Five Reasons To Feel Good About Oklahoma State in Realignment

Streaming is the future. TV contracts beyond 25/26 will have big $'s tied to it. Need to find away to get ahead of it.

Thank you RA for another reassuring therapy session. This realignment cannot happen fast enough as there are few that can be trusted. A little paranoia can save your azz at times but you cannot let it paralyze from taking aggressive action. OSU cannot rely on Bowlsby for anything as he has been paralyzed for years and jeopardized much. Glad the OSU brain trust is working hard and showing support.

Not trying to make a good story have less upside, but I wonder how our TV numbers hold up nationally and even in conference for games not involving OU and UT? Are we still 3rd in conference and nationally in the top 30 or so?

what's odd is I looked and looked and could not find a statement saying..

"OSU would not be a drain on revenues to other conference teams".

... I'll go back and read it again...

Orangeheart72 said:

---

Not trying to make a good story have less upside, but I wonder how our TV numbers hold up nationally and even in conference for games not involving OU and UT? Are we still 3rd in conference and nationally in the top 30 or so?

---

TV viewing numbers likely mean about ZERO... unless they can be converted into tens of millions of dollars.

Do our TV viewing numbers add any value to warrant the B1G or the ACC (or even the 12Pac) possibly diluting their contract revenues?

Does adding an OSU increase that conferences TV contract by a full $30 million dollar share? (or whatever the that conference team share is).

Our conference would not add teams like BYU or Boise, etc. because it would only dilute the payouts... why would other conferences behave any different than the Big12 did? (which was, stand pat at 10 teams)

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

Orangeheart72 said:

---

Not trying to make a good story have less upside, but I wonder how our TV numbers hold up nationally and even in conference for games not involving OU and UT? Are we still 3rd in conference and nationally in the top 30 or so?

---

TV viewing numbers likely mean about ZERO... unless they can be converted into tens of millions of dollars.

Do our TV viewing numbers add any value to warrant the B1G or the ACC (or even the 12Pac) possibly diluting their contract revenues?

Does adding an OSU increase that conferences TV contract by a full $30 million dollar share? (or whatever the that conference team share is).

Our conference would not add teams like BYU or Boise, etc. because it would only dilute the payouts... why would other conferences behave any different than the Big12 did? (which was, stand pat at 10 teams)

---

That is exactly what they translate into. The problem is that ESPN wants to add to those TV viewers with their opinion of the teams brand which has no impact on their ad rates so its pretty foolish, but we are talking about ESPN/Disney.

The push not to expand was by ESPN who was already working to get OU/UT to the SEC amidst their waves of layoffs of personnel, and FOX which had just paid huge money to land the full B1G package and didn't have slots for any more TV games. So based on a bad timing issue and a manipulative partner we were told none of the schools considered were worth $35M a year. Not to mention UT was opposed to it period because they're snobs, and ISU, KU and BU were stupid enough to believe that stopping expansion and demanding OU & UT sign an extension of the GOR with no new TV contract was the way to save the conference. OU, OSU, & TCU were the only schools that were honestly looking to expand. So that's hardly a fair evaluation of worth.

So when you look at OSU in terms of viewers vs the teams in those conferences and the viewers they bring to the table then you would have to assume with OSU in the top half in any conference that they are an addition to value.

I don't like the consolidation, but it does appear to be underway, and as they consolidate OSU is going to be attractive to the other conferences. It's a waiting game.

Hopefully, not the SEC it would be death for football, not only still have to play uo and texas but also people like LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Geo, etc. In the past we have had a terrible time with even Miss. Rating the three remaining for me would be the B1G by a lot, then the ACC, then lots of distance and the PAC in some eastern division, and finally the SEC. Of course I do not even want to consider a left over Big 12 with, UCF, Houston, Memphis, and Boise State or Cinn., which are the next best teams left on the tv list over the last 5 years who are not in power conferences, other than Notre Dame and BYU who do not want to be in conferences.

NJAggie said:

---

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

Orangeheart72 said:

---

Not trying to make a good story have less upside, but I wonder how our TV numbers hold up nationally and even in conference for games not involving OU and UT? Are we still 3rd in conference and nationally in the top 30 or so?

---

TV viewing numbers likely mean about ZERO... unless they can be converted into tens of millions of dollars.

Do our TV viewing numbers add any value to warrant the B1G or the ACC (or even the 12Pac) possibly diluting their contract revenues?

Does adding an OSU increase that conferences TV contract by a full $30 million dollar share? (or whatever the that conference team share is).

Our conference would not add teams like BYU or Boise, etc. because it would only dilute the payouts... why would other conferences behave any different than the Big12 did? (which was, stand pat at 10 teams)

---

That is exactly what they translate into. The problem is that ESPN wants to add to those TV viewers with their opinion of the teams brand which has no impact on their ad rates so its pretty foolish, but we are talking about ESPN/Disney.

The push not to expand was by ESPN who was already working to get OU/UT to the SEC amidst their waves of layoffs of personnel, and FOX which had just paid huge money to land the full B1G package and didn't have slots for any more TV games. So based on a bad timing issue and a manipulative partner we were told none of the schools considered were worth $35M a year. Not to mention UT was opposed to it period because they're snobs, and ISU, KU and BU were stupid enough to believe that stopping expansion and demanding OU & UT sign an extension of the GOR with no new TV contract was the way to save the conference. OU, OSU, & TCU were the only schools that were honestly looking to expand. So that's hardly a fair evaluation of worth.

So when you look at OSU in terms of viewers vs the teams in those conferences and the viewers they bring to the table then you would have to assume with OSU in the top half in any conference that they are an addition to value.

I don't like the consolidation, but it does appear to be underway, and as they consolidate OSU is going to be attractive to the other conferences. It's a waiting game.

---

Exactly

NJAggie said:

---

So when you look at OSU in terms of viewers vs the teams in those conferences and the viewers they bring to the table then you would have to assume with OSU in the top half in any conference that they are an addition to value.

---

there is no doubt that OSU could add some value to a conference, it seems doubtful that we could add a "full share" worth of value, adding $30 million or more to an existing TV contract.

If the conferences want to continue to expand, and their members are willing to take a cut in revenue, then I agree we are the top available program.

So, less than 19 of the 64 P5 programs produce more than $30mm in value?

That's hard to believe.

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

So, less than 19 of the 64 P5 programs produce more than $30mm in value?

That's hard to believe.

---

I'd try to explain it for you, but I don't know how to use crayons on this forum.

Those are your words, not mine. Those contracts are in place how ever they were contrived... I believe this discussion is about a possible re-write of those contracts in which WE would need to add that much additional value or obviously everybody else takes a haircut.

Maybe $30 million is chump change for ESPN, but the Big12 did not think so when we looked at expanding beyond 10 teams.

So, ESPN is going to automatically give one of these conferences enough extra money to cover our share ...

That's hard to believe

My words? I think your probably confusing me with one of your many detractors over the years though your description sounds mostly like you. But, whatever.

Nevertheless, the discussion is whether OSU could add its pro-rata share ($30mm?) to any of the existing or future tv contracts held or to be held by other conferences. If a program with the 19th best viewership can't contribute its pro- rata share, then I guess you're saying 18 or fewer programs are willfully subsidizing the media value of the remaining 47 P5 college football programs. That doesn't sound close to being mathematically possible, especially given the number of teams representing individual conferences within the top-18. The PAC 12 has 1 team in the top-18, USC. So USC is the only program that has more value than the average of all 12 programs? The ACC has 2 teams in the top 18, Clemson and FSU. We're supposed to believe all 12 of the other programs contribute less than the average? Pffffft!

Heck, a week ago you were promoting San Diego State to the B12 because the San Diego population equated to adding value to the B12. So SDSU adds value to the B12, but OSU adds no value to any P5 league? SMH.

Yes. YOUR WORDS. THESE: So, less than 19 of the 64 P5 programs produce more than $30mm in value?

YOU SAID THEM, NOT ME. That is your position, not mine.

quit stalking me and trying to pick a fight.

saying the same thing again in a second thread does not make it my words, they are yours. I did not say that or imply that.


Who is going to up the B1G contract by $30 million to ease our entrance into that conference? Who?

Who is going to up the ACC or the Pac12 contracts by $30 million to ease our entrance into those conferences? Who?

Those numbers you keep posting are OUT OF CONTEXT. They are what happened then, not what happens next. You said it yourself that even A$M has a limit on viewership, and given our small footprint, it is unlikely that we could surpass what they've done in the SEC. I've explained it many times already. I'm sorry you don't follow along, or don't agree. Bug off. Leave me alone.

I don't agree with your use of out of context numbers, I don't agree with your shallow analysis, wishful thinking is just that... a wish.

I hope this all works out for OSU, I don't care what you have to say about it. You can't prove your opinion, you cannot disprove my opinion. Just stop it already.

and I did not say that about SDSU.... stop twisting my posts into your sick attacks on me.

