ADVERTISEMENT

as expected...Downing

St.Cardsfan said:
Change the goal post again, may be 22 spots out of 129, but ISU would have been ranked right after Iowa in the Big 10. That fact is what you want to ignore.
Click to expand...
You just won some sort of irony award.

"Attendance doesn't matter, only the number of subscribers"

"PAC 12 can't afford to leave the cash ISU will bring on the table" (I/we point out that 60 million subscribers bring each school $1.5 million annually currently, so 1.5 million additional subscribers isn't going to move the needle)

"Well look at the attendance of those other schools"

"Well look at the number of students ISU has compared to the other schools" (my personal favorite chest pound)

"Well we will be part of a package deal with Texas and Kansas"

"Well ISU's attendance isn't that far off from Iowa's" (I'd LOVE to see the average ticket prices and gate totals on this)

Look, your premise to begin this thread and all of your posts save maybe 2 have all come from fantasy land. Your initial point was to point out that Iowa and ISU aren't in much different places. Then you got bitch slapped when it was pointed out the Big Ten focuses on academics and the billions in research more than athletics. (See: University of Chicago)

Then you bobbed and weaved your way through a number of topics and none of it adds up. You did touch on the subscriber topic, and I'll do some math for you. Currently, 60,000,000 subscribers in their conference footprint bring in $1.5mm annually to each school. $18 million combined. $18 million÷60,000,000 subscribers comes out to $.30 per subscriber per year. Multiply that by the 1.5 million Iowa subscribers and it comes out to $450,000. Divide that by 13 (current PAC 12 + ISU) and you get ISUs contribution to the PAC 12 annually from the PAC 12 Network...$34,615.38. How could they possibly turn that down?

The long and short of it is: the conference is on borrowed time since Texas and Oklahoma voted to not extend the GOR. I just can't imagine a scenario where ISU finds a chair when the music stops. It might just be time for you to understand ISU just doesn't bring much to the table.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ree4, ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAWK, iahawkeyes17 and 1 other person
The Governator said:
You just won some sort of irony award.

"Attendance doesn't matter, only the number of subscribers"

"PAC 12 can't afford to leave the cash ISU will bring on the table" (I/we point out that 60 million subscribers bring each school $1.5 million annually currently, so 1.5 million additional subscribers isn't going to move the needle)

"Well look at the attendance of those other schools"

"Well look at the number of students ISU has compared to the other schools" (my personal favorite chest pound)

"Well we will be part of a package deal with Texas and Kansas"

"Well ISU's attendance isn't that far off from Iowa's" (I'd LOVE to see the average ticket prices and gate totals on this)

Look, your premise to begin this thread and all of your posts save maybe 2 have all come from fantasy land. Your initial point was to point out that Iowa and ISU aren't in much different places. Then you got bitch slapped when it was pointed out the Big Ten focuses on academics and the billions in research more than athletics. (See: University of Chicago)

Then you bobbed and weaved your way through a number of topics and none of it adds up. You did touch on the subscriber topic, and I'll do some math for you. Currently, 60,000,000 subscribers in their conference footprint bring in $1.5mm annually to each school. $18 million combined. $18 million÷60,000,000 subscribers comes out to $.30 per subscriber per year. Multiply that by the 1.5 million Iowa subscribers and it comes out to $450,000. Divide that by 13 (current PAC 12 + ISU) and you get ISUs contribution to the PAC 12 annually from the PAC 12 Network...$34,615.38. How could they possibly turn that down?

The long and short of it is: the conference is on borrowed time since Texas and Oklahoma voted to not extend the GOR. I just can't imagine a scenario where ISU finds a chair when the music stops. It might just be time for you to understand ISU just doesn't bring much to the table.
Click to expand...

I have never said attendance was the be all and deciding factor, I brought it up as another reason the PAC 12 will chose ISU along with two or three other big 12 members. The Iowa fans WHOLE argument for not choosing ISU is ONE thing. ISU SUCKS AT FOOTBALL. that is your whole point and therefore no conference will want them. Where are you getting your numbers, Do you think the pac 12 only paid member schools 1.8 million dollars last year, each school received 28.7 million from the Pac 12 network. Would the league take ISU as a stand alone team, I doubt it, but they will also be taking one or two teams from Texas and K State. The league will add 32 million new people to charge. This is not fantasy land, it business, I know Hawk fans may not like it, but if you think that when the Big 12 sinks, the pac 12 is going to be filling their open slots with Boise St, N. Colorado, New Mexico to stay in the footprint you are truly ignorant. As for my flip flopping, I have only shot down every angle that Iowa fans keep coming up with as they change the goal line, as why ISU will not be chosen. Academics, Check ISU is an AAU school. Attendance Check 42 in the country would have been behind Iowa if a member of the big 10, more than Boise, N. Col. by 10,000 per game at least. Descent men's and woman's bb teams. And in a market not currently served by the Pac 12.

http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2017/05/24/big-12-member-distribution-smashes-acc-pac-12-payouts/
 
Last edited:
As I read through this thread its truly amazing how Iowa fans like to take things I said out of context, to support their belief that ISU would not be at the table after the Big 12 goes under.

I have never said ISU would be taken as a stand alone team. One or two Texas teams, along with K State would go also.

I never said Attendance was the deciding factor, I just showed the ISU was drawing much better than Boise St., N. Colo. and other teams that will also be trying to take the Pac 12 slots. And would have been right behind Iowa if in the Big 10.

I have never said that the Academics at ISU are top notch, just point out that they are above many of the schools that will want a slot in the Pac 12 and ISU is an AAU school.

I have never said the Big 10 will take ISU, they will not, does not mean another conference will not.

Finally, I have shown by choosing ISU, Texas schools and K State how the Pac 12 will increase their footprint and bring in 32 million new people to sell their product too. The formula I used was the one currently being used by BTN. I also pointed out that new money is why Rutgers and Maryland were added to the conference, when neither is considered a blue blood in anything sports related.

The Iowa fans response, "ISU sucks at football, no conference will want them, and they will end up in the MAC. "

That about sums up your whole debating points.
 
St.Cardsfan said:
As I read through this thread its truly amazing how Iowa fans like to take things I said out of context, to support their belief that ISU would not be at the table after the Big 12 goes under.

I have never said ISU would be taken as a stand alone team. One or two Texas teams, along with K State would go also.

I never said Attendance was the deciding factor, I just showed the ISU was drawing much better than Boise St., N. Colo. and other teams that will also be trying to take the Pac 12 slots. And would have been right behind Iowa if in the Big 10.

I have never said that the Academics at ISU are top notch, just point out that they are above many of the schools that will want a slot in the Pac 12 and ISU is an AAU school.

I have never said the Big 10 will take ISU, they will not, does not mean another conference will not.

Finally, I have shown by choosing ISU, Texas schools and K State how the Pac 12 will increase their footprint and bring in 32 million new people to sell their product too. The formula I used was the one currently being used by BTN. I also pointed out that new money is why Rutgers and Maryland were added to the conference, when neither is considered a blue blood in anything sports related.

The Iowa fans response, "ISU sucks at football, no conference will want them, and they will end up in the MAC. "

That about sums up your whole debating points.
Click to expand...

The PAC 12 Network did not pay out 28 million to each team, the Network didn't even come close to reaching that as a total for all the schools. Your $1 per subscriber concept needs tweaked.
 
cidhawkeye said:
The PAC 12 Network did not pay out 28 million to each team, the Network didn't even come close to reaching that as a total for all the schools. Your $1 per subscriber concept needs tweaked.
Click to expand...

The link I provided says otherwise, did you click and read the information. It was posted May 24th 2017. Or are you just going to call it fake news, and move the goal line again? As to the dollar per subscriber its the amount the BTN charges each household in the conference footprint is it not. Do you think the SEC and PAC 12 charge less per household?
 
St.Cardsfan said:
I have never said attendance was the be all and deciding factor, I brought it up as another reason the PAC 12 will chose ISU along with two or three other big 12 members. The Iowa fans WHOLE argument for not choosing ISU is ONE thing. ISU SUCKS AT FOOTBALL. that is your whole point and therefore no conference will want them. Where are you getting your numbers, Do you think the pac 12 only paid member schools 1.8 million dollars last year, each school received 28.7 million from the Pac 12 network. Would the league take ISU as a stand alone team, I doubt it, but they will also be taking one or two teams from Texas and K State. The league will add 32 million new people to charge. This is not fantasy land, it business, I know Hawk fans may not like it, but if you think that when the Big 12 sinks, the pac 12 is going to be filling their open slots with Boise St, N. Colorado, New Mexico to stay in the footprint you are truly ignorant. As for my flip flopping, I have only shot down every angle that Iowa fans keep coming up with as they change the goal line, as why ISU will not be chosen. Academics, Check ISU is an AAU school. Attendance Check 42 in the country would have been behind Iowa if a member of the big 10, more than Boise, N. Col. by 10,000 per game at least. Descent men's and woman's bb teams. And in a market not currently served by the Pac 12.

http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2017/05/24/big-12-member-distribution-smashes-acc-pac-12-payouts/
Click to expand...

St.Cardsfan said:
As I read through this thread its truly amazing how Iowa fans like to take things I said out of context, to support their belief that ISU would not be at the table after the Big 12 goes under.

I have never said ISU would be taken as a stand alone team. One or two Texas teams, along with K State would go also.

I never said Attendance was the deciding factor, I just showed the ISU was drawing much better than Boise St., N. Colo. and other teams that will also be trying to take the Pac 12 slots. And would have been right behind Iowa if in the Big 10.

I have never said that the Academics at ISU are top notch, just point out that they are above many of the schools that will want a slot in the Pac 12 and ISU is an AAU school.

I have never said the Big 10 will take ISU, they will not, does not mean another conference will not.

Finally, I have shown by choosing ISU, Texas schools and K State how the Pac 12 will increase their footprint and bring in 32 million new people to sell their product too. The formula I used was the one currently being used by BTN. I also pointed out that new money is why Rutgers and Maryland were added to the conference, when neither is considered a blue blood in anything sports related.

The Iowa fans response, "ISU sucks at football, no conference will want them, and they will end up in the MAC. "

That about sums up your whole debating points.
Click to expand...

I'll try to address all of these.

You bring up attendance not being the end all be all, but could be a determining factor. What does a single PAC 12 school get out of ISUs attendance? With that said, how many ISU fans are going to fly out to Corvallis for a Saturday game?

Which Texas schools are you convinced will let ISU ride their coat tails to the PAC 12, if memory serves, Texas teams have only been in play since the BIG XII formed. What allegiance do they have to ISU? I could see Nebraska, Colorado or Missouri. Wait....

Your link citing the 28.7 million dished out from the conference network keeps timing out, so forgive me if I don't believe it. You REALLY think a network that JUST got picked up by Dish Network on the basic package and is only available on DirecTV on a sports package dished out $6 million more per school than the BTN? (By the way, here is my functioning link, you seemed to skip by the first time http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/11/30/In-Depth/Pac12.aspx?)

Then you follow it up with "the league will add 32 million new people to charge". You keep blabbing populations, but conveniently forget that Timmy, the preschooler in Ankeny doesn't pay for a cable subscription. Remember, the population in Iowa is north of 3 million, but the actual subscriber number is 1.5 million.

Yes, ISU does suck at football. Then you try and end-around and play the academics card. Only 5 of the 12 teams are in the top 100 in university rankings (www.google.com/amp/www.kgw.com). Oregon is #375. Do you think the conference gives a damn about academics?

Next, Ive been casually following this thread, but has anybody brought up New Mexico or Northern Colorado outside of you?

Now we're back to attendance. Again, no other PAC 12 team gets a dime from stadium attendance if ISU brings in 125,000 people.

Now to the second quote:

It's truly amazing how you're here twisting and turning to convince us Iowa fans that "ISU is here to stay". Us Iowa fans know we're at the adult table.

Again, I'd like to know which Texas schools are going to partner up with ISU. Baylor? They're even worse off than ISU. Texas Tech? Probably on the same level as ISU. TCU? Small private university that isn't going to raise an eyebrow. Texas? More likely to go independent. They aren't going to give up $15 million per year from their own network to split money with another conference.

Lastly, I'm pretty sure you mentioned Kansas pairing up with ISU earlier, not K-State. Which makes sense, Kansas at least has a basketball program. What does K-State have to offer outside of an irrelevant basketball program and a football coach who is about to retire?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ree4 and iahawkeyes17
The Governator said:
I'll try to address all of these.

You bring up attendance not being the end all be all, but could be a determining factor. What does a single PAC 12 school get out of ISUs attendance? With that said, how many ISU fans are going to fly out to Corvallis for a Saturday game?

Which Texas schools are you convinced will let ISU ride their coat tails to the PAC 12, if memory serves, Texas teams have only been in play since the BIG XII formed. What allegiance do they have to ISU? I could see Nebraska, Colorado or Missouri. Wait....

Your link citing the 28.7 million dished out from the conference network keeps timing out, so forgive me if I don't believe it. You REALLY think a network that JUST got picked up by Dish Network on the basic package and is only available on DirecTV on a sports package dished out $6 million more per school than the BTN? (By the way, here is my functioning link, you seemed to skip by the first time http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2015/11/30/In-Depth/Pac12.aspx?)

Then you follow it up with "the league will add 32 million new people to charge". You keep blabbing populations, but conveniently forget that Timmy, the preschooler in Ankeny doesn't pay for a cable subscription. Remember, the population in Iowa is north of 3 million, but the actual subscriber number is 1.5 million.

