Archive for Monday, June 14, 2010

Statehouse Live: Kansas higher ed officials hoping to retain remaining 10 in Big 12

June 14, 2010, 3:06 p.m. Updated June 14, 2010, 4:02 p.m.


— Kansas higher education officials on Monday contacted their counterparts in Oklahoma and Texas urging them to stay in the Big 12.

“A 10 institution Big 12 Conference appears to be a win-win for all involved,” said Kansas Board of Regents Chair Jill Docking of Wichita. “Our universities, students, alumni, and state would all benefit from K-State’s and KU’s continued affiliation in a Big 12 consisting of the 10 remaining universities,” she said.

“A 10-institution Big 12 would an extremely bright future,” she said. Last week, Colorado and Nebraska said they were leaving for the Pac-10 and Big Ten, respectively.

The regents sent the letter to higher education officials at Texas, Texas A&M;, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.


yourworstnightmare 8 years ago

A 10-team Big 12 would be a disaster.

Texas would dominate the administration and finances of the league even more, and Kansas City would never again see a championship game. They would all be in Dallas.

It might feel safe and cozy, but the league won't last. Texas will demand more and more and drive others out, likely starting with OU and OSU.

yourworstnightmare 8 years ago

From the ESPN article:

"The Longhorns network figures to generate between $3 million and $5 million, according to the report. Because the Big 12 has unequal revenue sharing, the deal will mean more money for Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma, who all would receive at least $20 million annually from the new deal.

The other seven schools in the Big 12 would make between $14 million and $17 million, doubling what they currently receive in TV revenue."

63BC 8 years ago

Ten is viable for now, take the pick of the litter over the next 1-3 years to get back to twelve.

Jayhawk444 8 years ago

things to consider... - Adding two more to the existing 10 divides any money generated two more ways - Not adding two more means no championship game in football. Which scenario generates more money per school? - One of the main reasons the Big 10 wanted to expand was to have the championship game in football. They felt the Big 10 became irrelevant beginning in mid-November and their top teams were not fresh in voters' minds when the final BCS rankings were computed after Championship Weekend in early December.

MDHawk 8 years ago

The two new schools weren't a part of the original contract, so they might not get cut in on the penalty payouts. Could be a good incentive to lure two good schools, though...a "signing bonus".

Richard Payton 8 years ago

Texas schools that could build the conference SMU, TCU, RICE, HOUSTON or STEPHEN F. AUSTIN.

tpatt 8 years ago

Stephen F. Austin ?! Do they even have a football team? I don't even know where that school is located. I sure think that if all of the works out we probably have enough teams from Texas.

Scott Smetana 8 years ago

How stupid is CU going to look if the Big12 holds it together? They will get no visitors from the West Coast and their athletic dept is already broke. How are they going to afford the $10M buyout? How are they going to afford sending non-profitable sport athletes to the west coast? How many big bucks are they going to lose out on by having no Texas, OU, KU, KSU, ISU, etc fans visiting? Also, I'm sure the Pac10 wants nothing of them since they aren't coming with the Texas Money. In case u didn't know, nobody in the Denver area watches CU sports. They can't even sell basketball tickets for $5/seats. If the Big12 holds it together, both CU and the Pac10 should beg us to take CU back.

jayhawkinATL 8 years ago

LOL. Stephen F. Austin barely competes at the FCS level!!!

Bobo Fleming 8 years ago

I want Northern Iowa, Butler, and Bucknell. Get lots of practice playing them in season so we can beat them in the NCAA

Commenting has been disabled for this item.