Sure, after the Big grabs teams. Okay I’ll drink your Kool-AidExactly. Even the apple deal dwarfs our BE money.
Sure, after the Big grabs teams. Okay I’ll drink your Kool-AidExactly. Even the apple deal dwarfs our BE money.
Cable boxes will die. I remember a meeting in late winter 1998 (at one of the larger cable companies in the country) being told by them that cable boxes would die, their time frame then was 8-12 years (but at the time they had no idea that Williams Communication was a farce while claiming to build fiber optic infrastructure throughout the US).Remember about a week and a half ago when I said that the theory that the Pac 12 would lose one team and then add UConn and we would live happily ever after was insane? Probably not, because you and the rest of this board were busy gargling the marbles of the Kansas fanboy who was pretending to be an insider.
I will give you something else to remember: Utah, ASU, UA and Colorado will regret turning down Apple to hop on the ESPN train that is going over a cliff.
Now I want your Kool-Aid of logicArizona, ASU, and Utah are going to get paid $32 million a year in a stable conference. Apple was only offering $20 million a year to stay in an unstable conference. Isn't this decision a no-brainer?
This depends on the timeline of the B1G taking more PAC schools.Arizona, ASU, and Utah are going to get paid $32 million a year in a stable conference. Apple was only offering $20 million a year to stay in an unstable conference. Isn't this decision a no-brainer?
No. But ACC would need to talk to ESPN, and possibly get more money.Is adding schools a material change to the the ACC agreement thereby allowing FSU and Clemson to bolt?
Arizona, ASU, and Utah are going to get paid $32 million a year in a stable conference. Apple was only offering $20 million a year to stay in an unstable conference. Isn't this decision a no-brainer?
The only way the ACC sticks together at this point is if they can get ND on board by bringing in Stanford. So we are screwed there too.No. But ACC would need to talk to ESPN, and possibly get more money.
For the record, the scenario I laid out yesterday is still in play. UConn, Cal, Stanford to the ACC.
The problem here is that ESPN knows it's already paying a premium for a lot of schools that don't merit it. That's a very tough ask of ESPN.No. But ACC would need to talk to ESPN, and possibly get more money.
yeah but you could make a nice logo/icon for a "coast-to-coast conference" - think C2C...This group isn't fending off the pillagers (B1G, SEC, XII) by adding two California schools that none of those conferences wanted.
Map for emphasis of how much of a misfit it would be to add them three time zones away.
Big XII's GOR ends sooner.This group isn't fending off the pillagers (B1G, SEC, XII) by adding two California schools that none of those conferences wanted.
Zags just reported the Big 12 is voting on ASU and Utah today
The B12 isn't going to pillage anyone. The money won't be there.This group isn't fending off the pillagers (B1G, SEC, XII) by adding two California schools that none of those conferences wanted.
Map for emphasis of how much of a misfit it would be to add them three time zones away.
View attachment 90348
Zags just reported the Big 12 is voting on ASU and Utah today
The boss move here when the money drives up is to create a 16 team basketball league, maybe one that also has football to a diminished level.While I don’t agree with Nelson’s take on NU and Vandy (I have personal experience at both schools), I can see a day when the top academic universities with large endowments and uncertain futures - Stan, UC, Duke, WF, BC, GTech, etc - say enough is enough (reliance of football) and explore another model.
Zags just reported the Big 12 is voting on ASU and Utah today
Zags is a legit college basketball writer. Not sure how much he'd know on the realignment front, but if he's reporting something, it's true.This guy have realignment cred or just another slick blogger / writer? Seems to be a jack of all trades- pro / college.
I said the bolded part earlier and got mocked for it. Why should the State continue to give these crooks hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks when they screw the flagship institution at every step of the way? It's disgusting.If I recall correctly, I thought it was posted that ESPN adivsed the Big 12 that UConn should be added if they were to expand again after they took the 3 G5 schools plus BYU. What ever happened to that? I also wonder if the CT government officials have bothered to put any pressure on ESPN at all? In any case, it is really time for the State of CT to look at removing all tax breaks from ESPN.
If I recall correctly, I thought it was posted that ESPN adivsed the Big 12 that UConn should be added if they were to expand again after they took the 3 G5 schools plus BYU. What ever happened to that? I also wonder if the CT government officials have bothered to put any pressure on ESPN at all? In any case, it is really time for the State of CT to look at removing all tax breaks from ESPN.
That guy said that 17 is one of the magic numbers for scheduling purposes. So I guess if the Big 12 and the media partners wanted it, it could happen. However, all of the talking heads are saying four additions to the Big 12.The guy who does a podcast from the cab of his truck seemed to think an odd number of teams in a conference works. Was it 15 or 17?
Originally he was emphatic that it was UConn and Colorado but only as a pair. He implied UConn was on board but our fate was dependent on Colorado leaving the PAC. The B12 does not want an odd number of schools. When he got word that Colorado made up its mind he passed that along to us before it became public knowledge.He may have had inside information, and was really in the know. But when asked why UConn had to wait to be invited, he had no answer. So, at that point, it was clear that it was not a certainty. Anyway, he is not wrong yet.