(09-28-2016 11:44 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 11:24 AM)tigersgrizzfan Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:09 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 09:03 AM)tigersgrizzfan Wrote:  we just can't get over the big 12...

Basically because there is a really good chance that the long term survival of our football program is dependent on it...

well guess what.. they don't want us..time to move on to what ever is next

Who says they don't want us?

I'm not saying they will choose us, or that they will even expand, but I have seen nothing to indicated that they have said we are not in the running

Well, you've seen something that INDICATES that they have said we are not in the running (the McSmurphy article). The question is, is it accurate...

(09-28-2016 11:13 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:20 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:12 AM)Crazier Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 06:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  I know Texas can write its own ticket anywhere it wants to go, but I don't think Oklahoma can do the same. Would the $EC or B1G want Oklahoma on its own? The ACC? Even the PAC-12?

Oklahoma is like Nebraska, except OU was never AAU, has a top 50 TV market in the state and the state is bigger. If the PAC-12 is told by UT that they'd come with Texas Tech instead of Oklahoma, would the PAC-12 protest?

Would the $EC want Oklahoma and its football history over North Carolina State or Virginia Tech and their respective much bigger (and actually southeastern states) and TV markets? If Texas left, OU could stay in the Big XII, dominate the league, and open up an easier path to the playoff.

Texas could go, and the Big XII, though losing its best asset, could still be a force as a power conference.

I think the SEC would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

Kansas too I believe.

Why Kansas?

No football, no football following, small state with 2 football playing schools-- not the best market

Why do people think Kansas has a weak market? Lawrence KS is about 30-40 minute drive from Kansas City. Lawrence KC is a lot closer to a major metropolitan area than a lot of the other P5 schools.

(09-28-2016 11:52 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 11:13 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:20 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:12 AM)Crazier Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 06:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  I know Texas can write its own ticket anywhere it wants to go, but I don't think Oklahoma can do the same. Would the $EC or B1G want Oklahoma on its own? The ACC? Even the PAC-12?

Oklahoma is like Nebraska, except OU was never AAU, has a top 50 TV market in the state and the state is bigger. If the PAC-12 is told by UT that they'd come with Texas Tech instead of Oklahoma, would the PAC-12 protest?

Would the $EC want Oklahoma and its football history over North Carolina State or Virginia Tech and their respective much bigger (and actually southeastern states) and TV markets? If Texas left, OU could stay in the Big XII, dominate the league, and open up an easier path to the playoff.

Texas could go, and the Big XII, though losing its best asset, could still be a force as a power conference.

I think the SEC would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

Kansas too I believe.

Why Kansas?

No football, no football following, small state with 2 football playing schools-- not the best market

Why do people think Kansas has a weak market? Lawrence KS is about 30-40 minute drive from Kansas City. Lawrence KC is a lot closer to a major metropolitan area than a lot of the other P5 schools.

The big Kansas City is in Missouri. You know, as in $EC member Mizzou.

KC cable networks will already include the $EC Network. You aren't adding KC.

Why would the $EC add a state the size of Mississippi?

(09-28-2016 11:48 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 11:44 AM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 11:24 AM)tigersgrizzfan Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:09 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 09:03 AM)tigersgrizzfan Wrote:  we just can't get over the big 12...

Basically because there is a really good chance that the long term survival of our football program is dependent on it...

well guess what.. they don't want us..time to move on to what ever is next

Who says they don't want us?

I'm not saying they will choose us, or that they will even expand, but I have seen nothing to indicated that they have said we are not in the running

Well, you've seen something that INDICATES that they have said we are not in the running (the McSmurphy article). The question is, is it accurate...

If THEY is ESPN they yes, if THEY is the Big12, I have not heard anything..

(09-28-2016 11:48 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:12 AM)Crazier Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 06:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  I know Texas can write its own ticket anywhere it wants to go, but I don't think Oklahoma can do the same. Would the $EC or B1G want Oklahoma on its own? The ACC? Even the PAC-12?

Oklahoma is like Nebraska, except OU was never AAU, has a top 50 TV market in the state and the state is bigger. If the PAC-12 is told by UT that they'd come with Texas Tech instead of Oklahoma, would the PAC-12 protest?

Would the $EC want Oklahoma and its football history over North Carolina State or Virginia Tech and their respective much bigger (and actually southeastern states) and TV markets? If Texas left, OU could stay in the Big XII, dominate the league, and open up an easier path to the playoff.

Texas could go, and the Big XII, though losing its best asset, could still be a force as a power conference.

I think the SEC would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

The $EC has enough football powers. They need $EC Network subscribers.

The 10 million people in NC and 8 million in VA (plus 5-6 in DC metro alone, excluding Bmore) are definitely more attractive than 4 million in OK.

KU would get as much of a sniff as us. Not southeast. Small population. $ec already in KS's biggest market with Missouri.

Doesn't matter. The SEC model is the best in football and it has nothing to do with market size. It is totally granfalloon driven and it creates market size by that virtue.

(09-27-2016 08:12 AM)Memphomaniac Wrote:  Iowa State: It is in trouble, as it'd garner little major conference interest.

Poor Iowa State. I'm not a fan of any Iowa schools but ISU has always labored under the B1G snots from the Univ. of Iowa.

(09-28-2016 12:18 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 08:12 AM)Memphomaniac Wrote:  Iowa State: It is in trouble, as it'd garner little major conference interest.

Poor Iowa State. I'm not a fan of any Iowa schools but ISU has always labored under the B1G snots from the Univ. of Iowa.

I'm an ISU fan, underdog to Iowa, but good BB, great fan support - and AAU school. Pretty nice achievements considering........

I'll do the told-ya-so-dance and get drunk on my ass!

(is this a trick question?)

(09-28-2016 11:48 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:12 AM)Crazier Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 06:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  I know Texas can write its own ticket anywhere it wants to go, but I don't think Oklahoma can do the same. Would the $EC or B1G want Oklahoma on its own? The ACC? Even the PAC-12?

Oklahoma is like Nebraska, except OU was never AAU, has a top 50 TV market in the state and the state is bigger. If the PAC-12 is told by UT that they'd come with Texas Tech instead of Oklahoma, would the PAC-12 protest?

Would the $EC want Oklahoma and its football history over North Carolina State or Virginia Tech and their respective much bigger (and actually southeastern states) and TV markets? If Texas left, OU could stay in the Big XII, dominate the league, and open up an easier path to the playoff.

Texas could go, and the Big XII, though losing its best asset, could still be a force as a power conference.

I think the SEC would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

The $EC has enough football powers. They need $EC Network subscribers.

The 10 million people in NC and 8 million in VA (plus 5-6 in DC metro alone, excluding Bmore) are definitely more attractive than 4 million in OK.

KU would get as much of a sniff as us. Not southeast. Small population. $ec already in KS's biggest market with Missouri.

I think they would jump at OU but if they demanded OSU come along then it would be a quick "no" for the SEC. I agree about Kansas not having any shot at the SEC but I also think they could be picked up by the BIG 10 and they would probably rather be in that conference (just seems like a better fit). I could also see the SEC being very interested in Virginia and a NC school. However, I do not see Duke and UNC breaking away from each but the SEC may still want NC State for the market.

(09-28-2016 12:05 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 11:48 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:12 AM)Crazier Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 06:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  I know Texas can write its own ticket anywhere it wants to go, but I don't think Oklahoma can do the same. Would the $EC or B1G want Oklahoma on its own? The ACC? Even the PAC-12?

Oklahoma is like Nebraska, except OU was never AAU, has a top 50 TV market in the state and the state is bigger. If the PAC-12 is told by UT that they'd come with Texas Tech instead of Oklahoma, would the PAC-12 protest?

Would the $EC want Oklahoma and its football history over North Carolina State or Virginia Tech and their respective much bigger (and actually southeastern states) and TV markets? If Texas left, OU could stay in the Big XII, dominate the league, and open up an easier path to the playoff.

Texas could go, and the Big XII, though losing its best asset, could still be a force as a power conference.

I think the SEC would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

The $EC has enough football powers. They need $EC Network subscribers.

The 10 million people in NC and 8 million in VA (plus 5-6 in DC metro alone, excluding Bmore) are definitely more attractive than 4 million in OK.

KU would get as much of a sniff as us. Not southeast. Small population. $ec already in KS's biggest market with Missouri.

Doesn't matter. The SEC model is the best in football and it has nothing to do with market size. It is totally granfalloon driven and it creates market size by that virtue.

They also aren't adding programs just for the hell of it. It's strategic to maximize their earning potential.

why do they want to add Grand Junction, KS when they could easily make the DMV more interested in $EC football.

(09-28-2016 11:15 AM)Briskbas Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:09 AM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 09:03 AM)tigersgrizzfan Wrote:  we just can't get over the big 12...

Basically because there is a really good chance that the long term survival of our football program is dependent on it...

Basketball too.

Basketball could probably beg its way into the Big East. I think the Big East in basketball would be included if the P5 broke off, obviously as basketball only.

(09-28-2016 12:27 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 12:05 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 11:48 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:12 AM)Crazier Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 06:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  I know Texas can write its own ticket anywhere it wants to go, but I don't think Oklahoma can do the same. Would the $EC or B1G want Oklahoma on its own? The ACC? Even the PAC-12?

Oklahoma is like Nebraska, except OU was never AAU, has a top 50 TV market in the state and the state is bigger. If the PAC-12 is told by UT that they'd come with Texas Tech instead of Oklahoma, would the PAC-12 protest?

Would the $EC want Oklahoma and its football history over North Carolina State or Virginia Tech and their respective much bigger (and actually southeastern states) and TV markets? If Texas left, OU could stay in the Big XII, dominate the league, and open up an easier path to the playoff.

Texas could go, and the Big XII, though losing its best asset, could still be a force as a power conference.

I think the SEC would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

The $EC has enough football powers. They need $EC Network subscribers.

The 10 million people in NC and 8 million in VA (plus 5-6 in DC metro alone, excluding Bmore) are definitely more attractive than 4 million in OK.

KU would get as much of a sniff as us. Not southeast. Small population. $ec already in KS's biggest market with Missouri.

Doesn't matter. The SEC model is the best in football and it has nothing to do with market size. It is totally granfalloon driven and it creates market size by that virtue.

They also aren't adding programs just for the hell of it. It's strategic to maximize their earning potential.

why do they want to add Grand Junction, KS when they could easily make the DMV more interested in $EC football.

Quite simple. Arkansas and Missouri neighbor Kansas.

The SEC gets ratings from Oxford. They are number one and nothing about them was ever tv market driven.

They have created groups of people who want to best each other. Another state is another natural group. That stuff is much more basic and long term produces deep rooted results. You can't buy that. You can't create it. You can recognize it. The SEC did years ago and it is why they are number one.

(09-28-2016 12:27 PM)Tygrys Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 11:48 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:12 AM)Crazier Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 06:55 AM)Latilleon Wrote:  I know Texas can write its own ticket anywhere it wants to go, but I don't think Oklahoma can do the same. Would the $EC or B1G want Oklahoma on its own? The ACC? Even the PAC-12?

Oklahoma is like Nebraska, except OU was never AAU, has a top 50 TV market in the state and the state is bigger. If the PAC-12 is told by UT that they'd come with Texas Tech instead of Oklahoma, would the PAC-12 protest?

Would the $EC want Oklahoma and its football history over North Carolina State or Virginia Tech and their respective much bigger (and actually southeastern states) and TV markets? If Texas left, OU could stay in the Big XII, dominate the league, and open up an easier path to the playoff.

Texas could go, and the Big XII, though losing its best asset, could still be a force as a power conference.

I think the SEC would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

The $EC has enough football powers. They need $EC Network subscribers.

The 10 million people in NC and 8 million in VA (plus 5-6 in DC metro alone, excluding Bmore) are definitely more attractive than 4 million in OK.

KU would get as much of a sniff as us. Not southeast. Small population. $ec already in KS's biggest market with Missouri.

I think they would jump at OU but if they demanded OSU come along then it would be a quick "no" for the SEC. I agree about Kansas not having any shot at the SEC but I also think they could be picked up by the BIG 10 and they would probably rather be in that conference (just seems like a better fit). I could also see the SEC being very interested in Virginia and a NC school. However, I do not see Duke and UNC breaking away from each but the SEC may still want NC State for the market.

One benefit of OU... adding another football blueblood to the $EC. Makes the national football package more attractive on CBS and ESPN...

Downside... OK is a small state. It's Kentucky if you took the population of Lexington out of the state. The $EC has seven schools that should be regular championship contenders (4 years out of 10); Alabama, Florida, LSU, TAMU, Auburn, Georgia, UTK. Is Oklahoma really going to add much with their tradition? When you add another winner, don't you make it difficult for everyone else to win a championship?

There are some that think the $EC would add West Virginia (it's a flagship state school!) just because. If the $EC wanted OU, I'm sure it would be public.

I think the $EC would love UNC and VA. They wouldn't add great football, but they would add big states and prestige. But NCSU and VPI add those states with more of a football focus. It would be akin to adding TAMU to enter a major state. I agree UNC wants to stay with Duke, plus they have too much power in the ACC (like OU in the Big XII). I think UVA eventually leaves, but for better fit B1G.

(09-28-2016 12:46 PM)Claw Wrote:  Quite simple. Arkansas and Missouri neighbor Kansas.

The SEC gets ratings from Oxford. They are number one and nothing about them was ever tv market driven.

Yup, the $EC should add The University of Memphis because it is in a great geographic position and would add ratings in Memphis!

If you think the $EC isn't Tv market driven, I, respectfully, don't think you understand how this works.

The $EC added TAMU for the 2nd largest state in the country population wise, with 2 top ten TV markets and 7 top 100 TV markets. Houston metro has more people than Oklahoma. They added Mizzou because of St. Louis and Kansas City.

Big TV markets means more households to clamor for cable and satellite carriers to carry the $EC network. The more people the have the channel, the bigger the audience. The bigger the audience, the better the positioning with cable carriers. The better the positioning, the greater the revenue. They already have national games on two networks. The $EC's greatest opportunity for revenue growth is the $EC Network. They want to make sure it is in as many homes as possible. So why worry about Oxford with only 10k homes when Norfolk metro has 800,000 that have no reason to demand the $EC Network on their cable system?

Quote:They have created groups of people who want to best each other. Another state is another natural group. That stuff is much more basic and long term produces deep rooted results. You can't buy that. You can't create it. You can recognize it. The SEC did years ago and it is why they are number one.

So why Kansas? Why not Delaware? New Mexico? West Virginia? Why not add the University of Rhode Island!?!

(09-28-2016 01:09 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 12:46 PM)Claw Wrote:  Quite simple. Arkansas and Missouri neighbor Kansas.

The SEC gets ratings from Oxford. They are number one and nothing about them was ever tv market driven.

Yup, the $EC should add The University of Memphis because it is in a great geographic position and would add ratings in Memphis!

If you think the $EC isn't Tv market driven, I, respectfully, don't think you understand how this works.

The $EC added TAMU for the 2nd largest state in the country population wise, with 2 top ten TV markets and 7 top 100 TV markets. Houston metro has more people than Oklahoma. They added Mizzou because of St. Louis and Kansas City.

Big TV markets means more households to clamor for cable and satellite carriers to carry the $EC network. The more people the have the channel, the bigger the audience. The bigger the audience, the better the positioning with cable carriers. The better the positioning, the greater the revenue. They already have national games on two networks. The $EC's greatest opportunity for revenue growth is the $EC Network. They want to make sure it is in as many homes as possible. So why worry about Oxford with only 10k homes when Norfolk metro has 800,000 that have no reason to demand the $EC Network on their cable system?

Quote:They have created groups of people who want to best each other. Another state is another natural group. That stuff is much more basic and long term produces deep rooted results. You can't buy that. You can't create it. You can recognize it. The SEC did years ago and it is why they are number one.

So why Kansas? Why not Delaware? New Mexico? West Virginia? Why not add the University of Rhode Island!?!

West Virginia may happen too. Did you see the Bristol game?

(09-28-2016 01:34 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:09 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 12:46 PM)Claw Wrote:  Quite simple. Arkansas and Missouri neighbor Kansas.

The SEC gets ratings from Oxford. They are number one and nothing about them was ever tv market driven.

Yup, the $EC should add The University of Memphis because it is in a great geographic position and would add ratings in Memphis!

If you think the $EC isn't Tv market driven, I, respectfully, don't think you understand how this works.

The $EC added TAMU for the 2nd largest state in the country population wise, with 2 top ten TV markets and 7 top 100 TV markets. Houston metro has more people than Oklahoma. They added Mizzou because of St. Louis and Kansas City.

Big TV markets means more households to clamor for cable and satellite carriers to carry the $EC network. The more people the have the channel, the bigger the audience. The bigger the audience, the better the positioning with cable carriers. The better the positioning, the greater the revenue. They already have national games on two networks. The $EC's greatest opportunity for revenue growth is the $EC Network. They want to make sure it is in as many homes as possible. So why worry about Oxford with only 10k homes when Norfolk metro has 800,000 that have no reason to demand the $EC Network on their cable system?

Quote:They have created groups of people who want to best each other. Another state is another natural group. That stuff is much more basic and long term produces deep rooted results. You can't buy that. You can't create it. You can recognize it. The SEC did years ago and it is why they are number one.

So why Kansas? Why not Delaware? New Mexico? West Virginia? Why not add the University of Rhode Island!?!

West Virginia may happen too. Did you see the Bristol game?

no, who did West Virginia play in Bristol?

If this country keeps going in the direction it is going their won't be anything to breakaway from, no one will be getting paid anything and contracts won't mean squat unless you can negotiate with gold and silver!! Just saying

(09-28-2016 01:42 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:34 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:09 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 12:46 PM)Claw Wrote:  Quite simple. Arkansas and Missouri neighbor Kansas.

The SEC gets ratings from Oxford. They are number one and nothing about them was ever tv market driven.

Yup, the $EC should add The University of Memphis because it is in a great geographic position and would add ratings in Memphis!

If you think the $EC isn't Tv market driven, I, respectfully, don't think you understand how this works.

The $EC added TAMU for the 2nd largest state in the country population wise, with 2 top ten TV markets and 7 top 100 TV markets. Houston metro has more people than Oklahoma. They added Mizzou because of St. Louis and Kansas City.

Big TV markets means more households to clamor for cable and satellite carriers to carry the $EC network. The more people the have the channel, the bigger the audience. The bigger the audience, the better the positioning with cable carriers. The better the positioning, the greater the revenue. They already have national games on two networks. The $EC's greatest opportunity for revenue growth is the $EC Network. They want to make sure it is in as many homes as possible. So why worry about Oxford with only 10k homes when Norfolk metro has 800,000 that have no reason to demand the $EC Network on their cable system?

Quote:They have created groups of people who want to best each other. Another state is another natural group. That stuff is much more basic and long term produces deep rooted results. You can't buy that. You can't create it. You can recognize it. The SEC did years ago and it is why they are number one.

So why Kansas? Why not Delaware? New Mexico? West Virginia? Why not add the University of Rhode Island!?!

West Virginia may happen too. Did you see the Bristol game?

no, who did West Virginia play in Bristol?

You miss the point. Two teams with nothing but geographic proximity in common created an event. It wasn't tv markets that filled that racetrack. It was people's associations and pride. That is why adding Kansas and West Virginia make sense. It is groups not markets that make the SEC work. Groups transcend markets. The rest of the leagues are playing in the minors.[/php]

(09-28-2016 02:13 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:42 PM)BinghamptonNed Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:34 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:09 PM)Latilleon Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 12:46 PM)Claw Wrote:  Quite simple. Arkansas and Missouri neighbor Kansas.

The SEC gets ratings from Oxford. They are number one and nothing about them was ever tv market driven.

Yup, the $EC should add The University of Memphis because it is in a great geographic position and would add ratings in Memphis!

If you think the $EC isn't Tv market driven, I, respectfully, don't think you understand how this works.

The $EC added TAMU for the 2nd largest state in the country population wise, with 2 top ten TV markets and 7 top 100 TV markets. Houston metro has more people than Oklahoma. They added Mizzou because of St. Louis and Kansas City.

Big TV markets means more households to clamor for cable and satellite carriers to carry the $EC network. The more people the have the channel, the bigger the audience. The bigger the audience, the better the positioning with cable carriers. The better the positioning, the greater the revenue. They already have national games on two networks. The $EC's greatest opportunity for revenue growth is the $EC Network. They want to make sure it is in as many homes as possible. So why worry about Oxford with only 10k homes when Norfolk metro has 800,000 that have no reason to demand the $EC Network on their cable system?

Quote:They have created groups of people who want to best each other. Another state is another natural group. That stuff is much more basic and long term produces deep rooted results. You can't buy that. You can't create it. You can recognize it. The SEC did years ago and it is why they are number one.

So why Kansas? Why not Delaware? New Mexico? West Virginia? Why not add the University of Rhode Island!?!

West Virginia may happen too. Did you see the Bristol game?

no, who did West Virginia play in Bristol?

You miss the point. Two teams with nothing but geographic proximity in common created an event. It wasn't tv markets that filled that racetrack. It was people's associations and pride. That is why adding Kansas and West Virginia make sense. It is groups not markets that make the SEC work. Groups transcend markets. The rest of the leagues are playing in the minors.[/php]

Virginia Tech is in a state with 8 million people. WVU is in a state smaller than every state in the $EC (by at least a million people!)

West Virginia has as many people as metro Nashville.

Why is that so hard to understand. $EC is fueled by money; not proximity.

The demise of the B12 in the future (outside of a larger reorganization based in 'breakaway') is greatly exaggerated IMHO. As is the current thinking that expansion is dead.