He1nousOne
The One you Love to Hate.
Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
|
RE: Twitter Rumor
(06-08-2015 09:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote: (06-08-2015 06:44 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: (06-08-2015 04:45 PM)GE and MTS Wrote: (06-06-2015 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: (06-05-2015 08:59 PM)GE and MTS Wrote: Why would the PAC 12 (or anyone for that matter) take Texas Tech, Iowa State, Kansas State, etc. if Texas, Oklahoma, and/or Kansas is available? Or to better phrase it, to dissolve the Big 12 everyone needs a home, why would the PAC 12 agree to take the relative scraps? Granted they are worth more to the PAC 12 than to everyone else but if they'd be available anyway, why would they essentially give away Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma?
The Pac tried and failed, in a very public attempt. Is this little tidbit of reality lost upon you? You do understand how the complication of travelling two time zones to the West sucks, don't you?
Do we need to run you through a beginners class for realignment? I am not having a go at you with this comment, I'm honestly at a loss when it comes to understanding your comment about the Pac "giving away" schools that chose to not join The PAC. Oklahoma only wanted to come if Texas was willing. They weren't so...Oklahoma doesn't want to go to the PAC.
Okay this isn't rocket science but it must have been hard to figure out so let's try again: To get out of the Big 12 grant of rights early instead of waiting for them to end in a decade plus, the Big 12 would have to dissolve which is YOUR scenario, right? So if we can all agree that Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas are all the big money makers, and they don't want to go to the PAC 12 or can't get the votes with "little brother", then why would the PAC 12 agree to "give them away" to the other conferences?
The PAC is already at a disadvantage on a per school payout to the Big Ten and SEC before anyone they get any new schools (and I'll bet you whoever the Big Ten and SEC gets are more valuable than Kansas State, Iowa State, etc. that ends up in the PAC). And the rich get richer and create an even bigger gulf of money between the PAC and the other two. So again I'll ask: why would the PAC give away Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas to give the Big Ten and SEC (and even ACC) more money, prestige, and power in order to take an uninspiring group of four that puts them further behind the top two and possibly even the ACC?
Did you really just try to talk down to me? Oh that's rich.
The PAC isn't "giving" anyone away because the PAC completely failed to get the highest caliber schools in the big 12. So it's not the PAC giving them away, it's the PAC being handed a big bag of money to take some of the lesser schools. Now THAT is a very simple concept and I do hope you can wrap your little Liberty addled brain around it. I know this big sports and big money thing is foreign to you guys.
You see, for someone to give something away, THEY HAVE TO OWN IT FIRST. You have to be able to understand something that simple.
The PAC makes the most use of schools like Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas Tech and TCU because that gets the PAC into the Central Time Zone. I have told everyone plenty of times why that is so valuable. If the concept is beyond you, well so be it but I really don't feel like taking the time to explain it to you on OUR forum because it seems like the concept is beyond you.
One more thing, start acting like a Moderator that is visiting a forum that he doesn't moderate.
If anyone started anything, you began it with your "Do we need to run you through a beginners class for realignment?" and your backtracking "I am not having a go at you with this comment," followed up with another jab of "I'm honestly at a loss when it comes to understanding your comment about the Pac "giving away" schools that chose to not join The PAC." But as you pointed out, I'm a mod so I'll try better to stay above the instigation and do my part to have an adult conversation. No more jabs from me.
I guess it boils down to you and I having different expectations of what we think the PAC will do. I am under the assumption that Oklahoma and Kansas to the Big Ten (Move A), Texas to the ACC (or wherever plus a potential buddy; Move B), and Oklahoma State and West Virginia (or whomever; Move C) to the SEC would make those conferences more money than Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, or whatever other group of four gets added to the PAC. Will the PAC make more money per school? Yes. Will the per school payout gulf that currently exists between the Big Ten/SEC and PAC increase as a result? Yes. So why would the PAC (from your scenario where all the P5 conferences divvy up the Big 12 by dissolving the GoR and finding 8/10 or so homes) agree break up a conference, get the short end of the stick, and create a further gulf between them and the two richest conferences? Okay, maybe "giving them away" isn't literally accurate because they aren't members of the conference but they can only go away in your scenario if the GoR is dissolved which wouldn't happen without the PAC's support.
I like this version of you better, despite the fact that you are correct in saying I started it.
I can answer this in very short, very simple and very accurate manner.
Why would the PAC go along with this? At the end of the big 12 GoR, similar result will happen. None of the major players in the big 12 will go West. That has already been made abundantly clear to us. What is the difference? The Networks wont have to pay The PAC big dollars for them to go along with anything. The PAC can be ignored at that point and then they will drastically fall behind.
Sure, with TCU, TTU, ISU and KSU they may not get equal money but if they are decent negotiators then they will realize how much money will be lost to the Networks if they cannot move things forward for the next decade. That alone will mean the Networks will end up paying them equally to the other conferences despite the differences that you point out. The longer time runs out though, the less leverage that the PAC has and thus the less money they can command for going along with The Plan.
That is why The PAC will get equivalent money for going along with this. They are Necessary. The excuse that the Networks will give for paying them the money will be the 90 extra tv slots that the PAC will then be able to offer match ups for. That number, Ninety, is a huge number. It's enough to explain the payoff to the masses.
|
|