Why doesn't MWC target...

[MN Frog]

Seems to me that just last week I was hearing all about how Missouri would be voted out of the league if the Big XII actually survived. How has this changed? With Utah on the verge of leaving why doesn't Craig Thompson get aggressive and try to save his league and keep Utah at the table?

Is there no merit at all in offering a dual invite to MIssouri and K-State or something along those lines? I can't imagine that with the unbalanced revenue sharing that these two teams would be any more thrilled to stay than Nebraska was. Sure, they are happy to have a conference once again, but they are still at the mercy of UT and OU.

Why couldn't he bring in these schools and re-negotiate a TV deal? My recall was that Missouri brought LOTS of TV sets to the table. Could a MWC deal that included Utah, Idaho, DFW and now Kansas and Missouri markets generate a deal comparable to what K-State and Mizzou would be getting out of their new TV deal? Especially if those additions mean a BCS bid and the associated money with that as well as a confefence championship game? It also gives K-State and Mizzou a more realistic shot at a conference title every couple of years. They don't sniff it with OU and UT in their league. Maybe it's a pipe dream...but why is our conference being reactive and not proactive?

 

[weklfrog]

QUOTE(MN Frog @ Jun 15 2010, 05:29 AM) [snapback]579398[/snapback]
Seems to me that just last week I was hearing all about how Missouri would be voted out of the league if the Big XII actually survived. How has this changed? With Utah on the verge of leaving why doesn't Craig Thompson get aggressive and try to save his league and keep Utah at the table?

Is there no merit at all in offering a dual invite to MIssouri and K-State or something along those lines? I can't imagine that with the unbalanced revenue sharing that these two teams would be any more thrilled to stay than Nebraska was. Sure, they are happy to have a conference once again, but they are still at the mercy of UT and OU.

Why couldn't he bring in these schools and re-negotiate a TV deal? My recall was that Missouri brought LOTS of TV sets to the table. Could a MWC deal that included Utah, Idaho, DFW and now Kansas and Missouri markets generate a deal comparable to what K-State and Mizzou would be getting out of their new TV deal? Especially if those additions mean a BCS bid and the associated money with that as well as a confefence championship game? It also gives K-State and Mizzou a more realistic shot at a conference title every couple of years. They don't sniff it with OU and UT in their league. Maybe it's a pipe dream...but why is our conference being reactive and not proactive?

I suspect that you don't make a public invite unless you are pretty confident that it will be accepted. Maybe we have sent out feelers behind the scenes and they are flat not interested in jumping from an AQ to a non-AQ conf. Just because nothing is happening doesn't mean nothing has been going on.

 

[Gehörnter Frosch]

Did you see how much money they're getting?

 

[MN Frog]

QUOTE(Gehörnter Frosch @ Jun 15 2010, 07:36 AM) [snapback]579403[/snapback]
Did you see how much money they're getting?


Yes, $14 million or something right? Sorry, I don't follow it as closely as I hope. With the addition of those markets, the addition on a conference championship game and TV revenue from that, as well as the BCS auto-bid revenue, can't we get close??? I apologize if it's a dumb question....

 

[Gehörnter Frosch]

Not a dumb question, and no, the MWC can't get close to that.

Not to mention most of the Big 12 can't get past the notion of life without being affiliated with UT and OU. It's their whole identity. Winning championships and getting to BCS bowls is secondary to them. It's all about who their "friends" are and which neighborhood they live it.

Doesn't matter that they live in the crappiest house in the neighborhood...as long as they have the same zip code as the boys in the big mansion on the hill. Then they feel "worthy" and valued.

It's really silly, and I was making the case a year ago that if a few schools like Texas Tech, Colorado, and Baylor would just wake up and realize it, they would have a whole new start in the MWC. I was laughed at by everyone then, and clearly they were right. These guys will NEVER be able to take off the yoke that has kept them down for the last 15 years.

 

[50FT FROG]

QUOTE(Gehörnter Frosch @ Jun 15 2010, 12:43 PM) [snapback]579408[/snapback]
Not a dumb question, and no, the MWC can't get close to that.

Not to mention most of the Big 12 can't get past the notion of life without being affiliated with UT and OU. It's their whole identity. Winning championships and getting to BCS bowls is secondary to them. It's all about who their "friends" are and which neighborhood they live it.

Doesn't matter that they live in the crappiest house in the neighborhood...as long as they have the same zip code as the boys in the big mansion on the hill. Then they feel "worthy" and valued.

It's really silly, and I was making the case a year ago that if a few schools like Texas Tech, Colorado, and Baylor would just wake up and realize it, they would have a whole new start in the MWC. I was laughed at by everyone then, and clearly they were right. These guys will NEVER be able to take off the yoke that has kept them down for the last 15 years.

especially not now, they just conceded more power to texas.

 

[JimSwinkLives!]

QUOTE(MN Frog @ Jun 15 2010, 07:29 AM) [snapback]579398[/snapback]
Seems to me that just last week I was hearing all about how Missouri would be voted out of the league if the Big XII actually survived. How has this changed? With Utah on the verge of leaving why doesn't Craig Thompson get aggressive and try to save his league and keep Utah at the table?

Is there no merit at all in offering a dual invite to MIssouri and K-State or something along those lines? I can't imagine that with the unbalanced revenue sharing that these two teams would be any more thrilled to stay than Nebraska was. Sure, they are happy to have a conference once again, but they are still at the mercy of UT and OU.

Why couldn't he bring in these schools and re-negotiate a TV deal? My recall was that Missouri brought LOTS of TV sets to the table. Could a MWC deal that included Utah, Idaho, DFW and now Kansas and Missouri markets generate a deal comparable to what K-State and Mizzou would be getting out of their new TV deal? Especially if those additions mean a BCS bid and the associated money with that as well as a confefence championship game? It also gives K-State and Mizzou a more realistic shot at a conference title every couple of years. They don't sniff it with OU and UT in their league. Maybe it's a pipe dream...but why is our conference being reactive and not proactive?



Thompson did target them, and he had discussions with each of the Kansas schools and Mizzou.

 

[gdu]

QUOTE(MN Frog @ Jun 15 2010, 07:39 AM) [snapback]579406[/snapback]
Yes, $14 million or something right? Sorry, I don't follow it as closely as I hope. With the addition of those markets, the addition on a conference championship game and TV revenue from that, as well as the BCS auto-bid revenue, can't we get close??? I apologize if it's a dumb question....

Nope, not even kinda close.

 

[berryfrog95]

QUOTE(tcugdu @ Jun 15 2010, 09:15 AM) [snapback]579475[/snapback]
Nope, not even kinda close.


Kansas and Missouri wouldn't choose MWC, they'd have to pay $5-7M to exit the Big 12. We've been a bcs buster in a 9 team conference, so why not continue that trend moving forward.

I'm still a bit suspicious of what Notre Dame is going to do at some point and if Texas tries to talk them down south....??

 

[gdu]

QUOTE(berryfrog95 @ Jun 15 2010, 09:18 AM) [snapback]579481[/snapback]
Kansas and Missouri wouldn't choose MWC, they'd have to pay $5-7M to exit the Big 12. We've been a bcs buster in a 9 team conference, so why not continue that trend moving forward.

I'm still a bit suspicious of what Notre Dame is going to do at some point and if Texas tries to talk them down south....??

$5-7M is not the reason they wouldn't do it. It is the decreased revenue, lack of an autobid and basketball.

I believe Texas has already talked to ND about coming down. Why not? Big tv bucks and easy pickins on the field.

 

[Frog DJ]

Money talks - nothing else comes close.

Go Frogs!

 

[gohornedfrogs]

At this point, I would rather the Big 12 expand to 14 and take TCU, BYU, Utah and Boise State if Utah is not planning on staying in the MWC...

 

[roddog]

QUOTE(gohornedfrogs @ Jun 15 2010, 02:26 PM) [snapback]579492[/snapback]
At this point, I would rather the Big 12 expand to 14 and take TCU, BYU, Utah and Boise State if Utah is not planning on staying in the MWC...


why would you wanna join a conf just to be someones beotch, id rather be in a conf that treated everyone more equal

 

[berryfrog95]

QUOTE(tcugdu @ Jun 15 2010, 09:23 AM) [snapback]579488[/snapback]
$5-7M is not the reason they wouldn't do it. It is the decreased revenue, lack of an autobid and basketball.

I believe Texas has already talked to ND about coming down. Why not? Big tv bucks and easy pickins on the field.


right, I was just focusing first on the Exit fee....we all know the revenue is obvious.

Yes, I'm thinking UT is brokering more than just the 10 teams in the long-haul. Maybe for starters they play each other annually, that would work out well for both teams. UT is going to have to man up their schedule anyway....(not that ND is a juggernaut....)

 

[Delmonico]

QUOTE(roddog @ Jun 15 2010, 09:30 AM) [snapback]579502[/snapback]
why would you wanna join a conf just to be someones beotch, id rather be in a conf that treated everyone more equal



And yet y'all signed up for the Big 12 anyways.

 

[roddog]

QUOTE(RSF @ Jun 15 2010, 02:31 PM) [snapback]579504[/snapback]
And yet y'all signed up for the Big 12 anyways.


and tcu wouldnt?

 

[Delmonico]

QUOTE(roddog @ Jun 15 2010, 09:33 AM) [snapback]579508[/snapback]
and tcu wouldnt?



Didn't say whether we would or wouldn't, actually, since that wasn't the point - which I see you missed once again. You say you want one thing, yet Tech does the opposite. If being an equal is what's important, I'm sure the MWC could squeeze y'all in.

 

[roddog]

QUOTE(RSF @ Jun 15 2010, 02:42 PM) [snapback]579516[/snapback]
Didn't say whether we would or wouldn't, actually, since that wasn't the point - which I see you missed once again. You say you want one thing, yet Tech does the opposite. If being an equal is what's important, I'm sure the MWC could squeeze y'all in.


i guess the tech admin would prefer the 17 or so million as opposed to the 3, and other teams bring 10k fans as opposed to 100