Yes, ISU does suck at football. Then you try and end-around and play the academics card. Only 5 of the 12 teams are in the top 100 in university rankings (www.google.com/amp/www.kgw.com). Oregon is #375. Do you think the conference gives a damn about academics?

Next, Ive been casually following this thread, but has anybody brought up New Mexico or Northern Colorado outside of you?

Now we're back to attendance. Again, no other PAC 12 team gets a dime from stadium attendance if ISU brings in 125,000 people.

Now to the second quote:

It's truly amazing how you're here twisting and turning to convince us Iowa fans that "ISU is here to stay". Us Iowa fans know we're at the adult table.

Again, I'd like to know which Texas schools are going to partner up with ISU. Baylor? They're even worse off than ISU. Texas Tech? Probably on the same level as ISU. TCU? Small private university that isn't going to raise an eyebrow. Texas? More likely to go independent. They aren't going to give up $15 million per year from their own network to split money with another conference.

Lastly, I'm pretty sure you mentioned Kansas pairing up with ISU earlier, not K-State. Which makes sense, Kansas at least has a basketball program. What does K-State have to offer outside of an irrelevant basketball program and a football coach who is about to retire?
Click to expand...

Before you start complaining about what you think I said, go back and read my first post on the topic, I laid out how I think this will go down and why each school will end up where it does. That should help you on your next rant. OK.

I had Texas to the ACC, the two Oklahoma schools to SEC, Kansas and TCU to the Big 10. Baylor is toxic no one will take them. Got it so far? The pac 12 will be forced to expand also by the networks and the other three conferences, still with me here?

So that leaves four schools from the Big 12 left, ISU, K State, W. Virginia and Texas Tech. My thinking is WV is the furthest away, smallest state population wise. So then the other 3 big 12 schools are in play. Now the Pac 12 will also look at schools in their area, but using the BTN formula, for additional tv, they will not get more money by taking a school from a state when they already have a school in that state. So they could take Wyoming, or N. Colo, BYU, Boise St, New Mexico ect, but none of those schools bring in as much money as taking the 3 schools from the big 12 some of those schools bring in no new money. Then I went on how ISU is doing in Attendance, academics, and so forth to strengthen the argument of why the Pac 12 would add them. Look it money first, and everything else second, but Iowa will be the largest population state after Texas it could add, where they do not already have a team. AS to the link, it works fine for me.

To your point about Pac 12 fans coming to Ames, how many iowa fans are ever going to go to Maryland or Rutgers? How many Arizona or A. State fan go to Oregon State or Washington state to attend a game, few if any. It does not matter if fans of those schools do not go to Ames, do you think they would go to Boise or N. Colorado? I doubt it. Look ISU is not at the top of any list for the Big 10, ACC or SEC, but if this goes down even close to like laid out, that would push ISU, K State and Tech to the top of the Pac 12 list.

You point about Academics, Yes, I do think the Pac 12 will take it into account. How many AAU schools will they be able to get, there are only 3 left in the Big 12. Its easier to sell ISU to the academics people in USC, UCLA, Stanford, and the rest then vote for Boise St, because they have really good football. Remember its the college presidents making this decision not the AD's, sports writers or Iowa fans. College Presidents tend to love to talk about academics, look at Rutgers and Maryland, both AAU schools, with fine academics, making it easier to appease the college presidents.
 
Last edited:
St.Cardsfan said:
Before you start complaining about what you think I said, go back and read my first post on the topic, I laid out how I think this will go down and why each school will end up where it does. That should help you on your next rant. OK.

I had Texas to the ACC, the two Oklahoma schools to SEC, Kansas and TCU to the Big 10. Baylor is toxic no one will take them. Got it so far? The pac 12 will be forced to expand also by the networks and the other three conferences, still with me here?

So that leaves four schools from the Big 12 left, ISU, K State, W. Virginia and Texas Tech. My thinking is WV is the furthest away, smallest state population wise. So then the other 3 big 12 schools are in play. Now the Pac 12 will also look at schools in their area, but using the BTN formula, for additional tv, they will not get more money by taking a school from a state when they already have a school in that state. So they could take Wyoming, or N. Colo, BYU, Boise St, New Mexico ect, but none of those schools bring in as much money as taking the 3 schools from the big 12 some of those schools bring in no new money. Then I went on how ISU is doing in Attendance, academics, and so forth to strengthen the argument of why the Pac 12 would add them. Look it money first, and everything else second, but Iowa will be the largest population state after Texas it could add, where they do not already have a team. AS to the link, it works fine for me.

