Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    Publisher
    Points: 792,921, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 40.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation First ClassVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience Points
    ChrisMWilliams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    16,204
    Points
    792,921
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 811
    Given: 209

    Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better


  2. #2
    Pro
    Points: 74,442, Level: 84
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 408
    Overall activity: 8.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,468
    Points
    74,442
    Level
    84
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 17
    Given: 6

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    The Big 12 going forward can tout regional rivalries that make sense, round-robin scheduling, like institutions partnering their resources and shared agendas. Those are elements which truly make for a strong league.


    I find this part interesting. I read somewhere that 9 of the conference members (excluding Texas) are exploring their own network. Hopefully there is some truth to that, and this comment may be confirmation of that.

    Chris have you heard any rumors like that?









  3. #3
    Publisher
    Points: 792,921, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 40.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation First ClassVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience Points
    ChrisMWilliams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    16,204
    Points
    792,921
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 811
    Given: 209

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by mt85 View Post
    The Big 12 going forward can tout regional rivalries that make sense, round-robin scheduling, like institutions partnering their resources and shared agendas. Those are elements which truly make for a strong league.


    I find this part interesting. I read somewhere that 9 of the conference members (excluding Texas) are exploring their own network. Hopefully there is some truth to that, and this comment may be confirmation of that.

    Chris have you heard any rumors like that?

    Honestly no. Everything that I have ever heard is that a network simply isn't realistic for ISU. Of course, that could change so don't that as the Bible. We'll have to see but from what I know, ISU simply doesn't have the resources right now to do this. Perhaps with increased revenue down the road, this could change?








  4. #4
    Speechless
    Points: 485,101, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 7.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience Points
    Al_4_State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Driftless Region
    Posts
    19,113
    Points
    485,101
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 375
    Given: 113

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMWilliams View Post

    Honestly no. Everything that I have ever heard is that a network simply isn't realistic for ISU. Of course, that could change so don't that as the Bible. We'll have to see but from what I know, ISU simply doesn't have the resources right now to do this. Perhaps with increased revenue down the road, this could change?





    A network for ISU isn't a reasonable. But a network for ISU, Mizzou, KU, KSU, OU, OSU, A&M, TTU, and Baylor might be.


    In 1984, I was hospitalized for approaching perfection.

  5. #5
    Starter
    Points: 9,919, Level: 29
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 31
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    CycloneJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    757
    Points
    9,919
    Level
    29
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4
    Given: 25

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by Al_4_State View Post
    A network for ISU isn't a reasonable. But a network for ISU, Mizzou, KU, KSU, OU, OSU, A&M, TTU, and Baylor might be.
    Would it be possible to still create a Big 12 Network but just not include Texas? Obviously Texas would still be discussed on the shows and what not, but their sports would just not be shown because they would be on the Texas Network. One problem with this (especially calling it a Big 12 Network) is Texas would probably still want a slice of the revenue.



  6. #6
    Pro
    Points: 74,442, Level: 84
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 408
    Overall activity: 8.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,468
    Points
    74,442
    Level
    84
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 17
    Given: 6

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMWilliams View Post

    Honestly no. Everything that I have ever heard is that a network simply isn't realistic for ISU. Of course, that could change so don't that as the Bible. We'll have to see but from what I know, ISU simply doesn't have the resources right now to do this. Perhaps with increased revenue down the road, this could change?





    What I recall was that the 9 schools were in discussion for a combined network.



  7. #7
    Publisher
    Points: 792,921, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 40.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation First ClassVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience Points
    ChrisMWilliams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    16,204
    Points
    792,921
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 811
    Given: 209

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by mt85 View Post
    What I recall was that the 9 schools were in discussion for a combined network.
    Could be. That's what makes me feel the most comfortable about this new league. There is so much going on behind the scenes right now that nobody knows about. Once all the smoke is clear and we have a better understanding of the finances in this new conference, I have a feeling that a lot of these negative feelings will naturally go away.



  8. #8
    Legend
    Points: 209,684, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 17.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    MNCyGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    10,596
    Points
    209,684
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 421
    Given: 293

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMWilliams View Post
    Honestly no. Everything that I have ever heard is that a network simply isn't realistic for ISU. Of course, that could change so don't that as the Bible. We'll have to see but from what I know, ISU simply doesn't have the resources right now to do this. Perhaps with increased revenue down the road, this could change?
    Chris, as someone who knows more about the media world than most of us, can you define "network". I'm sure many people hear network and think of the Big Ten Network, and obviously that set-up would be completely unfeasible for ISU, but is that the model that Texas, much less any other Big XII school, is even looking at?


    Last edited by MNCyGuy; 12-15-2010 at 09:00 AM.

  9. #9
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 95,928, Level: 96
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 1,122
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,190
    Points
    95,928
    Level
    96
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 14
    Given: 0

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    If the members, without Texas, would form a TV network, it would make a lot of sense, and put all of them in a better position for the future. In essence, it would be more difficult for Texas to hold the league hostage. If Texas chose to go independent, one team could be plugged in the hole and life would go on. This would be in everyone's best interest, except Texas. That's why it would make sense. I suspect in the end, Texas might decide to throw in with the rest of the group. One more down season, and the mighty Texas isn't so mighty.



  10. #10
    Addict
    Points: 173,434, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 6.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    RayShimley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Montreal, QC
    Posts
    6,002
    Points
    173,434
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 45
    Given: 24

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by CycloneJames View Post
    Would it be possible to still create a Big 12 Network but just not include Texas? Obviously Texas would still be discussed on the shows and what not, but their sports would just not be shown because they would be on the Texas Network. One problem with this (especially calling it a Big 12 Network) is Texas would probably still want a slice of the revenue.
    I don't know the intricacies of the B12 rules in regards to networks, but I don't see why that network would have to share revenue with Texas if they do not share revenue with the rest of the B12 for the Longhorn network. The other good thing about this is that I assume that the home team against Texas would still have the broadcast rights so they would be able to broadcast on the larger network (with UT getting it's share in those cases).



  11. #11
    Publisher
    Points: 792,921, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 40.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation First ClassVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience Points
    ChrisMWilliams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    16,204
    Points
    792,921
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 811
    Given: 209

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by MNCyGuy View Post
    Chris, as someone who knows more about the media world than most of us, can you define "network". I'm sure many people hear network and think of the Big Ten Network, and obviously that set-up would be completely unfeasible for ISU, but is that the model that Texas, much less any other Big XII school, is even looking at?
    Eventually maybe, but not right away. The Big Ten Network is special because it includes soooo many markets...That's why it is so big. The Big 12 doesn't have that big of a geographical footprint, as far as TV eyes go. That's how I understand it anyway.

    I think that if the Big 12 ever goes this route, it will be a lot like the SEC currently has. That's just a guess though.



  12. #12
    Legend
    Points: 209,684, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 17.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    MNCyGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    10,596
    Points
    209,684
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 421
    Given: 293

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMWilliams View Post
    Eventually maybe, but not right away. The Big Ten Network is special because it includes soooo many markets...That's why it is so big. The Big 12 doesn't have that big of a geographical footprint, as far as TV eyes go. That's how I understand it anyway.

    I think that if the Big 12 ever goes this route, it will be a lot like the SEC currently has. That's just a guess though.
    Can you elaborate? I'm not familiar with how the SEC coverage is set-up.



  13. #13
    Addict
    Points: 151,551, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 2.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    6,081
    Points
    151,551
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 73
    Given: 10

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Bigger must be better. My wife didn't marry me for my earning potential, manscaping abilities, and overall kindness. There is a reason she puts up with my crap.



  14. #14
    All-Star
    Points: 29,717, Level: 52
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 33
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,322
    Points
    29,717
    Level
    52
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 12
    Given: 0

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by MNCyGuy View Post
    Can you elaborate? I'm not familiar with how the SEC coverage is set-up.
    The SEC has agreements with CBS and ESPN. CBS gets the first choice of SEC FB games, ESPN and/or ESPN2 get 2nd & 3rd choice. The remaining games are shown on a branded "SEC Network" but they are telecasted via ESPNU or syndicated to local broadcast stations across the Southeast and Texas.

    I am guessing the B12 will end up with a similar arrangement with the following exceptions: 1) substitute ABC for CBS and 2) the remaining games (those not selected by ABC and ESPN/ESPN2) will be shown on Texas' Longhorn Network (for UT home games) or a branded "Big 12 Network" for all other games.

    I don't think a BTN-like network for B12 programs other than Texas is feasible due to lack of eyeballs in the B12 footprint. As a result, look for something similar to what the SEC is doing.



  15. #15
    Starter
    Points: 9,919, Level: 29
    Level completed: 95%, Points required for next Level: 31
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    CycloneJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ankeny
    Posts
    757
    Points
    9,919
    Level
    29
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 4
    Given: 25

    Re: Malchow Blog: Bigger isn't always better

    Quote Originally Posted by RayShimley View Post
    I don't know the intricacies of the B12 rules in regards to networks, but I don't see why that network would have to share revenue with Texas if they do not share revenue with the rest of the B12 for the Longhorn network. The other good thing about this is that I assume that the home team against Texas would still have the broadcast rights so they would be able to broadcast on the larger network (with UT getting it's share in those cases).
    I probably should have been more clear. I meant Texas would probably have a problem with naming it the "Big 12 Network" and not sharing revenue with Texas. If they put up a fight then it might have to be named some else. Hopefully the Big 12 minds are a little better than the legends and leaders over in the in the B16 Ten.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • TV: FOX
  • Iowa State vs. Baylor
  • September 27, 2014
  • 07:20 PM