The BigXII shot itself in the foot yesterday with the round-robin setup. 4 of the 5 P5 conferences have a championship game. The higher seed in each of those games got into the playoffs...whether those are the 4 top teams or not. I don't think FSU or OSU are a top 4 team...but that's for another thread.
The Big12 is going to be relying on the lower seed to win one of these championship games from her on out if they choose not to have a B12 CCG. IMO, that isn't a good way to get your conference represented in the playoffs...
The round-robin is cute...but until they expand to 8 teams. The B12 could find themselves in this situation more often than Not.
The Baylor vs KSU was the championship argument is flawed as is the B12 could have had 2 teams in the playoffs...
So....to get the B12 back to....12 teams, what two teams would you add?
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
It’s overall marketability. No one’s talking about brands. The fact is that Mizzou was selling out its football stadium for years and Kansas has been playing in front of a half full football stadium for almost a decade now. The fact is, that no matter how shitty Mizzou football is, a Saturday night football regular season matchup will have nearly twice as many viewers as any of your regular season college basketball games. It’s a market and the market is primarily football for obvious reasons. (Bigger stadiums, more emphasis on every game, much bigger TV market)
You all can put all your chips into the basketball program and continue to ignore the signs of the times. I’m sure idiots like Bearcat will still go out and buy Missouri Valley championship bottles of wine and continue to boast of their success in whatever smaller division you all eventually end up in, but it won’t change the fact that you all ****ed up by not putting ANY sort of investment into the football side. I know none of you Kansas fans will miss KU football when it inevitably disappears in the next decade or so, but I think most people still enjoy college football enough to still want a place at the table at least every year. You Kansas fans are a rare breed of college fans. I’ll give you that. I don’t think many people could stand being the football laughing stock you all have been for so long now.
Watching college basketball is almost as exciting as watching flies ****. [Reply]
ACC, Pac-12 Discussing ESPN TV Partnership After Big Ten’s Moves
Could the two conferences negotiate a broadcasting deal in response to USC and UCLA’s defections?
Admittedly, it was much easier to just feast off the easy pickings from the dead Jayhawk in the corner. No one gets stronger eating dead birds, though. We’ll continue to fight for scraps and survive. It’s much more exciting than just dying. [Reply]
Glad to see a few of you embrace the KU vs. MU hate and act like MU is anything more to the SEC than the St Louis television market and that KU basketball is a secondary sport. It's good to hear the same nonsense as we all heard 12 years ago.
For us KU fans, we'll just sit in our irrelevant conference, enjoy our Orange Bowl win a couple decades ago, our few national titles in basketball, and always being a contender in at least one major sport knowing that no matter what conference we're in, we still have accomplished more than MU ever will. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
Mizzou was a perennial top 25 team for the last 10 years of Pinkels time at Mizzou. The only year they didn’t touch the AP top 25 was 2012 which was the first year in the SEC. Then he went on to win back to back SEC east division titles, and finish in the AP top 5 for the second time in 10 years. What a bottom feeder program we had. I know it’s not as long term as your place in ESPN’s bottom 10, but it was still a perennial spot in the rankings.
You may want to tell your athletic director to start thinking of this shit as a business instead. While I love hearing you admit that KC is a Mizzou market, it’s a little more than just TV markets. It’s overall marketability as well. At the time of the move to the SEC we had sustained success in most major sports (Mizzou won the Big 12 in its final season in basketball, Mizzou baseball just had its most successful pitcher of all time in Scherzer, and the football team had the success mentioned before)
It may have been a nice fake breast enhancement at the right time, but it sure beats being the ugly chick who put all her chips into one career choice only to find that the career she chose wasn’t in demand when she graduated so she ended up sucking dicks on the street corner to make ends meet.
If only your athletic director would have put ANY effort into the football program to make the games watchable again, you could have been playing in front of some fans to make your university seem a little more marketable than 1 winter sport that doesn’t get much attention until the tournament. It’s always been about marketability and KU just doesn’t have enough value spread out. They instead focus all of their attention on 1 sport and it’s why you’ll end up in a conference eventually with just a focus on basketball. Which as you said, you’ll be fine with, but Mizzou fans actually care about the football program so it would be a tough place for us to be in.
Not sure why you keep comparing to Kansas, but okay.
So the bar for 'perennial top 25' is actually just being in the top 25 at any point of the season.
You can of course define 'bottom feeder' versus 'perpetually mediocre' to actually being good for yourself... IMO, there's a huge difference between making it into the top 25 (which is very easy for any team in the big conferences, especially the SEC and B1G) and being a top 25 team, then again actually being proud of it.
Beyond half of that 10 year span barely even touching the top 25, they were 6-14 against B12 ranked teams and 6-11 against SEC teams during that span.... and 3 of those B12 wins came in 2007 and 4 of the SEC wins in 2013..... so acting like they were good year in and year out shakes out to 3-12 in the B12, 2-10 in the SEC, and 5-23 overall, outside of those two years against ranked teams.
And again, feel free to be proud of beating cupcakes in the non-con and then Vandy and other bottom feeders in the regular season; all while coming back to compare them to the dumpster fire program of KU for some reason, like that's some bar to set.
And the average rank of all those teams is 12.4, so I certainly wouldn't expect them to have a winning record against that, either..... but again, I've heard quite a bit about the B12 being trash and now we're bragging about being a top 25 team in the B12 for years... so yeah. :-)
On a side note, maybe there's just something in the water, but it's always been really strange to me how there's a subset of people who are MU/Blues/Chiefs fans and many love to wallow in mediocrity... they really seem to live for that one time they beat Oklahoma in the regular season or that one time they beat the Patriots with Alex Smith (or was it Cassel) in September.... and then they always seem to grossly overestimate their value from those relatively pointless upsets. It's weird, but at least the latter two have won something. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KChiefs1:
I can see the Kansas outstanding citizens are out in full force. Must suck to sit on the sidelines watching huh?
