Big12 guy

is the dates of the BIG and SEC contracts that will determine if and when they leave.

have made the investment for a campus football stadium. For whatever reason, a campus football stadium is very important to the B12, and is often cited as one of the reasons Memphis and UConn are not part of the B12. The calculus of all of that changed when the PAC imploded, and the 4 corners came to the B12. All of a sudden, the B12 is a legit power conference, and should be in a position after the next round of contract negotiations to solidify it's presence of a legit and powerful football power conference. It will be up to the networks on whether or not the B12 can add ACC schools, or vice versa.

University presidents that do not see investing into athletics as important. That was all good and well in the past, but today, there is a tremendous pressure to up the capital spending in FBS to keep up with your conference, no matter which conference you are in. Alabama will always put emphasis on football - almost #1 compared to academics. Vanderbilt on the other hand, would continue to be a very respected University and brand without the SEC, or a power conference for that matter. Would Bama be a brand without football?

at the time, the B12 was hanging on by a thread. The Cincy add was suspect as well, but both Houston and Cincy have a decent basketball history. I did like the UCF add, they have potential to be a force if they can find the money. BYU was a no brainer, and should have been in a power conference decades ago.

at things. Some put a lot of emphasis on athletics, but there are many that deem athletics to be a pain. Being in the academia club is much more important to some schools as being in the athletic club.

where UNC and Duke fall in the distribution pecking order. Around 25% is based on basketball, and while it isn't football, it's not something that can be ignored. VT is a school that will find a landing spot, or do just fine in the ACC. Pitt, Cuse, NCSU, and a couple others could be a very different story. As long as the ACC can keep FSU, Clemson, Miami, UNC, and ND in the conference, the ACC will continue to be the better conference. Baltimore is right though, this is not an ACC vs B12 thing, it's an ACC thing.

can discount an academic conference with outstanding basketball, and football as an after thought. Kinda like the ACC was before they got Big East schools. The presidents may opt for that as well, but even football as an afterthought is very expensive. No school wants to lose prestige like Washington State and Oregon State, so the fight is on for the big boy chairs. If and only if the ACC falls apart - and none of us knows what will happen, then maybe The ACC can become the "private" school conference that is high on academics, basketball, and Olympics - with decent football. There are a few "public" schools like Cal that may want to be in the club as well. As long as they have access to the playoffs, they would be just fine, but just not SEC caliber football. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 7/16/2026, 6:58:30 PM

because they already have such a strong Texas presence. They chose Houston over SMU because of their basketball, and potential market. The B12 had Dallas already, and SMU got the short end of the stick. SMU has always gotten the short end of the stick starting with the death penalty. As stated in another post, SMU has a long and strong history in football, so large market or not, now that they are in a power conference, they will be extremely competitive.

if the money (media deal) makes it happen. Fox and CBS have got my attention with the next media deal. If the Paramount deal gets closed, CBS will be looking for more content. NBC might be looking around as well. ESPN seems content with the SEC/ACC footprint, and FOX will not give up the BIG easily. With the ACC locked into their ESPN contract, and their network, it could be their downfall. On the other hand, could the B12 get enough revenue with the 4 corners, then maybe 4 ACC schools? Maybe? Hope? What I do know, is that it will be more difficult for the ACC to poach B12 schools than the other way around, but that is all contingent on the next media deal and what Paramount and NBC want - in addition to ESPN and FOX.

Clemson and others are happy with the distributions, then maybe they realize they are better off staying. The tell tale sign will be if Memphis ups it's $200M offer, and offers it to the ACC instead of the B12. That shows me that schools want in, and not wanting out.

next contract early, but like the ACC look - in recently, none of us lay people even knew it existed until FSU's lawsuit revealed it. Just for the record, No one that I know of, including the youtubers, think that FSU, Miami, or Clemson could end up in the B12. When you talk about the middle of the ACC, that is a different story as they may not want to remain in the ACC if the top brands exit. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 7/16/2026, 1:31:51 PM

are no bluebloods in the B12. Mostly upper middle class schools. You are right that the top tier schools in the ACC will make more than the distributions in the B12. Unless you are one of those top schools, I wouldn't be too quick to Ra Ra, the ACC is better than the B12. Lets see where Louisville, Pitt, NCSU, and VT land in distributions. That will tell the tape.

the problem with the ACC is their media contract - hands down. SMU was added to give a boost of payouts to the existing members for the duration of the contract. I agree with you that if the ACC stays together (not likely), SMU will add nothing to the next media contract, and may actually be a negative. Way too many small privates in the ACC now, and moving forward.

