PDA

View Full Version : Other Sports Big 12, Pac-10 look at alliance


ArrowheadHawk
05-06-2010, 07:45 PM
Big 12, Pac-10 look at alliance

By BLAIR KERKHOFF
The Kansas City Star

Big 12 Conference athletic directors met with their Pacific-10 counterparts in Phoenix on Wednesday and Thursday to discuss collaborating in a future sports landscape and possibly working together on television contracts, a source told The Kansas City Star.

Contacted Thursday, Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe confirmed the meetings but did not offer specifics. He called the exchange “very positive.”

“It was an informal gathering,” Beebe said. “We talked about how we might cooperate going forward.”

The meeting could be seen as preparation for possible Big Ten expansion. The Big Ten announced last December that it was exploring adding members, and among those swirling in the speculation are Big 12 members Missouri and Nebraska.

An alliance between the Big 12 and Pac-10 could strengthen their position in television negotiations. As the two major conferences west of the Mississippi River, their schools are located in or near six of the nation’s top 13 media markets — Los Angeles, Dallas, San Francisco, Houston, Seattle and Phoenix.

The Big 12 has football television contracts with ABC/ESPN that go through 2016 and with Fox Sports Net through 2012. The league begins negotiations with Fox starting next spring.

The Pac-10 also has deals with ABC/ESPN and Fox through 2012 and is expected to begin negotiating new deals this year.

According to the source, a negotiating point for new deals could involve games between the Pac-10 and Big 12.

The conferences already partner in men’s basketball. Last week, the leagues announced the matchups for the fourth Big 12/Pac-10 Hardwood Series.

Posted on Thu, May. 06, 2010 06:12 PM

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/05/06/1929542/big-12-pac-10-look-at-alliance.html

ArrowheadHawk
05-06-2010, 07:51 PM
They should start their own TV network. The Big 12/Pac 10 Television Network would be awesome.

Pants
05-06-2010, 07:54 PM
They should start their own TV network. The Big 12/Pac 10 Television Network would be awesome.

If that juggernaut of a conference ever happens, you can bet your ass there will be a network. Traveling would be a bitch, but goddamn, it would be worth it.

ChiefsCountry
05-06-2010, 08:12 PM
Damn KC media, I keep breaking their stories for them
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=6739419&postcount=689

Sweet Daddy Hate
05-06-2010, 08:15 PM
So basically, everyone in the 12 who is NOT UT or OU, is telling UT and OU to "fuck off".

I like it.

InChiefsHell
05-06-2010, 08:16 PM
The Big Pac 22...nice ring to it...

BWillie
05-06-2010, 08:33 PM
How about this? Personally, I think it's kind of bad ass. They should do it. F*ck Nebraska and Missouri. Only thing bad about it is it limits rivalry games a bit for KU.

West:
* USC
* UCLA
* Stanford
* Cal
* Oregon
* Oregon State
* Washington
* Washington State

East:
* Texas
* Texas A&M
* Oklahoma
* Kansas
* Colorado
* Arizona
* Arizona State
* BYU, Texas Tech, K-State, Oklahoma State, or Iowa State

You could add different variations. Like giving Colorado to the WAC or Mountain West. Putting K-State in there for Colorado. I don't think BYU is a very good possibility. They don't like to play on Sundays.

alnorth
05-06-2010, 08:37 PM
They aren't talking merger, only a strategic partnership. Basically, getting as close to being a superconference, without actually being one, putting together a good joint TV deal, a few non-con games, etc.

The PAC 10 is not likely going to expand, and the NCAA will likely cave and allow the Pac 10 to have their football game with 10 teams. The PAC 10 has rules saying they can not expand without a unanimous vote, and they have at least 1 school against any expansion.

KcMizzou
05-06-2010, 08:57 PM
They aren't talking merger, only a strategic partnership. Basically, getting as close to being a superconference, without actually being one, putting together a good joint TV deal, a few non-con games, etc.

The PAC 10 is not likely going to expand, and the NCAA will likely cave and allow the Pac 10 to have their football game with 10 teams. The PAC 10 has rules saying they can not expand without a unanimous vote, and they have at least 1 school against any expansion.You're squashing dreams here, man.

BWillie
05-06-2010, 08:59 PM
They aren't talking merger, only a strategic partnership. Basically, getting as close to being a superconference, without actually being one, putting together a good joint TV deal, a few non-con games, etc.

The PAC 10 is not likely going to expand, and the NCAA will likely cave and allow the Pac 10 to have their football game with 10 teams. The PAC 10 has rules saying they can not expand without a unanimous vote, and they have at least 1 school against any expansion.

What school is that? I believe you, but what literature do you know of to support this? I really think the Big 12 and Pac 10 have to combine because they will be left in the dust w/ the other three super conferences.

KcMizzou
05-06-2010, 08:59 PM
What school is that? I believe you, but what literature do you know of to support this? I really think the Big 12 and Pac 10 have to combine because they will be left in the dust w/ the other three super conferences.USC, I would assume.

ChiefsCountry
05-06-2010, 09:06 PM
What school is that? I believe you, but what literature do you know of to support this? I really think the Big 12 and Pac 10 have to combine because they will be left in the dust w/ the other three super conferences.

Its Stanford, but the word on the street is they are more willing this time around.

Mr. Flopnuts
05-06-2010, 09:10 PM
I want nothing to do with the Big XII. I don't mind Texas, Oklahoma, and maybe the Kansas schools, but the rest will be a burden to our conference AFAIC. Missouri and Nebraska not being a part of the equation hurts IMO.

tk13
05-06-2010, 09:15 PM
I want nothing to do with the Big XII. I don't mind Texas, Oklahoma, and maybe the Kansas schools, but the rest will be a burden to our conference AFAIC. Missouri and Nebraska not being a part of the equation hurts IMO.

I'd be curious to see if it even works. You'd be talking about some flat brutal road trips. Groups of schools 2000 miles apart.

KChiefs1
05-06-2010, 09:15 PM
They aren't talking merger, only a strategic partnership. Basically, getting as close to being a superconference, without actually being one, putting together a good joint TV deal, a few non-con games, etc.

The PAC 10 is not likely going to expand, and the NCAA will likely cave and allow the Pac 10 to have their football game with 10 teams. The PAC 10 has rules saying they can not expand without a unanimous vote, and they have at least 1 school against any expansion.

There would be some awful long road trips if the Big 12/Pac-10 became one conference....Lawrence to LA, Austin to Seattle, Eugene to Ames...we are talking about 3 times zones! I just don't see it.

Columbia to Happy Valley or Lincoln to Ann Arbor make more sense.

RustShack
05-06-2010, 09:21 PM
Maybe they should just quit the NCAA and join the NFL.

ChiefsCountry
05-06-2010, 09:25 PM
I'd be curious to see if it even works. You'd be talking about some flat brutal road trips. Groups of schools 2000 miles apart.

Football its no big deal, but the other sports you will see it more regionalized.

RustShack
05-06-2010, 09:29 PM
Hawaii travels pretty far for sports.

ChiefMojo
05-06-2010, 10:00 PM
In reality once the Super Conferences are formed, the thought of regional travel is pretty much out of the books. In the end their will likely be four Super Conferences. The PAC-10/BIG XII merger, the BIG 10/some additions from BIG XII/BIG EAST, SEC with some additions from the ACC, and then the ACC/some BIG EAST teams.

alnorth
05-06-2010, 10:35 PM
I'd be curious to see if it even works. You'd be talking about some flat brutal road trips. Groups of schools 2000 miles apart.

getting over the Stanford hurdle (The other 20 or so schools can always leave the Pac 10/Big 12 structures behind and form their own private club if they want) the only way it works is if you go really big, and then treat it like MLB's AL and NL.

The east division and the West division teams might each play 1 or 2 games a year for the novelty, but in reality you are looking for a West Champion after a long series of west games and vice-versa for the East champion to slug it out for 1 game.

dreaming is nice. Back in reality again, we're basically talking a partnership, since if you are likely only going to have almost no east-west mixing during the regular season anyway because of geography, then you might as well keep the two conferences seperate and work together just for the sake of money.

Mr. Flopnuts
05-06-2010, 10:39 PM
I am pretty confident that the Pac 10 is not going to go along with any sweetheart deals for Texas. That's going to have to go me thinks.

tk13
05-06-2010, 10:40 PM
getting over the Stanford hurdle (The other 20 or so schools can always leave the Pac 10/Big 12 structures behind and form their own private club if they want) the only way it works is if you go really big, and then treat it like MLB's AL and NL.

The east division and the West division teams might each play 1 or 2 games a year for the novelty, but in reality you are looking for a West Champion after a long series of west games and vice-versa for the East champion to slug it out for 1 game.

dreaming is nice. Back in reality again, we're basically talking a partnership, since if you are likely only going to have almost no east-west mixing during the regular season anyway because of geography, then you might as well keep the two conferences seperate and work together just for the sake of money.

I think it'd be more of a pain for the non-money sports, but we'll see. I agree they could make it work fine for football. It'll just be weird because how can you accurately determine a conference champ when you don't even play half the teams in your league.

Another big adjustment would be conference tourney time... I'm guessing KC won't get the chance to host as many tournaments. It'll be Dallas and LA, Dallas and LA... mostly LA.

alnorth
05-06-2010, 10:43 PM
I think it'd be more of a pain for the non-money sports, but we'll see. I agree they could make it work fine for football. It'll just be weird because how can you accurately determine a conference champ when you don't even play half the teams in your league.

Another big adjustment would be conference tourney time... I'm guessing KC won't get the chance to host as many tournaments. It'll be Dallas and LA, Dallas and LA... mostly LA.

If your talking 16 to 20+ teams in a superconference, you arent playing everyone anyway. We can determine a champion in an east-west championship game. You can argue about who was really 2nd place (the East was loaded this year, look at all those weak-ass teams in Cali!), but no one cares about 2nd.

HolyHandgernade
05-06-2010, 11:46 PM
If you have that many teams, you're probably not going to have a "single" championship game. You'll probably get some type of "mini playoff" format where the top four teams or the top two from each division have a semifinals and championship games. Instead of the revenue from one championship game, you get three, with the added drama of a playoff atmosphere.

ChiefMojo
05-07-2010, 01:42 AM
Looks like the AD's of the BIG XII and Pac-10 met yesterday in Phoenix to discuss making a alliance between the two conferences. This would mean a joint BIG XII/Pac-10 TV Network made up of 22 schools all West of the Mississippi River. Also the BIG XII/Pac-10 would work hand and hand together on scheduling. This doesn't mean a full merger, but the two conferences working hand and hand to act pretty much as one in many circumstances.

The money amounts with this alliance would be TREMENDOUS and basically ward off anything the BIG 10 could do to the BIG XII (namely Missouri and Nebraska).

This is the first time since the BIG 10 talk started up that I have felt joyful and excited for the future of the BIG XII. I think you would also see the issue much of the league has with Texas and revenue sharing go out of the picture. Everyone would become fat cats in this partnership... BIG XII and Pac-10.

Also remember the TV contracts with Fox and ABC/ESPN are up in 2012 for the Pac-10 and up in 2012 for Fox and 2016 for ABC/ESPN. I'm sure if their is a joint Mega Network, then both Fox and ABC/ESPN will work to make a new lucrative deal in 2012 for both conferences.

Again this is the first time there has been real talk of the BIG XII surviving and also giving Mizzou a legit option in not leaving. With this deal, why would they leave? I highly doubt Nebraska would leave with this type of set-up.

ClevelandBronco
05-07-2010, 01:48 AM
The Big 12 should seriously consider cutting Colorado loose. They bring nothing to the table.

BWillie
05-07-2010, 01:50 AM
The Big 12 should seriously consider cutting Colorado loose. They bring nothing to the table.

And pick up who?

ClevelandBronco
05-07-2010, 02:05 AM
And pick up who?

I'm not convinced they should pick up anyone. I'm intrigued by where this Big 12/Pac 10 thing could go, and I think it could actually work better with a smaller number of teams.

Old Dog
05-07-2010, 07:59 AM
The Big 12 should seriously consider cutting Colorado loose. They bring nothing to the table.

The TV market in Denver? I know Denver isn't exactly huge, but isn't it somewhere in the mid 20s in population in the US?

duncan_idaho
05-07-2010, 08:18 AM
Those thinking this will stave off the Big Ten expansion attraction for Missouri and Nebraska are deluding themselves.

You'd be splitting the same type of money pot(if lucky) among six more teams. And that's assuming the partnership can get a mega tv deal. Problem there is that ESPN has said it's not doing another huge tv deal. So you're left trying to convince Fox to pony up by itself (unlikely).

ArrowheadHawk
05-07-2010, 08:50 AM
Those thinking this will stave off the Big Ten expansion attraction for Missouri and Nebraska are deluding themselves.

You'd be splitting the same type of money pot(if lucky) among six more teams. And that's assuming the partnership can get a mega tv deal. Problem there is that ESPN has said it's not doing another huge tv deal. So you're left trying to convince Fox to pony up by itself (unlikely).Actually I don't care if they stay or if they go this partnership should be a good thing.

ROYC75
05-07-2010, 09:12 AM
Personally, I like the MAC 24, take the B12 + Big 10 & 1, add 1 team, split into 4 divisions and play ball. Less traveling time and much closer to the fan base, all in the Midwest. Screw the east coast & the west coast bias turkeys.

But that is just me.

Pants
05-07-2010, 09:21 AM
Personally, I like the MAC 24, take the B12 + Big 10 & 1, add 1 team, split into 4 divisions and play ball. Less traveling time and much closer to the fan base, all in the Midwest. Screw the east coast & the west coast bias turkeys.

But that is just me.

Why in the hell would the Big 10 ever do that? I guess that's a pretty neat idea in a world where money is of no importance.

Coogs
05-07-2010, 09:29 AM
Call me Old School. I like things just the way they are. :shrug:

Los Pollos Hermanos
05-07-2010, 09:42 AM
Call me Old School. I like things just the way they are. :shrug:

I like the Big 12 the way it is too but if Missouri and Nebraska leave the for the Big 10 the Big 12 would be forced to do something like this in order to compete.

duncan_idaho
05-07-2010, 09:50 AM
It's the best deal the Big 12 remnants would find, for the most
part. It's possible a few (oklahoma, okie lite) might look to the SEC. It's likely a few (ksu, isu) might get left out.

Texas, aTm and ku all probably are best served by something aligning with the PAC-10.

Only question for ku... How much of a chainis ksu, and would the PAC-10 take them both if it is a straight merger? If it is just a
partnership, no big deal...

Coogs
05-07-2010, 09:58 AM
I like the Big 12 the way it is too but if Missouri and Nebraska leave the for the Big 10 the Big 12 would be forced to do something like this in order to compete.

I mean I am really Old School. I like all the conferences the way they are. In fact, I think some of them like the Big East are a bit too big.

ChiefMojo
05-07-2010, 10:11 AM
I think to many people are confusing this a Super Conference merger. It is not, just the alliance of a Mega TV Network geared towards the BIG XII/Pac-10. With the expiring TV contracts happening in a couple of years, the TV companies can work out a brand lucrative deals to go along with the new Mega TV Network. To think ABC/ESPN isn't going to do anything big with the BIG XII/Pac-10 is crazy talk and being blinded by BIG 10 propaganda!

If Missouri still wants to leave... so be it. It will be their loss. The BIG XII will just grab a bigger market in someone like BYU. Missouri will basically be regulated to the St. Louis market as KC would likely be controlled mostly by KU (as they pretty much are anyways now).

|Zach|
05-07-2010, 10:15 AM
I think to many people are confusing this a Super Conference merger. It is not, just the alliance of a Mega TV Network geared towards the BIG XII/Pac-10. With the expiring TV contracts happening in a couple of years, the TV companies can work out a brand lucrative deals to go along with the new Mega TV Network. To think ABC/ESPN isn't going to do anything big with the BIG XII/Pac-10 is crazy talk and being blinded by BIG 10 propaganda!

If Missouri still wants to leave... so be it. It will be their loss. The BIG XII will just grab a bigger market in someone like BYU. Missouri will basically be regulated to the St. Louis market as KC would likely be controlled mostly by KU (as they pretty much are anyways now).
Yes I am sure the hordes of Mizzou fans in Kansas City will just stop watching Missouri. Did you write this post directly from your ass? Salt Lake is a smaller TV market than both KC and STL.

So except for mischaracterizing the sports makeup of KC, the size of TV markets, and the effect a move would have on MU this was a solid take.

morphius
05-07-2010, 10:15 AM
I heard on the radio this morning that the AD's from KU, Neb, and Texas were not there. Though they didn't say that they didn't have any sort of representation there, but seems odd that some big players in this not showing up.

Mr. Arrowhead
05-07-2010, 10:28 AM
my goodness, this crap is getting ridiculous

KChiefs1
05-07-2010, 10:40 AM
my goodness, this crap is getting ridiculous

I have a feeling the next months it's going to get even more ridiculous.

ChiefMojo
05-07-2010, 10:54 AM
Frankly Lew Perkins and DeLoss Dodd are attached at the hip. Another reason it drives Alden and Mizzou crazy.

buddha
05-07-2010, 11:01 AM
I am pretty confident that the Pac 10 is not going to go along with any sweetheart deals for Texas. That's going to have to go me thinks.

And there's the rub. Tejas can't just be one of the boys...they have to take over. They can't help themselves. The Pac 10 schools aren't stupid...they saw what Tejas did to the Big 12. They didn't assimilate into the Big 8...they chewed up the old SWC and took over the new conference. The Big 8 schools were too stupid and too slow to stop them. Fool me once, shame on you...the PAC 10 isn't going to give anything away to UT, and why should they? In a few months, Tejas is going to be negotiating from a position of weakness. Losing Missouri/Nebraska is just the start. Colorado has wanted to leave for years.

There won't be a "what's left of the Big 12/PAC 10" super conference. I could see a few teams joining the PAC 10, but it will be on the PAC 10's terms.

Pants
05-07-2010, 11:21 AM
And there's the rub. Tejas can't just be one of the boys...they have to take over. They can't help themselves. The Pac 10 schools aren't stupid...they saw what Tejas did to the Big 12. They didn't assimilate into the Big 8...they chewed up the old SWC and took over the new conference. The Big 8 schools were too stupid and too slow to stop them. Fool me once, shame on you...the PAC 10 isn't going to give anything away to UT, and why should they? In a few months, Tejas is going to be negotiating from a position of weakness. Losing Missouri/Nebraska is just the start. Colorado has wanted to leave for years.

There won't be a "what's left of the Big 12/PAC 10" super conference. I could see a few teams joining the PAC 10, but it will be on the PAC 10's terms.

Texas can do whatever the **** they want. Their AD makes by far the most money in the country and their endowment fund was ****ing 16 BILLION in 2008, I don't even know what it is now.

ArrowheadHawk
05-07-2010, 01:06 PM
Texas can do whatever the **** they want. Their AD makes by far the most money in the country and their endowment fund was ****ing 16 BILLION in 2008, I don't even know what it is now.This. Texas can do whatever the fuck they want to.

ClevelandBronco
05-07-2010, 01:17 PM
The TV market in Denver? I know Denver isn't exactly huge, but isn't it somewhere in the mid 20s in population in the US?

Denver was the #18 TV market in 2004 (quick search, so I'll go with '04), but I doubt that it performs like a larger market when it comes to CU sports.

I grew up in Ohio, so I'm comparing that to what I see in Denver. CU has a small fraction of the attention of the market that Ohio State commands.

CU doesn't have the tradition, so there just aren't that many people paying attention. They aren't going to be able to manufacture it. They're really more suited to a second-tier conference, IMO.

beer bacon
05-07-2010, 01:21 PM
Call me Old School. I like things just the way they are. :shrug:

It isn't old school to like the Big 12 the way it currently exists. It would be old school to want the Big 8 back.

ROYC75
05-07-2010, 02:23 PM
Why in the hell would the Big 10 ever do that? I guess that's a pretty neat idea in a world where money is of no importance.

So you are saying an All Midwest major conference would not be a money seller with shorter traffic lanes to follow than a B12 & Pac 10 . B10 adding all he B12 schools would boost TV sales and boost recruiting. Pac 10 & B12 teams would be a transportation nightmare.

But please explain to me why it wouldn't work better. ?

Coogs
05-07-2010, 02:25 PM
It isn't old school to like the Big 12 the way it currently exists. It would be old school to want the Big 8 back.

I could live with that. Loved the Big 8.

ROYC75
05-07-2010, 02:28 PM
I know Texas is the key to it, they have to give, but will they ?

beer bacon
05-07-2010, 03:36 PM
Texas is now my most hated state when it comes to sports. Sorry Colorado and Kansas.

ChiefsCountry
05-07-2010, 05:29 PM
Here is my prediciton:
Missouri, Nebraska, Pittsburgh, Rutgers and Syracuse to the Big Ten
Texas, Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas, Utah, and Texas Tech to the PAC-16.
Texas A&M, Oklahoma State, Florida State, and West Virginia to the SEC.
Connecticut, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati, and Temple to ACC.

You have 4 16 Superconferences plus Notre Dame. 65 BCS teams. A plus one playoff is more than likely in the works with the 4 BCS bowls.

Rain Man
05-07-2010, 05:30 PM
Big 12, Pac-10 look at alliance






The Pig-22. I like it.

KcMizzou
05-07-2010, 05:44 PM
The Pig-22. I like it.The 12 Pac

ArrowheadHawk
05-07-2010, 06:03 PM
Here is my prediciton:
Missouri, Nebraska, Pittsburgh, Rutgers and Syracuse to the Big Ten
Texas, Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas, Utah, and Texas Tech to the PAC-16.
Texas A&M, Oklahoma State, Florida State, and West Virginia to the SEC.
Connecticut, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati, and Temple to ACC.

You have 4 16 Superconferences plus Notre Dame. 65 BCS teams. A plus one playoff is more than likely in the works with the 4 BCS bowls.

How is that gonna work?

alnorth
05-07-2010, 06:07 PM
How is that gonna work?

I assume WV has a massive and well-regarded state system. Kinda like UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, etc

Mr. Flopnuts
05-07-2010, 06:08 PM
I thought Kansas and Kansas State were tied at the hip?

alnorth
05-07-2010, 06:09 PM
I thought Kansas and Kansas State were tied at the hip?

I gave up explaining why the merger wasn't going to happen a page or so ago. We're dreaming now.

ArrowheadHawk
05-07-2010, 06:12 PM
I gave up explaining why the merger wasn't going to happen a page or so ago. We're dreaming now.

Better than waiting I guess. I'm pretty sure Lew will have KU in good shape after this mixup. I couln't think of anyone else I would rather have as an AD right now.

Mr. Laz
05-07-2010, 06:16 PM
I thought Kansas and Kansas State were tied at the hip?
i hope to hell that KU kicks the committee in the nards until they let KU and KSU be broken up.

KU has the ability to get into a BCS major conference ... KSU probably doesn't.

i would hate to see KU end up in mid-valley scrub conference because of the KSU albatross hanging around it's neck.

the Talking Can
05-07-2010, 06:19 PM
random thoughts

i have no idea what KU should do, much less say ksu which has even less going for it...

i'm guessing ku's first instinct is to stay attached to UT at all cost, as that's the only leverage ku has (even if it is as a basically a parasite) and as i understand it Texas's legislature won't allow the texas schools to break up (though that could be outdated) which would complicate them moving, as opposed to bringing someone in...


i just don't see how the remnants of the big 12 can compete with the sec and big whatever (even if you bring in byu/utah/tcu etc..), it's just accelerating a process already underway so then the remaining big 12 comes flying apart as if put in a centrifuge and KU lands where???

no clue...and is UT going to be content to be king of the smallest shitpile?

UT and the SEC would be like micheal jackson and U2 going on concert together....but people always say that's a 'when hell freezes over' scenario for various reasons on both sides...

and then what about Oklahoma...what pull do they have separate from Texas?

big time program with small time media markets....

i see lots of problems and no clear solutions...MU is smart to move though, can't blame them....

the Talking Can
05-07-2010, 06:21 PM
i hope to hell that KU kicks the committee in the nards until they let KU and KSU be broken up.

KU has the ability to get into a BCS major conference ... KSU probably doesn't.

i would hate to see KU end up in mid-valley scrub conference because of the KSU albatross hanging around it's neck.

amen

i sure as hell hope our future isn't tied to ksu....

Pants
05-07-2010, 06:21 PM
So you are saying an All Midwest major conference would not be a money seller with shorter traffic lanes to follow than a B12 & Pac 10 . B10 adding all he B12 schools would boost TV sales and boost recruiting. Pac 10 & B12 teams would be a transportation nightmare.

But please explain to me why it wouldn't work better. ?

Because the Big 10 splits all their profits between the schools equally. Right now every school gets something like $22 million a year. So any school they add will have to earn the conference more money than it would take as its share from the total profit (~242 million) to cover the difference. The more schools you add, the less money each school gets unless of course each school you add can cover their ass plus have enough on top to benefit all the other schools. That's impossible with all the schools you have joining the Big 10.

Mr. Laz
05-07-2010, 06:25 PM
i see lots of problems and no clear solutions...MU is smart to move though, can't blame them....
right now you need to get while the getting is good

which is why when i heard the rumor that the Big 10 wanted to talk to KU, until they heard that KSU was a package deal, it pissed me off.

We need to make sure we end up in a quality BCS conference ... period.

alnorth
05-07-2010, 06:27 PM
Because the Big 10 splits all their profits between the schools equally. Right now every school gets something like $22 million a year. So any school they add will have to earn the conference more money than it would take as its share from the total profit (~242 million) to cover the difference. The more schools you add, the less money each school gets unless of course each school you add can cover their ass plus have enough on top to benefit all the other schools. That's impossible with all the schools you have joining the Big 10.

Thats why I simply do not believe the big 10 goes beyond 12 until I see it happen. Could Missouri be #12? Maybe, the Big 10 would then get their football game. Beyond 12 though, each additional team would have to be able to bring in a lot more money than I'd think is reasonably possible, or it wouldn't be worth it to the existing schools.

the Talking Can
05-07-2010, 06:32 PM
right now you need to get while the getting is good

which is why when i heard the rumor that the Big 10 wanted to talk to KU, until they heard that KSU was a package deal, it pissed me off.

We need to make sure we end up in a quality BCS conference ... period.

again, totally agree

i hadn't heard that.....would much rather be in the big 10 than any kind of pac10 western whatever...and if we are tied to ksu, then we're screwed probably unless some miracle like stealing arkansas (yes i realize it makes no monetary sense for them to leave the sec) happens


the only real money is for football, and it's only for: 1. the SEC, 2. big 10, and to a lesser extent 3. pac 10 and then 4. Texas and Oklahoma as long as they remain together...

KU's got to be with one of those groups..

Pants
05-07-2010, 06:35 PM
Thats why I simply do not believe the big 10 goes beyond 12 until I see it happen. Could Missouri be #12? Maybe, the Big 10 would then get their football game. Beyond 12 though, each additional team would have to be able to bring in a lot more money than I'd think is reasonably possible, or it wouldn't be worth it to the existing schools.

Missouri makes sense because it gives the B10 network a footprint in Kansas City. That is a pretty good cash cow.

Pants
05-07-2010, 06:37 PM
right now you need to get while the getting is good

which is why when i heard the rumor that the Big 10 wanted to talk to KU, until they heard that KSU was a package deal, it pissed me off.

We need to make sure we end up in a quality BCS conference ... period.

That's a silly rumor. If PAC-10 was looking at any B12 school, it was Colorado.

Mr. Laz
05-07-2010, 06:44 PM
That's a silly rumor. If PAC-10 was looking at any B12 school, it was Colorado.
um ... Big 10, not Pac-10 and it was along with Mizzou,Neb.

Pants
05-07-2010, 06:47 PM
um ... Big 10, not Pac-10 and it was along with Mizzou,Neb.

Oh, my bad. I highly doubt it though, because the only big market KU brings is KC and MU already delivers that for the Big-10. Read my previous post about profit sharing to see how getting both MU and KU would be pretty much useless to that conference.

Mr. Laz
05-07-2010, 07:02 PM
Oh, my bad. I highly doubt it though, because the only big market KU brings is KC and MU already delivers that for the Big-10. Read my previous post about profit sharing to see how getting both MU and KU would be pretty much useless to that conference.
i understand about the markets which is why i was surprised to hear about the initial Big 10 interest in KU. Maybe they were just being thorough, maybe they figured it would be nice to have a basketball "trophy".

maybe it was just rumor crap ...

but still ... this link to KSU needs to be broken pronto or it will hurt KU's chances of getting into a Mega-Conference IF the shakeup really does happen.

Sweet Daddy Hate
05-08-2010, 01:34 PM
Call me Old School. I like things just the way they are. :shrug:

Except Texas and OU get all the goods. Which is one reason we're leaving.

This. Texas can do whatever the fuck they want to.

Which is one reason we're leaving. That, and everything about Texas is horrible and should Die In Fire.

right now you need to get while the getting is good

which is why when i heard the rumor that the Big 10 wanted to talk to KU, until they heard that KSU was a package deal, it pissed me off.

We need to make sure we end up in a quality BCS conference ... period.

You get nothing, and may you be tied to KSU forever.

Missouri makes sense because it gives the B10 network a footprint in Kansas City. That is a pretty good cash cow.

God I love life right now! WOOT! ELEVENTY!!!!!11111@11111:thumb:

ChiefsCountry
05-08-2010, 01:47 PM
How is that gonna work?

Meant USF.

teedubya
05-08-2010, 01:53 PM
When all of these conferences originated, they had to travel by trains. So long distances were out of the question.

Now, it won't be that big of deal. Wahhhh... a 3 hour flight instead of a 90 minute flight. Cry me a river.

Do it.