Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

Media Size calculations are done many ways as well. Wyoming for Example is the only 4 year University in the entire state. For the MWC TV contract they counted the entire state as the media market, not just the local area around Laramie. When the conference Network was launched they guaranteed access on basic cable to the mtn network for the entire state.

I don't think we know how the TV execs totally look at market calculations by looking at the numbers that get tossed around on the message boards.

I do agree Temple goes to the BE and it will be in 2012 instead of Boise who is getting expensive to move in 2012

(02-16-2012 01:38 PM)billings Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

Media Size calculations are done many ways as well. Wyoming for Example is the only 4 year University in the entire state. For the MWC TV contract they counted the entire state as the media market, not just the local area around Laramie. When the conference Network was launched they guaranteed access on basic cable to the mtn network for the entire state.

I don't think we know how the TV execs totally look at market calculations by looking at the numbers that get tossed around on the message boards.

I do agree Temple goes to the BE and it will be in 2012 instead of Boise who is getting expensive to move in 2012

That's a great point, I intended to mention that. One of the things I did in that calculation was inlcuded the school's media market plus the next closest DMA if they were not already in a metro area. For Wyoming, I didn't include it's next closest, because it was already captured with the Fort Collins/Denver area by other schools in the league, but I did not include the entire state of Wyoming. Well done on behalf of your adminstration to pull that off as a selling point.

With that said; however, Wyoming still ranks at the bottom with 211,000 TV households (for the entire state) vs. the 57,000 in I included for your DMA.

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

From all the interviews and press conferences with univ presidents and athletic directors, it's very apparent that tv markets are priority one. Seems to be good indication the conference will go to 20 by this summer, maybe just 18 but I think it will be 20. The first 4 in will likely be in as big of a market as can be found. Temple will be given some time to figure out the BE angle. If they are not in the BE in the next couple of months, I would expect to see them as a football only in the Alliance. Utah State likely in the west to help bring back the state of Utah or at least get us in that market. Maybe SJSU instead. UNT very likely one of the 1st 4 in imo. Probably one of the F_U schools because of markets. That would be 4 to start with. If Temple is not available then it's anybodys guess with Toledo, ODU, MTSU, Ark St all being possibilities too.

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

If you add MTSU, which in spite of last year's football season is great, you should consider WKU also. They would instantly be on the top rivalries in the Alliance.

It's starting to sound like CUSA and the Sunbelt should have the Alliance.

(02-16-2012 06:27 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

If you add MTSU, which in spite of last year's football season is great, you should consider WKU also. They would instantly be on the top rivalries in the Alliance.

You're saying MTSU and WKU are big time rivals? I thought Memphis and MTSU are big time rivals?

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

Problem is, MTSU isn't in Nashville it's in Murfreesboro about 30-45 minutes southeast of Nashville. Murfreesboro is a little bigger than Greenville. I guess technically MTSU is in the Nashville market but there isn't much interest.

(02-16-2012 06:42 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

Problem is, MTSU isn't in Nashville it's in Murfreesboro about 30-45 minutes southeast of Nashville. Murfreesboro is a little bigger than Greenville. I guess technically MTSU is in the Nashville market but there isn't much interest.

ohhhhh I see that on google maps.......that's tricky.......

(02-16-2012 06:46 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:42 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

Problem is, MTSU isn't in Nashville it's in Murfreesboro about 30-45 minutes southeast of Nashville. Murfreesboro is a little bigger than Greenville. I guess technically MTSU is in the Nashville market but there isn't much interest.

ohhhhh I see that on google maps.......that's tricky.......

True Murfreesboro is 30-40 minutes outside Nashville and Bowling Green, KY is less than an hour north of Nashville and less than an hour and a half south of Louisville but UNT is not in Dallas and neither of the F_U's are in Miami. Both MTSU and WKU have huge alumni bases in Nashville and WkU has a huge alumni base from Louisville. In fact I believe Louisville provides more WKU students thank any city by far except Bowling Green. Also, both Murfressboro and Bowling Green are the fastest growing cities in their respective states and both have metro's of 100,000 plus in addition to hundreds of thousands in their market areas. Neither are truely small potatoes like a Ruston, Troy, etc.

(02-16-2012 06:34 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:27 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

If you add MTSU, which in spite of last year's football season is great, you should consider WKU also. They would instantly be on the top rivalries in the Alliance.

You're saying MTSU and WKU are big time rivals? I thought Memphis and MTSU are big time rivals?

MT/WKU is the biggest, most hate-filled, all sports rivalry in the Sun Belt (which is why many of us call it '100 Miles of Hate') that has only deepened with WKU's move to FBS football. Cajun and Warhawk fans may object, but it's true. If MT did get an invite to the Alliance, I guarantee you our AD makes the case for WKU, and vice-versa. Another poster said that MT-WKU would be one of the biggest rivalries in the Alliance out of the gate. I'm comfortable saying it probably would be the biggest. Not trying to pimp the programs, but the Alliance would poach the hands down two best athletic programs in the Sun Belt with the two biggest fanbases.

(02-16-2012 06:42 PM)NoQuarter08 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

Problem is, MTSU isn't in Nashville it's in Murfreesboro about 30-45 minutes southeast of Nashville. Murfreesboro is a little bigger than Greenville. I guess technically MTSU is in the Nashville market but there isn't much interest.

Just for clarity, Murfreesboro is officially part of the Nashville MSA. It's called Nashville-Murfreesboro-Columbia. There's a massive alumni base in Nashville, so I wouldn't say there isn't interest. The daily newspaper is the biggest problem, but who freaking reads papers anymore?

Anyway, wasn't trying to pimp. I'm genuinely interested in folks perspectives posed by the questions in the initial post. Thx.

of all the delusional talk about "the alliance" I've seen, the discussions about TV markets are by far the most laughable. On what planet do second tier college football programs "bring a TV market"? Really, do you think MTSU or WKU will bring Nashville? You ever been to Nashville? Lived there for 10 years, never heard the letters WKU mentioned once, ever. You think Temple will bring Philly? Temple was in the Big East for 13 years and couldn't bring Philly. But now because they've had a couple of good seasons in the MAC 30 years of apathy is going to evaporate because they moved to a different non-AQ conference? please.

if just being in a TV market was all it took then Fordham in NYC would be the hottest team in the country. And conversely, just because a program is in a small market doesn't mean they wouldn't be a good addition. Are you telling me if given a choice between Marshall and WVU you'd pick Marshall? don't thinkso. You'd pick Penn State over Temple in a heart beat and they touch little kids in Happy Valley. So please, stop this nonsense about TV markets.

Akron does not bring Cleveland, N.Texas does not bring Dallas, UTSA does not bring San Antonio, and on and on and on. If you want any chance for this 1+1=3 conference to survive you need to start looking at more relevant factors other than fantasy TV markets.

Best of luck.

(02-16-2012 08:58 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  of all the delusional talk about "the alliance" I've seen, the discussions about TV markets are by far the most laughable. On what planet do second tier college football programs "bring a TV market"? Really, do you think MTSU or WKU will bring Nashville? You ever been to Nashville? Lived there for 10 years, never heard the letters WKU mentioned once, ever. You think Temple will bring Philly? Temple was in the Big East for 13 years and couldn't bring Philly. But now because they've had a couple of good seasons in the MAC 30 years of apathy is going to evaporate because they moved to a different non-AQ conference? please.

if just being in a TV market was all it took then Fordham in NYC would be the hottest team in the country. And conversely, just because a program is in a small market doesn't mean they wouldn't be a good addition. Are you telling me if given a choice between Marshall and WVU you'd pick Marshall? don't thinkso. You'd pick Penn State over Temple in a heart beat and they touch little kids in Happy Valley. So please, stop this nonsense about TV markets.

Akron does not bring Cleveland, N.Texas does not bring Dallas, UTSA does not bring San Antonio, and on and on and on. If you want any chance for this 1+1=3 conference to survive you need to start looking at more relevant factors other than fantasy TV markets.

Best of luck.

Exactly what I've been saying but reality is TV execs don't pay attention those factors, it's market size and that's it. TV deals for a conference are what drives decisions....thus WKU is not going to be in the picture. And you are correct,neither WkU nor MTSu will carry Nasville. It's Tennessee, then Vanderbilt. The same applies to anyOhio city (ohio State), North Carolina cities (UNC and Duke), Florida cities (Florida and Florida State), etc....

(02-16-2012 08:58 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  of all the delusional talk about "the alliance" I've seen, the discussions about TV markets are by far the most laughable. On what planet do second tier college football programs "bring a TV market"? Really, do you think MTSU or WKU will bring Nashville? You ever been to Nashville? Lived there for 10 years, never heard the letters WKU mentioned once, ever. You think Temple will bring Philly? Temple was in the Big East for 13 years and couldn't bring Philly. But now because they've had a couple of good seasons in the MAC 30 years of apathy is going to evaporate because they moved to a different non-AQ conference? please.

if just being in a TV market was all it took then Fordham in NYC would be the hottest team in the country. And conversely, just because a program is in a small market doesn't mean they wouldn't be a good addition. Are you telling me if given a choice between Marshall and WVU you'd pick Marshall? don't thinkso. You'd pick Penn State over Temple in a heart beat and they touch little kids in Happy Valley. So please, stop this nonsense about TV markets.

Akron does not bring Cleveland, N.Texas does not bring Dallas, UTSA does not bring San Antonio, and on and on and on. If you want any chance for this 1+1=3 conference to survive you need to start looking at more relevant factors other than fantasy TV markets.

Best of luck.

I think you miss the point. There isn't a single team in the Alliance that can say they fully carry their market either. This concept of "carrying the market" is far more overrated than the concept of adding large media markets to your league that will show games in that city/area.

Bottom line is networks don't get to sell advertising for college football in markets they are not in. By your logic, the Alliance wouldn't add anyone else, so why are they talking about adding to two to eight schools? It's because 13.5 to 14 million TV households isn't going to be enough to justify coming together. The Alliance isn't going to make BCS money on its TV deal. At this point they have to find the right mix of schools that's going to add TV sets to bring the total annual value of the contract enough to make it worth everyone's while and the only way to do that is by adding large media markets. You damn sure aren't going to get it if you don't add them and you aren't going to do it if you add schools like Louisana Tech and anyone else with less than a million TVs (and maybe even 2 million).

Could you list those teams with their DMA's pop. amounts?

My top 4 list for adding teams is:

-Temple
-FIU (not really what I would want, but I guess recruiting ties must be maintained)
-MTSU
-WKU

(02-16-2012 07:59 PM)MTowho Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:34 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:27 PM)BMcKitchup Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 06:18 PM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 01:23 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Have a few questions for all of you.

First, what weight do you all think the media market of potential candidates will be given in the expansion process? Half, more than half or less than 50%? I did a little calculation of over on Middle Tennessee's Scout board of the 16 current institutiosn plus 12 of the potential candidates.

What I found is the current 16-team footprint offers direct market opportunity of approximately 13.5 million TV households. Based on this number it would appear that's not nearly high enough to warrant the type of TV contracts both leagues have recently signed. With that said, it seems to make sense that schools in larger metros are listed as likely candidates.

Second, and given the above why is Louisiana Tech listed in most everyone's top few candidates or does this indicate you all do not think media market size is going to be an important factor? I ask because of the 28 institutions, LT ranks 24th and that's if you include Shreveport along with Monroe-Ruston. With just Monroe/Ruston they would be 27th only above Wyoming.

Third, I continue to hear from former colleagues that Temple is not interested and remains confident they will get an invite to the Big East. If you can't get Temple does it then make sense to expand by more teams - especially for those of you who want to stop at 18 - or does Temple's decision have no bearing on what you guys want to see happen?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a former employee of the Middle Tennessee athletic dept.

I don't know why MTSU isn't getting more interest by folks. I've been to Nashville....it's a great city. Fun, seemed clean, "cosmopolitan" if you will. Gets the alliance back into the state of Tennessee. And there are direct, non-stop flights on Southwest Airlines from Raleigh to Nashville.

So I would classify it as "easy to get to".

If you add MTSU, which in spite of last year's football season is great, you should consider WKU also. They would instantly be on the top rivalries in the Alliance.

You're saying MTSU and WKU are big time rivals? I thought Memphis and MTSU are big time rivals?

MT/WKU is the biggest, most hate-filled, all sports rivalry in the Sun Belt (which is why many of us call it '100 Miles of Hate') that has only deepened with WKU's move to FBS football. Cajun and Warhawk fans may object, but it's true. If MT did get an invite to the Alliance, I guarantee you our AD makes the case for WKU, and vice-versa. Another poster said that MT-WKU would be one of the biggest rivalries in the Alliance out of the gate. I'm comfortable saying it probably would be the biggest. Not trying to pimp the programs, but the Alliance would poach the hands down two best athletic programs in the Sun Belt with the two biggest fanbases.

Quality post. MTSU/WKU would be a quality matchup and fit in some gaps in Alliance geography.

(02-16-2012 09:59 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 08:58 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  of all the delusional talk about "the alliance" I've seen, the discussions about TV markets are by far the most laughable. On what planet do second tier college football programs "bring a TV market"? Really, do you think MTSU or WKU will bring Nashville? You ever been to Nashville? Lived there for 10 years, never heard the letters WKU mentioned once, ever. You think Temple will bring Philly? Temple was in the Big East for 13 years and couldn't bring Philly. But now because they've had a couple of good seasons in the MAC 30 years of apathy is going to evaporate because they moved to a different non-AQ conference? please.

if just being in a TV market was all it took then Fordham in NYC would be the hottest team in the country. And conversely, just because a program is in a small market doesn't mean they wouldn't be a good addition. Are you telling me if given a choice between Marshall and WVU you'd pick Marshall? don't thinkso. You'd pick Penn State over Temple in a heart beat and they touch little kids in Happy Valley. So please, stop this nonsense about TV markets.

