Page 52 of 101 FirstFirst ... 242505152535462 ... LastLast
Results 1,021 to 1,040 of 2016
  1. #1021
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Okay, but here's the thing. Regardless of how we feel about what Texas has or has not done, we have to agree that *something* has gone very wrong with the Big 12 Conference, don't we? Three schools have left in barely more than a year, and a fourth is ready to bolt - and not leaving as part of a raid, but leaving for any major conference that will take them. Two more were ready to leave before they got denied by their planned destination. Schools are breaking up hundred-year rivalries to get away from this league.

    Is this Texas' fault? I have no idea. Does that make Texas a "bad guy"? I don't know, and it probably doesn't matter. Should Texas care if people think it's a bad guy? Probably not. But something in the plains just isn't right.
    I discussed this in another post, but the Big XII was always ripe for the picking if other conferences wanted to expand due (1) to the shotgun marriage nature of its formation, (2) Nebraksa's loss of "hand", (3) geography, and (4) as TexHawk pointed out, demographic issues. There is some animosity because the LHN is much more lucrative than anyone expected, and I get that. But Texas is, and always has been, one vote. Nebraska didn't lose power because of Texas alone. Texas did explore its options (although after it looked like the survival or the Big XII was dire both times), and I believe that many schools in the conference, rightly or wrongly, don't trust Texas not to strike out again in the near future. I get that.

    But *my opinion* still is that if the Big Ten or the SEC came calling, the Big XII was always going to lose teams. If this was pre-Mack Brown Texas, it would have happened. If Texas fell into its '85-'95 purgatory, teams would have left. Texas is an easy scapegoat, and perhaps its size and success ($$-wise) is a legitimate reason to get away from Texas as fast as you can. But what does Texas do? Be less successful?

  2. #1022
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Okay, but here's the thing. Regardless of how we feel about what Texas has or has not done, we have to agree that *something* has gone very wrong with the Big 12 Conference, don't we? . . .

    Is this Texas' fault? I have no idea. Does that make Texas a "bad guy"? I don't know, and it probably doesn't matter. . . . Probably not. But something in the plains just isn't right.
    I don't know all the details, of course, but I can understand the frustration ATex has expressed over the past few weeks. Compare this to the ongoing saga of "Does Duke get all the calls" and how we always had to fight with other fan-bases over the years to explain that, while there was a disparity between how many free throws Duke shot vs. how many our opponents shot, it was not attributable to anything unfair but, rather, to our players being better positioned, more aggressive, etc.

    Having been through that kind of thing ourselves, we ought to appreciate ATex arguing that approaching this subject with a "something just isn't right" kind of argument is insufficiently precise.

    My personal view is that this is very much like the Yankees' situation. The Yankees' local tv and radio rights are objectively 10 times more valuable than those of the Kansas City Royals. Some of that is attributable to luck of location and some of it is attributable to the equity they have developed over 80 years of (mostly) winning. Is it "arrogant" of the Yankees to realize that value for themselves and not give it away to the Royals or Pirates? Isn't that essentially the "worst" that Texas is "guilty" of here?

    I hadn't been quite convinced by ATex's arguments that Texas has done anything particularly unique or innovative in deloping their Tier 3 rights (though I don't know the details, honestly). But, simply by virtue of the fact that they are Texas (with historic/demographic advantages), those rights are more valuable than similar rights that an Oklahoma St. or Texas Tech -- should Texas be pilloried for simply not giving those advantages away for free?

    And, as ATex notes, it certainly isn't (or, at least, hasn't been in the past) "equal" in all the other conferences. Beyond the examples ATex gave, I do know that, up until the most recent Pac 12 contract (which is equal shares), USC and UCLA had always gotten larger percentages of the Pac 10 tv packages -- there was significant criticism within LA of those schools giving up that prior advantage when the Pac 12 did its recent deal.

    I think at the end of the day most of what Texas has done is wholly legitimate (I don't think the LHN should be doing high school games) and it is being painted as the bad guy primarily because of jealousy and because of the uniqe power and profile within the sports world of their deal being with ESPN, rather than one of the Fox or less prominent cable channels. If this wasn't an ESPN deal, I imagine there would be much, much less outcry against Texas.

  3. #1023
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorp4me View Post
    Baseless speculation is all this conference realignment non-sense is, with most of it changing day to day.

    I did read one interesting tidbit in the article linked by fda. The idea that olympic sports form their own small conferences. It was dismissed, but I like it. One conference for football, another for everything else. Why not!
    On that same theme, how about the same 16 teams but different names. If they could call it B12 in football and BE in Basketball they would be on to something, very competitive with ACC in Bball, just a tad below:

    1, UCONN- UNC
    2. Kansas - Syracuse
    3. Baylor - Duke a bit of a mismatch
    4. Louisville - Pitt

    5. Texas - FSU
    6, Cincy - Miami
    7. West VA - UVA
    8. K-State - VA Tech

    9. [BYU or Missouri] - Clemson
    10. Rutgers - NC State
    11. USF - Maryland historically gets the edge, maybe not so much this year
    12. Okie St - Wake Forest

    13. Oklahoma - GA Tech
    14. Iowa State - Boston College, historical edge to BC but really down this year
    15 Texas Tech - you pay the price in Bball to have 912 K TV share in football
    16. TCU - have to wait and see what ACC comes up with for 15-16

    As the saying goes in national politics, it seems as Missouri goes, so goes the nation.

    If Katz is right and B12 does lose Mizzou and then goes after BYU, UL and two other BE teams WV and soon to be BE or never was TCU, why not just do a full B12/BE merger and spin off the 8 Bball only schools? - personal opinion only, so no link.

    I ask you if super conferences are inevitable, after B12 loses 3 of its top 5 markets in two years (Nebraska, A&M and now maybe Missouri), who is going to join them from P12, from B1G or from ACC, certainly no one from SEC.

    So it seems after garnering BYU, UL, WV and TCU, not a lot of choices on eventual road to 16 any better than Rutgers 938K NY/NJ market, UCONN more for its Bball than football, Cincy for a little of both and USF more for its football than Bball.

    This would also avoid litigation and set Cuse and Pitt free next year. As ACC did getting to 14 and a $20 M exit fee, a B12/BE merger would do being the first to get all the way to eventual16 to establish some temporary stability, especially if the 6 year grant or rights remains a criteria.

    I know first impression would be what a mediocre football conference.

    But look at this week’s rankings that may even be over reacting to USF and TCU losses. I will use ESPN’s but AP would be very similar

    1. SEC is clearly #1 - has 7 in top 25 plus UGA and TN with votes

    2. B12 has #3 Oklahoma, #6 Okie St, #11 Texas, #20 K- St, #25 Baylor plus Texas Tech with 25 votes for 6 in top 29.

    3. If you then add in #16 West VA, USF with 22 votes for honorary #31 plus TCU who used to be ranked, and Cincy, more than half of the merged B12/BE is ranked, or at least gets votes.

    4. By contrast B10 has 4 in top 25, plus Michigan St #26, Penn State with 9 votes and Ohio State will someday get healthy for 7 of 12 versus 9 of 16. I am not sure what two teams of 4 B1G could add would be ranked, maybe Notre Dame some day.

    5. ACC has 4 in top 25 plus Pitt got a vote in ESPN, got more votes as did UNC in other poll. Miami is good some years. Again best hope and it is long term for 1 of final 2 added to be a ranked teams is Notre Dame.

    6. P12 has just 3 in top 25 plus Washington and USC with votes, and UCLA some years. If SEC takes Missouri, and B12/BE lock in KU and K-St, probably looking at MWC teams to get to 16 someday.

    Notre Dame may or may not remain independent and form a new Bball league with Nova, Marquette, G-town, St. John’s, Providence, Seton Hall and DePaul plus some of the Catholic Universities.

    Who knows, Notre Dame may someday decide to join either B1G football or ACC football.

    I realize UL @ 300K, Cincy @ 323K, TCU @ 371K are all small TV shares relative so Texas 2.25 million, Oklahoma 1.2 million, bigger only than Baylor 210K.

    They are still bigger than any of the CUSA schools in Texas SMU(164K), Rice (127K), Houston (100K), or any other CUSA schools except UCF (507K), So, Miss (362K) and ECU (348K), not exactly crown jewels.

    Of course all this hinges on who SEC cherry picks for 15-16 even if A&M and Missouri are SEC 13-14.

    So Missouri is the first domino to fall and then who is next overall?

  4. #1024
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorp4me View Post
    I did read one interesting tidbit in the article linked by fda. The idea that olympic sports form their own small conferences. It was dismissed, but I like it. One conference for football, another for everything else. Why not!
    That sounds like a great way to kill about a dozen or so of Duke's programs. Maybe more.

  5. #1025
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Nugget View Post
    I hadn't been quite convinced by ATex's arguments that Texas has done anything particularly unique or innovative in deloping their Tier 3 rights (though I don't know the details, honestly).
    I would actually agree with you here -- and that's been a point I am trying to make (probably poorly) -- the LHN isn't that materially different than what, say, Florida does with its Tier 3 rights. While I think there is some need by UT to control its branding and the future of content distribution, and thus an eye to the future for distributing content to those that want to see it, one of my major points is that the LHN and keeping tier 3 rights with the school is common place among the haves in the Big XII (KU basketball for instance) and the SEC, and even to an extent in the Big Ten (see Ohio St.'s contract with IMG Sports, for instance).

  6. #1026

  7. #1027
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham at heart
    Quote Originally Posted by formerdukeathlete View Post
    BTW, you were one as I recall to suggest that my posts that Greg Paulus would be recruited for Football for a year of ball were baseless speculation. I posted this immediately after the end of his senior season. I had spoken with one of the coaches interested. This was before the Green Bay Packers, before I believe the Basketball office had received inquiries. I think there is a lot more out there to suggest that Penn State would at least listen.
    You should check your memory banks.

    I realize your aversion to using actual facts to back up your arguements, but if you're going to call me out for something, you should at least have the courtesy to provide some evidence.
    WWJDD?

  8. #1028
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Sorry, Bill kinda has to be that guy. Mizzou thinking they can compete in football/basketball in the SEC is comical. The Big12 will be fine/upgraded with BYU/Louisville/TCU/others. But leaving the conference basically torpedoes the Big12 tournament in KC (which is almost entirely a KU town, just on the wrong side of the border). That's millions of dollars lost. The Sprint Center may be toast.

  9. #1029
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by TexHawk View Post
    Sorry, Bill kinda has to be that guy. Mizzou thinking they can compete in football/basketball in the SEC is comical. The Big12 will be fine/upgraded with BYU/Louisville/TCU/others. But leaving the conference basically torpedoes the Big12 tournament in KC (which is almost entirely a KU town, just on the wrong side of the border). That's millions of dollars lost. The Sprint Center may be toast.
    I agree with this sentiment (although I disagree that on the field success has that much to do with why teams are leaving). Texas is getting grief for probably giving up the A&M rivalry. Some of the reasons are in that DeLoss Dodds interview I posted. But also, why does A&M get to pick and choose what Big XII teams have to keep playing them? They have just as long a history with Baylor, and I am sure Texas Tech would like the opportunity to keep playing them. Both of those schools lose money by not playing A&M anymore. Texas has every right to stand in solidarity with them. I get Texas is A&M's biggest rival and all, but this is like walking out on your family then asking for conjugal visits every Thanksgiving. You chose to leave. It's all or nothing until the schools mutually agree to play again (or meet in a bowl/tourney).

    So I am sympathetic to Self's comments, and especially since I had not even contemplated how this might affect KC and the Sprint Center.

  10. #1030
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    That sounds like a great way to kill about a dozen or so of Duke's programs. Maybe more.
    How do you figure? You still get your money from the football (and maybe basketball) to fund all the other sports, you just save money be putting the other sports closer to their competition. Perhaps the proposal wasn't clear, but the olympic sports still get funded.

  11. #1031
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorp4me View Post
    How do you figure? You still get your money from the football (and maybe basketball) to fund all the other sports...
    Won't be much money for a school with a SoCon football program.

  12. #1032
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Won't be much money for a school with a SoCon football program.
    lol, no no no. As I said perhaps the proposal wasn't clear. Football would simply be a separate entity. In other words there would be two conferences. One for revenue sports, one for non-revenue sports. At least as I saw it, I realize it won't happen. Other than that money would still be distributed the same within each schools athletic department.

    Unless you're implying Duke football is so bad it'd be in the SoCon...in which case you may currently have a point, lol.

  13. #1033

    A Dream Scenario that could become a reality?

    I would love to get people's thoughts, especially A Tex-Devil and Texhawk's, about a scenario I just heard via online streaming on the Dave Glenn Show. A caller from Tampa Fla called in and mentioned that the beat writers down there were all talking about Missouri, and the high probability that Missouri was going to go the SEC in their opinions (nothing profound about that), He also said that he read from Orangebloods.com that while Texas agreed to share their Tier 1 and Tier 2 equally with conference members, they were not budging on their stance of not equally sharing money from the LHN; and that is still causing a lot of friction with the other schools. If Missouri does leave the Big 12, the caller believes the Big 12 would destabilize (again); and that Texas would look elsewhere.

