Realignment talk not going away

[Valmy77 12519]

2 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

You’re unbelievable. We ain’t holding you back.  The b1g and the sec don’t want you.  We ca. talk about 17th largest stadium, 27th in attendance, 4 straight nine win seasons etc.   you’re not wanted.  Ucla sucks in a lot of sports can’t draw worth shit, is apathetic and they still got in.  Figure out why. 

Where did he say he thinks we are holding him back? He knows ISU is not wanted. He isn't happy about it and doesn't understand why you think he should just shut up about it. I totally get that.

Can you read English or?

Edited July 7, 2022 by Valmy77

[closetohumping 17258]

4 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Where did he say he thinks we are holding him back? He knows ISU is not wanted. He isn't happy about it and doesn't understand why you think he should be.

Can you read English or?

He’s been a victim for the last three years.  Are you defending his honor?  And English ain’t my first language so yea sometimes things get lost In translation.  If you two have a petition to get isu into the sec or b1g message me. Until then thanks for your brevity. I’m not from the south or Midwest.   Love the “you speak anglish” directive.  Never heard that before cochise 

 

pull up his last fifty posts I. This thread and grab some context. 

Edited July 7, 2022 by closetohumping

[Horn of Gabriel 1570]

9 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

The SEC does not want to freeze out ND.  They're ND's biggest Indy supporter.   If they freeze them out, they join the B1G

That's fine, because ND was never going to join the SEC.  ND in the B1G is better for the SEC because...

12 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Yeah? Well good on Notre Dame then.

The status quo sucks.  The PAC is better off dead.  The ACC is a joke outside of Clemson who is rapidly fading.  We already live in a B1G/SEC world.  It's time to formalize it, create better in-conf matchups and get the realignment into 1-2 conferences done so that 1) a single seller controls all the media rights creating higher $$$ like the NFL and 2) we can re-divide the B1G/SEC into smart geographic divisions after relegating the Baylors of the world.

[statsman 5352]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Oh man, never thought of that, hyuck! 

Yeah, there's a boost when a good program plays a blueblood. In the Big 12 that's two games a year. The ratings numbers are averages. If you put an OSU or ISU into the BIG or SEC there are more matchups against good programs, bluebloods and near bluebloods. The analysis has been done. And its more misleading to look at ratings excluding OU and Texas because the discussion is how would these programs do in the SEC or BIG where there will still be marquee oponents. Yeah if we're playing BYU and UCF the ratings will decline. That's why we're making our case that we belong.

Or how about this. Cincy and Houston played in CUSA and now they will be playing in the B12. Somehow that makes their games worth three times as much now? TCU and Houston were a dogshit matchup in the SWC that helped kill the league. Now it’s a B12 game and that makes it more valuable to networks?

[closetohumping 17258]

4 hours ago, Valmy77 said:

Yeah Iowa State has carried their weight. 

Yes they have.  Yes they should get an offer from the B1G or SEC soon

[flatdawgs 1191]

1 minute ago, Llogg said:

That's not the superficial analysis I was talking about. You have to figure out the appropriate weight that each of several factors plays in determining the number of viewers. Those factors are opponent, time slot, network, home v. away. So you have the data outlined there but the analysis is not simply "what are the numbers without TX and OU?"

Not to mention that picking a single season and basing everything on that is ludicrous. What OOC match-ups did you have? Did you have an out of the ordinary good/bad season? Why not just cherry pick the past 5 non-Covid seasons? At least there's some leveling there (and OK and Iowa States still probably come out okay.

(Example: UW's numbers are never under a million, except last season they missed USC in the conference schedule and had a head coach go 4-8 with 9 win talent, getting shitcanned after one season.  Go back 5 non-Covid years? Three NY6 bowls and a CFB berth. Probably a lot more eyeballs on those teams.)

I actually really like ISU and want them to land on their feet in the best possible conference they can get. This entire thing pisses me off to no end. Anything that gets Ducks and Huskies to work together must be an abomination to the Lord. 😉

[Bodhi 1086]

17 minutes ago, flatdawgs said:

USC and Oregon recruit nationally. I doubt the Trojans lose much sleep over Duck recruiting. If they do, they're still a giant pussy that's going to get reamed in the B1G. May it ever be so.

I’m fascinated to see if USC and Riley will have to adjust their style in the B1G. My guess is they are hoping to be similar to tOSU. If they aren’t quite up to that standard I expect several Ls annually. Not bad but not what USC wants. Don’t think they are going to enjoy late Oct early November road games against Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan. Teams that are committed to running, defense, and limiting mistakes in craptastic weather. 
 

UCLA should just shut down football now. This won’t end well.

Edited July 7, 2022 by Bodhi

[closetohumping 17258]

2 minutes ago, Bodhi said:

I’m fascinated to see if USC and Riley will have to adjust their style in the B1G. My guess is they are hoping to be similar to tOSU. If they aren’t quite up to that standard I expect several Ls annually. Not bad but not what USC wants. Don’t think they are going to enjoy late Oct early November road games against Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan. Teams that are committed to running, defense, and limiting mistakes in craptastic weather. 

I’m waiting for the “Iowa state and osu have a better record than usc in the 21st century, has out drawn them in football and basketball and if you can’t figure that out learn to read and speak English”post to pop up from ole Tex aka @Valmy77

[flatdawgs 1191]

1 minute ago, Bodhi said:

I’m fascinated to see if USC and Riley will have to adjust their style in the B1G. My guess is they are hoping to be similar to tOSU. If they aren’t quite up to that standard I expect several Ls annually. Not bad but not what USC wants. Don’t think they are going to enjoy late Oct early November road games against Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan. Teams that are committed to running, defense, and limiting mistakes in craptastic weather. 

They're not. You basically described UW football, and we were always hopeful they'd get scheduled up here in November because of it. We called it "USC weather" - one year was 60mph winds, 45 degrees and sideways rain. They always had the talent advantage, but weather is a leveller. They're about to FAFO with those northern schools.

[Bama Chick 28595]

People keep talking about this, but Vandy is the SEC's only private school and all conferences want at least ONE private school so that the conference can deflect/avoid FOI type of requests or requirements.

Yup.

And seriously, take it from a old timer - Vandy will never be booted from the SEC. It’s just not done.

And I bet if you went to SECHQ and asked about bringing back Georgia Tech you’d find many of the ole bubbas very enthusiastic about that. This conference clings to its traditions and folklore. The conference is an innovator but some things are sacrosanct.

Shit, Bama name checks the Yellowjackets in our fight song and they left the SEC in 1964.

[markstanco 12424]

 
UCLA should just shut down football now. This won’t end well.

Guessing you are joking here. They are paying a coach nearly 6 million to win. They want to win.

[closetohumping 17258]

10 minutes ago, Bodhi said:

I’m fascinated to see if USC and Riley will have to adjust their style in the B1G. My guess is they are hoping to be similar to tOSU. If they aren’t quite up to that standard I expect several Ls annually. Not bad but not what USC wants. Don’t think they are going to enjoy late Oct early November road games against Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan. Teams that are committed to running, defense, and limiting mistakes in craptastic weather. 
 

UCLA should just shut down football now. This won’t end well.

You want them to shit down football and yet they got an invite to the b1g.   Quick name the ten best athletes from ucla, iowa st and Oklahoma st

 

ill name the first three from ucla.  Kareem, Troy , Walton.  Ok. Your turn with iowa st and osu (Barry).  
 

Now let’s talk about how isu and osu has out performed ucla in most relevant sports the last ten years.  And yet…ucla got the invite somehow. 

[DFW Horn 6020]

13 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

And I bet if you went to SECHQ and asked about bringing back Georgia Tech you’d find many of the ole bubbas very enthusiastic about that. This conference clings to its traditions and folklore. The conference is an innovator but some things are sacrosanct.

Shit, Bama name checks the Yellowjackets in our fight song and they left the SEC in 1964.

What about Tulane and Suwanee?

[Left Coast 862]

40 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

You’re unbelievable. We ain’t holding you back.  The b1g and the sec don’t want you.  We ca. talk about 17th largest stadium, 27th in attendance, 4 straight nine win seasons etc.   you’re not wanted.  Ucla sucks in a lot of sports can’t draw worth shit, is apathetic and they still got in.  Figure out why. 

Da fuq?

[Vertigo 20203]

15 minutes ago, Left Coast said:

Da fuq?

Are those all emmys and peoples choice awards?

[Bodhi 1086]

31 minutes ago, markstanco said:

 

Guessing you are joking here. They are paying a coach nearly 6 million to win. They want to win.

 

I'm aware they want to win.  However their record has been routinely bad in a down PAC.  Moving to a stronger conference where I don't think their style will work well isn't going to improve their record IMO.  

26 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

You want them to shit down football and yet they got an invite to the b1g.   Quick name the ten best athletes from ucla, iowa st and Oklahoma st

 

ill name the first three from ucla.  Kareem, Troy , Walton.  Ok. Your turn with iowa st and osu (Barry).  
 

Now let’s talk about how isu and osu has out performed ucla in most relevant sports the last ten years.  And yet…ucla got the invite somehow. 

I'm a bit lost on your last two responses to my posts.  Are you under the impression I'm a part of this Iowa State/Oklahoma State debate?  I'm not and think its doing just fine without my involvement.  

[40acredropout 2901]

2 hours ago, 'stache said:

 

FYI this was for 2020 season.  This weekend I will try to replicate for 2021. 

Here is same data for other conferences which I don't think I included when I posted this about a year ago.  Viewership data doesn't get published for some of the other conference tv deals so you'll see that it's a much less complete picture.  Maybe still good fodder for you fucking nerds.

NOTE- Second section of viewership includes following exclusions:  PAC- USC & Oregon, ACC- Clemson & Miami, B10- Mich & OSU, SEC- Bama & UGA.

PAC:

ACC:

B10:

SEC:

Edited July 7, 2022 by 40acredropout

[Hagbard Celine 10498]

7 hours ago, 'stache said:

Conferences themselves are not public institutions and not subject to FOIA.

The NCAA, the b1g, the sec, the big12, the pac, and almost every athletics department at every level nationwide are 501c3 non-profit organizations which are subject to *some* foia

[ABSR 5266]

4 hours ago, Pancho said:

You just made this up and should probably stop promoting it as if it is fact. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/03/05/big-ten-presidents-portal-football-covid/
 

Big Ten presidents kept return-to-school, football communications out of public eye

Various sections from the article about 2021 communications moved to Big 10 conference communications in order to avoid FOIA.

“I would be delighted to share information,” Wisconsin Chancellor Rebecca Blank responded in an email chain begun in August by Michigan President Mark Schlissel, “but perhaps we can do this through the Big 10 portal, which will assure confidentiality?”

The Big Ten portal, which uses Nasdaq Boardvantage’s software, allows users to communicate with one another, share meeting materials and view documents — but the school presidents value it at least in part because they see it as exempt from open-records laws.

 

The 13 public institutions in the Big Ten, which spans 11 states, are subject to Freedom of Information laws, which make exceptions for some private data, such as an individual’s medical information. Such material should be redacted from records that otherwise should be released.

The conference itself is a private entity and does not have the same obligations to comply with public records laws.

 

 

 

[Hagbard Celine 10498]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

This conference clings to its traditions and folklore. The conference is an innovator but some things are sacrosanct.

Shit, Bama name checks the Yellowjackets in our fight song and they left the SEC in 1964.

So, invitations to Sewanee and Tulane have already been issued, right?

[Pancho 41824]

41 minutes ago, ABSR said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/03/05/big-ten-presidents-portal-football-covid/
 

Big Ten presidents kept return-to-school, football communications out of public eye

Various sections from the article about 2021 communications moved to Big 10 conference communications in order to avoid FOIA.

“I would be delighted to share information,” Wisconsin Chancellor Rebecca Blank responded in an email chain begun in August by Michigan President Mark Schlissel, “but perhaps we can do this through the Big 10 portal, which will assure confidentiality?”

The Big Ten portal, which uses Nasdaq Boardvantage’s software, allows users to communicate with one another, share meeting materials and view documents — but the school presidents value it at least in part because they see it as exempt from open-records laws.

 

The 13 public institutions in the Big Ten, which spans 11 states, are subject to Freedom of Information laws, which make exceptions for some private data, such as an individual’s medical information. Such material should be redacted from records that otherwise should be released.

The conference itself is a private entity and does not have the same obligations to comply with public records laws.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, this isn’t what you said.  

This is, however, what @‘stache said. 

 

 

 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

25 minutes ago, 40acredropout said:

FYI this was for 2020 season.  This weekend I will try to replicate for 2021. 

Here is same data for other conferences which I don't think I included when I posted this about a year ago.  Viewership data doesn't get published for some of the other conference tv deals so you'll see that it's a much less complete picture.  Maybe still good fodder for you fucking nerds....

 

Good stuff man.   Yeah, except for a few, rare, match-ups, conference networks are not metered in any shape or form.    The Big 12 doesn't have one so every game is broadcast and metered.   The averages for all teams go down, but the total is higher.   For the rest of the conferences very few teams are always on a national network, hell Missouri got one game...one.   As did Kentucky and Vandy. The rest of their games were on the SEC Network.  Since OkSt and ISU were used earlier, if you go back and remove their bottom three games their averages jump considerably, hell ISU's average swells by 40% when you remove Baylor/KU/TCU, beating the 6 game averages of Oregon and USC. 

The original point that everyone's best game is against Texas has validity, and its no different than playing OSU or ND or Bama in other conferences.  Some of it is a larger audience, but a lot of it is the brand gets on the big networks.   In the example above Texas and Oklahoma had all but one game on a T1 channel (ESPN is like T1.5 at this point).   OkSt had 6 and ISU had 5.   That helps a lot.   OkSt/ISU only drew 20% less than Texas/ISU when both were on T1 channels.  Texas v Tech and Texas v WVU drew 2.75m on ABC/FOX, but Tech v WVU only drew 675k.  Most likely because it was on ESPN2.  FS1 is even worse.

What we also see here when looking at all the holes in the other conferences metering is the financial effect of conference networks.   While this allows them to bury the fodder for affiliate fees, it also allows them to only pitch the best games that week to their over the air partners.  ALL of the team averages are higher, because their bad games are removed from the meter.  Due to that the value of the total contract is higher.   It isn't that Texas always pulls a lot of people, it is they pull a bitch load amount in their top four games.   

And that's what you'll see in 5 years: 3-5 big match ups a year on regular TV, which likely will draw between 3.5-6m on average, with the occasional massive games when both teams are ranked and in the running for a division at the end of a year.  That's why the SEC's T1 deal pays out twice as much as the Big 12s.  All of the games are big because they only let the big ones get on TV.

This begs the question of what to do with all the games not shown?   This is where everyone needs to stop saying "DMA's don't matter anymore its all content".   They fucking matter a ton.  USC and UCLA paid for themselves not with their eyeballs, but because BTN can now get full carriage for 5.7 million homes in LA, which easily amounts to over $100m per year in affiliate fees alone.   The DMAs for Oregon and Washinton, combined, isn't even half of LA.   That's why they aren't getting picked up by the B1G.   It's also why @Al_4_ISU is right that ISU is clearly a Top50 program now in performance and support, but also why they're not being woo'd.   The Des Moines DMA is not NYC or LA or Dallas or Chicago, etc.   Their DMA would net the B1G roughly $9m a year at most.   Only way you get courted with that market is being a big brand.   This is the Nebraska vs Rutgers conversation all over again. (side bar, if you do that all over again you take Rutgers over Nebraska as their DMA is worth up to $140m for BTN)

So the SEC boosted their T1/2 games by adding Texas and Oklahoma, who won't factor into the T3 revenue payouts, as each is paid directly by ESPN for LHN and Soonervision.   Unlike with the Big 12, this isn't an additional check, its an "in lue of" SEC Network money.   It also will make everyone even at the end of the day, so no one is upset.

The Big Ten boosted their T1 with USC and their T3 network with LA.  

While its fun to speculate 20-24 teams and killing off conferences, it's also likely where it stops until ND decides.   The only other school for the B1G which may come close is Stanford who could bring $50m from the SanFran market.    UNC/UVA/GTech have legs, but the math isn't as favorable, something would start to decrease.   On the other side, Clemson/FSU don't build the SECNetwork and dilute the T1 contract further.   

This is where the Big 12 has a bit of leverage that gets lost in the shuffle.   They lost their key brands, you're not making that up quickly nor easily, but they've got serviceable brands with good support, doubled the size of their DMA households, even after the loss of Texas/OU, and picked up more inventory.   If they added the four corners or the six they've mentioned, they could create a linear network that, while not going to touch BTN/SECN, will definitely make up a lot of the revenue they're losing.   If they got half of what the B1G/SEC charge the network could be worth around a half bill if done right.

 

 

[notre dame joe 170]

4 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

The SEC does not want to freeze out ND.  They're ND's biggest Indy supporter.   If they freeze them out, they join the B1G

I think the SoCal to the BUG broke the absurdity barrier.  There is no real reason ND can't join the SEC. 

[hawkfan 60]

3 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

I think the SoCal to the BUG broke the absurdity barrier.  There is no real reason ND can't join the SEC. 

I think if you're the B1G at this point you add UNC/UVA/GT with your next move and you force them to make that decision.  If they go SEC, great.  The B1G adds Miami or FSU and calls it a day.  If they eventually get to 24, then you go back and add Oregon/Stanford/Washington/Utah to give USC/UCLA travel partners.  That wouldn't make as much money, but would be great for having actual regional divisions in a national conference.

They can go either way, but ND is going to be forced to stop fiddle fucking around and make a decision.  We all know where this is going now.  If the B1G did go to 24 you'd have to do an 11 game conference schedule and basically scrap non-cons.

My best guess is ND wouldn't choose the SEC in that scenario, they aren't academically aligned, and they have the option to maintain some kind of national agreement with NBC in the B1G, which they won't have in an SEC that will be wholly owned by ESPN for a long time.  They also have most of their biggest historical rivals in the B1G at this point with the USC addition. 

[Mitch Cumsteen 18326]

5 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Good stuff man.   Yeah, except for a few, rare, match-ups, conference networks are not metered in any shape or form.    The Big 12 doesn't have one so every game is broadcast and metered.   The averages for all teams go down, but the total is higher.   For the rest of the conferences very few teams are always on a national network, hell Missouri got one game...one.   As did Kentucky and Vandy. The rest of their games were on the SEC Network.  Since OkSt and ISU were used earlier, if you go back and remove their bottom three games their averages jump considerably, hell ISU's average swells by 40% when you remove Baylor/KU/TCU, beating the 6 game averages of Oregon and USC. 

The original point that everyone's best game is against Texas has validity, and its no different than playing OSU or ND or Bama in other conferences.  Some of it is a larger audience, but a lot of it is the brand gets on the big networks.   In the example above Texas and Oklahoma had all but one game on a T1 channel (ESPN is like T1.5 at this point).   OkSt had 6 and ISU had 5.   That helps a lot.   OkSt/ISU only drew 20% less than Texas/ISU when both were on T1 channels.  Texas v Tech and Texas v WVU drew 2.75m on ABC/FOX, but Tech v WVU only drew 675k.  Most likely because it was on ESPN2.  FS1 is even worse.

What we also see here when looking at all the holes in the other conferences metering is the financial effect of conference networks.   While this allows them to bury the fodder for affiliate fees, it also allows them to only pitch the best games that week to their over the air partners.  ALL of the team averages are higher, because their bad games are removed from the meter.  Due to that the value of the total contract is higher.   It isn't that Texas always pulls a lot of people, it is they pull a bitch load amount in their top four games.   

And that's what you'll see in 5 years: 3-5 big match ups a year on regular TV, which likely will draw between 3.5-6m on average, with the occasional massive games when both teams are ranked and in the running for a division at the end of a year.  That's why the SEC's T1 deal pays out twice as much as the Big 12s.  All of the games are big because they only let the big ones get on TV.

This begs the question of what to do with all the games not shown?   This is where everyone needs to stop saying "DMA's don't matter anymore its all content".   They fucking matter a ton.  USC and UCLA paid for themselves not with their eyeballs, but because BTN can now get full carriage for 5.7 million homes in LA, which easily amounts to over $100m per year in affiliate fees alone.   The DMAs for Oregon and Washinton, combined, isn't even half of LA.   That's why they aren't getting picked up by the B1G.   It's also why @Al_4_ISU is right that ISU is clearly a Top50 program now in performance and support, but also why they're not being woo'd.   The Des Moines DMA is not NYC or LA or Dallas or Chicago, etc.   Their DMA would net the B1G roughly $9m a year at most.   Only way you get courted with that market is being a big brand.   This is the Nebraska vs Rutgers conversation all over again. (side bar, if you do that all over again you take Rutgers over Nebraska as their DMA is worth up to $140m for BTN)

So the SEC boosted their T1/2 games by adding Texas and Oklahoma, who won't factor into the T3 revenue payouts, as each is paid directly by ESPN for LHN and Soonervision.   Unlike with the Big 12, this isn't an additional check, its an "in lue of" SEC Network money.   It also will make everyone even at the end of the day, so no one is upset.

The Big Ten boosted their T1 with USC and their T3 network with LA.  

While its fun to speculate 20-24 teams and killing off conferences, it's also likely where it stops until ND decides.   The only other school for the B1G which may come close is Stanford who could bring $50m from the SanFran market.    UNC/UVA/GTech have legs, but the math isn't as favorable, something would start to decrease.   On the other side, Clemson/FSU don't build the SECNetwork and dilute the T1 contract further.   

This is where the Big 12 has a bit of leverage that gets lost in the shuffle.   They lost their key brands, you're not making that up quickly nor easily, but they've got serviceable brands with good support, doubled the size of their DMA households, even after the loss of Texas/OU, and picked up more inventory.   If they added the four corners or the six they've mentioned, they could create a linear network that, while not going to touch BTN/SECN, will definitely make up a lot of the revenue they're losing.   If they got half of what the B1G/SEC charge the network could be worth around a half bill if done right.

 

 

I think the argument about DMAs not mattering is in response to cord cutting and streaming trends. As I understand it, the cable companies are taking a bath so those numbers are not driving what they used to. It's a dinosaur. This isn't my bag, so someone else can chime in, but even if they do still matter, the B1G already has Iowa. They need a second team in that market like they need a hole in their head. 

And one more thing about Iowa State... All those attendence and TV numbers are coming out at the absolute zenith of that program - pre-season top 10, sleeper pick for the playoffs, hot coach on everybody's watch list, Purdy actually receiving some national hype, etc. What happens when / if Campbell leaves and things revert to status quo? Also, I'd like to point out that even with all the hype, that five star culture still went 7-6.

[statsman 5352]

National rankings of attractiveness shouldn’t be based on 2020 and 2021 stats. They should eliminate those years. Different conferences responded to Covid differently, and the stats for B12 and SEC were boosted artificially while those for B10 and PAC were suppressed. 

[Al_4_ISU 12199]

9 hours ago, closetohumping said:

You’re unbelievable. We ain’t holding you back.  The b1g and the sec don’t want you.  We ca. talk about 17th largest stadium, 27th in attendance, 4 straight nine win seasons etc.   you’re not wanted.  Ucla sucks in a lot of sports can’t draw worth shit, is apathetic and they still got in.  Figure out why. 

Have I said Texas was holding us back?  Texas isn't holding us back.  I KNOW why we aren't wanted.  College football is being run by the villains in an 80's coming of age movie.  Schools like ISU, OK State, KSU, etc are the equivalent of the girl who was ugly in elementary school but pretty good looking in high school, but the circle of who's in and who's out socially was set long ago, and they sure as hell aren't getting let in.  The people watching the movie get this, but the characters in it are oblivious.

This has fuck all to do with merit, and actual value, and that's my point.  This is being driven by dated perceptions and the way things were and it sure seems personal to those of us on the outside.

We aren't wanted because of who we were, not because of who we are.  And that's what's maddening.  If ISU played in a 40K seat stadium, put 25K people in it, and no one watched on TV, I'd get it.  I wouldn't like it, but I'd understand.  I'm pissed because by every current objective metric, we're a major-ish player, and some kind of Big 10/SEC breakaway with all the current schools would feature 15ish schools that draw dick in the stands, draw dick on TV, and objectively aren't very good just because they're either in a more populous state or years ago they were good at something and they have amorphous "name" cache, or they were born into the right family.  Unfortunately for us, this doesn't end like the 80's coming of age movie where we're recognized for what we became.  It's just some kind of shit-ass Greek tragedy.

[Al_4_ISU 12199]

33 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

I think the argument about DMAs not mattering is in response to cord cutting and streaming trends. As I understand it, the cable companies are taking a bath so those numbers are not driving what they used to. It's a dinosaur. This isn't my bag, so someone else can chime in, but even if they do still matter, the B1G already has Iowa. They need a second team in that market like they need a hole in their head. 

And one more thing about Iowa State... All those attendence and TV numbers are coming out at the absolute zenith of that program - pre-season top 10, sleeper pick for the playoffs, hot coach on everybody's watch list, Purdy actually receiving some national hype, etc. What happens when / if Campbell leaves and things revert to status quo? Also, I'd like to point out that even with all the hype, that five star culture still went 7-6.

We've been averaging 50K+ in attendance for like 12 years now.  Through a couple of 3 win seasons and even a 2 win season.

[nunna yo bizness 1687]

10 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

We've been averaging 50K+ in attendance for like 12 years now.  Through a couple of 3 win seasons and even a 2 win season.

In general I'm an ISU fan, but filling the stadium doesn't mean a thing to Fox or ESPN.  How many TV viewers were there during those seasons?  That's what they care about.  How many TV viewers can you pull, not just in your halcyon days, but in the bad times too.

[statsman 5352]

When was the last time ISU played a no conference game against a P5 team besides the Hawkeyes? I’ve scrolled back ten years and haven’t found one. I did see a lot of Akron and Northern Iowa, with some Drake and Toledo thrown in. 
Nothing screams “P5-worthy” like not playing P5 teams. 

['stache 21490]

Florida went like a decade without playing a non-con game outside the state of Florida. Aggy plays mostly g-5 and fcs non con. Every sec school plays a Panhandle State in November.

I swear, some if you aren’t even trying to listen. Al’s primary beef is with the absurdity of Purdue and South Carolina being “safe” in the new 32 team super conglomerate having nothing to do with merit. ISU would have a chance at 32 and would be safe at 48 if based on merit from a clean slate (attendance, ratings, revenue, etc). But Rutgers is safe because of a ridiculous cable tv package metric that was relevant for a blip in time. He’s right, this whole thing is stupid af.

[utee94 15671]

12 minutes ago, statsman said:

When was the last time ISU played a no conference game against a P5 team besides the Hawkeyes? I’ve scrolled back ten years and haven’t found one. I did see a lot of Akron and Northern Iowa, with some Drake and Toledo thrown in. 
Nothing screams “P5-worthy” like not playing P5 teams. 

Huh?  They play a 9-game full roundrobin conference schedule made up entirely of P5 teams, plus one OOC P5 game every single year. That's the same as Texas this year, last year, and 2019 (not counting 2020 covid year).

Do you expect them to fill all three OOC slots with P5 teams?  That's an... odd... expectation.

 

[DanTheHorn 4849]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Florida went like a decade without playing a non-con game outside the state of Florida. Aggy plays mostly g-5 and fcs non con. Every sec school plays a Panhandle State in November.

I swear, some if you aren’t even trying to listen. Al’s primary beef is with the absurdity of Purdue and South Carolina being “safe” in the new 32 team super conglomerate having nothing to do with merit. ISU would have a chance at 32 and would be safe at 48 if based on merit from a clean slate (attendance, ratings, revenue, etc). But Rutgers is safe because of a ridiculous cable tv package metric that was relevant for a blip in time. He’s right, this whole thing is stupid af.

No I think @Al_4_ISU is saying (i.e. praying) that when the dust settles he is not relegated to the  "Left Behind: A Quick Dose Of Post Big 12 Reality" thread by the moderators.

[nunna yo bizness 1687]

30 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I swear, some if you aren’t even trying to listen. Al’s primary beef is with the absurdity of Purdue and South Carolina being “safe” in the new 32 team super conglomerate having nothing to do with merit. ISU would have a chance at 32 and would be safe at 48 if based on merit from a clean slate (attendance, ratings, revenue, etc). But Rutgers is safe because of a ridiculous cable tv package metric that was relevant for a blip in time. He’s right, this whole thing is stupid af.

I don't disagree with this at all.  However, it's the same thing as old houses that would not meet current building codes.  They are grandfathered in while new houses have to meet the code.  Is it completely fair?  No.  But it avoids the chaos and cost that would occur if everytime the building codes change you required every preexisting home to tear down and start over.

[JFKFC 4875]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This has fuck all to do with merit, and actual value, and that's my point.  

We aren't wanted because of who we were, not because of who we are.  And that's what's maddening. 

You aren't wanted because of who you are.

No national titles ever. No national titles in the last 20 years.

No conference title in the last century. No conference title in the last 20 years. 

Past or recent, your results are bleak. You highlight some regular season wins here or there. Those are meaningless. Your "high" tv ratings are high because you play schools people care about, not because they care about ISU. 

You are being relegated to the level you deserve but you refuse to accept it. You have been stealing money you didn't earn for generations. 

[JFKFC 4875]

42 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Al’s primary beef is with the absurdity of Purdue and South Carolina being “safe” in the new 32 team super conglomerate having nothing to do with merit.

I'm in the minority but I don't think they are safe. The bell will toll for them soon.

[CooterBrown 17695]

When the B10 and SEC form their own national football championship playoff, they can just leave ND out and there’s dick they can do about it since it won’t be associated with the NCAA. ND can stay independent and compete for the lesser mythical NCAA title or join a big boy conference.

[Incredulity 11141]

Just now, JFKFC said:

I'm in the minority but I don't think they are safe. The bell will toll for them soon.

This is right.  The also rans will get culled eventually when the winning and money needs to concentrate further.

I would say the the answer for ISU or any other bubble team is...

 

 

Now they aren't going to win the whole fucking thing, but consistent 9-10 win teams are going to get eyes and aren't going to be on the outside.

 

['stache 21490]

3 minutes ago, JFKFC said:

I'm in the minority but I don't think they are safe. The bell will toll for them soon.

I think it's a lot more likely it'll go to uneven revenue shares. Ohio State will get $140 million a year, Indiana will get $50 million, or whatever is slightly above the XII and ACC. In some respect I might be okay with it if it leads to more teams at the table and if it is adjustable based on ratings, attendance, etc. If it leads to 48 at the table, I think it would be okay since most of the successful teams below the bluebloods would be included.

[clapclapclap 8998]

So Ross Dellinger/SI says he can't get any confirmation of Pac schools returning B12 expansion interest, but Joel Klatt said he thinks CU ends up in the B12.  Tim Brando (I know, I know) says most of the knee jerk media is getting this wrong and that while schools may/probably break away from the NCAA when a new playoff contract is agreed to, it will probably be more than just the B1G and SEC (probably 60ish schools, so most of the ACC/B12/Pac school shouldn't panic now).  On this I think Brando is correct on all counts.  Too many schools left out if B1G-SEC separates with 40 to 44 schools, Congressional meddling attempts likely.  Allowing 1 to 3 former P5 discount conferences to tag along gives them political cover, cannon fodder for non-conf, and $$$/NIL/new rules effectively will give the 2 giants enough advantage.

A conspiracy theorist might wonder if a Pac-ACC partnership (not merger) could be used by ESPN to raid the best of the B12.  If ESPN gets the new Pac contract, that may be enough inventory for them that they low ball any new B12 contract.  CBS to the B12's rescue?  Maybe not, they've been ok so far having mid-majors be the core of their sports channel.  Rolling the Pac channels into a single ACCPACNet should give Pac schools a $ boost, since that would finally get Pac coverage on many sat and cable outlets (not as import as in years past but still relevant).  Should get the ACCNet higher fees now in west coast markets, and in Texas if some B12 schools get nabbed.  The threshold for adding B12 schools to the Pac (or ACC, or Pac schools to the B12) is multiples lower than that needed to justify B1G or SEC expansion.

If I'm the B12, I'm nervous as hell.  Based on past history all the P5 survive this round (if ND and ACC schools don't move to B1G/SEC) but it's more likely that ESPN (or maybe Fox) favors the Pac over the B12.

Pac with a shared ACCPacNet and a Pac-ACC title game likely goes to at least 12, probably 14.  I'd guess OK St (brand and some DFW), TCU (still a brand and TX/DFW claims for ESPN), UH (TX/Hou claim, academic research is stronger than many realize), and maybe another TX school or Kansas (basketball but more academic, Stanford and Cal still heavily influencing decisions).  Or ESPN could push a Pac desperate to survive to hold their nose and go with a BYU (better tv draw vs the rest of the B12 options) instead.  Of course TCU and UH don't carry their local markets, but with the power of ESPN the smaller incremental factors of their addition may be enough to make it justifiable.  Again, we aren't talking about B1G/SEC thresholds, but rather the Pac-ACC common law marriage (full merger could give ACC top schools an escape from GOR) as ESPN's discount/filler conference.  Effectively killing or wounding the B12 as a future competitor increases the value of their current ACC investment and possible Pac add.

The worst case scenario for the B12 is if the ACC adds 2 and the Pac 6, to match the B1G and SEC at 16.  Cincy has the academics and the current playoff potential for the ACC, and ESPN might push them for WV (not a big cable market, but still a secondary brand.  WV diaspora along the east coast and southeast does matter some).  In that scenario the Pac holds their nose and goes for survival by taking lower caste schools for $, perhaps even getting talked into Baylor (on field success in fb and bouncyball may be attractive to ESPN, as compared to some of the other B12 leftovers).  OK St, 3 or 4 TX schools, and 1 or 2 BYU/KS/IA St?  P16-ACC16 kills off the B12, 2026 playoff and NCAA breakaway maxes out at 65 schools. 

Pac14 is probably the most likely of those 2 options, or the B12 might instead succeed in peeling off P12 schools, but the B12 is more at risk right now than some realize.  

Edited July 7, 2022 by clapclapclap

['stache 21490]

2 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

This is right.  The also rans will get culled eventually when the winning and money needs to concentrate further.

I would say the the answer for ISU or any other bubble team is...

 

 

Now they aren't going to win the whole fucking thing, but consistent 9-10 win teams are going to get eyes and aren't going to be on the outside.

 

OKST is a consistent 9-10 win team with two Fiesta Bowl wins in the last decade, a Sugar Bowl NY6 appearances, and a Cotton Bowl appearance the year before the NY6 became a thing. Our ratings are consistently top 25 with only two "marquee" matchups a year. Our CCG last year against another non-"marquee" had 8 million viewers, more than the ACC and PAC champ games combined. Yet, we're still on the outside for historical reasons. I see some possibilities of making the SEC if they expand again, but its still a long shot. As I said above, I think unequal revenue sharing might be worthwhile if it opens up spots, as long as there is still a fair metric that pays us below the obvious bluebloods but well above Vandy and South Carolina.

[Jabberwocky 1666]

4 minutes ago, clapclapclap said:

So Ross Dellinger/SI says he can't get any confirmation of Pac schools returning B12 expansion interest, but Joel Klatt said he thinks CU ends up in the B12.  Tim Brando (I know, I know) says most of the knee jerk media is getting this wrong and that while schools may/probably break away from the NCAA when a new playoff contract is agreed to, it will probably be more than just the B1G and SEC (probably 60ish schools, so most of the ACC/B12/Pac school shouldn't panic now).  On this I think Brando is correct on all counts.  Too many schools left out if B1G-SEC separates with 40 to 44 schools, Congressional meddling attempts likely.  Allowing 1 to 3 former P5 discount conferences to tag along gives them political cover, cannon fodder for non-conf, and $$$/NIL/new rules effectively will give the 2 giants enough advantage.

A conspiracy theorist might wonder if a Pac-ACC partnership (not merger) could be used by ESPN to raid the best of the B12.  If ESPN gets the new Pac contract, that may be enough inventory for them that they low ball any new B12 contract.  CBS to the B12's rescue?  Maybe not, they've been ok so far having mid-majors be the core of their sports channel.  Rolling the Pac channels into a single ACCPACNet should give Pac schools a $ boost, since that would finally get Pac coverage on many sat and cable outlets (not as import as in years past but still relevant).  Should get the ACCNet higher fees now in west coast markets, and in Texas if some B12 schools get nabbed.  The threshold for adding B12 schools to the Pac (or ACC, or Pac schools to the B12) is multiples lower than that needed to justify B1G or SEC expansion.

If I'm the B12, I'm nervous as hell.  Based on past history all the P5 survive this round (if ND and ACC schools don't move to B1G/SEC) but it's more likely that ESPN (or maybe Fox) favors the Pac over the B12.

Pac with a shared ACCPacNet and a Pac-ACC title game likely goes to at least 12, probably 14.  I'd guess OK St (brand and some DFW), TCU (still a brand and TX/DFW claims for ESPN), UH (TX/Hou claim, academic research is stronger than many realize), and maybe another TX school or Kansas (basketball but more academic, Stanford and Cal still heavily influencing decisions).  Or ESPN could push a Pac desperate to survive to hold their nose and go with a BYU (better tv draw vs the rest of the B12 options) instead.  Of course TCU and UH don't carry their local markets, but with the power of ESPN the smaller incremental factors of their addition may be enough to make it justifiable.  Again, we aren't talking about B1G/SEC thresholds, but rather the Pac-ACC common law marriage (full merger could give ACC top schools an escape from GOR) as ESPN's discount/filler conference.  Effectively killing or wounding the B12 as a future competitor increases the value of their current ACC investment and possible Pac add.

The worst case scenario for the B12 is if the ACC adds 2 and the Pac 6, to match the B1G and SEC at 16.  Cincy has the academics and the current playoff potential for the ACC, and ESPN might push them for WV (not a big cable market, but still a secondary brand.  WV diaspora along the east coast and southeast does matter some).  In that scenario the Pac holds their nose and goes for survival by taking lower caste schools for $, perhaps even getting talked into Baylor (on field success in fb and bouncyball may be attractive to ESPN, as compared to some of the other B12 leftovers).  OK St, 3 or 4 TX schools, and 1 or 2 BYU/KS/IA St?  P16-ACC16 kills off the B12, 2026 playoff and NCAA breakaway maxes out at 65 schools. 

Pac14 is probably the most likely of those 2 options, and the B12 might instead succeed in peeling off P12 schools, but the B12 is more at risk right now than some realize.  

Wrong

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1254]

Last year's Big 12 championship game (Baylor vs. OSU) outdrew the ACC and Pac championship games combined. The AAC championship game (Houston vs. Cincinnati) outdrew the ACC championship game. I think the idea that ESPN or any network would place more value on the Pac than the Big 12 is ludicrous. The Big 12 will continue to be the third best conference competitively and monetarily until the B1G and SEC break apart from the NCAA.

[Incredulity 11141]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

OKST is a consistent 9-10 win team with two Fiesta Bowl wins in the last decade, a Sugar Bowl NY6 appearances, and a Cotton Bowl appearance the year before the NY6 became a thing. Our ratings are consistently top 25 with only two "marquee" matchups a year. Our CCG last year against another non-"marquee" had 8 million viewers, more than the ACC and PAC champ games combined. Yet, we're still on the outside for historical reasons. I see some possibilities of making the SEC if they expand again, but its still a long shot. As I said above, I think unequal revenue sharing might be worthwhile if it opens up spots, as long as there is still a fair metric that pays us below the obvious bluebloods but well above Vandy and South Carolina.

IMPO OKST, and most every team from the power 5, ends up in whatever the final rendition of all this is.  There might be a half a dozen culls.

 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

OKST is a consistent 9-10 win team with two Fiesta Bowl wins in the last decade, a Sugar Bowl NY6 appearances, and a Cotton Bowl appearance the year before the NY6 became a thing. Our ratings are consistently top 25 with only two "marquee" matchups a year. Our CCG last year against another non-"marquee" had 8 million viewers, more than the ACC and PAC champ games combined. Yet, we're still on the outside for historical reasons. I see some possibilities of making the SEC if they expand again, but its still a long shot. As I said above, I think unequal revenue sharing might be worthwhile if it opens up spots, as long as there is still a fair metric that pays us below the obvious bluebloods but well above Vandy and South Carolina.

I'd actually prefer that all these contracts scrap the "revenue" sharing model and move to a NCAA tournament style payment system.   Make it a rolling three years, so universities can budget, within the contract and you're paid for performance, conference wins, division titles, conference titles, bowl wins, playoff appearances, natties, etc.   You net 7 wins over three years as Florida, you're paid like that for the next three years.   You win 30 and play in a playoff as Rutgers, you're paid for that the next three years.   Bama would clean up while Vandy would be paid as they're worth.

If we're going to talk about earning your keep, let's pay that way.

['stache 21490]

12 minutes ago, clapclapclap said:

So Ross Dellinger/SI says he can't get any confirmation of Pac schools returning B12 expansion interest, but Joel Klatt said he thinks CU ends up in the B12.  Tim Brando (I know, I know) says most of the knee jerk media is getting this wrong and that while schools may/probably break away from the NCAA when a new playoff contract is agreed to, it will probably be more than just the B1G and SEC (probably 60ish schools, so most of the ACC/B12/Pac school shouldn't panic now).  On this I think Brando is correct on all counts.  Too many schools left out if B1G-SEC separates with 40 to 44 schools, Congressional meddling attempts likely.  Allowing 1 to 3 former P5 discount conferences to tag along gives them political cover, cannon fodder for non-conf, and $$$/NIL/new rules effectively will give the 2 giants enough advantage.

A conspiracy theorist might wonder if a Pac-ACC partnership (not merger) could be used by ESPN to raid the best of the B12.  If ESPN gets the new Pac contract, that may be enough inventory for them that they low ball any new B12 contract.  CBS to the B12's rescue?  Maybe not, they've been ok so far having mid-majors be the core of their sports channel.  Rolling the Pac channels into a single ACCPACNet should give Pac schools a $ boost, since that would finally get Pac coverage on many sat and cable outlets (not as import as in years past but still relevant).  Should get the ACCNet higher fees now in west coast markets, and in Texas if some B12 schools get nabbed.  The threshold for adding B12 schools to the Pac (or ACC, or Pac schools to the B12) is multiples lower than that needed to justify B1G or SEC expansion.

If I'm the B12, I'm nervous as hell.  Based on past history all the P5 survive this round (if ND and ACC schools don't move to B1G/SEC) but it's more likely that ESPN (or maybe Fox) favors the Pac over the B12.

Pac with a shared ACCPacNet and a Pac-ACC title game likely goes to at least 12, probably 14.  I'd guess OK St (brand and some DFW), TCU (still a brand and TX/DFW claims for ESPN), UH (TX/Hou claim, academic research is stronger than many realize), and maybe another TX school or Kansas (basketball but more academic, Stanford and Cal still heavily influencing decisions).  Or ESPN could push a Pac desperate to survive to hold their nose and go with a BYU (better tv draw vs the rest of the B12 options) instead.  Of course TCU and UH don't carry their local markets, but with the power of ESPN the smaller incremental factors of their addition may be enough to make it justifiable.  Again, we aren't talking about B1G/SEC thresholds, but rather the Pac-ACC common law marriage (full merger could give ACC top schools an escape from GOR) as ESPN's discount/filler conference.  Effectively killing or wounding the B12 as a future competitor increases the value of their current ACC investment and possible Pac add.

The worst case scenario for the B12 is if the ACC adds 2 and the Pac 6, to match the B1G and SEC at 16.  Cincy has the academics and the current playoff potential for the ACC, and ESPN might push them for WV (not a big cable market, but still a secondary brand.  WV diaspora along the east coast and southeast does matter some).  In that scenario the Pac holds their nose and goes for survival by taking lower caste schools for $, perhaps even getting talked into Baylor (on field success in fb and bouncyball may be attractive to ESPN, as compared to some of the other B12 leftovers).  OK St, 3 or 4 TX schools, and 1 or 2 BYU/KS/IA St?  P16-ACC16 kills off the B12, 2026 playoff and NCAA breakaway maxes out at 65 schools. 

Pac14 is probably the most likely of those 2 options, and the B12 might instead succeed in peeling off P12 schools, but the B12 is more at risk right now than some realize.  

I think the PAC-ACC partnership is meant to put the PAC in a position of raiding the XII and not the other way around. The XII currently is in a stronger position, but if the PAC can convince ESPN to pay more by way of this partnership, that could change. It's the PAC's effort to be the survivor. I like this map except if the PAC is doing the raiding, the XII newbs are out (Cincy, WVU, and UCF for geographic reasons and BYU for weirdo reasons)  and WSU, ORST, Stanford, and Cal are back for historical reasons. It also makes sense geographically, BIG=Northeast and Upper Midwest, SEC = Southeast, ACC = East Coast, PAC = West Coast plus the west.

 

Edited July 7, 2022 by 'stache

[Al_4_ISU 12199]

28 minutes ago, JFKFC said:

You aren't wanted because of who you are.

No national titles ever. No national titles in the last 20 years.

No conference title in the last century. No conference title in the last 20 years. 

Past or recent, your results are bleak. You highlight some regular season wins here or there. Those are meaningless. Your "high" tv ratings are high because you play schools people care about, not because they care about ISU. 

You are being relegated to the level you deserve but you refuse to accept it. You have been stealing money you didn't earn for generations. 

There are a shit load of teams in the new club that fit these metrics.

[JFKFC 4875]

1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

There are a shit load of teams in the new club that fit these metrics.

I submit they won't be in the club in its final form. 

[Al_4_ISU 12199]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Florida went like a decade without playing a non-con game outside the state of Florida. Aggy plays mostly g-5 and fcs non con. Every sec school plays a Panhandle State in November.

I swear, some if you aren’t even trying to listen. Al’s primary beef is with the absurdity of Purdue and South Carolina being “safe” in the new 32 team super conglomerate having nothing to do with merit. ISU would have a chance at 32 and would be safe at 48 if based on merit from a clean slate (attendance, ratings, revenue, etc). But Rutgers is safe because of a ridiculous cable tv package metric that was relevant for a blip in time. He’s right, this whole thing is stupid af.

[statsman 5352]

People keep mentioning Vanderbilt  and MSU. Something about the SEC tv schedule- they play league games the first couple weeks of the season. This increases the value of the contract, even though the schools are taking a risk from not having the FCS tune up games that so many B12 schools rely on. MSU and Vandy are contributing. 
The Snyder KSU model (tuneups against patsies in non-conference) works, but it is a very selfish model. It lessens the value of the league media contract. Most of the B12 has adopted this scheduling model. 
And ISU playing one credible non-conference opponent (Iowa)? Great! Any league you’re in knows that the tv contract can count on the value of locking down the state of Iowa one week every other season!

Edited July 7, 2022 by statsman