Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff has been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten years. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

The administration/boosters made the decision to cease building the football brand by admitting it was too expensive to buy out a substandard coaching staff.

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

Florida St. as well lest we forget Corso's white towel

Some schools are traditional football schools and some aren’t.

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

I don't remember Rutgers ever being good in any sport...much less football.

(12-09-2022 09:30 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

I don't remember Rutgers ever being good in any sport...much less football.

They went 30-0 in basketball in 1976 lost in the final four.

(12-09-2022 09:31 AM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 09:30 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

I don't remember Rutgers ever being good in any sport...much less football.

They went 30-0 in basketball in 1976 lost in the final four.

Ah. Now I see why they got in the big 10 40 years later.

(12-09-2022 09:30 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

I don't remember Rutgers ever being good in any sport...much less football.

The narrative is flexible and can change to fit whatever the power brokers want it to be to justify any current decision that they make.

(12-09-2022 09:47 AM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 09:30 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

I don't remember Rutgers ever being good in any sport...much less football.

The narrative is flexible and can change to fit whatever the power brokers want it to be to justify any current decision that they make.

Exactly.
There is no rule book.
Very similar to NCAA tourney at large invitations.

(12-09-2022 03:47 AM)3rdgenerationtiger Wrote:  The administration/boosters made the decision to cease building the football brand by admitting it was too expensive to buy out a substandard coaching staff.

I just have a hard time believing that. If so, they need better financial people around them. Because it's going to be ugly next year.

(12-09-2022 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 03:47 AM)3rdgenerationtiger Wrote:  The administration/boosters made the decision to cease building the football brand by admitting it was too expensive to buy out a substandard coaching staff.

I just have a hard time believing that. If so, they need better financial people around them. Because it's going to be ugly next year.

I's NOT pretty now, we're digging deeper into a whole, that is obviously creating even more of a financial burden that the university states that it already has trouble overcoming.....CRS does NOT rectify this situation NOW, nor will he in the near future....The discrepancy will only widen (get worse)

A weak schedule and a weak leader is THE DEATH of this program.....

(12-09-2022 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 03:47 AM)3rdgenerationtiger Wrote:  The administration/boosters made the decision to cease building the football brand by admitting it was too expensive to buy out a substandard coaching staff.

I just have a hard time believing that. If so, they need better financial people around them. Because it's going to be ugly next year.

I think the issue is whose money would pay the buyout. The university would not, it would be the boosters. Yes, the university will lose an equal or greater share of revenue but it will be university losses not that of boosters who committed to the RS contract deal. All the more reason extending RS' contract term seemed ill-conceived at the time & even more so now. I understood that was a AD sponsored move, so maybe the boosters agreed, and by doing so put LV on the hook too. And maybe his seat is now as hot as RS'. One would hope so.

The Big10 network is why Rutgers and Maryland got in the Big10. Their presence in the Big10 helped the Big10 network get more money from the NYC and DC markets — it had nothing to do with Rutgers actual achievements in the field — the cable companies paid more per subscriber to the Big10 network—. This is a fact

(12-09-2022 10:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 03:47 AM)3rdgenerationtiger Wrote:  The administration/boosters made the decision to cease building the football brand by admitting it was too expensive to buy out a substandard coaching staff.

I just have a hard time believing that. If so, they need better financial people around them. Because it's going to be ugly next year.

I think the issue is whose money would pay the buyout. The university would not, it would be the boosters. Yes, the university will lose an equal or greater share of revenue but it will be university losses not that of boosters who committed to the RS contract deal. All the more reason extending RS' contract term seemed ill-conceived at the time & even more so now. I understood that was a AD sponsored move, so maybe the boosters agreed, and by doing so put LV on the hook too. And maybe his seat is now as hot as RS'. One would hope so.

He agreed to take a pay cut in 2020 which went directly toward the Tiger Scholarship Fund, which was depleted because there were less donations during covid. His pay was 9th out of 11 AAC coaches.

(12-09-2022 09:36 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 09:31 AM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 09:30 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  

(12-08-2022 06:19 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Bob Thompson is a former President of Fox Sports and helped create the Big 10 Network. He's retired and lately shares a lot of insight on things like how media deals are negotiated. This tweet in particular was in regards to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff who's been saying some rather unfounded things after USCLA decided to leave. This tweet in particular was due to his claim that part of the reason why their new Pac-12 media deal is being delayed is because he knew Deion was being hired to Colorado and that would help increase the conference's value.

The reason I am posting this here is because of that specific sentence. I've mentioned before that we haven't spent a lot of time trying to build the Memphis football brand. On the basketball side that brand had been built for decades, while on the football side it's been really just ten years. And considering Silverfield's recent performance it could be argued that it's been less than ten year. This is why I hope that news about the admin likely giving up on moving up isn't quite true. It needs time.

