|
Replies: 30
| visibility 2,173
|
Scout Team [194]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 255
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Concerns about moving to Big 12
May 17, 2012, 1:57 PM
|
|
I moved to the Atlanta area from Nebraska after living in Kansas. The Big 12 is not the place to aspire to. If we want to join the SEC or Big 10 then I think we would better ourselves but I am not sold on the Big 12. It is very unstable at this point in time. If it is such a great conference why would Nebraska leave to go to the Big 10? Colorado also left and joined the PAC 10. One of the big reasons is the Longhorn Sports Net Work which is giving Texas a leg up on the competition because they control what is broadcast and what is not. The conference tried to shut them down but it failed because Texas has so many wealthy alumni. Texas controls that conference much more than NC and Duke control the ACC.
Additionally, when we lived in Kansas, Kansas and K State couldn't even sell out their rivalry game. Kansas is as much or more of a basketball school than Duke or NC. After living in Kansas for two years and missing college football my son and I decided to go to a Kansas game. The local IGA store was giving away tickets for a can of tuna or 4 rolls of toilet paper. (I am not making this up). When I called to see how many cans of tuna I had to buy to get two tickets, I was told that if I would come to the store they would give me all the tickets that I wanted. We got the two free tickets, went to the game and Kansas lost to New Mexico State who hadn't won a game in 5 years. At that time K State was about as bad. Iowa State is not much better. Most of the schools with the exception of Texas, Baylor and Oklahoma are in out of the way small cities. It would not be fun to go on the road. That would be fine if it was a powerhouse conference but we don't know who they are going to be once the new teams settle in. I am in favor of moving to the SEC or Big Ten but not the Big 12.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [60215]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42553
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Clemson is in a small out of the way city
May 17, 2012, 2:04 PM
|
|
you evidently see some problem with this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [194]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 255
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Re: Clemson is in a small out of the way city
May 17, 2012, 2:07 PM
|
|
Clemson is a beautiful small little southern down with a lake, beautiful mountains and hills surrounding it. Ames, Iowa, Manhattan, Kansas and Lawrence, Kansas are cities in the middle of nothing. Kansas and Iowa are so flat you can see the back of your own head.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Re: Clemson is in a small out of the way city
May 17, 2012, 6:51 PM
|
|
Too bad you are letting your jaded view of KS paint such a negative picture. It's not for everyone, but it's not nearly as bad as you want to put out there. I think it would be appropriate to encourage others to give it a go (if the opportunity arises) and see for themselves.
Lawrence is a very cool, hip college town in and of itself, plus it's just a half hour from downtown KCMO and around 15 minutes to some nice development near KS Speedway in KCK. The only thing wrong with Lawrence is that whole KU thing - and basketball is the only sport they care about. But it's still a good visit.
Manhattan is farther out (though accessible pretty easily by air with direct flights via Chicago and Dallas - easier to fly to than several B12 cities), and it's not for everyone. That said, it's right near a lake and the rolling Flint Hills do provide some picturesque scenery, and gameday (and Friday nights) in Aggieville is as good a party as anything anywhere. Bill Snyder Family Stadium has a reputation for being as loud as many in the conference that are 20K (or more) larger in numbers.
