DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
The two scenarios aren't even close to being comparable. They're in separate solar systems.
Talk of FSU and Clemson to Big 12.
- Thread starter hawkfan1319
- Start date
The two scenarios aren't even close to being comparable. They're in separate solar systems.
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
Doesn't matter if they care or not. If the Big Ten gets a team in those markets, they'll get the cable money whether people watch the BTN or not.
Please explain. You aren't so ignorant to think that tOSU and Michigan don't run the Big 10 are you?
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
You are wrong about this. The protected rivalries was only needed because they decided to go with a competitive balanced divisions instead of geographic. Wisconsin is on the opposite side of 2 of their biggest rivalries, Iowa and Minnesota. While I miss the annual Iowa/Wisconsin rivalry in no way would I say it is bigger than Ohio State vs Michigan. That game puts more money into all of our pockets. That is not proof Ohio State and Michigan are running the conference it just means our conference can make good business decisions.
The B1G must disagree with you that Iowa is a "bottom feeder" as it is Iowa vs Nebraska featured on Black Friday. While you poke fun of Iowa's rivalries off the top of my head I cannot even think of who Iowa States biggest rival is. Is it Kansas? Or was it Nebraska or Missouri?
They already get the cable money. The BTN is in those markets. Schools like tOSU, Penn State, Michigan already carry those markets. So a school like BC adds very little to nothing in the NE market. It would be like adding ISU and thinking you would get more BTN subscribers in Iowa.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
In what world does TCU or WV have more pull than Missouri? You do realize that the SEC could have taken TCU, but passed, and WV begged to get in, and they took Missouri over them.....
You are probably right about Colorado though, seems like centuries ago when they were in the NC hunt every year, and had AA players being drafted into the NFL every year.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
Again, your lack of knowledge is making you look like an idiot. The BTN gets 2 different rates from cable subscribers, I forget the exact numbers, but they get much less per subscription if there is no B1G team in the state. This includes all the satellite subscriptions as well.
I was just going to say the same thing. The B1G makes an effort to treat all schools fairly. The Big 12 does not. Will Texas come to Ames in November? I doubt it. Yes Michigan and tOSU are important to the B1G, but if anyone thinks they are on the same level as Texas in terms of controlling a conference, you are flat out wrong.
The criteria was set up to ensure that Michigan and tOSU were the top dogs in separate divisions. They went with competetive balance but they used criteria that ensured Michigan was still a top dog. If they would have used something like a 10year competitive balance, the divisions would have panned out much different. They didn't. They used a longer window so it ensured Michigan was a top dog. Protected games were set up to ensure that Michigan and tOSU would continue their annual game.
Now tell me why they protected Wisconsin/Minn instead of Wisconsin/Iowa? It is because it was a better game? More competitve balance? Was it because Iowa no longer wanted Wisconsin? Or was it because Wisconsin had a little more influence and got to pick their protected rival? I am guessing Iowa did not pick Purdue and MSU did not pick Indiana. In short, the Big 10 pecking order went. Michigan/tOSU, Nebby/Penn St, Wisconsin. The rest got stuck.
Let me clarify that I am not mocking anyones rival. I am just stating that in every conference, there are haves and have nots. Their are schools whose voices ring much, much louder than others. Their are schools that grab coat tails, hang on and don't rock the boat. The statement that one confernence is equal and has parity because of "equal revenue sharing" is laughable. For crying out loud with "equal revenue sharing" tOSU brings in $65 million more than Purdue.
Last edited:
There is a big difference between premium cable and basic expanded. The BTN is not there on basic expanded. But, MA is not a good state. They are too small. So BC is silly talk and I haven't heard that name from any credible source. I hear UVA, Maryland, Duke, and UNC - no BC.
And yes, GT and the B12 are talking. That would put the B12 in Texas, Fla, and GA. They would only have NC left.
Everybody wanted something. Minnesota wanted Wisconsin, everybody agrees Michigan & tOSU needed to play, Iowa got the Black Friday game with Nebby. Not all rivals could be protected.
If you take the conspiracy theory goggles off, there is a very logical reason that Texas nor many of the southern schools come North in winter.
For the most part, the league had teams play within their division later in the year to minimize travel. If you look at schedules since nebraska, colorado left, you will notice OU coming in November this year. OSU coming in November last year. And Texas was slated to come to ISU in November until TCU and WV were added and schedule were thrown out the window
Thak you. that is basically what I was stating but since I have "clone" in my screen name, I am automatically discredited
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
that's like stating the obvious. how's one become a clown anyway? i assume you must have gone to school there?
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
This is not true at all, in fact a reason why they almost did not go this route was the fear of a repeat match up of Michigan vs Ohio State in the championship game.
I already answered this, Iowa vs Purdue makes more sense than Minnesota vs Purdue. The people at Wisconsin almost have to flip a coin when it comes down to who they consider a bigger rival, Minnesota or Iowa.
If B1G was not a 1 for all and all for 1 conference then Notre Dame would have been in the conference a long time ago and Texas would have been in the conference last year. Iowa's situation in the B1G is no where near the same as Iowa State is in the B12.
You truly are the bottom feeder of the B12, even Kansas vs Kansas St bring more to the conference than ISU. Other than Iowa you have zero rivalries and if you stopped playing football tomorrow no one outside the state of Iowa would even notice or care. It is a Hawkeye state, we are in a superior conference, and we actually have rivalry games people outside the state care to watch. B1G is the strongest conference in college sports, the B12 will fall apart if Texas wants it to. The differences between the 2 conferences is night and day.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Take what happened over the last couple years in the conference. ISU and all the members of the big 12 were flapping in the wind, waiting for Texas to decide where they were going and what they were doing.
Contrast that to the voice that every team in the Big10 had when they brought in Nebraska. All the teams had a voice, and they all got things they wanted, and all missed out on other things they wanted.
If you think that the Big10 power structure is similar to the Big 12 in any way, shape, or form, then you need to open your eyes, and take the blinders off.
Agree. Did Michigan St, Purdue and Indiana get what they wanted or did their wants get pushed aside for those above them?
I would like to hear where Texas has really screwed the Big 12. I guess I just don't see that as much as others. Is it the Big 12 office getting moved to a larger market with better airport access? That was and 11-1 vote. Was it the championship game geting moved? Again an 11-1 vote and more $$$ Was it "equal revnue sharing" that equated to Texas getting an extra $3 million in the old contract which they in turn gave to their general fund?
Last edited:
I never said iowa was in the same position as ISU. I didn't say that the Big 10 was unstable. I would compare ISU to Purdue, Michigan St or NW. Bottom feeders that go along with what the confernce wants and have very little say.
iowa would be similar to an Okie State, Kansas, Kansas St. Middle dwellers that have some say but less than tOSU and Michigan.
I am not arguing that the stability of the conferences isn't differnt but if you think there isn't a p[ecking order int he Big 10, you are crazy
And here we are a year later and ISU has double their TV revenue, the conference is more stable and is a coveted landing spot. Damn that Texas and damn Oklahoma. How dare they treat us so poorly
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
But what you do not seem to understand is the B1G treats all of its schools equally. Schools like Northwestern, Indiana, and Purdue have as much say as Iowa, Ohio State, and Michigan. The Ohio State/Michigan rivalry game is a huge money maker for all of us, that gets shared equally in the conference.
