8

(03-09-2019 09:28 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-08-2019 08:49 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

Quo Vadis Wrote:That said, in a sense this clause was superseded by the Big 12 expansion process of 2016, when they winnowed the candidates down to the final 12, as that represented a more current objective determination of value.

For the hundredth time, this is false. Carry on with your foolish trolling. I frankly don't care if you believe it to be true but I hope no one else is as obtuse.

What part is the false part? I wasn't obsessively tracking the 2016 Big 12 "expansion" dog and pony show (1) but the Big 12 list seems as objective (2) as anything gets in realignment. Did Memphis get snubbed? I mean, it's not my circus or my monkeys, but I enjoy being right and dislike being wrong.

(1) I was pretty darn sure that since there wasn't $30M in value sitting out there for the Big 12 to add in 2012 with Louisville, Rutgers and adding a CCG on the table, there wasn't going to be $40-$50M in value with Louisville gone, Rutgers vaunted NYC access gone and a CCG in the bag. And the Big 12 plan worked, the TV networks coughed up some money to avoid Big 12 expansion

(2) A school's "objective value" ignores that it's value TO WHOM and FOR WHAT. BTN made Rutgers valuable for a brief shining moment. And I tend to buy the theory that Comcast believed that CSN Philadelphia made Temple momentarily valuable)

The whole part I bolded was not true. Its a false media narrative. I won't say more for a number of reasons. Like the old big east, i dont give two hoots in hell about the big 12 other than the money. What the motards at the big 12 put out as misinformation during contract negotions is just that.. Its not personal to me at all. If it were true so be it. Its not. Some simpletons take it as gospel. I laugh at them.
Carry on. Love yah, mean it.