Quote:
Originally Posted by alnorth
The networks have already basically told the Big 12 that if TA&M were to be replaced with BYU, they would have no problem with that at all. Central and East Missouri is not a bad market, but you have no national following, at all. OU, Texas, and a school like BYU does. (Kansas in basketball, but not football) They can sell those teams outside the midwest.
So yeah, Mizzou is replaceable.
|
"Basically", huh? Where did you read that?
No one is comparing Mizzou to OU or Texas, so not sure what the point of that comment was for, but okay.
And again, your comments have all been to support why you think they will maintain the current contracts, when the comment you originally got your panties in a bunch about was when I suggested replacing A&M and Mizzou with rag tag teams like Louisville to get to 12 would not call for increasing tier 1 and 2 contracts meaningfully so as not to dilute the current teams. You've danced around this but have yet to provide any compelling reasons for this illogical viewpoint.