WVU to the Big 12 in the next two days...

[starbigd]

Ummmmm, for Texas maybe. Pretty sure Nebraska, Colorado and Missouri might disagree with you.

Pretty sure they won't. Also pretty sure you don't know much about what you're speaking of here.

Here's a clue - who do you think WANTED the revenue plan to begin with? Nebraska.

Perhaps you should actually look up the revenue distribution by that plan. Also look up WHY those schools left - clue #2, it wasn't the unequal revenue sharing

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

Wouldn't they want the BE broken up, especially with NBC making a push to take over all BE broadcasting?

not yet, they have the BE for two more years, they want a slow dissolve.....potentially forcing teams to actually honor their "27 month" agreement. If WVU leaves, it is done and they are left paying a good bit of cash for CUSA-2.

 

[TexasFight98VI]

Ummmmm, for Texas maybe. Pretty sure Nebraska, Colorado and Missouri might disagree with you.

No, it actually worked out well for Nebraska the first 5-6 years of the conference's existence when they were still relevant b/c Nebraska demanded that TV revenue was to be distributed unequally when the conference was formed and were #1 in TV revenue during that timespan. It's also been very beneficial for OU since they have been #1 in TV revenue the past 2 years. Regarding not sharing 3rd tier rights, it's been extremely beneficial for KU, since they sold their 3rd tier rights in basketball for $65M a few years ago. It's been also beneficial for Nebraska, since they sold their 3rd tier rights in football for a little over $100M a couple of years ago. Neither school has shared one penny with any conference members, btw. So, yes, unequal revenue sharing has benefitted several conference members, not just Texas. Would you care to get owned and ruined some more?

 

[vtpoop]

Pretty sure they won't. Also pretty sure you don't know much about what you're speaking of here.

Here's a clue - who do you think WANTED the revenue plan to begin with? Nebraska.

Perhaps you should actually look up the revenue distribution by that plan. Also look up WHY those schools left - clue #2, it wasn't the unequal revenue sharing

I could stand to be corrected if that's the case, but that is how I understood it. Perhaps Big Red Said could answer this because he would know more about this than anyone else on here, I can guarantee you that.

 

[TexasFight98VI]

I could stand to be corrected if that's the case, but that is how I understood it. Perhaps Big Red Said could answer this because he would know more about this than anyone else on here, I can guarantee you that.[/QUOTE]

Not really. NU fans never bring facts to the table, just their opinion. Star and I have researched and followed all of this closely.

 

[vtpoop]

No, it actually worked out well for Nebraska the first 5-6 years of the conference's existence when they were still relevant b/c Nebraska demanded that TV revenue was to be distributed unequally when the conference was formed and were #1 in TV revenue during that timespan. It's also been very beneficial for OU since they have been #1 in TV revenue the past 2 years. Regarding not sharing 3rd tier rights, it's been extremely beneficial for KU, since they sold their 3rd tier rights in basketball for $65M a few years ago. It's been also beneficial for Nebraska, since they sold their 3rd tier rights in football for a little over $100M a couple of years ago. Neither school has shared one penny with any conference members, btw. So, yes, unequal revenue sharing has benefitted several conference members, not just Texas. Would you care to get owned and ruined some more?

You mean like in the 1995 Sugar Bowl? Sure, bring it.

 

[goDAWGSsicem]

 

[goDAWGSsicem]

Why are so many Texas fans here such D-bags?

 

[TexasFight98VI]

You mean like in the 1995 Sugar Bowl? Sure, bring it.

Haha, translation: I just got slapped silly like a little bitch so I bring up a game from 16 years ago......

Be gone before I call James Madison to slap Va Tech down again......

 

[vtpoop]

Haha, translation: I just got slapped silly like a little bitch so I bring up a game from 16 years ago......

Be gone before I call James Madison to slap Va Tech down again......

Hahaha. You can't beat us so you make fun of us for a I-AA doing something you can't. Typical bully Texas attitude.

 

[Volbound1700]

Why are so many Texas fans here such D-bags?

They are not as bad as a certain Va Tech fan on here and his mancrush for the
B1G.

 

[Volbound1700]

49 and everyone proved my point with the ACC Championship Game and Orange Bowl.

Who cares about Peach Bowl or regular season games.

In the biggest revenue games that matter (Conference Championship Game and BCS Bowl Games); Va Tech fans were no show.

 

[TexasFight98VI]

Hahaha. You can't beat us so you make fun of us for a I-AA doing something you can't. Typical bully Texas attitude.

Are you serious? that was 16 years ago, numnuts. Texas would slap you fools silly today and we're just average right now.....

 

[goDAWGSsicem]

They are not as bad as a certain Va Tech fan on here and his mancrush for the
B1G.

I don't know... they always seem to have an angry, condiscending tone. It's very annoying. Why they mad bro?

 

[starbigd]

I could stand to be corrected if that's the case, but that is how I understood it. Perhaps Big Red Said could answer this because he would know more about this than anyone else on here, I can guarantee you that.

Perhaps. But the distribution of monies under that plan was not very much. The top school typically brought home a little more than 3 mill than the average school. That's peanuts. The conference shared 60% of the revenue, so everyone got a base amount.....the rest was contingent on you building a quality program and EARNING your money. It was supposed to be an incentive to improve your program.

NU didn't leave over revenue sharing. Mizzou isn't leaving over revenue sharing. CU didn't leave over revenue sharing. A&M didn't leave over revenue sharing. Not once did any of these schools vote to change the model in the conference's history.

And all this is a moot point anyway, as the conference no longer has unequal revenue sharing.

 

[starbigd]

I don't know... they always seem to have an angry, condiscending tone. It's very annoying. Why they mad bro?

Just tired of uninformed, ignorant people always pointing the finger at Texas when something happens.

 

[vtpoop]

Are you serious? that was 16 years ago, numnuts. Texas would slap you fools silly today and we're just average right now.....

Pretty big talk from a fan of a team that couldn't even go to a bowl last year. Smoke another one.

 

[vtpoop]

Are you serious? that was 16 years ago, numnuts. Texas would slap you fools silly today and we're just average right now.....

BTW, we heard that same crap 16 years ago until we took a dump on Bevo's head. So say whatever you want, we still are undefeated against you clowns.

 

[starbigd]

Pretty big talk from a fan of a team that couldn't even go to a bowl last year. Smoke another one.

Pretty big talk from a school that lost to James Madison last year......we can do this all day, LOL

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

No, it actually worked out well for Nebraska the first 5-6 years of the conference's existence when they were still relevant b/c Nebraska demanded that TV revenue was to be distributed unequally when the conference was formed and were #1 in TV revenue during that timespan. It's also been very beneficial for OU since they have been #1 in TV revenue the past 2 years. Regarding not sharing 3rd tier rights, it's been extremely beneficial for KU, since they sold their 3rd tier rights in basketball for $65M a few years ago. It's been also beneficial for Nebraska, since they sold their 3rd tier rights in football for a little over $100M a couple of years ago. Neither school has shared one penny with any conference members, btw. So, yes, unequal revenue sharing has benefitted several conference members, not just Texas. Would you care to get owned and ruined some more?[/QUOTE]

already said...texas fans....hmph....