Updated: Big 12 TV deal made official

[Poke]

Sounds like most of the game now will be televised..


http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/07/report-big-12-tv-announcement-coming-friday/

 

[Mr Tony]

so its just like the old contract but just more games.

Big12 basketball alot of times was on local stations (syndicated)

 

[whitewolf8214]

What gives first the TV Contract or the Big 12 being no more? I see Big 12 breaking up with the big schools going to Pac-12 soon ...Yes when Mizzou was in Big 12 we got alot of Big 12 Games on regular TV no matter who teh school was

 

[osu1991]

What gives first the TV Contract or the Big 12 being no more? I see Big 12 breaking up with the big schools going to Pac-12 soon ...Yes when Mizzou was in Big 12 we got alot of Big 12 Games on regular TV no matter who teh school was

You need to keep up, like the Big 10 and the Pac 12, there is a grant of rights in force. No one is going anywhere for at least 13 years, unless they can get by without any tv money. The league owns the rights to all schools tier 1 and tier 2 tv money, whether they are in the Big 12 or get a wild hair up their butt and decide to go west or southeast. I'm pretty sure no other conference is going to want to send their tv money to the Big 12.

The most likely scenario is Big 12 will be back to 12 members for the 2014 season with a championship game when the new playoff system starts. Whether people like it or not, there is a list of schools on the Big 12 radar

 

[SamCdbs]

I don't see any current so-called BcS team going to the Big 12. The recent realignment was caused by those that could (Nebraska, Colorado, TAMU, and Mizzou) moving out, because of the unequal (made more unequal by this deal) TV situation that Texas enjoys and the kickback that Oklahoma is paid out of it to keep them there. They took two mid-majors to get back to 10.

Maybe Louisville and its several dozen football fans, but other than that, why would a team join this league and have a permanent disadvantage to the Big 2.

In any event, the details of the deal are more complex than most but here goes:

- Disney (the ESPNs, Longhorn Netwrok (AKA the network no one gets), and ABC) gets 19 games per year until 2016 when it goes to 23. Of those only 6 can be "non-national", meaning on Longhorn Network or ABC regionally without the "reverse mirror" deal. Since ESPN is already obligated to "reverse mirror" the Big 10, this means probably a double reverse mirror in those weeks.

- Fox (Fox, FX, FSNs and FCS) gets 40 games, of which 6 must be on Fox, (meaning 25 games per year will be on trully national TV). It can force the league to schedule three games on a Thursday night, plus "Labor Day Sunday" and "Black Friday" (the day after Thanksgiving). (This means Thursday night is going to have, at least, an NFL game on NFLN, a Big 12 game on some Fox outlet, and a game or two from some other conference on ESPN).

- Every team gets to keep one game, which it can sell as it wishes. Texas will use this game for its Longhorn Network. Others will sell it to an RSN serving their state, sell it PPV (within the state only) or syndicated it to local OTA stations in their state only. If a school cannot sell a game on this basis, it goes back to Fox and doesn't count towards the totals. ESPN can put additional games on LN but these would count towards its 6 "non-national" games.

- Theoretically, there is a "grant of rights" meaning that even if a team leaves the league, the TV rights to its games would belong to the league. The legality of this is unknown.

Big winner? The SEC, which will demand that CBS and ESPN tear up the current deal and pay them at least 4 times this.

 

[osu1991]

I don't see any current so-called BcS team going to the Big 12. The recent realignment was caused by those that could (Nebraska, Colorado, TAMU, and Mizzou) moving out, because of the unequal (made more unequal by this deal) TV situation that Texas enjoys and the kickback that Oklahoma is paid out of it to keep them there. They took two mid-majors to get back to 10.


- Theoretically, there is a "grant of rights" meaning that even if a team leaves the league, the TV rights to its games would belong to the league. The legality of this is unknown.

Big winner? The SEC, which will demand that CBS and ESPN tear up the current deal and pay them at least 4 times this.

another sec fanboy.

So how is this deal unequal to any of the schools? Everyone is paid the same for tier 1 and 2 games. All schools retain their tier3 rights. ESPN made a stupid deal that gives Texas money for the shorthorn network, but most of the schools make a nice amount of money from tier 3 rights and that is increasing for some. I actually see the LHN going away in the future or espn rebranding it into something else

It's funny those schools complained about unequal revenue sharing, when they were the ones that voted for it. Nebraska and A&M more than others. OU, OSU and Texas even gave money back from the Nebraska and Colorado exits, but not A&M.

Mid Majors or not, those 2 teams won more BCS bowls than the last 2 that left and really the only school anyone misses is Nebraska. The other 3 were always crying that they got no respect, yet they could never do anything on the field when it mattered. The league is better off now than its been since we let the SWC schools into the Big 8

The legality of the grant of rights is known and it is a legally binding contract. That's not to say if a school wanted to leave, they could try and buy themselves out of it, but it will not be cheap.

Whats the sec going to do, stop playing games until ESPN/CBS agrees to tear up the contract?
So where's the legality in that. The SEC has a contract and they will be held to it, until their contract look in, at which time they will get a bump but you're out of your mind if you think it will be 4 times higher.

