Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #21
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
What I would like to see is the Network report card on where the schools of the Big 12 fit. Just to reground in reality, here are a some of the issues that will have to be dealt with.

How long can two networks trying to lure the best product from the Big 12 afford to sew up their T3 rights or overpay them for the content of their conference footprint? FOX holds some sway with Oklahoma, ESPN holds some with Kansas, and a lot with Texas.

Face it, they could earn much more for about the same investment if Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas were in any other conference. Oklahoma State could be profitable, Baylor possibly. Iowa State would simply add a market to anyone but the Big 10 and Kansas State is a foothold for somebody into a state with 2.8 million people. West Virginia is a question mark. T.C.U. only delivers a city and not as effectively as Texas, Oklahoma, or Oklahoma State. Texas Tech is a state school in a large sports crazy TV market.

Just look at it from the compelling nature of contests. 1. Texas vs Oklahoma. But who is number 2? Oklahoma vs Oklahoma State which is far more interesting as a regional match. It's nobody vs Iowa State and nobody vs Kansas and when Snyder retires again it will be nobody vs Kansas State. The Texas schools vs each other is great for the state but not much elsewhere. And yet the Networks are paying these guys a little more than they are currently paying the ACC which while lacking some content has a nice large market and at least a few more compelling match ups than the Big 12.

I just don't see FOX and ESPN continuing to overpay for Big 12 product. What they are being paid now amounts to the fee necessary to put the brakes on realignment before the Mouse lost product. The LHN is leverage for future ESPN product. After that it's a grab bag. That's why before it's all over I expect to see Texas, Oklahoma, Baylor, and Kansas to the ACC as full members (or some other combination of Texas and Oklahoma schools) and Virginia Tech and N.C. State to the SEC. I know it's old news but such a move is the only way to increase in multiples the football content of the ACC while giving the SEC what it needs most (two more large markets). If the PAC picks up 4 central time zone states that benefits them without them giving up rights to their own network. The price for a big name for them will be those rights.

But the report card on fit is crucial to any eventual distribution of these schools. We'll see.
(This post was last modified: 06-03-2014 05:39 PM by JRsec.)
06-03-2014 05:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #22
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
1. as a CU fan I am rather insulted (not much though so no worries) that anyone would ever think that you would assume I was a proponent of a east/west pac16 split.I thought this was self explanatory with my being a CU guy and my statement that TTU & the arizona schools having history would make it obvious that I am 100% against it.

2. Think like a university professor. These are universities first and the will of the academia's > the fanbase the majority of the time.
06-03-2014 07:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
oliveandblue Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,779
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Tulane
Location:
Post: #23
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
[Image: 9XwWnPP.jpg]

There's mine. I don't see that many good "outside options" for most of the Big XII. I like a number of them as institutions - it's just that they kind of need each other (if you get my drift).
06-03-2014 07:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #24
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
I found it too hard to try to grade the Big 12 schools re: the SEC, PAC and B1G because I just don't know enough about those conferences. I really can't say I know that much about the Big 12 schools, but I can say that the only two that I see ever joining the ACC are Texas and Kansas. I think that Oklahoma somehow ends up in the SEC.
I agree with OliveandBlue in that Oklahoma is not a good fit for the ACC.

If Texas does not go to the PAC we won't get 4 x 16.
06-03-2014 08:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #25
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-03-2014 08:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  I found it too hard to try to grade the Big 12 schools re: the SEC, PAC and B1G because I just don't know enough about those conferences. I really can't say I know that much about the Big 12 schools, but I can say that the only two that I see ever joining the ACC are Texas and Kansas. I think that Oklahoma somehow ends up in the SEC.
I agree with OliveandBlue in that Oklahoma is not a good fit for the ACC.

If Texas does not go to the PAC we won't get 4 x 16.

The B1G outlook is relatively straightforward. Texas is an "A" because it fits the B1G criteria perfectly - large state school, top notch research powerhouse, AAU member, prime recruiting grounds and able to easily bring more revenue than would be needed to cover its $35-$40 million share of conference payouts. And of course good football in most years.

Kansas and Oklahoma would be attractive for different reasons. KU is an AAU school, with outstanding basketball and helps shore up the Nebraska end of the conference. Oklahoma isn't an academic powerhouse, but might get a 'football power' exception. I'd rate them both as "B" candidates, with one or both of them getting an offer if Texas would go - perhaps they both get offers even without Texas if the B1G is shut out trying to expand to the east/southeast.

No other school would interest the B1G. Iowa State is AAU, but the B1G will not add a second Iowa school. None of the rest even come close to fitting the B1G profile. So I'd give them all an "F".

Personally, I'd love to see all three plus Missouri join the B1G, but Delaney's sights are set eastward and I don't think he'll pursue any of them, except Texas if Texas shows some interest.
06-04-2014 12:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #26
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
I think everyone has really put WVU too low on the lists. I do agree that if you have your Big XII university name ends with "STATE" you are in trouble with realignment.
06-04-2014 12:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
oliveandblue Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,779
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Tulane
Location:
Post: #27
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-04-2014 12:41 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I think everyone has really put WVU too low on the lists. I do agree that if you have your Big XII university name ends with "STATE" you are in trouble with realignment.

WVU are a power program, but they're an oddball of one.

They're too far east for the PAC, a bad institutional fit for the ACC or B1G, and are slightly out of SEC lands.

I think they're a good add for the SEC - but that's about it.

WVU really ought to be in either a new Big East OR live alone as a power Independent.
06-04-2014 06:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #28
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-03-2014 07:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  1. as a CU fan I am rather insulted (not much though so no worries) that anyone would ever think that you would assume I was a proponent of a east/west pac16 split.I thought this was self explanatory with my being a CU guy and my statement that TTU & the arizona schools having history would make it obvious that I am 100% against it.

That's why I was confused by your TT & ASU/AU comment. I didn't think there was any way you of all people could be advocating an E/W split.

Quote:2. Think like a university professor. These are universities first and the will of the academia's > the fanbase the majority of the time.

Frank's manta is applicable some of the time, in some of the cases. Take a look at A&M. Obviously, PAC academic affiliation would have been a boon to them, but they instead chose to blow up the PAC 16 deal in order to join the SEC.
(This post was last modified: 06-04-2014 09:07 AM by vandiver49.)
06-04-2014 07:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #29
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-04-2014 12:41 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I think everyone has really put WVU too low on the lists. I do agree that if you have your Big XII university name ends with "STATE" you are in trouble with realignment.

Well, for the B1G and the PAC, WVU is obviously a NFW kind of addition. If paired with the right high value school though, I feel the SEC and ACC would be amenable to adding the Mountaineers. Also, OKST should be OK as I think they too would be decent additions to the SEC and ACC. It's ISU and KSU that are going to have to worry.
06-04-2014 07:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #30
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-03-2014 08:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  I found it too hard to try to grade the Big 12 schools re: the SEC, PAC and B1G because I just don't know enough about those conferences. I really can't say I know that much about the Big 12 schools, but I can say that the only two that I see ever joining the ACC are Texas and Kansas. I think that Oklahoma somehow ends up in the SEC.
I agree with OliveandBlue in that Oklahoma is not a good fit for the ACC.

If Texas does not go to the PAC we won't get 4 x 16.

I used to believe that as well, but I've now come around to H1 position of the PAC adding 4 Central Time Zone schools to get the value necessary for a P4 to come to fruition.
06-04-2014 07:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #31
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-04-2014 07:16 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-03-2014 08:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  I found it too hard to try to grade the Big 12 schools re: the SEC, PAC and B1G because I just don't know enough about those conferences. I really can't say I know that much about the Big 12 schools, but I can say that the only two that I see ever joining the ACC are Texas and Kansas. I think that Oklahoma somehow ends up in the SEC.
I agree with OliveandBlue in that Oklahoma is not a good fit for the ACC.

If Texas does not go to the PAC we won't get 4 x 16.

I used to believe that as well, but I've now come around to H1 position of the PAC adding 4 Central Time Zone schools to get the value necessary for a P4 to come to fruition.

I think that way too much is made about trying to keep up dollar wise with the B1G especially when it comes to the PAC. Why would they (PAC) want schools that don't fit their profile just to get mid-western coverage for their network. If it weren't for increased revenue the PAC would NEVER consider Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Baylor or TCU!
And so what if they make 10 million less than the SEC or the B1G, how can that really hurt them. UCLA is not ever going to join the B1G just to get $10M a year.
The Big 12 has some great schools that just don't fit in anywhere else. And the PAC schools are so isolated from the rest of the country that they are untouchable.
Unless some schools want to move around to get a better "fit", I'm beginning to think that we might be done for a while.
06-04-2014 07:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #32
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-04-2014 07:57 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(06-04-2014 07:16 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-03-2014 08:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  I found it too hard to try to grade the Big 12 schools re: the SEC, PAC and B1G because I just don't know enough about those conferences. I really can't say I know that much about the Big 12 schools, but I can say that the only two that I see ever joining the ACC are Texas and Kansas. I think that Oklahoma somehow ends up in the SEC.
I agree with OliveandBlue in that Oklahoma is not a good fit for the ACC.

If Texas does not go to the PAC we won't get 4 x 16.

I used to believe that as well, but I've now come around to H1 position of the PAC adding 4 Central Time Zone schools to get the value necessary for a P4 to come to fruition.

I think that way too much is made about trying to keep up dollar wise with the B1G especially when it comes to the PAC. Why would they (PAC) want schools that don't fit their profile just to get mid-western coverage for their network. If it weren't for increased revenue the PAC would NEVER consider Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Baylor or TCU!
And so what if they make 10 million less than the SEC or the B1G, how can that really hurt them. UCLA is not ever going to join the B1G just to get $10M a year.
The Big 12 has some great schools that just don't fit in anywhere else. And the PAC schools are so isolated from the rest of the country that they are untouchable.
Unless some schools want to move around to get a better "fit", I'm beginning to think that we might be done for a while.

Why? Corporate Network money and the desire for further advertising incentives for higher rates have been behind it all and those motivations are still with us. The tinkering by corporate influences has is only paused as they figure out the legal entanglements before moving on.
06-04-2014 02:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #33
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-04-2014 07:09 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-03-2014 07:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  1. as a CU fan I am rather insulted (not much though so no worries) that anyone would ever think that you would assume I was a proponent of a east/west pac16 split.I thought this was self explanatory with my being a CU guy and my statement that TTU & the arizona schools having history would make it obvious that I am 100% against it.

That's why I was confused by your TT & ASU/AU comment. I didn't think there was any way you of all people could be advocating an E/W split.

Quote:2. Think like a university professor. These are universities first and the will of the academia's > the fanbase the majority of the time.

Frank's manta is applicable some of the time, in some of the cases. Take a look at A&M. Obviously, PAC academic affiliation would have been a boon to them, but they instead chose to blow up the PAC 16 deal in order to join the SEC.

my mantra is different from tanks. i have a academics/cultural fit philosophy when i say "think like a university prez" hence the reason aggie/cuse never went to the pac/b10

the SEC & pac12 while different from the b12, are not total cultural outliers for OU than the pac was for aggie.
06-04-2014 02:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #34
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-03-2014 10:13 AM)john01992 Wrote:  1. I do not understand the b10 love for KU. Remember that despite having solid BB, academics and being a state flagship they were passed over by the pac12, SEC, & B10 already. On top of that you have Mizz which is essentially a better overall school for the b10 and even they couldn't get an invite to the b10.

Solid basketball 04-jawdrop? The reason is that they check all the boxes that matter to the B1G president's which are AAU and being in a contiguous state with enough value to add to the bottom line of the B1G. KU also has added value to conferences with a network due to all the content filler basketball provides and the eyeballs they would bring to those match-ups by being a blue blood BB program.

KU was caught sleeping in 2010. I doubt that happens again. KU was always pretty content with the Big 8/Big 12 prior to 2010. It also has a little brother problem in that if it leaves the B12 to die, KSU might be outside the power conference structure. Before the PAC was vetoed by Texas in 2010, KU was starting talks with the PAC, and Gee (former OSU president) admitted that the B1G made a mistake NOT taking KU and MU in 2010, since they thought they could get them later (huge mistake now that KU is under GoR and MU is in the SEC and unlikely to return any B1G overtures). The SEC/KU thing would only happen if the SEC went to 20 or they really struck out to the east and on OU/UT at 16 so it was not a thought by either party in 2010/2011. There is interest. Just there are targets ahead of KU for most conferences, many of which are unrealistic to land and coveted by 2 or more conferences. Once the biggest fish make their decisions, if the B12 is done, KU will settle in to one of the four, most likely.

The best example of why the B1G is interested in Kansas is this estimated revenue added chart from Frank the Tank's blog, from the spring of 2010, that has been highly accurate about which schools the B1G has added (though a few schools that may be targets now are not included like UVA, OU, and UNC):


CANDIDATES TOTAL ADDED REVENUE ESTIMATE

Texas $101,369,004
Rutgers WITH NYC $67,798,609
Nebraska $54,487,990
Maryland $50,818,889
Boston College $48,382,692
Notre Dame $47,629,255
Kansas $46,320,092
Missouri $45,901,459
Syracuse $43,504,813
Connecticut $38,080,271
Pittsburgh $34,365,175
Iowa State $31,831,077

Syracuse WITH NYC $65,874,573

Notice 3 of the top 4 are now in the B1G. Later they say that this is probably a conservative estimate and the article came out in 2010 so is probably under valuing adds currently.


2. I think the texahoma & pac12 have a deeper interest in each other than is originally believed. TTU used to be in the same conference as arizona/arizona st. for a few decades. OSU may not have the history for it, but because of a single turbobooster they have the wealth/resources of your traditional tier 2 level program on par with michigan state, wisconsin, stanford, auburn etc.

texas being in that liberal city gives them a cultural aspect that fits in nicely with the pac12 and the OU administration seems to have a hard on for being in a top academic conference.

The PAC would like to drop one of OSU or TTU for KU I am 99% sure; however, they can't at this point and land both Texas and OU (I doubt this occurs anyway, Texas will go east most likely if the B12 fails, and OU might not be too thrilled with the PAC after the 2011 fiasco). TTU and OSU would be the price paid to get UT and OU to come to the PAC. If the PAC could choose freely, TTU and OSU would be fighting it out for the fourth spot. OSU is a redundant add if you have OU. TTU is to a point too, but Texas is a massive state, plus like you said it has some previous history with some current PAC schools. To be honest if you have Texas and OU, you might not need anyone else in Texas. OU is pretty big in Texas by itself. If there was much interest in OSU from the PAC, they would have added OU and OSU when they could have in 2011 and killed the B12. If it was OU/TTU or OU/KU, that probably happens. OSU is only worth it to the PAC if it is required to land Texas.

Note: Colorado was smart to take the PAC when they could with the instability involved with the B12. But they also had nobody to look after. All the schools like that left. The three with those responsibilities are still there. That is not a coincidence. Just look at OU who would probably have MU's place in the SEC right now if they had no OSU to care for for an example of this.
(This post was last modified: 06-04-2014 11:18 PM by jhawkmvp.)
06-04-2014 10:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #35
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-04-2014 02:37 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(06-04-2014 07:09 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-03-2014 07:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  1. as a CU fan I am rather insulted (not much though so no worries) that anyone would ever think that you would assume I was a proponent of a east/west pac16 split.I thought this was self explanatory with my being a CU guy and my statement that TTU & the arizona schools having history would make it obvious that I am 100% against it.

That's why I was confused by your TT & ASU/AU comment. I didn't think there was any way you of all people could be advocating an E/W split.

Quote:2. Think like a university professor. These are universities first and the will of the academia's > the fanbase the majority of the time.

Frank's manta is applicable some of the time, in some of the cases. Take a look at A&M. Obviously, PAC academic affiliation would have been a boon to them, but they instead chose to blow up the PAC 16 deal in order to join the SEC.

my mantra is different from tanks. i have a academics/cultural fit philosophy when i say "think like a university prez" hence the reason aggie/cuse never went to the pac/b10

the SEC & pac12 while different from the b12, are not total cultural outliers for OU than the pac was for aggie.

Culture was a big part in rejecting the PAC but so was geography. We would have been the Eastern-most outpost of the PAC and require several trips to the west coast annually and then flying home west to east which sucks for travel losing time as you cross two TZs
06-05-2014 06:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #36
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-05-2014 06:27 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  
(06-04-2014 02:37 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(06-04-2014 07:09 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(06-03-2014 07:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  1. as a CU fan I am rather insulted (not much though so no worries) that anyone would ever think that you would assume I was a proponent of a east/west pac16 split.I thought this was self explanatory with my being a CU guy and my statement that TTU & the arizona schools having history would make it obvious that I am 100% against it.

That's why I was confused by your TT & ASU/AU comment. I didn't think there was any way you of all people could be advocating an E/W split.

Quote:2. Think like a university professor. These are universities first and the will of the academia's > the fanbase the majority of the time.

Frank's manta is applicable some of the time, in some of the cases. Take a look at A&M. Obviously, PAC academic affiliation would have been a boon to them, but they instead chose to blow up the PAC 16 deal in order to join the SEC.

my mantra is different from tanks. i have a academics/cultural fit philosophy when i say "think like a university prez" hence the reason aggie/cuse never went to the pac/b10

the SEC & pac12 while different from the b12, are not total cultural outliers for OU than the pac was for aggie.

Culture was a big part in rejecting the PAC but so was geography. We would have been the Eastern-most outpost of the PAC and require several trips to the west coast annually and then flying home west to east which sucks for travel losing time as you cross two TZs

i am sure that was a factor. but i have always viewed geography as a sub portion of cultural fit.
06-05-2014 11:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #37
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
it is, but our AD was also concerned about travel associated issues with the distance like athletes coming back from say Seattle to Houston at 3 in the morning CT, 90 minute drive to CS and then having to go to class the next day sort of thing.
06-05-2014 03:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #38
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-05-2014 03:59 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  it is, but our AD was also concerned about travel associated issues with the distance like athletes coming back from say Seattle to Houston at 3 in the morning CT, 90 minute drive to CS and then having to go to class the next day sort of thing.

i think what it ultimately came down to: the realization that the most conservative school in the P5 would be in the same conference as the 7 most liberal ones.

with texas, tech, ou & osu the outlier aspect of it isn't as bad as you are trying to make it be.

and while you can point to quotes from the aggie admin. personally I think it is just a deflection on the political reasons for not doing so.
06-05-2014 09:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #39
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
(06-05-2014 09:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(06-05-2014 03:59 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  it is, but our AD was also concerned about travel associated issues with the distance like athletes coming back from say Seattle to Houston at 3 in the morning CT, 90 minute drive to CS and then having to go to class the next day sort of thing.

i think what it ultimately came down to: the realization that the most conservative school in the P5 would be in the same conference as the 7 most liberal ones.

with texas, tech, ou & osu the outlier aspect of it isn't as bad as you are trying to make it be.

and while you can point to quotes from the aggie admin. personally I think it is just a deflection on the political reasons for not doing so.

I think both points here are accurate. The distance between Texas and the West Coast is ridiculous, and Texas A&M is nothing culturally similar to the PAC 12...
06-06-2014 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #40
RE: B12 Realignment Fit Report Card
Exactly.

It wouldn't have mattered much for FB because we'd have only played out there once, maybe twice a season....but volleyball? Both basketball teams? baseball? softball? soccer? That is a **** ton of travel to the west coast and back. And as you correctly pointed out, to play teams that we have nothing in common with. Hell, just having to play teams like KSU and CU every year was pissing off our fans, let alone Berkely or UW
06-06-2014 02:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.