Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think a Big East Network could be very valuable, especially with KU, K-State, and MU. It could air 2-3 basketball games per week, and most of those games would be some kind of marquee matchup.

And "Win the West" has a better ring for a season slogan than "Win the North".

Yes, it does. We could call the west division the "Wild West" and the east division the "Blue Blood East".

Am I wrong in thinking that a Big East network would have more appeal airing 3rd tier basketball games than the Big 10 Network has airing 3rd tier football games, though?

[pissclams]

imagine the uproar when our big east big monday games delay the start of KU's pac 16 game

[steve dave]

I think a Big East Network could be very valuable, especially with KU, K-State, and MU. It could air 2-3 basketball games per week, and most of those games would be some kind of marquee matchup.

And "Win the West" has a better ring for a season slogan than "Win the North".

Yes, it does. We could call the west division the "Wild West" and the east division the "Blue Blood East".

Am I wrong in thinking that a Big East network would have more appeal airing 3rd tier basketball games than the Big 10 Network has airing 3rd tier football games, though?

would be amazing.  also, yes, you are wrong.

[Rage Against the McKee]

imagine the uproar when our big east big monday games delay the start of KU's pac 16 game

I bet the KU fans get pissed off about having to pay for our Big East Network, too.

[mcmwcat]

go big east go big east.  sorry Texas.  sometimes we have to look out for our own interests.  maybe in a couple years we can get you in.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think a Big East Network could be very valuable, especially with KU, K-State, and MU. It could air 2-3 basketball games per week, and most of those games would be some kind of marquee matchup.

And "Win the West" has a better ring for a season slogan than "Win the North".

Yes, it does. We could call the west division the "Wild West" and the east division the "Blue Blood East".

Am I wrong in thinking that a Big East network would have more appeal airing 3rd tier basketball games than the Big 10 Network has airing 3rd tier football games, though?

would be amazing.  also, yes, you are wrong.

Yeah, probably. The Big 10 football fanbases are huge. I just think that Big East basketball would have a ton of national appeal, especially when you consider the number of teams that would be in that conference would allow for some pretty damned good 3rd tier games that are going up against Indiana vs. Iowa on the Big 10 Network.

[CHONGS]

I am going to miss geographic rivals, it won't be the same.  We can all kid ourselves into liking our new arrangement, but it won't be as fun.

[KITNfury]

I am going to miss geographic rivals, it won't be the same.  We can all kid ourselves into liking our new arrangement, but it won't be as fun.

Yeah me too. I'm really hoping that KU and MU (and to a lesser degree, ISU) end up in the BE along with us. It's unlikely it seems, but still it would make the move much more palatable.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I am going to miss geographic rivals, it won't be the same.  We can all kid ourselves into liking our new arrangement, but it won't be as fun.

As long as we still have KU and MU, it wouldn't be all that bad.

[steve dave]

I am going to miss geographic rivals, it won't be the same.  We can all kid ourselves into liking our new arrangement, but it won't be as fun.

As long as we still have KU and MU, it wouldn't be all that bad.

agreed.  if we can maintain that I don't have a problem with it at all.  our next best geographic rival already bolted to the Big10 and once the Oklahoma schools moved to the south division when the Big 12 was formed that lost some of it's luster. 

[CHONGS]

I just have the feeling MU and KU will be going a different way than we are.   

[steve dave]

I just have the feeling MU and KU will be going a different way than we are.   

yes, that would suck

[Rage Against the McKee]

My friends on the Kansas BOR are saying that KU, K-State, and MU are all working very closely together to make sure that they all stay in the same conference, fwiw. It makes sense that the schools would want to hold on to their rivals that produce the best attendance at games year in and year out.

[Acceleration Man]

I think a Big East Network could be very valuable, especially with KU, K-State, and MU. It could air 2-3 basketball games per week, and most of those games would be some kind of marquee matchup.

And "Win the West" has a better ring for a season slogan than "Win the North".

Yes, it does. We could call the west division the "Wild West" and the east division the "Blue Blood East".

Am I wrong in thinking that a Big East network would have more appeal airing 3rd tier basketball games than the Big 10 Network has airing 3rd tier football games, though?

