The Mizzou perspective.
My post on Big Ten expansion candidates drew a comment from the author of Mizzou Sanity, a blog covering Missouri sports, obviously. He has a couple of posts concerning Big Ten expansion and Missouri's possible interest in joining the Big Ten. MS pointed out this article from the Dallas Morning News concerning the Big XII's revenue sharing procedures. To entice the Texas school to reject overtures from the Pac-10 and SEC, the Big XII, during its formation, allowed schools that make more appearances on television to collect more money. According to the article, half of the TV revenue is split equally, and the other half is distributed based upon appearance fees. How much of a difference does that make?
Under the current formula, the so-called haves in the conference earn anywhere from $1 million to $1.5 million more per year in television revenue than the have-nots.
Athletic budgets in the Big 12 average nearly $50 million with Texas at the top end ($83 million) and Iowa State at the bottom ($32 million).
It's not a surprise that a conference in which the members are not equal partners would experience some tension. On the other hand, taking $1.5 million from Texas and giving it to Iowa State would not create financial parity in the Big XII. Would Mizzou leave the Big XII over $1.5 million? Is it the principle of the thing? Who knows. I can't imagine that Missouri's position in the Big Ten would be much better, unless the Big Ten makes that much more money off of its TV contracts. I don't know the answer to that. In the Big Ten, although the league does pool all TV and bowl money, the schools that sell the most tickets and T-shirts have the largest budgets.
3 comments:
Wow, what a fool am I ... I've amended my post! Eesh!!!
No harm done. I'm glad that you mentioned the 2001 game. That game was so out of the blue that it's nice to know I didn't hallucinate it.
Thanks for the link. Obviously the big boys in the Big 12 will always be the big boys money-wise, but I think teams like Mizzou and Iowa State would be open to moving elsewhere for the same reason that Arkansas bolted from the SWC to the SEC (well, aside from the fact that it's the SEC)--not only does Texas have the money, but you really do end up feeling like they get preferential treatment after a while. That probably comes across as a whiny thing to say, but I think the preferential treatment, combined with the inferior football TV package (Mizzou used to get on TV 3-4 times a year while every Indiana game was on an ESPN affiliate...makes you a bit jealous...it's improved now, but it's still far below what the Big Ten has), makes your eye wander a bit. So if you can improve your exposure, get more TV revenue, and move to a more respected academic conference, you have to take it seriously.
And according to College Blitz (which I had admittedly not heard of until I read this article), there's an offer on the table. I highly doubt that's true, but it's not out of the realm of possiblity to think that there's some flirtation going on...
Post a Comment