Story Poster
Photo by Big 12 Conference

Big 12 Conference Fourth Financially Among Leagues in Final Year of Power Five

June 1, 2024
3,050

IRVING, Texas – The Big 12 Conference meetings with the member school Presidents and Chancellors with Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark wrapped up yesterday in Irving, Texas. The final day news was headlined by Yormark announcing a strong earnings figure of $470 million by the conference in the past competition year. There was added money by the College Football Playoff and a strong bowl contingent and a decent showing in the NCAA Tournament. The overall figure was a record high, but with new mouths to feed it was also a shrinking of the figure paid out to the schools. The 10 remaining original or long-time members (minus Oklahoma and Texas) received $39.8 million each. The new members of BYU, Cincinnati, Houston, and UCF each received $18 million.

Jerome Miron-USA TODAY Sports
Big 12 Commissioner Brett Yormark

“Our 10 original members will see some dilution versus last year. The reason for that obviously was the addition of the G5 schools (and BYU), which this was their first year,” Yormark explained. “As you know and we’ve discussed this before, we went with stability as a conference and we felt it was investing in all the right ways and for all the right reasons, and clearly that was the right move for this conference as we think about where we’re going.” 

The Big 12 finished last in overall earnings among the Power Five that existed as five for the final time in 2023-24. The Pac-12 is breaking up and four of the schools; Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah; will be in the Big 12 next school year, officially joining on Aug. 1. 

2023-24 Major College Conference Earnings and Distribution to Member Schools
Conference Overall Earnings Distribution
Big Ten $879.9 million $60.5 million
SEC $852.6 million $51 million
ACC $707 million $44.8 million
Pac-12 $603.9 million $33.6 million
Big 12 $470 million

$39.8 million (10 schools)

$18 million (4 schools)

The Big 12 also heard over the past couple of days about some enterprising ideas from Yormark on monetizing the conference and money-making ideas for the conference in the wake of the upcoming settlement of the House vs. NCAA lawsuit. The word was Yormark not only challenged his membership to come up with ideas and be problem solvers in this oncoming economic situation, but he also brought ideas to the membership for them to consider. 

“The overall, overarching theme for the (spring meetings) was all about creating value for our membership,” Yormark said. “Value creation is the number one initiative and priority.”

The Big 12 is fortunate in they have a creative and “think outside the box” commissioner in a time where that kind of leadership is urgently needed.

Discussion from...

Big 12 Conference Fourth Financially Among Leagues in Final Year of Power Five

2,605 Views | 6 Replies | Last: 4 mo ago by RodeoPoke
RodeoPoke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
pathetic.. we finished last in conference payout, made less money than last year, OU/UT got out cheap, and now he is trying to make everything for sell, to make it the trinket conference, because the shortfall is so great versus the P2

I just don't understand what everybody sees in this guy. He was even bragging about making it more like his last gig, where everything was totally commercialized moving away from a collegiate atmosphere and appeal.

aggie1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think we see he's a lot smarter than you and has a long term plan versus short term payouts
RodeoPoke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggie1 said:

I think we see he's a lot smarter than you and has a long term plan versus short term payouts
no need to get nasty and personal... I didn't say anything about you.

I did not say anything about how smart he is either, and I said exactly what the failures are that I'm disappointed with.... as for long term plan, I haven't seen or heard one from him.

"i hope we can renegotiate the horrible play off mess we agreed too" (great plan).

I'm not impressed, you can be if you like.
NJAggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RodeoPoke said:

aggie1 said:

I think we see he's a lot smarter than you and has a long term plan versus short term payouts
no need to get nasty and personal... I didn't say anything about you.

I did not say anything about how smart he is either, and I said exactly what the failures are that I'm disappointed with.... as for long term plan, I haven't seen or heard one from him.

"i hope we can renegotiate the horrible play off mess we agreed too" (great plan).

I'm not impressed, you can be if you like.
The only one being nasty was you.

We made more money per school than the PAC 12, and the ACC edged us out because last year we had the $50M Sugar Bowl Money while this year they got their $40M of Orange Bowl money. That $50M was why we were down this year, not because of expansion or "not getting more" out of OU/UT. There was no way to get more out of them, and the new schools got paid out of the exit fees we did get.

You continue to imagine that he and the Big XII have all kinds of leverage in these negotiations. We don't. And thinking like yours is what lead the PAC to extinction.
Orangeheart72
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Seems to me he's making good moves, shows good effort and insight. Hope that's the case as there are rough roads ahead.
RodeoPoke
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NJAggie said:


The only one being nasty was you.

We made more money per school than the PAC 12, and the ACC edged us out because last year we had the $50M Sugar Bowl Money while this year they got their $40M of Orange Bowl money. That $50M was why we were down this year, not because of expansion or "not getting more" out of OU/UT. There was no way to get more out of them, and the new schools got paid out of the exit fees we did get.

You continue to imagine that he and the Big XII have all kinds of leverage in these negotiations. We don't. And thinking like yours is what lead the PAC to extinction.
I was not "being nasty", I simply shared my opinion about the results of decisions that he has made, and I provided examples as to why I felt that way..... YOU SAID.... "you're stupid". That's being nasty.

"we" only made more money per team than the PAC if you do not average it by team. If every team got a full cut, like they did in the PAC, then they totally blow us away. Even not averaging, OSU got LESS than last year.

and the rest is simply your unfounded opinion that any other options were impossible. Your inferred opinion is that we are weak and have no negotiating power, but I do not share that opinion of yours. And we can't prove who's opinion is correct except by looking at the post mortem facts, like these, that show us getting smacked around and falling further behind.




Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.