Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

FriendlySpartan said:
I agree it’s a money grab, and bad for the non revenue athletes. I would push back and say that it doesn’t negatively impact the fan experience, kinda the opposite for me personally, but again that’s just a big ten fan perspective.
Click to expand...
i'll just agree to disagree on that. i think every fan would find playing all the closest other D1 schools would be far more enjoyable. if live in that area - can travel to more games. you know more fans of other schools. friends fam co-workers. fans might even go to games they aren't fans of either team, just cause it's so close and same conf as their own school. TV deals are still very large because there are big schools in every region and would have 20+ team conferences, and viewership is just as good if not better cause it's rival nearby schools fans would actually care more about.

you might not get this angle as much since you already are playing all the teams closest to your school.

but you might be slightly more excited to play Cincinnati and Pitt opposed to...Rutgers and Maryland? at least it'd be games you could actually drive to, right? and maybe know a few more people that are fans of those teams. your situation just isn't best scenario for showing it. but still it'd impact you in positive ways i bet to some degree.

(actually MD and Rutgers might still be in your conf even in geographic realignment ha Michigan is just in a tricky geographic location to be near a ton of schools)
 
loyalson4evatru said:
i'll just agree to disagree on that. i think every fan would find playing all the closest other D1 schools would be far more enjoyable. if live in that area - can travel to more games. you know more fans of other schools. friends fam co-workers. fans might even go to games they aren't fans of either team, just cause it's so close and same conf as their own school. TV deals are still very large because there are big schools in every region and would have 20+ team conferences, and viewership is just as good if not better cause it's rival nearby schools fans would actually care more about.

you might not get this angle as much since you already are playing all the teams closest to your school.

but you might be slightly more excited to play Cincinnati and Pitt opposed to...Rutgers and Maryland? at least it'd be games you could actually drive to, right? and maybe know a few more people that are fans of those teams. your situation just isn't best scenario for showing it. but still it'd impact you in positive ways i bet to some degree.

(actually MD and Rutgers might still be in your conf even in geographic realignment ha Michigan is just in a tricky geographic location to be near a ton of schools)
Click to expand...
So I’ve always tried to figure out if this is a Big12 thing or an age thing but I don’t know of a single person that goes to away games unless they already live there or have close family/friends there.

A couple people have had a goal of seeing every stadium once but that’s usually just a one and done. I’ll go to Indy or Chicago for a playoff/tournament game but that’s a little different. So for me and most of the people I know the geographic thing means very little.

You are right that I’m also probably biased because of Michigans location we already do play all the major programs in the area (minus ND which is annoying) on a fairly regular basis, especially now that divisions are going away.

Where I think we do agree is that I would rather the conference remain smaller then grow to where they are now becuase playonh the games has more to do with building a rivalry then geographical location.
 
FriendlySpartan said:
So I’ve always tried to figure out if this is a Big12 thing or an age thing but I don’t know of a single person that goes to away games unless they already live there or have close family/friends there.

A couple people have had a goal of seeing every stadium once but that’s usually just a one and done. I’ll go to Indy or Chicago for a playoff/tournament game but that’s a little different. So for me and most of the people I know the geographic thing means very little.

You are right that I’m also probably biased because of Michigans location we already do play all the major programs in the area (minus ND which is annoying) on a fairly regular basis, especially now that divisions are going away.

Where I think we do agree is that I would rather the conference remain smaller then grow to where they are now becuase playonh the games has more to do with building a rivalry then geographical location.
Click to expand...

obviously not every fan or even every conference would notice the same level impact. some might never go to games in person and enjoy seeing their team play all over the country. but i think a vast majority would find it much more enjoyable. some conferences won't notice much like the "West" would basically be combining Pac 12 and Mountain West. the schools are still really spread out. but 80% of schools are East of Colorado.

also as an ISU fan these things are more noticeable. we aren't in same conf with Neb Minn Missouri Illinois Wisconsin. our fans would definitely travel to these games. same with a lot of schools in the South and East.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlySpartan
loyalson4evatru said:
obviously not every fan or even every conference would notice the same level impact. some might never go to games in person and enjoy seeing their team play all over the country. but i think a vast majority would find it much more enjoyable. some conferences won't notice much like the "West" would basically be combining Pac 12 and Mountain West. the schools are still really spread out. but 80% of schools are East of Colorado.

also as an ISU fan these things are more noticeable. we aren't in same conf with Neb Minn Missouri Illinois Wisconsin. our fans would definitely travel to these games. same with a lot of schools in the South and East.
Click to expand...
I agree with a lot of this. What I will say is that while Michigan is positioned in an odd area that we already play everyone (outside of ND) that is close to us, ISU is kinda in the exact opposite. The SEC schools for example are in a similar way now where there aren’t too many schools they miss out on playing and the ACC is also similar outside of WVU and Maryland but Pitt still plays WVU. I think the Big12 being in the middle of the country makes this a more glaring issue then for the other conferences but your point stands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: landerson
FriendlySpartan said:
So I’ve always tried to figure out if this is a Big12 thing or an age thing but I don’t know of a single person that goes to away games unless they already live there or have close family/friends there.

A couple people have had a goal of seeing every stadium once but that’s usually just a one and done. I’ll go to Indy or Chicago for a playoff/tournament game but that’s a little different. So for me and most of the people I know the geographic thing means very little.

You are right that I’m also probably biased because of Michigans location we already do play all the major programs in the area (minus ND which is annoying) on a fairly regular basis, especially now that divisions are going away.

Where I think we do agree is that I would rather the conference remain smaller then grow to where they are now becuase playonh the games has more to do with building a rivalry then geographical location.
Click to expand...
I have been fortunate to have hit every Big12 stadium so far.
Will do BYU this year.
I've also done many G5 games where ISU play.
We as a fan base travel damn well.
 
  • Like
  • Friendly
Reactions: t-noah, laminak, agentbear and 4 others
jctisu said:
It’s selling a stake not offloading the whole thing.
Click to expand...
You can still do the same thing as an IPO, but better off, just incorporate that part of it as a private corporation and work the shares like that until you think the public perception can raise value. Then an IPO.
 
So could Apple be weighing purchasing ESPN vs purchasing PAC network which is reason for media deal delay? The schools would definitely not be interested in leaving the PAC if they could stay and get paid for their interest in the PAC Network. Games could well be shown on ESPN in other option.
 
Bestaluckcy said:
So could Apple be weighing purchasing ESPN vs purchasing PAC network which is reason for media deal delay? The schools would definitely not be interested in leaving the PAC if they could stay and get paid for their interest in the PAC Network. Games could well be shown on ESPN in other option.
Click to expand...
That'd be one heck of an acquisition. But, smart money says if they do purchase ESPN, it's dooms day for sure for the P12. IMO P12 might get some exposure, but certainly not enough to be the P3$.
 
Bestaluckcy said:
So could Apple be weighing purchasing ESPN vs purchasing PAC network which is reason for media deal delay? The schools would definitely not be interested in leaving the PAC if they could stay and get paid for their interest in the PAC Network. Games could well be shown on ESPN in other option.
Click to expand...
Disney has no plans of selling ESPN as of now. They interested in selling some of what they own, but ESPN is not one of them.
 
From what I understand, ESPN is approaching major sports leagues and saying, “Hey, NFL, NBA, MLB etc.” Let’s be equity partners. Let’s all own a piece of ESPN.
 
RustShack said:
Disney has no plans of selling ESPN as of now. They interested in selling some of what they own, but ESPN is not one of them.
Click to expand...
That's certainly not what I heard on the Iger interview. He's looking for 'equity' partners in ESPN. Given the size of contracts they've extended themselves for, I can certainly see an equity position from the professional and college ranks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom