Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Unread post by **appst89** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 12:21 pm

hapapp wrote:Actually, I believe Nebraska has lost membership in the AAU. However, they were members when admitted.

Didn't know that, but did a little reading after your post. There are some very interesting theories as to why Nebraska was kicked out, and most of them involve Texas and reataliation for leaving the Big 12.

Also read that Syracuse voluntarily left the AAU because of disagreements over some membership criteria.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 12:37 pm

I would guess that BC would move to the basketball conference with the 7 Catholic schools. Is it interesting how Miami might be left on the outside looking in despite the size of their television market?

hapapp · Unread post by **hapapp** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 1:09 pm

The NDSU fans I see on AGS are really obnoxious. Worse than any of the Ga So fans or others. Would like to see them get spanked just to take the wind out of their sails, but I must admit the Bison look very good.

It should be a good game as both teams will know what to expect going into the game. I, too, am pulling for a reverse of last year's result.

Have fun!

goapps93 · Unread post by **goapps93** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 1:57 pm

Though I'm sure U of Florida wouldn't be super excited about it I think they would have less problem accepting Miami in the SEC than FSU. UF and the U very seldom if ever play each other and if they are in different divisions then they still wouldn't have to play each other every season. UF plays FSU every year anyway and they could keep doing that or alternate years with the U. Recruiting is not really hurt either way as there are plenty of Florida players to go around and they all 3 battle each other anyway. The "Big 4" would have a tough time leaving the Hurricanes out.

As far as NC's "Big 4" go I think the Red-headed stepchild Wolfpack(no offense to any red-headed stepchildren on the MMB) would be pretty quick to bolt for the SEC just to get out of UNC's football and basketball shadow and to get out of Duke's basketball shadow.

MountainMan · Unread post by **MountainMan** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:15 pm

appst89 wrote: None of the discussions I have heard present any alternatives for Wake, BC or Miami other than that they will be left out. If they do ultimately end up at 64 with the 4 16-team conferences then there are going to be some schools left out that have always been at the top level. I don't think that is going to sit well with them, whoever they may be.

At the end of the day, this seems to me like a potential "monkey wrench" that may keep the 4 16-team super conference idea from pulling away from everyone else -- it's just not quite large enough to include all the schools that may have a legitimate claim they should be included. Four super conferences are nice and neat for a playoff and championship and TV setup, but if a handful of schools like Miami, BC, Wake, Boise, or whoever is cut out of a chance at a playoff shot in a new system and a new pile of TV money there will be "restraint of trade" lawsuits like they are going out of style. As we all know, it's all about the money, and if a school that has been getting a good slice of the money finds that they are booted to the curb with an empty bag they are not going to go quietly.

Unread post by **appst89** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:29 pm

MountainMan wrote:
appst89 wrote: None of the discussions I have heard present any alternatives for Wake, BC or Miami other than that they will be left out. If they do ultimately end up at 64 with the 4 16-team conferences then there are going to be some schools left out that have always been at the top level. I don't think that is going to sit well with them, whoever they may be.
At the end of the day, this seems to me like a potential "monkey wrench" that may keep the 4 16-team super conference idea from pulling away from everyone else -- it's just not quite large enough to include all the schools that may have a legitimate claim they should be included. Four super conferences are nice and neat for a playoff and championship and TV setup, but if a handful of schools like Miami, BC, Wake, Boise, or whoever is cut out of a chance at a playoff shot in a new system and a new pile of TV money there will be "restraint of trade" lawsuits like they are going out of style. As we all know, it's all about the money, and if a school that has been getting a good slice of the money finds that they are booted to the curb with an empty bag they are not going to go quietly.

That may be what saves the ACC, in some form. 5 14-team conferences, or even 5 16-team conferences would accommodate all the current "top tier" teams and allow for the inclusion of a few extras, like Boise St. When it all shakes out, that may be the more likely outcome because sharing a little bit of the pie is going to be cheaper than defending 15 restraint of trade lawsuits.

bcoach · Unread post by **bcoach** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:34 pm

MountainMan wrote:
appst89 wrote: None of the discussions I have heard present any alternatives for Wake, BC or Miami other than that they will be left out. If they do ultimately end up at 64 with the 4 16-team conferences then there are going to be some schools left out that have always been at the top level. I don't think that is going to sit well with them, whoever they may be.
At the end of the day, this seems to me like a potential "monkey wrench" that may keep the 4 16-team super conference idea from pulling away from everyone else -- it's just not quite large enough to include all the schools that may have a legitimate claim they should be included. Four super conferences are nice and neat for a playoff and championship and TV setup, but if a handful of schools like Miami, BC, Wake, Boise, or whoever is cut out of a chance at a playoff shot in a new system and a new pile of TV money there will be "restraint of trade" lawsuits like they are going out of style. As we all know, it's all about the money, and if a school that has been getting a good slice of the money finds that they are booted to the curb with an empty bag they are not going to go quietly.

That does not take into consideration the posibility of them pulling out of the NCAA. Probable, maybe not due to the impact on basketball. Possible? I don't know. I have heard it is.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:41 pm

Wow! The restraint of trade lawsuit. I had not thought about it from a legal standpoint but I think that you certainly hit the nail on the head with that one. Along those lines, someone mentioned UNC and UVA to the Big 10. With all of the political pressures applied by the state legislatures to get Va Tech into the ACC and getting UNC and State to play ECU, I can't see them bowing out. The TV Deals are good but the schools do not operate on budgets drawn from TV Deals.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:49 pm

bcoach wrote:
MountainMan wrote:
appst89 wrote: None of the discussions I have heard present any alternatives for Wake, BC or Miami other than that they will be left out. If they do ultimately end up at 64 with the 4 16-team conferences then there are going to be some schools left out that have always been at the top level. I don't think that is going to sit well with them, whoever they may be.
At the end of the day, this seems to me like a potential "monkey wrench" that may keep the 4 16-team super conference idea from pulling away from everyone else -- it's just not quite large enough to include all the schools that may have a legitimate claim they should be included. Four super conferences are nice and neat for a playoff and championship and TV setup, but if a handful of schools like Miami, BC, Wake, Boise, or whoever is cut out of a chance at a playoff shot in a new system and a new pile of TV money there will be "restraint of trade" lawsuits like they are going out of style. As we all know, it's all about the money, and if a school that has been getting a good slice of the money finds that they are booted to the curb with an empty bag they are not going to go quietly.
That does not take into consideration the posibility of them pulling out of the NCAA. Probable, maybe not due to the impact on basketball. Possible? I don't know. I have heard it is.

I'm not so sure some of your basketball rich schools would want to do that. The Indianas and Kentuckys of the world play football to pass the time until basketball season rolls around. Those schools make a ton of money from basketball from the NCAA.

bcoach · Unread post by **bcoach** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:07 pm

AppSt94 wrote:
bcoach wrote:
MountainMan wrote:
appst89 wrote: None of the discussions I have heard present any alternatives for Wake, BC or Miami other than that they will be left out. If they do ultimately end up at 64 with the 4 16-team conferences then there are going to be some schools left out that have always been at the top level. I don't think that is going to sit well with them, whoever they may be.
At the end of the day, this seems to me like a potential "monkey wrench" that may keep the 4 16-team super conference idea from pulling away from everyone else -- it's just not quite large enough to include all the schools that may have a legitimate claim they should be included. Four super conferences are nice and neat for a playoff and championship and TV setup, but if a handful of schools like Miami, BC, Wake, Boise, or whoever is cut out of a chance at a playoff shot in a new system and a new pile of TV money there will be "restraint of trade" lawsuits like they are going out of style. As we all know, it's all about the money, and if a school that has been getting a good slice of the money finds that they are booted to the curb with an empty bag they are not going to go quietly.
That does not take into consideration the posibility of them pulling out of the NCAA. Probable, maybe not due to the impact on basketball. Possible? I don't know. I have heard it is.

I'm not so sure some of your basketball rich schools would want to do that. The Indianas and Kentuckys of the world play football to pass the time until basketball season rolls around. Those schools make a ton of money from basketball from the NCAA.

Well like I said maybe not probable but just to throw it around a little, what does the NCAA do that they could not do on their own?

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:20 pm

bcoach wrote:
AppSt94 wrote:
bcoach wrote:
MountainMan wrote:
appst89 wrote: None of the discussions I have heard present any alternatives for Wake, BC or Miami other than that they will be left out. If they do ultimately end up at 64 with the 4 16-team conferences then there are going to be some schools left out that have always been at the top level. I don't think that is going to sit well with them, whoever they may be.
At the end of the day, this seems to me like a potential "monkey wrench" that may keep the 4 16-team super conference idea from pulling away from everyone else -- it's just not quite large enough to include all the schools that may have a legitimate claim they should be included. Four super conferences are nice and neat for a playoff and championship and TV setup, but if a handful of schools like Miami, BC, Wake, Boise, or whoever is cut out of a chance at a playoff shot in a new system and a new pile of TV money there will be "restraint of trade" lawsuits like they are going out of style. As we all know, it's all about the money, and if a school that has been getting a good slice of the money finds that they are booted to the curb with an ey bag they are not going to go quietly.
That does not take into consideration the posibility of them pulling out of the NCAA. Probable, maybe not due to the impact on basketball. Possible? I don't know. I have heard it is.

I'm not so sure some of your basketball rich schools would want to do that. The Indianas and Kentuckys of the world play football to pass the time until basketball season rolls around. Those schools make a ton of money from basketball from the NCAA.
Well like I said maybe not probable but just to throw it around a little, what does the NCAA do that they could not do on their own?

.

I'm not sure. I wasn't trying to debate you rather I was thinking out loud. Sorry for the confusion.

bcoach · Unread post by **bcoach** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:29 pm

No I didn't mean it as debate. You brought up an interesting point and I meant it as a question. I really don't have the answer and was just curious.

canes_mj · Unread post by **canes_mj** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:46 pm

Personally i think this is going to happen in some form. Too much money out there and too many lawyers to find loopholes. I've read a lot on this as well and Firemoose has summed it all up nicely. Reports I've read say that by 2017, Maryland will be making almost $20 million more in the Big 10 than they would in the ACC. Just no way schools are going to turn down that type of money if they want to remain a player on the national stage. Everything I've read also has suggested that all of this hinges on what the Big 12 decides to do. If they stand pat with the number of teams they have, then the ACC may survive. If not, then all of the dominoes start to fall again. It's no secret FSU isn't thrilled about the ACC and they are the team rumored for the Big 12. Regarding the teams that get left out, I would imagine they would join the basketball conferences (Duke, BC) or merge with the scraps of the Big East/C-USA (Wake).

ASUGoose · Unread post by **ASUGoose** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:34 pm

Just read on ESPN that MWC is looking to add Tulsa from CUSA. If SDSU doesn't come back by the end of the month, then the likely replacement is Tulsa. If SDSU does come back to the MWC, then Tulsa would be added whenever the MWC would want to move to 14 teams.

I don't see ASU getting an invite anywhere for at least another month.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:36 pm

The President of FSU likes being in the ACC. He has gone on record as saying such. While Maryland may stand to make $20 million in 2017, they stand to lose $50 million in 2014 through exit fees. The Big 12 is not in control of there destiny, yet. The ACC holds the fate of those schools in their hand. If Swoffords stands pat on th exit fee, then the ACC will ward off anymore defections. If he caves in, then all bets are off.

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:41 pm

ASUGoose wrote:Just read on ESPN that MWC is looking to add Tulsa from CUSA. If SDSU doesn't come back by the end of the month, then the likely replacement is Tulsa. If SDSU does come back to the MWC, then Tulsa would be added whenever the MWC would want to move to 14 teams.

I don't see ASU getting an invite anywhere for at least another month.

So if we assume that the top 64 reclassify and take a large price of the pie. Will moving up and incurring the added expense of 44 scholarships and increased travel justify the nominal increase in revenue?

AppSt94 · Unread post by **AppSt94** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:43 pm

bcoach wrote:No I didn't mean it as debate. You brought up an interesting point and I meant it as a question. I really don't have the answer and was just curious.

It would be interesting to see what basketball schools would want to do.

hapapp · Unread post by **hapapp** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:02 pm

ASUGoose wrote:Just read on ESPN that MWC is looking to add Tulsa from CUSA. If SDSU doesn't come back by the end of the month, then the likely replacement is Tulsa. If SDSU does come back to the MWC, then Tulsa would be added whenever the MWC would want to move to 14 teams.

I don't see ASU getting an invite anywhere for at least another month.

I agree none of the lesser conferences are going to do anything until things shake out up top. Much of this seems to be about being in the right place at the right time and I'm not sure we are either in or at.

bcoach · Unread post by **bcoach** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:18 pm

AppSt94 wrote:
bcoach wrote:No I didn't mean it as debate. You brought up an interesting point and I meant it as a question. I really don't have the answer and was just curious.
It would be interesting to see what basketball schools would want to do.

Here is a what if. What if some of them drop football such as a Duke and join the Big East who drops football, and they just play the big four in the other sports? OR! is that just nuts and I need to go home and rest.

eggers76 · Unread post by **eggers76** » Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:30 pm

Some interesting reads linked here for whatever their worth...

Football is obviously the king of this study. Louisville's basketball status surprises me that they are more profitable than Kentucky's but the second link shows how basketball gets most of the perks at Kentucky. The rankings are also heavily skewed towards the public universities as well. It is my understanding that even at traditionally football poor Duke, the revenue from football is much greater than basketball due to their benefiting from their ACC's member school's relative success and TV monies. But there are far more football scholarships to fund at their very expensive tuition rate than basketball.

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011 ... -programs/

http://www.aseaofblue.com/2012/9/18/335 ... r-football

Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Re: Boise St. not going to BE afterall

Login • Register