ticketfrog123
Active Member
Rutgers peak is better than Tech or SMU. Schiano put them with a few top 15 finishes and maybe an orange bowl. They were top 5 at one point
FWST: TCU, Texas Tech and Baylor’s future as Power 5 schools depends on ESPN, Fox and Big Ten
- Thread starter TopFrog
- Start date
LisaLT
Active Member
I also think the NYC media market and viewers mostly care about their pro sports.
Eight
Member
how is that different from the metroplex, houston, the bay area or so cal?
Peacefrog
Degenerate
Rutgers knocked TCU out of the womens soccer tournament last fall. So they have that going for them.
Froggy Style
Active Member
If the only game in town is Big 10 and SEC...and the only Texas teams are A&M, UT, and TCU...I suspect the eyeballs for our games would increase exponentially. On top of that, ALL of the Big 10 schools have an immediate in to Texas recruiting with fewer competitors.
There is a chance. There's really no reason for the Big 10 to just let UT and the SEC take over the whole state. TCU powers that be should be selling the heck out of that and the fourth largest TV market.
I also like the Big 12 with adding the Arizona schools plus Utah and Colorado.
CountryFrog
Active Member
The value of Rutgers to the B10 was all about the NYC market and it had nothing to do with actual viewership. It didn't matter if 0 New Yorkers were actually watching Rutgers football, having them in their footprint allowed for the B10 Network to be mass distributed in lower tier cable and satellite packages in the NYC area, thereby resulting in slightly higher costs for those packages which resulted in revenue for the network and the conference. In a city as massive as New York, those tiny little additional fees that more cable and satellite customers had to pay (whether they were watching the B10 Network or not) was worth millions.
You could make the argument that TCU could bring the same type of value to the BIG for the same reasons. The 2 drawbacks to that argument are that as large as the DFW market is, it still pales in comparison to NYC so the money wouldn't be as large and also as the television landscape changes over the coming years the old constructs that resulted in Rutgers becoming valuable may not matter as much 5-10 years from now. So I don't think the Rutgers model for BIG membership could actually be correctly applied to TCU.
You could make the argument that TCU could bring the same type of value to the BIG for the same reasons. The 2 drawbacks to that argument are that as large as the DFW market is, it still pales in comparison to NYC so the money wouldn't be as large and also as the television landscape changes over the coming years the old constructs that resulted in Rutgers becoming valuable may not matter as much 5-10 years from now. So I don't think the Rutgers model for BIG membership could actually be correctly applied to TCU.
Froggy Style
Active Member
People in Texas are HUGE fans of college football. People in the NE (and LA from what I can tell) region really only watch and talk about their pro teams. It's very strange. I lived up there for a bit, and everyone just gave me grief about the cowboys because I was from Texas. They thought it was weird I didn't have much interest in the pro banter. Occasionally, I would let them know I couldn't care less about them, and generally just watch games where TCU players were playing.
Summary...being in the NYC/tri-state area is meaningless. It's not about Rutgers...it's just that nobody cares in general. People in Texas will watch big games regardless of the team...especially if it's a local team.
BrewingFrog
Was I supposed to type something here?
Good point. My thinking was influenced by old modes of thought. Never occurred to me that they would get paid even if no one tuned in to watch...
We're beginning to sound like the Ponies strategizing their way into the B12recently... which was never happening. I'm very excited about the Big12's future with either taking the last 8 PAC12 schools or 4 of them and 4 of the ACC. It makes us the unquestionable 3rd best league instead of the distant 3 or 4th best league. We wouldn't/couldn't be ignored.
Dogfrog
Active Member
This is a good point. It is denying reality to believe that the only big time college football TV broadcasters will be Disney and Fox forever. In fact it could be argued that some of the impetus to make moves now is to protect Fox and ESPN from future competition. This is also why the left outs shouldn’t panic. There will continue to be a significant audience for college football including those outside the “elite” professional college leagues IMO.
BrewingFrog
Was I supposed to type something here?
At the risk of still being mired in old modes of thought, it seems to me that the streaming folk have an entirely different business model than the traditional broadcast/cable outfits. And, considering some of the content they have been producing, I don't think even they understand the medium in which they operate...
Palliative Care
Active Member
No Big 10 teams that is for sure!
LVH
Active Member
Even if it did, it would not be considered a "super conference".
Things are headed to a Power 2 structure.
LVH
Active Member
TCU's board of trustees is blind as they are still believe the "Power 5" structure will exist beyond 2024.
There will be a Power 2 that we are not a part of. That's reality. TCU's board of trustees would be wise to start scaling back now, rather than trying to invest more money into a fantasy that we will somehow be accepted into one of the Power 2 leagues.
I understand that there is a lot of money invested and there is no Plan B, but Plan A won't happen. Might as well start trying to salvage as much as possible now rather than digging the hole deeper.
Dogfrog
Active Member
Understood, and I agree that they would not likely figure this out on their own. Conferences (or schools) and consultants would have to figure it out for them. But the revenue available in college football could bring immediate clarity to their confusion.
LVH
Active Member
Being the 3rd best league is meaningless if only the Top 2 leagues are relevant when it comes to national relevance, postseason access, and prime TV slots.
Agree with the concept of sounding like SMU trying to wishcast their way into the Big 12. "Here's how Bernie can still win" vibes abound.
BrewingFrog
Was I supposed to type something here?
LVH
Active Member
I think the only hope is if somehow the ACC Grant of Rights keeps Clemson, North Carolina, and Florida State in the ACC beyond 2025. If not, they are gone to the SEC or Big 10 anyway and that conference is dead like the Pac-12 is now. If Clemson/UNC/FSU are able to stay, there may still be some quasi Power 4 structure that has enough leverage to keep the Power 4 structure and playoff access for another 10 years or so.
BrewingFrog
Was I supposed to type something here?
The ACC GOR runs for another 10 years, IIRC. That is, if the ACC remains as a legal entity. The loss of four Conference members may drop them below some magical number, and Poof! The Conference no longer exists, and the GOR revert back to their institutions with the dissolution. Don't have any idea if that is even a possibility, but if it is, then it is in the calculus for the SEC.
They may have made a solemn vow to A&M about not bringing another Texas program onboard, but they have since demonstrated their fidelity and honor. Florida and others might just get ready for some in-State company.
I like to think that they would keep things at 4 Power Conferences for the present. In the end, they are really looking for compelling content, and having Regional rivalries across the Nation keeps the locals interested. I know this is Old Thinking, but those matchups still have to carry some weight.
Also, with 22 potential members, isn't the B1G a little large? Are they going to shed some dead wood?
