collapse

* '23-'24 SOTG Tally


2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

Crean vs Buzz vs Wojo vs Shaka by MUDPT
[May 04, 2024, 10:05:13 PM]


2024 Transfer Portal by wadesworld
[May 04, 2024, 09:36:37 PM]


Big East 2024 Offseason by TSmith34, Inc.
[May 04, 2024, 08:28:28 PM]


2024-25 Non-Conference Schedule by Nukem2
[May 04, 2024, 01:57:07 PM]


Most Painful Transfers In MUBB History? by Jay Bee
[May 04, 2024, 10:20:49 AM]


Marquette NBA Thread by Uncle Rico
[May 04, 2024, 07:00:37 AM]


Recruiting as of 3/15/24 by MU82
[May 03, 2024, 05:21:12 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: The long cold summer

Marquette
Marquette

Open Practice

Date/Time: Oct 11, 2024 ???
TV: NA
Schedule for 2023-24
27-10

Author Topic: More conference expansion nonsense  (Read 43317 times)

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #125 on: May 11, 2016, 05:45:29 PM »
If the Big Ten could somehow get a deal with both Texas and Oklahoma, they aren't going to let OU's lack of AAU membership stand in the way of it. 

Stretchdeltsig

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3199
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #126 on: May 11, 2016, 08:13:06 PM »
Ahem... the Big East.

Litehouse

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2211
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #127 on: May 11, 2016, 08:27:31 PM »
Can anyone cite any support for this mysterious Big Tweleventeen AAU deal breaker requirement other than "I read it on a message board once"?

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207

Benny B

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5969
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #129 on: May 11, 2016, 08:59:42 PM »
CSU has no Denver market.


BYU has more of the Denver market than CSU.
Wow, I'm very concerned for Benny.  Being able to mimic Myron Medcalf's writing so closely implies an oncoming case of dementia.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #130 on: May 11, 2016, 09:09:53 PM »
Why do people think that CSU doesn't have the Denver market?  CSU is just as big as CU and has more in-state students enrolled.  Arguably better than CU for Denver.

Herman Cain

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 12902
  • 9-9-9
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #131 on: May 11, 2016, 09:20:46 PM »
Why do people think that CSU doesn't have the Denver market?  CSU is just as big as CU and has more in-state students enrolled.  Arguably better than CU for Denver.
I  think CSU is also on an uptrend. They are building a beautiful new stadium, cost 220 million.
https://stadium.colostate.edu/
The only mystery in life is why the Kamikaze Pilots wore helmets...
            ---Al McGuire

Tums Festival

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #132 on: May 11, 2016, 09:43:06 PM »
With cord cutting likely to be an ongoing trend, and with continued cuts to their employee base, how can ESPN be thinking of starting up another on-air network? Plus they essentially just let Fox grab the tier-one rights for the B1G without much resistance. Doesn't really sound like an ideal climate for an ACC Network launch.
"Every day ends with a Tums festival!"

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #133 on: May 11, 2016, 09:52:31 PM »
To be clear, Fox got half of the first tier rights.

MUMountin

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 807
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #134 on: May 11, 2016, 10:51:34 PM »
Why do people think that CSU doesn't have the Denver market?  CSU is just as big as CU and has more in-state students enrolled.  Arguably better than CU for Denver.

I'm a CU Law grad who lives in Denver.  I think the issue, to be honest, is that the college game really doesn't have the Denver market.  It's an NFL town, and there just isn't that same energy for college football.  Sure, some alums trek up to Boulder and Fort Collins on the weekends, but their games don't really move the needle outside of that.  Definitely not like how it is in the Midwest or south. 

There are far too many transplants from other places who follow their college/home teams, so not many outside of the alumni bases tune in to the local teams.  And, the local teams have been so poor in recent history, that large parts of the alumni bases (myself included), only pay passing attention at best to what CU/CSU do.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2016, 10:55:02 PM by MUMountin »

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #135 on: May 12, 2016, 07:07:36 AM »
I'm a CU Law grad who lives in Denver.  I think the issue, to be honest, is that the college game really doesn't have the Denver market.  It's an NFL town, and there just isn't that same energy for college football.  Sure, some alums trek up to Boulder and Fort Collins on the weekends, but their games don't really move the needle outside of that.  Definitely not like how it is in the Midwest or south. 

There are far too many transplants from other places who follow their college/home teams, so not many outside of the alumni bases tune in to the local teams.  And, the local teams have been so poor in recent history, that large parts of the alumni bases (myself included), only pay passing attention at best to what CU/CSU do.


OK that is a good answer.  Thank you.

Tums Festival

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #136 on: May 12, 2016, 09:46:52 AM »
To be clear, Fox got half of the first tier rights.

Thank you for the clarification.
"Every day ends with a Tums festival!"

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #137 on: May 12, 2016, 09:51:41 AM »
BTW, and Chicos would know this, but I don't think that the rights deal has been announced.  So I don't know if its finalized.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #138 on: May 12, 2016, 09:59:40 AM »
Can anyone cite any support for this mysterious Big Tweleventeen AAU deal breaker requirement other than "I read it on a message board once"?

Been the case for a long long long time.  It was one of the reasons why Notre Dame was so hotly debated on whether to be admitted several rounds ago. 

It is the measure for research institutions....follow the money.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26478
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #139 on: May 12, 2016, 10:05:17 AM »
Can anyone cite any support for this mysterious Big Tweleventeen AAU deal breaker requirement other than "I read it on a message board once"?

Just look at the expansion in the past. Penn State is a member, Nebraska was a member, Rutgers and Maryland are members. All ten original Big 10 schools are members. Pretty sure that's not an accident.
This space reserved for a 2024 2025 National Championship celebration banner.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #140 on: May 12, 2016, 10:05:18 AM »
With cord cutting likely to be an ongoing trend, and with continued cuts to their employee base, how can ESPN be thinking of starting up another on-air network? Plus they essentially just let Fox grab the tier-one rights for the B1G without much resistance. Doesn't really sound like an ideal climate for an ACC Network launch.

ACC Network launch is still a topic at hand to be sure.  Those of us that have worked on the distribution side have told Disney we don't want it, we won't carry it because all it does is add cost. With so many non-sports fans out there, it becomes a sports tax and that accelerates people downgrading to non-sports packages or going to SVOD \ OTT services.   To be clearer, the distributors would be happy to carry the network if it could be sold as an add-on, where non-sports fans are not hit with the enormous costs of the sports networks.

The flip side of that is Disney has a ton of leverage, and they can do things like prevent all the other Disney channels from being carried, or pick and choose who can sell Star Wars, Marvel movies, etc in their studio output deals.   So it's a big puzzle, never easy to answer.

Certainly the ACC schools want the network for obvious reasons...money, exposure, etc. 

Lennys Tap

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 12297
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #141 on: May 12, 2016, 10:11:57 AM »
Been the case for a long long long time.  It was one of the reasons why Notre Dame was so hotly debated on whether to be admitted several rounds ago. 

It is the measure for research institutions....follow the money.

As I recall the big debate was inside Notre Dame, not the BIG. They desperately wanted the Irish but the Domers declined.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #142 on: May 12, 2016, 10:21:24 AM »
From a few years ago, but AAU has always been a big deal to the Big Ten.

"If they happen to be in the mix, then that would have to be looked at relative to all the other criteria. That's pretty common sense," he said. "But that (AAU membership) is a big criteria for us. We've always leaned toward that."


Billy Hoyle

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2674
  • Retire #34
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #143 on: May 12, 2016, 11:13:28 AM »
BYU has more of the Denver market than CSU.

It isn't as much about CSU "having" the Denver market as much as being in it. Rutgers is a non entity in the NYC market when compared to others schools in the region but due to their proximity they got the Big Ten invite so BTN would be on basic cable.  CSU would do that for Denver and a Big 12 network.

As for BYU, you run into the issue of no Sunday games and other demands they make.
“You either smoke or you get smoked. And you got smoked.”

mu03eng

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5049
    • Scrambled Eggs Podcast
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #144 on: May 12, 2016, 12:50:12 PM »
Nebraska was only AAU for about 8 minutes after the B1G welcome press conference.

Yeah and there was actually a vote taken to kick Nebraska out because of it.
"A Plan? Oh man, I hate plans. That means were gonna have to do stuff. Can't we just have a strategy......or a mission statement."

Babybluejeans

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 390
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #145 on: May 12, 2016, 02:36:43 PM »
Sure, some alums trek up to Boulder and Fort Collins on the weekends, but their games don't really move the needle outside of that.  Definitely not like how it is in the Midwest or south. 

As a current Denverite, this is 100% true. Going to bars on a Saturday afternoon, as one does, you'll see much more energy around Big 10 teams since so many people in Denver are from the Midwest. CU fans are more like a niche. And CSU fans...they're like tumbleweeds blowing in the Western wind. People just don't care about CSU football in Denver. 

Litehouse

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2211
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #146 on: May 12, 2016, 05:19:51 PM »
Been the case for a long long long time.  It was one of the reasons why Notre Dame was so hotly debated on whether to be admitted several rounds ago. 

It is the measure for research institutions....follow the money.
I get that its a factor, and all the linked articles said its "a big criteria" and "very important".  Fine, but is it an absolute deal breaker?  Would they turn down ND, or refuse to take OU as a package deal with UT just because of AAU membership?  I'm not convinced of that.  If they were really serious about it they'd kick out Nebraska.

The link that actually said it was a requirement was a UConn message board with a paraphrased quote from Twitter about Delaney testifying in the lawsuit accusing the Big Ten of being a price-fixing cartel.  That's the same testimony where he said the Big Ten would stop sponsoring sports if athletes got paid.  I don't think either of those statements are an absolute hard-line rule they'd stick to.

GGGG

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #147 on: May 12, 2016, 05:31:15 PM »
I get that its a factor, and all the linked articles said its "a big criteria" and "very important".  Fine, but is it an absolute deal breaker?  Would they turn down ND, or refuse to take OU as a package deal with UT just because of AAU membership?  I'm not convinced of that.  If they were really serious about it they'd kick out Nebraska.


Since they invited ND at one point, there is your answer.

Dawson Rental

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10455
  • I prefer a team that's eligible, not paid for
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #148 on: May 12, 2016, 05:31:32 PM »
Solid points.  I will add that Missouri's first choice was the B1G - there were rumblings that they, Nebraska and a third school could have been added in 2011 to the Big Ten; however, it was only Nebraska that got added.  When the SEC became their only option, it was an easy choice to make.  Many think that Missouri would never leave the SEC - but Missouri is a rare school that fits the mold of both an SEC and B1G school.  If the B1G is assured of getting more $$$ from Fox than the SEC is from ESPN, it's very possibly Missouri changes course.  Time will tell though. 

I 100% agree that the B1G's focus, as of today, is eastern and southern expansion (Virginia, UNC, Duke, and Georgia Tech).  It's where the populations are increasing and where the stronger media markets will be (not to mention plethora of respected academic/research institutions).

IIRC, the SEC is the only conference that has no exit fee.  Now that's confidence.
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

Dawson Rental

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10455
  • I prefer a team that's eligible, not paid for
Re: More conference expansion nonsense
« Reply #149 on: May 12, 2016, 05:41:54 PM »
Nobody is mentioning that Oklahoma has a little brother problem with Oklahoma State.  Oklahoma's politicians insist that Oklahoma will not go to another conference without Oklahoma State in tow.  That's why when the Pac-12 was sniffing around, they were looking to add 4 schools from the Big 12.  And it's why Oklahoma going to the SEC is not very likely.
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

 

feedback