I'm willing to bet that Aflac gave some incentive as well.

would be Auburn vs. Baylor which was an already scheduled game to be played at Auburn. They moved the game to Atlanta for a multi million dollar NIL payoff for the Auburn players. So Auburn gives up a home game to a neutral site so the players can get paid as well. The Baylor players do not receive any money, but were scheduled to play at Auburn anyway. Financials are not disclosed, but I see neutral site games as a way to pay players in the future. Link below ** Edited by Big12 guy at 7/14/2026, 9:06:27 PM

add in the context of the FSU/SMU litigation, and there seemed to be a fair chance that the ACC would lose a few schools. The minimum number of schools in the ESPN contract needed also played a roll. Then you have SMU agreeing to not take any media money to add to the existing schools payouts, seemed like a screwed move. While SMU may not add much to the next contract, they do certainly have some time to prove themselves, and they are playing good ball from where I'm sitting. Where the ACC dropped the ball is they could have gotten more from SMU. Based on Memphis' $250M offer to joining the B12, and not taking any media money shows that the schools that have the money are willing to pay. SMU has the money, so I ask - How much more would they have paid?

a patch on their jerseys ($6M per year). The individual schools can, and are, entering into agreements for their own brand. Currently, the B12 patch is the only "conference" patch. AI vales these patch deals as being worth $500,000 to up to $12M for the blue bloods. They are only worth what someone will pay, so with just one point on the graph, it's easy to assume it's not a good deal. When the ACC announces their deal, we will than have a basis for comparison. Until then, the schools in the B12 will get approximately $1M more per school that the ACC is not. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 7/13/2026, 12:03:25 PM

population of Idaho, where they are the #1 draw. SMU's problem is they are a small private in a state that has at least 6 better ratings FBS schools in the State - maybe even add Texas state University as they mature.

pay parking, and the neighborhood has been pretty bad in the past. A school, and the media companies, need an energized stadium, and students provide just that. IMO, it's also why UConn isn't in the B12 or ACC.

went to court, and won. TT had nothing to do with fighting for his eligibility, however, when the court ruled that he could play, they stood up for the kid - not as a player, but as a kid. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 7/9/2026, 6:33:38 PM

saw what those broadcast rights would be worth.

because at the time, it wasn't much money. Remember blackouts in the NFL if they didn't sell out the stadium? They made more money in ticket sales.

never done Jack in Football. How many News Year Day bowls have they played in? KU hasn't done much in football either, just so i don't get pummeled here, but out here in Flyover, UNC is like Kentucky, or IU, Duke, UConn and Villanova. No one, and I mean no one watches their football games. Air Jordon in a good brand, but that is not UNC's brand.

to have PE in the private sector, for whatever reason. With the patchwork of public Universities and the different States mechanisms and mandates, it would be virtually impossible to have PE involved on a school by school basis. from what I have read, Utah's venture with PE is a a commercial for-profit entity that manages the school's ticketing, sponsorships, licensing, and branding operations. The university retains majority ownership - but I do not know the specifics. but $500M is a lot of money. We both see that the B12's PE deal has gone over like a lead balloon. A line of credit is available far any school, but so far, none have taken any money. Time will tell on that one, but I don't see the advantage. The conference gets $12.5M for commercial development, but frankly, I haven't seen where the ROI is coming from that, and they could have gone to a bank for that amount. What has got my attention though, is that schools are buying themselves into conferences. Not sure where Memphis can come up with $250M to join the B12 and take no media money until 2031. How much money do you think they would offer to go to the SEC? It's insane. If schools go in that direction, like FSU?, they will do it with PE money.

UConn will be the basketball conference of the future. UConn would go to either the ACC or B12 tomorrow if there was an invite. frankly, I think it's the lack of a campus stadium that is holding them back.

of my posts that PE doesn't belong in college athletics. However, it already is in college athletics, is not going away, and like it or not, it will be part of the future.

have to admit that is most likely a one off by adding California and Texas.

is the reason to continue this discussion? Do you have a point somewhere? Do tell, besides winning an argument, or demeaning me, what exactly is your point?

I read them as rhetorical in nature in that you already knew the answer to your question. This is not a deposition, and once again - for the last time - I will state that I am not, repeat, not advocating for PE to be in college football. The individual reasons or successes/failures of PE in the professional leagues is of no concern to me for this discussion. the FACT that they are involved with PE though is. BTW, PE is already in college athletics - and while that money hasn't been used specifically for changing conferences, it is my opinion you can add a "yet" to that sentence. This could be a decent discussion, but getting into the weeds with you takes away the fun. I ask questions because I do not know the answers. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 7/3/2026, 2:55:56 PM

they we anywhere close to how they were sold back then, the PAC would still be a conference, the blue bloods of the ACC would not want out, and the B12 would not have lost schools in the last 10 years. Even the ACCN is a failed business model. BTN is the only one that reports their ratings, and the only one that continues to pay anywhere close to the numbers when they became a thing. I used to think not having a B12 network was a death nail. I changed my mind the second that ESPN and FOX both own rights to B12 games. With the next contract, multiple networks and streamers will be able to bid for content. Including Paramount who now owns CBS, CBS sports, TNT, True TV, and a few others. Add that NBC is now on their own from Comcast, and streamers are looing for live content - I am thrilled that the B12 does not have a network. Now, there is no way for me to know if the next contract will be for more in 2031, but what I do know, is there are a LOT of linear channels and streamers looking for quality content.

