Big 12 expansion eyes Memphis, 'substantive' talks with Colorado, per reports: https://t.co/FcOFSahfph pic.twitter.com/Kxr5Lf9Hv5

— 247Sports (@247Sports) May 31, 2023

Fog of war is strong.

Jason Scheer, an Arizona partisan but sounds level headed says CU and UConn are about to join the XII even though UConn makes no sense in my opinion . They are not P5 right now and sounds like a weird move to make with CU.

PartyBear said:

---

Jason Scheer, an Arizona partisan but sounds level headed says CU and UConn are about to join the XII even though UConn makes no sense. They are not P5 right now and sounds like a weird move to make with CU.

---

The Big 12 currently seems all-in on two things (1) men's basketball even to the point where it could be a detriment to the football product and (2) expanding with P5 teams regardless of the real world value.

The men's basketball final was one of the poorest attended games and had some of the lowest ratings of all time. Please no to UConn. Memphis also makes no sense, they are UH with less history and lower potential. I would honestly rather add one of the service academies or Hawaii than UConn and probably Memphis

We shouldn't be adding anything but current P5 teams at this point. I hope the Presidents push back and tell BY to focus on current P5s and also there is no rush to reach 16 or 20. Wait to see what develops with the ACC.

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Jason Scheer, an Arizona partisan but sounds level headed says CU and UConn are about to join the XII even though UConn makes no sense. They are not P5 right now and sounds like a weird move to make with CU.

---

The Big 12 currently seems all-in on two things (1) men's basketball even to the point where it could be a detriment to the football product and (2) expanding with P5 teams regardless of the real world value.

---

(1) was basically the big east model, and we saw how that worked out. I get that it's sort of apples to oranges with the modern conference landscape versus 15 years ago, but building a conference on basketball prestige is building a house upon the sand

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

No Quarterback said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

Jason Scheer, an Arizona partisan but sounds level headed says CU and UConn are about to join the XII even though UConn makes no sense. They are not P5 right now and sounds like a weird move to make with CU.

---

The Big 12 currently seems all-in on two things (1) men's basketball even to the point where it could be a detriment to the football product and (2) expanding with P5 teams regardless of the real world value.

---

(1) was basically the big east model, and we saw how that worked out. I get that it's sort of apples to oranges with the modern conference landscape versus 15 years ago, but building a conference on basketball prestige is building a house upon the sand

---

Unlike the Big East, football will always be king in the Big 12. The Big 12 is the best basketball conference in America currently, and only one program in the league (Kansas) prioritizes basketball over football. This is a baseless fear.

Improving the basketball product is value added on top of the football revenue, which is maxed out in its value without any name brands.

Yormark is a really smart guy. He knows what he's doing. Fans would be wise to trust him -- particularly over tired paradigms that left the Big 12 on the brink of extinction.

I think BY is looking to add money into the conference pot any way he can. He is also trying to build the brand.

I'm thinking Gonzaga and UConn would be basketball additions only. Or maybe he is working on some kind of showcase tournament that all parties would walk away with $$$$.

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

For perspective the UConn campus is only a little closer to the UC and WVU campuses than the Baylor campus is. That shows how far away this addition would be. It isn't really conveniently located to our Eastern conference mates as a travel partner and again it isn't like UConn is an ACC member to raid away.

Do we really have people on here advocating for adding…. UConn? Good grief…

Not keen on UConn.

Dear Brett,

UConn not be serious, right?

Regards,
Big 12 fans everywhere

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

---

The Big 12 has maxed out its football revenue. That's just a fact. With the tightening taking place in the spending habits of networks and streamers, there's a good chance the deal the Big 12 just signed will be the most lucrative football-centric deal it ever gets going forward. The league has to get creative and create new revenue streams or it will fall even further behind the P2. The only chance it has to do that is to focus on and try to monetize its strengths, and basketball is probably its biggest. That's where the growth opportunity is, not football.

This isn't about maximizing the per-school payout in the recently signed TV deal. This is about strengthening the league in a way that allows it to remain viable and get another good deal when that one expires. The college sports media marketplace is getting much more competitive and the money in it is shrinking. Yormark recognizes this. He's playing 3D chess while fans play Chutes and Ladders.

Memphis is an easy drive for me. Wouldn't be as opposed as some on here…

boykin_spaniel said:

---

Memphis is an easy drive for me. Wouldn't be as opposed as some on here…

---

I don't think it will happen, but I wouldn't mind Memphis either. I don't get hung up on the silly P5/G5 designation. To me, it's all about potential. TCU and Utah have been far better additions for their respective leagues than Nebraska or Colorado were for theirs.

