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

[steve dave]

The Big 10 has really made their football product a pile of crap.

exactly. who in the eff is going to want to watch rutgers vs minnesota, syracuse vs purdue ect ect?

Who in the eff watches KU vs ISU football games?  Besides K-State and ISU fans?

 

[EMAWmeister]

Miami >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Louisville

Yeah because Miami was in a BCS bowl game this year and a Final Four last year

who cares

Miami has like 10k undergrads. They are a pud school and a irrelevant in their own immediate market. No thanks.

You just described 1/5th of the current Big 12.

[CyberToothCat]

The Big 10 has really made their football product a pile of crap.

exactly. who in the eff is going to want to watch rutgers vs minnesota, syracuse vs purdue ect ect?

Who in the eff watches KU vs ISU football games?  Besides K-State and ISU fans?

There is only one KU vs ISU game per year. The Big 10 has like 15 of them.

Oh, come on.  The Big 12 has a bunch of crappy matchups that few people outside of those two fanbases will watch.  Despite our high rankings the last couple of years, few people outside of Big 12 country pay any attention to K-State.  No one beside ISU fans watches the Clones play.  Ditto KU.  Ditto Baylor.  Ditto Texas Tech.  Frankly, outside of OU and UT, very few people around the country pay any attention to the Big 12.

By virtue of having more teams in their conference, you could argue the Big Ten has more irrelevant teams than the Big 12.  But the Big Ten also has more power programs to make up for it.  The same is true with the SEC.

The Big 12 is in a unique position that I'm not sure is sustainable.  We have a bunch of schools located in small media markets and small population states that few people outside of those fanbases will watch or care about.  And yet we get paid like one of the big boys.  IMO, the success or failure is going to rest on the shoulders of programs like KSU, OSU, WVU or TCU or BU to always have a couple of these teams to step up and play at a high level.  If we ever have a season or string of seasons like what the SEC had this past year (a couple of great teams at the top and everyone else was completely shitty), things could get very rough for the Big 12.

[Katpappy]

The Big 10 has really made their football product a pile of crap.

exactly. who in the eff is going to want to watch rutgers vs minnesota, syracuse vs purdue ect ect?

Who in the eff watches KU vs ISU football games?  Besides K-State and ISU fans?

There is only one KU vs ISU game per year. The Big 10 has like 15 of them.

Oh, come on.  The Big 12 has a bunch of crappy matchups that few people outside of those two fanbases will watch.  Despite our high rankings the last couple of years, few people outside of Big 12 country pay any attention to K-State.  No one beside ISU fans watches the Clones play.  Ditto KU.  Ditto Baylor.  Ditto Texas Tech.  Frankly, outside of OU and UT, very few people around the country pay any attention to the Big 12.

By virtue of having more teams in their conference, you could argue the Big Ten has more irrelevant teams than the Big 12.  But the Big Ten also has more power programs to make up for it.  The same is true with the SEC.

The Big 12 is in a unique position that I'm not sure is sustainable.  We have a bunch of schools located in small media markets and small population states that few people outside of those fanbases will watch or care about.  And yet we get paid like one of the big boys.  IMO, the success or failure is going to rest on the shoulders of programs like KSU, OSU, WVU or TCU or BU to always have a couple of these teams to step up and play at a high level.  If we ever have a season or string of seasons like what the SEC had this past year (a couple of great teams at the top and everyone else was completely shitty), things could get very rough for the Big 12.

Yea, we only have a five state footprint.  But, you do realize that one of the states has the top school, AD wise, and the largest media market. 

[DQ12]

Miami has like 10k undergrads. They are a pud school and a irrelevant in their own immediate market. No thanks.

You just described 1/5th of the current Big 12.

Yeah.  I think we can all agree that the remedy to whatever problem exists in the Big 12 is to add another Baylor/TCU or two.

[Panjandrum]

The Big 10 has really made their football product a pile of crap.

Nothing in realignment thus far has made a single product better than it was before.  It just made people more money.

The only thing that may get better is if that Catholic League becomes reality.  That will be pretty awesome.

As a rule, though, wouldn't a diluted product eventually lead to less viewers?

I think the future of the television model we're currently in is so volatile that you may as well cash grab now and figure out what to do later.  That probably explains a lot of what's going on.  If you have the juice to influence the future (Big Ten), you may as well be proactive than reactive.  Better an imperfect something than a perfect nothing.

I'm currently in the process of trying to "cut the cord" in as many places as possible.  But I have to keep somewhat of a basic cable package because I need Fox Sports (and assorted other networks that broadcast sports that I care about).  And therein lies the racket.  If I want to watch every potential KSU football/basketball game out there, I need a package that has ESPN (all of them), Fox Sports Net, Fox Sports One (eventually), FX, CBS College Sports, etc.  I can't replace that with Netflix and Hulu Plus.  And I'm not even talking about the pro sports I watch/care about.  Hell, 2/3 of the NASCAR circuit is on cable.

So, I'll never truly be unable to cut the cord because I watch sports.  If these conferences continue to partner with networks that continue to partner with cable companies, I'll forever be a subscriber.  Until there is a tipping point where these networks can make more money going to a subscriber based model than a carriage fee model, I'm stuck with a digital box in my house.

Hence why they don't give a damn if the product sucks.  They're holding the content hostage on cable.

[Panjandrum]

The Big 10 has really made their football product a pile of crap.

exactly. who in the eff is going to want to watch rutgers vs minnesota, syracuse vs purdue ect ect?

Who in the eff watches KU vs ISU football games?  Besides K-State and ISU fans?

There is only one KU vs ISU game per year. The Big 10 has like 15 of them.

Oh, come on.  The Big 12 has a bunch of crappy matchups that few people outside of those two fanbases will watch.  Despite our high rankings the last couple of years, few people outside of Big 12 country pay any attention to K-State.  No one beside ISU fans watches the Clones play.  Ditto KU.  Ditto Baylor.  Ditto Texas Tech.  Frankly, outside of OU and UT, very few people around the country pay any attention to the Big 12.

By virtue of having more teams in their conference, you could argue the Big Ten has more irrelevant teams than the Big 12.  But the Big Ten also has more power programs to make up for it.  The same is true with the SEC.

The Big 12 is in a unique position that I'm not sure is sustainable.  We have a bunch of schools located in small media markets and small population states that few people outside of those fanbases will watch or care about.  And yet we get paid like one of the big boys.  IMO, the success or failure is going to rest on the shoulders of programs like KSU, OSU, WVU or TCU or BU to always have a couple of these teams to step up and play at a high level.  If we ever have a season or string of seasons like what the SEC had this past year (a couple of great teams at the top and everyone else was completely shitty), things could get very rough for the Big 12.

We're going to ultimately expand because not having a conference championship game is going to hurt us in the playoff selection process, which will hurt us financially.  That's why Bowlsby has already asked for an exemption to the 12-team minimum.

If we can get the exemption, we'll stay at ten.  If we can't, we'll expand.

But, at this point, the best bet is to just wait it out.  We're geograpically unattractive, but the upside is that the schools that may ultimately fall in our lap are probably good fits anyway (VT, NC St., FSU, Miami, Clemson, etc.).  We're a good conference for the little brother state schools that want to stick it to big brother by being good at football.  Hell, outside of OU/UT/KU, that's all that's left.

[Rage Against the McKee]

The Big 10 has really made their football product a pile of crap.

exactly. who in the eff is going to want to watch rutgers vs minnesota, syracuse vs purdue ect ect?

Who in the eff watches KU vs ISU football games?  Besides K-State and ISU fans?

There is only one KU vs ISU game per year. The Big 10 has like 15 of them.

Oh, come on.  The Big 12 has a bunch of crappy matchups that few people outside of those two fanbases will watch.  Despite our high rankings the last couple of years, few people outside of Big 12 country pay any attention to K-State.  No one beside ISU fans watches the Clones play.  Ditto KU.  Ditto Baylor.  Ditto Texas Tech.  Frankly, outside of OU and UT, very few people around the country pay any attention to the Big 12.

By virtue of having more teams in their conference, you could argue the Big Ten has more irrelevant teams than the Big 12.  But the Big Ten also has more power programs to make up for it.  The same is true with the SEC.

The Big 12 is in a unique position that I'm not sure is sustainable.  We have a bunch of schools located in small media markets and small population states that few people outside of those fanbases will watch or care about.  And yet we get paid like one of the big boys.  IMO, the success or failure is going to rest on the shoulders of programs like KSU, OSU, WVU or TCU or BU to always have a couple of these teams to step up and play at a high level.  If we ever have a season or string of seasons like what the SEC had this past year (a couple of great teams at the top and everyone else was completely shitty), things could get very rough for the Big 12.

People watch games that feature ranked teams playing against each other. Adding shitty programs from large media markets will only make things worse.

[Emo EMAW]

The Big 10 will still have ranked teams, even if they have 10 or 12 or 20 members.  Someone's gotta be ranked.  And Rutgers & Maryland folks will still watch the Rutgers Maryland game (not my talking point but I agree).

[Rage Against the McKee]

The Big 10 will still have ranked teams, even if they have 10 or 12 or 20 members.  Someone's gotta be ranked.  And Rutgers & Maryland folks will still watch the Rutgers Maryland game (not my talking point but I agree).

Yeah, but they are also going to have like 15 teams that aren't ranked, and they will have to televise those games and then distribute revenue equally. The size of the pot will get bigger, but I just don't see how the size of everyone's share doesn't get smaller.

[Emo EMAW]

The Big 10 will still have ranked teams, even if they have 10 or 12 or 20 members.  Someone's gotta be ranked.  And Rutgers & Maryland folks will still watch the Rutgers Maryland game (not my talking point but I agree).

Yeah, but they are also going to have like 15 teams that aren't ranked, and they will have to televise those games and then distribute revenue equally. The size of the pot will get bigger, but I just don't see how the size of everyone's share doesn't get smaller.

I think they could keep the broadcasts quite localized, so everyone gets the watch the games they care about.  Have three time slots throughout the day, 1 for the local matchup, and then 2 covering the ranked teams and compelling matchups.

[kslim]

The Big 10 will still have ranked teams, even if they have 10 or 12 or 20 members.  Someone's gotta be ranked.  And Rutgers & Maryland folks will still watch the Rutgers Maryland game (not my talking point but I agree).

boise state is generally ranked every year, how many people watch the mwc/big east/wac?

rutgers=/=san diego state in most of the countries eyes\

[Rage Against the McKee]

The Big 10 will still have ranked teams, even if they have 10 or 12 or 20 members.  Someone's gotta be ranked.  And Rutgers & Maryland folks will still watch the Rutgers Maryland game (not my talking point but I agree).

Yeah, but they are also going to have like 15 teams that aren't ranked, and they will have to televise those games and then distribute revenue equally. The size of the pot will get bigger, but I just don't see how the size of everyone's share doesn't get smaller.

I think they could keep the broadcasts quite localized, so everyone gets the watch the games they care about.  Have three time slots throughout the day, 1 for the local matchup, and then 2 covering the ranked teams and compelling matchups.

The point is that those local broadcasts pay next to nothing and then they have to split the payouts from ABC/ESPN with those teams that aren't even good enough to play on those networks. I just don't see how a program like Ohio State benefits from being in the Big 10, especially considering the programs they are adding.

[sonofdaxjones]

College sports is still very regional in nature from my perspective, with only a handful of games every year really moving the needle on a national level, and in the largest media markets college sports is still multiple rungs below pro sports.

That's why I think these commissioners are chasing windmills if they really do think something like a 20 team league is going be looked back upon as a good idea a few years after it happens (if it happens).    You've got "needle moving" rivalries getting killed off already, it takes years to build those types of things.

[kslim]

You've got "needle moving" rivalries getting killed off already, it takes years to build those types of things.

This is part of my point. There was a article about TCU and WVU becoming a rivalry. Which will never ever happen and is just stupid to comprehend

[Rage Against the McKee]

KSU and WVU seems much more likely. Those guys hate us.

[sonofdaxjones]

Yeah, and you've got people out there harping . . . like some Texas fans who bitch about who they have coming in to play there, and how their biggest game is off campus.   Well, come on man, they've got Ole Miss the first AQ conference opponent they've played at home in 3 seasons, so that's their own damn fault in terms of scheduling.  Then they've got us, defending conference champions, who they haven't beat in 9 years. Texas Tech who they hate, and Oklahoma State who won the conference and a BCS bowl two years ago.   If they're so effing big time then step up and beat these teams, and quit acting like they're all bored because it's not UCLA (who brought a sucky team in and beat their ass up and down the field 3 years ago) or USC, or like some want the SEC . . . the top SEC teams would humiliate Texas (just like the Top Big 12 teams do now). 

[Dugout DickStone]

KSU and WVU seems much more likely. Those guys hate us.

We owned their ugly faces.  they should hate us.

[Panjandrum]

The point is that those local broadcasts pay next to nothing and then they have to split the payouts from ABC/ESPN with those teams that aren't even good enough to play on those networks. I just don't see how a program like Ohio State benefits from being in the Big 10, especially considering the programs they are adding.