To your point about Pac 12 fans coming to Ames, how many iowa fans are ever going to go to Maryland or Rutgers? How many Arizona or A. State fan go to Oregon State or Washington state to attend a game, few if any. It does not matter if fans of those schools do not go to Ames, do you think they would go to Boise or N. Colorado? I doubt it. Look ISU is not at the top of any list for the Big 10, ACC or SEC, but if this goes down even close to like laid out, that would push ISU, K State and Tech to the top of the Pac 12 list.

You point about Academics, Yes, I do think the Pac 12 will take it into account. How many AAU schools will they be able to get, there are only 3 left in the Big 12. Its easier to sell ISU to the academics people in USC, UCLA, Stanford, and the rest then vote for Boise St, because they have really good football. Remember its the college presidents making this decision not the AD's, sports writers or Iowa fans. College Presidents tend to love to talk about academics, look at Rutgers and Maryland, both AAU schools, with fine academics, making it easier to appease the college presidents.
Click to expand...

So basically at the end of the day, you're saying "we are/were a P5 school so you should let us join your conference even though we're 2 time zones away."

It's good that we've whittled down the goofy arguments (I think)

I'll agree that WVU is in a tough spot geographically. But hell, if the PAC 12 is desperate enough to 'nab' ISU, then it isn't a stretch for WVU go get picked up by the ACC.

It's comical to listen to you spout about a conference being "forced" to take anybody. Especially since the BIG XII was "forced" to take TCU and WVU because they saw the iceberg that would wreck the conference as everybody was abandoning ship. You blast Rutgers and Maryland all you want. Both after by far more accomplished universities than ISU. So we circle back around to the Big Ten being an academic THEN athletic conference.
 
The Governator said:
So basically at the end of the day, you're saying "we are/were a P5 school so you should let us join your conference even though we're 2 time zones away."

It's good that we've whittled down the goofy arguments (I think)

I'll agree that WVU is in a tough spot geographically. But hell, if the PAC 12 is desperate enough to 'nab' ISU, then it isn't a stretch for WVU go get picked up by the ACC.

It's comical to listen to you spout about a conference being "forced" to take anybody. Especially since the BIG XII was "forced" to take TCU and WVU because they saw the iceberg that would wreck the conference as everybody was abandoning ship. You blast Rutgers and Maryland all you want. Both after by far more accomplished universities than ISU. So we circle back around to the Big Ten being an academic THEN athletic conference.
Click to expand...

I only had 3 current Big 12 teams going to the Pac 12, if they think WV would be attractive there would be one space for them. I have not blasted either Rutgers nor Maryland, just as examples of not football schools, but they were extended an invitation to join the Big 10. I have not circled back to anything. Iowa fans keep coming up with reasons why they think ISU will not be taken, I have responded to those. Lets look.
1. ISU sucks at football, and its ALL about football. Then how do you explain Maryland and Rutgers?
2. No major success and not in a large metro market. Does not matter, get one team in a state, money pours in. Iowa is the 2nd largest state behind Texas that is left. Look at Rutgers and Maryland.
3. To far away. They will be flying to the games, not driving or taking stage coach. Under the Pod system most schools will only have to go to Ames every 2 to 4 years.
4. Brings nothing to the Pac 12, basically football related. $$$$$$$ is what they, along with Texas and Kanas bring.
5. Will take BYU, Boise St, and anyone not named ISU. Then why did the Pac 12 pass on BYU and take U of Utah? Maybe they do not want small religious schools. So no TCU or Baylor.
6. Iowa fans will not watch it, nor will anyone else. Does not matter, just like few ISU fans watch BTN, "I actually do, watched their baseball game last night" so they will not add them. Does not matter, if you are a fan or not, everyone will end up paying.
7. Newest reason, "why will the pac 12 be forced to expand?" Do you really think the other three conferences at 16 and the Networks will allow the Pac 12 to stay at 12 schools. I thought the whole point was to get to 64 teams, 16 per conference, is it not.
8. No one goes to ISU games and no one cares. ISU expanded their stadium thinking they would sell out each game. No one ever said the second part, and if ISU had been in the big 10 last year, their attendance would have placed them right behind Iowa. Ahead of 5 big 10 schools. But no one cares about ISU.

Waiting for your response.
 
Last edited:
St.Cardsfan said:
The link I provided says otherwise, did you click and read the information. It was posted May 24th 2017. Or are you just going to call it fake news, and move the goal line again? As to the dollar per subscriber its the amount the BTN charges each household in the conference footprint is it not. Do you think the SEC and PAC 12 charge less per household?
Click to expand...

Maybe digging into the information you attempt to provide would help you. Please show me what the PAC 12 Network provides to each school. Not the total tv package, the PAC 12 network. Per school or total, either works. You have been very fun to track in this thread, you start with Tech, KState and ISU going to the PAC, then you attempt to show how ISU belong with no mention of it being a package deal. You remind me of the Vegas tipsters who give their 'lock' each week with multiple messages when you call. I will still go with Waffle House.
 
cidhawkeye said:
Maybe digging into the information you attempt to provide would help you. Please show me what the PAC 12 Network provides to each school. Not the total tv package, the PAC 12 network. Per school or total, either works. You have been very fun to track in this thread, you start with Tech, KState and ISU going to the PAC, then you attempt to show how ISU belong with no mention of it being a package deal. You remind me of the Vegas tipsters who give their 'lock' each week with multiple messages when you call. I will still go with Waffle House.
Click to expand...

Show me where I ever said, ISU belongs alone, as a stand alone team. I never said or even implied it. I was just making the case as to why ISU would be one of the four chosen The link I provided above gives all the information. It says next year the conference will pay out 29 million per team. .
http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2017/05/24/big-12-member-distribution-smashes-acc-pac-12-payouts/
 
St.Cardsfan said:
Show me where I ever said, ISU belongs alone, as a stand alone team. I never said or even implied it. I was just making the case as to why ISU would be one of the four chosen The link I provided above gives all the information. It says next year the conference will pay out 29 million per team. .
http://landgrantgauntlet.com/2017/05/24/big-12-member-distribution-smashes-acc-pac-12-payouts/
Click to expand...

When you have entire posts where you expound on why ISU is attractive and never mention any other school, any part of a package or combination that is most certainly implying that. As far as your link is concerned it doesn't give the information on the PAC 12 network. You know that and you are being intellectually disengenuos or I have given you too much credit.
 
cidhawkeye said:
When you have entire posts where you expound on why ISU is attractive and never mention any other school, any part of a package or combination that is most certainly implying that. As far as your link is concerned it doesn't give the information on the PAC 12 network. You know that and you are being intellectually disengenuos or I have given you too much credit.
Click to expand...

We were only talking about ISU, from my OP I said it was 3 to 4 schools from the Big 12. If you cannot keep up, maybe you should read a little slower.
Yes, the link does say how much each school will receive this year,

The Pac-12 reportedly payed out $28.7 million to each member, which again, includes third tier media rights. To put it into perspective, the Pac-12, with its TV network, paid out less to its members that the Big 12, that does not have a conference network. And, Big 12 members pull in several more million in third tier revenue. It doesn’t look like it will be much better next year either, as The Mercury News is reporting the conference expects to payout just $29.5 million per member next year.
 
St.Cardsfan said:
You tell me, you seem to be the expert on the topic at hand. Its late, been up since 5:30, worked all day. Have a good night. Guys its just a football, there is not one of us that will be playing the game this fall, we just cheer, nothing more. One fan base is not better than another. Iowa fans do not cheer harder, want it more or are any more special then fans from Alabama, Northwestern, BYU or even Iowa State. Everyone has an opinion, no one knows who will be right. I guess we will just have to wait and see. Here is to a good game this fall.
Click to expand...
I am sure many of your days are long little red, seeing how you spend hours spouting off on other teams boards. Jealous, tiny people do things that you do.
 
Sad. You have posted almost more than all Hawks combined the last 2 days on this thread on a Hawkeye board. I told u to get a life. You said your goal is to come here and upset "douche Hawkeyes." Do you not realize how pathetic that really is? Your goal in spending hours a day and night is to upset a rival fanbase. I posted I think twice yesterday on a Hawkeye board. U posted like 15 times on a rival board on a holiday weekend? And you obviously have spent countless hours number crunching and doing all your stats as this process has played out. Do you not have a family or friends or a hobby? Dear God. When you catch me at age 55 (well any age but at 55 I assume he has a family and job responsibilities) posting more on a rivals board than their own fans on a Saturday night at 11 pm than call me a loser. And I will agree.
 
You are now spending a Sunday night quoting the SAN Jose Mercury news on PAC 12 payouts on a rivals board?! This is seriously not happening.
 
KujawaFan said:
Sad. You have posted almost more than all Hawks combined the last 2 days on this thread on a Hawkeye board. I told u to get a life. You said your goal is to come here and upset "douche Hawkeyes." Do you not realize how pathetic that really is? Your goal in spending hours a day and night is to upset a rival fanbase. I posted I think twice yesterday on a Hawkeye board. U posted like 15 times on a rival board on a holiday weekend? And you obviously have spent countless hours number crunching and doing all your stats as this process has played out. Do you not have a family or friends or a hobby? Dear God. When you catch me at age 55 (well any age but at 55 I assume he has a family and job responsibilities) posting more on a rivals board than their own fans on a Saturday night at 11 pm than call me a loser. And I will agree.
Click to expand...

Cool, visited the cemeteries this afternoon, took my wife and daughter out to lunch, just got home, drinking a beer and getting ready to watch a movie on DVD. Life is good, even at 55, only 5 or 6 years away from retirement. Will have maxed out my IPERS by then. Don't golf anymore, Cards lost today, so now. If you do not like the posts block me or do not answer back.
 
percyland said:
I love how Iowa is getting after it in Florida lately.

Especially since we shat our pants in Texas, FL is a good back-up.
Click to expand...

St.Cardsfan said:
Cool, visited the cemeteries this afternoon, took my wife and daughter out to lunch, just got home, drinking a beer and getting ready to watch a movie on DVD. Life is good, even at 55, only 5 or 6 years away from retirement. Will have maxed out my IPERS by then. Don't golf anymore, Cards lost today, so now. If you do not like the posts block me or do not answer back.
Click to expand...
You got a picture of your wife?
 
St.Cardsfan said:
We were only talking about ISU, from my OP I said it was 3 to 4 schools from the Big 12. If you cannot keep up, maybe you should read a little slower.
Yes, the link does say how much each school will receive this year,

The Pac-12 reportedly payed out $28.7 million to each member, which again, includes third tier media rights. To put it into perspective, the Pac-12, with its TV network, paid out less to its members that the Big 12, that does not have a conference network. And, Big 12 members pull in several more million in third tier revenue. It doesn’t look like it will be much better next year either, as The Mercury News is reporting the conference expects to payout just $29.5 million per member next year.
Click to expand...

I will make it a little easier for you. How much of the 29.5 million comes from the Pac 12 network? To go slower yet, not the PAC 12 but the PAC 12 network. I am assuming you know the the number contains all of their broadcast partners. The link that has been posted for you twice has the information, your link does not.
 
cidhawkeye said:
I will make it a little easier for you. How much of the 29.5 million comes from the Pac 12 network? To go slower yet, not the PAC 12 but the PAC 12 network. I am assuming you know the the number contains all of their broadcast partners. The link that has been posted for you twice has the information, your link does not.
Click to expand...

Unlike BTN and the SEC network, the Pac 12 network is wholly owned and operated by the Pac 12. Sorry about the link, it works for me every time I have tried it.
 
KujawaFan said:
You are now spending a Sunday night quoting the SAN Jose Mercury news on PAC 12 payouts on a rivals board?! This is seriously not happening.
Click to expand...

So you think the San Jose paper is Fake news? Is it propaganda for the Pac 12. God what is happening to this country?
 
St.Cardsfan said:
Unlike BTN and the SEC network, the Pac 12 network is wholly owned and operated by the Pac 12. Sorry about the link, it works for me every time I have tried it.
Click to expand...

So the PAC 12 gets no money from ESPN, Fox, 3rd tier rights, it's all PAC 12 network, got it. You are winning the troll war. You know the PAC 12 network contributed 1.5 million per school and the schools are disappointed with the revenue flow from their network. You keep throwing out what you want, the numbers are the numbers and they don't support your premise.
 
Hawkdroppings said:
It is a Common practice here and they seem to believe name calling somehow amplifies their message. What happens is they get totally discounted.
Click to expand...
If you don't like it, leave. You throw out misinformation and lies on a regular basis that get proven wrong. Your sole purpose for coming onto an opponents board it to antagonize. You are a douche bag. Period. Get a life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iahawkeyes17 and ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAWK
cidhawkeye said:
So the PAC 12 gets no money from ESPN, Fox, 3rd tier rights, it's all PAC 12 network, got it. You are winning the troll war. You know the PAC 12 network contributed 1.5 million per school and the schools are disappointed with the revenue flow from their network. You keep throwing out what you want, the numbers are the numbers and they don't support your premise.
Click to expand...

