Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 348 | The Boneyard

Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

B1G, B12 and ACC are all on the hunt and UConn is all in their center aim. BiG locks up NE and blocks B12 entry into NE, ACC back fills and builds essentially the old BE as a north division, B12 scoops up a dominant BB school and accesses a key market for growth. Frankly, the B1G wins big time with UConn because they block both the ACC and B12.
 
Hey, reality check - I love UConn and if the B1G doesn't want to lock up now, then go wherever the $ is!
Can't quite believe the B1G is so sleepy, so F them.
 
NEforceUConn said:
Hey, reality check - I love UConn and if the B1G doesn't want to lock up now, then go wherever the $ is!
Can't quite believe the B1G is so sleepy, so F them.
Expand ...
Problem is B1G thinks they don’t need anybody which is probably largely true, but if the goal is to dominate then you are always looking to put out brush fires before they start. So, you preemptively move on UConn and take away an ACC lifeline and neutralize their presence in the NE/Tri-State, and take away a market entry point to the B12. In the West, trying to gut the PAC taking Washington and Oregon may not be as smart as leaving the conference hobbled but functional because if they did that then Arizona and Colorado bolt to the B12 which strengthens the B12 as a super conference. However you cut it, the SEC and B1G will be Super+ P5s, and the Big12 is positioned as a Super P5, and ACC and PAC as dangerously close to G5 status.
 
giddyup said:
Problem is B1G thinks they don’t need anybody which is probably largely true, but if the goal is to dominate then you are always looking to put out brush fires before they start. So, you preemptively move on UConn and take away an ACC lifeline and neutralize their presence in the NE/Tri-State, and take away a market entry point to the B12. In the West, trying to gut the PAC taking Washington and Oregon may not be as smart as leaving the conference hobbled but functional because if they did that then Arizona and Colorado bolt to the B12 which strengthens the B12 as a super conference. However you cut it, the SEC and B1G will be Super+ P5s, and the Big12 is positioned as a Super P5, and ACC and PAC as dangerously close to G5 status.
Expand ...
Not sure this is the goal. You don’t take schools to keep them away from others (unless they make the conference more money). The ACC took Big East schools to harm the conference and see what has become of that decision. As far as the Big12 goes, the Big10 and SEC don’t care who they take. It will always be 3rd in the pecking order (at least for the foreseeable future).
 
.-.
dayooper said:
Not sure this is the goal. You don’t take schools to keep them away from others (unless they make the conference more money). The ACC took Big East schools to harm the conference and see what has become of that decision. As far as the Big12 goes, the Big10 and SEC don’t care who they take. It will always be 3rd in the pecking order (at least for the foreseeable future).
Expand ...
True. Ostensibly that’s why the B1G won’t pony up for UW and OR. I think the calculus is certainly they can’t get to a $100M justification, and even if they could justify it as a marginal case, they probably benefit by keeping the PAC alive and weakened.

That said, CFB is a zero sum game at this point. So, each guy is trying to capture $$ from the other, and the more you can weaken competitors to your $$, the better.
 
giddyup said:
True. Ostensibly that’s why the B1G won’t pony up for UW and OR. I think the calculus is certainly they can’t get to a $100M justification, and even if they could justify it as a marginal case, they probably benefit by keeping the PAC alive and weakened.

That said, CFB is a zero sum game at this point. So, each guy is trying to capture $$ from the other, and the more you can weaken competitors to your $$, the better.
Expand ...
I think Washington and Oregon are a bit different. If part of the deal with USC and UCLA was to bring in more west coast teams, then that has to be accounted for. They can also sell another time slot or 2 (Saturday late night and Friday night). I don’t think they would get $100 million each for them, but they sure got a lot more with the LA schools and that just might be the cost of adding them.
 
From McMurphy's story:

The only way the ACC can receive significantly more money from ESPN is by expanding. Sources told Action Network that if the ACC adds additional teams — whether from the Power 5 or Group of Five — ESPN contractually must pay the ACC a pro-rata amount for each new member.

The ACC, if it desired, could add four more schools (almost certainly Group of Five programs), pay them a reduced amount and split the remaining revenue between the existing members. However, that likely would only increase the current membership’s revenue by a few million dollars a year until the new members would earn full shares.

That scenario is unlikely, a source said.

“We already have too many mouths to feed,” the source said. “That’s not the answer.”
 
.-.
.-.
.-.
jostar1 said:
Behind a paywall.

Expand ...

"UConn has deemphasized football" is a continued lazy, lazy take that most sports journalists keep putting out there. Why? This take maybe made sense in the month after the Big East move, but so much has happened since then, and it's clear AD David Benedict is looking for a permanent solution. The team went to a bowl last year. Infuriating but not surprising
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,192
Messages
4,556,269
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom