(02-18-2015 09:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 06:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  I'm not sure how much semi-finals would add financially. You are talking about the winners of a 4 or 5 team division. 1 or 2 of those teams could be pretty weak.

20 million for the championship games, 15 million for the semifinals for a total of 50 million. That last sentence is a very glass half empty kind of statement. Sure, some years it may end up being a very strong team versus a very weak team in one of the games but so what? It's a conference tournament. It wont be just about seeing who wins the conference but it will also be about seeing who will represent the conference. Each representative having to win two conference tournament games at the end instead of just a single match up serves to better portray them as worthy instead of perhaps just getting lucky.

They already have the conference championship game. That's not new money.

They also have to find time slots where these are valuable that don't conflict with the NFL. So I don't see it generating so much.

Whoa, you made the comment about not knowing how much it would be worth. They could easily be worth 15 million each. I never said the championship game money is new, how do you even make that mental synapse connection in your head??

It was a total amount of how much the entire conference tournament would be worth. Did you just misunderstand?

Your reason for it not generating so much is the NFL? Funny, very funny. If you are going to whimsically make up something and try to pass it off as a good point, at least come up with something believable. ESPN is not going to let the NFL keep them from such an opportunity. It will get figured out.

(02-19-2015 12:19 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 06:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  I'm not sure how much semi-finals would add financially. You are talking about the winners of a 4 or 5 team division. 1 or 2 of those teams could be pretty weak.

20 million for the championship games, 15 million for the semifinals for a total of 50 million. That last sentence is a very glass half empty kind of statement. Sure, some years it may end up being a very strong team versus a very weak team in one of the games but so what? It's a conference tournament. It wont be just about seeing who wins the conference but it will also be about seeing who will represent the conference. Each representative having to win two conference tournament games at the end instead of just a single match up serves to better portray them as worthy instead of perhaps just getting lucky.

They already have the conference championship game. That's not new money.

They also have to find time slots where these are valuable that don't conflict with the NFL. So I don't see it generating so much.

Whoa, you made the comment about not knowing how much it would be worth. They could easily be worth 15 million each. I never said the championship game money is new, how do you even make that mental synapse connection in your head??

It was a total amount of how much the entire conference tournament would be worth. Did you just misunderstand?

Your reason for it not generating so much is the NFL? Funny, very funny. If you are going to whimsically make up something and try to pass it off as a good point, at least come up with something believable. ESPN is not going to let the NFL keep them from such an opportunity. It will get figured out.

The topic was how much it added financially. You started talking about money they already had. I didn't know if you were confused or whether you were simply (intentionally or not) being misleading by talking about $50 million.

You didn't understand my 2nd point. The problem is finding a time slot where it doesn't compete with the NFL in order to maximize value. If you have Saturday prime time with no NFL competition (they start playing Saturday games sometime in December) your ratings will be much better and your value much better than if you get programmed opposite the NFL.

(02-19-2015 02:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 12:19 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 06:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:51 AM)bullet Wrote:  I'm not sure how much semi-finals would add financially. You are talking about the winners of a 4 or 5 team division. 1 or 2 of those teams could be pretty weak.

20 million for the championship games, 15 million for the semifinals for a total of 50 million. That last sentence is a very glass half empty kind of statement. Sure, some years it may end up being a very strong team versus a very weak team in one of the games but so what? It's a conference tournament. It wont be just about seeing who wins the conference but it will also be about seeing who will represent the conference. Each representative having to win two conference tournament games at the end instead of just a single match up serves to better portray them as worthy instead of perhaps just getting lucky.

They already have the conference championship game. That's not new money.

They also have to find time slots where these are valuable that don't conflict with the NFL. So I don't see it generating so much.

Whoa, you made the comment about not knowing how much it would be worth. They could easily be worth 15 million each. I never said the championship game money is new, how do you even make that mental synapse connection in your head??

It was a total amount of how much the entire conference tournament would be worth. Did you just misunderstand?

Your reason for it not generating so much is the NFL? Funny, very funny. If you are going to whimsically make up something and try to pass it off as a good point, at least come up with something believable. ESPN is not going to let the NFL keep them from such an opportunity. It will get figured out.

The topic was how much it added financially. You started talking about money they already had. I didn't know if you were confused or whether you were simply (intentionally or not) being misleading by talking about $50 million.

You didn't understand my 2nd point. The problem is finding a time slot where it doesn't compete with the NFL in order to maximize value. If you have Saturday prime time with no NFL competition (they start playing Saturday games sometime in December) your ratings will be much better and your value much better than if you get programmed opposite the NFL.

Ahh, gotcha. No I was simply stating the 20 million as a comparison for folks to understand where I was coming from with the 15 million number. That final tally, 50 million, is the selling point of the tournament as a whole so it is relevant to our conversation. Not all of that is new money though, as you are saying.

To your second point, fair point. When there is that much value sitting in front of you though, I give the marketing experts enough credit to figure it out.

(02-19-2015 06:35 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 02:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 12:19 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 06:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  20 million for the championship games, 15 million for the semifinals for a total of 50 million. That last sentence is a very glass half empty kind of statement. Sure, some years it may end up being a very strong team versus a very weak team in one of the games but so what? It's a conference tournament. It wont be just about seeing who wins the conference but it will also be about seeing who will represent the conference. Each representative having to win two conference tournament games at the end instead of just a single match up serves to better portray them as worthy instead of perhaps just getting lucky.

They already have the conference championship game. That's not new money.

They also have to find time slots where these are valuable that don't conflict with the NFL. So I don't see it generating so much.

Whoa, you made the comment about not knowing how much it would be worth. They could easily be worth 15 million each. I never said the championship game money is new, how do you even make that mental synapse connection in your head??

It was a total amount of how much the entire conference tournament would be worth. Did you just misunderstand?

Your reason for it not generating so much is the NFL? Funny, very funny. If you are going to whimsically make up something and try to pass it off as a good point, at least come up with something believable. ESPN is not going to let the NFL keep them from such an opportunity. It will get figured out.

The topic was how much it added financially. You started talking about money they already had. I didn't know if you were confused or whether you were simply (intentionally or not) being misleading by talking about $50 million.

You didn't understand my 2nd point. The problem is finding a time slot where it doesn't compete with the NFL in order to maximize value. If you have Saturday prime time with no NFL competition (they start playing Saturday games sometime in December) your ratings will be much better and your value much better than if you get programmed opposite the NFL.

Ahh, gotcha. No I was simply stating the 20 million as a comparison for folks to understand where I was coming from with the 15 million number. That final tally, 50 million, is the selling point of the tournament as a whole so it is relevant to our conversation. Not all of that is new money though, as you are saying.

To your second point, fair point. When there is that much value sitting in front of you though, I give the marketing experts enough credit to figure it out.

SEC Tier I at CBS gets $4 million a game. B1G gets about $24 million for their championship game. I just think a semi-final when you may even have teams with losing records winning a division is closer to the $4 million than the $24 million.

So how much will the ACC make off of those 26M Texas households when the 'horns join?

(02-19-2015 08:01 PM)XLance Wrote:  So how much will the ACC make off of those 26M Texas households when the 'horns join?

None. Texas will still have the LHN, and all games in Texas will be broadcast on that network.

(02-19-2015 07:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 06:35 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 02:54 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 12:19 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:42 PM)bullet Wrote:  They already have the conference championship game. That's not new money.

They also have to find time slots where these are valuable that don't conflict with the NFL. So I don't see it generating so much.

Whoa, you made the comment about not knowing how much it would be worth. They could easily be worth 15 million each. I never said the championship game money is new, how do you even make that mental synapse connection in your head??

It was a total amount of how much the entire conference tournament would be worth. Did you just misunderstand?

Your reason for it not generating so much is the NFL? Funny, very funny. If you are going to whimsically make up something and try to pass it off as a good point, at least come up with something believable. ESPN is not going to let the NFL keep them from such an opportunity. It will get figured out.

The topic was how much it added financially. You started talking about money they already had. I didn't know if you were confused or whether you were simply (intentionally or not) being misleading by talking about $50 million.

You didn't understand my 2nd point. The problem is finding a time slot where it doesn't compete with the NFL in order to maximize value. If you have Saturday prime time with no NFL competition (they start playing Saturday games sometime in December) your ratings will be much better and your value much better than if you get programmed opposite the NFL.

Ahh, gotcha. No I was simply stating the 20 million as a comparison for folks to understand where I was coming from with the 15 million number. That final tally, 50 million, is the selling point of the tournament as a whole so it is relevant to our conversation. Not all of that is new money though, as you are saying.

To your second point, fair point. When there is that much value sitting in front of you though, I give the marketing experts enough credit to figure it out.

SEC Tier I at CBS gets $4 million a game. B1G gets about $24 million for their championship game. I just think a semi-final when you may even have teams with losing records winning a division is closer to the $4 million than the $24 million.

I said 15 million. The halfway point between 4 and 24 is 14. You are attempting to quibble with me over 1 or 2 million? If you think more than that then you better speak up because your choice of words was very vague and rather amusing to me.

To think that a game between divisional champions will not be propagandized better than that? People are better followers than that.

(02-19-2015 08:01 PM)XLance Wrote:  So how much will the ACC make off of those 26M Texas households when the 'horns join?

It's not just the Horns. It is also Baylor which arguably has the best performing Athletic Department in the State. Top level football, high level basketball for both men and women. Brand new Stadium that looks great on TV.

What will the ACC make off of them? Equality.

(02-19-2015 08:12 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-19-2015 08:01 PM)XLance Wrote:  So how much will the ACC make off of those 26M Texas households when the 'horns join?

None. Texas will still have the LHN, and all games in Texas will be broadcast on that network.

Yeah, just like how all games are broadcast on that network now?

Big 12 implosion scenario:

http://www.vavel.com/en-us/ncaa/college-...nario.html

"Mountain West - Teams added: Kansas State, Baylor, TCU". These programs would be devastated if they went to the MWC.