Does it really matter, each school received over 28 million from television rights. Would you please give me a break down of how much money Iowa received last calendar year, and break it down between, BTN, ABC, and tier 3 revenue, and any other moneys Iowa received. Thank You
 
RogerKint said:
If you don't like it, leave. You throw out misinformation and lies on a regular basis that get proven wrong. Your sole purpose for coming onto an opponents board it to antagonize. You are a douche bag. Period. Get a life.
Click to expand...
I think we know what you are. Should I get a life like yours? No thanks
 
blhawk said:
Douche bags. Like you. That is what is happening to this country.
Click to expand...

So anyone that does not toe the line, has anything negative to say, or is a fan of another team is a DOUCHE BAG? Every person here must bow to the great and powerful Iowa Hawkeyes, is that it? Sounds like you are preaching Marxism. Are you a communist by the way? Look I appreciate your passion to your team, but insulting others that have a different opinion is un-American and just wrong OK. That is why I asked "why is wrong with this country? Our morals have gone out the window, we are now questioning what we read in the newspaper about sports.
 
St.Cardsfan said:
So anyone that does not toe the line, has anything negative to say, or is a fan of another team is a DOUCHE BAG? Every person here must bow to the great and powerful Iowa Hawkeyes, is that it? Sounds like you are preaching Marxism. Are you a communist by the way? Look I appreciate your passion to your team, but insulting others that have a different opinion is un-American and just wrong OK. That is why I asked "why is wrong with this country? Our morals have gone out the window, we are now questioning what we read in the newspaper about sports.
Click to expand...

Seriously what kind of response did you expect going to an IOWA message board talking negatively about IOWA. Few times I've read crap on cyclone board the same stuff happens to Iowa fans. Go to any other teams board and talk negative about them. I'm mean are you that surprised. Finally get off your soap box before preaching about moralities on a message board that is just comical actually.

Finally keep on dreaming for the ISU to PAC 12...
 
No Cards - I did not question the San Jose Mercury as a source. I questioned you spending a Sunday night researching it and posting it on a rival's board. In all my years never seen somebody so sad and pathetic. You are 55 with a family and you joined a rivals board this week and have posted more than Hawk posters combined. And said your goal in life is to piss off "douche Hawks." Do you really not understand how sad and pathetic that is? Trolling is one thing, but what you are doing now is really weird and creepy. Whether you are right or wrong is not even the point now. Dear God, look at all your 7 paragraph posts on a rivals board at all hours of the day and night. Frickin just crazy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iahawkeyes17, ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAWK and RogerKint
KujawaFan said:
No Cards - I did not question the San Jose Mercury as a source. I questioned you spending a Sunday night researching it and posting it on a rival's board. In all my years never seen somebody so sad and pathetic. You are 55 with a family and you joined a rivals board this week and have posted more than Hawk posters combined. And said your goal in life is to piss off "douche Hawks." Do you really not understand how sad and pathetic that is? Trolling is one thing, but what you are doing now is really weird and creepy. Whether you are right or wrong is not even the point now. Dear God, look at all your 7 paragraph posts on a rivals board at all hours of the day and night. Frickin just crazy.
Click to expand...

So its cool to call me an idiot and a douche bag, but if I return the crap, its not right. Got it. Sad and pathetic, Jesus, do not worry about me, get back on point and explain to me why what I said is wrong? I have also not been trolling, just gave a different opinion to your "ISU will be in the MAC" garbage that you have been through out here for the past month or so.
 
St.Cardsfan said:
So its cool to call me an idiot and a douche bag, but if I return the crap, its not right. Got it. Sad and pathetic, Jesus, do not worry about me, get back on point and explain to me why what I said is wrong? I have also not been trolling, just gave a different opinion to your "ISU will be in the MAC" garbage that you have been through out here for the past month or so.
Click to expand...
But you are a douche bag. Anyone who has a wife and kids and spends their holiday trolling their idols site, is a douche bag. The clowns will be invited to the Mountain West.......at best. They have no shot in getting into one of the power conferences. They either go a bit West or they go a bit east to play with Cincinnati, UConn, Houston and those boys. Sad and pathetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAWK
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Drinkin Buddy

College Football Playoff expected to approve expansion

Replies
20
Views
1K
Iowa Football
Hawk_4shur
Hawk_4shur
QChawks

S Carolina -4.5

Replies
27
Views
2K
Iowa Basketball
hawkirugged17
hawkirugged17
cigaretteman

Iowa’s state parks need $100M in infrastructure repairs

Replies
81
Views
1K
Off Topic
Joes Place
Joes Place
H

No rate cuts this year

Replies
86
Views
1K
Off Topic
markfromj
markfromj
cigaretteman

Watch Iowa women's basketball Final Four game at Carver-Hawkeye Arena

Replies
0
Views
189
Off Topic
cigaretteman
cigaretteman
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back