Non-Key Tweets | Page 768 | The Boneyard
.

Non-Key Tweets

I find it ironic that the Big Ten Commissioner led the charge to stop the ACC's proposed NCAA legislation in 2015 that would allow conferences to decide how they want to organize...have pods, go divisionless, etc.

It was the Big Ten amendment that made two divisions a mandatory component...
 
billybud said:
I find it ironic that the Big Ten Commissioner led the charge to stop the ACC's proposed NCAA legislation in 2015 that would allow conferences to decide how they want to organize...have pods, go divisionless, etc.

It was the Big Ten amendment that made two divisions a mandatory component...
Expand ...
I am not a fan of pods. One reason that I don't like the ACC, is that I can never remember which team, is in which division. But I can for the other conferences who are divisioned by Geography. Pods will make it messy. But I understand the money grab of conference semi-finals. But why not keep the same divisions and have the 1st 2 teams ofceach division participate?
 
Going by pods allows you to set things up to have your top teams routinely in the semi-finals and help maximize your TV value.

In the Big Ten let's say hell freezes over and UConn and Kansas are the teams the pods could look like this:

Penn State; Maryland; Rutgers; UConn
Ohio State; Indiana; Purdue;Illinois
Michigan; Michigan State; Northwestern; Minnesota
Wisconsin; Iowa; Nebraska; Kansas

Now you're setting up semi-finals each year with Penn State; Ohio State; Michigan; and Wisconsin (or Iowa)

You've just maximized value on those semi-finals... and if a team breaks past the heavyweights to get into a semi-final you can still squash Cinderella in time to maximize the title game value.


You've added valuable semi-final games... some extra inventory and just provided a nice boost to the winter content you can offer on your network courtesy of the new additions.
 
PaulMec said:
I am not a fan of pods. One reason that I don't like the ACC, is that I can never remember which team, is in which division. But I can for the other conferences who are divisioned by Geography. Pods will make it messy.
Expand ...
The Pods would be geographically based so would just as easy to remember as the divisions.

Eg,
SEC - East: Fla, Ga, SC, KY
SEC - Cen: Ala, Aub, Tn, Vandy
SEC - Serah Williams: Miss, Miss St, LSU, TAMU
SEC - NW: Ark, Mo, Okl, Tx

BiG - East: PnSt, Md, RU,
BiG - Cen: OhSt, Mich, MichSt, Indi
BiG - MidW: Pur, Ill, NW, Wisc
BiG - West: Mn, Ia, Nebr, Kan
 
….and why not a western pod of USC, Zona, UO and UWA to the BiG? Seriously, if you want a dominant position why f…. around?
 
PaulMec said:
I am not a fan of pods. One reason that I don't like the ACC, is that I can never remember which team, is in which division. But I can for the other conferences who are divisioned by Geography. Pods will make it messy. But I understand the money grab of conference semi-finals. But why not keep the same divisions and have the 1st 2 teams ofceach division participate?
Expand ...

Yeah...weird splits occur like Mizzou is in the SEC East while Auburn is in the West.

Or Purdue in lafayette, Indiana in the west while Indiana in Bloomington is in the east.

Or the Big East...with teams from Nebraska to Connecticut....poor Creighton has four programs in the BE that are 1100 to 1265 miles distant.
 
ScottVib said:
Going by pods allows you to set things up to have your top teams routinely in the semi-finals and help maximize your TV value.

In the Big Ten let's say hell freezes over and UConn and Kansas are the teams the pods could look like this:

Penn State; Maryland; Rutgers; UConn
Ohio State; Indiana; Purdue;Illinois
Michigan; Michigan State; Northwestern; Minnesota
Wisconsin; Iowa; Nebraska; Kansas

Now you're setting up semi-finals each year with Penn State; Ohio State; Michigan; and Wisconsin (or Iowa)

You've just maximized value on those semi-finals... and if a team breaks past the heavyweights to get into a semi-final you can still squash Cinderella in time to maximize the title game value.


You've added valuable semi-final games... some extra inventory and just provided a nice boost to the winter content you can offer on your network courtesy of the new additions.
Expand ...
How many UConn fans would say no to playing Penn State yearly along with Maryland & Snooky & getting 2 teams each from the other 3 pods on a rotating basis for a 9 game conference schedule? Sign me up yesterday!
 
Vowelguy said:
The Pods would be geographically based so would just as easy to remember as the divisions.

Eg,
SEC - East: Fla, Ga, SC, KY
SEC - Cen: Ala, Aub, Tn, Vandy
SEC - Serah Williams: Miss, Miss St, LSU, TAMU
SEC - NW: Ark, Mo, Okl, Tx

BiG - East: PnSt, Md, RU,
BiG - Cen: OhSt, Mich, MichSt, Indi
BiG - MidW: Pur, Ill, NW, Wisc
BiG - West: Mn, Ia, Nebr, Kan
Expand ...
UConn to the BiG East!
 
CAtlantic said:
Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
Heads up:

This morning BTM has given some unexpected info on Big Ten’s recent thinking on SEC’s positioning.

The info does not fit traditional past BTM’s conservative cautious statements of Big Ten possible future expansion so I will need to confirm my understanding of it all.

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“Big Ten’s eyeing SEC’s decision on pods. If SEC selects pods & “semi-final pod weekend” as their “9th” conf game to go with 3 OOC games and receives another boost on media REV because of pod semi-final content this could make Big Ten expand sooner than expected or wanted.”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“SEC would maximize their content in going with 4 pods & semi-final weekend. This is action which could force Big Ten into deciding on expanding with candidates that would not normally be considered especially under this time frame. Alliance schools would be off the board”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“You combine SEC’s possible changing of the structure of how conferences maximize their content with Big Ten’s internal dissatisfaction with their current divisional alignments it all could push Big Ten to 16 before they had planned”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“Much like when SEC created SEC Championship Game which structurally pushed other conferences to add 11 & 12 members to gain access to own CCG’s the movement towards pods in SEC could open up
structural changes in Big Ten and others to keep up.”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“Big Ten have been discussing changes in divisional alignment for last few years. 14 teams in 1 division with top 2 schools in CCG is the chalk right now but this format does have issues especially when AD’s want to go to 8 Conf games to have equal 4 home & away each year.”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“4 pods of 4 schools cures lots of the issues that is causing strife inside Big Ten when it comes to alignment. Especially if you add 1 Eastern with 1 Midwest school. But Big Ten has 14 schools and will not raid schools from PAC & ACC at this time. This will not happen”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“Every alignment with 2 divisions and 7 schools you write down on paper has issues. None of it really works. You create 4 pods with 4 teams and suddenly Penn St is happy with Rutgers, Maryland +1 Eastern school. Add school in Midwest and you can make Nebraska happy.”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“Pods work beautifully on paper. Big Ten creating championship weekend during Covid is basically same as “Semi-Final weekend” with pods. 4 pod winners play each other for their 9th conf game. Crossover pod games (2nd place vs 2nd place etc) for other schools 9th conf game”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“Essentially, Big Ten believes SEC will be the first to at least experiment with this pod concept which is a concept many in Big Ten believes will work. All eyes on SEC if they pull trigger on pods and semi-final weekend.”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“If SEC does pull the trigger on pods and semi-final weekend how does Big Ten stand at 14? If SEC rakes in extra 35 mil for 2 “semi-final pod winner” games on final weekend of regular season to go with SEC CCG $ the following week how does Big Ten not follow suit?”


Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM

“All eyes on SEC’s decision to go pods or stay 2 divisions. But pretty much all in Big Ten agree current alignment of Big Ten divisions will not last more than few more years. Most of those same people believe pods are the future and it’s coming faster than expected.”

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
This was unexpected information from BTM this morning.

But it all boils down to this: there is a strong belief if SEC chooses pods they will monetize the bleep out of the new structure.

If true, everyone eventually…especially Big Ten…will do the same.

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
BTM made no mention of possible schools in long email.

Obviously it’s Big 12 schools.

Watch SEC’s decision on new conference structure which will probably follow FBS 10 conferences and Notre Dame’s decision on playoff format.

Greg Flugaur@flugempire · Oct 6
I’ve written this in a few DM’s in last hour.

As you all know BTM has never considered WVU a Big Ten candidate for expansion but now it can’t be ruled out as long as Big Ten becomes more enamored with pod system to match SEC’s potential decision to monetize new pod structure.
Expand ...
1) The B1G will not add WVU, sorry boys. 2) Even I thought of going to a 'pod' system with 16 schools a while back, so nothing special there. 3) The B1G won't raid another conference, especially the ACC, yeah right. If UVA called the B1G tomorrow, they would be in the confernece by the weekend. 4) I don't think the B1G will do much right now until the dust around the 'Alliance' settles.
 
ScottVib said:
Going by pods allows you to set things up to have your top teams routinely in the semi-finals and help maximize your TV value.

In the Big Ten let's say hell freezes over and UConn and Kansas are the teams the pods could look like this:

Penn State; Maryland; Rutgers; UConn
Ohio State; Indiana; Purdue;Illinois
Michigan; Michigan State; Northwestern; Minnesota
Wisconsin; Iowa; Nebraska; Kansas

Now you're setting up semi-finals each year with Penn State; Ohio State; Michigan; and Wisconsin (or Iowa)

You've just maximized value on those semi-finals... and if a team breaks past the heavyweights to get into a semi-final you can still squash Cinderella in time to maximize the title game value.


You've added valuable semi-final games... some extra inventory and just provided a nice boost to the winter content you can offer on your network courtesy of the new additions.
Expand ...
This pod set-up makes sense from a football standpoint. A 4th automatic confernece game would be a rivalry game, like Ohio St v Michigan and Minnesota v Iowa, etc.
 
Stinger92860 said:
you forgot UConn v Rutgers..lol
Expand ...
The divisions in the power four are too unwieldy for my taste. I hope they're scrapped. But I'd probably hate pods too.

Just assign each school three or four permanent annual games that make some sense. Rotate the rest.

For example, Michigan might be assigned Ohio State, Michigan State, Northwestern and Minnesota as annual opponents. Ohio State might draw Michigan, Penn State, Maryland and Illinois. And Penn State might annually play Ohio State, Michigan State, Maryland and Rutgers.
 
If we still had the thread, this would definitely be key tweet material.

Whatever reason UConn brought him and his group in to kick the tires and knock off the dust, it again sends a signal that UConn takes footballl seriously.

And no, I don't think it has anything to do with joining B12 or any of the G5 conferences. Even if just for football.
 

Online statistics

Members online
240
Guests online
2,105
Total visitors
2,345
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,295
Messages
4,390,863
Members
10,195
Latest member
adn77


..
Top Bottom