Akron does not bring Cleveland, N.Texas does not bring Dallas, UTSA does not bring San Antonio, and on and on and on. If you want any chance for this 1+1=3 conference to survive you need to start looking at more relevant factors other than fantasy TV markets.

Best of luck.

I think you miss the point. There isn't a single team in the Alliance that can say they fully carry their market either. This concept of "carrying the market" is far more overrated than the concept of adding large media markets to your league that will show games in that city/area.

Bottom line is networks don't get to sell advertising for college football in markets they are not in. By your logic, the Alliance wouldn't add anyone else, so why are they talking about adding to two to eight schools? It's because 13.5 to 14 million TV households isn't going to be enough to justify coming together. The Alliance isn't going to make BCS money on its TV deal. At this point they have to find the right mix of schools that's going to add TV sets to bring the total annual value of the contract enough to make it worth everyone's while and the only way to do that is by adding large media markets. You damn sure aren't going to get it if you don't add them and you aren't going to do it if you add schools like Louisana Tech and anyone else with less than a million TVs (and maybe even 2 million).

Whats the pitch to the TV execs- yeah but we have marginally relevant football programs in a lot of TV markets, not just a few. mo mediocre = mo money? I'm just not seeing the added value but hopefully it works out for you.

(02-17-2012 08:05 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 09:59 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 08:58 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  of all the delusional talk about "the alliance" I've seen, the discussions about TV markets are by far the most laughable. On what planet do second tier college football programs "bring a TV market"? Really, do you think MTSU or WKU will bring Nashville? You ever been to Nashville? Lived there for 10 years, never heard the letters WKU mentioned once, ever. You think Temple will bring Philly? Temple was in the Big East for 13 years and couldn't bring Philly. But now because they've had a couple of good seasons in the MAC 30 years of apathy is going to evaporate because they moved to a different non-AQ conference? please.

if just being in a TV market was all it took then Fordham in NYC would be the hottest team in the country. And conversely, just because a program is in a small market doesn't mean they wouldn't be a good addition. Are you telling me if given a choice between Marshall and WVU you'd pick Marshall? don't thinkso. You'd pick Penn State over Temple in a heart beat and they touch little kids in Happy Valley. So please, stop this nonsense about TV markets.

Akron does not bring Cleveland, N.Texas does not bring Dallas, UTSA does not bring San Antonio, and on and on and on. If you want any chance for this 1+1=3 conference to survive you need to start looking at more relevant factors other than fantasy TV markets.

Best of luck.

I think you miss the point. There isn't a single team in the Alliance that can say they fully carry their market either. This concept of "carrying the market" is far more overrated than the concept of adding large media markets to your league that will show games in that city/area.

Bottom line is networks don't get to sell advertising for college football in markets they are not in. By your logic, the Alliance wouldn't add anyone else, so why are they talking about adding to two to eight schools? It's because 13.5 to 14 million TV households isn't going to be enough to justify coming together. The Alliance isn't going to make BCS money on its TV deal. At this point they have to find the right mix of schools that's going to add TV sets to bring the total annual value of the contract enough to make it worth everyone's while and the only way to do that is by adding large media markets. You damn sure aren't going to get it if you don't add them and you aren't going to do it if you add schools like Louisana Tech and anyone else with less than a million TVs (and maybe even 2 million).

Whats the pitch to the TV execs- yeah but we have marginally relevant football programs in a lot of TV markets, not just a few. mo mediocre = mo money? I'm just not seeing the added value but hopefully it works out for you.

I'm not going to claim to know what the pitch is. All I know is C-USA with 12 schools signed deals that gave them $14 to $15 million dollar TV package with a lot of the same - what did you call them marginally relevant football programs - that are still in the league now. Joining the remaining schools from the Moutain West should allow them to sign a decent TV package, but not as a good as one if programs are added from larger markets, so you're welcome to whatever opinion you want to have on it but networks are clamoring for college football and are willing to pay for it. I see no reason that the new league won't secure a deal that will pay schools in the league a minimum of $1 million annually.

With that said, of course TV markets are not the only factors. A committment to football and athletics in general, athletic budget, how well the fan base travels, facilities, etc. are obviously criteria the new league is going to look at in terms potential candidates. My question is what weight are the Presidents going to put on TV vs these other factors, becasue everything I've been hearing from the presidents and AD's is that TV markets are going to be weighted heavily or that's at least the impression they have left on me.