Watching what?
I'm watching the NHL draft.
Guess I could watch the Final Four again. Too bad I didn't record Kansas being Texas in Austin last year, I could watch that.... that's the bar for joining the SEC right, beat one of their teams?
Watch any exciting Missouri sports lately? [Reply]
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
It’s overall marketability. No one’s talking about brands. The fact is that Mizzou was selling out its football stadium for years and Kansas has been playing in front of a half full football stadium for almost a decade now. The fact is, that no matter how shitty Mizzou football is, a Saturday night football regular season matchup will have nearly twice as many viewers as any of your regular season college basketball games. It’s a market and the market is primarily football for obvious reasons. (Bigger stadiums, more emphasis on every game, much bigger TV market)
You all can put all your chips into the basketball program and continue to ignore the signs of the times. I’m sure idiots like Bearcat will still go out and buy Missouri Valley championship bottles of wine and continue to boast of their success in whatever smaller division you all eventually end up in, but it won’t change the fact that you all ****ed up by not putting ANY sort of investment into the football side. I know none of you Kansas fans will miss KU football when it inevitably disappears in the next decade or so, but I think most people still enjoy college football enough to still want a place at the table at least every year. You Kansas fans are a rare breed of college fans. I’ll give you that. I don’t think many people could stand being the football laughing stock you all have been for so long now.
Glad you've come around to knowing it has nothing to do with Mizzou being respectable, because no matter how shitty they are, the networks will put Alabama and Georgia and teams people want to watch.
No idea why I should care about how many people watch CBB. When has popularity ever been a good thing for a product? [Reply]
Originally Posted by POND_OF_RED:
The fact is, that no matter how shitty Mizzou football is, a Saturday night football regular season matchup will have nearly twice as many viewers as any of your regular season college basketball games.
I was curious if you knew this as a fact as you stated or if it was merely a guess.
Missouri Saturday night football game (couldn't find numbers for a SATURDAY night game in 2021, a Bowl game counts I guess)
Wednesday, Dec 22, 2021 (7:30 PM EST): Missouri - Army Armed Forces Bowl Viewership: 2.57 million viewers https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/202...y-up-thus-far/
I wanted to use the numbers for Missouri-Kentucky in September (a 7:30 PM EST Saturday night kickoff), but I couldn't find the viewership for that game. This source does however show the viewership for Kansas-Coastal Carolina. https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/col...ll-tv-ratings/
Furthermore, in an article from 2019 (I couldn't find numbers for both teams since then) Wall Street Journal ranks the value of college football programs and lists their revenues.
39. Kansas - 64,704,137
56. Missouri - 42,568,466 https://graphics.wsj.com/table/NCAA_2019
Originally Posted by DJay23:
I was curious if you knew this as a fact as you stated or if it was merely a guess.
Heh, I was curious if Missouri's even had a home Saturday night prime time slot on ABC or ESPN since joining the SEC... I mean, if it's marketability for full stadiums and all.
That was @UK last season and on SEC Network. And then of course @Alabama (on ESPN), they could put them up against basically anyone in the SEC and draw well.
Someone need to tell the SEC that they forgot about Missouri's marketability for full stadiums!!
Guess I shouldn't be surprised at how it doesn't seem like these guys even watch their own team... for starters, they aren't really worth watching in CFB or CBB; but they also currently think all the sports action is taking place right now and KU is sobbing "on the sidelines of the offseason". Weird. [Reply]
Let’s say KU sticks to a quaint basketball conference and says “fuck football and being in the SEC/Big 10.
Would anybody be surprised at all if their football team happened to catch lightning in a bottle ala that one time with Mark Mangino, and the college football playoff got expanded and they ended up going to the playoffs in football before mizzou did?
Not saying it’s going to happen, but since we’re all just fans, who the fuck gives a shit about conference marketability if you’re dog crap and never win anything? [Reply]
According to this WSJ article that is now a few years old Kansas has the 39th most valuable football program DESPITE being dog shit for decades. Ahead of Cal, and virtually tied with Colorado and Utah.
If ranking based on unclaimed and NOT in the Big 10 or SEC,
#19 Washington
#21 Oregon
#25 Arizona State
#26 Clemson
#28 Va Tech
#29 K-State
#30 Oklahoma State
#33 Texas Tech
#34 Stanford
#36 Georgia Tech
#37 Utah
#38 Colorado
#39 Kansas
#40 Cal
#41 Miami
#42 TCU
#43 Iowa State
#46 NC State
#47 Louisville
#48 Arizona
#50 North Carolina
So I don't really get wanting the UNC football program. However, KU and Colorado's value is hinged upon the success of the Big 12 and Pac 12 so without USC and UCLA and OU and Texas the value of all of those schools is diminished. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
According to this WSJ article that is now a few years old Kansas has the 39th most valuable football program DESPITE being dog shit for decades. Ahead of Cal, and virtually tied with Colorado and Utah.
If ranking based on unclaimed and NOT in the Big 10 or SEC,
#19 Washington
#21 Oregon
#25 Arizona State
#26 Clemson
#28 Va Tech
#29 K-State
#30 Oklahoma State
#33 Texas Tech
#34 Stanford
#36 Georgia Tech
#37 Utah
#38 Colorado
#39 Kansas
#40 Cal
#41 Miami
#42 TCU
#43 Iowa State
#46 NC State
#47 Louisville
#48 Arizona
#50 North Carolina
So I don't really get wanting the UNC football program. However, KU and Colorado's value is hinged upon the success of the Big 12 and Pac 12 so without USC and UCLA and OU and Texas the value of all of those schools is diminished.
