BIG10 expansion talk: a few update details....
Some more from nevadabuck:
--Kansas talk is real, but it's all Kansas right now presenting their case
--Denver is part of the Kansas tv market, odd as that sounds, which may devalue Colorado's importance
--The BIG12/PAC12 meeting may not have had more substance than the leaders of the two Conference showing the Conference members they are on the job, however much that can mean
--The new FOX/BIG10 contract in the works has HUGE $$! HUGE!
--Those huge $$ might be looking very good to USC, Washington, and Oregon, as it could potentially be ~2 times what they make now in their current PAC12 deal
--it's clearer now, USC is determined leave the PAC12
--USC is still looking for one team, just one at the moment, to go with them, Arizona could even be the team
--There was no mention of Oregon St, Washington St, and Arizona St in all this
Again, watch the video for the information. Don't freak out that is from an Ohio St related channel.
Sounds like he has shitty walls.
The shittiest.
Hmmmmm I recall someone around here kinda like that... Loosely linked to someone in the department with some knowledge, dropping vague hints about roster moves, and then taking credit a week later when someone hit the portal or committed.....
There's one in every fanbase, it would seem.
August 5th, 2021 at 11:12 AM ^
I think there are a few in every fanbase unfortunately .
Can anyone see a reasonable scenario where the B1G adds Clemson?
As long as we don't let the Delaware Fighting Blue Hen's into the Big Ten.... We can't have another winged helmet in the conference.....that just can't happen.
Love the clarifying comment that it is coming from the KU side. That is the consensus here in KC too. All KU people think they are going to the Big 10 so it will probably happen right? I think i'm going to win the lottery tomorrow too. There has not been one legit rumor from the Big10 that they are even considering KU from what I've seen. The only "leaks" are KU bloggers and random twitter accounts. There has also been no reasonable explanation as to why the Big 10 would even take KU. Each Big 10 school will lose money by adding them. Why on earth would they do that?
Weird things happen so I guess there is a chance and as a KSU grad i'm honestly jealous that KU is at least part of random twitter rumors.
I get that USC and the like are looking at a potential significant $ increase to their AD coffers, but how will it impact the current B1G allocations? i.e. if UM gets $50M now (I don't know the numbers) by adding more schools the denominator increases, so where does that leave UM going forward?
Also, FOX is going to kill football viewership with all their commercial breaks, which are only going to increase if they are paying more money...
August 5th, 2021 at 10:33 PM ^
The Big Ten’s TV deal is up following the 2022-23 season. The new TV deal is already expected to be massive. So the thought is that by bringing in a few teams that bring in larger markets (like USC bringing in LA) that it also increases the membership payout by increasing the number of homes that get BTN because the Big Ten is also going to receive an even larger payout due to the increase in coverage.
So what it boils down to, is whether the perspective schools bring enough New TV subscribers within their markets to make the move worth it. Adding USC does. Adding a team like Iowa State when you already own the Iowa market, does not.
I really hope that this ends up with no expansion for the Big Ten (even better would be some contraction). I listened to the CBS Eye on College Basketball podcast last night and they had some really good points about what makes a college program special and attractive to their fans and donors. Above all else, it's winning things. You can see the fatigue in Michigan football's fanbase now with not having won the league in forever. Remember Michigan basketball in the first decade of this century?
If you end up in a 20 team league, especially with successful programs like Oregon / USC football and Kansas basketball, how often are you actually going to win the league? 4-5 times per century? That is lame and I think will hurt school's bottom line in the long run. If you are Mississippi State right now, how excited are you for Texas and Oklahoma. Yeah, you will get more money, but you already have a ton of money and now you are not only never sniffing a championship in football or basketball, you're never even finishing above .500.
August 5th, 2021 at 10:21 AM ^
Mississippi State had no chance to win the SEC anyways.
August 5th, 2021 at 11:50 AM ^
Mississippi St fans are closet Alabama fans
August 5th, 2021 at 10:02 AM ^
Lets add USC, Washington, & Oregon and call it a day. UCLA can come too if they want. I'm all set with Kansas. While we're at it can we swap Rutgers for UVA?
August 5th, 2021 at 10:45 AM ^
What is the point of calling it a "conference" when you only play all of the teams in the opposite division only once in 7 or 8 years? It is already bad enough in our conference with scheduling as it is.
August 5th, 2021 at 11:30 AM ^
Well, it will end up like the NFL, where you rarely play teams on the other side except in the championship game (conference championship game in this case)
August 5th, 2021 at 11:38 AM ^
Going to 16 teams has an interesting possibility regarding scheduling. If you divide the conference into 4 pods, (East, Mid-West, Central, West) you can rotate the pods. I would set up 2 year increments so you get home and aways. Years 1 and 2, east plays mid-west and central plays west. Years 3 and 4, east plays central, years 5 and 6 east plays west. You set up the "division winners" out of the paired pods. That gives you 7 conference games every year. You can augment that by playing 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 against the non paired pods, like the NFL does. How does this work in practice? If Michigan is in the Mid-west with MSU, IU, and PU, we'd play them every single year. 2 of the 6 years we play OSU. Traditionalists might scoff at that, but we're way beyond concepts of "tradition." But lets say it was like the old days of the Big 2 and little 8, i.e., Michigan and OSU are dominant. Then we would play them every year as part of the cross-divisional matchups.
dont worry, OSU will play UCLA every year and UM will play USC. no different than the current crossovers
August 5th, 2021 at 10:54 AM ^
It’s has been so clear that the only play is to add the West coast, PAC12 teams. Wether it’s 2, 4, or 6 teams this fits almost all the criteria that Delaney laid out in the past that (and warren should follow now). Gives the broadest reach, most $$$ and most (if not all) have the AAU requirement. If Kansas is part of that, good, but should not come at the expense of the PAC12.
August 5th, 2021 at 12:26 PM ^
First of all - why on earth would I give a flying fuck what the fuck NevadaBuck thinks - on a Michigan forum? Who the fuck is NevadaBuck? Why the fuck do you think Michigan fans give a shit?
That out of the way - if the Big Ten did add Kansas it would be final proof that while the SEC is playing chess, the Big Ten is playing checkers. It's one of the more inane ideas I've ever heard.
I do not understand why fans would care about markets for television. We should be rooting for the most fun matchups. In basketball that's Kansas. In football that's Notre Dame. What makes college sports fun is that it's regionalized, which sparks rivalry, neighbors goading neighbors, family, etc.
Bringing in Pac 12 teams that have little to no cultural ties makes it much more like a minor NFL and NBA league: sterilized.
It’s not that “fans” care. But fans are able to see it from the perspective of the schools and in that sense, markets still matter very much. And money wins out over everything in that regard.
In case you haven't noticed, no one gives a tiny bit of shit about what fans want. This is 100% about money and adding KU gives each school less of it, so it almost certainly isn't happening.
The Big 12 should consider adding:
Memphis ( #51 TV Market and Good Basketball)
Cincinnati the #36 TV market, competitive in both basketball and football
Houston the #8 TV market, competitive in basketball and can has the recruiting base to be good in football
One or both of South Florida and Central Florida, which nets them either the #13 or #18 TV market.
Maybe take both Florida Schools, Houston and Cincinnati. This gets them back to 12 schools and four additional large TV markets with competitive football teams.
The only schools that add value to the conference in both sports and subscriptions without losing the geographic continuity are UVA and UNC. Kansas coming on would only be a plus in MBB. The eastern schools add academic prestige (I know, I know, UNC MBB) and sports beyond the Big 2. Since we're playing in a fantasy world, I would *much* rather take the 2 ACC teams than Kansas or USC.