Page 51 of 520 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361101151 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 5194
  1. #501
    Supporting Member xudash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,389
    Quote Originally Posted by _LH View Post
    The $200 million came from the 14 team PAC league. Are you that stupid? You must be.

    It would not be increased then by just adding two more teams. Seriously, you can't be that dumb. Not all teams make sense to add. You don't add just to add. Damn your stupid!!
    The $200 million for the Pac14 deal didn't come from that league. The $200 million Pac14 television contract was primarily structured by Disney network properties.

    So you really are stupid enough to think that the PAC contract is a fixed value contract.

    I didn't write anything about adding just to add. If the network partners run their models on select prospective program targets and the numbers work, the deal would be deemed accretive. If the network partners run their models on the same and the numbers don't work, then they'll most likely hold at 14, unless other criteria, which would have to be substantial, adjust their decision-making framework.

    The fact that you don't understand this really makes you look stupid here. Otherwise, the way you attempt to make counterpoints - "You don't add just to add" - is juvenile.

    Have you figured out yet that most of the posters in this thread aren't exactly on the same page with you? That doesn't bode well for you or your lame contributions.

    "You don't add just to add." Wow. Did that thought give you chills when it fired into your brain?
    X A V I E R

  2. #502
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,660
    Furthermore, there aren't two additional teams out there that WOW anyone to get to 16.

  3. #503
    Supporting Member bobbiemcgee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    11,440
    Quote Originally Posted by _LH View Post
    The $200 million came from the 14 team PAC league. .


    You are aware that Scott negotiated an expansion clause in the TV contract to provide for the new teams. So if it's 20 million a team for 14 and he adds two more good schools, they also get the 20 million. Depending on who the schools are, it could be a helluva lot more.

  4. #504
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee View Post
    You are aware that Scott negotiated an expansion clause in the TV contract to provide for the new teams. So if it's 20 million a team for 14 and he adds two more good schools, they also get the 20 million. Depending on who the schools are, it could be a helluva lot more.
    What schools? THAT's MY WHOLE POINT. Name them!!!

  5. #505
    Supporting Member xudash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,389
    Quote Originally Posted by _LH View Post
    Dash,

    You can't be that dumb. You just can't. The PAC 14 can get a $200 deal and they don't have to add more teams to get to 16 to get it.

    You don't have to be more than 14. WOW!!
    This is it for me responding to you. Frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself. I noticed you're also soiling the Bilas thread. You don't know whether there are two other financially valuable teams out there or not. That is your opinion, and that's where you get yourself in trouble here.

    The $200 million deal with the PAC14 is done. It's executed. It's $200 million for the 14. It is based on models that reflect a certain amount of estimated viewership and ratings that, when ran against the advertising values for its regions, translates to that contract value for those 14 team.

    IF Larry Scott and his staff choose to fire the models back up with their TV account executives to see if TEAM X or TEAM Y or TEAM Z lead to a financially accretive outcome if assumed added - do you get it now you absolute clueless bastard - then they may decide to go to 16 teams, because they aren't going to add just to add (Captain Obvious Award for you).

    How on God's green earth do you think they got to the $200 million figure to begin with? Seriously, do you think they just pulled that out of the air? Those questions are rhetorical. I'm finished with you.
    X A V I E R

  6. #506
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by xudash View Post
    This is it for me responding to you. Frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself. I noticed you're also soiling the Bilas thread.

    The $200 million deal with the PAC14 is done. It's executed. It's $200 million for the 14. It is based on models that reflect a certain amount of estimated viewership and ratings that, when ran against the advertising values for its regions, translates to that contract value for those 14 team.

    IF Larry Scott and his staff choose to fire the models back up with their TV account executives to see if TEAM X or TEAM Y or TEAM Z lead to a financially accretive outcome if assumed added - do you get it now you absolute clueless bastard - then they may decide to go to 16 teams, because they aren't going to add just to add (Captain Obvious Award for you).

    How on God's green earth do you think they got to the $200 million figure to begin with? Seriously, do you think they just pulled that out of the air? Those questions are rhetorical. I'm finished with you.
    There are only 12 teams in the PAC and they don't need to get to 16. 14 would be just fine. The SEC could easily stop at 14, same with the B10.
    Last edited by American X; 09-01-2011 at 12:10 PM. Reason: insult other member

  7. #507
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    10,147
    I'm actually of the thought that conferences aren't really adding much by expanding.

    Having said that, a team that makes financial sense is Hawaii. I'm not saying they'll get a serious look. They probably won't, but they would be an asset in terms of revenue.

    It would allow for a 13th football game in the years the conference teams travel out there. More games means more TV more money. That's something no other program can offer.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  8. #508
    Quote Originally Posted by _LH View Post
    I thought the SEC didn't want more than one program in a US state? If so, no FSU, no Texas Tech.

    The ACC would be able to raid the BE if they lose a team or two and be just fine.
    The ACC's ability to raid the BE depends on which teams they would lose. If in the unlikely event they lose Virginia Tech and Florida State they would not be an attractive option for Big East teams especially given the current situation at Miami.
    If the SEC doesn't want another team in a state currently occupied by an SEC member then Missouri seems a very likely option provided they don't have any assurance from the Big 10 that they will be added in the future. Given the currentl situation in the Big12 I would think Missouri would gladly take accept an invitation to the SEC and stability that would come with it.

  9. #509
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by bearcat65 View Post
    The ACC's ability to raid the BE depends on which teams they would lose. If in the unlikely event they lose Virginia Tech and Florida State they would not be an attractive option for Big East teams especially given the current situation at Miami.
    If the SEC doesn't want another team in a state currently occupied by an SEC member then Missouri seems a very likely option provided they don't have any assurance from the Big 10 that they will be added in the future. Given the currentl situation in the Big12 I would think Missouri would gladly take accept an invitation to the SEC and stability that would come with it.
    There are at least 6 BE teams that would jump at the chance to join the ACC if they ACC comes calling, with or without V-Tech but like you said, V-Tech is probably not going anywhere and the SEC is not interested in FSU.

  10. #510
    Junior JimmyTwoTimes37's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    4,758
    One more move and Big 12 is over
    Kirk Bohls, Commentary

    Your move, Oklahoma.

    Go ahead, Sooners. Make the last move that sinks the Big 12.

    And it is quite possible, in light of Texas A&M's defection, that your move will be one that politically astute Texas quietly supports while also hoping that it happens quickly. The Longhorns would dearly love the Sooners to take the lead. And much of the heat that comes with it.

    Should Oklahoma act upon its earnest desires and seek an invitation to join the Pacific-12 Conference — something I'm fully expecting to happen within days, if not hours — that decision could well be the killing blow to the Big 12 while also providing Texas the political cover to follow suit and ask for admission as well.

    The Pac-12's not going to ask first. It's been down that road before, led along until the eleventh hour a year ago.

    If OU gives notice that it is leaving the Big 12 — or if any of the other remaining eight members do, for that matter — the very foundation of the league would crumble.

    Here's what I think will happen, probably before the calendar turns to October:

    Your new Pac-16 members: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.

    The era of the super conference begins.

    The Longhorn Network gets folded into the Pac-16 as a downsized regional network, joining the six regional networks that already exist within the conference.

    Missouri ends up in the Big Ten or ACC, and Kansas heads to the Big East. If for some inexplicable reason Texas chooses not to pursue Pac-12 membership, look for Texas Tech to be left out and expect the Pac-12 to focus on Kansas and Missouri along with OU and OSU. Don't dawdle, Texas.

    In the end, these Big 12 schools should have gone their separate ways last summer and avoided all this unnecessary drama and hand-wringing. Every school has its own agenda and is ready to act upon it. If A&M can uproot itself from historical ties in the Big 12 and extricate itself from centuries-old rivalries, nothing is sacred.

    OU wants to be more assertive and wants to blaze its own trail — separately or aligned with Texas — and will pull the trigger on the relocation it considered last June. Oklahoma State is along for the ride.

    Once it became obvious the Aggies were leaving for the SEC, Texas wanted to remain in a 10-team Big 12 with Notre Dame, but the Longhorns must make other plans as the Irish cling firmly to their independence. Maybe the Big 12 could survive with BYU, Pitt and, say, Louisville, and it says here the league would need to add three teams to avoid looking vulnerable to a single school holding the conference's future hostage every year.

    But I think Texas would prefer the Pac-Large and would do cartwheels if OU made the first dramatic move, so the Longhorns' hands would be politically clean.

    Texas president William Powers embraced the idea of rubbing elbows with academic elites in the Pac-10 a year ago, but he was persuaded to stay put by athletic director DeLoss Dodds.

    Once Notre Dame turned down the Big 12, the list of attractive replacements for A&M fell off dramatically.

    BYU remains a possibility, but its use of older, more mature athletes because of two-year mission trips, its refusal to play on Sundays and its lack of an impeccable academic pedigree make it a harder sell.

    Houston makes sense for the state and links up with legislators' desires to create another top-tier research institution, but Texas and Texas Tech would prefer to keep that rich recruiting base to themselves.

    Pittsburgh makes little geographic sense but would greatly expand the Big 12's footprint. But so would the University of British Columbia, and I haven't seen them on the list.

    Because the Big 12's options are few, its future is tenuous at best. No one seems to trust anyone any more. Everybody is jealous of Texas' clout and tired of its flaunting of the Longhorn Network. Most of the Big 12 schools are petrified they'll be left out. With good reason.

    Every Big 12 school will have Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott on speed-dial and will beg the Pac-12 to embrace it as a member. Scott issued a statement Wednesday, saying his league has "no plans to expand" at this time, but added that his schools will listen to and evaluate any scenario. Scott has openly predicted more realignment will occur in college athletics in the near future.

    OU clearly wanted to bolt to the Pac-10 a year ago and take Oklahoma State with it. That hasn't changed. The OU administration warmly embraced the idea. Bob Stoops was ready to take the field at the Rose Bowl for the league's first championship game.

    He openly lusted over all those California recruits.

    Texas and Texas Tech were this close to joining them before a political wrench and the Longhorn Network brought those plans to a halt.

    It was a done deal until it was undone at the last moment.

    Fifteen months later, OU will take the lead.

    "Oklahoma owns all the cards," a Big 12 source told me.

    Look for the Pac-12 and interested Big 12 parties to use the same script as A&M did in plotting its exit from the Big 12. Nobody wants to be the instigator in these delicate, sensitive negotiations, and no one wants to be the villain. Expect them all to paint the Aggies with that broad brush.

    And once OU and Texas make that clear, then it will be every man for himself.

    kbohls@statesman.com; 445-3772


    http://www.statesman.com/sports/long...inglePage=true
    Live Action

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •