of this. It's not like I believe that it will only be about B1G and SEC schools in the future. But what I do believe is that it will be very difficult to operate a highly successful football program in the future outside of B1G and SEC membership, given what we know now and given the revenue and expense picture for big time college football.
This is kind of a strictly American thing: pouring money into a sport in an attempt to protect/strengthen an academic institution's standing and appeal.
Thought this article from yesterday was interesting. "In addition, sources close to the situation tell CBS Sports that TV partner Fox is against the move". Doesn't sound like all the Big 12 institution's are aligned on this.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...long-decision/
pretty clear to me that the B12 have embarked on a strategy of Quantity over Quality. They lost UT and Oklahoma, which are blue blood national brands and restocked with UC, BYU, South Florida (or is it Central Florida), Arizona, ASU, Utah, and Colorado.
I cant even tell you the premier football brand in the B12. Maybe OSU? Maybe Baylor? Or KState? Or Utah? Bottom line is that they clearly see "safety in numbers."
The odd part is that the ACC is widely viewed as more "at risk" than the B12 at this point. But strangely, that has more to do with the fact that the ACC actually HAS several National Brands (Clemson and FSU) that may want out.
The B12 is actually secure because they dont have anything that anyone else wants.
As it pertains to Uconn, there seems to be alot of reasons why people think a move to the B12 and the resulting financial commitment to football would be a horrible idea. There is alot of evidence that its going to be VERY expensive and possibly would prohibit them being competitive into the foreseeable future.
So the question is, dont you think they also know that? And if so, and they continue to move forward on the plan, then they must have a very bleak outlook on the alternative scenario where they DONT make this move.
For Uconn, this might not be about making the best move that works in their favor. This is more about picking the lesser of 2 evils. Maybe being in the B12 and facing those challenges is actually a BETTER outcome than staying in the Big East and running the risk of being locked out if Football splits off.....
Couple other random thoughts:
Pretty obvious that UConn is the initiator of the B12 talks. They arent just "listening" they are actively pursuing the deal. Sounds like they were vetted before and told their football program wasn't up to snuff. They went back to the drawing board, make a plan and then came back to B12 leadership to make their case. they are not being loyal to teh BE and would leave if they could. Dont lose sight of that.
Anyone wonder if the ACC could make a move on UConn? UConn is obviously signaling that they want to leave the BE, and if the B12 wont take them, what would stop the ACC from seeing an opportunity? I don't know the ACC bylaws and how many votes it would take to approve it, but I have to think it's a possibility. Hell, if Cal and Stanford can join the ACC, why couldnt UConn?