Texas just screwed the B12

[fro daddy]

That they played hard ball for a few weeks with the big 10, then lost and Mu's bid went to NE, who was willing to sit and wait to become full members.

 

Think about that logically for a second. You're the Big 10, you could have either Missouri or Nebraska. You're saying that the Big 10 would choose Missouri first, and when that falls through, they took Nebraska as Plan B?

 

On what planet is Missouri Plan A over Nebraska? I rarely disagree with you, Fro, but this is some pretty easy math.

 

I never said that...so dont credit me with those words. Its what i was told by a guy that has been right way more than wrong everyother time.

 

Also i know we see things differnt because of glasses, and i sure dont need a history leason right now, but logically there is very little that seperates the two univesities at this point and time; financially, academically or athletically

[VectorVictor]

I would like to see you produce any numbers to support any of your claims. East ST.(also known as Illinois) yes does carry big10. Just like west Stl (also know as MO) MU is by far the biggest carry. And KC is split amoung many teams, MU is not lowest on that pole though. KSU is. KU is tops in basketball only. For all sports its MU & NU and then KSU & KU. As for your claim that KU carries the rest of Missouri your crazy. You can not and will not be able to provide one ounce of proof for that crazy claim because it simply isnt true.

 

Your choice if you had one is KU that is fine, but making things up as you go will not make your choice look any better or make any more sense

 

Fro Daddy--

 

No, I did not say Kansas carries the rest of Missouri, I said "Plus, Kansas carries the rest of its state (FWIW)". Its is a possessive pronoun that implies Kansas' own state (which would be Kansas, last I recall).

 

Also, there are a lot more households in Missouri than you think that are already part of the Big 10 footprint. Frank the Tank has a breakdown of the net gain from pre-Big 10 expansion talk here:

 

Analysis

Article Page

 

Additionally, the U.S. Census Bureau has the number of Missouri households at 2,194,594 (in 2000) per their site here. 2,194,594 minus the 1,542,000 (estimated) net household gain for the Big 10 picking Missouri leaves approx. 652,594 households, or roughly 1/3rd of the households in Missouri already in the Big 10 footprint.

 

While saying the Big 10 has half of Missouri in its footprint is incorrect, saying a third is still relevant, factual, and does not help Missouri's case. Granted, the number of Big 12 Missouri households is larger than the 1,037,891 households the entirety of Kansas would bring in, but bringing in Kansas would likely fracture part of the current non-Big 10 Missouri broadcasting footprint, and even just 20% of the Missouri households switching to the Big 10 broadcast would be enough to put a Kansas acquisition on par (+/- 100k households) with a Missouri acquisition.

 

Plus, the Big 10 has already set the precedent that national following trumps households--otherwise they would have never chose Nebraska and it's paltry 666,184 households (Link). Kansas does have a national following in Basketball, and it would be this that sets them apart from Missouri (who, while currently doing well, does not have the history or pedigree Kansas does).

 

Remember the Big 10 is first selling a network and secondly expanding for academic/athletic gain. National brands will continue to trump local players unless we talk states like New Jersey/New York and a Rutgers or Syracuse acquisition (3,064,645 and 7,056,860 households, respectively).

 

As for ratings, I couldn't find the local STLlive articles that broke down Top 10 TV ratings for the St. Louis area last year, but on a national basis, Nebraska handily beat all of the (likely) competition, including Notre Dame.

 

See chart here.

 

Of course, all of this is moot if Kansas up and joins the Big East per the recent scuttlebutt, and all we will have done here is inconvenience a group of electrons.

[gratefullred]

OK fro, this is only my opinion. The thing that seperates NU from MU is TV ratings. They are not far apart on the field or in the class room and I agree with the points you bring up. When NU is on TV they get good ratings, better than most anyone. That makes NU worth more than MU. Not better, just worth more.

[VectorVictor]

That they played hard ball for a few weeks with the big 10, then lost and Mu's bid went to NE, who was willing to sit and wait to become full members.

 

Think about that logically for a second. You're the Big 10, you could have either Missouri or Nebraska. You're saying that the Big 10 would choose Missouri first, and when that falls through, they took Nebraska as Plan B?

 

On what planet is Missouri Plan A over Nebraska? I rarely disagree with you, Fro, but this is some pretty easy math.

 

Knapplc--

 

Just playing Pinkel's advocate here, so don't shoot me...but it all comes down to what the Big 10 and their network partners (Media Corp.) prioritize. If they wanted larger contiguous footprint, then Missouri would have the upper hand on Nebraska in that regard.

 

But since the Big 10 is focused on national expansion, it needs a national brand that generates ratings and, more importantly, gets people to call their cable company in Texas, Arizona, Alaska, etc. and ask demand the Big 10 network.

 

Not trying to 'defend' Fro Daddy or anything--just saying that had priorities been shifted and the decision was between us and Missouri, Missouri may had been Plan A.

[knapplc]

There is and always will be a tremendous difference between the national audience Nebraska has and Missouri has. Financially there's little comparison as well - Nebraska outstrips Missouri by nearly 2:1. Forbes magazine ranked Nebraska the fourth most valuable team in the country as recently as 12/2009. Missouri didn't make their top 20, although Texas did (the obvious #1), as well as Oklahoma (#10), Oklahoma State (#20) and Texas A&M (#18).

 

Academically Missouri is a better school, but not by a lot (#41 in the country compared to Nebraska's #47).

 

TV ratings are another factor, and again Nebraska far outstrips Missouri. I'm having a hard time tracking down numbers, but in last year's bowl games Nebraska vs. Arizona had a 4.31 rating, nearly double Missouri's 2.47 vs. Navy. Nebraska played in three of the five highest-rated college football broadcasts ever: the 1996 Fiesta Bowl and the 1994 & 1995 Orange Bowls. We have five total games in the top 20, all-time. Again, Missouri does not appear in this list.

 

Missouri is no slouch, so don't think I'm saying that. It's just that, as national cache goes, Nebraska clearly outstrips Missouri. Nebraska has been in the Big 10's crosshairs for decades according to Jim Delany. Missouri cannot say the same.

[knapplc]

Knapplc--

 

Just playing Pinkel's advocate here, so don't shoot me...but it all comes down to what the Big 10 and their network partners (Media Corp.) prioritize. If they wanted larger contiguous footprint, then Missouri would have the upper hand on Nebraska in that regard.

 

But since the Big 10 is focused on national expansion, it needs a national brand that generates ratings and, more importantly, gets people to call their cable company in Texas, Arizona, Alaska, etc. and ask demand the Big 10 network.

 

Not trying to 'defend' Fro Daddy or anything--just saying that had priorities been shifted and the decision was between us and Missouri, Missouri may had been Plan A.

 

Geographically contiguous footprint has never been a priority, near as I've ever seen. Have you ever heard that this was something the Big 10 was concerned about? They're not such great fools, I think.

 

Missouri was never Plan A. Missouri has made it clear for years that they wanted into the Big 10. If Missouri was ever Plan A, they'd be in the Big 10 now. They are not in any position to play hardball with Big 10 brass - as evidenced by their tenuous situation in the Big 12 right now. This is a conference in decline, clearly.

 

Frankly, if there's a shred of truth to the allegation that the Big 10 asked Missouri to join and Missouri played hardball with them, they're the largest nincompoops in the history of college football.

[VectorVictor]

 

I think what he is trying to say is many tv sets in Missu are tuned to watch ILL on the east and NU or KS on the west (st. louis and K city). I am not sure about that but if you dont think the fans had anything to do with NU getting into the B10 you are wrong, for one thing from the years of past power Husker ball, the Huskers have fans all over, and the state itself was impenetrable from a tv stand point. I am not sure on academics as I have not researched either of them, hoops hands down KS.

 

That's kind of what I'm saying.

 

What I'm ultimately getting at is that you can't think of these realignments going forward as something school-related. Now that TV is king, these networks need programs that drive ratings (so national ads with higher ratings can be sold to fuel expansion and $$$ to schools), allow for larger subscriber footprint (footprint is typically charged much more TV set for the channel than TV sets outside of the footprint--this money keeps the lights on), or improve the existing product (Big 10 vs. SEC today).

 

It all depends on the focus, but all foci are based from the notion that they need to primarily improve a network more so than improving a 'conference', if that makes sense.

[da skers]

To be truthful. . .MU screwed itself. For what ever reason they have this complex and feel they should be mentioned with great college athletics and as a storied program. As a result they are always touting themselves, trying to draw attention and point out they are relevant. Its like when the fat kids gets a pitty date from the prom queen and then he as to brag that he's going to bone her after the dance only to have her find out leave with the prom king/captin of the football team. They draw attention to themselves and then piss away what they were about to have a chance to accomplish.

 

They were going to be invited into the B10 then had to leak it and try to rub it in everyone's face and try to flip them the bird. One of my friends is an assistant AD there and he sat in the meetings that Thursday afternoon that planned the leaving of the B12 and how the B10 would most likely proceed. The B10 got turned off by the leak. This was going to be very quite as they explored and brought in two more teams (besides MU and NU) and would have a 14 team conference. But the AD department just had to leak it to the KC radio and all of the sudden there is all of this attention on whats going down. A few of the possible players got scared off and it shut down. No one even knew NU was being considered until MU started saying we're in the B10 and we're going to bring NU with us. The fact was at that point. . .they we're only getting in because of us and only if all the other teams came along and when the other teams backed away there was only one spot to be filled.

 

heres the thing, there are 1000 different stories about how it went down, what did or didnt happen. YOu have a source, i have a source, radio had a source, my brothers mother-in-laws uncle has a source. I can tell you what my source said. He said it was a done deal but leadership at MU didnt want to wait the waiting period to become full members. That they played hard ball for a few weeks with the big 10, then lost and Mu's bid went to NE, who was willing to sit and wait to become full members.

 

So who is right, my good friend or your friend? Was it Mu who was the only one and they blew it or was MU only in because of NE? Its like tootsie pops....the world may never know.

 

and really at this point does any of that matter? Whats done is done. I think the process is far from over and i believe MU will land on their feet. They are not the best option available but they are a hell of a lot better than a number of other bcs schools that may end up in the same boat.

Thats fine if you choose not to believe me. I honestly don't give two squirts of a rats ass. This is the information I got first hand after the fact from an athletic department official. I'm going to take it from the guy sitting in the room representing MU and helping to make the decisions on the transition. He was pissed they f'd it up. If there is any speculation in there its from him and he'd probably base it off of pretty damn good information.

 

There are exactly 4 places I know people. Outside of them I won't speculate and if I do I'll always list the media I read it in. They are UNL (several people in the AD department, several of TO family members including the attorney for my business, and very close associates of TO including his college teammates and buddies, several key former players still tied to the program including my banker, several key boosters and regents; Michigan a booster and an Athletic department Marking agent; Missouri an assistant athletic director for a sport I won't name because it will be easy to tell who he is; the WAC conference office I know a media relations person who basically spoon feeds the info to the rest of the world. There I laid my dick on the table for everyone to see. Happy?

[kchusker_chris]

That they played hard ball for a few weeks with the big 10, then lost and Mu's bid went to NE, who was willing to sit and wait to become full members.

 

Think about that logically for a second. You're the Big 10, you could have either Missouri or Nebraska. You're saying that the Big 10 would choose Missouri first, and when that falls through, they took Nebraska as Plan B?

 

On what planet is Missouri Plan A over Nebraska? I rarely disagree with you, Fro, but this is some pretty easy math.

 

Knapplc--

 

Just playing Pinkel's advocate here, so don't shoot me...but it all comes down to what the Big 10 and their network partners (Media Corp.) prioritize. If they wanted larger contiguous footprint, then Missouri would have the upper hand on Nebraska in that regard.

 

But since the Big 10 is focused on national expansion, it needs a national brand that generates ratings and, more importantly, gets people to call their cable company in Texas, Arizona, Alaska, etc. and ask demand the Big 10 network.

Not trying to 'defend' Fro Daddy or anything--just saying that had priorities been shifted and the decision was between us and Missouri, Missouri may had been Plan A.

Were you even trying to defend him? I'm confused - because I don't think you'll find a Missouri fan that would argue the fact that Nebraska fans are going to be calling their cable companies in TX, AZ, and AK long before a Tiger fan would be - and in greater numbers. Nebraska fans are just flat out obsessed - Missouri fans have other things to do (Ram/Chiefs - Royals/Cardinals...)

[knapplc]

There I laid my dick on the table for everyone to see. Happy?

 

 

What? Put that away!

[VectorVictor]

Knapplc--

 

Just playing Pinkel's advocate here, so don't shoot me...but it all comes down to what the Big 10 and their network partners (Media Corp.) prioritize. If they wanted larger contiguous footprint, then Missouri would have the upper hand on Nebraska in that regard.

 

But since the Big 10 is focused on national expansion, it needs a national brand that generates ratings and, more importantly, gets people to call their cable company in Texas, Arizona, Alaska, etc. and ask demand the Big 10 network.

 

Not trying to 'defend' Fro Daddy or anything--just saying that had priorities been shifted and the decision was between us and Missouri, Missouri may had been Plan A.

 

Geographically contiguous footprint has never been a priority, near as I've ever seen. Have you ever heard that this was something the Big 10 was concerned about?

