LOL. I can think of maybe 4-5 teams people want to see in that conference. I'm including ND in that count.
Here comes the doomsday thread, sorry
- Thread starter 1238576073jb
- Start date
LOL. I can think of maybe 4-5 teams people want to see in that conference. I'm including ND in that count.
Man I respect you but you’re letting emotions affect your reading comprehension. I never said anything about this committee being about academics.
Again those schools got relegated to another current P4 conference so not even relegation. Considering how much of disaster the Pac leadership was you can’t be surprised when you waste hundreds of millions on conference offices a failed network and private jets.
I don’t know anything about the inner workings of the SEC but it takes two to tango. OUT really didn’t want to be in the Big12 and even after those moves the Big12 is intact with a great media deal.
You expressed yourself very poorly here I guess. If this was 100% sarcasm than I agree.
"Good thing these are institutions of higher learning not businesses."
Tiers of demotion I previously posted:
- WSU/Ore St got relegated, it's real, it sucks
- Cal/Stan demoted to a ridiculous island, doesn't matter, they don't care...but for their student athletes that's a horrible solution
- UConn/USF, doesn't matter they had only gotten just promoted to a very weakened fb conference
I said that in direct response to your very post “You cannot trust people to want something to be profitable in 20 or 50 years, you can expect people to want to maximize their payday now. This is almost a universal constant in the business world.”
And I accurately pointed out that they aren’t business they are institutions of higher learning whos mission has nothing to do with maximizing profit. Again I get you’re fired up but read exactly what I’m saying not what you think I’m saying.
FA: Cut a huge chunk of traditional power conference programs out of the club
FO: None of those fans are interested in transferring their university degrees, ratings, or fandom to the next closest blue-blood school
Sure, they're institutions of higher learning that easily rejected two of the top three universities in the world.
That's insane. If I'm fired up it's over that nonsensical statement more than the reality of what's been happening for decades.
Yeah they rejected two awesome schools because it’s about athletic membership? Your comment was entirely about short term profit which is what I was responding to with that statement.
Also those two schools are still in the P4. If they would have cared enough to have responsible Pac12 leadership this wouldn’t have been an issue but they don’t care about sports so they let their conference be be run into the ground.
Texas has had more money than anyone for decades and it hasn’t don’t much for them. Vanderbilt and Indiana have had more money for the big 12 for decades as well and they haven’t done anything with it.
The contract is great because it secures a financial future for years to come with a membership base of peers.
Sounds like you agree with me academic prestige, research, etc is all an afterthought in these purely athletic $$$ decisions. If it mattered you take the world's greatest when available. So maybe claiming "higher learning" mattered was bs on your part.
It's a business, the same way mega churches are businesses even if they aren't technically classified the exact same way as Google or Starbucks.
I haven't read much of this thread and I assume what I'm about to say has been said in different ways about 100 times already. There's clearly a need for some organization and oversight over collegiate athletics as the current system isn't sustainable in my opinion. It's a tough call though, because it looks as if organization and oversight leads down the road to a P2 and if that's the case, collegiate athletics will lose a big part of what made it so popular in the first place.
Big Ten teams don't want more money because it's not a business. That summarizes the past couple pages.
Well the big payout hasn't quite hit yet for the big 2. We're gonna see obscene contracts for coaches in the following years.
Hahaha no it’s not, and again these are institutions of higher learning not for profit businesses. Comparing them to mega churches is pure emotions talking.
Again your reading comprehension is lacking because I didn’t say anything about research or academic prestige or anything of the sorts. You keep trying to put words in my mouth that I didn’t say.
So to explain, you said businesses can always be counted on for short term profit over long term stability/outlook. I said they aren’t businesses they are institutions of higher learning and aren’t focused on profit. Then you spend the next several posts making comments about completely unrelated things that I never said in reference to my higher learning response.
Hope that cleared it up, if you want to keep going try to quote what I actually said instead of inferring or infusing your own thoughts into my statements.
Agree on that one. Especially for assistants. However in what way does that change anything from how it has been? All the new money does is start saying the quiet and obvious part out loud.
It takes the best coaches and when they start paying players it will make it nearly impossible for the Big 12 to compete talent wise.
I'm just over this whole thing. Go be a super conference, I can't bring myself to care anymore, go Cyclones.
This is purely speculation on my part but this is what foresee with the revenue sharing inevitably coming. The top recruits have always been getting a bag that is no secret but I will use an example.
Say you have a 3-4 star player whose offer list is Iowa state, Kansas, KSU, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota. I would imagine majority of the time that type of recruit wasn’t getting induced by money to a school. Now with revenue sharing that recruit will get FAR more money going to any of the big 10 schools than the big 12 schools. That’s where the talent gap will widen, in my opinion.