Realignment talk not going away

[Hurtlocker 2208]

12 hours ago, kopp0e said:

The most recent Big XII revenue per team has risen to over $34 million per team for 1st & 2nd tier payouts... I believe that includes XII CCG payouts, while the PAC is averaging $30 million for less inentory distributed to ESPN & FOX... 

As you say, this gives more inventory for the PACN, the only problem for the conference is that it's 3rd tier network is not worth nearly the value of Longhorn Network at $15 millionor fellow XII school platforms as SoonerSports & Jayhawk Network at $8 & $7 million, respectively...

Other than West Virginia, which values it's 3rd tier rights at about $8 million, the rest of the XII averages just $4 million in rights, while the PAC average is only $2 million without the value of including Texas & Oklahoma...

I think it very possible that both leagues may look to do a scheduling alliance, with joint product between the leagues for a stronger leverage of rights in the upcoming negotiations window of 2023 to 2025...

Yes, you were quoting the averages in the deal so I stuck with those.   A lot of things have changed from them that have added a significant amount of money to the pot, including the playoffs, the sugar bowl, and a CCG.   Those put about $12M more per year in each Big 12 school, while the Pac 12 added about $7.5M per team in that time.    That's probably the biggest reason why the Big 12 is pretty content with ten.

As for the extra games, e.g. PacNet, LHN, etc, currently the Big 12 is topping the Pac at that aspect too.   I'm not sure where they are spending their money, but PacN is still only paying out less than $3m per team.   When it started I thought they had a pretty slick set up with a national channel and regional flair, but it cost too much.   They need to ditch the regionals and cut some expenses.  

[angelos's frog 83]

This is an interesting development. B1G Network will not be available on Comcast outside of B1G home market states.  That means no B1G Network in NYC.  Maybe the TV guys are figuring out that interest in college sports is largely regional. 

 

 

 

 

[DRH1382 0]

Well, I guess Forde is technically correct that you can't watch the BTN on Comcast in NYC. But you never could, since New York is Time Warner territory. His snark is justified in that Rutgers in the B1G is terrible for many other reasons, but Comcast "dropping" coverage NY has nothing to do with it.

[kopp0e 1135]

7 hours ago, angelos's frog said:

This is an interesting development. B1G Network will not be available on Comcast outside of B1G home market states.  That means no B1G Network in NYC.  Maybe the TV guys are figuring out that interest in college sports is largely regional. 

 

 

 

 

Also losing carriage outside of footprint:
 

 

March 08, 2018 05:13 PM

Midco Dropping Big Ten Network Channels In South Dakota

tarting April 9, many Midco Cable TV customers in South Dakota will no longer get the four Big Ten Network channels. The company says it's "a business decision."

"We really have to look at our population base, and all of our customers, and so those are the decisions that we have to make, and they're really tough decisions to make, so my heart, my personal heart goes out to the sports fans." Paige Pearson Meyer Midco's Director of Public and Media Relations said.

But, she says, customers in Minnesota are not losing the Big Ten Network. She says you can check out Big Ten basketball on CBS, and also mentions Big Ten's YouTube channel as a place to watch.

Also latest rumors from ACC on impending ACCN cost are over budget...
 

 ACC Network looking more like a sinking ship than the rising tide

by Derek Helling2 weeks agoFollow @dhellingsports
The soon-to-launch ACC Network is already over budget, and the return on the investment might not improve the outlook much.

For collegiate conferences, the name of the money game in the current era is the revenue created by their own television networks. Salivating over the impressive advertising and rights returns posted by the Big Ten Network and SEC Network, the ACC Network is the rising tide that the ACC hopes will raise all of its ships.

So far, that’s not looking good.

[n64ra 1078]

lol at Iowa and Nebraska also not on the list...

Edited April 13, 2018 by n64ra

[angelos's frog 83]

1 hour ago, n64ra said:

lol at Iowa and Nebraska also not on the list...

Comcast doesn't operate at all in those states.

[SnowAggy 154]

The Midco thing in South Dakota is interesting because the Nebraska & Iowa fans (of which there are many) are very engaged here in Sioux Falls.  Plus Gopher hockey gets a lot of eyeballs.  I'd expect BTN to be really valuable here.

[kopp0e 1135]

Spring game attendance for two recent SEC & B1G expansion members...

 

 

Edited April 28, 2018 by kopp0e

[OnAComputer 1405]

 

[HornsofBevo 122]

16 hours ago, OnAComputer said:

 

That is some good info and it really just reaffirms the fact that the BigXII is working from a position of strength not weakness. It's time to start talking to any and all Pac schools and see who is willing to listen. My guess is the California schools will never leave but Utah, Colorado and the Arizona schools might be willing to at least hear what we have to offer. Potentially adding the Denver and Phoenix markets will help any future TV deals which should comfortably leave us in the top 3 payouts per conference.

['stache 21774]

Spring game attendance is such a stupid way to gauge a program.  I'm a big fan and have little to no interest in watching a glorified practice.  It's a gauge of how many fans have zero life.

[SnowAggy 154]

8 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Spring game attendance is such a stupid way to gauge a program.  I'm a big fan and have little to no interest in watching a glorified practice.  It's a gauge of how many fans have zero life.

Meh, I think it's a good way to gauge interest for and an upcoming season.  We might've set a Spring Game attendance record if it hadn't been fucking snowing...

And for teams up north it's usually fun just to be able to finally get outside into warm sun because it's well documented that we indeed don't have lives.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

19 hours ago, OnAComputer said:

 

The actual article he was referencing too was actually a pretty interesting read.   And the raise this year will be the addition of the CCG, to the tune of about $3m a pop.

Q&A with Bob Bowlsby: Big 12 commissioner reviews year, looks to future

Quote

G-M: Let’s dive right in. Financially, what kind of fiscal year did the Big 12 have?

BOWLSBY: We have forecast a significant increase in distribution to our members. The year is not over yet, but we anticipate our forecast is pretty close. We expect to have another good year financially.

G-M: How much do you expect to distribute per school?

BOWLSBY: We’ll reveal the numbers at the end of May, but we expect a substantial increase from that of last year, which was $34.5 million per school.

Quote

G-M: Can you could pinpoint one reason why the league didn’t expand? Was there pressure from your network partners not to do so?

BOWLSBY: There’s not a short answer to that. We went through a long process of analyzing a lot of data. Essentially, when it came down to it, there wasn’t an institution or group of institutions that had the requisite votes to be elected to membership. It requires a super majority of eight out of 10. Although there weren’t any votes taken, it was apparent there wasn’t an institution that had the requisite votes. For each of our 10 members it was an individual decision. They probably came to those in different ways.

Quote

G-M: Director Lyons said expansion is always on the burner, but now on the back burner. What’s on the front burner for the Big 12 these days?

BOWLSBY: We’re spending a lot of time considering what to do with our third-tier rights. All of the baseball, softball, volleyball and championships not covered by our other agreements. Most of our members would like to see us aggregate and have some sort of digital network that would allow for standardization of distribution and a shared capture of revenue. We’re spending time on that.

G-M: When you signed a new extension through 2024-25, I assume some of that was so you could handle — and maybe get a running start on — media rights negotiations. What are your early thoughts on that?

BOWLSBY: I appreciate the confidence our Board of Directors have shown in me and my leadership. I’m very bullish on our future, but we do have some important decisions coming up. Our Tier 1 media contracts involving football and men’s basketball, particularly, come up in ’24-25. There are a number of opportunities for us between now and then that will require some negotiation and thinking about how we want to structure things.

Among the most interesting things to me is the changing landscape of the sports media environment. The world is consuming sports and news in ways that were unforeseen a few years ago. Anyone that tells you they know what will be happening in the world of media three or four years from now is delusional. It’s changing so fast it’s difficult to make such forecasts. I find it fascinating and think we’ll be right in the middle of it. We’ll have some tremendous opportunities. I feel very good about the next few years.

 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5784]

I think the main reason realignment talk has died down is because of the lack of impact from these contracts. Yes, there is a quiet period right now with no conferences publicly  exploring expansion, but maximizing TV contracts was the main driver for a lot of expansion, and its importance appears to have been way overblown. 

 

The Big 10 and the secsecsec have dominated TV revenue for years now, giving the perception that the Pac, ACC, and Big 12 have been fighting for their lives. The fans were whipped into a frenzy thinking that their program had to relocate or be relegated to the dustbin of college football history. 

 

The problem is that after all these years, the money really hasn't changed anything. The top teams are still the top teams, regardless of conference. All that Big 10 and secsecsec money hasn't elevated any of their mid to lower level teams, nor has it separated their top teams from the top teams of the "have not" conferences. It's obvious the importance of TV money is overblown, and not worth losing regional ties and rivalries. 

 

 

[angelos's frog 83]

2 hours ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I think the main reason realignment talk has died down is because of the lack of impact from these contracts. Yes, there is a quiet period right now with no conferences publicly  exploring expansion, but maximizing TV contracts was the main driver for a lot of expansion, and its importance appears to have been way overblown. 

 

The Big 10 and the secsecsec have dominated TV revenue for years now, giving the perception that the Pac, ACC, and Big 12 have been fighting for their lives. The fans were whipped into a frenzy thinking that their program had to relocate or be relegated to the dustbin of college football history. 

 

The problem is that after all these years, the money really hasn't changed anything. The top teams are still the top teams, regardless of conference. All that Big 10 and secsecsec money hasn't elevated any of their mid to lower level teams, nor has it separated their top teams from the top teams of the "have not" conferences. It's obvious the importance of TV money is overblown, and not worth losing regional ties and rivalries. 

 

 

Bingo.  Texas will always be Texas, OU will always be OU, USC will always be USC and Rutgers will always be Rutgers.  The biggest place the money will make a difference is between the G5 and P5 schools.  It is going to be very difficult for G5 schools to do what TCU and Utah have done.  UCF, UH, CSU and Cincy are all trying to spend their way into the P5 but I'm not sure it can be done anymore.

[rickyspub 801]

I am not sure aggy would have gotten Fisher if they were still in the Big 12. At the very least I am not sure if they would have gone with $75M guaranteed, even though FSU likely wasn't all that interested in keeping Fisher around even if aggy had gone with something less. That few added millions they get from sharing a conference with Bama, Georgia, and Florida, allowed them to be even more reckless than usual.

Edited April 18, 2018 by rickyspub

[HornsofBevo 122]

1 hour ago, angelos's frog said:

Bingo.  Texas will always be Texas, OU will always be OU, USC will always be USC and Rutgers will always be Rutgers.  The biggest place the money will make a difference is between the G5 and P5 schools.  It is going to be very difficult for G5 schools to do what TCU and Utah have done.  UCF, UH, CSU and Cincy are all trying to spend their way into the P5 but I'm not sure it can be done anymore.

I agree. It's going to take a "Baylor getting kicked out of the Big12" type of event for a Houston or Cincinnati to have a chance to move up to a P5 conference. With the money where it is right now, I can't see any conferences expanding especially the Big12 unless it's a major conference team.

[tonedeaf 56]

On ‎4‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 11:47 AM, HornsofBevo said:

I agree. It's going to take a "Baylor getting kicked out of the Big12" type of event for a Houston or Cincinnati to have a chance to move up to a P5 conference. With the money where it is right now, I can't see any conferences expanding especially the Big12 unless it's a major conference team.

I'm all for it.  Lets get it done.

[Saint Tacky 1610]

On 4/13/2018 at 10:55 AM, SnowAggy said:

Plus Gopher hockey gets a lot of eyeballs

. 

 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

On 4/20/2018 at 12:10 PM, Saint Tacky said:

[kopp0e 1135]

A hypothetical number per conference for a 16 member PAC, and current ACC/ B1G & SEC #'s for NFL players by state...

Just as shown in Fox choosing to merge with Disney over the more generous monetary offer from Comcast, (or if using actual NCAA universities past decisions):

Miami picking the Big East over [potential] SEC offer...
Notre Dame picking Big East over [actual] B1G offer...
Florida State picking ACC over [potential] SEC offer...
Virginia remaining in ACC over [actual] B1G offer...
North Carolina remaining in ACC over [actual] B1G offer...

Likewise, it is possible for both Texas & Oklahoma to find more "intrinsic value" in remaining aligned as allies within the same conference; be it an expanded XII absorbing the PAC (similar to the Big 8 & SWC merger forming the XII)...

Many states within a merged PAC-XII & SEC have the lowest unemployment rates in the nation, on top of current population growth within the regions as well...

Quote

14 states hit record-low unemployment
BY REID WILSON - 04/23/18 11:21 AM EDT

Fourteen states have set new records for low unemployment rates in the last year, nearly a decade after the recession put millions of Americans out of work.

The states hitting new unemployment lows run the ideological gamut, from conservative Texas to liberal California, suggesting a recovery stronger than any particular political persuasion.

In March, eight states saw new record lows, including Hawaii (2.1 percent), Idaho (2.9 percent), Kentucky (4 percent ), Maine (2.7 percent), Mississippi (4.5 percent), Oregon (4.1 percent) and Wisconsin (2.9 percent).

California also set a new record last month. The Golden State’s unemployment rate stands at 4.1 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). That’s the lowest rate recorded since BLS began keeping track of state-level unemployment figures in 1976, and it’s a third of the 12.3 percent unemployment rate California notched at the height of the recession in December 2010.

Colorado’s unemployment rate is just 2.6 percent, among the lowest in the nation, and a third of the 8.9 percent peak it hit in 2010.

In Alabama, just 3.7 percent of workers are unemployed. Arkansas reached a 3.6 percent unemployment rate last May, its lowest rate ever. http://thehill.com/homenews/state-wa...w-unemployment

 

While on the other end of the spectrum, the "Rust Belt" region that most of the B1G sits in, is still losing population & in decline...

 

Edited April 28, 2018 by kopp0e

[S11 16]

On 4/17/2018 at 9:29 AM, HornsofBevo said:

That is some good info and it really just reaffirms the fact that the BigXII is working from a position of strength not weakness. It's time to start talking to any and all Pac schools and see who is willing to listen. My guess is the California schools will never leave but Utah, Colorado and the Arizona schools might be willing to at least hear what we have to offer. Potentially adding the Denver and Phoenix markets will help any future TV deals which should comfortably leave us in the top 3 payouts per conference.

So much will depend on what tv deals get projected out as next decade.   Early signing a fox contract right before the tier two rights market shot up due to the BTN really hurt the Big 12 with the 2007 Fox deal.   If that is negotiated even a year later we may never have lost a single school as financial incentives would have been dramatically reduced.  Big 12 went from fair pay to barely paid overnight.   Tier one deal was still market though.

['stache 21774]

moar graphics

[flatdawgs 1264]

Why bother with poaching teams, either direction? Big 12 and Pac 12 would be well-served by developing a strong cross-conference media arrangement and interconference scheduling. No need to trash either one or create an unwieldy mega-conference. Keep the conferences' strengths while shoring up each other's perceived weaknesses (Pac-12's lack of reach into strong football regions; Big 12's perceived ""poachability.").  The conferences can remain the regional ones we all prefer with a partnership that strengthens them both.

[Shmitty 112]

On 4/18/2018 at 10:20 AM, angelos's frog said:

Bingo.  Texas will always be Texas, OU will always be OU, USC will always be USC and Rutgers will always be Rutgers.  The biggest place the money will make a difference is between the G5 and P5 schools.  It is going to be very difficult for G5 schools to do what TCU and Utah have done.  UCF, UH, CSU and Cincy are all trying to spend their way into the P5 but I'm not sure it can be done anymore.

What did Utah do besides have 2 great seasons and benefit from the 2002 Olympics building up their small stadium?  And their fanbase is confined to a small pocket around the SLC area where they are #2 in their own state.  

[Thiefery 4969]

7 hours ago, flatdawgs said:

Why bother with poaching teams, either direction? Big 12 and Pac 12 would be well-served by developing a strong cross-conference media arrangement and interconference scheduling. No need to trash either one or create an unwieldy mega-conference. Keep the conferences' strengths while shoring up each other's perceived weaknesses (Pac-12's lack of reach into strong football regions; Big 12's perceived ""poachability.").  The conferences can remain the regional ones we all prefer with a partnership that strengthens them both.

The merger is a stupid idea, however what you bring up isn't. Both conferences should play each other more frequent. TX vs USC/UCLA/UW/UO/AZ schools.. hell even Colorado would be nice games for the out of conference schedule.

Also I really hope UT schedules more home and home games out east for us transplanted fans.  I'm super excited about the MD game at FedEx in September.

[SnowAggy 154]

7 hours ago, flatdawgs said:

Why bother with poaching teams, either direction? Big 12 and Pac 12 would be well-served by developing a strong cross-conference media arrangement and interconference scheduling. No need to trash either one or create an unwieldy mega-conference. Keep the conferences' strengths while shoring up each other's perceived weaknesses (Pac-12's lack of reach into strong football regions; Big 12's perceived ""poachability.").  The conferences can remain the regional ones we all prefer with a partnership that strengthens them both.

Yeah, been saying this for years and I think we discussed it at the old site.  Why not have an agreement by which a (vast) majority of P5 CFB west of the Mississippi is one group?  Doesn't have to be a merger at all.  But some scheduling agreements would be nice.

[angelos's frog 83]

10 hours ago, Shmitty said:

What did Utah do besides have 2 great seasons and benefit from the 2002 Olympics building up their small stadium?  And their fanbase is confined to a small pocket around the SLC area where they are #2 in their own state.  

I don't really think they're #2 in their own state.  Even if they were, they've been much more successful than BYU over the last 10-15 years.  Utah won 79 games in the last 8 years they were in the MWC, had two undefeated seasons, won two BCS bowl games including a win over Bama in the Sugar Bowl and regularly sell out a good sized stadium.  They earned a spot in a P5 league by winning. It also helped that they are the flagship state school in a state with a larger population than other states with P5 teams like Iowa, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kansas, Nebraska and West Virginia.  Utah has also proved they belong in the Pac-12 by finishing ranked in the AP top 25 in 3 of the last 4 seasons. 

[kopp0e 1135]

On 5/1/2018 at 2:19 AM, Shmitty said:

What did Utah do besides have 2 great seasons and benefit from the 2002 Olympics building up their small stadium?  And their fanbase is confined to a small pocket around the SLC area where they are #2 in their own state.  

Actually, Utah has a better penetration within not only it's home state, but also quite popular in surrounding state as well...

On 5/1/2018 at 12:48 AM, flatdawgs said:

Why bother with poaching teams, either direction? Big 12 and Pac 12 would be well-served by developing a strong cross-conference media arrangement and interconference scheduling. No need to trash either one or create an unwieldy mega-conference. Keep the conferences' strengths while shoring up each other's perceived weaknesses (Pac-12's lack of reach into strong football regions; Big 12's perceived ""poachability.").  The conferences can remain the regional ones we all prefer with a partnership that strengthens them both.

I'm not opposed to an alliance in the XII & PAC, as it basically does many of the same things as a merger...

What I am opposed to that i deem "stupid" or a lack of foresight, is allowing the schools to be split between the leagues to the east, in the B1G & SEC...

Having either/ or both situations where a merger or alliance is formed, and keeping rivalries with Tech/ Kansas/ Iowa State/ TCU & both UT & OU as conference rivals, is far better than repeating the same steps made in the late 1980's and early 1990's... And it basically ensures that neither the XII or PAC wind up at the whims of the networks as to who makes the cut...

Edit: The PAC & XII alliance guarantees that (in the case of a XII vs PAC conference championship game), the winner & loser both have a NY6 bowl...

 

Edited May 3, 2018 by kopp0e

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

23 hours ago, SnowAggy said:

Yeah, been saying this for years and I think we discussed it at the old site.  Why not have an agreement by which a (vast) majority of P5 CFB west of the Mississippi is one group?  Doesn't have to be a merger at all.  But some scheduling agreements would be nice.

I would love an ISU/Wazzu home and home.  Been wanting a reason to go to a game in Pullman forever.

[SnowAggy 154]

59 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I would love an ISU/Wazzu home and home.  Been wanting a reason to go to a game in Pullman forever.

Any Pac destination would be great for me.  Tempe or Tuscon in November would be...less snowy...

Always been a casual fan of most Pac teams especially UDub who I (aged 7) first saw play on TV Jan 1, 1982 taking down my fathers Iowa Hawkeyes in the Rose Bowl.  For some reason I instantly liked the Huskies, Dad didn't.

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

5 minutes ago, SnowAggy said:

Any Pac destination would be great for me.  Tempe or Tuscon in November would be...less snowy...

Always been a casual fan of most Pac teams especially UDub who I (aged 7) first saw play on TV Jan 1, 1982 taking down my fathers Iowa Hawkeyes in the Rose Bowl.  For some reason I instantly liked the Huskies, Dad didn't.

I'd assume a non-con scheduling agreement would likely mean games in September.

[SnowAggy 154]

47 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I'd assume a non-con scheduling agreement would likely mean games in September.

Don't snow on my AZ dreams.

['stache 21774]

11 hours ago, kopp0e said:

Actually, Utah has a better penetration within not only it's home state, but also quite popular in surrounding state as well...

 

[angelos's frog 83]

The only reasonable solution is a scheduling alliance and pooling the media rights for purposes of negotiations.  Maybe even throw in a Pac vs. Big 12 bowl game and/or kick-off classic type game as part of the media package. 

Reduce the conference games to a 8 game schedule (with one permanent rivalry game per team if we stay at 10).  Everyone plays 2 Pac-12 teams each year.  One early season game and one game later in the season like the SEC does.  It would work best if we had 12 teams but it's doable with 10.  To get to 12 we try to get Mizzou and Arkansas or Nebraska back.  I think Mizzou is doable, don't know about Arkansas or Nebraska but it's worth a try.  If we could get Mizzou back, I'd take just about anyone to fill the 12th spot. 

[TrashMaster G 17391]

5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Boy, this really supports the WRTS BS in Collieville, huh?  More like WRTC.

[Thiefery 4969]

31 minutes ago, angelos's frog said:

The only reasonable solution is a scheduling alliance and pooling the media rights for purposes of negotiations.  Maybe even throw in a Pac vs. Big 12 bowl game and/or kick-off classic type game as part of the media package. 

Reduce the conference games to a 8 game schedule (with one permanent rivalry game per team if we stay at 10).  Everyone plays 2 Pac-12 teams each year.  One early season game and one game later in the season like the SEC does.  It would work best if we had 12 teams but it's doable with 10.  To get to 12 we try to get Mizzou and Arkansas or Nebraska back.  I think Mizzou is doable, don't know about Arkansas or Nebraska but it's worth a try.  If we could get Mizzou back, I'd take just about anyone to fill the 12th spot. 

Why would we want to bring Mizzou back?? Nebraska is too prideful to ever return even if it's their best option to become "elite" again. Maybe Arkansas..if we finally kick out Baylor

[angelos's frog 83]

2 hours ago, Thiefery said:

Why would we want to bring Mizzou back?? Nebraska is too prideful to ever return even if it's their best option to become "elite" again. Maybe Arkansas..if we finally kick out Baylor

 The Big 12 would take Mizzou back in a nano-second if they called.  KC and StL media markets.  Flagship state university of the 18th largest state with no other FBS school in the state as a clear competitor.   Compare Mizzou to what we had to pick from last year -- BYU, Cincy, UH, Memphis, CSU . . . .  Mizzou is head and shoulders over any of those schools.  They really should come back.  They're a total misfit in the SEC, especially in the east division. 

[Thiefery 4969]

36 minutes ago, angelos's frog said:

 The Big 12 would take Mizzou back in a nano-second if they called.  KC and StL media markets.  Flagship state university of the 18th largest state with no other FBS school in the state as a clear competitor.   Compare Mizzou to what we had to pick from last year -- BYU, Cincy, UH, Memphis, CSU . . . .  Mizzou is head and shoulders over any of those schools.  They really should come back.  They're a total misfit in the SEC, especially in the east division. 

nah man , they were the first one raising their skirts and dropping to its knees trying to get out of the conference.. let them take their money and have their sports fizzle with the occasional 8/9 win season.  

I also think that the BIG 12 should continue to stay at 10 teams for now, the money hasn't been effected yet.

[TrashMaster G 17391]

7 minutes ago, Thiefery said:

nah man , they were the first one raising their skirts and dropping to its knees trying to get out of the conference.. let them take their money and have their sports fizzle with the occasional 8/9 win season.  

I also think that the BIG 12 should continue to stay at 10 teams for now, the money hasn't been effected yet.

*affected

[kopp0e 1135]

19 minutes ago, angelos's frog said:

 The Big 12 would take Mizzou back in a nano-second if they called.  KC and StL media markets.  Flagship state university of the 18th largest state with no other FBS school in the state as a clear competitor.   Compare Mizzou to what we had to pick from last year -- BYU, Cincy, UH, Memphis, CSU . . . .  Mizzou is head and shoulders over any of those schools.  They really should come back.  They're a total misfit in the SEC, especially in the east division. 

Mizzou would more than likely look to stay in the SEC, (unless the B1G comes looking for an additional west partner for Nebraska nearing it's media contract renewal in 2023...

But there is talk on the Arkansas boards of missing the tremendous recruiting grounds within the Lone Star State, so I wouldn't totally count count out the chance of a return...

Quote

BoarnSupremacy
Varsity

 Offline
Posts: 323
Surfing the web at Hogville.net

I think a Big 12 switch may be
« on: October 11, 2017, 06:52:15 pm »

a good thing.  Its no secret the texas recruiting has gone down alot since 1992.  Parents of texas recruits want to watch sons play in texas.  Its pretty obvious the present recruiting isn't enough.  The venues are alot closer and would build more fan support due to simple geography.  I don't think its running from competition as much as it is trying to improve our pitiful recruiting.  A year to year series with OU would be fun.  I think it should be considered.

29 minutes ago, angelos's frog said:

 The Big 12 would take Mizzou back in a nano-second if they called.  KC and StL media markets.  Flagship state university of the 18th largest state with no other FBS school in the state as a clear competitor.   Compare Mizzou to what we had to pick from last year -- BYU, Cincy, UH, Memphis, CSU . . . .  Mizzou is head and shoulders over any of those schools.  They really should come back.  They're a total misfit in the SEC, especially in the east division. 

Nebraska has a deficit problem, as it just ended the "junior membership" in the B1G, where the Huskers had to buy into the BTN for over half a decade, to get full media payments...

Quote

 

Regents respond to recently proposed budget cuts

• Nathan Anderson
• • Feb. 19, 2018

The University of Nebraska system will be staring down more tough choices if Gov. Pete Ricketts’ proposed budget cuts are accepted by the state Legislature.
Grappling with a $49 million budget deficit and seeing a potential $34 million in additional budget cuts, the university system may be forced to cut over 80 full-time-equivalent jobs, eliminate various degree programs including geography, art history and electronic engineering and increase tuition.

 

There is a narrative, where the Bugeaters' fans are unhappy with losing access to the Lone Star State (seems to be a trend here) & want access to the talent rich state for recruits...
 

Quote

 

Nebraska Football’s Enduring Identity Crisis

The Cornhuskers fired athletic director Shawn Eichorst this week. Head coach Mike Riley might be next. The program keeps changing course in an attempt to reclaim its spot atop the college football pecking order, but is a return to glory even possible? By Jonathan Tjarks Sep 22, 2017, 9:15am EDT

[...]
Some of my earliest memories are watching the Big Red Machine tear through teams from all over the country, one option run at a time. From 1993 to 1997, the Huskers went an unfathomable 60-3 and won three national titles. Given everything that’s happened since, that feels like a lifetime ago. For the players the program is now trying to recruit, it might as well be.
I was 9 years old the last time Nebraska won a national championship. The Huskers haven’t won a conference title since Bill Clinton was president. On Thursday, five days after an embarrassing 21-17 home loss to Northern Illinois, the school fired athletic director Shawn Eichorst. Times have changed in Lincoln, and no one knows how to turn back the clock.

 

Quote

regoratsginrom
Senior
Joined:May 15, 2004

Messages:2,206 

Likes Received:158

I have always thought Nebraska made a big mistake by leaving the B12. It was at that point that we lost our identity as a program. While the B1G has some prestige to it, I don't feel like we've ever really fit in...and I couldn't give two sh*ts about the majority of the schools in this conference. Sure, Michigan and Ohio State are cool...after that, who cares? Seriously. Moving to the B1G has hurt our fans in many ways both in terms of travelling, rivalries, caring about what's going on. And I don't buy the $$ aspect. Yes, we're making a lot of money in the B1G. However, you can't tell me that a Big 12 conference that featured Texas, Oklahoma and Nebraska wouldn't have had very lucrative TV deals as well. Much of the Big 12's issues (perceived or otherwise) are a RESULT of Nebraska and Missouri leaving the conference. Yes, Texas wanted to throw its weight around, but you know what...so did Nebraska. We voted WITH Texas to not have equal revenue sharing among the conference. We got our feelings hurt because we couldn't beat them a few times and we took our ball and went elsewhere. Not a popular opinion but had we stuck it out and demanded our (rightful) seat at the table, the Big 12 would have been just fine. Missouri HATES being in the SEC. They've become totally irrelevant...they've lost the Kansas City market and they are pining for old rivalries (KU and K-State in particular). I know I'm in the minority, but I truly believe we've made our own bed as it relates to our conference. We've let our identity slip away and it's now affecting our play on the field. My two (unpopular) cents.
 
40 regoratsginrom, Sep 22, 2017
rwine, The ScapeGOAT, CBOYZ CAT and 3 others like this.

 

[flatdawgs 1264]

12 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I would love an ISU/Wazzu home and home.  Been wanting a reason to go to a game in Pullman forever.

Apple Cup's in Pullman this year.  It's usually fun.... 

 

(I'd go to a UW game at any/all of the Big 12 schools...the only question really is what ones I'd return to. Based on what I've heard, ISU would be one of those.)

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

11 hours ago, flatdawgs said:

Apple Cup's in Pullman this year.  It's usually fun.... 

 

(I'd go to a UW game at any/all of the Big 12 schools...the only question really is what ones I'd return to. Based on what I've heard, ISU would be one of those.)

I'd be jumping all over the UW game as well.  Your setting looks beautiful, and my wife's cousins live in Seattle, so we have a free place to crash.  There's just something about Pullman's isolation that intrigues me.  Plus Leach.

I'd be interested in the following Pac 12 games (besides the two Washington schools):  Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, Colorado (never went when they were Big 12)

The California schools don't interest me at all, and the Arizona schools aren't terribly interesting football destinations either.  Just don't get the impression that their fans care.

Edited May 3, 2018 by Al_4_ISU

[Shmitty 112]

On 5/1/2018 at 10:38 PM, kopp0e said:

Actually, Utah has a better penetration within not only it's home state, but also quite popular in surrounding state as well...

I'm not opposed to an alliance in the XII & PAC, as it basically does many of the same things as a merger...

What I am opposed to that i deem "stupid" or a lack of foresight, is allowing the schools to be split between the leagues to the east, in the B1G & SEC...

Having either/ or both situations where a merger or alliance is formed, and keeping rivalries with Tech/ Kansas/ Iowa State/ TCU & both UT & OU as conference rivals, is far better than repeating the same steps made in the late 1980's and early 1990's... And it basically ensures that neither the XII or PAC wind up at the whims of the networks as to who makes the cut...

Edit: The PAC & XII alliance guarantees that (in the case of a XII vs PAC conference championship game), the winner & loser both have a NY6 bowl...

No they don't, it's not even close.  Utah is still dominated by BYU.  And BYU vastly outnumbers Utah in the surrounding states as well, including California.  

No they don't, it's not even close.  Utah is still dominated by BYU.  And BYU vastly outnumbers Utah in the surrounding states as well, including California.  Utah is a small market program confined to a pocket around SLC, they have some of the most casual, fairweather fans in their conference who only really come out when they play BYU.  

Edited May 6, 2018 by Shmitty

[angelos's frog 83]

The lowest home game attendance in '17 during a 7-6 season was 45,826.  Capacity at Rice-Eccles is 45,807.  Utah has had 51 straight sold out games and is looking into expanding the stadium. Meanwhile, BYU has averaged fewer than 60,000 at home the last 4 seasons in a row and according to the Deseret News, BYU only had 46,000 for SJSU and 51,000 for UMass last season.  8 of the 20 worst attended games at LaVell Edwards stadium since the '82 expansion were in the past 3 seasons.  What were you saying about fair weather fans?  

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865693491/Analysis-BYU-had-a-not-so-crowded-house-as-football-attendance-hits-new-low.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Utah_Utes_football_team

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice-Eccles_Stadium

 

 

[mdleast 8262]

I want us to raid the Pac-12. I loved going to that USC game last year and want more away games like that.

They seem potentially ripe for the taking....


https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/cracks-are-forming-in-the-pac-12-will-they-be-patched-before-its-too-late/

[Hurtlocker 2208]

13 hours ago, mdleast said:

I want us to raid the Pac-12. I loved going to that USC game last year and want more away games like that.

They seem potentially ripe for the taking....


https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/cracks-are-forming-in-the-pac-12-will-they-be-patched-before-its-too-late/

It is interesting how quickly the narrative changes on who is worst.  First the Big 12, then the ACC, now the Pac 12.   Hell, it wasn't long ago that everyone said the Big Ten sucked at football and they spun it around to smack everyone this past bowl season.   The problem with the Pac is it is so far away and the only conference that can really take is the Big 12, who now has a flag planted about as far east from Dallas as Phoenix is west.  I still think the answer is the Big 12 and the Pac 12 pool their rights in 2023, not poach or realign.  It also wouldn't surprise me if the Big Ten entered into that mix and they were negotiating the three largest states and a lot of connected geography in between.

If you're going to poach, poach close.

Edited May 16, 2018 by Hurtlocker

[mdleast 8262]

I’m OK with full on realignment vs poaching it just seems there is more poaching talk recently. I remember hearing Deloss speak years ago at an event where he was hinting at a Big 12/Pac 12 supergroup which I was on board with then and now. As to their location/game times, maybe I’m a weirdo as I’m the sad soul who actually likes having Pac 12 after dark games to watch.

[PhillyD 1257]

I live on the east coast and I find that those are often the games I get to watch the most.  I'm not happy when Texas plays that late game, but for casual viewing, I love that they have those late games.

[angelos's frog 83]

26 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

It is interesting how quickly the narrative changes on who is worst.  First the Big 12, then the ACC, now the Pac 12.   Hell, it wasn't long ago that everyone said the Big Ten sucked at football and they spun it around to smack everyone this past bowl season.   The problem with the Pac is it is so far away and the only conference that can really take is the Big 12, who now has a flag planted about as far east from Dallas as Phoenix is west.  I still think the answer is the Big 12 and the Pac 12 pool their rights in 2023, not poach or realign.  It also wouldn't surprise me if the Big Ten entered into that mix and they were negotiating the three largest states and a lot of connected geography in between.

If you're going to poach, poach close.

I agree with pooling the media rights and doing a scheduling alliance.  Honestly, just adding the two Arizona schools doesn't excite me too much.  Zona historically has a pretty mediocre football program and ASU hasn't exactly been kicking ass in the Pac the last 20 years either.  ASU has three double digit win seasons since 1997 and zero major bowl appearances.  Zona has two double digit win seasons since '97 (one of which was in '98) and one Fiesta Bowl appearance.  I don't think adding either one of those schools is going to add a ton of value.  One of them and CU or Utah might be better since you're adding more media markets but that seems unlikely. 

Pool the media rights, and schedule 2 cross-conference games every season for every team.  Combine that with some high profile cross-conference basketball, baseball and olympic sports match ups and you have pseudo mega-conference.  TCU under Del Conte and now under Donati has been foreshadowing this possibility for years with basketball games against Pac-12 teams at Staples Centers in '17 and '18, baseball games at Dodgers Stadium for several years and OOC football games scheduled against Pac-12 teams 6 out of 7 years beginning in 2020.