Turn Off Ads?
Page 43 of 45 FirstFirst ... 3339404142434445 LastLast
Results 631 to 645 of 671

Thread: College Football Realignment

  1. #631
    Yay!
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Middletown, Ohio
    Posts
    7,420

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor View Post
    The best of the rest isn't demonstrably better than the MAC -- especially if UC goes to the MAC w/ UConn & USF in tow.
    Using the logic of geography, USF should join the Sun Belt or C-USA. They're better leagues than the MAC anyway.
    When all is said and done more is said than done.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #632
    On the brink wolfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    is everything
    Posts
    2,677

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor View Post
    This new "best of the rest" conference will offer nothing by way of strength of schedule and will also generate next to no revenue for football.

    Six to one, half a dozen to the other. You could put UConn and UC in the MAC and it would be a better conference than the "best of the rest" without those two.

    No matter what UC does, it's not going to make TV money for football. It's a no win situation, so may as well avoid some complex solution.
    It will generate significantly more revenue than the MAC. If I have a chance tomorrow, I'll link articles saying as much.
    How do we know he's not Mel Torme?

  4. #633
    On the brink wolfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    is everything
    Posts
    2,677

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    In my experience, devout football fans gravitate to the best games. A fan will watch his team no matter what but the rest of the saturday he basically acts like a fun gun for hire.

    The hypothetical conference above would consistently fail to offer and meat for the fan searching for his next game. Literally ESPN 12 might carry some of the conferences games but then again the Appalachian State game might preempt it...
    In my experience, devout fans want to know how conference mates are playing. As to the ESPN 12 comment, not really sure what that adds to the conversation.
    How do we know he's not Mel Torme?

  5. #634
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,678

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfboy View Post
    In my experience, devout fans want to know how conference mates are playing. As to the ESPN 12 comment, not really sure what that adds to the conversation.
    It makes a specific point that is very relevant. Devout fans can check the internet to see how conference mates fared. They can spend their attention watching actual compelling football. And make no mistake, given the hypothetical conference outlined, there is not enough devout fandom to get many games on tv.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  6. #635
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    639

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor View Post
    This new "best of the rest" conference will offer nothing by way of strength of schedule and will also generate next to no revenue for football.

    Six to one, half a dozen to the other. You could put UConn and UC in the MAC and it would be a better conference than the "best of the rest" without those two.

    No matter what UC does, it's not going to make TV money for football. It's a no win situation, so may as well avoid some complex solution.
    I respectfully disagree.

    I think the inclusion of schools like Boise State and BYU makes the best of the rest conference demonstrably better than what the MAC offers and most of the programs being mentioned offer far more growth potential than any team currently residing in the MAC. If nothing else consider the disparity in marketplaces; on one side you've got Tampa, Orlando, Philadelphia and San Diego and on the other you've got rust belt cities like Toledo, Akron and Buffalo. Not to mention the fact that the quality of basketball with UConn, UC, BYU, UNLV, SDSU, New Mexico and Temple would be roughly 1000x better than what you'd find in the MAC, or frankly what the Catholic league will probably be able to offer.

    Ultimately I think UC will end up in a better situation before the Big East disintegration comes to pass but they've also got to prepare for the worst and IMHO the proposed best of the rest is less awful than the MAC.

  7. #636
    We are back! Assembly Hall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Warsaw, IN
    Posts
    742

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by nmculbreth View Post
    Ultimately I think UC will end up in a better situation before the Big East disintegration comes to pass but they've also got to prepare for the worst and IMHO the proposed best of the rest is less awful than the MAC.
    I agree with that comment.

    The next dominoes that fall will come from the ACC. It will be interesting to see how it all works out for UC.
    ...and this one belongs to the Reds.

  8. #637
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,350

    Re: College Football Realignment

    I saw this on another message board and they were from Saturday morning and nothing's happened yet so take it with a grain of salt.

    The following tweets are from Dave Reynolds, Bradley MBB beat writer. Take out of them what you will as he is the only source I've found on this and I'm personally wary until someone else provides true confirmation, especially from any of the schools involved. If true, this could be some serious breaking news...

    10:43am - I'm hearing that announcements on Creighton and Evansville leaving Valley are coming today.

    10:44am - Creighton going to the Catholic conference, Evansville to the Horizon.

    10:44am - Valpo, UW-Milwaukee, Loyola, UIC, Oral Roberts among candidates to replace them in the MVC.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  9. #638
    On the brink wolfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    is everything
    Posts
    2,677

    Re: College Football Realignment

    I think the following link addresses the points raised by both CE and jojo:

    http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012...e-this-season/

    As to jojo's point, clearly the teams in this new conference won't get as many appearances as other conferences; however, they will still get more television exposure than the everyone outside of the big 5.

    I think the link also supports two points I've made: (i) that people do in fact watch these teams; and, (ii) that the big 5 conferences have games that few people watch. Cincinnati and Boise, the two flagship programs for this new conference had respectable ratings for their televised games, ranging from 1.0 to 2.7. Granted, this is nowhere near the premier match ups from the power 5 conferences, but no one is claiming that this new conference stacks up with those guys. If you add in BYU, that's another team that can bring a respectable rating. Outside of the Pitt game, even USF did pretty well in its televised games.

