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

[sys]

I was talking about an alliance without the tv network, which is what I thought you and dax were referring to.  I was kind of saying if they're going to the TV alliance route instead of TV network alliance route, then they need to just get the F on TV any way they can because I'm not sure what their value is to Fox Sports and ABC.  However, I think a the Big Pac Network would be fantastic.  regardless, in any scenario, I don't see teams sharing revenue equally.

equal rev sharing is a red herring.  it's meaningless, at least as far as kstate is concerned.


i think you are dramatically undervaluing the content that the big 12 (or the big 12 + pac 10) controls.  the big 10 is nothing special in terms of content.  they just have the best vehicle.  the sec could bury them if they had an equivalent vehicle.

[mcmwcat]

pac 10 volleyball and water polo coming live from the big pac network

[ksutrumpet]

Since those A-holes from Austin seem to be the issue why don't we throw UT out on their butt and pick up someone who would play ball

[OK_Cat]

Since those A-holes from Austin seem to be the issue why don't we throw UT out on their butt and pick up someone who would play ball

Without UT, the Big12 doesn't even exist, don't be a tard.

[sonofdaxjones]

I was talking about an alliance without the tv network, which is what I thought you and dax were referring to.  I was kind of saying if they're going to the TV alliance route instead of TV network alliance route, then they need to just get the F on TV any way they can because I'm not sure what their value is to Fox Sports and ABC.  However, I think a the Big Pac Network would be fantastic.  regardless, in any scenario, I don't see teams sharing revenue equally.

equal rev sharing is a red herring.  it's meaningless, at least as far as kstate is concerned.


i think you are dramatically undervaluing the content that the big 12 (or the big 12 + pac 10) controls.  the big 10 is nothing special in terms of content.  they just have the best vehicle.  the sec could bury them if they had an equivalent vehicle.

Totally agree sys . . . SEC country overall is far more college sport centric than Big 10 country,  4 states in SEC country have NO major league professional sports teams, and those states comprise over 15 million people in population.   As a comparison, the population in states outside of Texas in the Big 12 is about 18 million, however 10 Major League Sports Franchises reside in those states.  

On local radio around here they think the SEC targets are going to be Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State and Miami.   It makes perfect sense:  Clemson's main rival is South Carolina, Georgia Tech's main rival is Georgia,  Florida State's main rivals are Miami and Florida, and of course vice versa for Miami.    With that they'll rule the fastest growing area of the United States where there are only 5 major leagues sports franchises that have been in existence for more than 30 years.  As stated, 4 states have no major league sports teams.   The smallest state in that mix is Mississippi its just as big as Kansas and Iowa and bigger than Nebraska.  

[EMAWzified]

Since those A-holes from Austin seem to be the issue why don't we throw UT out on their butt and pick up someone who would play ball

As   as moonbeams thinking about KU basketball has any relevance in conference realignment.

[sonofdaxjones]

Since those A-holes from Austin seem to be the issue why don't we throw UT out on their butt and pick up someone who would play ball

As   as moonbeams thinking about KU basketball has any relevance in conference realignment.

I'll see your   and then double it  

[sonofdaxjones]

Forgot to mention in my SEC scenario . . . they'll have one of the lowest travel expenditures to play conference games/matches of any of the so called super conferences. 

[catzacker]

I was talking about an alliance without the tv network, which is what I thought you and dax were referring to.  I was kind of saying if they're going to the TV alliance route instead of TV network alliance route, then they need to just get the F on TV any way they can because I'm not sure what their value is to Fox Sports and ABC.  However, I think a the Big Pac Network would be fantastic.  regardless, in any scenario, I don't see teams sharing revenue equally.

equal rev sharing is a red herring.  it's meaningless, at least as far as kstate is concerned.


i think you are dramatically undervaluing the content that the big 12 (or the big 12 + pac 10) controls.  the big 10 is nothing special in terms of content.  they just have the best vehicle.  the sec could bury them if they had an equivalent vehicle.

This is true and it's why they (ABC/ESPN) basically paid the SEC not to do this.  But as for the pac-10 and big 12, again, it's not undervaluing rather it's looking at what they are currently getting paid and then trying to determine where the "extra" value comes from.  They'd have to include something together that they don't seperately and the only thing they could offer is either (a) the threat of starting their own network or (b) prime games - which would have to be agreed upon by schools who wouldn't necessarily need to do this.

[sys]

They'd have to include something together that they don't seperately and the only thing they could offer is either (a) the threat of starting their own network or (b) prime games - which would have to be agreed upon by schools who wouldn't necessarily need to do this.

a.  or actually start their own network.


b could supplement that or provide the face-saving carrot or whatever, but the impetus is all a.

[yosh]

i think you are dramatically undervaluing the content that the big 12 (or the big 12 + pac 10) controls.  the big 10 is nothing special in terms of content.  they just have the best vehicle.  the sec could bury them if they had an equivalent vehicle.

...and the vehicle is replicable and improvable.

[sonofdaxjones]

i think you are dramatically undervaluing the content that the big 12 (or the big 12 + pac 10) controls.  the big 10 is nothing special in terms of content.  they just have the best vehicle.  the sec could bury them if they had an equivalent vehicle.

...and the vehicle is replicable and improvable.

Completely agree . . . and likely able to do that with just an alliance.   Remember the Big 10 can't have a CCG today, so they need the numbers.   I still say that if ND were to say yes, the Big 10 will tell all the other "Candidates" to go f themselves.    The problem is the history of ND being an Independent in football is decades old and derives its existence from the bad blood between Michigan and Notre Dame.

[catzacker]

It seems to me the value is being able to have the capacity to put on tv the least wanted games and still have them produce a profit.  The Mich/tOSU football game isn't on the B10 network, correct? The value or rather the good part of the network is being able to put Iowa vs. Northwestern and those areas have the ability (i.e. the tv sets) to make that a profitable venture.  Translating that to the Big 12....can the ISU/KU football game do the same?  The KU/KSU football game?  I don't know, just asking. But maybe it's not that the people in kansas will "buy" the Big Pac Network, it's that the people in Texas and California will be foreced to for the off chance that Texas is relegated to a Big Pac Network broadcast. So I understand that those states and those tv sets will subsidize the rest of us...and thus will want a larger cut of the check.

[nicname]

It seems to me the value is being able to have the capacity to put on tv the least wanted games and still have them produce a profit.  The Mich/tOSU football game isn't on the B10 network, correct? The value or rather the good part of the network is being able to put Iowa vs. Northwestern and those areas have the ability (i.e. the tv sets) to make that a profitable venture.  Translating that to the Big 12....can the ISU/KU football game do the same?  The KU/KSU football game?  I don't know, just asking. But maybe it's not that the people in kansas will "buy" the Big Pac Network, it's that the people in Texas and California will be foreced to for the off chance that Texas is relegated to a Big Pac Network broadcast. So I understand that those states and those tv sets will subsidize the rest of us...and thus will want a larger cut of the check.

Exactly. 

[sonofdaxjones]

I don't think K-State or other smart schools mind seeing schools like Texas get more money.  If K-State raises it's TV revenue by $6 to $8 million dollars a year, to $14 to $16 million dollars annually, I don't think K-State is going to give a Frank if Texas makes $22 million on TV.    K-State doesn't need an $80 million dollar athletic budget, K-State does need to get to a $53 to $55 million dollar budget with a strong revenue stream though.  

The other part of the equation is for the bitchers and moaners about mandatory donations and higher ticket prices to pull their head out of their ass and understand that if they want K-State be left out for certain . . . don't buy tickets and don't contribute money, and they'll have the good old days of 18,000 people in the stands for football before they know it.

Here on the radio they keep talking about a 64 team Super Mega College Level of sports that breaks free of the NCAA and starts its own deal.   That could happen, but I can almost gurantee you, if it does there's going to be all matter of legal and legislative roadblocks.    Why??  Well IMO they'll have everything from their status as a non profit called into question which is HUGE and toss in some anti-trust/exclusionary banter and everything in between.   The Super Mega Conference may ultimately prevail but they'll a strong contingency from the state level to the Feds that will say they might as well be considered a professional sports league and they'll spend a gazzillion dollars on lawyers and PR firms to fight all that.  At some point if this continues IMO . . . some very powerful government entities are going to try and put a stop to it.  

[sys]

It seems to me the value is being able to have the capacity to put on tv the least wanted games and still have them produce a profit.  The Mich/tOSU football game isn't on the B10 network, correct? The value or rather the good part of the network is being able to put Iowa vs. Northwestern and those areas have the ability (i.e. the tv sets) to make that a profitable venture.  Translating that to the Big 12....can the ISU/KU football game do the same?  The KU/KSU football game?  I don't know, just asking. But maybe it's not that the people in kansas will "buy" the Big Pac Network, it's that the people in Texas and California will be foreced to for the off chance that Texas is relegated to a Big Pac Network broadcast. So I understand that those states and those tv sets will subsidize the rest of us...and thus will want a larger cut of the check.

yes, that's correct.  the big 10 network is televising the unwanted games left over.  and it is still incredibly, ridiculously profitable.  it is a glaring indicator that tv networks have dramatically underpaid for collegiate content.  it isn't a question of if an isu/ku fball game or ku/ksu fball game would be profitable to air, it's no-brainer profitable.

for a rough idea of the value of big 10 ten vs big 12 games, i saw this figure for populations in big 10 vs big 12 states:

Big 10:  67 million
Big 12:  47 million

i'm sure that understates the actual big 10 footprint, since it doesn't include border state areas.  but it's a ballpark.  another way to ballpark the numbers would be using the % of tv #s that were thrown around for the big12/pac10 cooperation thing:  31% vs around 25% for the current big 10 (but revenue split by 22 instead of 11).  obviously, there is no way that the numbers are going to equal the big 10 numbers, but it would absolutely dwarf the current package.

keep in mind, the big 10 network has not been marginal.  it has been absolutely amazing.  they made something like 310 million (620 million including fox's cut) this year.  and that's in with other tv deals siphoning off the best games.  the idea that the big 12 or big 12 + pac 10 couldn't follow the same model and also make (only slightly less) incredible money is ridiculous.

a few other numbers.  these are estimates of what these schools would add to the big 10 network revenue.  look at the big 12 schools.  presumably they would also add some sort of similar revenue stream to a big 12 or big 12 + pac 10 network.  even isu adds decent revenue    not big 10 worthy revenue, but still 

CANDIDATES    TOTAL ADDED REVENUE ESTIMATE
     
Texas    $101,369,004
Rutgers    WITH NYC    $67,798,609
Nebraska    $54,487,990
Maryland    $50,818,889
Boston College    $48,382,692
Notre Dame    $47,629,255
Kansas    $46,320,092
Missouri    $45,901,459
Syracuse    $43,504,813
Connecticut    $38,080,271
Pittsburgh    $34,365,175
Iowa State    $31,831,077
     
Syracuse  WITH NYC    $65,874,573

 

[chum1]

You also have to consider that these conference networks plan to add the big games when they are able.  The master plan is to do away with the middle man entirely.

[nicname]

BIG
Texas - 24,782,302
Colorado - 5,024,748
Oklahoma - 3,607,050
Iowa - 3,007,856
Kansas - 2,818,747
Total = 39,240,703

PAC
California - 36,961,664
Washington - 6,664,195
Arizona - 6,595,778
Oregon - 3,825,657
Total = 54,047,294

Total BIG-PAC population = 93,287,997

The average American household has 2.59 people.  That means that roughly 36,018,531 households reside within the 9 state region containing the alliance, not to mention the some of the nations largest alumni bases and the households they bring.  If the actual conference remain intact and configure some big time cross conference match-ups for FB and MBB this could be extremely lucrative. IMO the merger would produce a network that bings in more money than the Big Ten Network.  

The difference is in the obvious larger pull from the big boys.  UT, USC etc pull a much larger audience than KSU, KU etc.  In the Big Ten the schools and states, for the most part, are of similar size.  It is clear why complete revenue sharing works for one and not the other.

I forget who it was that mentioned the Rose Bowl, the possibility of the Rose Bowl ditching the Big10 for a match-up of alliance teams would be a huge blow to the Big10 and a huge get for the remainder of the Big 12.

[catzacker]

It seems to me the value is being able to have the capacity to put on tv the least wanted games and still have them produce a profit.  The Mich/tOSU football game isn't on the B10 network, correct? The value or rather the good part of the network is being able to put Iowa vs. Northwestern and those areas have the ability (i.e. the tv sets) to make that a profitable venture.  Translating that to the Big 12....can the ISU/KU football game do the same?  The KU/KSU football game?  I don't know, just asking. But maybe it's not that the people in kansas will "buy" the Big Pac Network, it's that the people in Texas and California will be foreced to for the off chance that Texas is relegated to a Big Pac Network broadcast. So I understand that those states and those tv sets will subsidize the rest of us...and thus will want a larger cut of the check.

yes, that's correct.  the big 10 network is televising the unwanted games left over.  and it is still incredibly, ridiculously profitable.  it is a glaring indicator that tv networks have dramatically underpaid for collegiate content.  it isn't a question of if an isu/ku fball game or ku/ksu fball game would be profitable to air, it's no-brainer profitable.

for a rough idea of the value of big 10 ten vs big 12 games, i saw this figure for populations in big 10 vs big 12 states:

Big 10:  67 million
Big 12:  47 million

i'm sure that understates the actual big 10 footprint, since it doesn't include border state areas.  but it's a ballpark.  another way to ballpark the numbers would be using the % of tv #s that were thrown around for the big12/pac10 cooperation thing:  31% vs around 25% for the current big 10 (but revenue split by 22 instead of 11).  obviously, there is no way that the numbers are going to equal the big 10 numbers, but it would absolutely dwarf the current package.

keep in mind, the big 10 network has not been marginal.  it has been absolutely amazing.  they made something like 310 million (620 million including fox's cut) this year.  and that's in with other tv deals siphoning off the best games.  the idea that the big 12 or big 12 + pac 10 couldn't follow the same model and also make (only slightly less) incredible money is ridiculous.

a few other numbers.  these are estimates of what these schools would add to the big 10 network revenue.  look at the big 12 schools.  presumably they would also add some sort of similar revenue stream to a big 12 or big 12 + pac 10 network.  even isu adds decent revenue    not big 10 worthy revenue, but still 

CANDIDATES    TOTAL ADDED REVENUE ESTIMATE
     
Texas    $101,369,004
Rutgers    WITH NYC    $67,798,609
Nebraska    $54,487,990
Maryland    $50,818,889
Boston College    $48,382,692
Notre Dame    $47,629,255
Kansas    $46,320,092
Missouri    $45,901,459
Syracuse    $43,504,813
Connecticut    $38,080,271
Pittsburgh    $34,365,175
Iowa State    $31,831,077
     
Syracuse  WITH NYC    $65,874,573

 

it makes you wonder why a conference wouldn't do it if it could be that profitable.  like, wtf would be their hold up?  just scared of the unknown?  i mean, even Texas would get that this would make more money (hell, those greedy mf'ers want to start their own network).

[sonofdaxjones]

K-State to the Big 10.

[Stevesie60]

K-State to the Big 10.

I can't tell if you are predicting this or  for this.

[sonofdaxjones]

Neither.

Just stating it.

[Pete]

K-State to the Big 10.

Don't toy with our emotions, Dax.

[sonofdaxjones]

I am not toying . . . everybody else is saying they're going to the Big 10, so f'it,  K-State to the Big 10.

Granted Pak's to various Big 10 locales won't have that good smelling, high end, beautiful people feel and look . . . think of it like a perpetual trip into Ditka Guys of SNL fame land cohabitating with the Fargo/Bridges of Madison County/Good Fellas cast and sprinkle in a little Browns Dog Pound for good measure.  Imagine the fun you'll have picking up the Paterno Mask at the PSU book store in Happy F_cking Valley.  You and your best buddy can go as Paterno and Snyder for Halloween . . . get another dumbass to go as Jim Tressel and enhance the fun factor by 33%

[Stevesie60]

I am not toying . . . everybody else is saying they're going to the Big 10, so f'it,  K-State to the Big 10.

I've heard of us going to the Pac 10, not the Big 10. The travel expenses would decrease significantly though, so I'd take it.