Red Meat for Tranghese bashers

[junglehusky]

For the record, I think Tranghese did as good a job as could be expected after the ACC raid, and I also think he is right to at least question whether the schools that are moving towards a superconference future will actually get more money. But since someone else is going to post this and use it as a cudgel to beat Tranghese in effigy, we might as well get it over with. Have at it.

Andy Katz

If the Big 12 were to lose one to four members to various conferences, the Big East would likely swoop in to pick apart what is left. A source with knowledge of the situation said the Big East order would be Missouri, Kansas and Kansas State if it were to decide to go to 20 overall teams. TCU joins the league in all sports in 2012.

If the Big East added three more schools, in addition to TCU (which is set to join the conference next fall), it would have 12 football-playing schools.

"I can't figure out why bigger is better," former Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese said. "I don't see it. Fewer conferences means more losers with so many teams in one league. It would be so hard to operate. I ask myself the same question since I was in the room with so many of these people: Where would the money come from that these schools would make more money going to 16?

"People have said to me that we were big, and we were, but we had no choice," Tranghese said of expanding to 16 schools under his watch after the ACC grabbed Boston College, Miami and Virginia Tech. "These other conferences would have a choice. They're electing to [possibly expand to 16 teams]. I haven't figured out why. I don't know why they want to get bigger but it seems like it's headed in that direction."

The one positive for me would be if the result is a de-emphasis on polls and perhaps a 4 team playoff in the near future.

 

[zls44]

Of course he can't fathom a cfb playoff. He doesn't care about college football.

 

[SAMCRO]

"Where would the money come from that these schools would make more money going to 16?"

Television/Media contracts Mike. The money will come from Television/Media contracts.

 

[businesslawyer]

Meat for bashers? Most of what he says is, from a logical perspective, correct. It is very hard to figure out how the networks are seeing the overall value for this product, not to mention the "more is better" results that they seem to be driving. In most of the world, more isn't better if the more is dilutive of the quality. But that is clearly not the case in the networks eyes at this point in time.

 

[RS9999X]

'Confusion .... will be my Epitaph' - King Crimson '69

>> I ask myself the same question since I was in the room with so many of these people: Where would the money come from that these schools would make more money going to 16? <<

 

[CTMike]

What's the per-school payout in a 12 team league vs. a 16 team league vs. whatever? That's what he's getting at. You start to reach a point of diminishing returns where each additional school doesn't necissarily equate to more money for each school.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

When I read that yeasterday art of me was thinkng of Rodney Dangferfield's line in Caddyshack (after seeing Judge Smails wearing the hat he was just making fun of) "but it looks good on you!". The only thing is, MT was both Rodney and Judge Smails in this case.

It also could be interpreted that other conferences (those who actually are looking to maximize athletic revenues and operate in bigtime athletics) shouldn't move to sixteen but the BE (implying that we aren't one of them) can do this.

Either way, the man who initiated the only currently existing sixteen member conference claiming thst sixteen is too big can easily be interpreted as reflecting badly on the BE either due ton our not being at the level of the conferences he claimed would be making a mistake in doing so or by admitting we made a mistake by doing so.

 

[EricLA]

Meat for bashers? Most of what he says is, from a logical perspective, correct. It is very hard to figure out how the networks are seeing the overall value for this product, not to mention the "more is better" results that they seem to be driving. In most of the world, more isn't better if the more is dilutive of the quality. But that is clearly not the case in the networks eyes at this point in time.

interesting points. but perhaps the proponents of the "more is better" strategy feel that the smaller conferences will eventually get poached. if the SEC were to swoop in and take WVU and the Big 10 were to take Pitt and maybe someone else, it would leave the BE scrambling. the whole thing is like a giant game of chicken. or musical chairs. and no one wants to be left in a 6 team conference after heavyweights have jumped ship...

 

[ZooCougar]

I actually agree with Trainedgeese here. Bigger is better for some, but not for others. I agree with Brian Cuban that nine is the right number.

 

[jpm25]

Meat for bashers? Most of what he says is, from a logical perspective, correct. It is very hard to figure out how the networks are seeing the overall value for this product, not to mention the "more is better" results that they seem to be driving. In most of the world, more isn't better if the more is dilutive of the quality. But that is clearly not the case in the networks eyes at this point in time.

The "more" is content, and for networks, live content is key. In the internet, Tivo, Boxee, Hulu era, live content is what keeps viewers paying $100+ monthly cable bills when they can get 80% of the content they watch on there for free.

 

[connectikev]

At some point the TV $ will decrease (per team, per league, per anyway you wish to look at it) - After all it cannot grow like real estate for ever; only real estate can keep growing fantasically forever.........

 

[SAMCRO]

More teams = more markets to sell your "conference network" into = more $$$. Which is why I'd be shocked if the $EC went after WVU before trying to get Mizzou, VT, Maryland, UVa, UNC, or NCSU.

Unless their thinking is 14 is not the final #, and 16 is in the cards. Then they can come back after two of those 6 a bit later.

 

[jpm25]

More teams = more markets to sell your "conference network" into = more $$$. Which is why I'd be shocked if the $EC went after WVU before trying to get Mizzou, VT, Maryland, UVa, UNC, or NCSU.

Unless their thinking is 14 is not the final #, and 16 is in the cards. Then they can come back after two of those 6 a bit later.

In some instances, product over market. SEC already has a brand that ESPN/ABC televises nationally. I agree MU is the most attractive TV market, but the B1G took Nebraska when others were more than available.

 

[RS9999X]

It has to be enough content to lock up a region and two timezones is the new mantra.

Frankly I expect another conference to evolve: Another attempt to stitch the best of the MWC, WAC, C-USA amd MAC into a viable TV product and BCS bid. It would call off the playoff wolves and legislature.

 

[TRest]

The BE had to expand to have the minimum number of football schools. It did not have to add MU and Depaul for the hell of it (appease the basketball schools/ND).

 

[Pudge]

Ummmmm ....

Let me point out the obvious. The MONEY is far more than Tranghese conceived it would be in 2004. The MONEY that the Pac 12 conference has gotten ... in a contract ... is far more than any of these commissioners saw coming. So, the RACE to 16 is the RACE to preclude the 68 or so from expanding to 80 ... and a PUSH to get that number to maybe 48.

There is definitely money big enough for the few 16 team conferences. There will be pennies for the non-16. Programming wise: I can see NBCU/Comcast & Fox angling in for something solid. But ... the next moves for the BE will be crucial.

 

[freescooter]

The BE had to expand to have the minimum number of football schools. It did not have to add MU and Depaul for the hell of it (appease the basketball schools/ND).

That is what always got me...it lost 3 football schools and added 3 football schools plus a couple of basketball schools too. I always thought that was simply a ploy to insure that when the football side stabilized, the 2 sides could split and remain viable. I think the efforts to keep the sides together have been somewhat misguided and unless someone pulls a rabbit from a hat, the football side will be the ones who get screwed.
Probably not every football school, but at least 2-3.

 

[epark88]

That is what always got me...it lost 3 football schools and added 3 football schools plus a couple of basketball schools too. I always thought that was simply a ploy to insure that when the football side stabilized, the 2 sides could split and remain viable. I think the efforts to keep the sides together have been somewhat misguided and unless someone pulls a rabbit from a hat, the football side will be the ones who get screwed.
Probably not every football school, but at least 2-3.

The way things are going down right now, someone's gonna have to pull that rabbit from someplace else on their body...

 

[oswald12]

In some instances, product over market. SEC already has a brand that ESPN/ABC televises nationally. I agree MU is the most attractive TV market, but the B1G took Nebraska when others were more than available.

The addition of Nebraska was bolstered by the revenue that the new conference chamopinship game brought. The SEC already has this revenue, so I would assume that any addition would need to bring in enough to keep the per team payout at least the same. I doubt the current members value product over market enough to take a pay cut. I believe the per team payout is around $20mm - does A&M/WVU add $40mm annually?