    Then the caller presented a what if scenario of Texas and Notre Dame coming together and presenting a proposition to the ACC in which they would join the ACC in all sports; and equally share their Tier 1 and Tier 2 money with conference members. They would then negotiate a deal individually with the ACC to keep a large percentage of their Tier 3 money for themselves (Texas- money from the LHN; ND -money from NBC). He thought (and I agree) that the financial windfall from renegotiating TV contracts based on adding those two schools would offset Texas and ND keeping a large percentage of their Tier 3 money. Then, the caller went on to propose that the ACC would then add Rutgers and UConn to shore up the NY market; and capture many of the largest TV markets in the country in the process. And the ACC would make a lot of money as a result.

    I don't know if the TV deals for an 18 team ACC would be financially more lucrative than the SEC or the Big 10 TV deals; but I would have to think that having ND, Texas, UConn and Rutgers (or possibly PSU now with ND and Texas in the fold), the ACC would be satisfactorily strengthened in football; and become unequivolically the best basketball conference for both men and women in the country. The downside is obvious the size of the conference as well as having to deal with the perceived arrogance and strong-will of Texas; but I would think the ACC would have to seriously consider that ND and Texas scenario; and as much as I believe in holding to your principles, I would take that deal with ND and Texas.

    Again, I know this might be far-fetched; but I think if the dominos fell into place, this could be a real possibility.

  14. #1034
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Class of '94 View Post
    I would love to get people's thoughts, especially A Tex-Devil and Texhawk's, about a scenario I just heard via online streaming on the Dave Glenn Show. A caller from Tampa Fla called in and mentioned that the beat writers down there were all talking about Missouri, and the high probability that Missouri was going to go the SEC in their opinions (nothing profound about that), He also said that he read from Orangebloods.com that while Texas agreed to share their Tier 1 and Tier 2 equally with conference members, they were not budging on their stance of not equally sharing money from the LHN; and that is still causing a lot of friction with the other schools. If Missouri does leave the Big 12, the caller believes the Big 12 would destabilize (again); and that Texas would look elsewhere.

    Then the caller presented a what if scenario of Texas and Notre Dame coming together and presenting a proposition to the ACC in which they would join the ACC in all sports; and equally share their Tier 1 and Tier 2 money with conference members. They would then negotiate a deal individually with the ACC to keep a large percentage of their Tier 3 money for themselves (Texas- money from the LHN; ND -money from NBC). He thought (and I agree) that the financial windfall from renegotiating TV contracts based on adding those two schools would offset Texas and ND keeping a large percentage of their Tier 3 money. Then, the caller went on to propose that the ACC would then add Rutgers and UConn to shore up the NY market; and capture many of the largest TV markets in the country in the process. And the ACC would make a lot of money as a result.

    I don't know if the TV deals for an 18 team ACC would be financially more lucrative than the SEC or the Big 10 TV deals; but I would have to think that having ND, Texas, UConn and Rutgers (or possibly PSU now with ND and Texas in the fold), the ACC would be satisfactorily strengthened in football; and become unequivolically the best basketball conference for both men and women in the country. The downside is obvious the size of the conference as well as having to deal with the perceived arrogance and strong-will of Texas; but I would think the ACC would have to seriously consider that ND and Texas scenario; and as much as I believe in holding to your principles, I would take that deal with ND and Texas.

    Again, I know this might be far-fetched; but I think if the dominos fell into place, this could be a real possibility.
    There was some talk of something like this several weeks back, but as an ACC fan, I don't like having Texas come in on an island, and vice versa as a Texas fan. I think the ACC spoke loudly and clearly, and firmly, to Texas by taking on Pitt and Syracuse after there had been some initial discussions between the ACC and Texas according to reports.

    If Texas were to make this move, DeLoss Dodds would have a lot of explaining to do re: PAC XII. He talked about not wanting to have the kids in airplanes all semester long, and I don't see why the ACC would be different from PAC 12. In fact it's worse b/c you don't have OU, OSU and Tech going over with you to minimize some of the travel.

  15. #1035
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    There was some talk of something like this several weeks back, but as an ACC fan, I don't like having Texas come in on an island, and vice versa as a Texas fan. I think the ACC spoke loudly and clearly, and firmly, to Texas by taking on Pitt and Syracuse after there had been some initial discussions between the ACC and Texas according to reports.

