Lchriscbear said:

---

There are about 12% to 15% of Texans who identify as UT fans and maybe 10% that are ATM fans. So yes the rest of people in Texas matter. BU, TT,TCU & Okie St matter. Also remember UT and ATM fans don't watch all games, all the time. Aggies and Longhorns don't run this state. Sicem.

---

LOL. Those two run it a helluva lot more then BU, TCU and OSU. TT at third is behind Ewe T and aggy but way ahead of the other three. TT has huge enrollment and alumni base. If any of the 8 get a seat bet on TT and OSU.

Tech does now have a huge enrollment. However I'm not sure it's alumni base is currently substantially larger than Baylor's. Only 20 years ago Tech was about the size Baylor is now. They have doubled in size since 2000 and have ballooned close to the size of UT Austin. To be fair Baylor also about doubled in size since the late 90s. So it isn't like Baylor has been at 20k for several decades and churning out alum like a school that size for decades.

Oklahoma State is only marginally larger than Baylor right now.

Tech has 225K alumni according to their edu.com. Apparently border states students do not have to pay out of state tuition. Really surprised State allows that gift.

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Baylor TCU did get 4 million once... #61-58

---

It was beautiful! But both were highly ranked. It was a one time situation, not an annual attraction for 4 million viewers.

historian said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Baylor TCU did get 4 million once... #61-58

---

It was beautiful! But both were highly ranked. It was a one time situation, not an annual attraction for 4 million viewers.

---

This. It was a top 10 matchup that operated as Power 5 conference championship game (Baylor had already beaten Texas and TCU had beaten Oklahoma), and a game of that nature will always bring viewers. The issue is that if Baylor doesn't end up in a Power conference - with TCU in the other division (or no divisions to allow for TCU vs Baylor for a Power conference title) - those circumstances will never repeat themselves.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Lchriscbear said:

---

There are about 12% to 15% of Texans who identify as UT fans and maybe 10% that are ATM fans. So yes the rest of people in Texas matter. BU, TT,TCU & Okie St matter. Also remember UT and ATM fans don't watch all games, all the time. Aggies and Longhorns don't run this state. Sicem.

---

LOL. Those two run it a helluva lot more then BU, TCU and OSU. TT at third is behind Ewe T and aggy but way ahead of the other three. TT has huge enrollment and alumni base. If any of the 8 get a seat bet on TT and OSU.

---

As shown in other threads and articles...they have about the same chance as us.

Tech 225k living alumni. Baylor 120k

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Tech 225k living alumni. Baylor 120k

---

And likely half or more of each don't give a hoot about college athletics. With that in mind I just don't see that either move the needle....none of the 8 do, certainly not enough to increase the payout for current conference members not to take a pay cut after having to split the pie more ways. If you don't increase your own revenue, what is the point of bringing in more teams?

blackie said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Tech 225k living alumni. Baylor 120k

---

And likely half or more of each don't give a hoot about college athletics. With that in mind I just don't see that either move the needle....none of the 8 do, certainly not enough to increase the payout for current conference members not to take a pay cut after having to split the pie more ways. If you don't increase your own revenue, what is the point of bringing in more teams?

---

His last question is a really important one. I agree on all points

There could be intangibles such as an example for the PAC, giving the PAC schools higher profile among Texas recruits. The flip side it gives the Texas schools reciprocity on that in California.

Regarding direct additional revenue. Did adding TCU and WVU to the XII really do that? If not Texas and OU were still for it for other reasons and if they did move the revenue needle enough to make even Texas and OU happy at that time why would Baylor, Tech and TCU not do that now for someone else?

The intangibles will be key. As many have said, none of the Irate 8 move the needle financially. However, the Pac12 commissioner did say previously that his primary goal is the get teams into the CFP. If so, in the past 10 years Baylor, TCU, Iowa St, Ok St have all shown they could be in the discussion. If you go back further, K St and Tech have also had some very good years. These schools would easily be in the top 1/4 or so of the PAC. That's probably our best argument.

I'm fairly sure that TCU and WVU did not get 100% revenue participation when they were added to our conference.

If by a very remote chance we were able to worm our way into a P5 I bet our portion of revenue sharing in a new conference wouldn't be anywhere near as lucrative as our current situation for years.

Yeah..if the package deal of the 4 schools happens to Pac 12 its not for revenue.

The pac 12 commish pretty overtly stated that because of their late start times theyve probably missed out on Heisman consideration and CFB consideration as the voters are either asleep or leaving that night to work on their stories or.columns..

