You are confusing attendance at games with things that really matter. You think that Kansas versus AF at 10p eastern on CSTV is going to attract kids? You think they will maintain the athletic budget playing in a non BCS conference? Think they will miss the football revenue that they received from Texas and Oklahoma and Nebraska and the rest of the football powers in the Big 12?

Perhaps what Kansas would do is become an Independent in mens basketball like Notre Dame, make their own tv deal and play a national schedule?

Find me a single time in recent history where a big Kansas game wasn't on ESPN at 9:00 p.m. Eastern time - KU games are nearly always the late part of an ESPN double header. I don't see the big deal there. Kansas could be in the Ivy League and would still get television exposure. Kansas, UNC, Kentucky, and to a somewhat lesser extent for a variety of reasons, UCLA and Duke, kind of transcend conference when it comes to college basketball.

Who says a conference with Kansas/Kansas State/Iowa State, etc. in it would still be on CSTV? The PAC 10 has had a stupid contract with a Fox Sports Network that absolutely nobody watches for eons and that doesn't seem to have hurt recruiting at UCLA.

Do you understand that they were on because their conference had a deal with ESPN, not because ESPN decided to show them? They may be going to a conference with a deal with CSTV. Have you ever once seen a game on CSTV? Remember last year when TCU football was undefeated and ranked in the top 5? Did you remember seeing any of their games? Probably not because they were on CSTV which virtually no one gets because it requires a separate subscription on most cable deals.

The world changes and like it or not this is a kick in the balls to Kansas basketball. It isn't like they are going to become terrible but they are certainly going to be negatively impacted

The Fox contract runs out which is why the Pac 10 is moving so swiftly. The vast majority of UCLA's best players the last 10 years are from Southern CA. That is not a coincidence.

I think we're arguing completely different things here. You are assuming that a basketball conference featuring Kansas will continue to be shown on CSTV. I am assuming that many networks would jump at the chance to form a television deal with a conference that features Kansas/Kansas State and others (maybe Iowa State, maybe Missouri, maybe even Memphis).

There's a 0.0 percent chance that Kansas is going to end up in a conference that has no basketball exposure. Zero. None. Nil. Arguing that a conference like the MWC has only a CSTV deal on June 10, 2010, is completely irrelevant to this discussion, IMHO.

I don't know where you get the idea that one school will make a difference? I have no idea how long the contract with CSTV lasts or what gets covered on the MTN but they cover all the mountain west sports and no one else wants that product. No major network is going to pay serious money to cover a bunch of schools mainly in small markets with virtually no national name recognition. None. You are completely delusional if you think that kansas basketball is big enough to make a network pay a billion dollars to cover the mountain west. Please read the vast number of articles on this topic that are all over the web. If you can't understand that bigtime football drives the bus then this discussion is a moot point. Individual teams simply don't matter that much especially basketball ones.

So you're saying that if North Carolina was suddenly in a conference with Duke, Maryland, NC State, and Memphis (Memphis being a perennial free agent in realignment discussions, so still applicable) along with five or six other randoms akin to BYU, et. al., that no major television network would want to cover that new conference? Because that is basically what you're saying in so far as Kansas/Kansas State/Missouri/Iowa State/Memphis goes in this conversation. I think you're vastly underestimating the public interest in college basketball.

Oh, and the Kansas/Kansas State cabal is vastly superior on the football side (both in attendance and recent performance) than the UNC/Duke crew in that last analogy.

CU has officially joined the Pac-10, according to the conference website. That should really improve the conference in both basketball and football.

You are missing the point. The ACC added football schools when it expanded. Do you think they added FSU and Miami and VaTech because of their basketball prowess? Don't you think there is a reason that Memphis always gets left behind? It is because they have a weak football program.

The schools that you mention like Kansas State and Iowa state are toxic assets. No one outside of the towns that they are based in cares a bit about those schools. The schools that you mention are all in small markets and outside of kansas have no national cache. They just dont, especially when it comes to football. The sad truth is that the football programs pay for the vast majority of sports at these schools.

I am not making this stuff up. There is a boatload of info available on the breakup of these conferences and the reasoning why. Rather than come back with hypothetical situations read up and see what is driving the bus. Hell I dont like it either but at least my school is lucky enough to be in one of the "have" conferences.

Dude attendance is not a factor, nor is recent performance. TV ratings are and none of those football teams move anyones chains.

What it does is move the Pac -16(?) into the biggest mountain time zone tv market, Denver. That's why they got to come along to the party. You have to realize this has very little to do with sports. It is all about money.

I'm not missing any point. I get it's about money. I understand that is why Kansas and Missouri are getting left behind on the football side. That being said, it's absolutely foolish to suggest that Kansas and Missouri and those couple other schools are going to end up in a conference that doesn't have a major television package when all of this is said and done.

I'm sorry, but do people in Denver really give a crap about CU sports? Serious question. I'd always thought Denver was much more a pro sports town.

What conference do you think they are going to if the Big 12 continues to fall apart? It isn't foolish, it is reality.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...html?eref=sihp

Ok, let me type this again:

I'm not suggesting KU/K-State/ISU/Mizzou are going to a conference that CURRENTLY has some big major television package (though I've read rumors that a Kansas-Big East discussion is ongoing), I'm suggesting that whatever conference those four plus Baylor end up in if this plays out the way it looks it might will absolutely, no doubt about it, have a major television package for, at the very minimum, college basketball.

The end.

I'm not trying to be an ass but do you understand what is happening here? The Denver market would be getting the pac-10 games now. The people there would be exposed to the Pac-10. They currently arent. Denver is like the 17th largest TV market in the country that would now be Pac-10 territory. It is by far the largest TV market in the Mountain time zone. The expansion gives the pac 10 the LA market(2), SF market(6), Dallas/Ft Worth(7), Houston (10), Seattle(13), Phoenix(14), Denver(17), Sacramento (19) and Portland (23)markets. That is 9 out of the top 23 TV markets in the country. Don't you think that is a whole lot more important clout-wise than kansas basketball? You don't think that every Sat night in the fall we are going to get ABC or Fox double headers featuring pac 10 teams? You don't think that the new pac-10 football championship isn't going to be a major deal?

The really troubling thing is that these same college presidents that are selling out thier conference partners for a bigger piece of the pie will howl with indignity if a player gets a pair of shoes or if someone buys their parents a plane ticket to see them play. "It's all about the student-athlete" they will cry and some idiots will actuall believe them. KY's president willing signed up calipari knowing full well that the shadester will virtually only "recruit" one and done guys who will most likely not bother to attend class but for one semester. USC's president ignored Carroll's players being better paid than some NFL teams and now they are going to the sidelines while Carroll gets paid to screw up the Seahawks.

You seem to be the only person in the country that has this opinion. Seriously if you think that Iowa state, Kansas State, Missouri, Baylor, kansas and a few other minor teams are going to get a major TV contract you are crazy.

:$::$::tro::tro:

Odd time to be a Mizzou alum/fan. We certainly aren't one of the big boys of the Big 12 (Texas), but we aren't exactly the worthless pieces of crap that no conference in their right mind would want (I'm looking at you Iowa St and Kansas St).

Could still end up in the Big 10. Could end up in some modified version of the Big 12. Could end up in some backwater conference (MWC? MAC?) with a few other Big 12 North rejects. It is odd that the future of Mizzou sports could depend on the actions of organizations like the Texas State legislature and/or the Notre Dame booster club.

Like I said in the first place, I just can't imagine the powers that be in Texas are going to let UT/A&M/Tech walk without bringing Baylor with them.

Cannon, so what if the Pac-10 is in television sets in Denver? Are you suggesting they're not typically on there already provided there isn't a conflict with Colorado? And the point was that nobody in Denver cares about college football, just like nobody in vast swaths of the greatest Northeast cares about college football. I laugh at the folks who think the Big Ten are going to take Rutgers because they get the "New York" market - what do you think the ratings are for Rutgers football games in New York? They're not very high, I can tell you that much.

rutgers 1, usc 0 in the first round of the nfl draft this year.

just sayin...

Yeah, well Michigan didn't have a single player drafted in the first round of the 2009 draft while Baylor, Wake Forest, Northern Illinois, and Connecticut did. I'm not sure that puts that foursome ahead of Michigan in the college football heirarchy.

i was just kicking sc while they're rolled up in a ball on the ground anyway.

it felt good.

at least we dont have to hear from Booth Operator about the Trojans potentially being National Champs in 2010 and 2011!! :tro::tro:

i heard today that TAM has been in contact with the SEC office. SEC is their preference.

since no one seems to want KU & KSU maybe the best place for them is CUSA. they'd be competitive in football and own the conference in b-ball.

i think denver leans toward CSU than colorado.

dd- i would take them and Missouri, round it off with 2 of these - Ga Tech, Va Tech, FSU, or the U.

but who knows what the SEC has in mind.....although I thought I read that if they were to expand, they could renegotiate the ESPN deal....

Or 2005

I would presume someone in Sooner Nation is printing out 2005 MNC shirts already.

lol, they are still not the NC's. there will be no BSC NC for that year.

You arent getting it. The Big 10 wants the NY market to show thier premier teams Michigan and Ohio State and Penn State, etc. Getting into the market will allow them to get their network into that market. NJ cable companies that may not be carrying the Big 10 channel will now do so. Rutgers is a means to an end.

Now with Colorado in the Pac 10 Denver is pac 10 territory. That means that market will be getting a steady does of pac 10 games, not just CU games. Why you don't think this is important to TV networks and sponsors is beyond me.

Honestly, if you've ever been in New York, you'd realize that the Big 10 is on the local ABC affiliate virtually every single weekend already, and that goes double in Philadelphia. What you're failing to understand is that nobody gives two craps about college sports in the Northeast aside from Penn State, and the Big 10 already has saturation in the NY/Philly market through the Nittany Lions.

You are failing to understand that they own their own network and want to get into the biggest tv market in the country. Why is that eluding you? If you owned a TV channel that featured Big 10 sports and made money getting on cable networks and from sponsors don't you think that getting a foothold in the NY market is important? Who else is there in that market? If they have Rutgers and Penn State they have the two biggest programs in the region.

Isn't the Big 10 network already available in NJ/NY/PA? I know it is where I live, and I'm in ACC country.

I'm sure it is in PA but have no idea about NY/NJ. I have it on a sports package in Louisville but My dad doesnt have it available in Saratoga and we didnt have it in FL this Winter.

You mean no one gives a crap about Boston College?

Another reason the Big Ten wants Rutgers is the high ARP.

Absolutely nobody gives a crap about Boston College. That is correct.