Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
From the other link posted, it appears some include endowments in their published revenue numbers.
Which would drastically change the list.
I wonder if this is part of the issue, a) it is reported revenue, which probably is manipulated, b) it doesnt include endowments, which would drastically change the numbers.
It was just a fun list from a set of data, that I found and was referenced in an article about realignment. Thought some would enjoy it here. Guess I need to post more puff pieces for the B1G to make people happy here, on Cyclone Fanatic.
They will go into full meltdownHere is an interesting list, from January this year.
Hawk fans are not going to like it.
And according to this ISU would be the most valuable team in the Big 12, after OuT (who are listed as overall 1 and 2).
College Football’s 25 Most Valuable Teams
College football isn’t only exciting, it’s also big business. With the title game coming up, can you guess which teams are the most valuable?www.yahoo.com
It's been a few years, but I seem to recall schools have some flexibility to how they assign revenues to sports. The easiest example would be Cyclone Club or Spartan Fund donations.
Also I would be curious how one time donations for facility projects are recognized. So having a stadium remodel, new practice facility or student performance center could generate a one-time vs reoccurring revenue.
I wouldn't do pods unless you get to 16+
You protect a 1-2 games for everyone and the rest is round robin
I hope they can protect ISU, KU, and KSU. Yes, ideally we would also love to play OSU and Colorado annually.. But those are far less important than the Kansas schools and you can't protect 1/2 of your annual FB schedule while other schools have maybe one..
BYU-CU
TCU-BU
UCF-Houston
WV-Cincy
OSU-Tech
You protect a 1-2 games for everyone and the rest is round robin
I hope they can protect ISU, KU, and KSU. Yes, ideally we would also love to play OSU and Colorado annually.. But those are far less important than the Kansas schools and you can't protect 1/2 of your annual FB schedule while other schools have maybe one..
BYU-CU
TCU-BU
UCF-Houston
WV-Cincy
OSU-Tech
16 team conference.
Three protected rivals.
Play the three every year, then 6 of the others. Play the other 6 the next year.
You play every team at least once every two years.
Three protected rivals.
Play the three every year, then 6 of the others. Play the other 6 the next year.
You play every team at least once every two years.
No protected rivals. Draft the pods and schedule on a yearly basis.
Gun to my head? If we keep getting POD talk, pull the trigger.
Well he's not wrong. If he's wanting it and not getting the backing of the schools, it's a story.
I would note however that Bowlsby didn't even get leeway to have the exploratory discussions with how little interest the schools had in growth. People hate him for it, but you still have a lot of old guards hesitant to change.
In this regard, I'm glad they're blocking a Gonzaga or UConn add at this time. There are much better options and those two will always be there.
Then why have pods? Just draft the schedule on a yearly basis.
Fair point. You could go that route and have the 2 best records play a championship.
My pod ideas was basically divisions. You could have 2 divisions and hold a championship or 4 divisions and hold semi-finals. The divisions would change yearly based on a draft.
He's technically not wrong, but as you said, I highly doubt Yormark went rogue and there is some power struggle in the conference. I'm sure he's doing what they want him to do. He seems like the idea guy and the presidents/ADs seem like the ones to reign it to make sure they're all headed in a direction they want to go. Seems like a good balance to me as long as both sides know what the other is doing. I would like to think by now the conference has moved beyond an all out power struggle from within broadcasted for the world to see. If they haven't, we have inept leadership.
I'll just say I can't stand Stew and his whole approach to reporting on realignment. It's clear to me that he does not value the Big 12 for whatever reason and his takes are littered with hypocrisy.
Having 3 protected rivals sounds a lot like a pod.
While I loved the round robin style, I think anything other than it basically means you go full open conference (no pods or divisions). Look how much of a joke the B1G has been with divisions - and what we used to have in our own conference.
What I don't want to see is schools that only play eachother every 4 or 5 years, which you'd have if you did pods or divisions. I know as the conference gets bigger, that will happen to some extent anyways, but it really dilutes what a conference means.
What I don't want to see is schools that only play eachother every 4 or 5 years, which you'd have if you did pods or divisions. I know as the conference gets bigger, that will happen to some extent anyways, but it really dilutes what a conference means.