Success in Memphis football overall has been sparse. We've had a really good run recently, but it's short relative to the history of the program and football in general. So now we know for sure at least a part of what these media decision makers are looking at is a program's past and present to determine their worth for a conference's media deal. As a regular fan all I can do is hope those directly involved keep pushing and building the football brand so our past continues to look better.

Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

I don't remember Rutgers ever being good in any sport...much less football.

They went 30-0 in basketball in 1976 lost in the final four.

Ah. Now I see why they got in the big 10 40 years later.

They got in along with Maryland for 2 reasons. 1 each was an AAU school. 2. The Big thought they would bring in the New York and Washington markets whe neither really care about college football or college sports in general

(12-09-2022 10:57 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 10:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 03:47 AM)3rdgenerationtiger Wrote:  The administration/boosters made the decision to cease building the football brand by admitting it was too expensive to buy out a substandard coaching staff.

I just have a hard time believing that. If so, they need better financial people around them. Because it's going to be ugly next year.

I think the issue is whose money would pay the buyout. The university would not, it would be the boosters. Yes, the university will lose an equal or greater share of revenue but it will be university losses not that of boosters who committed to the RS contract deal. All the more reason extending RS' contract term seemed ill-conceived at the time & even more so now. I understood that was a AD sponsored move, so maybe the boosters agreed, and by doing so put LV on the hook too. And maybe his seat is now as hot as RS'. One would hope so.

He agreed to take a pay cut in 2020 which went directly toward the Tiger Scholarship Fund, which was depleted because there were less donations during covid. His pay was 9th out of 11 AAC coaches.

Probably because he knew he hit the lottery with the University buying his "I'll never leave you" pitch. His pay is right in line with his finish in conference the past 2 years. Ready for this failed experiment to run its course.

(12-09-2022 11:30 AM)Unbreakable04 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 10:57 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 10:50 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 03:47 AM)3rdgenerationtiger Wrote:  The administration/boosters made the decision to cease building the football brand by admitting it was too expensive to buy out a substandard coaching staff.

I just have a hard time believing that. If so, they need better financial people around them. Because it's going to be ugly next year.

I think the issue is whose money would pay the buyout. The university would not, it would be the boosters. Yes, the university will lose an equal or greater share of revenue but it will be university losses not that of boosters who committed to the RS contract deal. All the more reason extending RS' contract term seemed ill-conceived at the time & even more so now. I understood that was a AD sponsored move, so maybe the boosters agreed, and by doing so put LV on the hook too. And maybe his seat is now as hot as RS'. One would hope so.

He agreed to take a pay cut in 2020 which went directly toward the Tiger Scholarship Fund, which was depleted because there were less donations during covid. His pay was 9th out of 11 AAC coaches.

Probably because he knew he hit the lottery with the University buying his "I'll never leave you" pitch. His pay is right in line with his finish in conference the past 2 years. Ready for this failed experiment to run its course.

Virtually every employee of the AD took a pay cut, with many layed off so there is nothing exceptional about RS taking a cut. But that certainly isn't justification for extending his contract. The university could have simply restored his pay over the initial remaining term. Contract extensions are generally granted for performance & that certainly didn't apply in the case of RS.

So what part of Silverfield’s salary got cut? The amount from the university or the amount from the boosters ?

(12-09-2022 11:28 AM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 09:36 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 09:31 AM)Eagleonpar Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 09:30 AM)southpaw1 Wrote:  

(12-09-2022 08:50 AM)micman Wrote:  Maryland and Rutgers really did a great job at football brand building before getting into the Big10. Utah was good for only about 4-5 years before getting into the PAC 10 (that was due entirely to 2 coaches). TCU and VT--their success was due almost entirely to single coaches.

I don't remember Rutgers ever being good in any sport...much less football.

They went 30-0 in basketball in 1976 lost in the final four.

Ah. Now I see why they got in the big 10 40 years later.

They got in along with Maryland for 2 reasons. 1 each was an AAU school. 2. The Big thought they would bring in the New York and Washington markets whe neither really care about college football or college sports in general

They do care about college basketball, but college football not so much. I’ve lived in both markets. The Rutgers announcement was shocking for me. I lived 15 miles from their main campus for about six years, up until 2004/5. I worked for a quite large company and we were ALWAYS talking sports, had betting pools (hoops), etc. I don’t recall Rutgers being mentioned a single time over that six year period. Even the Rutgers grads I knew were all Syracuse football fans. Rutgers sports were a total non factor.