Thanks for proving my point.

Yes, because this is all just about what conference we can likely win the most football games in.

Glad we have you here to delve deep into complex topics like this.

It doesn't work.

LMAO

Hell KU football actually brings in more revenue than KU basketball.

huh?

Is that really your point? Yes, I'm a "net revenue" kinda guy

LMAO

Here is the main page.
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/

Then do institution search.

Moving football teams around cost a lot of money.

A lot less than your bball team.

Keep chiming though. Fact is Syrascuse is a bball school. And they were desired by a conference.

The last year of your claims are worthless.

And paying for the football team costs a lot more.

Why is this so hard for you three to understand?

Here are the Syracuse numbers. As you can see the football team actually costs the school money while the basketball team makes the school approx 8 million a year.


http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/605...10923at105.png

Some particular reason that you have your panties all in a wad today just because we don't want to hang around to be OU and UT's lapdog?

Stay in the U R (my) B**** 12 and have fun watching Texas and Oklahoma make your life miserable every year or 2 when someone brings them a proposal that will make them rich without having to share it with "your little sisters in the conference"

That looks to me like Syracuse made 4 mil on their FB team and 10 mil on their BB team.

Here are the numbers for Kansas. Both sports make KU money. However the value of a Championship level basketball program makes KU's 3rd tier income very high.

Another school that firmly relies on bball to make them $$.

Just like Duke, Syracuse, Stanford, etc etc

http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/605...10923at105.png

Which Football and Basketball Programs Produce the Largest Profits?

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2...rgest-profits/

It takes a while to get to the Kansas basketball program in terms of profit...

Go down the top 10...then move past Georgia Tech Football....past Pitt basketball...then keep going...past Northwestern football...and it is at #73.

Oh yea my bad. I was looking at total.

But the point is still valid.

Thanks Pants!

Earnings and net revenue are not the same thing. You fail.

He does make good points in some areas...but his problem is that he gets really pissy when we all don't just agree he is always correct.

But...I would agree with what you say here. He seems to have a very thin skin when it comes to disagreeing. I'm betting his ignore list is long.

I take it you aren't an Accounting Major?

Thanks. This list also helps my point.

Syracuse is a bball school. They were in demand by the ACC.

Jesus, who gives a **** about Syracuse's basketball profit.

Keep reachin dude.

His main point is that Syracuse BB makes more than Syracuse FB for the school. Judging by the the link, he looks to be correct.

Reaching? You (falsely) claimed that Syracuse basketball EARNED $10 million more than Syracuse football. That is factually incorrect. in fact, Syracuse football EARNED more than Syracuse basketball.

Keep being wrong, dude.

Because them and Pitt are the teams that were deemed desirable to the ACC.

Syracuse is firmly a basketball school and relies on bball to run it's atletic department.

It goes completely against what many have been saying in this thread for about a year now.

That's who should be giving a ****.

omg

Top 25 most profitable football and basketball programs. 1 of them is a basketball program.

It is Louiseville. LMAO

Jesus christ. Earnings, revenue, profit - it's meaningless.

Football > Basketball

Syracuse, the "basketball school", leaves the best basketball conference in the country for the ACC. Why? Their football revenues will be MUCH higher from the ACC's TV contract than they received while in the Big East.

You keep bringing up why the ACC would want Syracuse. Their football viewership numbers are larger than many of the other possible additions to their conference.

The difference in football profit compared to basketball is a lot bigger than I thought.

I mean K-State football makes more money than Kansas basketball.

Exactly. This is the broader point.

The 'Cuse basketball team does make more money but they are making the move for more football money.

That list is amazing. I've wanted to see something just like that for years.

Wanted to copy and paste a lot of it but the formatting was a complete bitch. LMAO

Which is what Wickedson can't get his pointy little head around.

Championships > Profit

:)

Nobody should be surprised. He is the University of Kansas version of the Iraqi Information Minister.

They aren't more profitable in football because the Big East has a shitty TV deal because they are a shitty basketball conference.

You call them a basketball school. Why do you think they want to leave the best basketball conference if basketball matters? Its because a shitty football program in a mediocre football conference still generates more profit than a good basketbball school in the premier basketball conference.

Totally fair point.

I rather enjoyed Syracuse's last championship. :)

okay that made me LMAO

Of course you want to be in a conference that has good balance.

All the conferences that are deemed desirable to be in have football and bball money rolling in.

Big East Football is not good. Pitt leaving makes it worse.

If the Big 12 had shitty football everyone would want to leave as well.

:#

dont let that bother you...

that the closest hes ever been to a championship... Let them bask in the glory of another school... It helps them cope...

This thread seem to be developing a case of the AIDS as well. Let's see if I can pro-tease inhibitor it back to respectability...

Talked to a few people this morning. I'm convinced of a few things:

1) The national media outlets assuming Missouri is GOOD in the Big 12 are overlooking what I think is obvious to those of us who follow Mizzou closely: Last night was a warning shot fired over the bow of the rest of the Big 12. That looked like a very carefully scripted show, designed to set Missouri up to either bolt or make big demands of OU and Tex.

2) The phrase "Proud members of the Big 12" was purposely left out by Deaton. If you start hearing them use this phrasing, we'll know Missouri is staying put.

3) The SEC wants to get to 14, and it wants to do it with Missouri if the Tigers can extricate themselves from the mess that is the Big 12.

4) If UT and OU make the concessions Missouri wants, the Tigers might stay. Of course, UT didn't even make all the concessions OU wanted, so its doubtful they make them for 'lil ole Missouri.'

You've been teeing that one up all morning. LMAO

This is where I am at.

speaking of that, I am heading to the course in exactly 1 hour and 40 min...

Methinks that if your list here factored in what Kansas makes off it's $6 million a year IMG deal for basketball it may look a bit different.

just sayin

This is key.

What concessions would need to be made to make Missouri, as well as the rest of the Big 12, happy and content with this league's future?

To me, the linchpin in all of this is LHN, and I don't see any scenario where UT modifies it. More likely, I expect they will either bring OU into the fold, or pair with ESPN to help OU do something similar.

I will give you 6 million of pure profit. You still can't touch University of Colorado football. Who barely looks like they know how to play football.

LMAO

That and all the deals other schools get that will only credited to KU in your world.

Not sure what Missouri's demands will be, but I would assume 100 percent resource sharing, rather than just first- and second-tier rights, is part of it.

I also think the expansion would have to include moves OUTSIDE the state of Texas.

From what I was told this morning, I think the demands list is going to be unreachable. If the demands shockingly are met, Missouri would stay in the Big 12 with a MUCH stronger hand than before. If they aren't? Deuces.

See...this I can be comfortable with if it is true.

I want the university to kick both UT and OK in the ass and let them know there are more than just 2 players in this conference.

Both are not playing with any sense of strength since they were rejected by the PAC 12. So it's time to make them realize if we stay it will be on better ground.

But I think Texas' ego won't let them allow that...and for that matter neither will OU's.

If that happens....MU should bolt.

Balance has nothing to do with it. Total dollars are what matter. Do you think the SEC is balanced between football and basketball?

Sure but basketball rules !!111!!!

Iowa State will join the Mountain West, Mizzou will join the SEC, and the schools from Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas will form the KOTex conference for bleeding vaginas.

I think its mostly a show. Baylor threatened to sue if A&M left, I don't imagine that is going away if Mizzou decides to do as well. If the SEC was going to put a condition in A&M, you can sure as hell bet they will on Mizzou too. If 100% revenue sharing is what Mizzou is demanding, they aren't gonna get it. They may get some kind of concession, but it won't be that.

LMAOLMAOLMAO

:clap:

They'll own the I-95 corridor from Florida through Connecticut - that's what make Syracuse so attractive.

The next TV contract will be enormous for the ACC and it will be in large part because they will essentially have every major school from Miami all the way up the Eastern Sea board in their footprint.

Just checking in...


So you guys figure this out yet?

The Tigers and their fans had a comfortable seat at home to watch it, correct?

I was pretty amazed at the language used in that press conference. Deaton hedged far more than I thought he would. I'm not at all convinced that MU isn't still looking to get out. UT and OU and running their own little show right now and I don't think MU is going to be able to nudge their way into the conversation. I hope someone grabs some cajones and either mans up to OU and UT, or decides its time to get off this sinking ship before we go from having one evil overloard (UT) to Co evil overloards in UT and OU (looking pretty likely).

The other thing I took from it: Good God, what a pointy-headed little dweeb we have running our University. I've been in OK for the last few days listening to guys from A&M, UT, OU and OSU talking and they all sound like decision makers and aggressive leaders.

Deaton sounds like an eager little poindexter. I know, it's superficial and it's stupid, but I just can't listen to that dude stammer in his high-pitched little voice and think "yeah, this guy is totally going to go toe to toe with Dodds and Boren..."

I also couldn't help but giggle about the fact that he referred to his chairmanship and his 'leadership position' no less than 3 times in response to 3 different questions in the first 5 minutes of the presser. The guy absolutely loves his shiny new title.

LMAO Like I actually watched it.

Hooked two so far.....

Baylor threatened to sue if the Big 12 collapsed due to aTm's move, because it looked like that would cause the complete destruction of the league.

In this case, if OU and UT are committed to the Big 12 (and where else are they going to go at this point?) and it survives, there are no grounds for a lawsuit.

If Missouri leaves before signing the new agreements, they wouldn't be in violation of any league bylaws. They wouldn't have broken any TV contracts or caused any long-term problems.

Basically, UT and OU are staying, so the league will survive. And ESPN has already stated it won't alter the tv deal. They really can't, or risk being sued as well.

I get it why you show such disdain for college basketball, similar to the reason why my dog is finally starting to learn to avoid skunks. He doesn't like the outcome.

But looking at the Mizzou football accomplishments, makes me wonder why you are so pro NCAA Football?

Jesus, Ed, lighten up. It was a joke.

I don't like basketball because I don't like basketball. I don't give a **** who's playing it.

I still like college hoops better than pro but I used to absolutely LOVE college hoops back when teams stayed together for 3 or 4 years. Ever since the revolving door of players started happening where it has lost continuity and a lot of appeal for me.

Has any of that affected how you view college bball?

This all makes sense. As long as the two main goons stay the conference will survive. And, ironically, could once again call itself the Big 8.

Interesting take from an OU guy:

http://blog.newsok.com/berrytramel/2...ad_story_title

At the same time David Boren and OU were proclaiming the stability of the Big 12, Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton was saying he hopes the conference can stabilize. The vaunted granting of rights? Which theoretically “handcuffs” schools to their league? Deaton made no mention of it.

So something’s up and maybe rotten.

Here’s the good theory: Missouri has assumed the role of tough guy. Mizzou, with apparent interest from the SEC to be its 14th member, has a little leverage. Missouri leaving wouldn’t kill the Big 12; as I wrote the other day, I’m convinced nothing can kill this league, with the exception of an Obama jobs bill (that’s a shoutout to my pal Ross, who supplied me with that line too late to use in the paper).

But Missouri leaving would signal to the world that Big 12 stability is a joke. It would signal to prospective members that stability is all hat, no cattle. Just Longhorns in this league.

Anyway, maybe Missouri is the school now holding Texas’ feet to the fire, and Mizzou just might be the school fired up enough to do it. You know who’s been overlooked in all this stuff? Gary Pinkel. The Mizzou football coach twice has spoken up about the problems in this conference. He hasn’t called Texas by name, but everyone knows who he’s talking about.

“I don’t know what’s going to happen,” Pinkel said Wednesday on St. Louis radio station KFNS . “Next year is it going to start brewing up again? I don’t know. It’s unbelievable. We’ve got problems in our league. OK? And we all know what most of them are. But we don’t solve them. We’ve lost three really good members in a year and a half and we think we’d maybe wake up and try and fix the problems so we can have a great league. Because until the problems are fixed, this stuff’s going to be happening and it’s going to go on and on. And it’s not a whole lot of fun to be a part of.”

Pinkel is not all that fun in a press conference. He’s not witty. He’s not gregarious. He’s not charming. But if you need someone to talk straight, he seems like your guy. Those comments mirrored something Pinkel said a few weeks ago. Sounds like he — and thus Missouri — are fed up.

So maybe OU stepped aside and Missouri assumed the mantle of telling Texas how the Longhorn ate the cabbage.
OK, now here’s the bad theory. Boren and OU jumped the gun, trying to save its own face. Not its skin. Its face. The Sooners come out looking bad this week. Let’s review:

1. Monday, OU empowers Boren to decide upon conference membership, and all signs point to the Pac-12.
2. Tuesday, an OU source tells me the requirements for OU to stay in the Big 12, including the removal of commissioner Dan Beebe and some Texas concessions, else the Sooners will go West.
3. Tuesday night, the Pac-12 says it’s not expanding.
4. Wednesday, OU says it decided not to go to the Pac and believes concessions are forthcoming.
5. Thursday, OU announces the league has signed over its first born and will be handcuffed together, concessions to be named later.
6. Simultaneous Thursday, Missouri says the league might stabilize.

So who knows? What a mess. Maybe Missouri told OU, you guys have run the relay this far, let us take it home. Or maybe Missouri said, uh, let’s not dismiss the SEC quite just yet.

Just having fun right back with you Tim.

The Mizzou, "we are too good for you" attitude is something thick in this thread. :D

Well, that's not coming from me. I learned my lesson last year.

I think it would be best for Missouri to move on to (hopefully) greener pastures. What becomes of the Big Texas League afterward doesn't really concern me.

If Missouri and Kansas do find themselves in separate conferences I'm sure they'll work something out to continue to play the Border War game at Arrowhead - it'll just start the season as a non-conference game instead of end it. Same with basketball, for those who care.

I still love College hoops, but do not like the "one and done" players at all. Kansas had one last year in Josh Selby, good luck to him. :eek:

This is where I think the NBA is wrong, and NFL is right.

I much prefer to watch College Hoops than College Football, but that may be due to the fact that Kansas teams haven't had as much success as you would like to see in football.

The K-State run was fun, and the short KU run was fun. I went to a few WSU football games before they quit, eeewwwwwwwwww. But the Shocker BB games at the roundhouse rock!

I'm no Missouri fan, but if I were I'd be rooting hard for a move to the SEC.

Not necessarily. Florida-Florida St., Georgia-Georgia Tech, and South Carolina-Clemson all end the regular season.

Wow, you are in the heart of some great college bball.

I remember as a little kid I learned college hoops going to Iowa bball games when Lute Olson was our coach and watching us play Indiana with Bobby Knight, Michigan State with Judd Heathcote, Purdue with Gene Keady, Illinois with Lou Henson, Michigan with Johnny Orr, etc.

We are in agreement on one-and-done players. I too would like to see it more like the NFL than current NBA policy.

If you are referring to me....I didn't really have that type of feeling until a few of the Wildcat, Jayhawk and Cyclone fans started acting like we were prima donas for not wanting to hang around and be the b**** for OU and UT.

If you can guarantee that we won't be looking at status quo, I might listen. But too much of what I am seeing now makes me nervouse that Texas has let OU look under her skirt in return for being an accomplice.

Iowa had some good teams back then, and those Coaches all were special. I was one that HATED Bobby Knight, but have learned to like him as time has passed.

Got to see your Coach, Lute Olsen bring his Iowa team to WSU against the Shockers at the 1981 regional. That was a very special day, as I had honestly found the ticket on the floor at Dillards an hour before the game started. NO ****ing way could I have afforded to gone, especially those seats.
Carr and the Shockers came back from 15 down at half to win.:clap: The Jayhawk game was second, and anti-climatic, many of us left, we were worn out.

I wouldn't, even if the SEC held a press conference to announce they are ready to accept. That is not to say Mizzou shouldn't play poker, if they have some cards to play to make sure Tier 1/2 is shared, force the Big 12 to put up rules on showing tier 3 conference games and make sure the LHN doesn't show high school, then by all means, play those cards. More power to MU if they can get those reforms.

However, if we all get that, then there's not much of a reason, other than emotion, to leave the conference for the SEC. The Big 12 TV contracts are temporarily low and will be comparable to everyone else in a few years. Tier 3 money isn't enough to complain about and the SEC also does not share Tier 3 money anyway, so you gain nothing there. "stability" is an artificial fake complaint since you can force stability if everyone really wants it, and once we get a new contract in 2015 there wont be any financial reason to leave anyway.

All you really get is long pain-in-the-ass road trips, and a smaller chance of ever making it into a BCS bowl. Its a somewhat more realistic option for Texas schools due to geography and culture.

I guarantee it! LMAO

Nah, the error was made clear back when they brought those Texas teams into the Big 8/12. Losing Nebraska sucked the big one, and Oklahoma would be the only other one that would hurt that bad.

I am probably one of the least informed posters in this thread on this subject, but I get the impression that doom is lurking for the conference, no matter what happens short term.