catdaddy_2402 Wrote:

Quote:I think its safe to say that last years Louisville team was the best fb team that CUSA has ever had.

No, 1998 was the best football team CUSA has ever had.

Quote:Marshall NEVER finished ranked in the Top 10 in the AP, ESPN/USA Today Coaches Poll or the final BCS Rankings.

In 1999 Marshall finished ranked #10 in both the AP and coaches poll.

Are you talking about the Tulane team that went undefeated, but did not really play anyone that was good? What was their final ranking? Was it top10? Did they lead the nation in almost every offensive statistical category? Did they finish with a top 15 defense?
Did they beat a top 10 bowl team in a bowl?

i disagree, I have seen MT comment many times that the issue is in doubt. these is strong opposition in the BCS aganist the Big East. The biggest opposition comes from the Big 12. Both the Big 12 and the SEC opposed the Big east keeping the bid. Unless they change the systen in some way I would say the Big east has about a 25% chance of keeping a pure auto bid.

TopCoog Wrote:i disagree, I have seen MT comment many times that the issue is in doubt. these is strong opposition in the BCS aganist the Big East. The biggest opposition comes from the Big 12. Both the Big 12 and the SEC opposed the Big east keeping the bid. Unless they change the systen in some way I would say the Big east has about a 25% chance of keeping a pure auto bid.

Now that is funny, since Kevin Weiberg(big12 commish) has publicly gone on record in defense of the BE. He himself said that the BE should be given a chance to recuperate. I have not read anything concerning negative comments from the SEC. If they have spoken against the BE, I have not read it and therefore can only say that I dont know anything about it. do you have a link?
As for the bcs changing the rules,They have already changed the rules unofficially, a little. Each time its for the betterment of the BE, such as allowing Louisville's ranking to be used with the BE rankings. All of the bcs leagues had a perfect opportunity to pull the bcs autobid from the BE and they didnt. Now we will continue to get better.

Cuaseroc, No ...they just voted aganinst you when the decision was made. thats how supportive they are.

Quote:Cuaseroc, No ...they just voted aganinst you when the decision was made. thats how supportive they are.

Prove it. Prove they voted against the Big East.

nflsucks Wrote:

Quote:Cuaseroc, No ...they just voted aganinst you when the decision was made. thats how supportive they are.

Prove it. Prove they voted against the Big East.

You mean kinda like TopCoog asking us to provide "links n proof" for the 9th member scenario?

NFL...proof is never required on this silly board ...get real. There are more rumors, half truths , speculation and just plain baloney here than any place on the world wide net. Most of the topics discussed are not even real issues. It reminds one of 'Alice in Wonderland.'

TopCoog Wrote:NFL...proof is never required on this silly board ...get real. There are more rumors, half truths , speculation and just plain baloney here than any place on the world wide net. Most of the topics discussed are not even real issues. It reminds one of 'Alice in Wonderland.'

And your board isn't with the crap about the NCUSA teams having better rankings over the last 20-25 years than the NBE teams?

Coog--I actually enjoy most of your inputs (don't usually agree, but...you usually are respectful), however, these boards are meant as much about posting linked news as it is for idle speculation and talk. You have to be able to filter which is which...

Speculation on this board (other thread) and in past BCS discussions have centered around the dismissal of automatic bids and replacing them with a qualification system. We needn't be geniuses to presume those qualifications will favor the existing BCS schools, with even attendance figures being mentioned as a possible factor. Until such a system is embedded and considered satisfactory to everyone, then the poster who mentioned the need for the BCS to retain a majority of 1-A schools within its membership is correct - If enough schools are outside the system they could use their voting prowess on the NCAA D-1 and 1-AA boards to try to screw the "BCS" schools. If not puruse further (stupid) political action.

And while the B12 and others supported the BE as they undergo this transition, don't think for a minute those conferences and their members are thrilled about a system that provides that much $ and support for a BE conference that is the smallest BCS member and regarded (for now) the weakest in terms of national football appeal. One press wonk on ATL sports radio suggested the automatic payments made by the BCS bowls could be made rationed out not by conferences but by schools, especially now that ND is to receive annual share. So instead of the BE getting 1/6 of the pie, each member would receive 1/64(?) of the allotment. Concessions that might add another conference (MWC) don't help the BE either, as again that would only cut the pie more ways. That option would minimze the damage to the other BCS conferences, however, and remains a real possibility.

Agreed: The BE has secure BCS status for a few more years, and until that status is in jeopardy they will not pursue expansion beyond a 9th member, if even that. And the BE will nbever be left behind completely. The league must improve its national appeal, however, or risk becoming a new age CUSA - not because of their own doing but because of what the other BCS conferences are doing.

IMO

What a shocker, TopCoog's rebuttle was 'You guys don't need proof. Why do I?'

You would think somebody with all the facts would present viable sources to prove himself since he piss and moans so loud when we speculate 'without sources.'

Quote:And while the B12 and others supported the BE as they undergo this transition, don't think for a minute those conferences and their members are thrilled about a system that provides that much $ and support for a BE conference that is the smallest BCS member and regarded (for now) the weakest in terms of national football appeal. One press wonk on ATL sports radio suggested the automatic payments made by the BCS bowls could be made rationed out not by conferences but by schools, especially now that ND is to receive annual share. So instead of the BE getting 1/6 of the pie, each member would receive 1/64(?) of the allotment. Concessions that might add another conference (MWC) don't help the BE either, as again that would only cut the pie more ways. That option would minimze the damage to the other BCS conferences, however, and remains a real possibility.

Payouts don't quite work like that. Each conference that receives an auto-bid are guaranteed 'x' amount of dollars. I believe 14 million was last year. If the BCS Bowls and revenues total goes above that guaranteed payout amount, then they can receive more than 14 million, but they cannot receive any less.

There has been discussion that if conference 'a' has 12 teams and conference 'b' has 8 teams than conference 'b' should only receive 8/12 or 2/3 the guaranteed amount. However, the Big Ten and Pac-10 didn't like that idea. I wonder why? So it was tabled. Of course it wouldn't surprise me to see it resurrected using 10 as the maximum. In this scenario, the BE guaranteed payout would be 4/5 of the minimum (11.2 million rather than 14 million) which is still better than nothing.

Quote:cuseroc Posted on Apr 19 2005, 11:53 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote: (TopCoog @ Apr 19 2005, 11:37 AM)
i disagree, I have seen MT comment many times that the issue is in doubt. these is strong opposition in the BCS aganist the Big East. The biggest opposition comes from the Big 12. Both the Big 12 and the SEC opposed the Big east keeping the bid. Unless they change the systen in some way I would say the Big east has about a 25% chance of keeping a pure auto bid.

Now that is funny, since Kevin Weiberg(big12 commish) has publicly gone on record in defense of the BE. He himself said that the BE should be given a chance to recuperate. I have not read anything concerning negative comments from the SEC. If they have spoken against the BE, I have not read it and therefore can only say that I dont know anything about it. do you have a link?

Actually, I believe you are both correct. The B12 and the SEC initially began as opposed to the BE keeping its BCS auto-bid. Not sure how the SEC feels about it now, but Weiberg apparently has had a change of heart. Some credit Tranghese for this. Others say that the B12 commish realized that after the BE had been decimated, the next league that could be raided was his own.

The Big Ten has always had its eye on Missouri as the second most desireable school for #12. The last time the Pac-10 did a feasibility study about expansion to 12, the top two candidates were Texas and Colorado. And if the SEC were ever to expand to 14, the first teams they reportedly will approach are Texas and Texas A&M.

Quote:As for the bcs changing the rules, they have already changed the rules unofficially, a little. Each time its for the betterment of the BE, such as allowing Louisville's ranking to be used with the BE rankings. All of the bcs leagues had a perfect opportunity to pull the bcs autobid from the BE and they didnt. Now we will continue to get better. 

And this was a part of a discussion UABGrad and myself were having in a thread on this board earlier this month. The fact remains is that if the BCS Cartel really wants the BE on the outside looking in, they have the ability to do so. And in terms of fairness, they probably should have already done so.

Instead they keep looking for reasons to keep the BE part of the mix. First they trumpet Mikey T's argument that the BE should be given time to prove itself. Of course all they have to do in this instance is give the BE a short amount of time and carryover the champion's rule. While they give the BE the short time span, instead of carrying over the champion's rule, there is vague talk that the next eligibility criteria will involve a conference (rather than champion) analysis. This can only help the BE. Next thing we know on top of this is that Louisville's standings from last year will count toward the BE when this analysis is developed. Again, this can only help the BE.

For a group bent on sending the BE out on a rail, their actions seem to be sending an entirely different message.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

Quote:And while the B12 and others supported the BE as they undergo this transition, don't think for a minute those conferences and their members are thrilled about a system that provides that much $ and support for a BE conference that is the smallest BCS member and regarded (for now) the weakest in terms of national football appeal. One press wonk on ATL sports radio suggested the automatic payments made by the BCS bowls could be made rationed out not by conferences but by schools, especially now that ND is to receive annual share. So instead of the BE getting 1/6 of the pie, each member would receive 1/64(?) of the allotment. Concessions that might add another conference (MWC) don't help the BE either, as again that would only cut the pie more ways. That option would minimze the damage to the other BCS conferences, however, and remains a real possibility.

Payouts don't quite work like that. Each conference that receives an auto-bid are guaranteed 'x' amount of dollars. I believe 14 million was last year. If the BCS Bowls and revenues total goes above that guaranteed payout amount, then they can receive more than 14 million, but they cannot receive any less.

There has been discussion that if conference 'a' has 12 teams and conference 'b' has 8 teams than conference 'b' should only receive 8/12 or 2/3 the guaranteed amount. However, the Big Ten and Pac-10 didn't like that idea. I wonder why? So it was tabled. Of course it wouldn't surprise me to see it resurrected using 10 as the maximum. In this scenario, the BE guaranteed payout would be 4/5 of the minimum (11.2 million rather than 14 million) which is still better than nothing.

Quote:cuseroc Posted on Apr 19 2005, 11:53 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote: (TopCoog @ Apr 19 2005, 11:37 AM)
i disagree, I have seen MT comment many times that the issue is in doubt. these is strong opposition in the BCS aganist the Big East. The biggest opposition comes from the Big 12. Both the Big 12 and the SEC opposed the Big east keeping the bid. Unless they change the systen in some way I would say the Big east has about a 25% chance of keeping a pure auto bid.

Now that is funny, since Kevin Weiberg(big12 commish) has publicly gone on record in defense of the BE. He himself said that the BE should be given a chance to recuperate. I have not read anything concerning negative comments from the SEC. If they have spoken against the BE, I have not read it and therefore can only say that I dont know anything about it. do you have a link?

Actually, I believe you are both correct. The B12 and the SEC initially began as opposed to the BE keeping its BCS auto-bid. Not sure how the SEC feels about it now, but Weiberg apparently has had a change of heart. Some credit Tranghese for this. Others say that the B12 commish realized that after the BE had been decimated, the next league that could be raided was his own.

The Big Ten has always had its eye on Missouri as the second most desireable school for #12. The last time the Pac-10 did a feasibility study about expansion to 12, the top two candidates were Texas and Colorado. And if the SEC were ever to expand to 14, the first teams they reportedly will approach are Texas and Texas A&M.

Quote:As for the bcs changing the rules, they have already changed the rules unofficially, a little. Each time its for the betterment of the BE, such as allowing Louisville's ranking to be used with the BE rankings. All of the bcs leagues had a perfect opportunity to pull the bcs autobid from the BE and they didnt. Now we will continue to get better. 

And this was a part of a discussion UABGrad and myself were having in a thread on this board earlier this month. The fact remains is that if the BCS Cartel really wants the BE on the outside looking in, they have the ability to do so. And in terms of fairness, they probably should have already done so.

Instead they keep looking for reasons to keep the BE part of the mix. First they trumpet Mikey T's argument that the BE should be given time to prove itself. Of course all they have to do in this instance is give the BE a short amount of time and carryover the champion's rule. While they give the BE the short time span, instead of carrying over the champion's rule, there is vague talk that the next eligibility criteria will involve a conference (rather than champion) analysis. This can only help the BE. Next thing we know on top of this is that Louisville's standings from last year will count toward the BE when this analysis is developed. Again, this can only help the BE.

For a group bent on sending the BE out on a rail, their actions seem to be sending an entirely different message.

Cheers,
Neil

Very well said Omni. Now what do you have to say about all of these very insightful posts Coog? The bcs has all of the power. If they wanted the BE out of the bcs, we would already be out. But for some reason, they keep making concessions for the BE that will allow it to reassert itself in good timing.

As for your post about the SEC and B12 voting against the BE. :laugh: That is really funny. As if you know who voted for what. Those 2 leagues wield more power and influence than any of the other leagues, save the b10. If they wanted the BE out, they certainly would have used their power and influence to get the BE out.

omnicarrier Wrote:Others say that the B12 commish realized that after the BE had been decimated, the next league that could be raided was his own.

The Big 12 will never ever have to worry about being raided. If that ever happened it would not be called "raiding" but moreless BCS conference realignment. Arkansas could very well end up in the Big 12 again. S. Carolina could end up in the ACC again. W. Virginia could land in the SEC. I'm sure the Big 12 commish was never worried about his conference being raided.

The Big Ten has always had its eye on Missouri as the second most desireable school for #12. The last time the Pac-10 did a feasibility study about expansion to 12, the top two candidates were Texas and Colorado. And if the SEC were ever to expand to 14, the first teams they reportedly will approach are Texas and Texas A&M.

This will never happen. The Big 12 is just as stable of a conference as the SEC. Texas and Texas A&M has too much history with the other Big 12 schools to ever leave. If anything, if Missouri ever wanted to leave the Big 12 for the Big 10 you would have to think Arkansas would be on the Big 12 radar. Then where would the SEC look to for a team? West Virginia is always mention here in the South. One thing for sure, dominoes would be a fallin'.

I love reading your posts because you apparently know what you're talking about.

But I had to disagree with you on a couple of points. I just don't think the Commissioner of the Big 12 was ever concern about his conference being raided .

Quote:I love reading your posts because you apparently know what you're talking about.

Thank you.

Quote:But I had to disagree with you on a couple of points. I just don't think the Commissioner of the Big 12 was ever concern about his conference being raided .

Well, I believe I wrote 'some' people have used that to explain the B12 commissioner's change in stance. I prefer to believe it was Mikey T., but somehow I doubt it.

As for whether or not Weiberg should be concerned about his conference being raided, that's another issue. Of the 5 super-conferences remaining, the B12 is without doubt the most vulnerable.

They have the lowest conference payout of the 5 (even with a football conference championship game) and with the SEC the weakest academic profile. I have pasted the most recent conference payout data I have, which I believe is from 03-04, but could be 02-03. The 04-05 figures haven't been posted yet. They usually come out in May.


ACC REVENUES
Clemson $11,074,338
Duke $9,908,358
Florida State $11,435,885
Georgia Tech $11,279,962
Maryland $11,104,031
North Carolina $9,834,452
NC State $10,856,505
Virginia $10,832,114
Wake Forest $11,292,168
Total $97,617,813
Avg per team $10,846,423


BIG EAST REVENUES
Boston College $6,202,652
Miami $9,651,630
Pittsburgh $6,984,222
Rutgers $4,156,323
Syracuse $5,263,585
Temple $1,639,485
Virginia Tech $5,811,615
West Virginia $6,924,340
Non-football members $14,977,152
Total all members $61,611,004
Total for football members $46,633,852
Avg for football members $5,829,315


BIG TEN REVENUES
Illinois $10,007,222
Indiana $10,003,222
Iowa $9,991,222
Michigan $9,900,394
Michigan State $10,029,722
Minnesota $9,988,222
Northwestern $9,980,222
Ohio State $9,994,222
Penn State $9,989,222
Purdue $9,921,394
Wisconsin $10,041,222
Total $109,846,286
Avg per team $9,986,026

BIG 12 REVENUES
Baylor $4,731,539
Colorado $7,317,100
Iowa State $6,464,560
Kansas $6,131,062
Kansas State $5,733,814
Missouri $6,185,800
Nebraska $6,513,057
Oklahoma $7,931,767
Oklahoma State $6,026,284
Texas $7,322,499
Texas A&M $6,450,615
Texas Tech $6,459,670
Total $77,267,767
Avg per team $6,438,981


PAC-10 REVENUES
Arizona $6,009,382
Arizona State $7,166,846
California $5,797,401
Oregon $7,023,432
Oregon State $3,048,277
Stanford $6,432,799
UCLA $8,476,385
USC $9,972,960
Washington $6,578,001
Washington State $8,780,902
Total $69,286,370
Avg per team $6,928,637

SEC REVENUES
Alabama $6,412,811
Arkansas $8,965,099
Auburn $9,305,396
Florida $9,314,579
Georgia $8,241,207
Kentucky $6,309,646
LSU $9,151,099
Ole Miss $9,230,227
Mississippi State $9,137,342
South Carolina $9,125,227
Tennessee $9,140,227
Vanderbilt $8,692,727
Total $103,025,727*
Avg per team $8,583,807

*SEC later adjusted their conference total up by adding in amounts they earned in previous years and withheld from distributing to teams that were either on NCAA probation or were on conference academic probation. This amount when added to the actual total then exceeded the overall amount earned by the B10 and the avg. team amount earned by the ACC. It was not reflected in these totals since it was an accounting procedure and not a true reflection of revenues earned during the year.

C-USA REVENUES
15-member average $1,306,838
Total $19,602,565


MTN. WEST REVENUES
8-member average $1,312,500
Total $10,500,000


Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

Quote:And while the B12 and others supported the BE as they undergo this transition, don't think for a minute those conferences and their members are thrilled about a system that provides that much $ and support for a BE conference that is the smallest BCS member and regarded (for now) the weakest in terms of national football appeal. One press wonk on ATL sports radio suggested the automatic payments made by the BCS bowls could be made rationed out not by conferences but by schools, especially now that ND is to receive annual share. So instead of the BE getting 1/6 of the pie, each member would receive 1/64(?) of the allotment. Concessions that might add another conference (MWC) don't help the BE either, as again that would only cut the pie more ways. That option would minimze the damage to the other BCS conferences, however, and remains a real possibility.

Payouts don't quite work like that. Each conference that receives an auto-bid are guaranteed 'x' amount of dollars. I believe 14 million was last year. If the BCS Bowls and revenues total goes above that guaranteed payout amount, then they can receive more than 14 million, but they cannot receive any less.

There has been discussion that if conference 'a' has 12 teams and conference 'b' has 8 teams than conference 'b' should only receive 8/12 or 2/3 the guaranteed amount. However, the Big Ten and Pac-10 didn't like that idea. I wonder why? So it was tabled. Of course it wouldn't surprise me to see it resurrected using 10 as the maximum. In this scenario, the BE guaranteed payout would be 4/5 of the minimum (11.2 million rather than 14 million) which is still better than nothing.

Perhaps I chould've rephrased my post by we're basically saying the same thing. I know how the payouts work now, being made directly to each conference. What the speculation has been is how those payments could be restructured so as not to leverage ND or a conference (now) with a much smaller membership. We're just presenting two of the different ideas raised here.

Other notes:

- I can't see Arkansas ever leaving the SEC now, but especially if it was to replace Missouri who would be another natural rival for them. a) it would mean less money for Arkansas, b) it would mean fewer bowl opportunities within the southeast, and c) the divisional alignment within the B12 would have to be restructured or else Arkansas would end up in the less desirable B12 north, negating any benefit of the move.

Plus, by the time this became a consideration one would suspect the financial implications would suggests a Texas/A&M move to the SEC would be more profitable for all parties... Except the other B12 schools, of course! :D

- The MWC actually increased their per-school payouts via the new contract with CSTV. Unsure if the value was enough to offset travel costs with the new gas prices! What that did, however, was put their exposure at risk by marginalizing their number of guaranteed appearances on the major networks. What's more, CUSA garnered (to my surprise) almost the same per-school money, negating some of the benefits TCU earned in the move. But the MWC did learn through their studies and negotiations that a move to 12 would not payoff unless they could clearly distance themselves from the WAC, thus stealing nearly all the air time and TV money from that conference.

Note: Speculation is that if the PAC 10 were to remove Utah and possibly 1 more school from the MWC conference, that the MWC would then go after Fresno, Boise and more until it reached 12. The more I think about it the less likely a jump to 12 feels. If the conference was only going to receive a pittance in TV money for their conference championship game WITH Utah and all the others, how much sense would it be to go to 12 without them? I only see this happening if they went completely regional, discarding TCU and never thinking about Hawaii, such that travel costs could be kept to an absolute minimum.

Wilkie01 Wrote:Everyone knows that I and many Louisville fans have been down on Memphis because of their scumbag AD!

Just an FYI and nothing else.......our AD's contract runs out next summer and rumor says he will likely retire.......hopefully he does because Tiger fans are really getting tired of the AD dropping the ball on alot of things around this program.....we want a proactive and enthusiastic AD who demands the most out of our Athletic Department staff and marketing department......we will see, but I think the writing is on the wall for RCJ in Memphis......if not, and he gets an extension, you will see a very unhappy fan base.......

On average the Big 12 has made just about the same amount of money as the SEC. Maybe not last year but overall I would think the difference would be less than a half-a-mil to a mil. I don't know if you could consider that making the Big 12 vunerable to being raided.

On a side note: Texas A&M or Texas leaving the Big 12 would be like Alabama and Auburn leaving the SEC. Just not gonna happen. The Big 12, Big 10+1, SEC, ACC and PAC 10 will basically remain the same over time. Maybe one or two teams may switch conferences and the PAC 10 or Big 12 may eventually decide to go to 12 teams but those conferences are as stable as stable can be.

If anything, it's the other conferences that need to be worried about them. JMHO!

Well, remember that Texas, A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor only joined the Big XII relatively recently. And at that, they practically had Baylor forced down their throats. There's no sense of loyalty between the Texas schools and, say, Iowa State, Kansas, K-State, Nebraska...

While we're at it, the Pac-10 was the Pac-8 not all that long ago.

None of us knows what will happen, but you can bet that 15 years ago, nobody would have predicted that Virginia Tech and Boston College would be in the ACC. Certainly none of us knows what the conference landscape will look like in 2020.

USFFan

Neil,

What are those revenue's based on? I saw a stat last year that Ohio State football alone pulled in $46,000,000 (plus they sell 100,000 seats at $57 each, and another 5,000 at $27 to students). That adds up to over $5.8M :eek: per game. What am I missing in this thread for those revenues?

mlbUC Wrote:Neil,

What are those revenue's based on? I saw a stat last year that Ohio State football alone pulled in $46,000,000 (plus they sell 100,000 seats at $57 each, and another 5,000 at $27 to students). That adds up to over $5.8M :eek: per game. What am I missing in this thread for those revenues?

I think the payouts that Neil listed are for TV payouts and what the conferences paid out to each team. What the individual teams make from selling tickets and concessions etc..., I would imagine is totally separate from the list above.