ChiefsPlanet - Funny Stuff New Conference re-alignment thread

Every time I think you have reached the threshold of your ignorance, you say something to push the threshold.

Sometimes I think you love Texas more than Texas fans, you go down on them enough.

alnorth

10-06-2011 11:10 PM

Among the TCU and high school restrictions, I missed this rather important LHN concession:

Quote:

And there are new provisions for a school carrying more than one of its own football games on its network; it must obtain league permission, and the participating schools would give up their shares of league-wide network proceeds from the game.

That pretty well wraps up the concerns about ESPN perhaps having a conflict of interest and causing a UT game to fall to tier 3. They have to get permission from the conference to show more than 1 conference game, and even if they do get permission, both schools forfeit any claim to proceeds from that game. So basically "UT wants to show a 2nd conference game on LHN and the school they are playing is fine with it? OK fine, but we're taking the money and neither school gets a cut of that game"

That pretty well solves just about every major concern about school networks.

DaKCMan AP

10-07-2011 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy (Post 7973198)

So how is bball going to work then with 14 teams and no divisions? Will everyone play each other at least once? How will it be determined which opponents you play twice?

They have to figure that out, even with 13 teams. They made the move before Texas A&M joined the league. With 12 teams the way it was going to work for next season was 16 conference games.

2 games each against your original division foes = 10 games
1 game each against the other division = 6 games

They were then going to either keep a 16 conference game schedule switching up the games, move to an 18 game conference schedule, or a 22 game round-robin conference schedule (least likely).

Now with 13 and possibly 14 teams they'll have to re-evaluate.

Saul Good

10-07-2011 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 7973562)

Among the TCU and high school restrictions, I missed this rather important LHN concession:

That pretty well wraps up the concerns about ESPN perhaps having a conflict of interest and causing a UT game to fall to tier 3. They have to get permission from the conference to show more than 1 conference game, and even if they do get permission, both schools forfeit any claim to proceeds from that game. So basically "UT wants to show a 2nd conference game on LHN and the school they are playing is fine with it? OK fine, but we're taking the money and neither school gets a cut of that game"

That pretty well solves just about every major concern about school networks.

That solves all of the except the biggest one. If Texas has its own network, there can be no viable conference network (like the B1G Network).

Saulbadguy

10-07-2011 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 7973710)

That solves all of the except the biggest one. If Texas has its own network, there can be no viable conference network (like the B1G Network).

Schools are free to start their own network though, correct?

Infidel Goat

10-07-2011 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crush (Post 7973535)

It looks like Rutgers has also decided to put itself on the market.

Rutgers is praying that they will eventually be team #16 in the ACC.

I can't see the Big 10 taking them.

alnorth

10-07-2011 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 7973710)

That solves all of the except the biggest one. If Texas has its own network, there can be no viable conference network (like the B1G Network).

The conference doesn't want a conference network. And by conference, I mean more than just Texas and OU, it has always been overwhelmingly voted down by the north schools as well. The Big 12 wants the SEC sharing model.

So given that, LHN really isn't a problem anymore.

alnorth

10-07-2011 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infidel Goat (Post 7973788)

Rutgers is praying that they will eventually be team #16 in the ACC.

I can't see the Big 10 taking them.

I could see the B1G taking them If they chose to expand, but that is a big if.

Rutgers sounds like a funny name, which might make some people think they are a weird private school that noone cares about, but they aren't. Rutgers is the flagship public school of New Jersey, without any significant collegiate competition in that market. If Rutgers is not an attractive school, then the STL and KC markets are irrelevant to MU's case as well.

patteeu

10-07-2011 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 7973828)

I don't know what "the conference" wants, but Missouri might want a conference network and that's all that matters at the moment.

eazyb81

10-07-2011 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 7973828)

The other Big 12 schools don't like money now?

BTN has proven that it is much more lucrative overall to pool tier 2 or 3 rights together and market them as a package to broadcasters, rather than having each school try to market their own tier 3 rights.

This is why the PAC and SEC are following in their footsteps, and it is why the Big 12 will continue to fall behind the pack in terms of overall conference TV revenue.

Saul Good

10-07-2011 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 7973828)

The SEC is going to a B1G-style network. It's a license to print money.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:48 PM.

Page 255 of 732