ADVERTISEMENT

SMU TO THE ACC STARTING 2024-25

Somewhere between $40m and $50m. I don’t have an updated number.
Tulsa does a lot with a little--we've never had state funding or government assistance. I don't think it's impossible for a few good winning seasons to lead to skelly stadium filling up again and more money being available to the program. If we could just beat Washington or Oklahoma this year, it'd do wonders for the visibility of the program. 40 to 50 million / year for athletics is money that was inconceivable when we were in C-USA and the WAC 20 years back.
 
I'm not sure how Aresco can be expected to poach from equal to more superior conferences? He has kept the American alive from day 1, replacing exiting schools with what most believe to be the best available options. At least until now, he's managed to keep the best "G5" media rights deal in tact after losing UConn, UCF, CIN, and UH. That's 4 programs with some combination or all of branding, fan bases, funding, and markets.

I believe he made a run at the best of the MWC when UCF, UH, CIN announced their departure but he was rebuffed. I believe he even attempted to engage some Big 12 schools after OU and Texas announced their departure. No Commissioner can force schools to join or stay. I think Conference Commissioner play a bigger role when it comes to negotiating revenue streams and based on what he's dealt with during his tenure, I think he gets a solid B+ or A- when it comes to Media Rights revenue.


TX
After OU and Texas left, the Big 12 was extremely disadvantaged. The conference was in dire straits with a new commissioner and their 2 flagship teams leaving. Aresco had all the leverage in the world, PLUS he had ESPN behind him and he STILL couldn't win the poker hand. Instead, he played it polite, cautious and folded and the Big 12 took our best teams from a seemingly disadvantaged bargaining position (there were rumors Kansas & K-state were going Big 10 and WV to the ACC). I just don't see Aresco as an aggressive guy. He can keep the ship afloat but he'll never fire a shot to win the battle.
 
There isn’t anybody out there with any true financial value, though Georgia State may be a sleeping giant kinda like UCF was a part time school for future Hilton night managers and without a football program 30 years ago.

Whether Idaho re-promoted itself, New Mexico State joined, or we added Coastal, the dollar values in terms of what it’s worth to the networks is roughly the same no matter who you add.

However, the brand value of the add, and therefore the brand value of the conference could be increased. So programs with national followings or national recognition do have an upside. So Army and Liberty do add a little bit whereas Arkansas State despite its facilities and track record the last ten years really doesn’t. Army has a tradition and cachet to it. And don’t underestimate the influence of administrators, athletic officials, donors and their wives wanting a couple of paid visits to NYC per year and at least one just before Xmas.

The key factor in deciding is probably looking deeper at actual and projected capital outlays and the availability of financing for that, as well as ease of transportation both air and highway. Nobody on here thought UTSA was credible 5 years ago until you were looking at what they were willing to spend after the start up project found its footing. So if there’s a school like that out there lurking, a Kennesaw State maybe, you start to examine the advisability of that.
I think we need a serious change to the ”insiders” making decisions for TU.

Some of these people are the reason we’re in this malaise in the first place. We barely caught the last lifeboat off of the titanic in 2014…. Now, just under 10 years later, we’re looking like we won’t escape this time. Look for Memphis to leave next.
 
After OU and Texas left, the Big 12 was extremely disadvantaged. The conference was in dire straits with a new commissioner and their 2 flagship teams leaving. Aresco had all the leverage in the world, PLUS he had ESPN behind him and he STILL couldn't win the poker hand. Instead, he played it polite, cautious and folded and the Big 12 took our best teams from a seemingly disadvantaged bargaining position (there were rumors Kansas & K-state were going Big 10 and WV to the ACC). I just don't see Aresco as an aggressive guy. He can keep the ship afloat but he'll never fire a shot to win the battle.

The TV Networks or media rights holders actually held the cards. I don't think Aresco ever had a chance at luring away any Big XII schools, there was still money to be paid and ESPN/Fox wasn't going to bump up 12 American schools earning $7m to $10 mil if they didn't have too. The value of those existing Big XII schools (some of which are flagship schools with branding), even without OU and Texas, was always worth more than the American schools.

