It’s similar. But we could have K-State as a rival, but not have all the same rivals they do.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Since the Greenbrier is in my backyard, the local coverage is probably better than someone thousands of miles away. To add clarity, BY doesn't have the 'full' support of the ADs, but more accurately a few which have yet to be brought on board to the whole basketball clout. Again, as pointed out, there are more advertising slots in bball over football by a large margin. Simple logic says there's a lot of room to grow those $$$$ instead of trying to outcompete the football conglomerates.
Not sure if I'd like it or not, but you could do a full open conference but have 3 teams that play 2 out of every 3 years. Still allows for a lot more open scheduling but have semi-protected rivalries.
I would hate an ISU schedule that doesn't have protected rivals and hope we have 4-5 protected rivals on our schedule each year. I love the ISU vs. KU, KSU and OSU games because of the history. CU or Cincy would be nice to add as protected rivals.
The issue with pods/divisions has always been unequal teams in CCG. This can be fixed by division/pod champ playing semi-final game for CCG and remaining teams flex their 9th conference game.
One has to wonder if a school like Kansas wouldn't be the most vocal against adding more elite MBB programs like Gonzaga and UConn. They've been the top dog in the conference even while the conference has been the best in the land. I could imagine them wanting to maintain that.
I want Kstate and OSU. Then put baylor, TCU and BYU together (obvious reasons), cincy and WV. TT and Houston maybe have TT and OSU. Wouldn’t have to have the same 2 protected ones. Like Kstate could be KU and us.
Even KS would come on board if the conference further separates themselves from the so-sos in bball. Especially, if BY is true to form on negotiating the BB contracts separate from FB. The dollar differential per team would (in bball at least) eclipsed the FB conglomerates bball contracts.
If you had 4 or 5 protected rivals, you'd go 3-4 years without playing other conference mates. I understand the rivalry appeal, but it feels like you lose so much in return.
Last edited:
No pods/divisions doesn't really solve the Big 10s problem, though. If you're at 16 teams and decide to take the top 2 teams based on records/tiebreakers, you're always going to have the chance that a less deserving team gets an awesome record and finishes in the Top 2.
I think conferences may start going 10 games to boost play. We either add a game on the schedule or non cons go down (May be the end of the cyhawk).
It's been proven that basketball fans are more casual watchers though so while there is plenty of room to grow the revenue, there is no way it gets us much closer to the B1G and SEC. Not to mention, the B1G would likely follow our model and get the same or more bump from MBB. And the SEC is quickly developing into a capable MBB conference.
'casual'? Does that mean they spend less per advertising minute? Not sure what you mean by that.
I can't remember the study, but there was some marketing research that determined basketball fans are much more likely to be multi-tasking and/or not paying close enough attention to focus on commercials, thus the decrease in ad costs per viewer vs football. I wish I could find the source.
Nobody has said it would get us closer to sec or bigtin. Why not do it to make as much as we can? Where is the downside?
Are you asking about trying to focus on basketball revenue or in adding basketball only schools?
If the former - of course, you grow revenue by trying to separate the contract to some extent. Not sure you're going to be that successful though because the networks are always going to have a max offer. But of course you try.
If the latter - I see a big downside for adding Gonzaga and UConn as basketball only schools. We already have the toughest league by a big margin. With just as many losses to go around as wins, I'm not real eager to add two more semi-blue bloods. While TJ has been able to overcome the headwinds we face, I'd like to feel like we don't lose another rung or two just for the sake of making things even harder.
They are forever locked in as a blue blood. As long as Bill Self is their coach they would welcome the increase in competition. They play these teams in non-con anyway. Their goal is to win National Championships at this point. Steel sharpens steel.
Steel doesn't sharpen steel, it equally subtracts miniscule pieces from both pieces
I get ya, but I want to have more 8-4 years in football than 4-8 years, even if it's against average teams instead of elite teams. Same goes for basketball. Been a Cyclone long enough to value wins more than anything.
They'll do protected rivalries along with every other conference. Pods aren't happening. It's just a worse version of protected rivalries.
The NFL says "Hi."
Pods wont be a longterm problem because they'll increase the number of regular season games to 14, which will make more money, and let conferences play 10 or 11 games.