    Are these ratings on par with premier SEC matchups? Heck no. At the same time, they're hardly "ESPN 12" material. I know you don't care for these teams jojo, but I think these ratings show that at least some people do. There is some value in a media deal for this conference, especially since NBC is desperate for inventory and it's the only conference on the market right now. Will it approach anything remotely close to what even the ACC gets? No way. Then again, as the sixth best conference in college football, it will get the sixth best contract.

    As to CE's point about the MAC, I think these ratings show just how terrible a move that would be for UC. The MAC championship game, which sent NIU to a BCS bowl, only garnered a .9 rating. No one cares about MAC football at all, and UC would destroy its football program if it joined up with the MAC. Even with the Cinderella story of NIU this year, no one really watched.

    I think the best move for UC right now, if they can negotiate it, is to go all sports with the new C7 league, and go football only with the teams mentioned in the DeCourcy article. The C7 bball contract should be fairly lucrative, and they can add icing to the cake with the new football conference. In the mean time, keep winning, upgrade facilities, and see where you land when realignment crops up again.
    How do we know he's not Mel Torme?

  10. #639
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,627

    Re: College Football Realignment

    The total value for a "New" BE media package (including Boise, prior to the defection of LOU and the catholic split) was $40-$60m per year. Assuming those losses push the deal to the low end ($40m), that works out to $2.8-$3.3M per school in a 12 or 14 team league. Again, it's better than any other deal out there, but not demonstrably better than what UC, UCONN and USF could do if they just added themselves, as a bloc, to some other conference. Every solution is bad, the question UC needs to ask is whether they want to make no money flying cross country or no money travelling locally.

    Also there's this -- everyone knows UC is looking to bolt at first chance. There's a chance no conference will have them (especially a conference looking to lure BYU) if UC isn't willing to sign a Grant of Rights. That would be suicide for UC athletics.

    ETA: The scenario you're advocating also assumes the catholic league would have UC. That's not a guarantee, especially if they're trying to lure Xavier.
    Championships Matter.
    23 Years and Counting...

  11. #640
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,350

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor View Post
    ETA: The scenario you're advocating also assumes the catholic league would have UC. That's not a guarantee, especially if they're trying to lure Xavier.
    It'll be tough to lure any A-10 teams away from there since they just signed a deal with 3 networks for $40M over 8 years.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  12. #641
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,537

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R View Post
    It'll be tough to lure any A-10 teams away from there since they just signed a deal with 3 networks for $40M over 8 years.
    That's only $350k per school. That won't be hard to lure entire a team away...at all.
    Last edited by Brutus; 12-17-2012 at 03:30 PM.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  13. #642
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Braintree, MA
    Posts
    2,075

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R View Post
    It'll be tough to lure any A-10 teams away from there since they just signed a deal with 3 networks for $40M over 8 years.
    Xavier will say yes before they can even finish getting the question out.

  14. #643
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,627

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Yeah -- that's a no-brainer switch for Xavier, and I'd be shocked if the Catholic League doesn't get more money from a media deal than the A10.

    Mack and Bobinski are already dreaming of championship games at MSG and hosting Georgetown, Marquette and 'Nova every season.
    Championships Matter.
    23 Years and Counting...

  15. #644
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,678

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfboy View Post
    I think the following link addresses the points raised by both CE and jojo:

    http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012...e-this-season/

    As to jojo's point, clearly the teams in this new conference won't get as many appearances as other conferences; however, they will still get more television exposure than the everyone outside of the big 5.

    I think the link also supports two points I've made: (i) that people do in fact watch these teams; and, (ii) that the big 5 conferences have games that few people watch. Cincinnati and Boise, the two flagship programs for this new conference had respectable ratings for their televised games, ranging from 1.0 to 2.7. Granted, this is nowhere near the premier match ups from the power 5 conferences, but no one is claiming that this new conference stacks up with those guys. If you add in BYU, that's another team that can bring a respectable rating. Outside of the Pitt game, even USF did pretty well in its televised games.

    Are these ratings on par with premier SEC matchups? Heck no. At the same time, they're hardly "ESPN 12" material. I know you don't care for these teams jojo, but I think these ratings show that at least some people do. There is some value in a media deal for this conference, especially since NBC is desperate for inventory and it's the only conference on the market right now. Will it approach anything remotely close to what even the ACC gets? No way. Then again, as the sixth best conference in college football, it will get the sixth best contract.

    As to CE's point about the MAC, I think these ratings show just how terrible a move that would be for UC. The MAC championship game, which sent NIU to a BCS bowl, only garnered a .9 rating. No one cares about MAC football at all, and UC would destroy its football program if it joined up with the MAC. Even with the Cinderella story of NIU this year, no one really watched.

    I think the best move for UC right now, if they can negotiate it, is to go all sports with the new C7 league, and go football only with the teams mentioned in the DeCourcy article. The C7 bball contract should be fairly lucrative, and they can add icing to the cake with the new football conference. In the mean time, keep winning, upgrade facilities, and see where you land when realignment crops up again.
    I think UC should shoot higher.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  16. #645
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,627

    Re: College Football Realignment

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    I think UC should shoot higher.
    I agree (you associate with mid-majors, you're going to inevitably get lumped in with mid-majors), but no one else wants them. They either would have to go independent (and get no TV money at all) or join some conference full of bad programs.
    Championships Matter.
    23 Years and Counting...


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

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

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25