When looking at potential expansion candidates, I want programs that can compete at a national level quickly in at least one of the two revenue sports. Those are the programs that become productive members of new conferences. And Memphis certainly has that capability.

UConn campus in Storrs, CT, is 43 miles from ESPN's headquarters in Bristol, CT.

Surely there is some value to that?

I thought the new media deal essentially says all current members of the new XII are guaranteed no reduced gross pay if P5s are added. I have not read the document but if it says that and doesnt say that about G5s that would indicate the media partners are saying "take G5s at your own risk" from this point on. UConn is so out of the way that will already cause more over head costs in addition to potential less pay as well.

bear2be2 said:

---

boykin_spaniel said:

---

Memphis is an easy drive for me. Wouldn't be as opposed as some on here…

---

I don't think it will happen, but I wouldn't mind Memphis either. I don't get hung up on the silly P5/G5 designation. To me, it's all about potential. TCU and Utah have been far better additions for their respective leagues than Nebraska or Colorado were for theirs.

When looking at potential expansion candidates, I want programs that can compete at a national level quickly in at least one of the two revenue sports. Those are the programs that become productive members of new conferences. And Memphis certainly has that capability.

---

100%

Memphis has shown it can be competitive (and sometimes better than that) in the 2 major sports. Large school in a major metro area that has started spending more money on athletics. It is in an insanely rich recruiting territory, which would be good for the B12, and Memphis itself would do better with P5 affiliation. Would chip away at SEC recruiting in the Delta at least slightly. Similar to adding Cincy. Lots of upside. I think probably more upside than U of H, but all 3 have a lot in common.

And UConn will always get tons of press in the NE and from ESPN b/c of its location. Elite basketball. Pretty good football for stretches (I think they're 2-0 against us?).

You can't evaluate these schools based just on what they have now. Joining a major conference will make them better.

When's the last time Nebraska could beat Cincy in anything? Over time, that will start to make a huge difference.

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

---

The Big 12 has maxed out its football revenue. That's just a fact. With the tightening taking place in the spending habits of networks and streamers, there's a good chance the deal the Big 12 just signed will be the most lucrative football-centric deal it ever gets going forward. The league has to get creative and create new revenue streams or it will fall even further behind the P2. The only chance it has to do that is to focus on and try to monetize its strengths, and basketball is probably its biggest. That's where the growth opportunity is, not football.

---

Agreed to an extent, but filling up the conference with also-rans in football will have a negative impact on the football product unless the Big 12 intends to expand with more G5 teams for either basketball only or all sports but football.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

---

The Big 12 has maxed out its football revenue. That's just a fact. With the tightening taking place in the spending habits of networks and streamers, there's a good chance the deal the Big 12 just signed will be the most lucrative football-centric deal it ever gets going forward. The league has to get creative and create new revenue streams or it will fall even further behind the P2. The only chance it has to do that is to focus on and try to monetize its strengths, and basketball is probably its biggest. That's where the growth opportunity is, not football.

---

Agreed to an extent, but filling up the conference with also-rans in football will have a negative impact on the football product unless the Big 12 intends to expand with more G5 teams for either basketball only or all sports but football.

---

The idea isn't to have them stay also-rans. The idea is that this increases their commitment to football (similar to what we've seen recently from Kansas) and that a rising tide lifts all boats. UConn was a football asset in the Big East -- not great, but an asset. They can get back to that point with the proper commitment. And they'll bolster the league's men's and women's basketball profiles in the process.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

---

The Big 12 has maxed out its football revenue. That's just a fact. With the tightening taking place in the spending habits of networks and streamers, there's a good chance the deal the Big 12 just signed will be the most lucrative football-centric deal it ever gets going forward. The league has to get creative and create new revenue streams or it will fall even further behind the P2. The only chance it has to do that is to focus on and try to monetize its strengths, and basketball is probably its biggest. That's where the growth opportunity is, not football.

---

Agreed to an extent, but filling up the conference with also-rans in football will have a negative impact on the football product unless the Big 12 intends to expand with more G5 teams for either basketball only or all sports but football.

---

The idea isn't to have them stay also-rans. The idea is that this increases their commitment to football (similar to what we've seen recently from Kansas) and that a rising tide lifts all boats. UConn was a football asset in the Big East -- not great, but an asset. They can get back to that point with the proper commitment. And they'll bolster the league's men's and women's basketball profiles in the process.

---

An asset in football?

You mean the UConn team that was part of the powerhouse Yankee Conference until 1997 and that's won a total of three bowl games in its entire history, the Motor City Bowl, the International Bowl, and most recently in 2010 in the PapaJohns.com bowl?

UConn I recall being decent only around the time we played them twice during the early Briles era. They werent really producing alot of top flight teams at the G5 level or actually what I will even just call P6 level like TCU, WVU and Cincinnati did.

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

---

The Big 12 has maxed out its football revenue. That's just a fact. With the tightening taking place in the spending habits of networks and streamers, there's a good chance the deal the Big 12 just signed will be the most lucrative football-centric deal it ever gets going forward. The league has to get creative and create new revenue streams or it will fall even further behind the P2. The only chance it has to do that is to focus on and try to monetize its strengths, and basketball is probably its biggest. That's where the growth opportunity is, not football.

---

Agreed to an extent, but filling up the conference with also-rans in football will have a negative impact on the football product unless the Big 12 intends to expand with more G5 teams for either basketball only or all sports but football.

---

The idea isn't to have them stay also-rans. The idea is that this increases their commitment to football (similar to what we've seen recently from Kansas) and that a rising tide lifts all boats. UConn was a football asset in the Big East -- not great, but an asset. They can get back to that point with the proper commitment. And they'll bolster the league's men's and women's basketball profiles in the process.

---

I suppose. For me, (1) it just seems as though the Big 12 will have resigned to be CUSA on steroids if it adds Memphis and UConn and (2) I thought the Big 12 was going to target PAC12 and ACC programs, so the shift to UConn and Memphis is a bit of a perceived drop. For (2) specifically, the thought of getting programs like Virginia Tech or NC State is great from a football standpoint and UConn/Memphis do not move the needle in a similar manner.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

---

The Big 12 has maxed out its football revenue. That's just a fact. With the tightening taking place in the spending habits of networks and streamers, there's a good chance the deal the Big 12 just signed will be the most lucrative football-centric deal it ever gets going forward. The league has to get creative and create new revenue streams or it will fall even further behind the P2. The only chance it has to do that is to focus on and try to monetize its strengths, and basketball is probably its biggest. That's where the growth opportunity is, not football.

---

Agreed to an extent, but filling up the conference with also-rans in football will have a negative impact on the football product unless the Big 12 intends to expand with more G5 teams for either basketball only or all sports but football.

---

The idea isn't to have them stay also-rans. The idea is that this increases their commitment to football (similar to what we've seen recently from Kansas) and that a rising tide lifts all boats. UConn was a football asset in the Big East -- not great, but an asset. They can get back to that point with the proper commitment. And they'll bolster the league's men's and women's basketball profiles in the process.

---

I suppose. For me, (1) it just seems as though the Big 12 will have resigned to be CUSA on steroids if it adds Memphis and UConn and (2) I thought the Big 12 was going to target PAC12 and ACC programs, so the shift to UConn and Memphis is a bit of a perceived drop. For (2) specifically, the thought of getting programs like Virginia Tech or NC State is great from a football standpoint and UConn/Memphis do not move the needle in a similar manner.

---

Memphis and UConn have better athletic departments than Colorado and Arizona State, which have done nothing but waste undeserved resources in the PAC-12. Same with mid-ass programs like Pitt and Virginia Tech in the ACC. People need to get over their weird P5/G5 biases. It's about what these programs can be with greater resources, not what conference they are coming from.

Booboo Bear said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

No Quarterback said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Yourmark thinks hoops is undervalued. I think eventually he wants to break off and have a separate package for hoops... would just add more to the football TV money... especially if we would have all the most valuable brands in our conference..and I can't think of many more valuable than UConn . Gonzaga..and Kansas..

---

UConn would instantly improve the profile of the Big 12 as both a men's and women's basketball conference. And they proved during their time in the Big East that they can field competitive football teams when committed to doing so.

I think the UConn add makes a lot of sense, actually.

1. They make the Big 12 the undisputed best basketball league in the country.
2. They give the conference the perfect geographic distribution (four Mountain, four Midwest, four Southwest, four East).
3. They open up the league to a new, previously untapped region/media market.

Fans need to trust Brett Yormark. He's building for the next TV contract, not this one. And UConn will be additive in the long run.

---

Again, a lot of people like watching college basketball….. not a lot of people like watching UConn play college basketball. A longhorn friend of mine bought tickets to the finals when he thought UT had a chance of making the big game then later tried to sell them when UConn got there, and he got literally ~10% what he originally paid. It's anecdotal, but it goes to show that no one cares about UConn

It's clear that yormark has been told by his employers that they expect him to be proactive, so kudos to him. I still think our best course of action is to get the soft underbelly of the pac 12 to fold and join the big 12, then hope that the dominoes start to tumble. If Colorado joins, I think we can potentially get our choice of Pac 12 schools not named Oregon or Washington

---

14.69 million viewers tuned in for the national title game, so let's be careful not to exaggerate things. While that may be "bad" by national championship game standards, the list of television programs capable of drawing that many viewers in 2023 is very, very, very short.

Now take into account that UConn was playing San Diego State in a game that was never particularly close -- after blowing out every other opponent it had played in the tournament, and there are plenty of reasons for that number to be lower than expected that don't lead us to a "nobody cares about UConn" conclusion.

In 2014, UConn and Kentucky drew over 21 million viewers. In 2011, UConn and Butler drew over 20 million. In 2004, UConn and Georgia Tech drew over 17 million. In 1999, UConn and Duke drew over 26 million. Plenty of people cared about those games.

---

Yes, a national championship game tends to draw a good number of viewers. That's not the point I'm making. How do the ratings and viewership of those uconn national championships compare with other national championships? How do their regular season games compare with say another big 12 team's regular season games? Ultimately, I really don't think that basketball moves the financial needle for a conference as much as some people think it does. Football is still king, and it's not close. Big 12 football games with UConn are not going to draw noteworthy ratings unless one of the teams is very highly ranked.

---

The Big 12 has maxed out its football revenue. That's just a fact. With the tightening taking place in the spending habits of networks and streamers, there's a good chance the deal the Big 12 just signed will be the most lucrative football-centric deal it ever gets going forward. The league has to get creative and create new revenue streams or it will fall even further behind the P2. The only chance it has to do that is to focus on and try to monetize its strengths, and basketball is probably its biggest. That's where the growth opportunity is, not football.

---

Agreed to an extent, but filling up the conference with also-rans in football will have a negative impact on the football product unless the Big 12 intends to expand with more G5 teams for either basketball only or all sports but football.

---

The idea isn't to have them stay also-rans. The idea is that this increases their commitment to football (similar to what we've seen recently from Kansas) and that a rising tide lifts all boats. UConn was a football asset in the Big East -- not great, but an asset. They can get back to that point with the proper commitment. And they'll bolster the league's men's and women's basketball profiles in the process.

---

An asset in football?

You mean the UConn team that was part of the powerhouse Yankee Conference until 1997 and that's won a total of three bowl games in its entire history, the Motor City Bowl, the International Bowl, and most recently in 2010 in the PapaJohns.com bowl?

---

I mean the UConn program that was consistently competitive in the Big East under Randy Edsall.

What does the new contract say about income from adding a G5 school going forward. I think the distinction is actually important in terms of how the media partners value the move. For all we know Tulane's athletic department may be run better than that of Univ of Texas and USC. That doesnt mean the B10 and SEC should have taken Tulane over those two.

I'm sure BY and team are looking at the available data, the probability of the ACC imploding and how being close to ESPN could impact this.

Also, what's the harm in putting this out in the media to put a little pressure on the 4 Corners schools to make a decision? That has to play a part in this.

PartyBear said:

---

What does the new contract say about income from adding a G5 school going forward. I think the distinction is actually important in terms of how the media partners value the move. For all we know Tulane's athletic department may be run better than that of Univ of Texas and USC. That doesnt mean the B10 and SEC should have taken Tulane over those two.

---

The pro-rata clause in the current TV contract only guarantees ESPN money for existing P5 schools, but I'm not as concerned about money in this round as I am the next. The Big 12 needs to focus on strengthening its product and brand, not on saving a few million dollars in the short term. Yormark is a bold, proactive visionary. The Big 12 and its fans need to stop thinking like Beebe's and Bowlsby's.

"I mean, we may have looked at it on the day it happened and go ‘Well that’s not exactly USC/UCLA/OU/Texas, but they’re all quality in their own way. So the Big 12 still seems to be desirous. I mean, you mentioned Rick George from Colorado. That might not be the end of it"

2/4

— Jeff Fuller (@jjfuller72) June 1, 2023

Loved his line: it was a "very good move" to add BYU, Cincy, Houston, & UCF; they "are all quality in their own way"

This is one of the best examples of synergism, or a "win-win" situation as all 4 schools are worth much more in the Big12 than before

4/4https://t.co/2c1VaK5i0K

— Jeff Fuller (@jjfuller72) June 1, 2023