(02-20-2015 12:18 AM)Zipfanatik Wrote:  Big 12 implosion scenario:

http://www.vavel.com/en-us/ncaa/college-...nario.html

All the guy did is repost a two year old theory. The big flaw in his thinking is that he doesn't consider corporate network property rights, or GOR's very seriously. ESPN will not want to lose Texas to a network independent, and it still takes 8 schools at the end of the day to dissolve the Big 12 and he has 3 of the 10 taking a bath in a G5 conference. Those 3 are enough to prevent dissolution. And for what it's worth should dissolution occur the SEC won't be idle with the DFW market with regards to an Oklahoma school and depending upon what we know about ACC viability at that time we may or may not be interested in WVU.

(02-20-2015 07:52 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 12:18 AM)Zipfanatik Wrote:  Big 12 implosion scenario:

http://www.vavel.com/en-us/ncaa/college-...nario.html

All the guy did is repost a two year old theory. The big flaw in his thinking is that he doesn't consider corporate network property rights, or GOR's very seriously. ESPN will not want to lose Texas to a network independent, and it still takes 8 schools at the end of the day to dissolve the Big 12 and he has 3 of the 10 taking a bath in a G5 conference. Those 3 are enough to prevent dissolution. And for what it's worth should dissolution occur the SEC won't be idle with the DFW market with regards to an Oklahoma school and depending upon what we know about ACC viability at that time we may or may not be interested in WVU.

Well, the writer shows us that they likely read this forum from time to time but the writer also shows a very distinct lack of knowledge about what has actually happened in the past in regards to realignment.

Still listing Texas as going to the PAC? Hilarious. The Big Ten taking Iowa State along with Kansas? Hilarious.

Three teams going to the Mountain West? Hilarious. All it would take to nosedive a dissolution vote is three votes.

At least he knows a good idea when he see's it. The problem is that he should have copied the rest of his idea from me as well.

(02-20-2015 05:51 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  "Mountain West - Teams added: Kansas State, Baylor, TCU". These programs would be devastated if they went to the MWC.

TCU has been there. They won a Rose Bowl and finished 2nd in the nation one year in the MWC.

(02-20-2015 01:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 05:51 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  "Mountain West - Teams added: Kansas State, Baylor, TCU". These programs would be devastated if they went to the MWC.

TCU has been there. They won a Rose Bowl and finished 2nd in the nation one year in the MWC.

The MWC isn't what it used to be. Boise State and Fresno State used to be more respectable then they are now. The MWC has significantly digressed in it's competitiveness. TCU would experience a sharp experience of departure by current athletes and a significant drop in their recruiting quality.

(02-20-2015 07:06 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 01:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 05:51 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  "Mountain West - Teams added: Kansas State, Baylor, TCU". These programs would be devastated if they went to the MWC.

TCU has been there. They won a Rose Bowl and finished 2nd in the nation one year in the MWC.

The MWC isn't what it used to be. Boise State and Fresno State used to be more respectable then they are now. The MWC has significantly digressed in it's competitiveness. TCU would experience a sharp experience of departure by current athletes and a significant drop in their recruiting quality.

Boy it sure is nice to have all these prognosticators around here. Nobody needs to worry about the future with Nostradumbass making predictions every day.

(02-20-2015 07:47 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 07:06 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 01:07 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-20-2015 05:51 AM)mac6115cd Wrote:  "Mountain West - Teams added: Kansas State, Baylor, TCU". These programs would be devastated if they went to the MWC.

TCU has been there. They won a Rose Bowl and finished 2nd in the nation one year in the MWC.

The MWC isn't what it used to be. Boise State and Fresno State used to be more respectable then they are now. The MWC has significantly digressed in it's competitiveness. TCU would experience a sharp experience of departure by current athletes and a significant drop in their recruiting quality.

Boy it sure is nice to have all these prognosticators around here. Nobody needs to worry about the future with Nostradumbass making predictions every day.

I just love how all you do anymore is go around trying to squash conversation on this "College Sports and Conference Realignment" discussion forum. Sour grapes are sour grapes. Talk about being a dumb ass.

Lucky for us, you cant close the thread.

Until the GOR's are up it's going to take some drastic unforeseen changes for any P5 to lose anyone. Be that Big 12, ACC, or anyone else.

1/3 of the country will freeze over.

The only way the Big 12 implodes is if at least eight schools have a soft landing in the P4, since it takes eight votes to dissolve the conference. If it gets that far, all 10 schools will probably have a soft landing to set up 4x16 (ACC at 17 with Notre Dame):

Pac 16 - Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
SEC - West Virginia, North Carolina State (Missouri moves to the SEC West)
ACC - Baylor, TCU, Iowa State/Cincinnati (to replace North Carolina State)
Big 10 - Kansas, Connecticut/Kansas State

Kansas State and Iowa State are the ones in biggest danger of being left behind because they duplicate areas covered by existing Big 10 or Big 12 schools, without offering the native market size or recruiting grounds found in Texas.