current b10 members want Cal and Stanford to piss pound in athletics and "collaborate" for academic endowments.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I just don't see the difference between BYU and Utah....6 of one, half dozen of the other...no need to double up there and take up a valuable spot.I liken Utah a lot to WVU. Proud of their school and definitely supportive. I think their problem is BYU is already a member of the Big 12. Two rivals in separate conferences is like ISU and EIU. Quite different when you have to live with each other. Think BYU fans have been insufferable towards them also. Guess we may yet find out who they are and what makes them passionate.
Still...and I'm not trying to push you away, but you speak from a position of strength, relatively. Similar to a group of soldiers who hold the high ground.
How will Clemson, Miami, FL State feel about things in a few more years of monetary inequity in the ACC? Will they be able to recruit and play at a high enough level to have any realistic shot at a Natty? How will OU & WA feel in a few years, if they decide to stay in the PAC (or MWC)?
From your POV, and you often are not fully aware of it, your team(s) have a distinct advantage from being in the B1G. You are more 'viable' because that is your home.
WAOR is plenty bad. They haven't been as public as Utah but that was because they believed the Big 12 was so far beneath them that they didn't have to comment. With the Colorado news out this past week, their Big 12 bashers came out in full force. In fact, since the recent news, the Utah bashing of the Big 12 has been less and WAOR more.And this is why I don’t want them in the Big 12. All the attitude and snobbery of Texas, without anything Texas has to offer. They’ve been the most vocal about bashing the Big 12, I don’t think they’d do anything but cause problems while they are here.
Would WAOR cause problems if the Big 12 managed to somehow pull that off, maybe, but they haven’t been complete dicks to the Big 12 this entire process, while Utah has.
I agree with this. Why do you need Utah when you already have BYU? Salt Lake City market isn't a whole lot bigger than Des Moines.I just don't see the difference between BYU and Utah....6 of one, half dozen of the other...no need to double up there and take up a valuable spot.
From what I just read, this is very true. A major difference is Utah is very active on Twitter so it has been very public. WAOR has been in their forums, so not as easy to see.WAOR is plenty bad. They haven't been as public as Utah but that was because they believed the Big 12 was so far beneath them that they didn't have to comment. With the Colorado news out this past week, their Big 12 bashers came out in full force. In fact, since the recent news, the Utah bashing of the Big 12 has been less and WAOR more.
Michigan won’t ever make that move. OSU, not sure but kinda doubt it. Also this board kinda needs to make up its mind. Most people talk about all the extra money places like Iowa and Texas have gotten and how they have done nothing with it while at the same time saying the top schools in the most powerful conferences would do this to get more money to do what? Again it’s the presidents making these decisions not the AD’s or coaches.He also speaks from a position where Michigan and Ohio St are smart enough - for now - not to make the same mistakes the Big 12 made. The question is, how long do the upper schools like Michigan and Ohio St, or Alabama and Georgia in the SEC, want to keep paying the teams like Northwestern, Rutgers, and Vanderbilt? With where ESPN wants to take college athletics, that temptation only grows by the year.
I won’t argue with you. Probably in the end comes down to who can we get, what we can do to make us the most money.I just don't see the difference between BYU and Utah....6 of one, half dozen of the other...no need to double up there and take up a valuable spot.
The two aren’t mutually exclusive. I believe many of those programs are at a point of diminishing returns, at least if/when they start paying players directly.Michigan won’t ever make that move. OSU, not sure but kinda doubt it. Also this board kinda needs to make up its mind. Most people talk about all the extra money places like Iowa and Texas have gotten and how they have done nothing with it while at the same time saying the top schools in the most powerful conferences would do this to get more money to do what? Again it’s the presidents making these decisions not the AD’s or coaches.
Fluegar said something similar that MHVer calling the USC/UCLA move came after he said it. The best explanation I have found for MHVer is that he is reading other tweets and forums, but tweaking them to sound like inside info and to be more definitive in nature. With additive positivity for WVU and the Big12.Fairly sure our good friend MHVer just reads Scheer tweets and then riffs off them for his
I can’t disagree because who knows what could happen 17 years from now. In 2006 no one would have thought we would be here today, that’s just too far out to make any realistic prediction. Personally I don’t think the sports bubble is going to burst anytime soon. At least not for the top 2/3 conferences.The two aren’t mutually exclusive. I believe many of those programs are at a point of diminishing returns, at least if/when they start paying players directly.
But if/when the sports media rights bubble bursts those programs will have decisions to make. They’re universities, but they are being run like businesses now. And, whenever a business’ revenue goes down YoY, cost cutting occurs, including layoffs. This would be no different. I think there probably one more TV contract of growth for the SEC and B10. But around 2040, when the tv offers remain the same or shrink, decisions will be made.
That’s a hell of a statementOnline Ute fans are more delusional than hawk fans.
I agree with this. The Northwesterns, Vanderbilts, Rutgers are safe for another 15-20 years I’d say.I can’t disagree because who knows what could happen 17 years from now. In 2006 no one would have thought we would be here today, that’s just too far out to make any realistic prediction. Personally I don’t think the sports bubble is going to burst anytime soon. At least not for the top 2/3 conferences.
I agree with this. The Northwesterns, Vanderbilts, Rutgers are safe for another 15-20 years I’d say.
I think the P12’s struggles right now is an early signal of bubble bursting though. Even when the Big 12 neared collapse in 2010, it wasn’t because it couldn’t field a TV contract, it was because all the schools were departing (mostly for non-monetary reasons)
100% agree with you (and don’t want to cave this) but Vanderbilt rolled over pretty damn quick when people came asking for names and documents. Not going to post a link but a quick google search will give it to yaVandy will likely always have a spot in the SEC. If for no other purpose than to store documents the SEC doesn't want exposed by FOIA. Every major conference does this with their private schools.
I think if the B1G wanted them, they'd have already gotten the call. If they were going to get a media deal, they'd already have a media deal. I don't see where they have a better option than the Big XII. Hope isn't a plan.WAOR is plenty bad. They haven't been as public as Utah but that was because they believed the Big 12 was so far beneath them that they didn't have to comment. With the Colorado news out this past week, their Big 12 bashers came out in full force. In fact, since the recent news, the Utah bashing of the Big 12 has been less and WAOR more.