+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: SECbbs (/forum-285.html)
+---- Forum: SEC Conference Talk (/forum-246.html)
+---- Thread: Dude contradicts his statement with his own posted link (/thread-820469.html)
Dude contradicts his statement with his own posted link - murrdcu - 06-20-2017 03:14 PM
Christopher Lambert @theDudeofWV
By the OU still isn't AAU and that means B1G isn't interested.
12:22 PM · Jun 20, 2017
Quite sad. He tweets this, then posts a 2015 story about realignment events from years earlier because the writer finally had enough sources to print it. The story mentions the B1G looked at adding the AAU's Neb-L, KU, ISU, A&M and non AAU member OU. The article re emphasized homework has been done on both OU and Kansas. The give schools didn't like the initial finances in the move and the talks were tabled.
http://www.omaha.com/huskers/barfknecht-during-realignment-four-others-from-big-took-a-look/article_2d507fc0-3337-11e5-8cc1-4373847a1bfe.html
Big Ten football fans, see if the following slate of conference games would interest you:
Oklahoma vs. Wisconsin; Nebraska vs. Texas A&M; Iowa vs. Iowa State; Minnesota vs. Kansas.
The feedback from Big Ten school officials was positive, both sources said. The sticking point was devising a revenue-sharing plan to satisfy all. It would have taken at least three to four years for that many incoming schools to hit the financial payoffs sought for moving.
Unfortunately, it’s not happening. But there was a time when grouping those eight schools into one division of a 16-team Big Ten was discussed at high administrative levels by members of both leagues.
If the predictions come true that the clock is ticking on the Big 12 sticking together, remember what we previously reported from two sources at Nebraska — the Big Ten has done its “homework’’ to evaluate Oklahoma and Kansas as potential members.
RE: Dude contradicts his statement with his own posted link - AllTideUp - 06-20-2017 03:28 PM
The Dude gets better with age. :D
That bolded portion definitely tells an important tale though. If those schools didn't like the revenue structure in the past then they aren't going to like it now either. The SEC does have an advantage here.
RE: Dude contradicts his statement with his own posted link - murrdcu - 06-20-2017 03:37 PM
(06-20-2017 03:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: The Dude gets better with age. :D
That bolded portion definitely tells an important tale though. If those schools didn't like the revenue structure in the past then they aren't going to like it now either. The SEC does have an advantage here.
That was a very important part of the article that tends to be forgotten for the juicier parts.
I thought the Big Ten having no problems with market duplicating ISU and non-AAU OU spoke volumes. It seems the long buy-in time and JR member status is not that popular as some would have us to believe. If the B1G is your only option, then you take it and enjoy it several years after the move.
RE: Dude contradicts his statement with his own posted link - JRsec - 06-20-2017 03:45 PM
(06-20-2017 03:37 PM)murrdcu Wrote:(06-20-2017 03:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: The Dude gets better with age. :D
That bolded portion definitely tells an important tale though. If those schools didn't like the revenue structure in the past then they aren't going to like it now either. The SEC does have an advantage here.
That was a very important part of the article that tends to be forgotten for the juicier parts.
I thought the Big Ten having no problems with market duplicating ISU and non-AAU OU spoke volumes. It seems the long buy-in time and JR member status is not that popular as some would have us to believe. If the B1G is your only option, then you take it and enjoy it several years after the move.
I'm not sold that there will be a buy in by 2022. They distributed 32 million to the oldest 11 members for FY2016. The distribution led to a 39.2% loss in value by the BTN. A couple of more years like that and their won't be any shares left in it. That would mean no buy in. They are angling for this IMO to avoid the buy in issues and because the changing models could easily wipe out that equity so the smarter move is to cash it in while you still have it. So let's watch the BTN's valuation next year. If it dips another 30% you'll have your answer as to what is going on.
RE: Dude contradicts his statement with his own posted link - murrdcu - 06-20-2017 03:47 PM
(06-20-2017 03:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-20-2017 03:37 PM)murrdcu Wrote:(06-20-2017 03:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: The Dude gets better with age. :D
That bolded portion definitely tells an important tale though. If those schools didn't like the revenue structure in the past then they aren't going to like it now either. The SEC does have an advantage here.
That was a very important part of the article that tends to be forgotten for the juicier parts.
I thought the Big Ten having no problems with market duplicating ISU and non-AAU OU spoke volumes. It seems the long buy-in time and JR member status is not that popular as some would have us to believe. If the B1G is your only option, then you take it and enjoy it several years after the move.
I'm not sold that there will be a buy in by 2022. They distributed 32 million to the oldest 11 members for FY2016. The distribution led to a 39.2% loss in value by the BTN. A couple of more years like that and their won't be any shares left in it. That would mean no buy in. They are angling for this IMO to avoid the buy in issues and because the changing models could easily wipe out that equity so the smarter move is to cash it in while you still have it. So let's watch the BTN's valuation next year. If it dips another 30% you'll have your answer as to what is going on.
That makes a ton of sense.