Fighting for scraps off of the table





guffus said:
PANIC!
Click to expand...
Yep,

I know we all enjoyed making fun of our little red headed sister just west of Iowa City about 100 miles, but seriously what are they going to do over there?

Bad timing for them as their head coach has brought them back to respectability.

We can look at the Big Ten conference and see examples of where there are two conferences teams in the same state. We are just increasing that in a couple of years with UCLA and USC. (Michigan & Michigan State) (Purdue & Indiana) (Northwestern & Illinois). Would it hurt instate recruiting if Iowa became one of those states?

So wouldn’t it even be better that instead of just 100 million dollars pouring into the state of Iowa from the University of Iowa why not have two hundred million pouring into the state from the big ten channel network paying two Iowa colleges.

So with that in mind there really isn’t any reason why the Big Ten shouldn’t let UNI join the big ten conference.


Just CLOWNing around!
 
Last edited:


ISU will be OK. The future is 2 power conferences, the B10 and SEC, with about 24 teams each after they take their picks from the ACC, PAC and B12 and ND.

Then there will be a Best of the Rest coast to coast conference, with the leftovers from the PAC, ACC and B12, with about 20 members. ISU will be a member of this Best of the Rest conference.
 


guffus said:
ISU will be OK. The future is 2 power conferences, the B10 and SEC, with about 24 teams each after they take their picks from the ACC, PAC and B12 and ND.

Then there will be a Best of the Rest coast to coast conference, with the leftovers from the PAC, ACC and B12, with about 20 members. ISU will be a member of this Best of the Rest conference.
Click to expand...
Colloquially the “Group of Losers”
 


My predictions

Big Ten-24
USC, UCLA, Wash, Ore., Stan, Cal
NEB, Iowa, Minn, Wisc, ILL, NW
Mich, MSU, OSU, Pur, Indy, PSU
ND, MD, Rut, VA, UNC, GT

SEC-24
Clem, NCSU, FL ST, VT, SCar, Ga
Bama, Aub, Tenn, KY, vandy, FL
Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, A&M, Arky, Mizzou, Tex, Ok
Kan, Col, Ariz, Utah

Best of the Rest-24
Ariz St, BYU, Wash St, Ore st
SDSU, Boise St, UNLV
TT, Ok St, Kan St, Iowa St
TCU, Baylor, Houston
WV, Cincy, UCF,
BC, Cuse, Pitt, Wake, Lou, Duke, Miami

Actually, the Best of the Rest is not a bad basketball conference
 


200.gif
 


guffus said:
My predictions

Big Ten-24
USC, UCLA, Wash, Ore., Stan, Cal
NEB, Iowa, Minn, Wisc, ILL, NW
Mich, MSU, OSU, Pur, Indy, PSU
ND, MD, Rut, VA, UNC, GT

SEC-24
Clem, NCSU, FL ST, VT, SCar, Ga
Bama, Aub, Tenn, KY, vandy, FL
Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, A&M, Arky, Mizzou, Tex, Ok
Kan, Col, Ariz, Utah

Best of the Rest-24
Ariz St, BYU, Wash St, Ore st
SDSU, Boise St, UNLV
TT, Ok St, Kan St, Iowa St
TCU, Baylor, Houston
WV, Cincy, UCF,
BC, Cuse, Pitt, Wake, Lou, Duke, Miami

Actually, the Best of the Rest is not a bad basketball conference
Click to expand...
Assuming your Big Ten groups are intentional pods of 6, giving ND that cupcake of a schedule is a solid way to get them in the conference.
 




If indeed, college football is headed to two leagues; B1G and SEC, then it is necessary to know the magic number in each league. To keep a third league out it would be necessary to go to a minimum of 24 teams in each league. For the B1G it has only 14 universities to pick from, all AAU members except one. Kansas, Georgia Tech, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Oregon, Arizona, California Berkley, Stanford, Colorado, Utah, and Notre Dame. Anyway you cut it six of these universities are left out unless the SEC would be interested.

The SEC has a lot more flexibility since the AAU isn't a requirement. A total of 37 teams could be in the mix, from the ACC, PAC 12, and BIGXII. Included in the BIGXII are the recent added teams. Any AAU teams the SEC admits lowers the number available to the B1G Ten. When you review the list of 37 universities the ACC and PAC 12 probably have the preferred candidates. Miami FL, Florida State, and Clemson would be top candidates from the ACC. Two other ACC candidates would be Virginia Tech and North Carolina State. The top PAC 12 teams would be Washington and Oregon, but unlikely if the B1G Ten wants them. That leaves 5 that are decent candidates: Arizona State, Arizona, Cal, Stanford, Colorado, and Utah as serious possibilities. Washington State and Oregon State are left out. The Big XII doesn't have a lot to offer for the SEC. Kansas and West Virginia are possible candidates.

At this point it is known that 37 universities are competing for 16 spots. It looks like the BIG XII would keep most of present and future declared members and pick off some ACC left overs like PITT and Georgia Tech. The PAC 12 leftovers probably move to the Mountain West.

Until Notre Dame signals its intentions nothing will happen. When it does then there will be some massive movements. There are too many unknowns to know if the idea of two leagues will ever fly.
 






ssckelley said:
I would have never guessed the PAC 12 was this fragile.
Click to expand...
USC had 75k at home v ND and the next highest was 57k v Stanford. They played in front of 24k was WSU. Yes they are fragile. Oregon averaged under 50k per game. UCLA average draw was 45k. Stanford average was under 36k.

Telling ya'll. We are seeing the demise of football and a scramble to keep it relative. Why does the Big want anyone from the west except maybe Wash and USC if they can compete.
 


HawkGold said:
USC had 75k at home v ND and the next highest was 57k v Stanford. They played in front of 24k was WSU. Yes they are fragile. Oregon averaged under 50k per game. UCLA average draw was 45k. Stanford average was under 36k.

Telling ya'll. We are seeing the demise of football and a scramble to keep it relative. Why does the Big want anyone from the west except maybe Wash and USC if they can compete.
Click to expand...

It's called television. USC is a national draw and brings the Big Ten the Los Angeles market, I believe UCLA was a package deal as they don't add much. The Big Ten is out maneuvering the SEC in terms of TV revenue as they now have the 4 largest markets in the US (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia). How many people attend the game does not matter, I don't think the Big Ten shares ticket revenue (I could be wrong) but it is a drop in the bucket compared to what the TV revenues generate.
 


HawkGold said:
USC had 75k at home v ND and the next highest was 57k v Stanford. They played in front of 24k was WSU. Yes they are fragile. Oregon averaged under 50k per game. UCLA average draw was 45k. Stanford average was under 36k.

Telling ya'll. We are seeing the demise of football and a scramble to keep it relative. Why does the Big want anyone from the west except maybe Wash and USC if they can compete.
Click to expand...

Part of this is probably on the NCAA for destroying USC after the Reggie Bush crap. Those allegations were basically nothing, certainly nothing more than what anyone paying attention expected. Like it or not, the lifeblood of a conference is the strength of the blue bloods with big fanbases. The importance of the blue bloods is why PSU didn't suffer the full sanctions or get the death penalty after Sandusky. But when USC sucks for a decade plus and it takes the fun out of beating them and they're the only giant in your conference, fan support wanes. The LA people are fair weather fans. They ain't gonna support a 7-5 USC program.

The Big Ten needs good content, and to get good content they have to add "name brands." Getting USC and hopefully ND into the mix will massively enhance our weekly scheduling of solid games.
 


okeefe4prez said:
I pointed it out last year. Here's another post where I said the PAC 12 could be raided: https://forum.hawkeyenation.com/threads/merged-big-12-aftermath-thread.92353/page-10#post-2008460

They completely botched their conference TV network and the schools with significant market value have to distance themselves from that shit media deal.
Click to expand...

I remember reading that and not thinking much of it considering the strong ties (supposedly) that the Big Ten had with the Pac 12. Thank gawd Delany created the BTN and went right after the TV revenues along with expansion or it could have been the Big Ten that got ripped apart.
 


ssckelley said:
I remember reading that and not thinking much of it considering the strong ties (supposedly) that the Big Ten had with the Pac 12. Thank gawd Delany created the BTN and went right after the TV revenues along with expansion or it could have been the Big Ten that got ripped apart.
Click to expand...

If we did not have BTN and SEC had a network and its current media deal, Ohio, Michigan and UPenn would all be long gone. The leftovers from the Big Ten (minus Rutgers and MD) still would have made a decent conference, better than the others except for the current ACC, but it would not have been good.
 


If the B1G goes to 20 teams, can we just start calling it the Big 10s network?

Makes more sense than calling a 14 team conference the Big 10.
 


ssckelley said:
It's called television. USC is a national draw and brings the Big Ten the Los Angeles market, I believe UCLA was a package deal as they don't add much. The Big Ten is out maneuvering the SEC in terms of TV revenue as they now have the 4 largest markets in the US (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia). How many people attend the game does not matter, I don't think the Big Ten shares ticket revenue (I could be wrong) but it is a drop in the bucket compared to what the TV revenues generate.
Click to expand...
I think that is history. The Big USC boosters are mostly now 80 at the youngest. ND has lost a lot as well. What does continue is regional local team support to some degree in places without an identity such as Iowa, Nebraska, Alabama. Then there are the OSUs and UMs which are their own animal.
 


okeefe4prez said:
Part of this is probably on the NCAA for destroying USC after the Reggie Bush crap. Those allegations were basically nothing, certainly nothing more than what anyone paying attention expected. Like it or not, the lifeblood of a conference is the strength of the blue bloods with big fanbases. The importance of the blue bloods is why PSU didn't suffer the full sanctions or get the death penalty after Sandusky. But when USC sucks for a decade plus and it takes the fun out of beating them and they're the only giant in your conference, fan support wanes. The LA people are fair weather fans. They ain't gonna support a 7-5 USC program.

The Big Ten needs good content, and to get good content they have to add "name brands." Getting USC and hopefully ND into the mix will massively enhance our weekly scheduling of solid games.
Click to expand...
USC destroyed USC. PSU isn't what it was. Look at IU BB and see PSU football in the future.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top