View Single Post
Old 06-07-2010, 05:48 PM   #1820
duncan_idaho duncan_idaho is offline
M-I-Z-Z-O-U
 
duncan_idaho's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Kansas City
Casino cash: $-1899692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickedson View Post
I just can't see those 6 going to the Pac-10 for multiple reasons:

1. This hot shot new Pac-10 commish may have bitten off more than than he can chew with his words Sunday. Rumor now is that the Academia wing of the Pac 10 (Cal, Stanford, etc.) are not so sure about schools like Ok St, Texas Tech and Baylor... Athletics do not mean everything to millions of college people in this country.

2. Everyone is ignoring the time difference and travel distance issues. Collegiate athletics is not all about football no matter how much these media talking heads are trying to make it out to be. Washington State to Southern Cal is one thing... Washington State to Texas is another.

3. So Texas is just going to give up all it has to deal with playing Oklahoma every year in a division title game and then having to end up playing USC for the title? I'm not so sure. For what? The prospects of a $20 million share of a TV contract? A lot of which will have to go back into funding the crazy travel and scheduling of the smaller sports? Why not just stay where they are?

I can believe MU wanting to go to the Big 10, the question is whether or not they end up asking. NEB I think will be more likely to be asked, but more unlikely to accept than MU.

If they're both ask, they both go. But I don't think Texas reacts because of those two schools leaving. If they go it will be their own decision.
1) Baylor is not a bad academic school. It actually is pretty good. And Oregon, Oregon State, Arizona State, Arizona, Wazzou are no better academically than Tech or Okie Lite. The Pac-10 academic wing basically is Cal and Stanford, with decent efforts from UCLA, USC and Washington.

2) They will find a scheduling deal that works for Olympic sports. For football, travel won't be a huge issue due to the division alignment.

3) The Big 12 has a shitty TV deal that is already far behind the Big Ten, SEC and ACC. How is it going to improve that without Missouri and Nebraska? If the Texas 6 to the Pac-10 doesn't handle, the league likely WILL grab Colorado and Utah.

The Big 12 HAS to improve the next deal or it's going to die. Ain't going to happen without the markets Missouri and Colorado bring. Lose either, and you're lucky to find a TV deal consistent with inflation. Lose both? YOu're taking a step back.

4) Missouri and Nebraska are both going to get offers. It's highly possible each has at least a verbal offer in place at this point (and has for a while).
__________________
"You gotta love livin', cause dying is a pain in the ass."
---- Sinatra
Posts: 22,325
duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.duncan_idaho is obviously part of the inner Circle.
    Reply With Quote