UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

[UNIpanther99]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

http://www.kbtx.com/sports/headlines...9.html?ref=039

New possible proposal adds Baylor, not Colorado to the list of invitees to the Pac-10

If that were to happen, it would make more sense for the remainder of the Big XII North to raid the best of the MWC and possibly Memphis. That would still be a very good conference, especially if Nebraska and Missouri don't go to the Big Ten.

[cydave]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

After reading a lot of articles, it really sounds like to me that the fate of the Big 12 rests in Nebraska's hands. It sounds like Texas really wants to stay in the Big 12 and will stay, as long as Nebraska doesn't leave for the Big 10. If Nebraska leaves, then goodbye entire state of Texas and OU.
The Big 12 is giving Nebraska a week or so to give its final decision on whether they're going or staying. We could survive if Misery left, but not both and not Nebraska.

All of this leads me to believe that there is some type of network in progess, otherwise, Texas would have been gone already.
I also haven't seen any clear cut articles saying the Big 10 has formerly offered Nebraska an invitation to the Big 10. So, maybe Nebraska is waiting for their invite, before they make that decision. Because, if they say they are leaving, then Texas leaves for the Pac10, and the Big 10 doesn't offer Nebraska, then they are in the same boat as ISU, KSU, KU, etc. (screwed)
Whatever happens, the Big 12 will either survive or we will add teams from the MWC and others to assemble a new conference.

And finally, when all is said and done, Dan Beebe needs to be fired for being the crappiest/slowest/laziest conference commissioner in the nation.

[Newsbreaker]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

I've heard a lot of criticism of Beebe recently. He has been given a terrible job, and if the Big XII breaks up it's not his fault. The seeds of its destruction were sown before it was ever formed.

[cydave]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

I've heard a lot of criticism of Beebe recently. He has been given a terrible job, and if the Big XII breaks up it's not his fault. The seeds of its destruction were sown before it was ever formed.

Why not?
The Big 12 brings in more TV revenue than the Pac 10.
Here is the TV revenue for 2009, by conference.

Big Ten: $242
SEC: $205
Big 12: $78
ACC: $67
Pac 10: $58
Big East: $33

Why didn't Beebe act first and go after AZ, AZ st, Utah, BYU, etc. Instead of having the Pac 10 come and raid the Big 12.
Beebe reacts after it's too late and now he's left fighting to keep the Big 12. It seems to me like he spends too much time sitting on his hands watching the others pass him by.

Once he found out about Mizzou and Nebraska wanting to go to the Big 10, he should have started offering other Universities and setting plans to expand the Big 12 and get some sort of TV network together. I'm sure Beebe enjoys being bent over by the state of Texa$.

[TH1974]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

Why not?
The Big 12 brings in more TV revenue than the Pac 10.
Here is the TV revenue for 2009, by conference.

Big Ten: $242
SEC: $205
Big 12: $78
ACC: $67
Pac 10: $58
Big East: $33

Why didn't Beebe act first and go after AZ, AZ st, Utah, BYU, etc. Instead of having the Pac 10 come and raid the Big 12.
Beebe reacts after it's too late and now he's left fighting to keep the Big 12. It seems to me like he spends too much time sitting on his hands watching the others pass him by.

Once he found out about Mizzou and Nebraska wanting to go to the Big 10, he should have started offering other Universities and setting plans to expand the Big 12 and get some sort of TV network together. I'm sure Beebe enjoys being bent over by the state of Texa$.

Arizons and ASU would never have gone to Big XII. Beebe didn't have many options.

[cydave]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

Arizons and ASU would never have gone to Big XII. Beebe didn't have many options.

Maybe, maybe not. They would fit better in the Big 12, than some of the Big 12 teams do in the Pac 10. Also, throw enough money at them and it doesn't take much.

Beebe could have been working on tv contracts a long time ago. He could have been going after other schools to expand to 14 or 16 and increase the Big 12 market. There are/were plenty of things that he could have done to put the conference in better position than it is now.

I have not heard one person say they are happy with Beebe and what he's done with the conference.

[Newsbreaker]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

He couldn't have been working on TV contracts a long time ago. That's silly. The contracts are signed and you are stuck with them until they expire. Several factors play against the Big XII.

First, the Pac-10 has huge advantages over the Big XII simply by way of population base. The Big XII has Dallas, Denver and some mid-sized regional cities. The Pac-10 has LA, SF and Phoenix. The population base is much larger in the Pac-10, which means the viability of a Pac-10 network far exceeds the viability of a Big XII Network. That means the Pac-10 simply has more money to throw around.

Second, the Pac-10's existing TV contract is better than the Big XII's. Using last year as an example, the Pac-10 had 68% of their games televised nationally, third highest amongst BCS leagues. The Big XII only had 56% televised, good for fourth best. Further, the Big XII package disappears after that - the remaining 32% of Pac-10 games saw regional coverage, while the remaining 44% of Big XII games were mostly untelevised. The Big XII is handicapped by this, and by the fact that their two TV deals (with ABC/Disney and FSN) are staggered - they can't increase their ESPN money for another half-decade! The Pac-10 can move much more swiftly to improve their deal (and therefore their piece of the pie).

Finally, and most importantly, the Pac-10 is a league of unified institutions. The Big XII is not. To get Texas, the Big 8 sold their soul and gave the southern teams disproportionate power. They get the biggest chunk of TV money, they get consolidated power with what operates as veto power over all league decisions, they get the Big XII title game in their back yard, and they get by far the best deal. Meanwhile the rest of the league fights over scraps. While the Big XII TV deal is worth more raw dollars, it is comparatively worth far less to all but a few schools - and even those schools can get a better deal elsewhere. Big XII country simply doesn't have enough people to compete.

ISU's problems are much greater. They have been the hanger-on in the Big XII (and Big 8) for years. Nobody cares about them nationally. They have a small (and questionably dedicated) fan base, poor football facilities, no population base around them, no tradition, a very small athletic budget, no ability to make money for a conference, and nobody who is loyal to them. I guarantee that during the meetings last week there wasn't a single school in the room who gave a damn about what ISU wants or what is best for Iowa State. There is strength in numbers, and ISU doesn't have it.

I honestly believe that what is/may be about to happen to ISU is for the best for everyone. ISU has a MWC sized building, a MWC sized budget and a program better suited to compete in a MWC-style league. The financial pressure of being the lowest-revenue team in a major conference will be gone and ISU can actually try to compete.

A state that really is only large enough to support one major conference team will be left with one major conference team.

UNI will benefit as well. The major conference revenue model will no longer be expected to apply thanks to a board of regents that doesn't understand the economics of college athletics. The situation in this state will be much more realistic.

[cydave]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

He couldn't have been working on TV contracts a long time ago. That's silly. The contracts are signed and you are stuck with them until they expire. Several factors play against the Big XII.

First, the Pac-10 has huge advantages over the Big XII simply by way of population base. The Big XII has Dallas, Denver and some mid-sized regional cities. The Pac-10 has LA, SF and Phoenix. The population base is much larger in the Pac-10, which means the viability of a Pac-10 network far exceeds the viability of a Big XII Network. That means the Pac-10 simply has more money to throw around.
The population of the Pac 10 states is a little more than the Big 12. Pac 10 = 54,047,294. And the Big 12 = 47,104,902. So, yes, the Pac 10 does have a slight advantage over the Big 12 in terms of population goes. And I know TV contracts can't be negaotiated until they expire, but Beebe could at least have a plan in place to get a Pac10/Big12 network going. He hasn't even attmepted to get a decent tv network for the Big 12.

Second, the Pac-10's existing TV contract is better than the Big XII's. Using last year as an example, the Pac-10 had 68% of their games televised nationally, third highest amongst BCS leagues. The Big XII only had 56% televised, good for fourth best. Further, the Big XII package disappears after that - the remaining 32% of Pac-10 games saw regional coverage, while the remaining 44% of Big XII games were mostly untelevised. The Big XII is handicapped by this, and by the fact that their two TV deals (with ABC/Disney and FSN) are staggered - they can't increase their ESPN money for another half-decade! The Pac-10 can move much more swiftly to improve their deal (and therefore their piece of the pie).
That paragraph had too many numbers for me, and I hate numbers. But, the Big 12 made more tv revenue money than the Pac10. Although, the Pac 10 divides it up by 2 less teams than the Big 12, not sure what kind of a difference that makes per team. I'm too lazy to find out.

Finally, and most importantly, the Pac-10 is a league of unified institutions. The Big XII is not. To get Texas, the Big 8 sold their soul and gave the southern teams disproportionate power. They get the biggest chunk of TV money, they get consolidated power with what operates as veto power over all league decisions, they get the Big XII title game in their back yard, and they get by far the best deal. Meanwhile the rest of the league fights over scraps. While the Big XII TV deal is worth more raw dollars, it is comparatively worth far less to all but a few schools - and even those schools can get a better deal elsewhere. Big XII country simply doesn't have enough people to compete.

ISU's problems are much greater. They have been the hanger-on in the Big XII (and Big 8) for years. Nobody cares about them nationally. They have a small (and questionably dedicated) fan base, poor football facilities, no population base around them, no tradition, a very small athletic budget, no ability to make money for a conference, and nobody who is loyal to them. I guarantee that during the meetings last week there wasn't a single school in the room who gave a damn about what ISU wants or what is best for Iowa State. There is strength in numbers, and ISU doesn't have it.
Poor football facilities? Minus the stadiums, our facilities are better than Iowa's. Unless you like practicing in a bubble. Remeber, conference expansion has much more to do with than just athletic performance. Academics play a large role in this. Something that is vastly overlooked by a lot of people. But, ISU is very much qualified to be in the Big 10, academically. We are an AAU University, land grant, research based institution, Vet Med school, etc. Very compareable to some Big 10 schools and more so than probably Mizzou. Mizzou has the advantage because they would bring the Missouri market. If there is one thing hurting ISU, its our lack of a market.
I honestly believe that what is/may be about to happen to ISU is for the best for everyone. ISU has a MWC sized building, a MWC sized budget and a program better suited to compete in a MWC-style league. The financial pressure of being the lowest-revenue team in a major conference will be gone and ISU can actually try to compete.
If ISU was in the MWC, we would be the Texas of the MWC. Our attendance numbers and budget is more than all of those schools, some by a huge amount. Baylor actually has a lower budget than ISU, btw, yet they are now taking the place of Colorado in going to the Pac 10, more than likely, Thanks to the Texas legislature.

A state that really is only large enough to support one major conference team will be left with one major conference team.
While I don't disagree with that statement, there are smaller states that have 2 BCS teams in them as well, Kansas and Mississippi to name a couple.
UNI will benefit as well. The major conference revenue model will no longer be expected to apply thanks to a board of regents that doesn't understand the economics of college athletics. The situation in this state will be much more realistic.

Overall, not a bad argument Newsbreaker.

[SteinPizza]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

He


ISU's problems are much greater. They have been the hanger-on in the Big XII (and Big 8) for years. Nobody cares about them nationally. They have a small (and questionably dedicated) fan base, poor football facilities, no population base around them, no tradition, a very small athletic budget, no ability to make money for a conference, and nobody who is loyal to them. I guarantee that during the meetings last week there wasn't a single school in the room who gave a damn about what ISU wants or what is best for Iowa State. There is strength in numbers, and ISU doesn't have it.

News, you are correct. I can already hear somebody typing "what about Des Moines, it's next door to ISU?" Granted, it's Iowa's premier city, especially from a demographic standpoint that matters to TV execs. As a DSM native, I can tell you that 3/4 of the people in DSM could give a rats a$$ about ISU. Geography doesn't mean jack in that regard. People in DSM are all pretty well aligned with U of Iowa, both from an alumni and cultural standpoint. Iowa State is an ag school, DSM is not an ag town. 'Nuff said.

[cydave]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

News, you are correct. I can already hear somebody typing "what about Des Moines, it's next door to ISU?" Granted, it's Iowa's premier city, especially from a demographic standpoint that matters to TV execs. As a DSM native, I can tell you that 3/4 of the people in DSM could give a rats a$$ about ISU. Geography doesn't mean jack in that regard. People in DSM are all pretty well aligned with U of Iowa, both from an alumni and cultural standpoint. Iowa State is an ag school, DSM is not an ag town. 'Nuff said.

While DM isn't some huge tv market, compared to other large cities, it doesn't really matter what teams they are fans of. They just need people to buy cable, they don't care who they are cheering for.
Kind of like the situation with Rutgers and the Big 10. Do you think the people of New Jersey and New York City actually care about Rutgers? No, they don't. But, that gives the Big 10 another few million people to put their network on their cable packages.
It doesn't matter what team they cheer for, so long as they buy cable.

[Panthers to the Bone]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

cydave-

Not trying to nitpick here, but I wanted to correct something you said. You mentioned that:

If ISU was in the MWC, we would be the Texas of the MWC. Our attendance numbers and budget is more than all of those schools, some by a huge amount. Baylor actually has a lower budget than ISU, btw, yet they are now taking the place of Colorado in going to the Pac 10, more than likely, Thanks to the Texas legislature.

ISU averaged 48,426 fans per game last year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Io..._football_team
The MWC football attendance from last year:
BYU 64,236
Utah 45,155
TCU 38,187
Air Force 35,686
New Mexico 27,982
San Diego State 24,464
Colorado State 23,643
UNLV 22,775
Wyoming 19,494

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Mountain_West_Conference_football_season

I would tend to think that Iowa State football attendance would probably drop slightly (due to not having Nebraska/Mizzou/Texas/A&M, etc... type teams on the schedule yearly), while the MWC would probably see an uptick in attendance. I could be wrong, but either way, I don't think ISU would be the Texas of the MWC regarding attendance, as BYU seems to be that currently. They would be positioning themselves for #2 yearly...which isn't a bad thing, IMO. Maybe with consistent winning % and bowl bids, the ISU attendance would increase. That too would be a good thing overall.

I don't know where ISU will end up, but the next 2 weeks will be interesting to see.

[SteinPizza]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

cydave-

I don't know where ISU will end up, but the next 2 weeks will be interesting to see.

PTTB, that's the understatement of the year. With the Big 12 giving an ultimatum to Nebraska and Missouri, and the PAC 10 threatening to take away the revenue producing teams from the Big 12, this whole thing is a feeding frenzy worthy of "Shark Week" on The Discovery Channel.

The business angle to this is extremely interesting. However, the scheme junky in me knows that, in a typical year, an SEC team will kick the living crap out of whoever wins the PAC 16 or the Big 14.

P.S. RIP Big 12. You lost your relevance when the Cotton Bowl went from being a major bowl game to meaning jack squat 20 years ago. This isn't 1977, Darryl Royal isn't coaching Texas, and Tom Osbourne isn't recruiting wife beaters at Nebraska anymore. The fact that most of the Big 12 teams fought on the Confederate side of the Civil War has me celebrating your demise that much more.

[cydave]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

cydave-

Not trying to nitpick here, but I wanted to correct something you said. You mentioned that:



ISU averaged 48,426 fans per game last year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Io..._football_team
The MWC football attendance from last year:
BYU 64,236
Utah 45,155
TCU 38,187
Air Force 35,686
New Mexico 27,982
San Diego State 24,464
Colorado State 23,643
UNLV 22,775
Wyoming 19,494

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Mountain_West_Conference_football_season

I would tend to think that Iowa State football attendance would probably drop slightly (due to not having Nebraska/Mizzou/Texas/A&M, etc... type teams on the schedule yearly), while the MWC would probably see an uptick in attendance. I could be wrong, but either way, I don't think ISU would be the Texas of the MWC regarding attendance, as BYU seems to be that currently. They would be positioning themselves for #2 yearly...which isn't a bad thing, IMO. Maybe with consistent winning % and bowl bids, the ISU attendance would increase. That too would be a good thing overall.

I don't know where ISU will end up, but the next 2 weeks will be interesting to see.

Good post. I guess I shouldn't have said the "Texas" of the MWC, but more like the Oklahoma or Nebraska, in terms of facilities, fanbase, and potential winning. And while we may be more competitive, it's a mystery on how well our fanbase will act. We would probaby see a drop in attendance and donors, at least for the time being until we started winning more often and being more competitive on a daily basis. With the ultimatum that was given to Mizzou and Nebraska, this next week should be very interesting and telling.

[06panther10]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

Iowa state's #1 problem IMO, is that without potentially being in a bcs league with the bcs money coming in, they will have the same exact financial issues that we currently have.

It's not as simple as going to the mwc and becoming a power, as many isu fans seem to think would happen. Iowa state in the mwc wouldn't be, financially, the same Iowa state that it is right now as they will lose all of that bcs money.

[Newsbreaker]

Re: UNI to join a conference with Kansas and ISU?

He hasn't even attmepted to get a decent tv network for the Big 12.

I don't think he can, and there are two reasons for that. First, Texas is blocking it on their dream of a Longhorn Network. Second, Big XII country isn't big enough to support a conference network. Everyone has network fever, but remember the SEC very recently decided it wasn't worth the risk - and they're the freaking SEC! The only way the Big XII Network happens is if they figure out a way to make this proposed joint Big XII/Pac-10 Network happen. The problem there: The Pac-10 isn't interested.

Although, the Pac 10 divides it up by 2 less teams than the Big 12, not sure what kind of a difference that makes per team. I'm too lazy to find out.

Not only that, but USC isn't eating a double portion while Oregon State gets the scraps. The biggest problem - and the problem the South will never allow to be remedied - is that the Big XII divides money by appearance, not equally per school. This is why the "bigger" total number for the Big XII means less money for most of the schools.

Poor football facilities? Minus the stadiums, our facilities are better than Iowa's.

Well, the stadiums are what make the money, so that's not insignificant. Jack Trice isn't a terrible stadium (despite looking like it is straight out of Soviet-era Russia), it just isn't a serviceable BCS facility. It is small (but still not filled, which is another big problem for ISU), but would be a perfectly sized building in a league like the MWC. In terms of other facilities, ISU has a nice practice building (Iowa is soon to build a state-of-the-art facility of their own), but that doesn't earn them a dime, and it certainly hasn't made them more competitive in the Big XII.

Academics play a large role in this. Something that is vastly overlooked by a lot of people.

Academics are extremely important. If ND decides to jump to the Big Ten it will be as much because of the academic prestige and admission to the "Academic Big Ten" as it will be because of football. Still, academics are a disqualifier, not a reason for consideration. Schools won't be invited to the Big Ten because of their academic reputation, but no school is going to be considered based upon its academics. Beyond that, ISU would be the lowest ranked academic school in the Big Ten, so "qualification" there is at least somewhat tenuous.

If there is one thing hurting ISU, its our lack of a market.

This is exactly right. ISU brings almost nothing in terms of TV homes, and the low attendance really hurts their reputation. There is no way to remedy either of those problems.

If ISU was in the MWC, we would be the Texas of the MWC. Our attendance numbers and budget is more than all of those schools, some by a huge amount.

I think BYU and (soon) Boise State have that title wrapped up at present, but you are right that ISU would enjoy a higher stature in the MWC than they have in the Big XII. Still, the question has to be asked, will those things stay the same after a move? ISU's attendance numbers are contingent on Nebraska or Iowa showing up every other year. Neither of those things will be certain in the MWC (though Iowa remains likely). Second, ISU's budget is likely to decline after the move because their income is certain to decline. They will make less "conference" money in the MWC, meaning their income is lower, and their budget will follow suit.

Baylor actually has a lower budget than ISU, btw, yet they are now taking the place of Colorado in going to the Pac 10, more than likely, Thanks to the Texas legislature.

I didn't realize Baylor's numbers were lower. Still, I don't quite believe this "Baylor in/CU out" talk. Baylor got into the Big XII because the Big 8 was willing to go along with the game. The Pac-10 has ZERO interest in Baylor and in a Mexican Standoff between a few Texas Legislators and the Pac-10, the league is going to win.

While I don't disagree with that statement, there are smaller states that have 2 BCS teams in them as well, Kansas and Mississippi to name a couple.

Yes, but they don't compare. Kansas can mooch players off Oklahoma and Texas. Mississippi can do the same off the entirety of the south - a football hotbed. Iowa doesn't have a single contiguous state that provides a similar pipeline.