• The KillerFrogs

Two conference memberships.

MissPalmer

New Member
Can someone please explain to me why it would be a negative for TCU to be in the Big East for football only and have all the other (non-rev) sports in a conference closer to home? Is it because there is no attractive second conference? Would the BE basketball money be too much to leave on the table? Does it make sense to send TCU teams other than football to the other side of the country when there are plenty of worthy opponents close by? Just curious as to your thoughts.
 

HG73

Active Member
Exactly how much $$ does a big east football school get from TV right now, and how is it split football vs. basketball?
 

JogginFrog

Active Member
OK, to answer the question:

No self-respecting conference would welcome a member for non-revenue sports only. Basketball isn't a money-maker at TCU, and a Top-5 baseball program, great as it is, cannot offset the loss of football.

So, if TCU said to the MWC, "we're going to the Big East in football, but we'd like to remain a loyal conference member in everything else," Craig Thompson would tell TCU where it could put its non-revenue sports. And so would other conferences. I can't see even C-USA welcoming TCU under those circumstances. And going independent would create scheduling nightmares.
 
D

Daniel Plainview

Guest
Why am I guessing that the OP is from a Big East basketball school?


yea, but you missed an even bigger point. The OP is a woman and they don't understand sports.

Thats why we put the hot ones on the sideline to talk about Antonio Gates pinky toe while the men do the reall talk and analysis in the booth.
 

toadallytexan

ToadallyTexan
yea, but you missed an even bigger point. The OP is a woman and they don't understand sports.

Thats why we put the hot ones on the sideline to talk about Antonio Gates pinky toe while the men do the reall talk and analysis in the booth.

Careful, I've seen Frisky Frog slap many a self-important, overreaching male upside the head with both solid facts and irrefutable logic. Even with the new concussion rules, don't think you'd be an exception to a sexist, hasty generalization based on your insufficient and nonrepresentative data sampling.
 
D

Daniel Plainview

Guest
Careful, I've seen Frisky Frog slap many a self-important, overreaching male upside the head with both solid facts and irrefutable logic. Even with the new concussion rules, don't think you'd be an exception to a sexist, hasty generalization based on your insufficient and nonrepresentative data sampling.


women are too weak to inflict damage on men.
 

BABYFACE

Full Member
I don't have the numbers but the TV money for Big East FB is not that great if my memory serves me correct. It isn't much of a gain for FB but the basketball money is a huge gain.
 

MissPalmer

New Member
yea, but you missed an even bigger point. The OP is a woman and they don't understand sports.

Thats why we put the hot ones on the sideline to talk about Antonio Gates pinky toe while the men do the reall talk and analysis in the booth.

It was a simple and honest question. For those of you who attempted to answer, thank you. For those of you you wish to turn it into some sort of sexist, generalized drivel then I suggest you continue to the sidewalk for your staring session. I doubt anyone stares back.
 

FeistyFrog

Sir FeistyFrog
OK, to answer the question:

No self-respecting conference would welcome a member for non-revenue sports only. Basketball isn't a money-maker at TCU, and a Top-5 baseball program, great as it is, cannot offset the loss of football.

So, if TCU said to the MWC, "we're going to the Big East in football, but we'd like to remain a loyal conference member in everything else," Craig Thompson would tell TCU where it could put its non-revenue sports. And so would other conferences. I can't see even C-USA welcoming TCU under those circumstances. And going independent would create scheduling nightmares.


It worked for Notre Dame (in the BE).
 
Top