Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Ldandy, post: 4869264, member: 4584"] Adding the combo of FSU & Miami could make sense to The B1G in terms of negotiating their next medial deal. The old paradigm was all about adding cable markets, but the current discussion is far more centered around brands. Down or not, Miami is still a name that can be sold with The B1G Marketing Machine behind it. Due to their proximity to talent, it is also a program that can be turned around relatively quickly under the right leadership. FSU has already made that difficult climb back to prominence. Adding 2 teams in Florida allows the conference to stake a strong claim there for traditional cable carriage, obtain regular access to its fertile recruiting grounds, and provide two opportunities for relocated alums and fans to see their schools compete in person. It also adds another large population state to the mix which will eventually feed out of state students to the rest of the conference. For years the belief was that the B1G desperately wanted UNC & UVA as a part of their future expansion plans. It could still be true, but it feels far less likely than in the Delany Era. While the conference would certainly love adding the crown jewel of The ACC Tarheels, UVA on the other had feels iffy to me now. If we're to believe that sports media is barreling full speed towards a streaming model that focuses on teams and matchups, what would you rather sell? UM, OSU, PSU, UO, and USC vs FSU and Miami or vs UNC and UVA? [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,533

Messages: 4,400,352

Members: 10,214

Latest member: illini2013