Funny Stuff New Conference re-alignment thread - Page 427

**Saulbadguy** · 09-12-2011, 07:57 AM

The old one has AIDS.

Anyways, Chip Brown from Orangebloods.com reports OU may apply to the Pac-12 by the end of the month.

Oklahoma will apply for membership to the Pac-12 before the end of the month, and Oklahoma State is expected to follow suit, a source close to OU's administration told Orangebloods.com.

Even though Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said Friday the Pac-12 was not interested in expansion at this time, OU's board of regents is fed up with the instability in the Big 12, the source said.

The OU board of regents will meet within two weeks to formalize plans to apply for membership to the Pac-12, the source said.

Messages left Sunday night with OU athletic director Joe Castiglione and Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder were not immediately returned.

If OU follows through with what appears to be a unanimous sentiment on the seven-member Oklahoma board of regents to leave the Big 12, realignment in college athletics could be heating back up. OU's application would be matched by an application from Oklahoma State, the source said, even though OSU president Burns Hargis and mega-booster Boone Pickens both voiced their support for the Big 12 last Thursday.

There is differing sentiment about if the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors are ready to expand again after bringing in Colorado and Utah last year and landing $3 billion TV contracts from Fox and ESPN. Colorado president Bruce Benson told reporters last week CU would be opposed to any expansion that might bring about east and west divisions in the Pac-12.

Currently, there are north and south divisions in the Pac-12. If OU and OSU were to join, Larry Scott would have to get creative.

Scott's orginal plan last summer was to bring in Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and put them in an eastern division with Arizona and Arizona State. The old Pac-8 schools (USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State) were to be in the west division.

Colorado made the move in June 2010, but when Texas A&M was not on board to go west, the Big 12 came back together with the help of its television partners (ABC/ESPN and Fox).

If Oklahoma and Oklahoma State were accepted into the Pac-12, there would undoubtedly be a hope by Larry Scott that Texas would join the league. But Texas sources have indicated UT is determined to hang onto the Longhorn Network, which would not be permissible in the Pac-12 in its current form.

Texas sources continue to indicate to Orangebloods.com that if the Big 12 falls apart, the Longhorns would consider "all options."

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe held an emergency conference call 10 days ago with league presidents excluding Oklahoma, Texas and Texas A&M and asked the other league presidents to "work on Texas" because Beebe didn't think the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma without Texas.

Now, it appears OU is willing to take its chances with the Pac-12 with or without Texas.

There seemed to be a temporary pause in any possible shifting of the college athletics' landscape when Baylor led a charge to tie up Texas A&M's move to the Southeastern Conference in legal red tape. BU refused to waive its right to sue the SEC over A&M's departure from the Big 12, and the SEC said it would not admit Texas A&M until it had been cleared of any potential lawsuits.

Baylor, Kansas and Iowa State have indicated they will not waive their right to sue the SEC.

It's unclear if an application by OU to the Pac-12 would draw the same threats of litigation against the Pac-12 from those Big 12 schools.

Stay tuned.

mnchiefsguy · 10-21-2011, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

OK, first of all, I never argued this "KU town" thing, so don't place that in my mouth. Second of all, it isn't about whether or not there are enough KU fans to make the tournament successful (they're absolutely are). The matter is putting conference dollars in a non conference state. That's just bad business, no other conference does that. KC would have to make some enticing offer above the ability to sell the tournament out and its just sad Mizzou has put their own city in that position.

They are costing Kansas money too. Lots of people stay and do things on the Kansas side of the line while the Big XII tourney is in town.

The BIG XII contract with Sprint runs through 2014. If the tourney continues to outperform OKC and Dallas without Mizzou when that contract expires...I can see the Big XII keeping KC in its tournament rotation. If the tourney crashes and burns without Mizzou in it, then it should leave town anyway.

The ACC holds its basketball tourney in Atlanta sometimes. Georgia Tech is an ACC member, but they are far and away the red headed stepchild in that state. Georgia and the SEC dominate that landscape, but Atlanta does the basketball tourney well and stays in their rotation.

At the end of the day it is about buts in the seats. If KC continues to put more buts in the seats than OKC or Dallas, which it consistently has, then I think KC will be able to keep its place in the tourney rotation. Will KC have to work harder than those cities? Yes, because they will have to keep their attendance up and ahead of those cities to keep their spot, but it is doable.

Pitt Gorilla · 10-21-2011, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

How can you say that? For the greatest majority of its existence, it has been a conference game. Most of the truly outstanding rivalries are conference games. Even the OU-Texas rivalry skyrocketed in animosity once it became a conference game.

Like I said, the game, if at Arrowhead, would always be in Missouri. That means the monetary benefits derivative thereof, would also largely go to Missouri. So, if KC really wants to see that game continue even as a non conference affair, it should pay KU more to even out the revenue streams. I mean, if MU is that clear about it, they shouldn't care KU gets paid more for it if that's what it tales to continue it.

Yeah, Nebraska/OU really sucked prior to them joining the same conference. Florida/FSU, Iowa/ISU, Notre Dame/Michigan, Clemson/South Carolina, Army/Navy, etc. all stink as rivalries as well.

mnchiefsguy · 10-21-2011, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

Of course, the whole argument is why would KU continuously put money into a non Big XII state? Its Missouri's market. We're not talking about having this game on each other's campus, right? We're talking about KC, MO and Arrowhead. Mizzou is the STATE school of Missouri.

Because KU does not want to cede the KC market to Mizzou. Because if KU can show demographically that it is at least an equal to Mizzou in the metro area, the Big XII can claim some of the TV sets in the KC market when it negotiates TV deals. Georgia Tech trails Georgia in the whole state of Georgia, but I guarantee the ACC claims the Atlanta market when they present their demographics to the networks.

You are the only one who claims KC is an exclusive MU market. Even the MU fans on here acknowledge that KU is strong in the metro area. Folks are letting a line on a map color their logic when viewing this.

HolyHandgernade · 10-21-2011, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

The bolded part is not true if you are referring to Mizzou. You could argue that it would be true to the state of Missouri itself, but Mizzou would see no more benefit than KU money wise in terms of payout. KU would actual benefit more, since more Mizzou fans buy tickets to Arrowhead anyway...so a 50-50 split of revenue would favor KU since they are filling less than 40% of the seats.

According to the KC pleading, the Border War generates 14 million dollars for the KC area. Taxes from those revenues are collected by the state of Missouri which in turn, helps fund the University of Missouri. Guess where those revenue don't partially return? That's right, to KU. So, like I said, if KC wants to pony up to keep that 14 million revenue stream going, it needs to pay the Jayhawks more to do so.

Al Bundy · 10-21-2011, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

According to the KC pleading, the Border War generates 14 million dollars for the KC area. Taxes from those revenues are collected by the state of Missouri which in turn, helps fund the University of Missouri. Guess where those revenue don't partially return? That's right, to KU. So, like I said, if KC wants to pony up to keep that 14 million revenue stream going, it needs to pay the Jayhawks more to do so.

That will hurt the Overland Park side of the State line as well. But I do hope that Jayhawk fans enjoy giving all of their money to the states of Texas and Oklahoma. That is where everything is headed.

HolyHandgernade · 10-21-2011, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

Because KU does not want to cede the KC market to Mizzou. Because if KU can show demographically that it is at least an equal to Mizzou in the metro area, the Big XII can claim some of the TV sets in the KC market when it negotiates TV deals. Georgia Tech trails Georgia in the whole state of Georgia, but I guarantee the ACC claims the Atlanta market when they present their demographics to the networks.

You are the only one who claims KC is an exclusive MU market. Even the MU fans on here acknowledge that KU is strong in the metro area. Folks are letting a line on a map color their logic when viewing this.

Are you kidding? Look, KU generates most of its revenue and fame from basketball. KU fans are going to watch KU basketball whether its played in KC or not. We don't have to prove that, we already know it. Tech is an Atlanta based school within the larger state of GA. That's not the dynamic at play here.

And quit twisting my words around, I never said "KC is an exclusive MU market". I said KC, MO is threatening to become a non Big XII state. It doesn't mean they're aren't KU fans on the Missouri side or MU fans on the Kansas side. It simply means revenues generated in the state of Missouri don't flow back into Kansas. If the Sprint Center was in Johnson County, I would be all for the Tournament continuing there. I think you are intentionally making things up at this point.

HolyHandgernade · 10-21-2011, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UCF Knight

That will hurt the Overland Park side of the State line as well. But I do hope that Jayhawk fans enjoy giving all of their money to the states of Texas and Oklahoma. That is where everything is headed.

It will have a minimal impact, mostly not being able to attend the game in person. Are you trying to tell me that people in Overland Park who went to establishments in Overland Park to watch the tournament will no longer do so if it is broadcast from OKC? Come on.

track · 10-21-2011, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KcMizzou

That's fine.

You'd go too though, if you had the chance.

I love the Big 12.... There is no other conference I would rather be in...NONE.

mnchiefsguy · 10-21-2011, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

It will have a minimal impact, mostly not being able to attend the game in person. Are you trying to tell me that people in Overland Park who went to establishments in Overland Park to watch the tournament will no longer do so if it is broadcast from OKC? Come on.

So if the impact is so minimal, why should it matter where the tourney is held?

Most of the revenues you are siting are local KC revenues...generated by sales tax. That money is not going anywhere towards Mizzou and you know that. Is there a state sales tax for Mizzou that no one knows about?

**dirk digler** · 10-21-2011, 09:55 PM

Interesting story about the contract that KU-MU signed to extend the border showdown at Arrowhead.

Quote:

The four-year extension that was signed in 2008 included a reworked contract. Missouri and Kansas no longer receive a guaranteed payout to protect the schools if the game bombs at the box office. The two sides now split all revenue after the Chiefs and Arrowhead take about $350,000 for expenses.

HolyHandgernade · 10-21-2011, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

So if the impact is so minimal, why should it matter where the tourney is held?

Most of the revenues you are siting are local KC revenues...generated by sales tax. That money is not going anywhere towards Mizzou and you know that. Is there a state sales tax for Mizzou that no one knows about?

Don't be so intentionally dense. Missouri funds the state sponsored schools. They get those funds from generated revenues. Those revenues are from collected taxes. The more they have, the more discretionary they can be with what improvements they want to make within the state of Missouri. Missouri's desire is to USE the rivalry with Kansas to increase their intake. I don't care if MU and Missouri wants to do that, I'm just stating what I believe KU would concede to to continue the yearly game in the state of Missouri.

As for the tournament, that's a conference decision and the conference will want the tournament held in and to the benefit of a state within the conference. If you really can't understand that then this discussion is at an impasse.

Frazod · 10-21-2011, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

According to the KC pleading, the Border War generates 14 million dollars for the KC area. Taxes from those revenues are collected by the state of Missouri which in turn, helps fund the University of Missouri. Guess where those revenue don't partially return? That's right, to KU. So, like I said, if KC wants to pony up to keep that 14 million revenue stream going, it needs to pay the Jayhawks more to do so.

Almost makes up for all the professional sports benefits Kansans enjoy that are paid for by the residents of Jackson County, doesn't it?

Al Bundy · 10-21-2011, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

It will have a minimal impact, mostly not being able to attend the game in person. Are you trying to tell me that people in Overland Park who went to establishments in Overland Park to watch the tournament will no longer do so if it is broadcast from OKC? Come on.

No, more along the lines of people who came into the city to watch the tournament in person and stayed on the Kansas side. Now that money will all be in the south. By the way.... the KU AD needs to understand the Big 12 is not a midwest conference, it is a southwest conference.

HolyHandgernade · 10-21-2011, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frazod

Almost makes up for all the professional sports benefits Kansans enjoy that are paid for by the residents of Jackson County, doesn't it?

I think its dangerous to cross collegiate loyalties with professional geographic ones. KC set itself up to be a regional attraction. I know KU fans that can't stand the Chiefs and Kansas based Chiefs fans that can't stand the Jayhawks or Wildcats.

kcfan82 · 10-21-2011, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

They are costing Kansas money too. Lots of people stay and do things on the Kansas side of the line while the Big XII tourney is in town.

The BIG XII contract with Sprint runs through 2014. If the tourney continues to outperform OKC and Dallas without Mizzou when that contract expires...I can see the Big XII keeping KC in its tournament rotation. If the tourney crashes and burns without Mizzou in it, then it should leave town anyway.

The ACC holds its basketball tourney in Atlanta sometimes. Georgia Tech is an ACC member, but they are far and away the red headed stepchild in that state. Georgia and the SEC dominate that landscape, but Atlanta does the basketball tourney well and stays in their rotation.

At the end of the day it is about buts in the seats. If KC continues to put more buts in the seats than OKC or Dallas, which it consistently has, then I think KC will be able to keep its place in the tourney rotation. Will KC have to work harder than those cities? Yes, because they will have to keep their attendance up and ahead of those cities to keep their spot, but it is doable.

Surprising considering Georgia Tech has twice as many NC's and has the most recent one by 10 years.

09-12-2011, 07:57 AM
Saulbadguy When a nightmare becomes real Join Date: Nov 2003 Casino cash: $796966	New Conference re-alignment thread The old one has AIDS. Anyways, Chip Brown from Orangebloods.com reports OU may apply to the Pac-12 by the end of the month. Oklahoma will apply for membership to the Pac-12 before the end of the month, and Oklahoma State is expected to follow suit, a source close to OU's administration told Orangebloods.com. Even though Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said Friday the Pac-12 was not interested in expansion at this time, OU's board of regents is fed up with the instability in the Big 12, the source said. The OU board of regents will meet within two weeks to formalize plans to apply for membership to the Pac-12, the source said. Messages left Sunday night with OU athletic director Joe Castiglione and Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder were not immediately returned. If OU follows through with what appears to be a unanimous sentiment on the seven-member Oklahoma board of regents to leave the Big 12, realignment in college athletics could be heating back up. OU's application would be matched by an application from Oklahoma State, the source said, even though OSU president Burns Hargis and mega-booster Boone Pickens both voiced their support for the Big 12 last Thursday. There is differing sentiment about if the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors are ready to expand again after bringing in Colorado and Utah last year and landing $3 billion TV contracts from Fox and ESPN. Colorado president Bruce Benson told reporters last week CU would be opposed to any expansion that might bring about east and west divisions in the Pac-12. Currently, there are north and south divisions in the Pac-12. If OU and OSU were to join, Larry Scott would have to get creative. Scott's orginal plan last summer was to bring in Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and put them in an eastern division with Arizona and Arizona State. The old Pac-8 schools (USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State) were to be in the west division. Colorado made the move in June 2010, but when Texas A&M was not on board to go west, the Big 12 came back together with the help of its television partners (ABC/ESPN and Fox). If Oklahoma and Oklahoma State were accepted into the Pac-12, there would undoubtedly be a hope by Larry Scott that Texas would join the league. But Texas sources have indicated UT is determined to hang onto the Longhorn Network, which would not be permissible in the Pac-12 in its current form. Texas sources continue to indicate to Orangebloods.com that if the Big 12 falls apart, the Longhorns would consider "all options." Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe held an emergency conference call 10 days ago with league presidents excluding Oklahoma, Texas and Texas A&M and asked the other league presidents to "work on Texas" because Beebe didn't think the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma without Texas. Now, it appears OU is willing to take its chances with the Pac-12 with or without Texas. There seemed to be a temporary pause in any possible shifting of the college athletics' landscape when Baylor led a charge to tie up Texas A&M's move to the Southeastern Conference in legal red tape. BU refused to waive its right to sue the SEC over A&M's departure from the Big 12, and the SEC said it would not admit Texas A&M until it had been cleared of any potential lawsuits. Baylor, Kansas and Iowa State have indicated they will not waive their right to sue the SEC. It's unclear if an application by OU to the Pac-12 would draw the same threats of litigation against the Pac-12 from those Big 12 schools. Stay tuned.
Posts: 47,020