BTN strikes deal w/Time Warner & Cablevision

[dayooper]

Say what do WVU, TCU, Utah have in common?

okay now what's the 2nd thing they all did before that?

You aren't really that naive, are you?

TCU - They could get out of the Big East contract relatively easily (I think 5 million without waiting). Some schools wanted another Texas school to compete.
WVU - A decent size program that had history AND were willing to pay more to get out of their contract early. The Big12 needed another school to get to 10 for their TV contract. They were the biggest fish to bite.
Utah - Who knows. I can't remember who they played let alone what bowl game they won. They are the flagship public school in a continuos state. If it were really about who was winning, wouldn't they have taken Boise St instead?

The Big12 needed to get to 10 or they lost their contract. TCU and WVU were the best they could get that fit what they needed.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

You aren't really that naive, are you?

TCU - They could get out of the Big East contract relatively easily (I think 5 million without waiting). Some schools wanted another Texas school to compete.
WVU - A decent size program that had history AND were willing to pay more to get out of their contract early. The Big12 needed another school to get to 10 for their TV contract. They were the biggest fish to bite.
Utah - Who knows. I can't remember who they played let alone what bowl game they won. They are the flagship public school in a continuos state. If it were really about who was winning, wouldn't they have taken Boise St instead?

The Big12 needed to get to 10 or they lost their contract. TCU and WVU were the best they could get that fit what they needed.

Yeah I was referring to how hard it is to get out of the Big East

 

[dayooper]

Yeah I was referring to how hard it is to get out of the Big East

Hmmmm . . . So any other school would have paid $20 million to get out of The Big East? To be accepted, they had to get out right away or the Big 12 was going to lose their media contract. To get out before the 27 month notification clause, they had to pay more. They settled for 20 million dollars.

 

[Gfunk]

You aren't really that naive, are you?

TCU - They could get out of the Big East contract relatively easily (I think 5 million without waiting). Some schools wanted another Texas school to compete.
WVU - A decent size program that had history AND were willing to pay more to get out of their contract early. The Big12 needed another school to get to 10 for their TV contract. They were the biggest fish to bite.
Utah - Who knows. I can't remember who they played let alone what bowl game they won. They are the flagship public school in a continuos state. If it were really about who was winning, wouldn't they have taken Boise St instead?

The Big12 needed to get to 10 or they lost their contract. TCU and WVU were the best they could get that fit what they needed.

To be fair, Utah is nearly integrated into the Pac12 now, but they, like most teams who switch conferences, had to adjust. Not everyone pulls an aTm. Before their Pac12 arrival, they were BCS killers - having won 6 bowl games against BCS teams between 99 and 2010 - including a big time upset of Bama. Have you forgotten Urban Meyer coached there? I don't like Meyer much, but people on his hate train forget that wherever he's gone, great results have followed. Dude can coach. He just lack significant character.

Utah boasts a pretty nice bowl record as well, something very few BIG teams can say. Utah recently had a run of 9 consecutive bowl wins dating back to 1999, only to be broken up in 2010. They are 14-4 in bowl games.

Notice below, that includes two Utah BCS bowl wins while not having BCS conference membership. Anyways, stick to fair and objective facts. Michigan has had plenty of football mediocrity lately. Hoke better change things this year, or he's out and you'll be back to RRod level performance again.

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_history_utah.html

 

[Ldandy]

To be fair, Utah is nearly integrated into the Pac12 now, but they, like most teams who switch conferences, had to adjust. Not everyone pulls an aTm. Before their Pac12 arrival, they were BCS killers - having won 6 bowl games against BCS teams between 99 and 2010 - including a big time upset of Bama. Have you forgotten Urban Meyer coached there? I don't like Meyer much, but people on his hate train forget that wherever he's gone, great results have followed. Dude can coach. He just lack significant character.

Utah boasts a pretty nice bowl record as well, something very few BIG teams can say. Utah recently had a run of 9 consecutive bowl wins dating back to 1999, only to be broken up in 2010. They are 14-4 in bowl games.