They benefit if the Big Ten's expansion platform keeps them relevant in the long term.

The Big Ten is in trouble because their footprint is leaking population.  They need to expand to places where the people are.  If they stay where they are, they'll decrease in relevance because A) the current product is pretty bad and B) the people watching the product are getting smaller and smaller.

Hell, our game against Texas outdrew the Big Ten title game on TV.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Hell, our game against Texas outdrew the Big Ten title game on TV.

As it should have.

[Panjandrum]

People watch games that feature ranked teams playing against each other. Adding shitty programs from large media markets will only make things worse.

That's not what the Big Ten is trying to do.  The Big Ten wants your team in it's stable so they can move a bunch of it's content onto their cable platform so they can jack up rates in your area by holding the content hostage so the provider moves it from the Sports package to the Basic cable platform.  The Big Ten (and Fox) get way more money that way.

The Big Ten doesn't give a crap about the quality.  They want to force your cable companies to move BTN to the basic cable package and jack up rates so the people who do care about Rutgers force the people who don't to pay a buck for it regardless of whether or not they want it.  If you can bundle BTN with something like YES (which Fox is going to do), then the reverse applies, and everyone in the BTN footprint will get YES on basic cable even if they don't give a crap about the Yankees.

It's crap like this that's made my cable bill go up $40 a month in the past five years, and I haven't even changed my package.

[Rage Against the McKee]

People watch games that feature ranked teams playing against each other. Adding shitty programs from large media markets will only make things worse.

That's not what the Big Ten is trying to do.  The Big Ten wants your team in it's stable so they can move a bunch of it's content onto their cable platform so they can jack up rates in your area by holding the content hostage so the provider moves it from the Sports package to the Basic cable platform.  The Big Ten (and Fox) get way more money that way.

The Big Ten doesn't give a crap about the quality.  They want to force your cable companies to move BTN to the basic cable package and jack up rates so the people who do care about Rutgers force the people who don't to pay a buck for it regardless of whether or not they want it.  If you can bundle BTN with something like YES (which Fox is going to do), then the reverse applies, and everyone in the BTN footprint will get YES on basic cable even if they don't give a crap about the Yankees.

It's crap like this that's made my cable bill go up $40 a month in the past five years, and I haven't even changed my package.

At some point, wouldn't viewership of their network drop to a level that some cable networks feel comfortable moving them to a different tier or dropping them completely?

[TheHamburglar]

At some point, wouldn't viewership of their network drop to a level that some cable networks feel comfortable moving them to a different tier or dropping them completely?

No cable company in the areas that have a BigTen school are ever going to drop BTN.  Also, I don't know how adding schools will drop viewership of BTN.  Right now they show crap BigTen games are and doing great.  With a larger BigTen, they are more likely to have games between two 6-3 teams available in October/November than they are now.  The games dropping to them are going to be better, not worse.  Sure there will be another game between two crap teams, but there will also be another game between two mid-level teams to show instead of the two crap teams.  Also, they can just move the crap games to night and have more games on Saturday, thus increasing viewership.   

[EMAWmeister]

The point is that those local broadcasts pay next to nothing and then they have to split the payouts from ABC/ESPN with those teams that aren't even good enough to play on those networks. I just don't see how a program like Ohio State benefits from being in the Big 10, especially considering the programs they are adding.

They benefit if the Big Ten's expansion platform keeps them relevant in the long term.

The Big Ten is in trouble because their footprint is leaking population.  They need to expand to places where the people are.  If they stay where they are, they'll decrease in relevance because A) the current product is pretty bad and B) the people watching the product are getting smaller and smaller.

Hell, our game against Texas outdrew the Big Ten title game on TV.

OSU is relevant when they go 6-6.

Wasn't that the whole point of adding Rutgers and Maryland?

[slucat]

College sports is still very regional in nature from my perspective, with only a handful of games every year really moving the needle on a national level, and in the largest media markets college sports is still multiple rungs below pro sports.

That's why I think these commissioners are chasing windmills if they really do think something like a 20 team league is going be looked back upon as a good idea a few years after it happens (if it happens).    You've got "needle moving" rivalries getting killed off already, it takes years to build those types of things.

Needle moving on a national level is done by ESPN and Gameday who is in partnership with the SEC, that is why the SEC was all over TV and their teams were ranked the highest...ESPN is the driver in all of this.  A few years ago the big 10 was their golden child, that contract ran out, and now it is the SEC.