 

[Derwin0]

Whats the sec going to do, stop playing games until ESPN/CBS agrees to tear up the contract?
So where's the legality in that. The SEC has a contract and they will be held to it, until their contract look in, at which time they will get a bump but you're out of your mind if you think it will be 4 times higher.

Expansion clause. Expand to 16 teams and the contract re-opens.

 

[osu1991]

Expansion clause. Expand to 16 teams and the contract re-opens.

Exactly, yet no one believes that the SEC wants to go to 16.

 

[Derwin0]

Exactly, yet no one believes that the SEC wants to go to 16.

Many didn 't think they wanted to goto 14.
I think they eventually will go to 16, but only when it $uits their purpo$e$.

 

[Ronnie-]

Expansion clause. Expand to 16 teams and the contract re-opens.

They had a clause that was triggered when they went to 14, that is why they are currently in negotiations as we speak.

So while it may come across as conference homerism to some, the SEC does stand to benefit greatly from the PAC12 and Big 12 TV deals. Possibly even moreso than those conferences themselves in a manner of looking at it.

 

[mdonnelly]

They had a clause that was triggered when they went to 14, that is why they are currently in negotiations as we speak.

So while it may come across as conference homerism to some, the SEC does stand to benefit greatly from the PAC12 and Big 12 TV deals. Possibly even moreso than those conferences themselves in a manner of looking at it.

I knew there had to be some financial reason why the SEC would want A&M and Missouri. I couldn't be that they were such athletic powerhouses. I expect both to be SEC doormats (in football, at least) for years.

 

[Ronnie-]

Well Slive is no idiot, and the possible financial reasons were fairly obvious.

I do agree that they will athletically have a tough time of it most likely, at first anyway. Much in the way that Ark and USC did, but given time, (the hogs most recent game aside), they could very well end up surpassing the success on the football field of both of those two, which as of late, is saying something.

 

[osu1991]

Missouri and A&M got the sec into the Missouri and TX tv markets, that is the reason they were chosen, that and they were willing to go. The same reason you're likely to see Virginia Tech, NC State and Maryland on the sec's future radar. They are close and are new tv markets, which is the only reason for expanding.

 

[Ronnie-]

Missouri and A&M got the sec into the Missouri and TX tv markets, that is the reason they were chosen, that and they were willing to go. The same reason you're likely to see Virginia Tech, NC State and Maryland on the sec's future radar. They are close and are new tv markets, which is the only reason for expanding.

Bingo, and it is likely why you will see little interest (outside of fan interest) in teams such as FSU, Clemson, or Ga Tech.

 

[Derwin0]

Missouri and A&M got the sec into the Missouri and TX tv markets, that is the reason they were chosen, that and they were willing to go. The same reason you're likely to see Virginia Tech, NC State and Maryland on the sec's future radar. They are close and are new tv markets, which is the only reason for expanding.

Maryland won't go to the SEC, they'd prefer the Big Ten for academic reasons. The SEC doesn't want VT for the same reason the ACC didn't (don't forget it was UVa blackmail that got VT in), no TV market. Blacksburg is nothing, and as much as the Hokies claim to be in the DC market, it's far away from them. Plus, VT is joined at the hip with UVA, and the SEC doesn't want them, and UVa doesn't want the SEC.

 

[eersmaniac]

I don't see any current so-called BcS team going to the Big 12. The recent realignment was caused by those that could (Nebraska, Colorado, TAMU, and Mizzou) moving out, because of the unequal (made more unequal by this deal) TV situation that Texas enjoys and the kickback that Oklahoma is paid out of it to keep them there. They took two mid-majors to get back to 10.

Maybe Louisville and its several dozen football fans, but other than that, why would a team join this league and have a permanent disadvantage to the Big 2.

In any event, the details of the deal are more complex than most but here goes:

- Disney (the ESPNs, Longhorn Netwrok (AKA the network no one gets), and ABC) gets 19 games per year until 2016 when it goes to 23. Of those only 6 can be "non-national", meaning on Longhorn Network or ABC regionally without the "reverse mirror" deal. Since ESPN is already obligated to "reverse mirror" the Big 10, this means probably a double reverse mirror in those weeks.

- Fox (Fox, FX, FSNs and FCS) gets 40 games, of which 6 must be on Fox, (meaning 25 games per year will be on trully national TV). It can force the league to schedule three games on a Thursday night, plus "Labor Day Sunday" and "Black Friday" (the day after Thanksgiving). (This means Thursday night is going to have, at least, an NFL game on NFLN, a Big 12 game on some Fox outlet, and a game or two from some other conference on ESPN).

- Every team gets to keep one game, which it can sell as it wishes. Texas will use this game for its Longhorn Network. Others will sell it to an RSN serving their state, sell it PPV (within the state only) or syndicated it to local OTA stations in their state only. If a school cannot sell a game on this basis, it goes back to Fox and doesn't count towards the totals. ESPN can put additional games on LN but these would count towards its 6 "non-national" games.

- Theoretically, there is a "grant of rights" meaning that even if a team leaves the league, the TV rights to its games would belong to the league. The legality of this is unknown.

Big winner? The SEC, which will demand that CBS and ESPN tear up the current deal and pay them at least 4 times this.

Mid majors? A mid major with 3 bcs titles in the last 6 years? How many does Colorado Utah Missouri and aTm have? Zip zilch nodda. HAIL WEST VIRGINIA!