That would be what we bring..and 4 schools are better than 2 in that regard..

If I remember correctly, TCU and WVa were given 75% revenue for 4 years. They get full revenue now

Definitely. We are not in a position of power..and the 75% that West Virginia and TCU got is a good precedent..

Keep in mind we have been living off of 75% of our revenue for years already. We would already be quite used to it.

I've never really understood what the suits in Dallas withheld from us. I thought it was a one time penalty? Your post implies it has been accumulating. If so ****'em

To honest I think it was a penalty for 2-3 years. My point though is we have gone through this before very recently.

Can someone quantify exactly what the Big 12 owes us in withheld revenue due to Zero U's AD owning the Commish?

The Big 12 withheld 25% for 4 years. So we should get roughly 1 years worth of revenue (~$35M) in October-ish. I assume it will be a lump sum.

$14 million was witheld in 2017-18...minus legal costs we must pay the conference of 1.6 million (not including 2million dollar fine we paid for damaging the conferences reputation) we get 12.4 million..

That 12.4 million has been in an interest bearing account and the interest is split every year among the 10 teams..Original plan was to hold it 4 years. Bowlsby announced recently he will recommend it be released to us.

I think..they just withheld one year..once we made the improvements they said no more withholding..but the money would be kept from us for 4 years..

Ahh. I didn't realize the Big 12 stopped withholding revenue after 2018. So we should expect $12.6M in total

https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/big-12-fines-baylor-2-million-will-no-longer-withhold-revenue-170422265.html

Stefano DiMera said:

---

$14 million was witheld in 2017-18...minus legal costs we must pay the conference of 1.6 million (not including 2million dollar fine we paid for damaging the conferences reputation) we get 12.4 million..

That 12.4 million has been in an interest bearing account and the interest is split every year among the 10 teams..Original plan was to hold it 4 years. Bowlsby announced recently he will recommend it be released to us.

---

Thanks for this. The B12 should start withholding money from ou and ut immediately

They have irreparably damaged the conference and it's reputation

PartyBear said:

---

There could be intangibles such as an example for the PAC, giving the PAC schools higher profile among Texas recruits. The flip side it gives the Texas schools reciprocity on that in California.

Regarding direct additional revenue. Did adding TCU and WVU to the XII really do that? If not Texas and OU were still for it for other reasons and if they did move the revenue needle enough to make even Texas and OU happy at that time why would Baylor, Tech and TCU not do that now for someone else?

---

Part of the issue is that the PAC12 virtually always has a higher average recruiting class than the Big 12, so it's difficult to see why they want teams that cannot even recruit their own region.

For 2021, the PAC12 recruiting classes looked like this:
#6 overall = Oregon
#7 = USC
#28 = CAL
#31 = UCLA
#33 = Utah
#36 = Washington
#41 = Stanford
#52 = Arizona State
#61 = Washington State
#64 = Colorado
#77 = Arizona
#109 = Oregon State

For 2021, the Big 12:
#10 = OU
#15 = UT
#30 = Oklahoma State
#40 = WVU
#46 = Baylor
#53 = TCU
#56 = KSU
#59 = ISU
#63 = Kansas
#74 = Tech

Just looking at the above, it seems unlikely that classes ranked 46 (Baylor), 53 (TCU) and 74 (Tech) would really support an argument that playing them would give the PAC12 access to meaningful Texas recruiting since those teams do not appear to be particularly competitive on average when it comes to recruiting (even if the examination went further back than just 2021).

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

There could be intangibles such as an example for the PAC, giving the PAC schools higher profile among Texas recruits. The flip side it gives the Texas schools reciprocity on that in California.

Regarding direct additional revenue. Did adding TCU and WVU to the XII really do that? If not Texas and OU were still for it for other reasons and if they did move the revenue needle enough to make even Texas and OU happy at that time why would Baylor, Tech and TCU not do that now for someone else?

---

Part of the issue is that the PAC12 virtually always has a higher average recruiting class than the Big 12, so it's difficult to see why they want teams that cannot even recruit their own region.

For 2021, the PAC12 recruiting classes looked like this:
#6 overall = Oregon
#7 = USC
#28 = CAL
#31 = UCLA
#33 = Utah
#36 = Washington
#41 = Stanford
#52 = Arizona State
#61 = Washington State
#64 = Colorado
#77 = Arizona
#109 = Oregon State

For 2021, the Big 12:
#10 = OU
#15 = UT
#30 = Oklahoma State
#40 = WVU
#46 = Baylor
#53 = TCU
#56 = KSU
#59 = ISU
#63 = Kansas
#74 = Tech

Just looking at the above, it seems unlikely that classes ranked 46 (Baylor), 53 (TCU) and 74 (Tech) would really support an argument that playing them would give the PAC12 access to meaningful Texas recruiting since those teams do not appear to be particularly competitive on average when it comes to recruiting (even if the examination went further back than just 2021).

---

I disagree. Does that mean just because Stanford, Stanford, Arizona State, Washington State, Colorado, Arizona and Oregon State all are rated below #40 that access to those States is not valuable? Even if the PAC identifies a A&M, OU or UT recruit they can invite to the Baylor/USC game. They can visit the school and develop relationships with Coaches. Most importantly, they can tell recruits that if you play in LA, we will be in TX three times this season and your family can drive to the games, as well as TV coverage. I think the access is not impacted by Baylor's ranking, they may not be competing for the same kids.

Again what did TCU and WVU bring to the XII? It was either something intangible that made Texas and OU happy or it was enough of a direct financial benefit to make them happy. Keep in mind those two at any point in their histories could bolt for whatever conference they want and still can from the SEC tomorrow if they change their mind. It isnt like they gained this power just over the past decade. I also single out those two because Bowlsby has run the XII as an extension of Texas' (primarily) and OU's athletic departments up until a month ago.

My point is that there are intangibles that are outside the box from what the lay people like us are looking at that can be in play here as well. The Pac Commissioner said something interesting in one of these stories I read yesterday. He said something along the lines of they are discussing expansion involving who you would think we would be looking at and some that might suprise people. I actually took that as the Texas 3 and OSU are the ones "people would think we are talking about". It made me ponder if they are perhaps looking at UH in place of one of us Texas 3 ( a bad sign for Baylor or TCU if so I would think) or instead of OSU to completely wrap the state up of every last real footprint. Maybe he meant BYU instead of one of the 4 we all talk about.

My assumption here is that they would expand by 4 but maybe they are looking to expand by as many as 6.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Tech has 225K alumni according to their edu.com. Apparently border states students do not have to pay out of state tuition. Really surprised State allows that gift.

---

They don't have to pay out of state tuition. It's a little more expensive than in state, but not as much as out of state.

As for Tech's enrollment, it was about 22k when I was an undergrad in '87, maybe 24k a few years later when I left after grad school. Enrollment probably hit 30k in the early 2000s and hit 40k in 2019 or last year. Not sure how much of a role this plays, but Tech also has campuses in Junction, Waco, med school in El Paso, new vet school in Amarillo and then also a pharmacy school there too.. Angelo State is part of Tech system also. Med school in Lbk is separate from those numbers too.

zebbie said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Tech has 225K alumni according to their edu.com. Apparently border states students do not have to pay out of state tuition. Really surprised State allows that gift.

---

They don't have to pay out of state tuition. It's a little more expensive than in state, but not as much as out of state.

As for Tech's enrollment, it was about 22k when I was an undergrad in '87, maybe 24k a few years later when I left after grad school. Enrollment probably hit 30k in the early 2000s and hit 40k in 2019 or last year. Not sure how much of a role this plays, but Tech also has campuses in Junction, Waco, med school in El Paso, new vet school in Amarillo and then also a pharmacy school there too.. Angelo State is part of Tech system also. Med school in Lbk is separate from those numbers too.

---

Does the 40k number include kids who go out to MCC and sit in front of a computer screen?

RMF5630 said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

There could be intangibles such as an example for the PAC, giving the PAC schools higher profile among Texas recruits. The flip side it gives the Texas schools reciprocity on that in California.

Regarding direct additional revenue. Did adding TCU and WVU to the XII really do that? If not Texas and OU were still for it for other reasons and if they did move the revenue needle enough to make even Texas and OU happy at that time why would Baylor, Tech and TCU not do that now for someone else?

---

Part of the issue is that the PAC12 virtually always has a higher average recruiting class than the Big 12, so it's difficult to see why they want teams that cannot even recruit their own region.

For 2021, the PAC12 recruiting classes looked like this:
#6 overall = Oregon
#7 = USC
#28 = CAL
#31 = UCLA
#33 = Utah
#36 = Washington
#41 = Stanford
#52 = Arizona State
#61 = Washington State
#64 = Colorado
#77 = Arizona
#109 = Oregon State

For 2021, the Big 12:
#10 = OU
#15 = UT
#30 = Oklahoma State
#40 = WVU
#46 = Baylor
#53 = TCU
#56 = KSU
#59 = ISU
#63 = Kansas
#74 = Tech

Just looking at the above, it seems unlikely that classes ranked 46 (Baylor), 53 (TCU) and 74 (Tech) would really support an argument that playing them would give the PAC12 access to meaningful Texas recruiting since those teams do not appear to be particularly competitive on average when it comes to recruiting (even if the examination went further back than just 2021).

---

I disagree. Does that mean just because Stanford, Stanford, Arizona State, Washington State, Colorado, Arizona and Oregon State all are rated below #40 that access to those States is not valuable? Even if the PAC identifies a A&M, OU or UT recruit they can invite to the Baylor/USC game. They can visit the school and develop relationships with Coaches. Most importantly, they can tell recruits that if you play in LA, we will be in TX three times this season and your family can drive to the games, as well as TV coverage. I think the access is not impacted by Baylor's ranking, they may not be competing for the same kids.

---

As a preliminary matter, recruiting doesn't drive Power conference expansion, so this discussion is merely academic in that regard.

That being said, the overall point is that the remaining Big 12 teams in Texas do not bring much to the PAC12, as it is generally understood (and reported) that the Big 12 teams do not move the needle with the media partners, and even if the recruiting in Texas angle doesn't mean much since (1) PAC12 recruits fine at a non-SEC Power conference level and that conference would likely recruit even better if it started regularly making the CFP and (2) the remaining Big 12 teams in Texas are not Texas recruiting powerhouses, so it's not as if the PAC12 would be adding game changers in terms of recruiting even if it did add those programs. The net result raises this question - if the Big 12 Texas teams do not add meaningful media value (way more important), do not add meaningful recruiting value (way less important), and are unlikely to be picked up by a different Power conference unless the marketplace changes (way less important, but drives urgency), what value are they to the PAC12?

It is about having a foot print and higher profile in Texas and more interest in another mega state in your conference including among Texas high schoolers. That was my point about some intangible type of benefit to the Pac as an example. It wasnt about whether the Texas school a Pac school played on a given Saturday had a good or great recruiting class this past December.

whitetrash said:

---

zebbie said:

---

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

Tech has 225K alumni according to their edu.com. Apparently border states students do not have to pay out of state tuition. Really surprised State allows that gift.

---

They don't have to pay out of state tuition. It's a little more expensive than in state, but not as much as out of state.

As for Tech's enrollment, it was about 22k when I was an undergrad in '87, maybe 24k a few years later when I left after grad school. Enrollment probably hit 30k in the early 2000s and hit 40k in 2019 or last year. Not sure how much of a role this plays, but Tech also has campuses in Junction, Waco, med school in El Paso, new vet school in Amarillo and then also a pharmacy school there too.. Angelo State is part of Tech system also. Med school in Lbk is separate from those numbers too.

---

Does the 40k number include kids who go out to MCC and sit in front of a computer screen?

---

No, these are kids in LBK.

LondonBear said:

---

SEC didn't become the #! conference for being stupid. I suspect they are waiting for the Pac12 /Big Ten and ACC to announce this silly "agreement" and then they will move into Phase II.

I still believe that Baylor, TT, OSU and TCU will be part of a package - and if they go SEC, it wouldn't surprise me. Those 4 schools offer a lot to a conference.

ACC and Big Ten make no sense for those 4. Pac12 is a dumpster fire in Football outside of Oregon...

Who knows really - but its good to be talking about College football again so close to the start of the season.

---

Like what????? Short of possibly maybe 5 years Baylor has sucked for almost 70 years, plus alumni, fan base, etc. etc. bring little to no value.. TCU & OSU maybe an exception, but still doubtful,

Go Alliance!

ACC in Week 1 💀

#3 Clemson vs #5 Georgia ❌
#10 UNC vs VA Tech ❌
#14 Miami vs #1 Alabama ❌
Duke vs Charlotte ❌
Georgia Tech vs Northern Illinois ❌
Florida State vs #9 Notre Dame ❌
Louisville vs Ole Miss ❌ pic.twitter.com/Ut3BlBk8c9

— PFF College (@PFF_College) September 7, 2021

Well an ACC team did win the UNC/VaTech game and arguably ND/FSU game.