Iowa State...

[Slappy Pappy]

B12 conference is joke. Here's a fact: B12 was 4-5 against other P5 conferences. Best win? TCU by 6 over Minny. Weak-weak-weak. They have done nothing on the field to show they are anything but the weakest conference in P5 football, full of weak-azzed patsy teams.

TCU should be no higher than 20, with their weak play, winning half their games by less than a TD. They gave up 45 to KSU! Baylor should be no higher than Iowa - probably the lowest of all undefeated teams due to playing the weakest schedule. Both of those teams would have a minimum of 4 losses in the B10.

 

[The Sleeping Dog]

Lone ... others have found that particular display of discretion to be far the better part of valor.

I will give you this, Ames Iowa is no Manhattan Kansas. How on Earth did Snyder ever recruit to Manhattan, I mean other than KSU's generous concept of athletic academic waivers. Its hotter in the summer, colder in the winter, and at least when I attended a tournament there in the fall of 78, a dry campus. No cigarette venders on campus. Never left for another tournament without three cartons of Luckys or Camel straights in the car.

 

[Lone Clone]

Lone ... others have found that particular display of discretion to be far the better part of valor.

I will give you this, Ames Iowa is no Manhattan Kansas. How on Earth did Snyder ever recruit to Manhattan, I mean other than KSU's generous concept of athletic academic waivers. Its hotter in the summer, colder in the winter, and at least when I attended a tournament there in the fall of 78, a dry campus. No cigarette venders on campus. Never left for another tournament without three cartons of Luckys or Camel straights in the car.

Kansas State is a special case. There are a number of factors, but frankly, the biggest one is that Bill Snyder is one of the best coaches in college football history. Period. The end.

Other factors are that the university went all-in with football, at the expense of other programs; that Snyder was able to recruit players who couldn't qualify at many other schools; that Manhattan is smack-dab in the middle of a major pool of junior college players; that Snyder was able to weaken the schedule while he got things turned around (just as Hayden, his former mentor, did at Iowa).

What Snyder did there is truly amazing. You think ISU is a coaching graveyard? You cannot imagine how much worse KSU was before Snyder. On top of everything else, they had no fan support.

 

[HerkyFan]

Kansas State is a special case. There are a number of factors, but frankly, the biggest one is that Bill Snyder is one of the best coaches in college football history. Period. The end.

Other factors are that the university went all-in with football, at the expense of other programs; that Snyder was able to recruit players who couldn't qualify at many other schools; that Manhattan is smack-dab in the middle of a major pool of junior college players; that Snyder was able to weaken the schedule while he got things turned around (just as Hayden, his former mentor, did at Iowa).

What Snyder did there is truly amazing. You think ISU is a coaching graveyard? You cannot imagine how much worse KSU was before Snyder. On top of everything else, they had no fan support.

Yet K-State is now K-State and isu is still isu.

 

[AuroraHawk]

When the Big 12 was close to imploding, which conferences were sending invitations to ISU ? Certainly not the BIG. Nor were any other of the major conferences. The bottom line is that despite being a very good educational institution ISU'scfootball program has no real options other than hoping the Big 12 stays in tact because its history does not make it an attractive partner. Iowa does have real history.

If the B1G were to disband, it would do so on the issue of revenue generation and revenue sharing. No conference would be clamoring to acquire Iowa because of the state's population and the number of television sets in the state.

That's why the Pac12 took Colorado over Oklahoma. It's not about football tradition or success levels. It's about TV sets and $1.00/month per cable/satellite subscription. Pac12 Network makes far more cash adding the markets in Colorado than the markets in Oklahoma. Colorado's sports stink, but the population is an attractive partner.

Similarly, any conference re-alignment decisions aren't about - as you put it - whether "history" makes a school "an attractive partner." History has nothing to do with it. It's all about the cash.

 

[Birky]

Wait, what? Colorado got an invitation that would not have been given to Oklahoma? I don't think that is true, but I don't have solid evidence to prove it.

