Big XII Rumblings, Part I

Last week, as I was on blogging sabbatical, the Big XII was rocked (well, that’s a strong word) by the resignation of commissioner Kevin Weiberg. Weiberg is leaving the Big 12 after 8 ½ years for a newly created position with the Big Ten Network.

As a fan of the University of Oklahoma, I am glad to see this happen. OU was ill-served by the conference office on three occasions in the last two years: the football officiating debacle at Texas Tech in 2005, the highway robbery in football at Oregon last season, and the elbowing incident involving Longar Longar in a basketball game at Texas Tech. In each case, the interests of OU were not defended, forcing the OU administration to defend itself. Furthermore, the commissioner allowed Tech coach Bob Knight to bully him into suspending Longar for two games as a result of an unintentional elbow, ignoring the pleas of the OU administration.

The conference, however, faces bigger problems. There is unrest in the league regarding revenue sharing. Currently, the league splits all non-television revenue equally. Conference members also split half of all television revenue equally. The other half of television revenue is placed in an “appearance pool”. This money is distributed based on football TV appearances and non-conference national TV appearances in basketball. This benefits schools like Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska (football), as well as Kansas (basketball). The more powerful programs earn up to $1-1/2 million more per year than the less-exposed schools under this plan.

Lesser-exposed members would like to see the Big XII follow the lead of the Big Ten and ACC, and share all revenue equally. This idea goes over like a lead balloon at places such as the University of Nebraska, who is considering the option of leaving the conference if they lose money in any revenue-restructuring deal. Currently, the conference requires 9 of the 12 schools to vote in favor of rewriting the conference constitution. As it stands now, 8 of the schools would be in favor of revenue sharing. Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Texas A&M are in favor of the status quo. Rumor is that A&M may be on the fence, and could change their position.

The Big XII is in an unenviable position. There are really only three programs that can draw a national audience, or large numbers of casual fans, for a television appearance against any random opponent. This explains why OU will play North Texas on national cable television in September, and why Texas can play Louisiana-Lafayette on national cable television. Therefore, Texas, OU, and Nebraska can bring in more money for TV appearances.

The lesser-exposed members argue that revenue sharing would make for a greater spirit of cooperation in the conference, resulting in more exposure and money for everyone involved. They point to the Big Ten and their new television deal as an example. The early NFL would be another example, as franchises such as New York and Cleveland gave up lucrative local TV deals in the 60’s so the league could share revenues from their national TV deal with CBS. The NFL mushroomed into the most valuable television property in the U.S.

OU, Texas, and Nebraska can also make the argument that they should get to keep the money they have earned, by having high-powered football programs that fans will watch on TV.

The next commissioner will have to broker a solution to this dilemma. The conference cannot afford to disintegrate. If the conference were to break up, the lesser-exposed schools would suffer the most.

At this point, I think rumors of a Big 12 breakup are premature and preposterous. But, anything can happen. In a future post, I will post possible scenarios for conference members.