college athletics in any way shape or form. You say that is a belief of mine, and given our history, how in the world could you espouse what I believe? I stated very clearly, that it is a development that is on the table, and can not be dismissed, no matter what either of us believe in. The FACT that PE firms have a relationship with ALL professional sports leagues, is just that, a FACT. With the NFL, you might be correct that it is a way for minority ownership to change hands - but really, I will have to take your word on that, as I don't have the time to research it. What I do know, is that the relationship with the NHL is much different, and as been a success to all franchises, and the PE firms alike. The actuary comment was just a different way of saying it has to pencil out - but you knew that. Your personal interactions with PE are completely irrelevent in the present tense. You are certainly entitled to your biases and opinions, but that doesn't change what is happening on the ground today. Like it or not, All but two of the BIG voted FOR PE involvement. I assure you, the presidents of those universities were most certainly involved in the discussions and votes. To do simple math, that is 16 for, and 2 against. To repeat myself, I am not advocating for PE to be involved in college athletics, I am saying it is on the table, and to retain an archaic opinion of private equity in college athletics is putting your head in the proverbial sand.

at this a minute. Washington and Oregon took less media money, Cal and Stanford took less media money. SMU agreed to take no media money. Memphis offered $250M to join the B12. Even Sacramento State paid $18M to get an invite to the MAC. I know how you feel about PE, as you have made that very clear. However, private capital in and of itself is not the boogie man you seem to be espousing. Every single major sports league, including the NFL has partnered with PE in some form or fashion. As I stated in my original post where I brought up Utah, and PE, I am not an actuary, and do not know how long it would take to get an ROI buying yourself into the BIG or SEC, but for the ones mentioned, including in your conference, it has to pencil out, or they wouldn't have done it.

what if there is a school that wants in a conference, and that conference doesn't really want them? Stanford to the BIG might be a good example. We assume that the BIG and SEC and the media guys want to expand into new markets. Maybe that is true, and the BIG really wants a UVA or a VT. What happens if it only splits the pie more, and the media companies do not want to pay $100M a year to broadcast UVA or VT? (just examples) Can they afford to pay the exit fees and take a short term (one contract) hit on their bottom line to get into the BIG? I don't know, but if there was an invite to the BIG for KU, but the condition was that you have to take a CalFord type of a deal, I'm not at all convinced they would not look at private capital to make it happen.

NCSU to get UNC, both will remain in the ACC. It's like paying double for UNC, and their brand is basketball, not football.

would allow a non P2 school to absorb a deal much like SMU or CalFord made to be invited to the ACC. What if, as an example only, a few ACC schools and say a Utah join the BIG, and take considerably less media money for an extended period of time. A win win? The same could happen for the SEC. Certainly not advocating for a VT (example) to take PE money to cover an exit fee and less than the SEC distributions to get an invite, but I don't think one can dismiss the option. You pay back the money when you start receiving full distributions.

a bum rap IMO - but they did to themselves.

there are many that think they may go. FSU could make a similar agreement, and from where I'm sitting, prostituting your athletic department in the short term to get an invite to the BIG could actually pay off in the long run. NOT that I think that is the way to go, but I'm not an actuary, and don't know how many years it would take to get an ROI.

out deciding what to do. The get a major four linier might be too enticing for a major company that wants in the sector to ignore. Paramount just made a move to expand into linear, it wouldn't surprise me if Netflix made a move to counter Paramount/CBS.

if that model will work - and it gives locals a way of investing into the growing pie. A win win.

I couldn't agree more which is why I do think they will act. They could always tweak and water down the bill that takes revenue sharing and allows future realignment - but it's got everyone's attention. If they attempt to freeze the conferences as they are, this could very well become an intensely quick game of musical chairs, and the schools that do not have their ducks in a row, could be on the outside looking in.

brands are in fact taken by the P2, the dominos could indeed fall very quickly. If the moves are made because of the bill being passed, there could be enough moves to dissolve the ACC as we currently know it. With Calford and SMU in the conference, it take more schools - but what if the P2 takes 4 or 5 schools? The best of the rest in the ACC could very well want to move to the B12, especially since a new contract could be negotiated early. How many schools does it take to dissolve the ACC? Personally, I don't see it, but with the bill supposed to be passed by September of this year, It is on the table IMO.