Ames is also a nice little college town - again, a little remote, but the gameday atmosphere is top notch. They may not have all the tradition, but it is a hearty fan base that fills the stadium and gets loud. It's a quality experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19584]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17256
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12
May 17, 2012, 2:09 PM
|
|
As someone put it before, I'd rather be a part of a conference that's ran by a football school than a conference that's ran by Swoffie and Dookie Hill...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [194]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 255
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12
May 17, 2012, 2:10 PM
|
|
Evidently, Nebraska, Colorado, Texas A&M and Missouri don't feel that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19584]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17256
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12
May 17, 2012, 2:14 PM
|
|
Their choice wasn't the same.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7470]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15406
Joined: 2/2/01
|
that is one of my concerns-- we only play one of TX OU and
May 17, 2012, 2:13 PM
|
|
OSU in a given year more than likely. Unless 3 or 4 teams from the ACC go with us to form an eastern block with WVU, it's not very desirable from a schedule standpoint. KSU would be ok but it's in Manhattan KS. KU and ISU-- ugh. At least playing BC, MD, Cuse, Pitt, etc., there are other things to do on the roadtrips. I would worry about getting stranded with those teams in a conference collapse later. At least we play in a our recruting territory now. Clemson shouldn't go without FSU and neither should go without a couple other ACC teams in the mix. If that happens I'm good with it, if not then get better and the TV $ will come-- There is enough $ to be successful regardless of the what the chicken littles say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [98]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 152
Joined: 10/13/08
|
Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12
May 17, 2012, 2:17 PM
|
|
Omaha89 - I don't dispute your account since you lived in the midst of Big12 country. But if the Big12 is as you say "not the place to aspire to" ... yet they were able to negotiate a TV-deal more lucrative than the ACC - then that doesn't speak a whole lot about the ACC & Swofford.
In an unintended way - you may be bolstering the argument to leave if opportunity knocks - since the ACC lags behind the Big 12. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [194]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 255
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12
May 17, 2012, 2:28 PM
|
|
You make a good point. The bottom line is that I don't think that a move to the Big 12 or any other conference is in our best interest. The TV contracts can change overnight. I doubt it will happen but some new ESPN executive could come in and change the whole mix. Wouldn't be a wise business decision but I have seen execs do things like that without a good business case. We are on ESPN almost every week, not the game of the week but I don't think that will change no matter what conference we are in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3573]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6516
Joined: 6/1/99
|
They took advantage of Fox
May 17, 2012, 3:43 PM
[ in reply to Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12 ] |
|
to keep Fox in and NBC out.
The Big 12 is desperate to expand to be able to keep that TV deal.
One major thing that has hurt the ACC is the merger of ABC and ESPN. Now we only have one network to play off of each other. They have us over a barrel with the exclusivity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [101]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 123
Joined: 2/25/03
|
Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12
May 17, 2012, 2:28 PM
|
|
Go read about the Big XII's grant of rights, which each of their teams signed after last year's unrest. Then, come back and tell us all that you now understand why the Big XII is so attractive and that we must bail on the ACC now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [548]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1298
Joined: 10/16/00
|
Ding-ding-ding. We have a winner.
May 17, 2012, 2:34 PM
|
|
The Big 12 is NOT an "unstable" conference. This isn't 2010. ALL of the Big 12 schools, Texas included, have signed away their 1st tier rights through 2025. A Big 12 with FSU and Clemson (potentially others) would generate huge dollars. Barring some major, unforeseen change, the ACC cannot compete financially.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3573]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6516
Joined: 6/1/99
|
The Conference had 1st and 2nd tier rights
May 17, 2012, 3:41 PM
|
|
All they did was sign longer. Its the 3rd tier rights that killed the B12. And those problems are still there.
Lets say we move to the B12 and we are playing Texas in Austin. Texas is so bad that ESPN or Fox don't want to show the game. So Texas puts the Texas/Clemson game on the Longhorn Network. Do you really want to go to a situation where a team you are playing for a conference championship gets to keep 100% of the revenue of a game we were playing in? We would have no rights to the TV dollars in that case. Texas benefits 100% from that game.
And lets say for example that we were in the B12 and created the Tiger Network. The next year when Texas comes to Clemson, ESPN decides to pick up the game. Now we are in a situation where the conference splits the revenue. Texas gets a double benefit for playing us and we get the conference share.
Talk about dictated by the conference and ESPN....
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [548]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1298
Joined: 10/16/00
|
Re: The Conference had 1st and 2nd tier rights
May 17, 2012, 5:59 PM
|
|
First, no school - not even Texas - walks away from its 1st and 2nd tier rights with years remaining. Second, the scenario you presented - "where Texas is so bad" that neither ESPN nor Fox would want to televise a Texas-Clemson football game is unlikely. Even if this scenario plays out, you basically prove my point - if Texas has such an amazing 3rd tier deal as a Big 12 member, why would they leave? Finally, if the Big 12 adds FSU and Clemson, it's 1st and 2nd tier revenue would be on par (or greater) than any other conference in the country. They would have no incentive to leave. As a result, the Big 12 is a stable as can be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Re: The Conference had 1st and 2nd tier rights
May 17, 2012, 7:10 PM
|
|
> First, no school - not even Texas - walks away from
> its 1st and 2nd tier rights with years remaining.
> Second, the scenario you presented - "where Texas is
> s so bad" that neither ESPN nor Fox would want to
> televise a Texas-Clemson football game is unlikely.
> Even if this scenario plays out, you basically prove
> e my point - if Texas has such an amazing 3rd tier
> deal as a Big 12 member, why would they leave?
> Finally, if the Big 12 adds FSU and Clemson, it's
> s 1st and 2nd tier revenue would be on par (or
> greater) than any other conference in the country.
> They would have no incentive to leave. As a result,
> , the Big 12 is a stable as can be.
...not to mention the grant of rights for the next 6 (soon to be 13) years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Re: The Conference had 1st and 2nd tier rights
May 17, 2012, 7:09 PM
[ in reply to The Conference had 1st and 2nd tier rights ] |
|
> All they did was sign longer. Its the 3rd tier
> rights that killed the B12. And those problems are
> still there.
>
> Lets say we move to the B12 and we are playing Texas
> in Austin. Texas is so bad that ESPN or Fox don't
> want to show the game. So Texas puts the
> Texas/Clemson game on the Longhorn Network. Do you
> really want to go to a situation where a team you are
> playing for a conference championship gets to keep
> 100% of the revenue of a game we were playing in? We
> would have no rights to the TV dollars in that case.
> Texas benefits 100% from that game.
>
> And lets say for example that we were in the B12 and
> created the Tiger Network. The next year when Texas
> comes to Clemson, ESPN decides to pick up the game.
> Now we are in a situation where the conference
> e splits the revenue. Texas gets a double benefit
> for playing us and we get the conference share.
>
> Talk about dictated by the conference and ESPN....
The tier 3 rights actually SAVED the B12 in the end. UT knows that this is the only conference that will let them have their cash cow, so their first priority was to save the conference (not join the P12 as so many want to believe - they were negotiating for a landing spot in case things imploded, just like everyone else was doing).
The conference only guarantees the availability of one home fb game for tier 3, and for any conference game to be on a tier 3 network, BOTH teams have to approve it, and it has to be available on the tier 3 network of BOTH teams. If a Clemson@UT game weren't picked up in one of the regular broadcast windows and LHN wished to show it, it would be available on Clemson's platform. This scenario played out last year with the Kansas at Texas game on LHN - KU broadcast the game throughout the state of KS on their "network."
Further, Texas gets $x from the LHN contract whether they play a conference game on their network or not - their is no "double benefit" on their part.
This is how misinformation can cloud someone's judgment in these kinds of discussions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
From what I read, you straighten me out if I'm wrong,' UT...
May 17, 2012, 6:25 PM
[ in reply to Re: Concerns about moving to Big 12 ] |
|
got 20 million/year while the other big hitters in the conference got only 13 mil/year. UT had a market for 3rd tier rights (lotsa fans) while the others had much less. It was what caused the exit of four conference teams.
The solution was a simple one, and one that Clemson fan can identify with. Split all the tier 1&2 rights and let each school market and development their 3rd.
It seems like a reasonable solution to me. Like the man said, you eat what you kill.
A fair market share from the Big 12 would put us nearly equal in compensation with the surrounding schools we recruit against and the powerful football conference we would become would satisfy me and many more Clemson fans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4098]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 10336
Joined: 7/1/97
|
Re: From what I read, you straighten me out if I'm wrong,' UT...
May 17, 2012, 6:28 PM
|
|
well said!! sure agree
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Re: From what I read, you straighten me out if I'm wrong,' UT...
May 17, 2012, 6:43 PM
[ in reply to From what I read, you straighten me out if I'm wrong,' UT... ] |
|
> got 20 million/year while the other big hitters in
> the conference got only 13 mil/year. UT had a market
> for 3rd tier rights (lotsa fans) while the others had
> much less. It was what caused the exit of four
> conference teams.
>
> The solution was a simple one, and one that Clemson
> fan can identify with. Split all the tier 1&2 rights
> and let each school market and development their
> 3rd.
>
> It seems like a reasonable solution to me. Like the
> man said, you eat what you kill.
>
> A fair market share from the Big 12 would put us
> nearly equal in compensation with the surrounding
> schools we recruit against and the powerful football
> conference we would become would satisfy me and many
> more Clemson fans.
Close, but slightly off on the first sentence. Before last year, there was unequal revenue sharing based on the number of tv appearances and in which tier. UT, OU, A&M, and Nebraska were guaranteed a million or two more than the others - the rest was strictly based on tv for football and tv appearances/NCAA tourney payout in basketball. (As far as the reasons that the others left, there was more to it than the revenue issue - some of it politics that dated back a dozen years, some of it 100 years).
An important point - Nebraska, Mizzou, A&M, Colorado all voted in favor of and benefited from the unequal revenue in tier 1/2 and the right of schools to have their own tier 3. In fact, Mizzou presented several concerns with regard to tv revenue and other conference policies. They weren't alone in these thoughts, but even after things were changed, they still bolted. They saw bigger $$ when all was said and done. (Irony is that now they may end up with less.)
None of that matters anymore as all tier 1 and 2 are now equally split and the grant of rights is in place (soon to be extended to 13 years).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Texas is a big state. It covers roughly the same area as...
May 17, 2012, 6:52 PM
|
|
covered by the entire SEC. A huge portion of the residents of that area are UT fans. Politics probably has been a problem in the conference since it began. I think that conflict, to some extent, is everywhere.
If anyone here thinks UT is too much of a diva to deal with they shouldn't be looking to Noter Dame for the ACC's salvation. ND has yet to do anything to save anyone other than ND. You can also bet the contract they sign won't include their 3rd tier rights!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Re: Texas is a big state. It covers roughly the same area as...
May 17, 2012, 6:55 PM
|
|
Agreed on the ND point, and there will always be politics in Texas. Sounds like there are political issues in most conferences though, no?
UT is not nearly the "diva" most want to make them out to be. They know that they need to "play nice" because of their cash cow (B12 is the only place they can have it), and they have even proposed many of the things that helped calm the waters. They are not a horrible conference partner at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93650]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95406
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I'd think that is one of the demons FSU and Clemson will
May 17, 2012, 7:18 PM
|
|
need to consider but really, that above my pay grade. I'm confident that if the Big 11 and UT want us they will make provisions to make the transition as easy as possible.
I just hope they put swofford in the ring with a ornery longhorn while we are packing our bags.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
When did you live in KS??
May 17, 2012, 6:36 PM
|
|
There are so many outdated thoughts and outright incorrect statements in your post that I don't care to take the time to go through them all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2253]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2967
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Is that you, Mack ?? *****
May 17, 2012, 7:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Re: Is that you, Mack ?? *****
May 17, 2012, 8:42 PM
|
|
Cute.
K-State graduate and fan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [194]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 255
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Re: When did you live in KS??
May 17, 2012, 8:09 PM
[ in reply to When did you live in KS?? ] |
|
I lived in Kansas in the late 80's and there is not an incorrect statement in my post. Another of your posts talks about how wonderful Lawrence, Ames and Manhattan are. There is no way they could have changed that much in 23 years since I left there. You sure can't put those cities in the mix with Raleigh/Durham, Boston, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Tallahassee, Miami, Atlanta and the rest of the cites in the ACC. We are the smallest of the 12 locations but we have the best atmosphere for football anyway in the country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Re: When did you live in KS??
May 17, 2012, 8:42 PM
|
|
> I lived in Kansas in the late 80's and there is not
> an incorrect statement in my post. Another of your
> posts talks about how wonderful Lawrence, Ames and
> Manhattan are. There is no way they could have
> changed that much in 23 years since I left there.
> You sure can't put those cities in the mix with
> h Raleigh/Durham, Boston, Syracuse, Pittsburgh,
> Baltimore, Tallahassee, Miami, Atlanta and the rest
> of the cites in the ACC. We are the smallest of the
> 12 locations but we have the best atmosphere for
> football anyway in the country.
Did I say they compared to the large cities? No. They are college towns, and in two of the three, the atmosphere is as good as any in the Big 12.
Yes, Manhattan HAS changed that much since the late 80's - that's when I started college there, and I've seen it grow, develop, and mature ever since. Have you even seen K-State games on tv? It's not Death Valley, but it sells out and creates a helluva lot of noise (ask around to current B12 fans - ask Pete Carroll).
And yes, there were several inaccurate statements about the state of the "old" Big 12 in your original post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 60%
Posts: 22
Joined: 3/13/12
|
Tell ya what, though
May 17, 2012, 8:47 PM
[ in reply to Re: When did you live in KS?? ] |
|
Tell ya what, though Omaha - I've posted here a few times to clear up common misconceptions about the Big 12 and its teams. Have there been problems? Sure. The conference almost died twice. Problem is, people just take info from the surface and make rash judgments when they aren't familiar with it. I am posting here to try to set the record straight.
It's cool that you didn't like KS and the smaller college towns. Everyone's entitled to their opinions, and it's not for everyone. But how about letting your fellow Clemson fans (should the chance arise) visit and decide for themselves? Why don't you come back for a game in Manhattan sometime and see how the environment has changed? I'll buy dinner and some refreshments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [194]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 255
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Re: Tell ya what, though
May 18, 2012, 9:19 AM
|
|
Interested Bystander I have been having trouble understanding what you were talking about with K State having a football tradition. I did some research and now I understand. You have been a K State fan during the Bill Snyder era and in my opinion he is one of the top five best college coaches ever. If you take him out of the equation K State has had a terrible history. Their winning percentage overall is .469 and there record is 475 wins, 613 losses and 41 ties and that includes the Synder era. They have the third worst winning percentage of all Division One schools behind only Northwestern and Indiana. Northwestern has gotten better also but that doesn't change their record.
All people have different perspectives about where they have lived and when. We lived in Kansas between 1985 and 1989 and it was the furthest thing from a football state of any place I have ever lived and I have lived in 11 states. The joke at that time was that Bear Bryant had moved to Kansas because his doctor told him to get as far away from big time college football as possible. There was also a joke that K State had bought all the 7-11 stores and changed the name to 0 & 11. It was not a good place to enjoy college football when we lived there. I am sure that Manhattan is more fun now than it was then but that doesn't make my statements false. The IGA store was really giving tickets away if you bought tuna or toilet paper. I had 3 KU graduated who worked for me and they didn't care about KU football but loved basketball. Just because things have changed it doesn't change the past.
I doubt if I will come back to Manhattan but would love to have dinner and drinks with you. Where do you live now?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1898]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3418
Joined: 11/7/01
|
You Are Right
May 18, 2012, 12:33 AM
|
|
on. I lived in Kansas off and on for eight years. No way would I travel to Lawrence or Manhattan or anywhere else out there to see an hour's worth of football. The ACC has the potential to be a very good football conference. Let some teams come our way - Clemson, FSU, VT, Miami and GT form a good nucleus to make some noise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 30
| visibility 2,173
|
|
|
50