You're the one that said it is doubtful OSU could add a full share to any conference. I think that thought is total crap given we're #19 in viewership.

Now I'm going to quit this discussion because you don't know what's up and what's down, what's relevant and what's irrelevant, and you couldn't convey a lucid train of thought if your ego depended on it.

Gumby out.

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

You're the one that said it is doubtful OSU could add a full share to any conference. I think that thought is total crap given we're #19 in viewership.

Now I'm going to quit this discussion because you don't know what's up and what's down, what's relevant and what's irrelevant, and you couldn't convey a lucid train of thought if your ego depended on it.

Gumby out.

---

that is YOUR OPINION. I've asked you a couple of times in this thread, and had to ask you not to make personal attacks in the last thread where you were stalking me.

quit attacking me. What you think of my ego, or of me is OUT OF BOUNDS for board discussion.

Come on guys.... I KNOW that we have been in the world long enough to figure out how to discuss - complete with agreement & disagreement - without the tender-skin sensitivities and disrespectful retorts. Let's get it together, OK?

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

So, less than 19 of the 64 P5 programs produce more than $30mm in value?

That's hard to believe.

---

Im sure most everybody understood the first sentence in the above post was a question, not a statement. A question posed in response to the thought that It is doubtful OSU could add it's full share of value to any of the other P5 conferences. Understanding, of course, that if OSU cannot add its full share of value to any of the other P5 conferences, by default that would mean any team with a viewership ranking below 18 is not adding their full share to their existing conference's tv contracts. That is preposterous.

RIF

Lets be honest here ... 'there is an age old principle in high dollar competitive sales that IF you cannot compete 'head to head' then you have to 'change the rules of the game' .... and that is exactly the position OSU/B12 is at RIGHT NOW! Stay with me on this!

if I'm Bob Bowlsby/B12 , I immediately start a PR run calling a 'spade a spade' ...a PR campaign that requires the Networks and P5 Commissioners (B10-ACC-PAC12 really) to come out of the 'smoke filled backrooms' and begin to speak out ..ie..address the REAL elephant in the room... which is:..

answer the following question Mr Network Executive...'is it an accurate statement that the Networks want the best content (games) that bring maximum TV eyeballs? Is it also accurate Mr. B10 Commissioner that you want maximum $'s for your Conference?

If the answer to those 2 questions is YES ...then how is tOSU vs Wake Forest going to accomplish that vs tOSU vs OSU ? OR, how is Oregon vs Rutgers going to accomplish that vs Oregon vs OSU?

Therefore, why would you pursue a scheduling alliance strategy vs blow-up the conference structure and start fresh with an approach that would let you put the top NCAA brand teams on TV every week vs an approach that requires you to put games on TV that match B10 heavyweight school vs ACC deadweight school .... makes zero sense ... for the Conferences OR Networks ... in STARK contrast ...the SEC is ALREADY at maximum negotiating power because they only have 1 dead weight team (Vandy) out of 16

...therefore ESPN already knows they have top notch games every day of every week and will PAY top $ for it ... Bowlsby has already lost the battle a long time ago ...he needs a NEW/BETTER strategy NOW that moves him (B12) from back row of the class to a front row seat by forcing the Networks and remaining Commissioners to ADDRESS the elephant in the room ....isn't NOW the time to blowup the old Conference structure all together vs tap dancing (football gerrymandering) around the real issue ...the Conferences structure is out dated and NOT aligned at all with what the networks and top conference teams/brands really want ....the top 25-30 schools DO NOT want to subsidize the bottem 30(+) P5 schools AND the networks really only want to pay top $ for televising maybe the top 30-35 national branded football programs......

Bowlsby get out front and start changing the dialogue .... make those dead weight schools in the P5 start to FEAR their existence and start to get the Networks and Commisioners to publically acknowledge what they really want!

CanadianCowboy said:

---

Come on guys.... I KNOW that we have been in the world long enough to figure out how to discuss - complete with agreement & disagreement - without the tender-skin sensitivities and disrespectful retorts. Let's get it together, OK?