    If Texas were to make this move, DeLoss Dodds would have a lot of explaining to do re: PAC XII. He talked about not wanting to have the kids in airplanes all semester long, and I don't see why the ACC would be different from PAC 12. In fact it's worse b/c you don't have OU, OSU and Tech going over with you to minimize some of the travel.
    I agree with you; but if this situation with Texas and ND approaching the ACC together (something that was rumored to have happen with the Big 10 weeks ago), I think it would force the ACC to really think long and hard and possibly take a step back from its principled beliefs in regards to revenue sharing. And if the Big 12 were to unravel once more with the departure of Missouri, it may cause schools like Texas and ND to re-evaluate their positions as far as joining the ACC.
    Last edited by Class of '94; 10-05-2011 at 04:21 PM.

  16. #1036
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorp4me View Post
    lol, no no no. As I said perhaps the proposal wasn't clear. Football would simply be a separate entity. In other words there would be two conferences. One for revenue sports, one for non-revenue sports. At least as I saw it, I realize it won't happen. Other than that money would still be distributed the same within each schools athletic department.

    Unless you're implying Duke football is so bad it'd be in the SoCon...in which case you may currently have a point, lol.
    It's important to note that football success has little to do with it - Duke could go to ten straight bowl games and still be a liability in terms of football.

  17. #1037
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by TexHawk View Post
    Sorry, Bill kinda has to be that guy. Mizzou thinking they can compete in football/basketball in the SEC is comical. The Big12 will be fine/upgraded with BYU/Louisville/TCU/others. But leaving the conference basically torpedoes the Big12 tournament in KC (which is almost entirely a KU town, just on the wrong side of the border). That's millions of dollars lost. The Sprint Center may be toast.
    It's not much different from a moment a few weeks ago when Texas was talking about separating from OU, and Stoops said that, if Texas left, the OU/Texas game could easily be toast. As an OU fan my whole life, that was a much bigger deal than some second-tier rivalry between Missouri and Kansas.

    As for Texas joining the ACC, I agree that it doesn't make sense. If we were to add UT, I'd have thought it would have been as part of a pod system so that we would take 4 of the B12 teams (OU, OSU, UT, TTech) so that they could at least spend much of their year playing a variety of sports locally. If Texas and ND were to come abeggin', it'd be hard not to at least look, but that scenario seems unlikely.

  18. #1038
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    I agree with this sentiment (although I disagree that on the field success has that much to do with why teams are leaving).
    Just saying that this latest mess is centered around Mizzou wanting to puff out their chest and yell "Someone wants us! Take that KU, Texas, OU, Big10!" This is not how long term decisions should be made.

    Their football program, which is making strides, will be moving from Top 3-4 in conference, to maybe 5 or 6 in their division.

  19. #1039
    Quote Originally Posted by TexHawk View Post
    Just saying that this latest mess is centered around Mizzou wanting to puff out their chest and yell "Someone wants us! Take that KU, Texas, OU, Big10!" This is not how long term decisions should be made.

    Their football program, which is making strides, will be moving from Top 3-4 in conference, to maybe 5 or 6 in their division.
    That is not fair. It's much more likely that these actions are centered around moving Mizzou from a league that has lurched from existential crisis to existential crisis for the last year to one that hasn't. The Big XII is, and will remain, one DeLoss Dodds-Larry Scott handshake away from ceasing to exist. Hard to criticize any team for trying to leave that.

  20. #1040
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorp4me View Post
    lol, no no no. As I said perhaps the proposal wasn't clear. Football would simply be a separate entity. In other words there would be two conferences. One for revenue sports, one for non-revenue sports. At least as I saw it, I realize it won't happen. Other than that money would still be distributed the same within each schools athletic department.

    Unless you're implying Duke football is so bad it'd be in the SoCon...in which case you may currently have a point, lol.
    The Big East is clearly in a situation where the football and other sport conferences should be separated. But, one of the things that is happening with the cable networks is that the other sports are generating some revenue. Women's basketball, Men's lax, Men's baseball don't pay for themselves, but they aren't complete sink holes either. I watched the Duke-UVa women's soccer game last week, and I'd love to see more Kelly Cobb, preferably in HD. I read somewhere that the ACC is going to announce a new network this week.

Similar Threads

  1. Baseball Realignment
    By SoCalDukeFan in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-06-2011, 11:36 PM
  2. Big East Realignment
    By johnb in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-23-2011, 09:29 PM
  3. The Kyrie Irving Toe Vigil
    By diveonthefloor in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1507
    Last Post: 02-05-2011, 06:25 PM
  4. NCAA Conference Realignment
    By A-Tex Devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 03-04-2010, 05:16 PM
  5. Sentinel: 5 Years After Realignment: Are Schools Better Off?
    By gotham devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-04-2008, 11:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •