Blog Entry

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

Posted on: October 6, 2011 3:17 pm
Edited on: October 6, 2011 3:46 pm
 
Posted by Jerry Hinnen

Missouri or no Missouri, the Big 12 isn't going anywhere.

That's the message sent by the league's Thursday afternoon announcement that its members have agreed to a equal-revenue sharing plan and a six-year "formal grant of television rights." The revenue distribution plan "becomes effective upon the formal assignment of rights by all institutions."

That assignment of rights isn't legally binding just yet--interim commissioner Chuck Neinas has been "authorized by the Board to immediately distribute legal documents for institutional execution." But with the grant of rights part of a "joint resolution" on the part of Texas and Oklahoma (who have each already publicly endorsed the conference's invitation to TCU), it seems unthinkable that either would back out of the arrangement now, or that any of the six other non-Missouri Big 12 schools wouldn't follow their lead.

To drive that point home, the adoption of the grant of rights and revenue plan was passed with an 8-0 unanimous vote by the Big 12 Board of Directors. As with the vote to issue TCU's invitation, however, Missouri abstained--another sign of the current rift between the conference and the Tigers.

The grant of rights is understood to gives the Big 12 control over any and all Tier 1 and Tier 2 television revenues generated by the schools which sign the agreement, in effect making them worthless from a TV perspective to any other conference that might wish to add them.

However, the proposal also addresses issues with the league's "third-tier" rights, which concern the much-discussed Longhorn Network and appears to include several concessions on Texas's part. According to the league's statement:
Conference bylaws will reflect that no member institution branded outlet will show high school games or highlights, noting that it is permissible pursuant to NCAA interpretation to use scores, standings and statistics of high school games; and, that additional games beyond the one member institution retained football game for telecast purposes must be approved by both institutions and both Conference telecast partners.
In other words, no filmed high school content, and any Big 12 games that appear on the LHN must have the approval of all parties involved.

“Today’s Big 12 meeting was the most positive conference meeting that we have had over the last two to three years," said Oklahoma president David Boren in a statement. "The reforms made and actions taken are a win for the entire conference.  The actions taken at the meeting will help to strengthen the conference and increase its stability.  Commissioner Chuck Neinas deserves great credit for his leadership in bringing this agreement together.  I also appreciate the close partnership between OU and OSU in working for meaningful reforms.  All of the actions taken are important and I was especially pleased that the conference will have its own bylaws to make sure that institutional branded networks will be prohibited from showing high school athletes in game or in highlight format in a way that could give any conference member a recruiting advantage.”

It might not be exactly what Texas wanted with the LHN, and the Big 12, period, may not be what the Sooners had in mind during their flirtation with the Pac-12. But with both schools now all-but locked in legal matrimony for the next six years and TCU set to officially come aboard any day now, they do have something both sides have been craving all along: conference stability.

Comments
kkjyywlpo
Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 17, 2011 1:38 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator




Since: Aug 4, 2008
Posted on: October 9, 2011 3:56 pm
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

@GOWASH2

However, the proposal also addresses issues with the league's "third-tier" rights, which concern the much-discussed Longhorn Network and appears to include several concessions on Texas's part. According to the league's statement:

Apparently there were problems with Texas and sharing of revenue as the above indicate that Texas and it’s Longhorn Network appears to include several concessions. Last I understood concessions are something given that might not have wanted to give.

So just from that you might surmise that Texas might have been the cause of the other teams leaving the conference. Why would a team want to be a member of a conference where revenue is not shared equally. Then to top it off a conference member start a solo TV network that at first wanted to show high school games of local high school teams. This was eventually vetoed by the NCAA.

A conference is suppose to protect it’s members to ensure that revenue is shared equally, also that no team has an advantage over another nor that a member school is take advantage of.

Once a member school feels as if one member is getting more of an equal share than they are, you have dissension in the ranks and eventually something would boil over and a revolt would happen.

Texas finally conceded and made some type of concessions, therefore apparently the member schools now would have to ratify this six year agreement that currently no one has signed and returned.

“ONE MAN’S OPINION”





Since: Nov 7, 2010
Posted on: October 7, 2011 2:35 pm
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

ebonyrod2

It is easy to blame Texas for the unequal revenue sharing when in fact Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas A&M were all against equal revenue sharing. The way I see it, there were 12 schools in the conference and the other 11 schools could have easily stood up to Texas (like the Pac12 did) if they had bothered to band together but they instead chose to cut and run. In the case of Nebraska and Texas A&M, they did not want equal revenue sharing so they were part of the problem. All of the schools that left the conference left for one simple reason, more money. Texas A&M has done one hell of a PR job blaming Texas and the Longhorn Network for their exit but all one has to do is read the statement from Texas A&M athletic director about how they had no problems with the Longhorn Network and they were going to start their own to realize that they essentially stabbed the Big 12 in the back. Even worse, when they agreed to stay in the Big 12, they insisted on getting a minimum amount of revenue (coming from the other schools in the conference that agreed to give it to Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma), which Oklahoma and Texas were willing to decline.  The bottom line is that there is more than one bad apple that caused the Big12 implosion but everyone seems to only be blaming Texas for it.  



Since: Nov 7, 2010
Posted on: October 7, 2011 2:11 pm
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

ebonyrod2

Your are right about Nebraska, but I question Colorado or Texas&M, other than financially. Having said that, I personally don't think the addition of Colorado or Utah has particularly strengthened the Pac 12.  



Since: Aug 4, 2008
Posted on: October 7, 2011 1:18 pm
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

@jcowpoke

When one can not deal with logic then the name calling of posters start. I though the thread was about Big-12 agrees to six year grant of TV rights.

If you think the Big-12 is better off without Nebraska, Colorado and Texas A&M, I am at a loss for words.

Others are speaking of bringing in Houston, SMU, Texas Christian to the conference. If these teams were so good why were they not invited to join the conference before now? When the Big 8 decided to expand to the Big -12 these teams were not in consideration to join.

Now  all are saying these programs now being invited are better than those that departed. It would appear to me that A conference would want the very best teams possible. At anytime the Big-12 could have eliminated any conference member, and invited other programs that would improve the conference, yet they chose not to so. Uhmmmmm!!1 Now all are saying the conference would be better with the new invites and the old members were not that good to begin with so we are better off without them. Uhmmmmmmmmm!!!
 
Yes Texas beat one of  the current PAC-12 bottom feeders. I would have been extremely surprised had they not, as well as many  that made a sport bet on the game. Before you state the obvious again, Texas won the BCS bowl championship game against us in 2005.

The obvious again, yes we are being sanctioned by the NCAA. We are still a viable football team , our current record is 4-1 for the season. We had a good season last year by any other team standards, except ours.

It was smart of Texas to realize that they are apart of a conference and that conference members share revenue and not take financial advantage of other conference members.

Had Texas not been so adamant about not sharing revenue last season the conference might still be together with the former members that have departed.

I still think the B-12 conference is unstable. So far no one has signed the agreement. Missouri was not invited to any of the teleconferences and did not vote on any discussed items.

“ONE MAN’S OPINION”





Since: Oct 7, 2011
Posted on: October 7, 2011 10:47 am
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

I think the big 12 conference should give mizzou a short time table to commit to the conference or be replaced...  How important is mizzou?



Since: Oct 6, 2011
Posted on: October 7, 2011 10:39 am
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

Good move by the Big XII....IMO  Mizzou should stay, also BYU and Airforce should be added. That way it can have a championship game once again.



Since: Aug 18, 2008
Posted on: October 6, 2011 11:21 pm
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

About losing Neb, A&M, and CU...its a huge loss to the Big 12.  While CU was basically a league whipping boy, one does not lose the a program the quality of Nebraska and simply replace them.  Both TCU and BYU are very competitive in football, and quality replacements, but there is little doubt the Big 12 has taken huge hits.  Can they survive?  Absolutely.  OU and UT can anchor the league, and things will continue...but some shine has went off that cant be replaced by the current available schools.

It will still be a tough football conference.  A&M was always just a bridesmaid, and Neb never quite regained its dominance. 





Since: Sep 28, 2006
Posted on: October 6, 2011 9:40 pm
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

They ultimately will be able to view them for free on LHN as well... it is not a PPV network.  However, UT still gets the 15 M a year until ESPN secures the rights to everything from DirecTV to Comcast.



Since: Sep 19, 2010
Posted on: October 6, 2011 8:09 pm
 

Big 12 agrees to six-year grant of TV rights

I think rodUSC boy needs to stick with keeping his team out of sanctions for cheating and stop anlyzing the Big 12, we are better without Nebraska, T$A, and of course Colorado, didn't Texas just kick the **** out of UCLA?


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com