---

agreed... thank you.

gary121853 said:

---

Lets be honest here ... 'there is an age old principle in high dollar competitive sales that IF you cannot compete 'head to head' then you have to 'change the rules of the game' .... and that is exactly the position OSU/B12 is at RIGHT NOW! Stay with me on this!

if I'm Bob Bowlsby/B12 , I immediately start a PR run calling a 'spade a spade' ...a PR campaign that requires the Networks and P5 Commissioners (B10-ACC-PAC12 really) to come out of the 'smoke filled backrooms' and begin to speak out ..ie..address the REAL elephant in the room... which is:..

answer the following question Mr Network Executive...'is it an accurate statement that the Networks want the best content (games) that bring maximum TV eyeballs? Is it also accurate Mr. B10 Commissioner that you want maximum $'s for your Conference?

If the answer to those 2 questions is YES ...then how is tOSU vs Wake Forest going to accomplish that vs tOSU vs OSU ? OR, how is Oregon vs Rutgers going to accomplish that vs Oregon vs OSU?

Therefore, why would you pursue a scheduling alliance strategy vs blow-up the conference structure and start fresh with an approach that would let you put the top NCAA brand teams on TV every week vs an approach that requires you to put games on TV that match B10 heavyweight school vs ACC deadweight school .... makes zero sense ... for the Conferences OR Networks ... in STARK contrast ...the SEC is ALREADY at maximum negotiating power because they only have 1 dead weight team (Vandy) out of 16

...therefore ESPN already knows they have top notch games every day of every week and will PAY top $ for it ... Bowlsby has already lost the battle a long time ago ...he needs a NEW/BETTER strategy NOW that moves him (B12) from back row of the class to a front row seat by forcing the Networks and remaining Commissioners to ADDRESS the elephant in the room ....isn't NOW the time to blowup the old Conference structure all together vs tap dancing (football gerrymandering) around the real issue ...the Conferences structure is out dated and NOT aligned at all with what the networks and top conference teams/brands really want ....the top 25-30 schools DO NOT want to subsidize the bottem 30(+) P5 schools AND the networks really only want to pay top $ for televising maybe the top 30-35 national branded football programs......

Bowlsby get out front and start changing the dialogue .... make those dead weight schools in the P5 start to FEAR their existence and start to get the Networks and Commisioners to publically acknowledge what they really want!

---

We'll, to answer your question, I don't think the ACC/B1G/PAC12 is about increasing viewership. I think it's about member institution votes in advance of the NCAA constitutional convention. The aforementioned alliance wants a majority so the SEC can't takeover college football with their preferred new structure to be adopted by the NCAA.

Agreed...no doubt there is major concern among other institutions about SEC and the outsized influence of Networks directing the future of college football. However, in its current form the NCAA is already in neutered position with the P5 with little authority. Don't think the NCAA Constitutional Convention will have much (if any) direct affect on the decisions of the P5. Regardless, major decisions will have to be made way before any effects of NCAA Constitutional Convention could come into play. Today? There is nothing that prevents the SEC from cherrry picking top 5 or 6 'brand' institutions from P4 or P3 and in effect create the Super 50 Conference ESPN would LOVE to have until their current SEC contract comes to an end

If Im Bowlsby, I am out in front breaking glass all over the place .... talking to the SEC and promoting to them that they have a chance to become the Super Conference starting with TT / OSU / ISU / TCU etc

Here's what I think the ACC/B1G/PAC are trying to protect. If the NCAA Constitutional Convention decides it wants to put on a football playoff (like it does with all the other sports) and contract with the media for the rights to that playoff, the new alliance wants a bigger say in that outcome than the SEC. Further, the Alliance (irrespective of the NCAA CC) wants the ability to vote as a block on any new CFP proposal that comes down the pike in the near term. Those are reasons more important than expansion (by adding B12 teams) which can wait until 2024-2025.

And there are new players coming into the live sports market place. Which could be why ESPN is making their move now, before someone like Amazon could sign a Big XII with OU/UT.

Amazon announces former NFLN exec Mike Muriano has joined Amazon as Executive Producer, Live Sports at Prime Video.

— Andrew Marchand (@AndrewMarchand) August 17, 2021

but if you want a top flight announcer and graphics, then you'll need Amazon Prime, if you want to watch it on network TV (not internet streaming, then you'll get a coupon for 20% off of a new tablet when purchased from Amazon)

Would oSu likely accept something like a 70% share if offered by the BIG or the SEC ?

Pokeon1 said:

---

Would oSu likely accept something like a 70% share if offered by the BIG or the SEC ?

---

I would hope not.

That sounds like it could be less than if we just stayed in the Big8, or a new Big12

Just for reference, 70% of the expected SEC payout of $75-80mm would be over $50mm. 70% of the B1G payout of $55mm is more than we get now.