What you're losing sight of is that FB is where all the real money/influence is. The big network $ is going to be aligned directly with the strong FB conferences (looks like SEC, PAC whatever and big 10 right now). As far as value goes, everything else will be second tier. Would still be fun in a way, but not near as much $ to go around.

[Dr Rick Daris]

I am going to miss geographic rivals, it won't be the same.  We can all kid ourselves into liking our new arrangement, but it won't be as fun.

As long as we still have KU and MU, it wouldn't be all that bad.

agreed.  if we can maintain that I don't have a problem with it at all.  our next best geographic rival already bolted to the Big10 and once the Oklahoma schools moved to the south division when the Big 12 was formed that lost some of it's luster. 

obviously keeping ku, mu and kstate together is best case scenario for kstate but i'm with chings, it won't be as good as we had it. we can get all excited that we will be in a new conf and will get to play pitt and rutgers and gtown and stuff, but the newness will wear off after a season or two. just like when people got all excited for interleague mlb and then now it's just who cares.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think a Big East Network could be very valuable, especially with KU, K-State, and MU. It could air 2-3 basketball games per week, and most of those games would be some kind of marquee matchup.

And "Win the West" has a better ring for a season slogan than "Win the North".

Yes, it does. We could call the west division the "Wild West" and the east division the "Blue Blood East".

Am I wrong in thinking that a Big East network would have more appeal airing 3rd tier basketball games than the Big 10 Network has airing 3rd tier football games, though?

What you're losing sight of is that FB is where all the real money/influence is. The big network $ is going to be aligned directly with the strong FB conferences (looks like SEC, PAC whatever and big 10 right now). As far as value goes, everything else will be second tier. Would still be fun in a way, but not near as much $ to go around.

As long as K-State has enough money to field competitive teams, I don't really care how much revenue the athletic department brings in. Football drives the 1st tier and 2nd tier tv contracts, but I'm not so sure football has a huge advantage over basketball for third tier rights on a conference network, when you consider the quality of 3rd tier games and the fact that so many more basketball games are played than football games.

[Acceleration Man]

My friends on the Kansas BOR are saying that KU, K-State, and MU are all working very closely together to make sure that they all stay in the same conference, fwiw. It makes sense that the schools would want to hold on to their rivals that produce the best attendance at games year in and year out.

Pressure from legislators, government powers-that-be, etc. is probably the only thing that will keep us in any kind of favorable position. We're the Baylor of whatever conference/affiliation we end up with. I'm sure that there will be some pressure to keep us together (particularly w/ KU), but let's be honest -- if push comes to shove (i.e., a power conference tells MU/KU that the deal is off if we're included), no one is going to be there holding our hand. That being said, just be glad you're not Iowa State right now.

[Rage Against the McKee]

My friends on the Kansas BOR are saying that KU, K-State, and MU are all working very closely together to make sure that they all stay in the same conference, fwiw. It makes sense that the schools would want to hold on to their rivals that produce the best attendance at games year in and year out.

Pressure from legislators, government powers-that-be, etc. is probably the only thing that will keep us in any kind of favorable position. We're the Baylor of whatever conference/affiliation we end up with. I'm sure that there will be some pressure to keep us together (particularly w/ KU), but let's be honest -- if push comes to shove (i.e., a power conference tells MU/KU that the deal is off if we're included), no one is going to be there holding our hand. That being said, just be glad you're not Iowa State right now.

I think the state of Kansas has far too much to lose by breaking up KU and K-State to allow that to happen, as long as there is an option for both schools to go to a BCS conference.

[Acceleration Man]

I think a Big East Network could be very valuable, especially with KU, K-State, and MU. It could air 2-3 basketball games per week, and most of those games would be some kind of marquee matchup.

And "Win the West" has a better ring for a season slogan than "Win the North".

Yes, it does. We could call the west division the "Wild West" and the east division the "Blue Blood East".

Am I wrong in thinking that a Big East network would have more appeal airing 3rd tier basketball games than the Big 10 Network has airing 3rd tier football games, though?

What you're losing sight of is that FB is where all the real money/influence is. The big network $ is going to be aligned directly with the strong FB conferences (looks like SEC, PAC whatever and big 10 right now). As far as value goes, everything else will be second tier. Would still be fun in a way, but not near as much $ to go around.

As long as K-State has enough money to field competitive teams, I don't really care how much revenue the athletic department brings in. Football drives the 1st tier and 2nd tier tv contracts, but I'm not so sure football has a huge advantage over basketball for third tier rights on a conference network, when you consider the quality of 3rd tier games and the fact that so many more basketball games are played than football games.

That's kind of the point -- we go from a 1st tier TV contract to a 3rd tier, and you think the $ difference won't affect the ability to field competitive teams going forward? Essentially, we'd need to become a basketball-centric school again, and maybe hope for a nice season in FB (a decent bowl) when the cards fall just right. I know that's kind of where we are now, but the ceiling would obviously be a lot lower via recruits/BCS bids/overall program level than what we have now. Overall it may be our best option, but still makes me sad.

[pike]

Man.  Mods, is it time for this badboy to get moved to the pit?

Somebody took too much METH last night

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think a Big East Network could be very valuable, especially with KU, K-State, and MU. It could air 2-3 basketball games per week, and most of those games would be some kind of marquee matchup.

And "Win the West" has a better ring for a season slogan than "Win the North".

Yes, it does. We could call the west division the "Wild West" and the east division the "Blue Blood East".

Am I wrong in thinking that a Big East network would have more appeal airing 3rd tier basketball games than the Big 10 Network has airing 3rd tier football games, though?

What you're losing sight of is that FB is where all the real money/influence is. The big network $ is going to be aligned directly with the strong FB conferences (looks like SEC, PAC whatever and big 10 right now). As far as value goes, everything else will be second tier. Would still be fun in a way, but not near as much $ to go around.

As long as K-State has enough money to field competitive teams, I don't really care how much revenue the athletic department brings in. Football drives the 1st tier and 2nd tier tv contracts, but I'm not so sure football has a huge advantage over basketball for third tier rights on a conference network, when you consider the quality of 3rd tier games and the fact that so many more basketball games are played than football games.

That's kind of the point -- we go from a 1st tier TV contract to a 3rd tier, and you think the $ difference won't affect the ability to field competitive teams going forward? Essentially, we'd need to become a basketball-centric school again, and maybe hope for a nice season in FB (a decent bowl) when the cards fall just right. I know that's kind of where we are now, but the ceiling would obviously be a lot lower via recruits/BCS bids/overall program level than what we have now. Overall it may be our best option, but still makes me sad.

The Big East is due for a new TV deal that would likely pay us similar, maybe even more than what we have been making in the Big 12. It will be nowhere near the amount we would make if the Big 12 were to stay together, but it would be enough to maintain the status quo.

[chum1]

time to go global

[Acceleration Man]

The Big East is due for a new TV deal that would likely pay us similar, maybe even more than what we have been making in the Big 12. It will be nowhere near the amount we would make if the Big 12 were to stay together, but it would be enough to maintain the status quo.

When exactly does the new TV deal transpire? Obviously, a major move in conf. affiliation could affect things in any number of ways on tv negotiations. And certainly it would be nice not to have to give up money. However, when there will be several other conferences w/ teams making a lot more, over time it will be hard to stay competitive (particularly in fb). Oh well, still would take over MWC.

[Rage Against the McKee]

The Big East is due for a new TV deal that would likely pay us similar, maybe even more than what we have been making in the Big 12. It will be nowhere near the amount we would make if the Big 12 were to stay together, but it would be enough to maintain the status quo.

When exactly does the new TV deal transpire? Obviously, a major move in conf. affiliation could affect things in any number of ways on tv negotiations. And certainly it would be nice not to have to give up money. However, when there will be several other conferences w/ teams making a lot more, over time it will be hard to stay competitive (particularly in fb). Oh well, still would take over MWC.

Their ESPN deal expires after the 2012 season. Most of the teams that will have much better deals than us are also fielding far more sports teams that lose money. Kansas State is one of the 10 most profitable athletic departments in the nation right now, and if worst comes to worst, we could always drop another sport like track and field.

[WildcatNkilt]

How would money be divided up per team if some had football and others did not?  I.E. K-State gets $15mill and a team with bball only gets $6mill??  I have no idea how it is divided now.