Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 472 | The Boneyard

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

king conn said:
I just read the SEC might be interested in TCU

This could go many different ways
Expand ...
They already have the two prize properties in Texas. Beyond that, the SEC Texas schools (UT, TA&M) have historically controlled more of the tv markets in DFW and Houston than the more local schools have. I'm not sure there is an upside to the SEC adding another Texas school.
 
So much for the FSU-to-Big 10 talk? (I wasn’t buying it anyway.)

Seems more likely that the Big 10 goes to 18 than 20, at least for right now. Do they really love Cal and Stanford that much, or is it better to keep spots #19 and #20 open for ACC defectors?

Whatever Utah may have preferred before, hard to believe they won’t be calling the Big 12 now. If the Big 12 is really serious about the Northeast, they’ll take UConn over Utah as #16, with the Arizona schools. If not, we’re doomed as usual (or we end up joining the burnt-out carcass of a rotting ACC someday, so only slightly less doomed).
 
PLAYOFFS said:
I think that B1G news is somewhat good for UConn finding a potential landing spot. My thought is if B1G does go to 20, how does the SEC not try and keep up with that? They will try and get ACC schools or Big 12 schools even maybe.

This then will leave an opening for us in the Big12/ACC. Thoughts?
Expand ...
FfldCntyFan said:
If this does quickly turn into the B1G and SEC scurrying to get the quality pieces of the PAC while casting aside the scraps don't be surprised if the SEC starts looking at UofA and ASU.
Expand ...
If I'm the SEC, I don't see an advantage of doing that. I would rather show patience and raid the ACC when the opportunity arises, even if that means waiting for a decade. What college male would pick up a 7 in a bar on a Saturday night rather than wait for their 10 to come around. (And yes, as soon as I typed that I realized that doesn't make my point at all.)
 
.-.
FfldCntyFan said:
They already have the two prize properties in Texas. Beyond that, the SEC Texas schools (UT, TA&M) have historically controlled more of the tv markets in DFW and Houston than the more local schools have. I'm not sure there is an upside to the SEC adding another Texas school.
Expand ...

Football prowess? Locking up the best recruits in the most recruited state? Who knows?

That conference cares about football more than markets
 
shizzle787 said:
We’re out. Cal, Stanford, Oregon, and Washington to B1G. Arizona, Arizona State, and Utah to Big 12.
Expand ...
That's what I think too. This was the worst possible news to come out. AZ/ASU/Utah will announce their move by the end of next week.
 
HuskyHawk said:
The third option, and I do not think it is imminent at all, is the article I posted from Dennis Dodd CBS just above. It came out 40 minutes ago. He details an organized and third party funded option to create an alternative to the B1G and SEC. With that third party buying out the top schools and essentially owning the conference.
Expand ...
Based on the ineptitude of most of the conferences and their leadership, private investment in college athletics is a foregone conclusion.
 
businesslawyer said:
So if we don't get invited by the Big XII, your plan is to make sure we turn them down?
Expand ...
Not sure where the snippy question comes from.
I was simply saying all four adds coming from the west makes the Big XII much less appealing regarding any future realignments (taking conferences to 20 or 24 for example).
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
If I'm the SEC, I don't see an advantage of doing that. I would rather show patience and raid the ACC when the opportunity arises, even if that means waiting for a decade. What college male would pick up a 7 in a bar on a Saturday night rather than wait for their 10 to come around. (And yes, as soon as I typed that I realized that doesn't make my point at all.)
Expand ...
I don't see the SEC rushing into anything but I have my suspicions that their end game (may be 12-14 years out) includes the two Arizona schools (and at least a couple ACC schools).
 
NH Husky said:
Not sure where the snippy question comes from.
I was simply saying all four adds coming from the west makes the Big XII much less appealing regarding any future realignments (taking conferences to 20 or 24 for example).
Expand ...
Meant to be more ironic than snippy. Sorry if it came over that way.
 
if the B1G does end up taking 4 the MWC should just buy the PAC name and add Oregon St and Washington St
 
I’ve tried to figure why Fox and ESPN have been aiding the B12 to strengthen it and accelerate the PACs demise. The best explanation I can up with is they are accelerating the consolidation of college sports to reduce the impact of any threats from the streaming platforms.

Easier to control 60 to 80 programs monetarily than 350 programs and it will be more profitable by reducing an over saturated product. Those programs will have less competition to divide up among themselves the best players with the monies they are getting. The concepts like NIL that already in the work in their favor can only get better.
 
.-.
In a banking crisis, the federal reserve will always look to the largest banks to step in and stabilize the system so it doesn't collapse. This benefits everyone, most especially the largest banks. It's somewhat counterintuitive. One would think that the surviving large banks benefit from the demise of a competitor, but the reality is that the larger banks are susceptible to failure and collapse if the system collapses around them, no matter how strong their balance sheet may appear. I think we are approaching that point here. I don't believe it's in the Big 10 or SECs interest (or the Big 12 for that matter) for the PAC to collapse. I am not sure that the system survives a PAC collapse, and if you start freezing out high profile state funded institutions, you are going to see congress get heavily involved. If I am counseling the Big 10 or the SEC I am telling them to find a way asap to salvage the PAC.
 
Gburyhusky said:
In a banking crisis, the federal reserve will always look to the largest banks to step in and stabilize the system so it doesn't collapse. This benefits everyone, most especially the largest banks. It's somewhat counterintuitive. One would think that the surviving large banks benefit from the demise of a competitor, but the reality is that the larger banks are susceptible to failure and collapse if the system collapses around them, no matter how strong their balance sheet may appear. I think we are approaching that point here. I don't believe it's in the Big 10 or SECs interest (or the Big 12 for that matter) for the PAC to collapse. I am not sure that the system survives a PAC collapse, and if you start freezing out high profile state funded institutions, you are going to see congress get heavily involved. If I am counseling the Big 10 or the SEC I am telling them to find a way asap to salvage the PAC.
Expand ...
Well, if you use the banking analogy, there is a cycle of consolidation until it reaches a point that the survivors are vulnerable to niche competitors who grow over time until there is another wave of consolidation.

I think conferences are still in the consolidation stage.
 
Gburyhusky said:
In a banking crisis, the federal reserve will always look to the largest banks to step in and stabilize the system so it doesn't collapse. This benefits everyone, most especially the largest banks. It's somewhat counterintuitive. One would think that the surviving large banks benefit from the demise of a competitor, but the reality is that the larger banks are susceptible to failure and collapse if the system collapses around them, no matter how strong their balance sheet may appear. I think we are approaching that point here. I don't believe it's in the Big 10 or SECs interest (or the Big 12 for that matter) for the PAC to collapse. I am not sure that the system survives a PAC collapse, and if you start freezing out high profile state funded institutions, you are going to see congress get heavily involved. If I am counseling the Big 10 or the SEC I am telling them to find a way asap to salvage the PAC.
Expand ...

The PAC won't collapse in the sense that 10 of the 12 schools land in the B1G or Big 12.

Washington State and Oregon State? Now they collapse. Unless the Big 12 adds them.
 
.-.
Gburyhusky said:
In a banking crisis, the federal reserve will always look to the largest banks to step in and stabilize the system so it doesn't collapse. This benefits everyone, most especially the largest banks. It's somewhat counterintuitive. One would think that the surviving large banks benefit from the demise of a competitor, but the reality is that the larger banks are susceptible to failure and collapse if the system collapses around them, no matter how strong their balance sheet may appear. I think we are approaching that point here. I don't believe it's in the Big 10 or SECs interest (or the Big 12 for that matter) for the PAC to collapse. I am not sure that the system survives a PAC collapse, and if you start freezing out high profile state funded institutions, you are going to see congress get heavily involved. If I am counseling the Big 10 or the SEC I am telling them to find a way asap to salvage the PAC.
Expand ...
Besides, they received a single tv deal yesterday. What better way to up the payout than to threaten to join other conferences. Today's tweets were as predictable as the sun rising. I doubt the Big 10 and SEC are expanding anytime soon. This is the Pac 9 trying to gain leverage.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,214
Messages
4,557,501
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom