(05-04-2013 09:42 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 09:36 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 09:00 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:45 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Perception is everything in college sports. SEC always had good teams but no one thought of them as dominant. After Auburn got left out of the NCG a few years ago, everything changed. SEC's mission was to change everyone's perception so that didn't happen again. They did this all without tons of TV money and this is where I think the BIG is making a mistake. The focus on money and not improving the product will hurt them. They haven't won a football championship since 2002. Just a reminder, the BIG has the same number of BCS championships as the ACC.

I have said it before, the Big Ten mentality at the top is very static. They don't understand the changing landscape all that well. They are slowly coming around but it has taken the conference being constantly ridiculed for their pride to be wounded enough to actually do something about it.

The major signal to this being the case is Urban Meyer. The quotes he puts out there are very significant. Who was the loser in the PR battle between Him and Bielema? Pretty obvious...

What has Urban said about expanding recruiting? He talked about wanting 8 times the amount of money allocated to him for recruiting. He knows what the Big Ten needs to do to be relevant because he has been successful in the SEC. He knows where he needs to go to get certain athletes and he knows how tough it is going to be.

Urban will lead the way and the others will have to get on their horses and ride rather than taking the Traditional Big Ten route of being Fat and Lazy.

Urban could end up being the Saban of the BIG, but then you have to wonder if everyone else is willing to keep up. The top should be fine as always, but I don't ever see Rutgers and Maryland competing. BIG just added two bottom feeders. It just dilutes the product.

Urban and Brady Hoke...now if Penn State can keep O'Brien away from the NFL once they get off this NCAA Sanction-(in which the NCAA went way overboard) they will be back as well.

Urban Meyer (Bowling Green), Brady Hoke (Ball State), Nick Saban (Kent State) all got their starts as head coaches in the MAC. If only the MAC has P5-like money we could compete with anybody. Money is really the only thing holding the MAC down. There are many other head coaches in the Big Ten and SEC (Gary Pinkel - Toledo) all stolen away from the MAC. Would love to see MAC schools make a dent in Big Ten country and take their fans away. Ball State beating Indian three straight years and NIU being better in Illinois could eventually make a swing in the Big Ten states of Indiana and Illinois. This all on literally 1/10th the funding and resources. Give the MAC schools the funding that the big Ten gets for 5-10 years and our schools could take them in a few states and challenge them fairly.

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

(05-04-2013 06:17 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  Urban Meyer (Bowling Green), Brady Hoke (Ball State), Nick Saban (Kent State) all got their starts as head coaches in the MAC. If only the MAC has P5-like money we could compete with anybody. Money is really the only thing holding the MAC down. There are many other head coaches in the Big Ten and SEC (Gary Pinkel - Toledo) all stolen away from the MAC. Would love to see MAC schools make a dent in Big Ten country and take their fans away. Ball State beating Indian three straight years and NIU being better in Illinois could eventually make a swing in the Big Ten states of Indiana and Illinois. This all on literally 1/10th the funding and resources. Give the MAC schools the funding that the big Ten gets for 5-10 years and our schools could take them in a few states and challenge them fairly.

Don't take this personal, but the MAC has more than money issues holding it down:

1) Too many small schools in Ohio competing for the same recruits

2) Too many small schools in Ohio, a very big problem because it's a B1G dominated state

3) One of the schools in Ohio needs to drop down to fcs (you can guess which one)

4)Too many schools in B1G dominated markets

5) Small Stadiums

6) Small attendance

7) Small Footprint

8) Conference has too many schools for its budget

9) Buffalo and UMASS aren't good fits for the MAC

10)The MAC should probably consider going down to ten schools

(05-04-2013 07:03 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

The Sugar and Rose (and Orange) situations tell us exactly who stands where in the P5 pecking order. That is not a "little bit", it is the whole ball game, as there are no other relevant markers to indicate this.

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

Quo, that just your opinion and right now in the sports media it is a minority opinion. It is much more detailed then just a Contract Bowl Tie-In and actually a rather simplistic view of the Business of College Athletics.

Arute pretty much stated in his opinion that many have said on this board, the Big XIi as constructed right now has limited upside due to lack of TV Sets and the overall size of the league in regards to number of schools and population in it Footprint.

Also, if the reporting is correct look @ the Bowl Lineup after the Contract/CFP that the ACC is putting together. As a league it is right their with the B1G especially if/when they complete the joint Tie-In with the Capitol One Bowl and the pending deal with the Gator Bowl to go with the Sun Bowl, Russell Athletic Bowl and the pending upgrade in payout of the soon to be B1G-ACC Pinstripe Bowl and the soon to be increased payout of the SEC-ACC Belk Bowl.

When it comes to academics, overall Bowl Lineup going forward, Media Rights Deal, the other revenue sport Basketball and overall Olympic Sports along with a much larger population base the advantage is swinging towards if they play their cards right the "East Coast Version" of the Pac 12....the ACC...

(05-04-2013 07:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:03 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

The Sugar and Rose (and Orange) situations tell us exactly who stands where in the P5 pecking order. That is not a "little bit", it is the whole ball game, as there are no other relevant markers to indicate this.

The $$$ going forward....the TV Ratings and now the Sports Media-(and not just Arute) and say'n different...but you can keep tell'n yourself that to make yourself feel better...it doesn't make you correct but it does make your opinion the minority one...just saying.

(05-04-2013 07:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:03 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

The Sugar and Rose (and Orange) situations tell us exactly who stands where in the P5 pecking order. That is not a "little bit", it is the whole ball game, as there are no other relevant markers to indicate this.

Exactly. When the Big 12 loses the Sugar Bowl against the SEC, I will be concerned. Until then, the ACC is on the outside looking in among power 4 conferences

(05-04-2013 07:31 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:03 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

The Sugar and Rose (and Orange) situations tell us exactly who stands where in the P5 pecking order. That is not a "little bit", it is the whole ball game, as there are no other relevant markers to indicate this.

Exactly. When the Big 12 loses the Sugar Bowl against the SEC, I will be concerned. Until then, the ACC is on the outside looking in among power 4 conferences

1. If you're hanging your hat on the Sugar Bowl...imma laugh @ you. The Bowl Tie-In is nice but in the end the landscape is not the Orange, Sugar or even Rose Bowls but to be in the 4 School Playoffs. The Bowls will have pretty much the same schools....Sugar Bowl the #2 or 3 SEC School...the Orange Bowl the #3 or 4 SEC School or the #2-3 B1G School or Notre Dame.

2. The National Media sentiment is shifting but it doesn't really matter...the Pac 12, Big XII & ACC when all $$$$ is handed out to the schools going forward will be making roughly the same...the two lead dogs are as Arute put it in the order are the SEC & B1G....he just slide the ACC @ into the 4th spot.

Nah, we own the Orange Bowl. As I see it the Big XII gave up the Fiesta (or possibly Cotton) to be the SEC's whipping boy

(05-04-2013 07:48 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:31 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:03 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

The Sugar and Rose (and Orange) situations tell us exactly who stands where in the P5 pecking order. That is not a "little bit", it is the whole ball game, as there are no other relevant markers to indicate this.

Exactly. When the Big 12 loses the Sugar Bowl against the SEC, I will be concerned. Until then, the ACC is on the outside looking in among power 4 conferences

1. If you're hanging your hat on the Sugar Bowl...imma laugh @ you. The Bowl Tie-In is nice but in the end the landscape is not the Orange, Sugar or even Rose Bowls but to be in the 4 School Playoffs. The Bowls will have pretty much the same schools....Sugar Bowl the #2 or 3 SEC School...the Orange Bowl the #3 or 4 SEC School or the #2-3 B1G School or Notre Dame.

2. The National Media sentiment is shifting but it doesn't really matter...the Pac 12, Big XII & ACC when all $$$$ is handed out to the schools going forward will be making roughly the same...the two lead dogs are as Arute put it in the order are the SEC & B1G....he just slide the ACC @ into the 4th spot.

Definitely not hanging my hat on the Sugar Bowl because 9 times out of 10, the Big 12 will have a team in the 4 team playoff. Most of the time, our 2nd place team will play in the Sugar.

So for quo all he cares about is the Sugar Bowl...The ONE bowl the Big 12 has against the SEC. Well starting in 2014, the ACC may have as many as FIVE bowl tie ins with the SEC. Way more than anyone else......

ACC-SEC tie-ins already exist in the Independence and Music City... Just needs to be renewed.
SEC wants to get into the Belk Bowl to replace the AAC opposite the ACC.
Gator wants the ACC back to take the Big 10's slot opposite the SEC
Orange has a deal with SEC/Big10/ND opposite the ACC.

So you are looking at a minimum of 4 and up to 5 matchups a year against the SEC. A lot of eyes on those games.

(05-04-2013 03:37 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:26 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 02:50 PM)lew240z Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 10:36 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Sorry, "the $$$$ is [not] going to be around the same," but still very good....

B1G is making a projected gross of $310

PAC -----------------------------$303

ACC ----------------------------$293

SEC -----------------------------$270

B12 -----------------------------$262

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/01/16/401...-list.html

You are correct. The numbers aren't the same.

Big 10 12 schools $25.8 million per School

PAC 12 12 schools $ 25.25 million per School

ACC 14 schools $20.9 million per School

SEC 14 schools $19.3 million per School

Big 12 10 schools $26.2 million per School

1. The Kansas City article was done in Jamuary...a lot has changed since them especially with the advent of the SEC Network & the ACC Media Rework....the two key words that I said and got overlooked was "Going Forward".

2. Like a previous poster said earlier in this thread who is not a "ACC Fanboy"...if Swofford & ESPN get an ACC Network off the ground it really becomes a mute point.

In the end....all 5 Contract Leagues are going to bring in $$$ that would have been laughed @ as being unrealistic even 2 years ago...

It's laughable and at the same time sad at the difference in $$$ the BIG 5 are/and will be making when compared to the mid-majors. I know the AAC is only getting about $2 mil per school. Moreover, I read in another thread that the MAC and SBC schools are getting about $40,000 each (anybody please correct me if these amounts are wrong)....

The gap has grown dramatically. The bottom of the Big 12 (Colorado/Baylor) was making $7 million from conference distributions just a few years ago and Washington State was making $2-3 million from the Pac 12 who had a more incentive based allocation plan than the Big 12. WSU was only doing a million or so better than the MWC schools. BE schools were $2-$3 million. Now its $15-$25 million a year difference between the gang of 5 and the AQ 5.

(05-04-2013 08:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:37 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:26 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 02:50 PM)lew240z Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 10:36 AM)Underdog Wrote:  Sorry, "the $$$$ is [not] going to be around the same," but still very good....

B1G is making a projected gross of $310

PAC -----------------------------$303

ACC ----------------------------$293

SEC -----------------------------$270

B12 -----------------------------$262

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/01/16/401...-list.html

You are correct. The numbers aren't the same.

Big 10 12 schools $25.8 million per School

PAC 12 12 schools $ 25.25 million per School

ACC 14 schools $20.9 million per School

SEC 14 schools $19.3 million per School

Big 12 10 schools $26.2 million per School

1. The Kansas City article was done in Jamuary...a lot has changed since them especially with the advent of the SEC Network & the ACC Media Rework....the two key words that I said and got overlooked was "Going Forward".

2. Like a previous poster said earlier in this thread who is not a "ACC Fanboy"...if Swofford & ESPN get an ACC Network off the ground it really becomes a mute point.

In the end....all 5 Contract Leagues are going to bring in $$$ that would have been laughed @ as being unrealistic even 2 years ago...

It's laughable and at the same time sad at the difference in $$$ the BIG 5 are/and will be making when compared to the mid-majors. I know the AAC is only getting about $2 mil per school. Moreover, I read in another thread that the MAC and SBC schools are getting about $40,000 each (anybody please correct me if these amounts are wrong)....

The gap has grown dramatically. The bottom of the Big 12 (Colorado/Baylor) was making $7 million from conference distributions just a few years ago and Washington State was making $2-3 million from the Pac 12 who had a more incentive based allocation plan than the Big 12. WSU was only doing a million or so better than the MWC schools. BE schools were $2-$3 million. Now its $15-$25 million a year difference between the gang of 5 and the AQ 5.

....and the separation of the Big 5 and M&M 5 has official occurred. With each passing year, the M&M 5 will eventually (if not already) find themselves totally out of reach of the Big 5.

(05-04-2013 08:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:37 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:26 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 02:50 PM)lew240z Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 10:36 AM)Underdog Wrote:  Sorry, "the $$$$ is [not] going to be around the same," but still very good....

B1G is making a projected gross of $310

PAC -----------------------------$303

ACC ----------------------------$293

SEC -----------------------------$270

B12 -----------------------------$262

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/01/16/401...-list.html

You are correct. The numbers aren't the same.

Big 10 12 schools $25.8 million per School

PAC 12 12 schools $ 25.25 million per School

ACC 14 schools $20.9 million per School

SEC 14 schools $19.3 million per School

Big 12 10 schools $26.2 million per School

1. The Kansas City article was done in Jamuary...a lot has changed since them especially with the advent of the SEC Network & the ACC Media Rework....the two key words that I said and got overlooked was "Going Forward".

2. Like a previous poster said earlier in this thread who is not a "ACC Fanboy"...if Swofford & ESPN get an ACC Network off the ground it really becomes a mute point.

In the end....all 5 Contract Leagues are going to bring in $$$ that would have been laughed @ as being unrealistic even 2 years ago...

It's laughable and at the same time sad at the difference in $$$ the BIG 5 are/and will be making when compared to the mid-majors. I know the AAC is only getting about $2 mil per school. Moreover, I read in another thread that the MAC and SBC schools are getting about $40,000 each (anybody please correct me if these amounts are wrong)....

The gap has grown dramatically. The bottom of the Big 12 (Colorado/Baylor) was making $7 million from conference distributions just a few years ago and Washington State was making $2-3 million from the Pac 12 who had a more incentive based allocation plan than the Big 12. WSU was only doing a million or so better than the MWC schools. BE schools were $2-$3 million. Now its $15-$25 million a year difference between the gang of 5 and the AQ 5.

Amazing...schools like WSU in the Pac 12 & Texas Tech in the Big XII-(Nothing against those school just making a point) are going to be making going forward $15-20 Milllion more per year then a school like UConn which has a higher National Bramd and only because of conference...

(05-04-2013 08:01 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  So for quo all he cares about is the Sugar Bowl...The ONE bowl the Big 12 has against the SEC. Well starting in 2014, the ACC may have as many as FIVE bowl tie ins with the SEC. Way more than anyone else......

ACC-SEC tie-ins already exist in the Independence and Music City... Just needs to be renewed.
SEC wants to get into the Belk Bowl to replace the AAC opposite the ACC.
Gator wants the ACC back to take the Big 10's slot opposite the SEC
Orange has a deal with SEC/Big10/ND opposite the ACC.

So you are looking at a minimum of 4 and up to 5 matchups a year against the SEC. A lot of eyes on those games.

The Big XII owe Chuck Neinas a huge debt...really IMO he saved that league and even the Sugar Bowl Deal was struck he hugged the SEC real tight.

But, going forward what will the Big XII do to increase their revenue....it is very apparent that the B1G, Pac 12, SEC & ACC are still looking to improve themselves all around....the Big XII not so much...if you are not moving forward you are losing ground.

(05-04-2013 07:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:03 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

The Sugar and Rose (and Orange) situations tell us exactly who stands where in the P5 pecking order. That is not a "little bit", it is the whole ball game, as there are no other relevant markers to indicate this.

You are borderline retarded if you believe that.

(05-04-2013 09:09 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:05 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 07:03 PM)JMUDuke25 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 04:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:29 AM)Maize Wrote:  ...so much for the "so-called" Big 4...no as Arute stated it is the SEC and then the B1G.

Myself, I see no real difference between the ACC & Big XII and going forward the $$$$ is going to be around the same....just found his statement interesting...

Well, when Arute reports that the ACC has replaced the B12 in the Sugar Bowl, maybe he'll be on to something?

The Sugar Bowl is the last little bit of hope you have left over there. You sound pathetic constantly referencing that.

The Sugar and Rose (and Orange) situations tell us exactly who stands where in the P5 pecking order. That is not a "little bit", it is the whole ball game, as there are no other relevant markers to indicate this.

You are borderline retarded if you believe that.

You have to remember...Quo actually thought that FSU wanted to go to the Big XII even though the FSU President is/was set dead against it...hell, he didn't even understand why the SEC would want Missouri...he is who he is...

(05-04-2013 08:20 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:37 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:26 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 02:50 PM)lew240z Wrote:  You are correct. The numbers aren't the same.

Big 10 12 schools $25.8 million per School

PAC 12 12 schools $ 25.25 million per School

ACC 14 schools $20.9 million per School

SEC 14 schools $19.3 million per School

Big 12 10 schools $26.2 million per School

1. The Kansas City article was done in Jamuary...a lot has changed since them especially with the advent of the SEC Network & the ACC Media Rework....the two key words that I said and got overlooked was "Going Forward".

2. Like a previous poster said earlier in this thread who is not a "ACC Fanboy"...if Swofford & ESPN get an ACC Network off the ground it really becomes a mute point.

In the end....all 5 Contract Leagues are going to bring in $$$ that would have been laughed @ as being unrealistic even 2 years ago...

It's laughable and at the same time sad at the difference in $$$ the BIG 5 are/and will be making when compared to the mid-majors. I know the AAC is only getting about $2 mil per school. Moreover, I read in another thread that the MAC and SBC schools are getting about $40,000 each (anybody please correct me if these amounts are wrong)....

The gap has grown dramatically. The bottom of the Big 12 (Colorado/Baylor) was making $7 million from conference distributions just a few years ago and Washington State was making $2-3 million from the Pac 12 who had a more incentive based allocation plan than the Big 12. WSU was only doing a million or so better than the MWC schools. BE schools were $2-$3 million. Now its $15-$25 million a year difference between the gang of 5 and the AQ 5.

Amazing...schools like WSU in the Pac 12 & Texas Tech in the Big XII-(Nothing against those school just making a point) are going to be making going forward $15-20 Milllion more per year then a school like UConn which has a higher National Bramd and only because of conference...

Schools like Louisville who were begging anyone with a pulse for a power 4 conference invite should not throw stones. Louisville would love to have our support and better yet play in the State of Texas. None of that happened because our TV partners valued West Virginia and their ability to escape a dying, worthless conference over a former CUSA school.

Texas Tech makes more money on our Tier 3 TV/Radio rights than most members of the old BE/new BE make on their Tier 1 TV rights. Sad but true and that is why Louisville begged for an escape and why UC and UConn are still begging.

(05-05-2013 12:00 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:20 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:37 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:26 PM)Maize Wrote:  1. The Kansas City article was done in Jamuary...a lot has changed since them especially with the advent of the SEC Network & the ACC Media Rework....the two key words that I said and got overlooked was "Going Forward".

2. Like a previous poster said earlier in this thread who is not a "ACC Fanboy"...if Swofford & ESPN get an ACC Network off the ground it really becomes a mute point.

In the end....all 5 Contract Leagues are going to bring in $$$ that would have been laughed @ as being unrealistic even 2 years ago...

It's laughable and at the same time sad at the difference in $$$ the BIG 5 are/and will be making when compared to the mid-majors. I know the AAC is only getting about $2 mil per school. Moreover, I read in another thread that the MAC and SBC schools are getting about $40,000 each (anybody please correct me if these amounts are wrong)....

The gap has grown dramatically. The bottom of the Big 12 (Colorado/Baylor) was making $7 million from conference distributions just a few years ago and Washington State was making $2-3 million from the Pac 12 who had a more incentive based allocation plan than the Big 12. WSU was only doing a million or so better than the MWC schools. BE schools were $2-$3 million. Now its $15-$25 million a year difference between the gang of 5 and the AQ 5.

Amazing...schools like WSU in the Pac 12 & Texas Tech in the Big XII-(Nothing against those school just making a point) are going to be making going forward $15-20 Milllion more per year then a school like UConn which has a higher National Bramd and only because of conference...

Schools like Louisville who were begging anyone with a pulse for a power 4 conference invite should not throw stones. Louisville would love to have our support and better yet play in the State of Texas. None of that happened because our TV partners valued West Virginia and their ability to escape a dying, worthless conference over a former CUSA school.

Texas Tech makes more money on our Tier 3 TV/Radio rights than most members of the old BE/new BE make on their Tier 1 TV rights. Sad but true and that is why Louisville begged for an escape and why UC and UConn are still begging.

All true...but Louisville still has an higher Athletic Budget...high profit margin while operating with the puny BIG EAST Media $$$ ...only Texas in the Big XII has a larger athletic budget and our profit margin was still over $7 Million...and we are not even going to talk about on the Field/Court Success.

Luckily for Louisville we landed in a league going forward that is very likely will be making more $$$$ then any league not named the SEC/B1G. So thank you Maryland and the B1G for opening up a spot and thank you ACC for taking us.

Win a BCS Bowl Game or 2 and win a National Title or 3 in a Revenue Sport and then you can get back to us...

(05-05-2013 12:07 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-05-2013 12:00 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:20 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 08:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-04-2013 03:37 PM)Underdog Wrote:  It's laughable and at the same time sad at the difference in $$$ the BIG 5 are/and will be making when compared to the mid-majors. I know the AAC is only getting about $2 mil per school. Moreover, I read in another thread that the MAC and SBC schools are getting about $40,000 each (anybody please correct me if these amounts are wrong)....

The gap has grown dramatically. The bottom of the Big 12 (Colorado/Baylor) was making $7 million from conference distributions just a few years ago and Washington State was making $2-3 million from the Pac 12 who had a more incentive based allocation plan than the Big 12. WSU was only doing a million or so better than the MWC schools. BE schools were $2-$3 million. Now its $15-$25 million a year difference between the gang of 5 and the AQ 5.

Amazing...schools like WSU in the Pac 12 & Texas Tech in the Big XII-(Nothing against those school just making a point) are going to be making going forward $15-20 Milllion more per year then a school like UConn which has a higher National Bramd and only because of conference...

Schools like Louisville who were begging anyone with a pulse for a power 4 conference invite should not throw stones. Louisville would love to have our support and better yet play in the State of Texas. None of that happened because our TV partners valued West Virginia and their ability to escape a dying, worthless conference over a former CUSA school.

Texas Tech makes more money on our Tier 3 TV/Radio rights than most members of the old BE/new BE make on their Tier 1 TV rights. Sad but true and that is why Louisville begged for an escape and why UC and UConn are still begging.

All true...but Louisville still has an higher Athletic Budget...high profit margin while operating with the puny BIG EAST Media $$$ ...only Texas in the Big XII has a larger athletic budget and our profit margin was still over $7 Million...and we are not even going to talk about on the Field/Court Success.

Luckily for Louisville we landed in a league going forward that is very likely will be making more $$$$ then any league not named the SEC/B1G. So thank you Maryland and the B1G for opening up a spot and thank you ACC for taking us.

Win a BCS Bowl Game or 2 and win a National Title or 3 in a Revenue Sport and then you can get back to us...

You've still got one BCS bowl to go to catch up to WVU, Maize. And while we may not have a national championship in a revenue sport, we do have 15 in rifle. So any detractors better walk carefully...

I will say Louisville made out. Thank goodness you escaped the sinking ship before it went down. Otherwise you'd be sitting with UC, USF, and UConn wondering what the hell just happened...

Any life raft in a storm, you know...