 

Geographically contiguous footprint came from Delaney himself, which is why Texas was taken out of the mix early on and why Syracuse and Rutgers came up for discussion during expansion. While neither 'Cuse or Rutgers has any sort of athletic pedigree, they do bring sizable TV footprints that eclipse that of Nebraska and the non-Big 10 Missouri footprint combined.

 

Oh, and about Nebraska being on the Big 10 crosshairs--remember that the Bobfather himself wanted us in the Big 10 so many years ago. T. Boones Farms Pickens reminded us as much as soon as we accepted our invite, and it's the only bit of truth he's uttered this decade.

[VectorVictor]

That they played hard ball for a few weeks with the big 10, then lost and Mu's bid went to NE, who was willing to sit and wait to become full members.

 

Think about that logically for a second. You're the Big 10, you could have either Missouri or Nebraska. You're saying that the Big 10 would choose Missouri first, and when that falls through, they took Nebraska as Plan B?

 

On what planet is Missouri Plan A over Nebraska? I rarely disagree with you, Fro, but this is some pretty easy math.

 

Knapplc--

 

Just playing Pinkel's advocate here, so don't shoot me...but it all comes down to what the Big 10 and their network partners (Media Corp.) prioritize. If they wanted larger contiguous footprint, then Missouri would have the upper hand on Nebraska in that regard.

 

But since the Big 10 is focused on national expansion, it needs a national brand that generates ratings and, more importantly, gets people to call their cable company in Texas, Arizona, Alaska, etc. and ask demand the Big 10 network.

Not trying to 'defend' Fro Daddy or anything--just saying that had priorities been shifted and the decision was between us and Missouri, Missouri may had been Plan A.

Were you even trying to defend him?

 

First paragraph, yes.

 

Second paragraph, I got ADD and like a state-appointed attorney, I lost interest and threw the client under a bus.

[VectorVictor]

There I laid my dick on the table for everyone to see. Happy?

 

 

What? Put that away!

 

That's a very sizable Dick. A/S/L?

[kchusker_chris]

First paragraph, yes.

 

Second paragraph, I got ADD and like a state-appointed attorney, I lost interest and threw the client under a bus.

[fro daddy]

Matthew,you have a ton of stuff so i am not going to quote copy all of it, but i will say this. I dont disagree with NE's tv pull. They are one of a handful of teams that has that type of pull and its not is dispute. WIth that said, MU's tv pull is better than many many others. KU does have a large national pull in basketball, a pull that is enhanced by the number of national primetime games they are given. But we all also know that MBB cant sniff what CFB does and KU is not in MU's class in CFB, much like MU is not in Ne's. Truthfully CFB is the driving machine to this whole issue and as far as that goes ku < mu < ne. and i am sorry for misready your post, that is my fault

 

Also I am familiar with those reports you posted. Info that is not listed is that (i believe it was close to 80% if memory serves me correct) of those sets with access to BTN have it listed as tier 2 or 3. In other words you have to basically buy every single package to get the programing. Its not equal to espn, its equal to HBO southwest. WIthout having a major instate draw or demand it will remain on the high (and very expensive teirs) that only a handful will ever pay for. Available and watched are two very differnt things. IMO Ne can effect that number, and MO can effect that number. No other school will effect that number to make a sizable difference in its current rating

 

gratefullred,

never disagreed with that point. its true and impressive. the longer Mu is good those numbers will get closer. but nu is on their own level and it took 40 straight year for them to earn that honor, so its not coming down anytime soon.

 

Knappy

again, never disputed the ratings. I believe the forbes report is bunk. Its the same type of report that factors opinions and leaves out facts to make an opionated list. Much like how Omaha was listed as most affordable city with no consideration to the tax rates with are some of the highest in the midwest. What matters to me financially is endowments and the money the university is making. Facts that can be tracked and recorded. The endowments are almost equal. link Its not 2:1 in the report you listed. NU has $75 mil, MU has $50. in that report. Does MU make as much as NE,OSU,TX,FL no they dont. Do they do pretty well. Yeah they do. 1 of only 14 to make money in FBS in 09 and one of only 25 the year before. link

 

We also both know that athletics is just part of the picture when it comes to money a univesity has. needless to say with hundreds of univesirties and a seperation of just a few % in terms of rankings its not a huge difference. Also consider your Delaney quote, How likely is he to come out and say, "you know we have liked these other schools also" or "shoot...we had never thought about nebraska until they called"... Do you honestly believe that MU and others havnt been talked about in those rooms for years as well?