Deep Creek
Well-Known Member
I would agree if he meant stability as weakest. They are absolutely the least stable but they are no weaker than most conferences on a percentage basis.Stability? I think that's pretty obvious.
I would agree if he meant stability as weakest. They are absolutely the least stable but they are no weaker than most conferences on a percentage basis.Stability? I think that's pretty obvious.
stability, finances, size....TV contract
This^Big 12 schools make more $$$ than the Pac 12 and ACC. As a matter of fact, Kansas State makes double the tier 3 money that any pac12 school does.
On the other hand, the PAC 12 and ACC will still exist in 10 years.This^
Plus we are about to get a bump in money from the CCG plus more tv contract money for expanding.
True. But neither may look like they do now. And they will probably still be making less $$ than the B1G and the SEC.On the other hand, the PAC 12 and ACC will still exist in 10 years.
True. But neither may look like they do now. And they will probably still be making less $$ than the B1G and the SEC.
On the other hand, the PAC 12 and ACC will still exist in 10 years.
Well, it's going to take 8 of the 10 to vote for Houston coming in. And the word is there are two for sure who dont want them, so they have a hard road ahead.
As of right now, the odds are much greater that the Big 12 no longer exists than any of the others. One conference has history and stability in addition to a geographic monopoly on half the country, one has a ridiculously long GOR, and one is looking to the AAC to add members. Which one lasts?opinion.
Back from the Dead?
Back in 1996, TCU, Houston, SMU, and Rice were left to fend for themselves. TCU is back in, Houston is not far behind, and now SMU wants to play.
View attachment 141785
SMU is pouring $150M into its facilities to impress the Big 12
The dying days of the SWC
As of right now, the odds are much greater that the Big 12 no longer exists than any of the others. One conference has history and stability in addition to a geographic monopoly on half the country, one has a ridiculously long GOR, and one is looking to the AAC to add members. Which one lasts?
You're burying your head in the sand. The PAC isn't going anywhere, and the ACC GOR lasts a decade longer than the Big 12. Now it is possible that the Big 12 might extend theirs, but until that happens, they are on the chopping block.Again, you're just making stuff up as you go. Follow the money, after all these GOR's and tv contracts are up whoever isn't bringing in the money will be the ones on the move.
You have got to be a fellow hick!richer than 6" up a bull's ass
Again, you're just making stuff up as you go. Follow the money, after all these GOR's and tv contracts are up whoever isn't bringing in the money will be the ones on the move.
You're burying your head in the sand. The PAC isn't going anywhere, and the ACC GOR lasts a decade longer than the Big 12. Now it is possible that the Big 12 might extend theirs, but until that happens, they are on the chopping block.
You really think the PAC 12 is going away and the Big 12 will remain?If the Pac 12 network suddenly takes off, then I'd agree about the Big 12. But Kansas state makes double the tier 3 money any pac school does right now, so you can go off msg board chatter and I'll base my opinion off of the money, we'll see who's right.
You really think the PAC 12 is going away and the Big 12 will remain?
I just know money talks, that's why your school is in the B1G. You think USC is fine with the fact that Kansas state makes double what they do in tier 3 $$?