Unlike the current PAC-12, the Big XII was not falling apart with 8 core schools still in place and TV revenue available. The PAC-12 basically fell apart when the linear media rights marketplace went dry or consolidated.


TX
 
The TV Networks or media rights holders actually held the cards. I don't think Aresco ever had a chance at luring away any Big XII schools, there was still money to be paid and ESPN/Fox wasn't going to bump up 12 American schools earning $7m to $10 mil if they didn't have too. The value of those existing Big XII schools (some of which are flagship schools with branding), even without OU and Texas, was always worth more than the American schools.

Unlike the current PAC-12, the Big XII was not falling apart with 8 core schools still in place and TV revenue available. The PAC-12 basically fell apart when the linear media rights marketplace went dry or consolidated.


TX
To be fair the PAC-12 fell apart when they turned down $30M a year from ESPN and Fox causing those networks to move on to the Big12. At that point the fall of the Pac12 was just a matter of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuffyCane
To be fair the PAC-12 fell apart when they turned down $30M a year from ESPN and Fox causing those networks to move on to the Big12. At that point the fall of the Pac12 was just a matter of time.
That's true and apparently adding SMU and SDSU was not going to get the PAC-12 closer to the $40 mil they desired.

TX
 
That's true and apparently adding SMU and SDSU was not going to get the PAC-12 closer to the $40 mil they desired.

TX
They demanded $50m per school haha

Tried to play hard ball going off numbers some professor came up with (from one of the member institutions), espn said lol nah, and now there is no more pac.

I wonder if that professor is tenured.
 
They demanded $50m per school haha

Tried to play hard ball going off numbers some professor came up with (from one of the member institutions), espn said lol nah, and now there is no more pac.

I wonder if that professor is tenured.
Rumored it was the Arizona St Pres who went to one of his professors and was in turn given that stellar advice. Other conference presidents then fell for it hook line and sinker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldenhurricane2
They demanded $50m per school haha

Tried to play hard ball going off numbers some professor came up with (from one of the member institutions), espn said lol nah, and now there is no more pac.

I wonder if that professor is tenured.
He was either tenured, or stupid. One professor was the slayer of the PAC. Some TU faculty would be proud. I wonder if the Rose Bowl sends him Bday cards?
 
He was either tenured, or stupid. One professor was the slayer of the PAC. Some TU faculty would be proud. I wonder if the Rose Bowl sends him Bday cards?
I was thinking that as well - how many academic purists would just wet themselves with joy knowing they completely ruined athletics for an entire institution? I’m sure we have a number of those types on staff.
 
I was thinking that as well - how many academic purists would just wet themselves with joy knowing they completely ruined athletics for an entire institution? I’m sure we have a number of those types on staff.
Maybe.

Or perhaps the professor was asked to calculate a valuation, did so, and handed it off to the administration.

Accountability goes to leadership.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chito_and_leon
I was thinking that as well - how many academic purists would just wet themselves with joy knowing they completely ruined athletics for an entire institution? I’m sure we have a number of those types on staff.
Unfortunately too many short sighted and narrow minded academic purist would certainly bust a nut if they could ruin athletics.
 
Somewhere between $40m and $50m. I don’t have an updated number.
It has been higher on paper in the past, in the vicinity of that number, due to creative accounting, such as adding pre-planned capital spending that was covered by endowment proceeds, but the actual operating budget of TU athletics, year to year, is a far lower number. I won’t discuss actual numbers in this forum.
 
Last edited:
Tulsa does a lot with a little--we've never had state funding or government assistance. I don't think it's impossible for a few good winning seasons to lead to skelly stadium filling up again and more money being available to the program. If we could just beat Washington or Oklahoma this year, it'd do wonders for the visibility of the program. 40 to 50 million / year for athletics is money that was inconceivable when we were in C-USA and the WAC 20 years back.
Basketball needs to start paying for itself. Too many lost opportunities to make money.
 
I was thinking that as well - how many academic purists would just wet themselves with joy knowing they completely ruined athletics for an entire institution? I’m sure we have a number of those types on staff.
The nature of the academy is that you will always have folks who think their stellar critical thinking* and general negative attitude is somehow a net positive in a business environment. Luckily, most but not all, of the problematic faculty at TU have largely retired or moved on. New vision. New era. And the faculty are behind it. Some are frustrated, sure. And some are groaning under the strain of actually having to work and be held accountable, but for the most part, the polarizing environment of 3 years ago is mostly gone. There’s a couple of notable exceptions but most of the faculty understand athletics role in attracting our best students and its value as an amenity once those students arrive on campus. They largely get it - the stadium was there 50 years before they were born. They chose to come here. If they are truly unhappy about it, there’s opportunities elsewhere at peer institutions without athletics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seniorgolfer
There’s a couple of notable exceptions but most of the faculty understand athletics role in attracting our best students and its value as an amenity once those students arrive on campus.
Are they tenured?
 
That doesn't seem too bad, I would expect TU to be on par with peer
universities such as Tulane and Rice.
I think so...Our one year improvement has been impressive, and our
recruiting to this point for the '24 class has been significant enough
to make me think that our improvement going into the '24 season will
also be worth noting..

We have some 12 recruiting slots to fill, and we need some defensive
size and a couple of O-linemen in that group....Some may well come
from the portal and the JUCOs near the end of recruiting for the '24
class....

So far, so good....It is easy to be impressed with what coach Wilson
and his staff have accomplished in a short period of time....Let's
keep supporting (with fingers crossed of course) the team and the
coaching staff in their efforts....
 
It has been higher on paper in the past, in the vicinity of that number, due to creative accounting, such as adding pre-planned capital spending that was covered by endowment proceeds, but the actual operating budget of TU athletics, year to year, is a far lower number. I won’t discuss actual numbers in this forum.
I’m sure the same could be said for many institutions.
 
I've been watching TU football for over 40 years and Hurricane-watch is correct. The fan base is not what is necessary for a successful program, the school has actively tried to kill athletics multiple times, and Dr. Donaldson was the WORST hire in school history which has led to the structural issues the university has today.

But go ahead and call this original AZ board member and former student a troll...
It's Been a long time since since Donaldson. Just like it has been a long time since a John Blake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chito_and_leon
After OU and Texas left, the Big 12 was extremely disadvantaged. The conference was in dire straits with a new commissioner and their 2 flagship teams leaving. Aresco had all the leverage in the world, PLUS he had ESPN behind him and he STILL couldn't win the poker hand. Instead, he played it polite, cautious and folded and the Big 12 took our best teams from a seemingly disadvantaged bargaining position (there were rumors Kansas & K-state were going Big 10 and WV to the ACC). I just don't see Aresco as an aggressive guy. He can keep the ship afloat but he'll never fire a shot to win the battle.
I actually believe the conference may be in better shape with the addition of Utah, CO, BYU, AZ and Arizona State.

Utah has turned into a consistent top 20 program. The BYU-Utah game will become a huge thing because it matters now.

AZ is a better basketball program than OU and Texas.

CO and Utah will be a good rivalry. They hated each other in the MLS. When their fans showed up, there were always fights.

ASU is the of the greatest party schools in the country. They always have the most beautiful girls that can hit the beer bongs as hard as any clown from OSU. Who doesn't want that in their conference ?
 
Maybe.

Or perhaps the professor was asked to calculate a valuation, did so, and handed it off to the administration.

Accountability goes to leadership.
Totally. This was bad negotiating strategy by whoever negotiated for the PAC. They highballed so the networks move up. That often works but if you go too high and the other side has choices, they can walk. Or in this case, the networks seem to have just not responded and the PAC thought they were important enough to wait the networks out. But they were wrong. Problem wasn't the number, it was whoever did the negotiations. It sounds like negotiation by committee, which would be right for their commissioner.
 
Rumored it was the Arizona St Pres who went to one of his professors and was in turn given that stellar advice. Other conference presidents then fell for it hook line and sinker.
Trusting a party school to come up with the number vs Stanford…. Yikes….

Stanford going along with it…. Double yikes!
 
  • Like
Reactions: chito_and_leon
Trusting a party school to come up with the number vs Stanford…. Yikes….

Stanford going along with it…. Double yikes!
That's a great reason to expect it's professors are not able to do a relatively simple statistical analysis. The professors are at all the parties. That's why US News and World Reports ranks them in the top 20, in undergrad teaching. :rolleyes:
 
I actually believe the conference may be in better shape with the addition of Utah, CO, BYU, AZ and Arizona State.

Utah has turned into a consistent top 20 program. The BYU-Utah game will become a huge thing because it matters now.

AZ is a better basketball program than OU and Texas.

CO and Utah will be a good rivalry. They hated each other in the MLS. When their fans showed up, there were always fights.

ASU is the of the greatest party schools in the country. They always have the most beautiful girls that can hit the beer bongs as hard as any clown from OSU. Who doesn't want that in their conference ?
What you really mean is OSU and Iowa State don’t know it yet, but they joined the WAC.
 
Eyes couldn’t roll back any further on this.

Probably quite a few less whor3s in Wichita Falls than Dallas as well. I'd certainly appreciate the safety, cost of living and relaxed lifestyle of Wichita Falls over the constantly under construction metro-plex. Hope pony gets rode like the broken down mare they are and then sent to the glue factory.
 
Fervently hope to beat these suckers & send them off to their new conference hoping to never play TU again, exactly like we did to the Coogs. Won't miss their obnoxious, stuck-up fans, either.
 
Eyes couldn’t roll back any further on this.

I can't see why they think moving from a 3rd tier conference to an unstable 2nd tier will make any difference. And they go from having more money than most of their competitors (remember Larry Brown, Weird Tim Jankovich at $2m/yr, Chad Morris at $3.5m/yr) to less. Their problem isn't the conference or anything the conference will solve, their problem is they're just not very good at athletics.
 
I can't see why they think moving from a 3rd tier conference to an unstable 2nd tier will make any difference. And they go from having more money than most of their competitors (remember Larry Brown, Weird Tim Jankovich at $2m/yr, Chad Morris at $3.5m/yr) to less. Their problem isn't the conference or anything the conference will solve, their problem is they're just not very good at athletics.
Their problems are numerous and include an inflated sense of entitlement, value of their presence in the DFW market, lack of any perspective regarding reality, etc....

It will be interesting to see what type of hole this venture puts the University in over the long term. Maybe their boosters are willing to kick in substantially more to athletics, but what does that commitment do to fundraising for the university proper? Time will tell if their decision works out or it bankrupts the university and puts them into the type of mess that Brad Carson has been cleaning up here magnified ten fold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chito_and_leon
TU to the MVC with Wash St and Ore St now before the American implodes when the AAC takes Memphis Tulane and UCF
Which happens when UNC Clemson and FSU go to the Big Ten
The future path is obvious and the longer we wait the more we become division II and rejoin the MVC

Although I detest their cheating program SMU played this right dangit
 
Their problems are numerous and include an inflated sense of entitlement, value of their presence in the DFW market, lack of any perspective regarding reality, etc....

It will be interesting to see what type of hole this venture puts the University in over the long term. Maybe their boosters are willing to kick in substantially more to athletics, but what does that commitment do to fundraising for the university proper? Time will tell if their decision works out or it bankrupts the university and puts them into the type of mess that Brad Carson has been cleaning up here magnified ten fold.
Why would joining the ACC put SMU in a hole? Joining the ACC will almost certainly bring additional money into the university on the academic side. Conference revenue distributions should be at least equal to that of the AAC at least as long as Clemson and FSU are onboard. Ticket revenue should increase in both football and basketball. Don’t see much of a downside here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: loca2874
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT