(04-01-2013 02:26 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  ... Nobody can bring anything to lift the No Name Conference out of Mid Major status in either revenue sport.

Now that you honestly think Tulsa is just outright a horrible addition why don't you give us all your opinion of who should have been ahead of Tulsa?

This is the real question. The Big TBA may be able to make moves to guarantee that its a strong BBall Mid-Major ~ the A10 punched five tickets to the Dance this March, after all, and before its decline Conference USA was averaging four ~ but its dropped down to Mid-Major status in football and wishing it was playing a different game doesn't change the fact that it has to play the game in front of it on the field where the game is going to be played.

The available adds were, two big market schools, and five smaller market schools:

UMass and Rice, both of which "add" a big market in a formal way, neither of which seem likely to convince many people in that big market to tune into their football games.

Then Tulsa, Southern Miss, Marshall, UTEP and UAB, each of which is a small market school, and given the desire to add a school that will be a natural part of the Western division, that's pretty much down to Tulsa and Southern Miss. Neither of them are an automatic add or they would have been taken instead of UCF, Memphis, Houston, or SMU.

Of those five, Tulsa has had the most consistent success in the past half decade in football, so looks like offering the best hopes that they can play some football that can strengthen the Big TBA's claim to Best of the Rest status for its champion, starting 2014 when the automatic Group of Five spot in the Access Bowls start up.

(03-27-2013 09:57 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Tulsa gets us Tallgrass

(04-01-2013 03:26 PM)Texas2Step Wrote:  Tiger85, you do know that UConn games are broadcast nationally in NYC, right? To say they don't have value is asanine. And they average upwards of 40k in football, and over 10k in basketball regularly, and have recent national titles. Tulsa cannot put 30k fans in the stands. Yes, we aren't the SEC, but to simply gloss over these types of things and be OK with it is worrying to others who do want to see growth in a conference. That is why we're here, right?

Of course I know UCONN is broadcast in NYC, so is Rutgers. I don't think UCONN has broke 39,000 average ever but I could be wrong. What I said is they have reached their ceiling in football and I did not say UCONN did not add value so don't twist it around. I think it's an established fact Football is driving the bus, not basketball. In fact UCONN is considered an anchor of the no name conference, I think everybody knows that much.

Here is what else I know, thus far FB:

UWV, TCU, Pitt, Syracuse, and UofL were all taken ahead of UCONN....that's right UWV from tiny old West Virginia.

My only point is just stop downing Tulsa. I want this conference to grow and succeed just like everyone else. But make no mistake it's mid major FB for now and forever.

The other issue I have is people always just make blanket statements without showing the market research to back up those statements.I simply asked if not Tulsa then who and why and what are the hard numbers. I think the fact is it's gotten to the point there are no home run type adds and every time I hear like UMASS for example I'm like why? this is a start up FBS program we are talking about and one that doesn't even have the full support of the faculty not to mention has a low ceiling as a FBS FB program. If anyone out there fits better that Tulsa (this round) in the overall scheme of thing I'm sure they would have been taken ahead of Tulsa.....when you start talking about UMASS that SPEAKS VOLUMES of just exactly where things stand.


The Northeast is a region of the country dominated by pro sports and that's what hurts college FB more than anything.

(04-01-2013 03:30 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 02:26 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  ... Nobody can bring anything to lift the No Name Conference out of Mid Major status in either revenue sport.

Now that you honestly think Tulsa is just outright a horrible addition why don't you give us all your opinion of who should have been ahead of Tulsa?

This is the real question. The Big TBA may be able to make moves to guarantee that its a strong BBall Mid-Major ~ the A10 punched five tickets to the Dance this March, after all, and before its decline Conference USA was averaging four ~ but its dropped down to Mid-Major status in football and wishing it was playing a different game doesn't change the fact that it has to play the game in front of it on the field where the game is going to be played.

The available adds were, two big market schools, and five smaller market schools:

UMass and Rice, both of which "add" a big market in a formal way, neither of which seem likely to convince many people in that big market to tune into their football games.

Then Tulsa, Southern Miss, Marshall, UTEP and UAB, each of which is a small market school, and given the desire to add a school that will be a natural part of the Western division, that's pretty much down to Tulsa and Southern Miss. Neither of them are an automatic add or they would have been taken instead of UCF, Memphis, Houston, or SMU.

Of those five, Tulsa has had the most consistent success in the past half decade in football, so looks like offering the best hopes that they can play some football that can strengthen the Big TBA's claim to Best of the Rest status for its champion, starting 2014 when the automatic Group of Five spot in the Access Bowls start up.

I know who the available adds were. I also know nobody left has anything that would resemble strong branding power. I also know the market sizes of Rice, Southern Miss and the others and what type of brands they are. The East and West has to be balanced, that goes without saying. I know all about Tulsa and FB and that is the EXACT reason they were added, not rocket science.

Memphis got in because of it's strong BB brand, not rocket science.

I'm not trying to a stick in the mud.....I'm just saying.

And I do think the no name conference should try to add 3 BB only programs to protect BB and elevate the status, especially protection in case the ones begging other conferences to take them actually ever do leave, which is a strong possibility within the next 2 to 5 years. The no name conference is striving to be that other conference outdside of the power 5, as things stand today it's clear (to me anyway) they are behind the MWC in both FB and BB. But not behind by that much. The MWC has Boise St and the no name conference doesn't, that is the MAJOR difference.

(04-01-2013 05:23 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  My only point is just stop downing Tulsa. I want this conference to grow and succeed just like everyone else. But make no mistake it's mid major FB for now and forever.

You can believe this all you'd like, but Houston has a new stadium that says otherwise. Think about it, Louisville and Memphis were once on the same footing as overall programs. But I have never once heard a Louisville fan say "well, we are mid major guys, might as well get used to it." Now, they have gone from a decent program in the middle of CUSA to a national force in all sports. What is stopping Memphis, or Houston, Temple, etc. from doing the same? Mentality that is....

My thing is this. Tulsa has some severe fan support issues that they may never get over. A very small student body, a very small living alumni base to draw from, in a small state completely dominated by one giant and one semi-giant. It's been a nice run for the past several years, but these things go in cycles. If the fans aren't showing up when times are great, and that they are for Tulsa football, then what happens when they inevitably hit hard times (7-5, 6-6 seasons)? There is not one major program in the history of college football that has all of the things Tulsa has going against them. Stanford, Vandy, Northwestern at least are in large locales/states where their programs have some room to breathe and gain good support. OU will always be OU, and T-Boone-U doesn't look to slow down very much any time soon. I hope the best for the good folks at Tulsa, but they have to show me something in support before I am comfortable with this addition.

(04-01-2013 06:55 PM)Texas2Step Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 05:23 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  My only point is just stop downing Tulsa. I want this conference to grow and succeed just like everyone else. But make no mistake it's mid major FB for now and forever.

You can believe this all you'd like, but Houston has a new stadium that says otherwise. Think about it, Louisville and Memphis were once on the same footing as overall programs. But I have never once heard a Louisville fan say "well, we are mid major guys, might as well get used to it." Now, they have gone from a decent program in the middle of CUSA to a national force in all sports. What is stopping Memphis, or Houston, Temple, etc. from doing the same? Mentality that is....

My thing is this. Tulsa has some severe fan support issues that they may never get over. A very small student body, a very small living alumni base to draw from, in a small state completely dominated by one giant and one semi-giant. It's been a nice run for the past several years, but these things go in cycles. If the fans aren't showing up when times are great, and that they are for Tulsa football, then what happens when they inevitably hit hard times (7-5, 6-6 seasons)? There is not one major program in the history of college football that has all of the things Tulsa has going against them. Stanford, Vandy, Northwestern at least are in large locales/states where their programs have some room to breathe and gain good support. OU will always be OU, and T-Boone-U doesn't look to slow down very much any time soon. I hope the best for the good folks at Tulsa, but they have to show me something in support before I am comfortable with this addition.

It's interesting you mentioned UofL...this is the same UofL that had a long term vision (from a few years ago) to better their situation. In case you havn't noticed this same UofL is joing the ACC.

Have you seen the new TV deal? case closed. This is Mid Major and is always going to be anybody thinks otherwise must have their head buried in the sand.

Until Houston, UCONN, CINCY, USF, UCF, Memphis or whoever joins a Major conference they they'll be in a Mid Major Conference....until then we are all stuck in Mid Major conference. The train has left the station.

Everybody has hurdles to clear before getting accepted to one of the Big Boy leagues, some more than others. But make no mistake the no name conference is not going to increase in value to the point of being a peer conference even with the ACC....it just isn't going to happen. We have to just make the best of what we have but we don't have to paint a picture for either now or the future that is pie in the sky BS.

There is not room in college FB for another Major conference. What do you think all this realignment over the last 2/3 years has been about. It's about consolidation, in fact that's exactly what has been going on.

(04-01-2013 07:13 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  Until Houston, UCONN, CINCY, USF, UCF, Memphis or whoever joins a Major conference they they'll be in a Mid Major Conference....until then we are all stuck in Mid Major conference. The train has left the station.

This should be the Alpha and Omega of every thread about the new Great Metro American Burger Conference.

Short, sweet, accurate.

(04-01-2013 08:35 PM)Fireman451 Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 07:13 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  Until Houston, UCONN, CINCY, USF, UCF, Memphis or whoever joins a Major conference they they'll be in a Mid Major Conference....until then we are all stuck in Mid Major conference. The train has left the station.

This should be the Alpha and Omega of every thread about the new Great Metro American Burger Conference.

Short, sweet, accurate.

Why do you care?

(04-01-2013 05:34 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  I know who the available adds were. ... I know ... I know ... I know ...

I'm not trying to a stick in the mud.....I'm just saying.

Sorry, I can't work out what it is that you are saying, up through this part. I agreed with one part of what you said, and you had to point out that you agreed with that part of what you said too?

(04-01-2013 08:35 PM)Fireman451 Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 07:13 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  Until Houston, UCONN, CINCY, USF, UCF, Memphis or whoever joins a Major conference they they'll be in a Mid Major Conference....until then we are all stuck in Mid Major conference. The train has left the station.

This should be the Alpha and Omega of every thread about the new Great Metro American Burger Conference.

Short, sweet, accurate.

Just the Alpha ~ the starting point. Over time, they could be a Mid-Major seen as a step ahead of the MWC and the best of the G5, or they could keep slipping down to barely ahead of the Sunbelt.

And, sure, its harder work for smaller incremental gains on offer than running a Major conference. That's just the way things are for a Mid-Major ~ its not a task for someone lazy who's looking at skimming the cream without putting any hard work in,

(04-01-2013 05:23 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  I think it's an established fact Football is driving the bus, not basketball.

That stopped being established when the Big East got more money than the Aresco League. It is now very questionable whether there's more money to be made in basketball or football if you don't have an Alabama or an Oklahoma or a USC or an Ohio State or a Miami or a Florida State or a Virginia Tech or a Wisconsin or an Oregon or even a Boise State in your conference.

My goodness, stop all the BS already. Everybody knows what hard work is about. Everybody knows the situation and the limitations. The no name conference could bring in the top CEO in the entire world and would still be hamstrung, because of the obvious reasons.

We have a no name conference as of today and one where 1/3 of the members are working behind the Commissioners back to get in a better league, which is fine. Make no mistake about it everybody is not pulling form the same rope. Some schools ultimate interest are different form others.

If everything holds as is long term the no name conference is not in bad shape at all but is still a MID MAJOR for now and forever. If 2 or 4 ultimately end up moving to greener pastures I think it would be fair to say they are never going to catch up to te MWC much less surpass them.

The funny thing about message boards and all the chatter is that a SUPER MAJORITY cannot seem to long any further than the the next day. If you beleive as I do that conference realignment is not over, but close to it, it would be wise to look down the road and what a future no name conference might look like with replacements for at least two teams and possibly four.

Does anyone striaght up 100 percent think realignment has once and for all reached it's final conclusion and everything is now set in stone?

(04-02-2013 08:12 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 05:23 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  I think it's an established fact Football is driving the bus, not basketball.

That stopped being established when the Big East got more money than the Aresco League. It is now very questionable whether there's more money to be made in basketball or football if you don't have an Alabama or an Oklahoma or a USC or an Ohio State or a Miami or a Florida State or a Virginia Tech or a Wisconsin or an Oregon or even a Boise State in your conference.

I don't think you can take the two contracts just on face value and make the assumption that basketball now can trump football...the new league was negotiating with Fox, who wanted its inventory over the old league...so when they didn't submit a bid for the old league and NBC was the only offer (who lowballed), then ESPN just had to match it. There was no ESPN clause in the Fox deal. As well, the old league didn't have some basketball inventory covered into the ESPN deal and has since announced that AND the basketball isn't on the same schedule right now.

IMO, there is no way that the basketball league gets more than the Aresco League after the contract is renewed (in 2019?). Assuming both have 12 team leagues, the inventory the Aresco league provides offering football as well as having competitive basketball will justify increases. Everyone should also keep in mind that the Aresco League now has better exposure than the Fox 1 contract.

(04-02-2013 08:32 AM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  My goodness, stop all the BS already. Everybody knows what hard work is about. Everybody knows the situation and the limitations. The no name conference could bring in the top CEO in the entire world and would still be hamstrung, because of the obvious reasons.

We have a no name conference as of today and one where 1/3 of the members are working behind the Commissioners back to get in a better league, which is fine. Make no mistake about it everybody is not pulling form the same rope. Some schools ultimate interest are different form others.

If everything holds as is long term the no name conference is not in bad shape at all but is still a MID MAJOR for now and forever. If 2 or 4 ultimately end up moving to greener pastures I think it would be fair to say they are never going to catch up to te MWC much less surpass them.

The funny thing about message boards and all the chatter is that a SUPER MAJORITY cannot seem to long any further than the the next day. If you beleive as I do that conference realignment is not over, but close to it, it would be wise to look down the road and what a future no name conference might look like with replacements for at least two teams and possibly four.

Does anyone striaght up 100 percent think realignment has once and for all reached it's final conclusion and everything is now set in stone?

I won't take exception to the term mid-major except that I think people really need to look at Aresco's statements about "intent to compete" in the marketplace. Look at the schools individually before making the assessment that the conference is mid major....look at the BCS era....

UCONN....has won multiple national championships in basketball and has played in a BCS Bowl, while FBS football is still less than 10 years old.

Cincinnati...has been a number 1 seed in basketball, has outstanding tradition and has played in multiple BCS Bowls.

USF....a former Metro conference basketball member that created football and ascended to as high as #2 in the polls, has averaged 50K for football games.

UCF....has won multiple football championships in CUSA, is starting to beat BCS programs with regularity and an annual bowl participant, has a 45K on campus stadium and sparkling new basketball arena...part of the "new world order" so to speak in college athletics.

Memphis...averages 16K or so in basketball and an annual NCAA tourney member...lost in the national championship game a few years ago...plays in a 60K stadium that is gradually seeing improvements.

ECU....averages 50K in an on campus football facility, has won multiple football championships and a long history of beating BCS opponents...an annual bowl participant. Has rapidly transformed its basketball and is expanding its basketball facility...also has transformed its Olympic sports facilities to the highest quality.

Temple...has a longstanding basketball tradition, has been a #1 seed in the past, won multiple conference championships and annual NCAA tourney member...has also transformed its doormat football program to a respectable level.

Houston...has been routinely ranked in football in the past 5 years, has a long history from the Southwest Conference in both football and basketball.

SMU...also has a long history from the Southwest Conference in football, where it competed at the highest level...has made re-investments in both its football and basketball program in hiring coaches and new facilities.

Tulane...within the BCS era finished an undefeated season, is building a new on campus stadium and has re-invested in its basketball program to get it to a respectable level.

Tulsa...one of the most underrated athletic departments in the country, excels in the Olympic Sports and has won multiple football championships in CUSA...has re-invested in basketball with a new coach and facilities.

Navy...has beaten Notre Dame a few times now recently and become an annual bowl participant, which has re-ignited its national fan base.

When you break down what each member is doing and if you broke down what each member of the Power conference or new Big East league were doing, you can see that the definition of a "major" might not be as easy as the drive by media makes it seem. All of the players bring something to the table and aspire to the highest level of college athletics.

(04-02-2013 08:41 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-02-2013 08:12 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 05:23 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  I think it's an established fact Football is driving the bus, not basketball.

That stopped being established when the Big East got more money than the Aresco League. It is now very questionable whether there's more money to be made in basketball or football if you don't have an Alabama or an Oklahoma or a USC or an Ohio State or a Miami or a Florida State or a Virginia Tech or a Wisconsin or an Oregon or even a Boise State in your conference.

I don't think you can take the two contracts just on face value and make the assumption that basketball now can trump football...the new league was negotiating with Fox, who wanted its inventory over the old league...

So why didn't they want Aresco League football? Because Big East basketball > Aresco LEague football.

Quote:IMO, there is no way that the basketball league gets more than the Aresco League after the contract is renewed (in 2019?).

That's your opinion, of course. Did you expect that, in 2012, the C7 portion of the league would get more money than the football-basketball side?

I'd say that the Aresco League drama pretty clearly demonstrates is that it is not college football *in general* that commands a premium price, but *certain college football teams*. If you don't have one of those teams, you're not going to command a premium price.

Once that's established, you can start looking at whether or not Memphis' basketball success and football non-success would add more to a league than Tulsa's football success and basketball non-success, or whatever other comparison you want to make.

I'm just saying that "football drives the bus" is no longer as obvious as it was six months ago, now that the football-driven Aresco League bus is stranded on the side of a highway with flames coming out of the engine.

(04-02-2013 08:32 AM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  My goodness, stop all the BS already. Everybody knows what hard work is about. Everybody knows the situation and the limitations. The no name conference could bring in the top CEO in the entire world and would still be hamstrung, because of the obvious reasons.

It was Fireman451 who said:

Quote: This should be the Alpha and Omega of every thread about the new Great Metro American Burger Conference.

If the Big TBA being relegated to Mid-Major status is "the alpha and the omega", the beginning and the end of all discussion, that seems to mean it doesn't make a damn bit of difference what the Big TBA does.

Its obvious that the Big TBA has already been relegated to Mid-Major status ~ its just being formalized in 2014 when they lose their AQ.

And obvious, as you say, that they are hamstrung, compared to any current Major conference ~ even the ACC.

The question is, so what? Should they throw up their hands and give up, since whatever they do it won't make a damn bit of difference, or not? Setting up "they are a Mid-Major" as the "beginning and the end" of all discussion pretty much says, yeah, they should just give up, put their feet up, pop a cold one and wait to see what happens next.

Quote: Does anyone striaght up 100 percent think realignment has once and for all reached it's final conclusion and everything is now set in stone?

If anyone does, they are not paying attention. Also anybody who thinks they know how its all going to roll out isn letting the realignment scenarios they write in their head over-ride reality, since some things that will decide how it rolls out just haven't been decided yet.
_______________________

(04-02-2013 08:12 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 05:23 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  I think it's an established fact Football is driving the bus, not basketball.

That stopped being established when the Big East got more money than the Aresco League. It is now very questionable whether there's more money to be made in basketball or football if you don't have an Alabama or an Oklahoma or a USC or an Ohio State or a Miami or a Florida State or a Virginia Tech or a Wisconsin or an Oregon or even a Boise State in your conference.

Doesn't that just mean that sometimes football can drive the bus off the road? The C7 breaking away was still a reaction to the raids on the Old Big East by the ACC, and then the reloading with all of those schools that threatened to drag the conference RPI down out of the level of the Major conferences.

If they had been in a position to drive decision making on reloading after the raids, the new version of the Big East would have looked a lot stronger on BBall, and a lot weaker on football.

Its still sports, and they are still selling matchups. The Big TBA have very few recognizable matchups to sell, in either football or BBall. The New Big East has more recognizable matchups to sell in BBall. So Big TBA BBall is not worth as much as New Big East BBall. But the FB is still worth more to the Big TBA than the BBall is.

And it makes a big difference in that comparison that Fox Sports had to pay a fair price to the C7 for the college winter inventory that they needed, otherwise the C7 wouldn't have broken away, while NBC Sports was only interested in the Big TBA if they could get them for a bargain, so ESPN only had to match a low-ball offer to keep the rights to the Big TBA.

(04-02-2013 11:22 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-02-2013 08:41 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-02-2013 08:12 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-01-2013 05:23 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  I think it's an established fact Football is driving the bus, not basketball.

That stopped being established when the Big East got more money than the Aresco League. It is now very questionable whether there's more money to be made in basketball or football if you don't have an Alabama or an Oklahoma or a USC or an Ohio State or a Miami or a Florida State or a Virginia Tech or a Wisconsin or an Oregon or even a Boise State in your conference.

I don't think you can take the two contracts just on face value and make the assumption that basketball now can trump football...the new league was negotiating with Fox, who wanted its inventory over the old league...

So why didn't they want Aresco League football? Because Big East basketball > Aresco LEague football.

Quote:IMO, there is no way that the basketball league gets more than the Aresco League after the contract is renewed (in 2019?).

That's your opinion, of course. Did you expect that, in 2012, the C7 portion of the league would get more money than the football-basketball side?

I'd say that the Aresco League drama pretty clearly demonstrates is that it is not college football *in general* that commands a premium price, but *certain college football teams*. If you don't have one of those teams, you're not going to command a premium price.

Once that's established, you can start looking at whether or not Memphis' basketball success and football non-success would add more to a league than Tulsa's football success and basketball non-success, or whatever other comparison you want to make.

I'm just saying that "football drives the bus" is no longer as obvious as it was six months ago, now that the football-driven Aresco League bus is stranded on the side of a highway with flames coming out of the engine.

That statement alone is absolutely incorrect. It is still driving the bus at the Power 5 level. To a lesser degree, it is still driving the bus for the Go5 leagues as well. There does seem to be a real need for the programs added now to contribute across the board, but football is still clearly driving the bus. Let's not let a little March Madness skew reality. The lack of a stable landscape played a huge roll in how contracts turned out.

(04-02-2013 11:22 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  So why didn't they want Aresco League football? Because Big East basketball > Aresco LEague football.

No, because they have MLB, in addition to their existing college football inventory. Where they had a shortage of inventory was after the MLB season finished.

If they didn't have a greater need for additional live programming in the Winter college season than in the Fall college, they wouldn't have engineered a breakaway that allowed them to just buy the BBall without having to buy the FB too.

(04-02-2013 11:48 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  

(04-02-2013 11:22 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I'm just saying that "football drives the bus" is no longer as obvious as it was six months ago, now that the football-driven Aresco League bus is stranded on the side of a highway with flames coming out of the engine.

That statement alone is absolutely incorrect. It is still driving the bus at the Power 5 level.

I don't disagree there. Oklahoma > Syracuse, Alabama > Duke, etc.

Quote:To a lesser degree, it is still driving the bus for the Go5 leagues as well.

The question is, is a bus driven by midmajor football going to get you anywhere. It got TCU to the promised land. But it only got Boise STate from the WAC to the MWC. (Or from I-AA to the MWC, depending how you look at it.) IT didn't get the MWC as a whole anywhere.

Quote:There does seem to be a real need for the programs added now to contribute across the board, but football is still clearly driving the bus.

There is a need for programs to contribute, I agree. The problem is, what exactly does "contribute" mean? There is a lack of serious "contributors" on the landscape at this point, in either sport. Tulsa and Southern Miss are seen as "contributors" in football, but how much TV audience does either one bring? UMass is talked about as a contributor in basketball, but Calipari doesn't coach there anymore.

Quote: Let's not let a little March Madness skew reality. The lack of a stable landscape played a huge roll in how contracts turned out.

The landscape ain't getting any stabler. And the lack-of-TV-value of the Aresco League was as much a CAUSE of the instability as a result--if the Big East were looking at a big contract last November, Boise STate and the C-7 are a lot more reluctant to bolt, even after Louisville left.

(04-02-2013 12:03 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-02-2013 11:48 AM)apex_pirate Wrote:  

(04-02-2013 11:22 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  I'm just saying that "football drives the bus" is no longer as obvious as it was six months ago, now that the football-driven Aresco League bus is stranded on the side of a highway with flames coming out of the engine.

That statement alone is absolutely incorrect. It is still driving the bus at the Power 5 level.

I don't disagree there. Oklahoma > Syracuse, Alabama > Duke, etc.

Quote:To a lesser degree, it is still driving the bus for the Go5 leagues as well.

The question is, is a bus driven by midmajor football going to get you anywhere. It got TCU to the promised land. But it only got Boise STate from the WAC to the MWC. (Or from I-AA to the MWC, depending how you look at it.) IT didn't get the MWC as a whole anywhere.

Quote:There does seem to be a real need for the programs added now to contribute across the board, but football is still clearly driving the bus.

There is a need for programs to contribute, I agree. The problem is, what exactly does "contribute" mean? There is a lack of serious "contributors" on the landscape at this point, in either sport. Tulsa and Southern Miss are seen as "contributors" in football, but how much TV audience does either one bring? UMass is talked about as a contributor in basketball, but Calipari doesn't coach there anymore.

Quote: Let's not let a little March Madness skew reality. The lack of a stable landscape played a huge roll in how contracts turned out.

The landscape ain't getting any stabler. And the lack-of-TV-value of the Aresco League was as much a CAUSE of the instability as a result--if the Big East were looking at a big contract last November, Boise STate and the C-7 are a lot more reluctant to bolt, even after Louisville left.

But it all points to football driving the value of contracts. I'm not arguing that C-TBA will get a bigger contract than the C-7, just that your comment that

Quote:"football drives the bus" is no longer as obvious as it was six months ago

is far from true. It is quite obvious at all levels. Whether it gets them more than a basketball league is not the issue. That was part of debate with the other poster. I took issue only with the bolded sentence. The fact is that football drives C-TBA and any other conference that sponsors that sport when it comes to TV negotiations...period...and undeniably obvious.

(04-02-2013 12:03 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  The question is, is a bus driven by midmajor football going to get you anywhere. It got TCU to the promised land. But it only got Boise STate from the WAC to the MWC. (Or from I-AA to the MWC, depending how you look at it.) IT didn't get the MWC as a whole anywhere.

The MWC is in a substantially stronger position than they were ten years ago.

And the flipside is even more definite ~ losing the football played by the Mountain West teams has left the WAC as a hollow shell of its former self.