Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Fluge: 5/19 BTM dinner tweets
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
YNot Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,671
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Fluge: 5/19 BTM dinner tweets
Would Kansas take the B1G or move with Oklahoma, Texas, and Iowa St. to the PAC? The only legacy Big 12 schools not involved in that PAC expansion would then be Baylor and Kansas St.

Play KSU OOC and Kansas gets most everyone it has played for a decade and a strong academic affiliation with a bunch of quality AAU schools in the West.

B1G brings back Nebraska game...and that's it. But, may be Kansas decision-makers wouldn't mind a re-start for the football program. KU could compete with Illinois, NW, and Minnesota for bowl eligibility?

SEC lineup would bring Missouri rivalry game and A&M for Texas recruiting...but SEC doesn't appear to have high interest in KU.

Personally, I think Kansas will choose to move with at least one or two Big 12 friends.
05-22-2017 09:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Underdog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,747
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 124
I Root For: The American
Location: Cloud Nine
Post: #22
RE: Fluge: 5/19 BTM dinner tweets
(05-21-2017 10:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Good to see you UnderDog.

Here are the issues as I see them:

First What is Best for College Football:

[The networks and conferences have shown that, “What is Best for College Football” is not necessary what is best for them. If it doesn’t make dollars, it doesn’t make sense in today’s college sports world. The love of money has ruined college football because it has become big business....]


It might be argued that if the PAC removed the top brands that would make either the SEC or Big 10 uncatchable in revenue that it would benefit the PAC and the ACC and would help to balance the imbalance that is currently threatening to drive us to two very large leagues called the Big 10 and SEC. The most attractive package for the Big 12 members and the PAC might be Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech.

That move to 18 with 3 regional divisions of six would simplify the whole transaction. The two current PAC divisions would not change, a new one would just appear and it would keep a 2/3rds of their schedule within reasonable travel distance for their fans.

The SEC would stand pat. The Big 10 would stand pat. and the ACC would expand with West Virginia and Notre Dame. West Virginia to have enough votes to disband the Big 12 and Notre Dame because in a P4 where the champs go to the finals Notre Dame has to choose between independence and having a shot at the National Championship.

Or, we conduct this the old fashioned way: What is Best for My Conference?

If the Big 10 lands OU and Texas they catch up with the SEC and maybe pass us by a little bit. The pair should be worth about 5 million more per conference member in annual payouts.

[Now you're talking... because money talk$.... Therefore, if a school doesn't add to the net worth, it's not "What is Best for My Conference". However, if the SEC were to add OU and OSU, going to 4 divisions of 4 and having two semi-final games might generate enough revenue to justify including OSU. Also, Texas with any combination would work….]


If the SEC lands them nobody ever catches us period. The difference between the SEC's revenue and that of the ACC would exceed the doubling it now has even with their network and eventually that difference would create the grounds for a merger of anywhere from 4 to 6, or maybe even a few more of their schools. We are talking past 2034.

I think this is one reason Slive said the conferences could get very very large.

So some kind of track for the future of college sports will be chosen in 2 - 6 years and the consequences of those choices will either result in an unequal but sustainable separation of 4 conferences, or will lead to the formation of leagues using the Big 10 and SEC as their cores.

Anyway that's how I see it.
05-24-2017 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,969
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 144
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Fluge: 5/19 BTM dinner tweets
Have to give him credit for this nugget:

BTM: News will be breaking soon on LHN receiving more limited play on Direct TV in some fashion.
06-06-2017 12:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,885
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Fluge: 5/19 BTM dinner tweets
(06-06-2017 12:02 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  Have to give him credit for this nugget:

BTM: News will be breaking soon on LHN receiving more limited play on Direct TV in some fashion.

I don't think his insider is a Big 10 employee. I think he may be an ESPN guy assigned to the Big 10. That news would have been network chit chat at break room time.
06-06-2017 01:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,231
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #25
RE: Fluge: 5/19 BTM dinner tweets
(05-21-2017 10:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Good to see you UnderDog.

Here are the issues as I see them:

First What is Best for College Football:

It might be argued that if the PAC removed the top brands that would make either the SEC or Big 10 uncatchable in revenue that it would benefit the PAC and the ACC and would help to balance the imbalance that is currently threatening to drive us to two very large leagues called the Big 10 and SEC. The most attractive package for the Big 12 members and the PAC might be Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech.

That move to 18 with 3 regional divisions of six would simplify the whole transaction. The two current PAC divisions would not change, a new one would just appear and it would keep a 2/3rds of their schedule within reasonable travel distance for their fans.

The SEC would stand pat. The Big 10 would stand pat. and the ACC would expand with West Virginia and Notre Dame. West Virginia to have enough votes to disband the Big 12 and Notre Dame because in a P4 where the champs go to the finals Notre Dame has to choose between independence and having a shot at the National Championship.

Or, we conduct this the old fashioned way: What is Best for My Conference?

If the Big 10 lands OU and Texas they catch up with the SEC and maybe pass us by a little bit. The pair should be worth about 5 million more per conference member in annual payouts.

If the SEC lands them nobody ever catches us period. The difference between the SEC's revenue and that of the ACC would exceed the doubling it now has even with their network and eventually that difference would create the grounds for a merger of anywhere from 4 to 6, or maybe even a few more of their schools. We are talking past 2034.

I think this is one reason Slive said the conferences could get very very large.

So some kind of track for the future of college sports will be chosen in 2 - 6 years and the consequences of those choices will either result in an unequal but sustainable separation of 4 conferences, or will lead to the formation of leagues using the Big 10 and SEC as their cores.

Anyway that's how I see it.

You might want to re-look at things this way;
What is good for the colleges and what is good for ESPN.

I have to believe that in light of all of the cord cutting tha ESPN is more interested in looking out for themselves more than they are looking out for the SEC or the ACC, etc. After all the colleges are just inventory, products for them to promote and make money off of.
The question then becomes would ESPN allow FOX to take the B1G and PAC and promote and broadcast it like they do 1/2 of the NFL or would they try to claim at least a portion of both leagues and Market themselves (ESPN) as they have been (the "official" source of college athletics in the US).
If they are willing to cede the B1G and PAC to FOX then we might end up with two leagues with a huge loss on ESPN's ability to control broadcast inventory.
It appears they have chosen to go in another direction and are in the process of figuring out how to grab what they want and where to place it for maximum benefit of ESPN. In January of 2016 I think Oklahoma was ready to bolt to the B1G, now I do believe that the SEC has their ear......buckle up!
06-06-2017 07:17 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.