Notice below, that includes two Utah BCS bowl wins while not having BCS conference membership. Anyways, stick to fair and objective facts. Michigan has had plenty of football mediocrity lately. Hoke better change things this year, or he's out and you'll be back to RRod level performance again.

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_history_utah.html

I've never fully bought into the success achieved by the Mountain West Powers a few years back. Not taking anything away from their bowl wins, because they earned those on the field, but the question remains had they been a part of a P5 Conference over that time frame, would they have been in a position to play in those games in the first place?

IMO had Boise St., Utah, and TCU all been a part of a P5 conference from the get go, they would all likely be middling to above middling based on their coaching and the ebb and flow of conference powers. Does Boise or Utah go undefeated or make BCS Bowl Games in a conference with USC, Oregon, Stanford etc? How about if TCU had been in the Big 12? Would they take out Texas, Oklahoma, Ok State, K State and others to make a Fiesta Bowl? I'm not sold.

Consider a Boise State Schedule for example. They basically had to get up for 2 big games a year. The first was typically a Kick Off Classic against a helmet school such as Georgia or VPI. Win that and they were off to play a schedule of 11 MAC Level opponents or worse. If things broke just right for them, they finished by playing in a BCS Game. More often than not their opponent in that game was far less enthused about playing them than The Broncos were about playing the opponent. Win that game and they were undefeated. The key for them was maintaining their focus during their conference season where the competition was dreadful.

No disrespect to any of them, but until they play a major conference schedule and replicate their success, I'll remain a skeptic. Lets be honest, Boise found success recruiting Cali kids who would never qualify academically for the majority of PAC Schools. Utah did a good bit of the same, as well as recruiting a healthy amount of Mormon Pacific Islanders. Neither would be able to recruit in this manner under the academic standards of The PAC. TCU? They used second tier Texas Talent to blitz The MWC. Flash forward to the present in The Big 12, and surprise everybody in the conference, save WVU, recruits Texas. Get in line Frogs.

 

[dayooper]

To be fair, Utah is nearly integrated into the Pac12 now, but they, like most teams who switch conferences, had to adjust. Not everyone pulls an aTm. Before their Pac12 arrival, they were BCS killers - having won 6 bowl games against BCS teams between 99 and 2010 - including a big time upset of Bama. Have you forgotten Urban Meyer coached there? I don't like Meyer much, but people on his hate train forget that wherever he's gone, great results have followed. Dude can coach. He just lack significant character.

Utah boasts a pretty nice bowl record as well, something very few BIG teams can say. Utah recently had a run of 9 consecutive bowl wins dating back to 1999, only to be broken up in 2010. They are 14-4 in bowl games.

Notice below, that includes two Utah BCS bowl wins while not having BCS conference membership. Anyways, stick to fair and objective facts. Michigan has had plenty of football mediocrity lately. Hoke better change things this year, or he's out and you'll be back to RRod level performance again.

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/bowl_history_utah.html

Oh, absolutely Utah wouldn't be in the PAC without their history. They beat Michigan in RR's first game as coach in 2008. They are also the Utah public school flagship with a total enrollment of over 30,000 students. They fit the PAC schools better than any other non P5 school at the time. They were the closest to a deserving school as there was out west to partner with Colorado.

That being said, the notion that the main reason they were added was they won a couple of BCS bowl games is absurd. Utah did several things for the PAC. Colorado was the big "prize" for the PAC. They were targeted and desired by the PAC schools. Utah extended the PAC to them. The only other flagship schools that could do that was Boise St (not like the PAC) and New Mexico, UNLV (never going to happen). They have a huge enrollment and their academics fit with what the Pac was looking for. Utah has a strong overall athletic program (at least for a non Pac/Big12 team out west) that they hoped would bring the state of Utah under the PAC12 Network. They were the obvious choice.

WVU and TCU were brought in because they were the best candidates that could (or would, in WVU's case) be able to get out of their conference quickly enough not to lose their media contract. The Big12 could not be picky. I couldn't tell you if Louisville or Cincinnati would have settled to get out, but we know that WVU paid around $12 million dollars (they paid $20 million and Syracuse paid $7.5 million) extra.

On a side note, I really don't understand the rip you just gave on Michigan and how that plays into the conversation. The results have been unacceptable for most fans over the past few years. This has been the worst run since the 60's and many UM faithful wanted change after this past year. Yet, those "poor" results have included a win in the 2012 Sugar Bowl. Michigan's mediocracy the past 10 years is still a good run for many schools. For yours, it very well could be the best since the days of Fielding Yost and the dawn of the Little Brown Jug game. Of course Brady Hoke needs to do better this year. If he doesn't, who knows what will happen. I just don't see how ripping on Michigan has any bearing on the conversation above.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I actually think if we had beat Oklahoma in the fiesta bowl that that may have just been the bump we needed to get in over pitt despite bc's objections.

Who knows.

 

[itgoeslike]

I actually think if we had beat Oklahoma in the fiesta bowl that that may have just been the bump we needed to get in over pitt despite bc's objections.

Who knows.

I think RE leaving in the middle of the night hurt UConn perception wise. If he had stayed, even for one season, UConn may have been able to build on its BCS appearance. Instead, it emboldened pundits to pile on and distort a game that wasn't a total blowout. We were down by a touchdown in the third quarter and if I remember correctly OK scored on a turnover late. Alabama beat Michigan State by something like 49 to 7 but our game was a blowout.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

@itgoeslike We were down 14 but had the ball in the 3rd. We also got stuffed at the goaline at the end of the game. That same year, Virginia tech lost to Stanford by 28 points as well but of course nobody brings that up.

It's seems too simplistic to say 1 game would make or break a program but those BCS wins over signature programs like Oklahoma really do resonate

 

[itgoeslike]

@itgoeslike We were down 14 but had the ball in the 3rd. We also got stuffed at the goaline at the end of the game. That same year, Virginia tech lost to Stanford by 28 points as well but of course nobody brings that up.

It's seems too simplistic to say 1 game would make or break a program but those BCS wins over signature programs like Oklahoma really do resonate

That's sounds right. I was probably thinking during the third quarter if we score here we're down by a touchdown.

I think UConn's early success was an afront to some of the "establishment" and RE slinking out in the middle of the night created an opening. I don't disagree that beating OK would have paid dividends.

 

[SAMCRO]

@itgoeslike We were down 14 but had the ball in the 3rd. We also got stuffed at the goaline at the end of the game. That same year, Virginia tech lost to Stanford by 28 points as well but of course nobody brings that up.

And a year later Clemson was pasted in the OB 70-33, butUConn didn't belong b/c OU won by 28.

 

[Gfunk]

Oh, absolutely Utah wouldn't be in the PAC without their history. They beat Michigan in RR's first game as coach in 2008. They are also the Utah public school flagship with a total enrollment of over 30,000 students. They fit the PAC schools better than any other non P5 school at the time. They were the closest to a deserving school as there was out west to partner with Colorado.

That being said, the notion that the main reason they were added was they won a couple of BCS bowl games is absurd. Utah did several things for the PAC. Colorado was the big "prize" for the PAC. They were targeted and desired by the PAC schools. Utah extended the PAC to them. The only other flagship schools that could do that was Boise St (not like the PAC) and New Mexico, UNLV (never going to happen). They have a huge enrollment and their academics fit with what the Pac was looking for. Utah has a strong overall athletic program (at least for a non Pac/Big12 team out west) that they hoped would bring the state of Utah under the PAC12 Network. They were the obvious choice.

WVU and TCU were brought in because they were the best candidates that could (or would, in WVU's case) be able to get out of their conference quickly enough not to lose their media contract. The Big12 could not be picky. I couldn't tell you if Louisville or Cincinnati would have settled to get out, but we know that WVU paid around $12 million dollars (they paid $20 million and Syracuse paid $7.5 million) extra.

On a side note, I really don't understand the rip you just gave on Michigan and how that plays into the conversation. The results have been unacceptable for most fans over the past few years. This has been the worst run since the 60's and many UM faithful wanted change after this past year. Yet, those "poor" results have included a win in the 2012 Sugar Bowl. Michigan's mediocracy the past 10 years is still a good run for many schools. For yours, it very well could be the best since the days of Fielding Yost and the dawn of the Little Brown Jug game. Of course Brady Hoke needs to do better this year. If he doesn't, who knows what will happen. I just don't see how ripping on Michigan has any bearing on the conversation above.

You don't understand my Michigan rip? Man, I may not be a big Mi fan, football wise, but their mediocrity has been bad for the BIG's perception, PSU as well - past 5 years at least. I'd love to see Mi back on the freight train again. Mi, Neb, PSU and even MSU do one thing OSU can't seem to do: they beat their SEC opponents in big games, at least half the time. So my slight is more out of respect and disappointment.

Utah, and you somewhat brushed on their strengths in your recent post, has other values outside football. It's a climbing school, academically speaking, it's in a decent metro, has a secular-public angle, which is not the case with their cross-town rival, their Olympic sports are respectable - remember they have some good basketball history, pre-Majerus. Moreover, outside the Jazz & the MLS team, Utah is one of those states where college sports offers a huge, passionate audience. Co would be a LONELY outlier in the Pac12 w/o Utah - almost as bad as WVa in the Big12.

 

[dayooper]

You don't understand my Michigan rip? Man, I may not be a big Mi fan, football wise, but their mediocrity has been bad for the BIG's perception, PSU as well - past 5 years at least. I'd love to see Mi back on the freight train again. Mi, Neb, PSU and even MSU do one thing OSU can't seem to do: they beat their SEC opponents in big games, at least half the time. So my slight is more out of respect and disappointment.

Utah, and you somewhat brushed on their strengths in your recent post, has other values outside football. It's a climbing school, academically speaking, it's in a decent metro, has a secular-public angle, which is not the case with their cross-town rival, their Olympic sports are respectable - remember they have some good basketball history, pre-Majerus. Moreover, outside the Jazz & the MLS team, Utah is one of those states where college sports offers a huge, passionate audience. Co would be a looney outlier in the Pac12 w/o Utah - almost as bad as WVa in the Big12.

Yes, it has killed the perception of The Big10. I hate it as much as anybody, but it was inevitable. No school has been good (not great) as long as Michigan was. Michigan holds the record for the longest bowl streak (1976 - 2008) and it would have been longer if the Big10 had allowed it's teams to go to a bowl except for the Rose Bowl before the '75 season. Every school has it's down years. What was Alabama in the years before Saban got there? Florida after Meyer left? Texas in the later Mack Brown years? FSU in Bowden's last few? USC before and after Carroll? ND between Holtz and Kelly (and Kelly's run hasn't been that spectacular). The issue is that Michigan's down time coincides with a time when the other Big10 teams, sans MSU, are either in decline or hit rock bottom as well.

The Big10 teams have to start putting all this money they are earning and paying their football coaches, especially their assistants, more. It's ridiculous that Wisconsin lost their coach to Arkansas. Pay him more. Michigan lost it's star DL coach (Jerry Montgomery) because he was just the DT coach. Give him what he wants. The only time I have seen an SEC coach leave for a parallel position was this year when Michigan hire OC Doug Nussmeier away from Alabama, and most think there was a mutual parting of the ways between Saban and Nussmeier. These schools need to choose better when they hire and not penny pinch so much on the football team.

As far as Utah goes, they were the best choice for number 12 for many reasons. Winning a couple of BCS games just isn't one them, IMO.

 

[NotreDameJoe]

Sorry Dayooper but the thread evolved to notice winning BCS bowls is one of the reasons the teams get promoted. It's not the only reason, or else Boise would be in the PAC, but it's heavily weighted. I think it destroys the objection they can't compete at this level that goes away when you beat an Alabama or an Oklahoma in January.