 

[SeaBassWins]

If the B1G were to disband, it would do so on the issue of revenue generation and revenue sharing. No conference would be clamoring to acquire Iowa because of the state's population and the number of television sets in the state.

That's why the Pac12 took Colorado over Oklahoma. It's not about football tradition or success levels. It's about TV sets and $1.00/month per cable/satellite subscription. Pac12 Network makes far more cash adding the markets in Colorado than the markets in Oklahoma. Colorado's sports stink, but the population is an attractive partner.

Similarly, any conference re-alignment decisions aren't about - as you put it - whether "history" makes a school "an attractive partner." History has nothing to do with it. It's all about the cash.

B12 conference is joke. Here's a fact: B12 was 4-5 against other P5 conferences. Best win? TCU by 6 over Minny. Weak-weak-weak. They have done nothing on the field to show they are anything but the weakest conference in P5 football, full of weak-azzed patsy teams.

TCU should be no higher than 20, with their weak play, winning half their games by less than a TD. They gave up 45 to KSU! Baylor should be no higher than Iowa - probably the lowest of all undefeated teams due to playing the weakest schedule. Both of those teams would have a minimum of 4 losses in the B10.

Funny thing about this thread is that Bigten fan from the 80's and 90's were the original "we beat each other up each week and our teams are so good top to bottom it's no wonder we never win a NC cause we can't get through a season, it's just soooooo tough". You may recognize that as the mantra of the 2000's sEc fan. Wasn't true then and is not true now.

 

[timinatoria]

Wait, what? Colorado got an invitation that would not have been given to Oklahoma?

LMAO.....no, that isn't true. He completely made that up.

 

[Lone Clone]

LMAO.....no, that isn't true. He completely made that up.

I don't know if he made it up or not. There was heavy talk of Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma going to the Pac-Whatever, back when Nebraska went to the Big Whatever. Supposedly, the sticking point was that the Texas Legislature wanted Baylor to go wherever Texas went, and the Pac-Whatever objected, based on rumors that people at Baylor believe in God. Or maybe it was because Ken Starr is the president of Baylor. Something along those lines.

I still don't understand how West Virginia got into the Big 8. Maybe they promised to supply all the other ADs with moonshine.

 

[AuroraHawk]

LMAO.....no, that isn't true. He completely made that up.

Nope. Oklahoma actively lobbied the Pac12 to join them. Pac12 said "you bring Texas, it's a deal."

It's all about revenue and TV markets. Why did the SEC grab Mizzou and Texas A&M? Here's a hint: it's not about traditions of excellence. It's all about expanding the conference's footprint and the $1.00 per month per cable/satellite subscription.

I don't like it but, in the conference re-alignment game, schools like Rutgers are far more attractive than schools like Iowa.

And simple math tells me that the B1G could drop 4 teams and lose very little revenue. That's loss of revenue would be more than offset by sharing revenue among 10 teams instead of 14. The B1G could drop Purdue, MSU, Northwestern and Iowa and lose very little footprint (only Iowa). Hell, it could drop Nebraska and add ND and its footprint could increase due to ND's national draw.

And, when decisions about conference composition are driven more by the dollar than other considerations, that concept should concern any Iowa fan (and ISU fan, KSU fan, Kansas fan, Nebraska fan, etc.).

It's not made up. Not even close. It's reality. Cold, hard reality.

 

[Birky]

Nope. Oklahoma actively lobbied the Pac12 to join them. Pac12 said "you bring Texas, it's a deal."

It's all about revenue and TV markets. Why did the SEC grab Mizzou and Texas A&M? Here's a hint: it's not about traditions of excellence. It's all about expanding the conference's footprint and the $1.00 per month per cable/satellite subscription.

I don't like it but, in the conference re-alignment game, schools like Rutgers are far more attractive than schools like Iowa.

And simple math tells me that the B1G could drop 4 teams and lose very little revenue. That's loss of revenue would be more than offset by sharing revenue among 10 teams instead of 14. The B1G could drop Purdue, MSU, Northwestern and Iowa and lose very little footprint (only Iowa). Hell, it could drop Nebraska and add ND and its footprint could increase due to ND's national draw.

And, when decisions about conference composition are driven more by the dollar than other considerations, that concept should concern any Iowa fan (and ISU fan, KSU fan, Kansas fan, Nebraska fan, etc.).

It's not made up. Not even close. It's reality. Cold, hard reality.

Aurora, I believe that was a year after Colorado had already left to join the Pac 10 with Utah to make it the Pac 12. I remember the next year when Mizzou and A&M left is when Oklahoma/Texas/two other teams were supposedly more seriously considering jumping to what would end up being the Pac 16 had they made the move.

They didn't take Colorado over Oklahoma. That Oklahoma scenario didn't arise until Colorado was already in the Pac 12. Colorado has 5 million people, and Oklahoma has 4 million. I highly doubt that is enough to tip the scales in favor of taking the Buffs over the Sooners. If so, then the B1G would have taken Rutgers twice before even glancing at Nebraska, for example.

 

[JStandefer]

Nope. Oklahoma actively lobbied the Pac12 to join them. Pac12 said "you bring Texas, it's a deal."

It's all about revenue and TV markets. Why did the SEC grab Mizzou and Texas A&M? Here's a hint: it's not about traditions of excellence. It's all about expanding the conference's footprint and the $1.00 per month per cable/satellite subscription.

I don't like it but, in the conference re-alignment game, schools like Rutgers are far more attractive than schools like Iowa.

And simple math tells me that the B1G could drop 4 teams and lose very little revenue. That's loss of revenue would be more than offset by sharing revenue among 10 teams instead of 14. The B1G could drop Purdue, MSU, Northwestern and Iowa and lose very little footprint (only Iowa). Hell, it could drop Nebraska and add ND and its footprint could increase due to ND's national draw.

And, when decisions about conference composition are driven more by the dollar than other considerations, that concept should concern any Iowa fan (and ISU fan, KSU fan, Kansas fan, Nebraska fan, etc.).

It's not made up. Not even close. It's reality. Cold, hard reality.

Is that why the PAC took Utah?

 

[AuroraHawk]

Is that why the PAC took Utah?

Is that why the PAC took Utah?

If you look at the data, I think you'd find that the number of television households in the DMA for Salt Lake City exceeds the number of television households in the DMA for Oklahoma City. By a factor of 25%.

In fact, the number of television households in the Salt Lake City DMA exceeds that of the Des Moines/Ames and CR/Waterloo/IC DMA combined.

But, hey, I get it. The Pac 12 poached Utah and Colorado because of their rich football traditions. The expansion of the Pac12 Network, the fees associated with expansion and television broadcast rights had nothing to do with that decision.

 

[AuroraHawk]

Aurora, I believe that was a year after Colorado had already left to join the Pac 10 with Utah to make it the Pac 12. I remember the next year when Mizzou and A&M left is when Oklahoma/Texas/two other teams were supposedly more seriously considering jumping to what would end up being the Pac 16 had they made the move.

They didn't take Colorado over Oklahoma. That Oklahoma scenario didn't arise until Colorado was already in the Pac 12. Colorado has 5 million people, and Oklahoma has 4 million. I highly doubt that is enough to tip the scales in favor of taking the Buffs over the Sooners. If so, then the B1G would have taken Rutgers twice before even glancing at Nebraska, for example.

Population isn't the key. It's the number of television households. The Denver DMA has about 1.5M television households. The Oklahoma City DMA has about 700K. That's a massive difference in ability to generate revenue.

 

[AuroraHawk]

If you don't believe me as to what is driving these decisions, read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/business/the-big-tens-bigger-footprint.html?_r=0

Or this:
http://adage.com/article/media/east-young-man-expansion-a-boon-big-ten-network/300748/

Adding Rutgers and Maryland generated more than double the amount of revenue for all B1G Athletic Departments . . . going from $13.9M per school to $31.7M per school.

These conferences aren't chasing tradition or current success stories. They are chasing market share, cable fees and leverage in negotiating monstrous broadcasting deals with ESPN, Fox and the networks.

 

[the24fan]

If you don't believe me as to what is driving these decisions, read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/business/the-big-tens-bigger-footprint.html?_r=0

Or this:
http://adage.com/article/media/east-young-man-expansion-a-boon-big-ten-network/300748/

Adding Rutgers and Maryland generated more than double the amount of revenue for all B1G Athletic Departments . . . going from $13.9M per school to $31.7M per school.

These conferences aren't chasing tradition or current success stories. They are chasing market share, cable fees and leverage in negotiating monstrous broadcasting deals with ESPN, Fox and the networks.

pretty hard to argue this point. It is driven by money, money, and oh yeah, money!
anyone who denies this is pretty ignorant in the college game these days

 

[Lone Clone]

Aurora, I believe that was a year after Colorado had already left to join the Pac 10 with Utah to make it the Pac 12. I remember the next year when Mizzou and A&M left is when Oklahoma/Texas/two other teams were supposedly more seriously considering jumping to what would end up being the Pac 16 had they made the move.

They didn't take Colorado over Oklahoma. That Oklahoma scenario didn't arise until Colorado was already in the Pac 12. Colorado has 5 million people, and Oklahoma has 4 million. I highly doubt that is enough to tip the scales in favor of taking the Buffs over the Sooners. If so, then the B1G would have taken Rutgers twice before even glancing at Nebraska, for example.

I don't know what period of time Aurora is citing, but in my case, I was talking about before Colorado left.

 

[Birky]

If you don't believe me as to what is driving these decisions, read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/business/the-big-tens-bigger-footprint.html?_r=0

Or this:
http://adage.com/article/media/east-young-man-expansion-a-boon-big-ten-network/300748/

Adding Rutgers and Maryland generated more than double the amount of revenue for all B1G Athletic Departments . . . going from $13.9M per school to $31.7M per school.

These conferences aren't chasing tradition or current success stories. They are chasing market share, cable fees and leverage in negotiating monstrous broadcasting deals with ESPN, Fox and the networks.

I agree with this, I am in no way arguing it is not about money, it is always about money. I'm telling you that the Pac 10 did not pass up an opportunity to take Oklahoma to take Colorado. If Colorado had 3 times the population of Oklahoma, then yes, I would agree that it makes sense. Your suggestion that they passed over an Oklahoma that wanted in for Colorado is not possible. The difference in the states populations is not large. Let me put this in perspective. The difference in population of Iowa and Nebraska is about the same as Colorado and Oklahoma. Do you think a conference would take Iowa or ISU over Nebraska? Nope.

You're correct, it is absolutely about money. That is not disputable, but Oklahoma is a national team that brings enormous cache, and probably even brings in a market like DFW to go along with entire state of Oklahoma?

Your idea of the driving force behind conference expansions is almost certainly correct. Whatever you heard about Colorado being picked over Oklahoma cannot possibly be correct. You got some bad info, or made some bad connections.

 

[AuroraHawk]

I agree with this, I am in no way arguing it is not about money, it is always about money. I'm telling you that the Pac 10 did not pass up an opportunity to take Oklahoma to take Colorado. If Colorado had 3 times the population of Oklahoma, then yes, I would agree that it makes sense. Your suggestion that they passed over an Oklahoma that wanted in for Colorado is not possible. The difference in the states populations is not large. Let me put this in perspective. The difference in population of Iowa and Nebraska is about the same as Colorado and Oklahoma. Do you think a conference would take Iowa or ISU over Nebraska? Nope.

You're correct, it is absolutely about money. That is not disputable, but Oklahoma is a national team that brings enormous cache, and probably even brings in a market like DFW to go along with entire state of Oklahoma?

Your idea of the driving force behind conference expansions is almost certainly correct. Whatever you heard about Colorado being picked over Oklahoma cannot possibly be correct. You got some bad info, or made some bad connections.

Denver's DMA is twice that of Oklahoma City's DMA. 1.5M compared to 700K. Regardless of timing, Pac 12 said "no thanks" to OU unless it could bring Texas along. OU wanted to leave and the Pac 12 said "thanks but no thanks." Despite its tradition and past successes.