Football ...
Basketball ...
Baseball ...
Other Sports ...
Futbol ...
🤫995🤫 ...
Gambling ...
Movies & TV ...
Music ...
Hobbies ...
Lulz ...
Food & Travel
...
Daily Texan ...
Business & Markets ...
Cloak Room ...
Help ...
For Sale ...
Board Discussion ...
Advertise...
Tailgate Donations
-
Posts
4562 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by TKthunder2
-
Cutting SJSU and their barely 20k seat stadium makes sense if you’re partnering with Cal/Stanford who are already in the Bay Area. Not sure I understand the logic of cutting Hawaii’s fb only membership but I guess if it doesn’t bring in money then it makes sense. I am a little puzzled with them listing Nevada as one to cut. Who did they piss off? You keep New Mexico, Wyoming, and Utah State but dump Nevada. Must be more to that story.
-
No, they’ve had very little football and basketball success other than a recent E8 run that they put together after only making the tournament by winning their conference, and a handful of above average years of football in the 2000-2010s. They had a great opportunity to make something of their program that every program West of the Rockies would have killed for and they did nothing with it, Their peers institutions are in the Mountain West where their stadium would be middle of the pack behind New Mexico, Colorado St, Fresno St and Boise St. OSU/WSU have the 2nd and 3rd smallest football stadiums in the Power 5 only missing out on the #1 spot due to Wake Forest (who we all know won’t make to cut when the ACC breaks up). In this case the water is simply finding its natural level. Cal and Stanford (despite their institutional incompetence) could realistically be in the Big Ten. WSU/OSU have no chance.
-
The Big Ten cares about 3 things: Athletic prestige, media markets, and academics (in that order). Athletically speaking there is only ND and the ACC remaining. ND, FSU/Clemson, UNC/Miami end of list. Sure other universities have acceptable programs (Duke/Kansas basketball for example) that can help their cause but the Big Ten does not care, you’ll need to lead off your PowerPoint presentation with something other than your athletic success. Media markets: Unless they can pull UT/aggy there is no one that will give them a notable Texas presence. Top Non-Texas markets they don’t have: Atlanta, Miami, Phoenix, Boston, San Francisco which is why they’ll have interest in GT, Miami, Arizona St, Boston College (very dark horse), and Stanford/Cal. Academics: Stanford, Cal, ND, BC, UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami With this basic understanding it seems obvious that adding ND (the biggest piece of the board) and Stanford (big market, great academics, no encumbrances) is the easiest move in the board to get to 20. When they go to 24, some combo of UNC, FSU, Miami, UVA, GT. If they can only land GT/Miami, then they move into their more fringe candidates like Arizona St, Boston College, Duke, Kansas, Colorado, and Utah
-
If they could find a way to dump San Jose State (don’t need a 3rd Bay Area school) and replace with SMU that would optimal. But with the MWC exit fee and short timeline I don’t see how that plays.
-
Does anyone find it humorous that the 4 schools left in the PAC are the two smartest highest level research universities in Silicon Valley that only want to associate with non religious AAU schools…and a pair of rural non AAU ag schools? If you were to list all former PAC12 schools on a spectrum Cal/Stanford would be in one side and WSU/OSU would be on the other.
-
Interesting take from local news out in Cal. Gives a pretty good synopsis but obviously doesn’t elaborate too much on how Cal/Stanford own a lot of blame for the situation and generally puts it on the ‘conference’
-
So next year… B1G: 18 SEC: 16 B12: 16 ACC: 14+ND nonfb PAC: 4 MWC: 11+Hawaii fb AAC: 14 (Navy fb & Wichita St nonfb) SBC: 14 MAC: 12 CUSA: 10 Ind: 4 (ND, Army, UConn, UMass)
-
Yeah that’s about $140million the MWC schools would have to payout plus $40million the AAC schools would have to payout to join WSU/OSU/Cal/Stanford. Those fees are more than Apple will pay for this new conference makeup. A PAC/MWC merger seems like the obvious choice at this point: Hawaii, SDSU, Fresno, SJSU, Cal, Stanford, OrSU, WSU, Boise, Nevada, UNLV, Utah St, Wyo, CO St, Air Force, New Mexico They keep A5 status and can negotiate a new TV deal and likely get someone in the playoff in 24/25.
-
Its not bad, but would be so much better if they could send those Eastern teams to the ACC. Not going to convince me otherwise.
-
Other than the value of Purdue and Rutgers was taken into consideration by FOX/CBS/NBC when they made their new deal and Oregon/Washington were not??? I think Oregon/Washington can ask for the same shares they’d receive in the Big 12 now as a junior members, with the understanding that they get full shares when the next contract is negotiated. That is a win/win for both parties. UO/UW get Big 12 level money without having to join the Big 12 and gets to participate in a Power 2 conference with future full membership and full shares, and the Big Ten adds two second tier brands to their conference and gets more money in the short term as their buy-in. Literally helps everyone other than USC/UCLA who don’t have a vote.
-
Except you have 2 with all the big time major brands and 2 with the mid tier brands. If Notre Dame, Oregon, Washington, Florida St, Clemson, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia and a few others all join the P2 it really would make a lot of sense to combine the Big 12 and the best or the ACC (sorry Wake/BC) and maybe a select team or two from the MWC/AAC and go to market as a single fb conference with two large divisions while maintaining other sports in a more geographically friendly setup.
-
Maybe, but with ESPN holding their tier 2 and 3 rights it made a lot of sense in the short term. I haven’t got into all the specifics before because until this last Big Ten deal the numbers for the SEC were just bonkers comparatively speaking so it wasn’t worth a lot of scrutiny. Often the conference with the newest deal makes the most money. Still, personally not upset if the SEC makes a little less money than the conference that has to fly from LAX to EWR for conference games (and maybe soon from SEA to MIA as well).
-
FOX has to pay more to get them. They know the Big Ten won’t let them in without $. They also bring two new markets under the BTN in market rate and offer more late kick options which is appealing for FS1. Oregon/Washington have options and so does the Big Ten in a late night package for ESPN. If they deliver that value at half cost and keep them away from ESPN then it’s a pretty solid deal. On the SEC, ESPN gets no new markets or carriage agreements, and the SEC has no other options. ESPN is playing hardball because they can and because they think the SEC will eventually go to 9 conference games on their own because they value their #2 rivalries too much. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? If the SEC stands pat at 8 games two years in a row and big time rivalry games get skipped then you might see them actually be willing to pony up. Until then, 8 games while keeping the rivals intact is a weak bluff.
-
Yes but that vote would be from all DI schools not just the A5. I also think you’re walking a thin line if you remove the voting power from the only true Western Conference. The PAC12’s interests (like in venue selection for the NCAA tournament and travel rules) often coincides with other Western conferences like the WCC, Big West, and Big Sky; so strategically it make sense to leave that alone and not rock the boat. The MWC/PAC combo is in a unique position here.
-
The PAC12 is an A5 conference that has formal authority within the NCAA. Merging the organization of the MWC into the PAC12 allows them to keep that designation AND all NCAA/CFP payouts that both conferences were scheduled to receive and avoid any exit fees. They can also keep the branding and sponsorships as well. The TV deal is the big mystery here but that large piece aside, it makes sense, even if the conference is down to just WSU/OSU.
-
Woah now, let’s not go that far. They both suck. Utah is just the having its turn at the top of the leaderboard, BYU will get a chance to suck again soon enough.
-
Joining the B1G at a reduced share now (even if it’s slightly less than the Big 12) will likely payoff when they get full shares in the future. Short of a true power league, I’d bet the vast majority of schools would make that trade today no questions asked no thoughts required. We have some Okie State and Tech fans here, do you really think if the SEC called them up and offered them a spot in the SEC next year $20 million a year for the remainder of their current TV deal that they’d say no? So it’s 12ish million less a year for 6 years so you’d lose around $70million in the short term, that you’d more than make up by year 3 of the new TV deal where you’d get full shares. The Big 12 is only a destination conference for those that have no shot at the SEC/B1G. If they offer to let you join the club at a reduced share now for a full share later, then you should take it and not look back.
-
FOX drives the bus, but they don’t have full control. If the Big Ten can pitch a weekly late night kick to ESPN with the best of the P12 that people wanted to watch (USC/UCLA/Oregon/Washington) vs Big Ten teams and Oregon/Washington join for only $32m/yr until the next contract that likely is a good value proposition for the conference as they had 3 games on OTA and another likely on ESPN late which covers every network giving everyone a vested interest in the conference. That late kick would likely only complete with the 4C B12 teams which are a tier below. Weekly the Big Ten would have coverage on FOX, CBS, NBC, ESPN, FS1 (possibly a 2nd when no teams on bye week), and 3 games on BTN. Stanford/Cal don’t really do the same thing or make anything better for the Big Ten outside of academics, the SFO market, and as ND bait.
-
I hope they take Cal. lol seriously that would pretty much put the SEC in prime position for the ACC candidates other than ND.
-
Angry man yelling at TV: “Open PEACOCK you fucker!” TV: ”Now playing Cock fucker 2 on Brazzers”
-
Okay but how do I watch the Big Ten on Peacock or Big 12 on ESPN+? /s
-
Big 12 only gets 1 home game a year for tier 3 rights. That’s roughly 1/6 of their inventory not 1/3.
-
Texas getting screwed was due to conference rules and shady voting in 2008. It wasn’t a problem with the BCS system directly and to top it off Oklahoma had legitimate argument (they still fucking suck, but in preBCS they still could have been voted #1). Your best argument would be 2007 LSU getting in with 2 losses or 2003 when Auburn got left out, but each of those selections still feel within the original intent of why the BCS was formed.
-
@chase25 the Bowl Coalition/Alliance/Championship was created to matchup of up the best of the conferences against each other to determine a national champion. Historically due to bowl ties in (like the Rose Bowl) #1 from say the Big Ten did not always have the opportunity to play against #2 in day the SEC. THE ENTIRE PURPOSE OF THE BCS was to remove the barriers and pair the best from the conferences (plural) against each other to see who was the overall best. It was not designed to put in the best made for TV matchup for ESPN, but that was a result of setting these matchups. In this scenario they shunned the system on which the entire foundation of the BCS was laid in order to make a better TV product. They turned away from the goals stated during their origination and sold their sole for $ over integrity (as is common). Since LSU won the SEC undefeated, they were already the undisputed champion of their league (by definition better than Bama) and Oklahoma State and Stanford were the undisputed champions of their league and they should have played. LSU/OK St and Stanford/Bama, but instead they gave Alabama a second chance at a title and deprived OSU/Stan of their first. Before the BCS LSU would have played in a bowl NOT against Bama. Going into Bowl season LSU/Okie St/Stanford all would have had a chance to win a national title but Bama would not. Without the BCS we could have had 2 champions between these 3 school, but only with this fucked up system would a school that historically never would have been in the running get a chance to revenge their loss and claim a title. That is why they went to the CFP. That is a substantive change to the original purpose of the old Bowl system. It truly was to pick the best teams to compete for a national title for TV, not for just removing bowl tie-ins to make sure the best teams from each conference COULD play.
-
Last year, SEC and B1G would have had 3 spots each (50% of the field) and that’s before adding their blueblood additions, may add USC’s spot to the Big Ten’s total giving them 7 bids. The ACC only would have had 1 bid. FSU was #13. You assume the PAC would have still had 1 (they had a strong year even if you remove USC) and the Big 12 could still pencil in for 2 spots. Tulane wins the autobid lottery. 2021- looks similar 3 bids for SEC/B1G again. 2 for the Big 12. Cincy representing the American. Utah the PAC, Pitt the ACC and ND. skipping 2020 due to COVID 2019 - looks similar 3 bids for SEC/B1G again. 2 for the Big 12. Utah the PAC, Clemson the ACC and #17 Memphis 12-1 stops the SEC from getting bid #4 with #12 Auburn or #13 Alabama. (Good highlight on why autobid won’t stay).
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... COOKIE MONSTER!