Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
Author Message
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #21
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-04-2015 10:20 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I did not/do not understand why the B1G didn't target Florida State and Georgia Tech when they settled for Maryland and Rutgers?

I think it would've given them a similar market explosion but it also would've put them in the talent-rich Southeast. The Southeast part of this country is also much more passionate about college athletics than is the Northeast.

Rutgers and Maryland would've still been there anytime the B1G wanted them. I think their failure to think outside the geographical box was a very bad choice – much worse than their decision to forgo Missouri.

The Big 12's decision to take West Virginia only instead of WVU, Louisville and Cincinnati, was also a boneheaded decision, IMHO.

Actually, FSU and GT were considered by The Big Ten. When discussions were outed within North Carolina, that idea ended. GT and FSU depended upon Schools a little further North being on board as well.

I said these very things here on this forum before the ACC GoR came into existence. I know, the ACC mob around here hated me for it.

**** happens, The Big Ten moved on.
07-04-2015 11:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #22
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-04-2015 10:01 PM)bluesox Wrote:  The lesson of realignment is when school of value is willing to move, you take them at that time. The bigger blunder is the Pac 12 not jumping to 14 with OU and Ok state.

Not a blunder. OU adds value, but unlike UT they don't add enough value to warrant any tag-alongs. Look at every recent expansion in the Pac-12, Big Ten, and SEC -- no tag-alongs, and no more than one school added from any state.
07-04-2015 11:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #23
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
Still say the biggest blunder of the decade in conference realignment was the ACC not taking Louisville, Pitt, SU, and West Virginia all at once back in 2011. When Maryland left a year later then take UConn.

Second biggest blunder was the PAC turning down OU and OSU. Would have gotten them prime coverage in the Central Time Zone and better noon EST match-ups.

Best conference realignment move this decade by far was the SEC getting TAMU and Mizzou.

B1G did fine by passing over Mizzou and getting Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers. Don't believe they had a realistic shot for UNC and UVa or FSU and GT. Probably would have needed to be all 4 or 3 of the 4, so it's hard to call that one a blunder.

Cheers,
Neil
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2015 11:40 PM by omniorange.)
07-04-2015 11:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #24
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-04-2015 11:27 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 10:01 PM)bluesox Wrote:  The lesson of realignment is when school of value is willing to move, you take them at that time. The bigger blunder is the Pac 12 not jumping to 14 with OU and Ok state.

Not a blunder. OU adds value, but unlike UT they don't add enough value to warrant any tag-alongs. Look at every recent expansion in the Pac-12, Big Ten, and SEC -- no tag-alongs, and no more than one school added from any state.
It's getting close to the end now Wedge. The pickings are going to get slim. If the Big 12 is the last on the menu there are only 3 brands for 4 conferences. There will be some tag a long deals this time. Plus UT is #2 in income, and OU is #7.
07-04-2015 11:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #25
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
I think if the B1G called right now and offered to take Mizzou, and it had no impact on the current SEC contract ... the SEC would say yes. Mizzou is just as bad a fit in the SEC as WVU is in the Big 12.
07-05-2015 01:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #26
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-04-2015 11:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 11:27 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 10:01 PM)bluesox Wrote:  The lesson of realignment is when school of value is willing to move, you take them at that time. The bigger blunder is the Pac 12 not jumping to 14 with OU and Ok state.

Not a blunder. OU adds value, but unlike UT they don't add enough value to warrant any tag-alongs. Look at every recent expansion in the Pac-12, Big Ten, and SEC -- no tag-alongs, and no more than one school added from any state.
It's getting close to the end now Wedge. The pickings are going to get slim. If the Big 12 is the last on the menu there are only 3 brands for 4 conferences. There will be some tag a long deals this time. Plus UT is #2 in income, and OU is #7.

The schools don't share the revenue they generate themselves, so OU getting booster money to fill their own bank accounts is great for them, but what matters to other conferences is how much a new addition increases conference revenue.

Also, I'd be very surprised if there's a rush to take big bites out of any existing P5 conference. Show me a 20-team Big Ten or SEC and I'll show you what will later become two conferences of about 10 each. At some point the weaker schools in those conferences will realize that they might be voting for their own doom if they vote to overexpand their league. Take the Big Ten as an example. Delany might dream of annexing a big chunk of the ACC, but Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska ought to be concerned that will lead to an east-west split in which Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State and Penn State form an eastern time zone conference with their new friends Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia, Va Tech, Duke, and North Carolina.
07-05-2015 02:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
connecticutguy Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 255
Joined: Mar 2014
Reputation: 6
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #27
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
Worst blunder was the BIG and the ACC not taking UConn instead of Rutgers, Louisville, respectively.
07-05-2015 07:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big Ron Buckeye Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 659
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 25
I Root For: THE Ohio State
Location:
Post: #28
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 01:24 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I think if the B1G called right now and offered to take Mizzou, and it had no impact on the current SEC contract ... the SEC would say yes. Mizzou is just as bad a fit in the SEC as WVU is in the Big 12.

Thats my first time hearing/reading that. They've won 2 division championships, they border 3 SEC states (although it feels like only Arkansas because the shared border with Kentucky and Tennessee are so small), the were because of the Missouri compromise a southern state. Why are they a bad fit?
07-05-2015 07:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #29
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-04-2015 05:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 05:04 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 04:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't know that much about it but I was also surprised the Big 14 didn't go after Missouri. Seemed like they would have been a good fit.

I think Mizzou was viewed as not sexy. Mediocre to decent in a bunch of sports but not exceptional at anything. KU has hoops brand, Oklahoma & Nebraska have the football brand. What does Mizzou excel at? That is the reason I think the were passed over.

The real boneheaded part of the snub is that they passed over the only state school in the P5 in a state of 7 million. Thanks! There aren't many solos that you can pick up and dominate a state.

I have to admit that when the SEC invited Missouri, I scratched my head, as the only thing they seemed to have going for them was that they were a flagship with decent basketball, and I wondered how much SEC East schools located far away would care about competing against them.

But so far, I have been proved wrong. They've fit right in, and fans of SEC schools have embraced competing against them. So far, a nice net-positive for the conference.
07-05-2015 07:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #30
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 01:24 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I think if the B1G called right now and offered to take Mizzou, and it had no impact on the current SEC contract ... the SEC would say yes. Mizzou is just as bad a fit in the SEC as WVU is in the Big 12.

I think that's an exaggeration. First, Missouri has some cultural ties with the SEC. Historically, part of it sided with the confederacy during the civil war, and its location on the Mississippi has always given it trading ties with those states further down river. It's almost as much the "gateway to the south" as it is the west.

Also, Missouri was a contiguous geographical move. It shares borders with three SEC states, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arkansas. That's a huge difference compared to WVU, which is vastly separated from other Big 12 states.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2015 07:54 AM by quo vadis.)
07-05-2015 07:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PGEMF Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 493
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #31
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 07:11 AM)connecticutguy Wrote:  Worst blunder was the BIG and the ACC not taking UConn instead of Rutgers, Louisville, respectively.

I think both leagues are quite happy. Why was it a blunder?
07-05-2015 07:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #32
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 07:48 AM)PGEMF Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 07:11 AM)connecticutguy Wrote:  Worst blunder was the BIG and the ACC not taking UConn instead of Rutgers, Louisville, respectively.

I think both leagues are quite happy. Why was it a blunder?

Because he's a UConn fan. 07-coffee3
07-05-2015 08:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #33
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-04-2015 07:13 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 06:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 05:04 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 04:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't know that much about it but I was also surprised the Big 14 didn't go after Missouri. Seemed like they would have been a good fit.

I think Mizzou was viewed as not sexy. Mediocre to decent in a bunch of sports but not exceptional at anything. KU has hoops brand, Oklahoma & Nebraska have the football brand. What does Mizzou excel at? That is the reason I think the were passed over.

People in Missouri follow the Cardinals and Royals and to some extent the Rams. CBS skipped a big Missouri game the year before last, because nationally people don't watch them. They said Missouri and South Carolina get really low ratings on CBS. That's why the B1G skipped them, coupled with the fact that they already had a lot of states like Missouri, slow growth Midwest states.

I don't understand why most folks don't get it. I also don't understand why suddenly Bullet and I are agreeing quite often.

Get what, exactly? That Midwest states already have large, stable populations with relatively high buying power and stable growth or that southern states have relatively lower amounts of education and buying power and are growing at a long term unsustainable rate due to Hispanic migration, people who could care less about buying trucks, 4k TVs, new appliances, etc and are just trying to survive working in the fields and in construction?

I think advertisers "get it" quite well.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2015 09:29 AM by MplsBison.)
07-05-2015 09:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #34
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 07:47 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 01:24 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I think if the B1G called right now and offered to take Mizzou, and it had no impact on the current SEC contract ... the SEC would say yes. Mizzou is just as bad a fit in the SEC as WVU is in the Big 12.

I think that's an exaggeration. First, Missouri has some cultural ties with the SEC. Historically, part of it sided with the confederacy during the civil war, and its location on the Mississippi has always given it trading ties with those states further down river. It's almost as much the "gateway to the south" as it is the west.

Also, Missouri was a contiguous geographical move. It shares borders with three SEC states, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arkansas. That's a huge difference compared to WVU, which is vastly separated from other Big 12 states.

Your point is not degraded at all, but I have to mention that Missouri doesn't really have a border with Kentucky. Sure, technically they do, but you can't even drive directly from one to the other. It's a pretty meaningless border. Similar I suppose to the "border" between Colorado and Arizona or New Mexico and Utah.
07-05-2015 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #35
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 09:26 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 07:13 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 06:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 05:04 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 04:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't know that much about it but I was also surprised the Big 14 didn't go after Missouri. Seemed like they would have been a good fit.

I think Mizzou was viewed as not sexy. Mediocre to decent in a bunch of sports but not exceptional at anything. KU has hoops brand, Oklahoma & Nebraska have the football brand. What does Mizzou excel at? That is the reason I think the were passed over.

People in Missouri follow the Cardinals and Royals and to some extent the Rams. CBS skipped a big Missouri game the year before last, because nationally people don't watch them. They said Missouri and South Carolina get really low ratings on CBS. That's why the B1G skipped them, coupled with the fact that they already had a lot of states like Missouri, slow growth Midwest states.

I don't understand why most folks don't get it. I also don't understand why suddenly Bullet and I are agreeing quite often.

Get what, exactly? That Midwest states already have large, stable populations with relatively high buying power and stable growth or that southern states have relatively lower amounts of education and buying power and are growing at a long term unsustainable rate due to Hispanic migration, people who could care less about buying trucks, 4k TVs, new appliances, etc and are just trying to survive working in the fields and in construction?

I think advertisers "get it" quite well.

What? That's great and all but what does that have to do with the debate about Missouri?
07-05-2015 09:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #36
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-04-2015 10:01 PM)bluesox Wrote:  The lesson of realignment is when school of value is willing to move, you take them at that time. The bigger blunder is the Pac 12 not jumping to 14 with OU and Ok state.

That's assuming the Pac 12 did make the decision and not Oklahoma. I think OU is doing face saving with all the stories that it was a bluff on their part, but its hard to know what the truth was there. The Pac 12 could be the one doing face saving. I think Texas would have had to have left the Big 12 if OU did. Not sure what they would have done other than it wouldn't have been the SEC.
07-05-2015 09:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #37
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
I think going to 14 or 16 is in general, a mistake, though, so I don't think the Pac not taking OU was a mistake.
07-05-2015 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #38
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 09:40 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 09:26 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 07:13 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 06:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 05:04 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  I think Mizzou was viewed as not sexy. Mediocre to decent in a bunch of sports but not exceptional at anything. KU has hoops brand, Oklahoma & Nebraska have the football brand. What does Mizzou excel at? That is the reason I think the were passed over.

People in Missouri follow the Cardinals and Royals and to some extent the Rams. CBS skipped a big Missouri game the year before last, because nationally people don't watch them. They said Missouri and South Carolina get really low ratings on CBS. That's why the B1G skipped them, coupled with the fact that they already had a lot of states like Missouri, slow growth Midwest states.

I don't understand why most folks don't get it. I also don't understand why suddenly Bullet and I are agreeing quite often.

Get what, exactly? That Midwest states already have large, stable populations with relatively high buying power and stable growth or that southern states have relatively lower amounts of education and buying power and are growing at a long term unsustainable rate due to Hispanic migration, people who could care less about buying trucks, 4k TVs, new appliances, etc and are just trying to survive working in the fields and in construction?

I think advertisers "get it" quite well.

What? That's great and all but what does that have to do with the debate about Missouri?

It means that a "slow growth Midwest state" like Missouri is more important to advertisers than unsustainable high growth southern states who can't afford to buy the product.
07-05-2015 09:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #39
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 09:26 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 07:13 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 06:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 05:04 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 04:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I don't know that much about it but I was also surprised the Big 14 didn't go after Missouri. Seemed like they would have been a good fit.

I think Mizzou was viewed as not sexy. Mediocre to decent in a bunch of sports but not exceptional at anything. KU has hoops brand, Oklahoma & Nebraska have the football brand. What does Mizzou excel at? That is the reason I think the were passed over.

People in Missouri follow the Cardinals and Royals and to some extent the Rams. CBS skipped a big Missouri game the year before last, because nationally people don't watch them. They said Missouri and South Carolina get really low ratings on CBS. That's why the B1G skipped them, coupled with the fact that they already had a lot of states like Missouri, slow growth Midwest states.

I don't understand why most folks don't get it. I also don't understand why suddenly Bullet and I are agreeing quite often.

Get what, exactly? That Midwest states already have large, stable populations with relatively high buying power and stable growth or that southern states have relatively lower amounts of education and buying power and are growing at a long term unsustainable rate due to Hispanic migration, people who could care less about buying trucks, 4k TVs, new appliances, etc and are just trying to survive working in the fields and in construction?

I think advertisers "get it" quite well.

Delany and your presidents don't see it your way. Prior to adding Maryland and New Jersey, every Big 10 state was growing slower than the national average. Only Minnesota was close to the national average. Some projections have Pennsyvlania, Ohio, Michigan and Iowa all starting to lose population. They had a huge population base with their 12, but their relative position was eroding. They were thinking 30 years down the road. With MD and NJ they added to that big population base and increased their average growth.

As for the Hispanic immigrants, you might look down I-35 at those meat packing plants in Iowa and Nebraska. They're like all immigrants as they increase their education level and buying power in future generations.
07-05-2015 10:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #40
RE: B1Gest blunder made thus far in realignment... snubbing Mizzou.
(07-05-2015 09:53 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 09:40 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(07-05-2015 09:26 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 07:13 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(07-04-2015 06:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  People in Missouri follow the Cardinals and Royals and to some extent the Rams. CBS skipped a big Missouri game the year before last, because nationally people don't watch them. They said Missouri and South Carolina get really low ratings on CBS. That's why the B1G skipped them, coupled with the fact that they already had a lot of states like Missouri, slow growth Midwest states.

I don't understand why most folks don't get it. I also don't understand why suddenly Bullet and I are agreeing quite often.

Get what, exactly? That Midwest states already have large, stable populations with relatively high buying power and stable growth or that southern states have relatively lower amounts of education and buying power and are growing at a long term unsustainable rate due to Hispanic migration, people who could care less about buying trucks, 4k TVs, new appliances, etc and are just trying to survive working in the fields and in construction?

I think advertisers "get it" quite well.

What? That's great and all but what does that have to do with the debate about Missouri?

It means that a "slow growth Midwest state" like Missouri is more important to advertisers than unsustainable high growth southern states who can't afford to buy the product.

Then why do these poor southern states get to charge more per month for SECN and have advertising revenue on par with the BTN after only their initial year?

Cheers,
Neil
07-05-2015 10:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.