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

Just for reference, 70% of the expected SEC payout of $75-80mm would be over $50mm. 70% of the B1G payout of $55mm is more than we get now.

---

"Expected payout", on contracts that have not even been written, and conference participation that is not final?

2019-2020

The average amount distributed from the conference office, excluding bowl money retained by participants, was slightly over $45.5 million per school.

"We are proud of the support our 14 member universities are able to provide to our student-athletes as a direct result of the revenue distributed through the Southeastern Conference," said SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey.

------------------------

The B1G payout is based on Maryland and Rutgers that are still getting partial payouts.

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

Just for reference, 70% of the expected SEC payout of $75-80mm would be over $50mm. 70% of the B1G payout of $55mm is more than we get now.

---

"Expected payout", on contracts that have not even been written, and conference participation that is not final?

2019-2020

The average amount distributed from the conference office, excluding bowl money retained by participants, was slightly over $45.5 million per school.

"We are proud of the support our 14 member universities are able to provide to our student-athletes as a direct result of the revenue distributed through the Southeastern Conference," said SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey.

------------------------

The B1G payout is based on Maryland and Rutgers that are still getting partial payouts.

---

So using current SEC payouts that every human on the planet knows will increase dramatically to compare with a projection of future B8 or B12 payouts when evaluating potential expansion/realignment possibilities seems like a good idea? Wow, who knew?

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

Just for reference, 70% of the expected SEC payout of $75-80mm would be over $50mm. 70% of the B1G payout of $55mm is more than we get now.

---

"Expected payout", on contracts that have not even been written, and conference participation that is not final?

2019-2020

The average amount distributed from the conference office, excluding bowl money retained by participants, was slightly over $45.5 million per school.

"We are proud of the support our 14 member universities are able to provide to our student-athletes as a direct result of the revenue distributed through the Southeastern Conference," said SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey.

------------------------

The B1G payout is based on Maryland and Rutgers that are still getting partial payouts.

---

Leagues always charge a entrance fee as well as an exit fee. WVU came in and didn't get the exit fee bonus, and also had their payouts reduced for five years to pay the entrance fee.

UMD & RU not only faced that fee, but the B1G network is partially owned by the schools (I think it's 50/50 with FOX) and so they had to buy their share.

OU & UT will be paying to enter the SEC as well so they won't be getting full shares at first.

So I would expect a bit of that if we get a berth somewhere else. But, I wouldn't take a permanent reduced share. I don't agree with the UT's of the world that they are inherently worth more. Because no one is paying anything to watch them play intra squad scrimmages. And if both teams are needed on the field for there to be a check, then both teams should get the same TV money.

NJAggie said:

---

CaliforniaCowboy said:

---

GumbyFromPokeyLand said:

---

Just for reference, 70% of the expected SEC payout of $75-80mm would be over $50mm. 70% of the B1G payout of $55mm is more than we get now.

---

"Expected payout", on contracts that have not even been written, and conference participation that is not final?

2019-2020

The average amount distributed from the conference office, excluding bowl money retained by participants, was slightly over $45.5 million per school.

"We are proud of the support our 14 member universities are able to provide to our student-athletes as a direct result of the revenue distributed through the Southeastern Conference," said SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey.

------------------------

The B1G payout is based on Maryland and Rutgers that are still getting partial payouts.

---

Leagues always charge a entrance fee as well as an exit fee. WVU came in and didn't get the exit fee bonus, and also had their payouts reduced for five years to pay the entrance fee.

UMD & RU not only faced that fee, but the B1G network is partially owned by the schools (I think it's 50/50 with FOX) and so they had to buy their share.

OU & UT will be paying to enter the SEC as well so they won't be getting full shares at first.

So I would expect a bit of that if we get a berth somewhere else. But, I wouldn't take a permanent reduced share. I don't agree with the UT's of the world that they are inherently worth more. Because no one is paying anything to watch them play intra squad scrimmages. And if both teams are needed on the field for there to be a check, then both teams should get the same TV money.

---

Yeah, some sort of entry fees are to be expected. And if someone is trying to evaluate what's acceptable as an entry fee, it's reasonable to base that calculus on projected future revenue instead of existing revenue, which is where I believe pokeone1 was directionally headed with his comment.

Here are some really detailed numbers on the Big 8 vs other conferences. OSU looks very good in these numbers.

https://sicem365.com/s/10313/stop-the-slander-aac-tv-viewership-doesnt-equal-to-the-big-12-remains