Looking back, I wish we had added D1 hockey teams a decade ago. We could have approached the Big 10 about competing in that conference (similar to Notre Dame), which would have gotten a foot in the door.
H
IOWA STATE TO BIG TEN?!? Dave Wannstedt thinks so.
- Thread starter cyclone4L
- Start date
Looking back, I wish we had added D1 hockey teams a decade ago. We could have approached the Big 10 about competing in that conference (similar to Notre Dame), which would have gotten a foot in the door.
H
If you follow women’s wrestling in Iowa, when I still lived in Iowa I used to be close with the Park family. Their daughters pretty much own their weight classes in the state of Iowa and are continuously posting what their daughters are doing in wrestling over Facebook. It actually wouldn’t stun me if at least one of their daughters ends up wrestling in the Olympics several years from now.
Our $$ is expected to be $10-15MM less than the Pac-12 for one. The other power leagues all have one or more cash cow anchors; ours are both leaving for the SEC.
I mean yeah we are getting Gonzaga and Wichita State for basketball! Wait no we are getting Creighton instead of Wichita State! Happy times are here again!
But yeah... I mean you can't call us stupid for talking about Big Ten and Pac 12 expansion and turn around and throw this nonsense out there.
I am sure Creighton will totally leave the Big East for this new "revamped" Big XII. What a hack but I deserve this for not switching to the 3rd hour of Dan Patrick.
His arguments for ISU not going to the B1G are heavily flawed. No note of our upward trend in the largest revenue sport. Saying Iowa has any say in this is flawed. Trust me, state representatives and BOR would heavily favor ISU in the B1G. That's as flawed as A&M not wanting Texas (see how quick they caved on that one). And, finally, what school has given KU fits in basketball more than any other B12 over the past 20 years. Maybe we're not on the their Nike level, but we sure as heck have been competitive (san last 2 years).
Not sure I see your math. If we poach Pac12, why wouldn't our current distribution match or even exceed the P12? We're downgrading their product and upgrading ours, extending it into 2 other time zones, and expanding the market.
Can we not post videos of guys with 6K subscribers and wrinkly shirts and claim its reporting?
Because each league’s $$$ is carried by their anchor brands. We can’t match Pac-12 money as long as they have a USC and we don’t.
The addition of Men’s Hockey means more Women’s Sports would need to be added.
Adding Hockey a decade ago would have meant forgoing many of our improvements that we have made. Doubt if BIG would have let Iowa State in. We are not Notre Dame.
One key component which seems to be adrift (not necessarily with your posts) is that 'streaming' is a superset of broadcast; meaning you can have 'blanket' advertising, 'regional' advertising, and an ever growing 'individual' advertising. It won't be long before even 'bars' are streaming everything where the 'individual' advertising, for example, are local brews or foods served at that bar. It'd be very interesting to see how many TV broadcasting antennas are put up vs 5G, point-to-point, and fiber links for MTSO's. Point being; further proof TV is being replaced.
So, our current contract is 'X' dollars which is still in effect. Yes, it'll be adjusted after the GOR. But lure USC, UCLA, AZ, ASU from a contract which is the most inferior of all P5s and I'll bet we're better off than pre OUT. Especially with the broader market and time zones.
Because assuming you aren't poaching USC, Oregon, Washington, and UCLA, you are matching the low value teams from the PAC with the low-value teams in the BIG 12. The point is you are taking teams with media value in the $30s without the teams driving that value. Now, would there be some boost for all by expanding into time zones? Sure, But without USC and Oregon you are running a conference with ISU and Okie St. as the teams with the best TV viewership. ISU and Okie St. are good brands to be in a conferences second/mid-tier. If they are at the top of a league it isn't going to attract much media value.
The Arizona schools and remaining CA schools suck for media value. CU isn't very good. Utah is OK. WSU and Oregon St. are very low. While I think a mix of Big 12 and PAC leftovers wouldn't be terrible, it wouldn't be much different or better in value than getting the best of the AAC in terms of media value. If it would help cling to power conference status and playoff eligibility then it would be better. But it is still WAY below membership of conferences with Big names, whether it's Big 10 or even the PAC than trying to expand.
The entertainment district would be a perfect place for a hockey rink AND casino
Your arguments are based on half truths.
Carriage fees shrinking as a % of overall value? Yes.
Carriage fees still the biggest component of $? Yes.
Carriage model has a reduced emphasis? Yes.
Is it the biggest reason why OSU, MU, PSU didn't jump ship and OU/Texas did? Yes.
JP says no to open beer sales in JTS, but somehow plops a casino next door? Put the bong down brother.
Not yet. It has to go through "emerging sport" status first. However, there has been a rapid growth in the high school ranks (I believe 30+ states now sanction girls wrestling), and as mentioned it exists in the lower collegiate levels right now (NAIA and JUCO), with a handful of scattered D2/D3 schools as well.
The first real domino is in the hands of D1 schools -- if a big-time D1 program commits to women's wrestling, I believe several others will follow.
These, from June 2019:
NCAA Administrators Meet to Discuss Women's Wrestling Emerging Sport Status | NWCA
BY NCWA, NWCA, NWHOF, USA WRESTLING, USOC, WRESTLE LIKE A GIRL Administrators from NCAA schools sponsoring women’s wrestling met in Orlando on June 11 to discuss a plan for positioning the sport to achieve the emerging sport status that has been recommended by the NCAA Women’s Committee on...
www.nwcaonline.com
Women’s wrestling, acrobatics and tumbling, get backing to join NCAA emerging sports | NWCA
From the NCAA Women’s wrestling, acrobatics and tumbling, get backing to join NCAA emerging sports The NCAA Committee on Women’s Athletics has recommended that all three divisions of the NCAA governance structure add two sports — women’s wrestling, plus acrobatics and tumbling — to the NCAA...
www.nwcaonline.com
"A sport must have a minimum of 20 varsity teams and/or competitive club teams that have competed in a minimum of five contests to be considered for the emerging sports program. The sport must reach 40 varsity programs to move forward to the NCAA governance structure for championship consideration.
The Wrestle Like a Girl organization, in conjunction with USA Wrestling, indicated there are 23 NCAA schools currently sponsoring the sport. The committee applauded the groups for the overall continued growth of women’s wrestling, and specifically for the potential growth of the sport at colleges and universities that currently sponsor men’s wrestling. They also noted the relatively low cost to sponsor women’s wrestling and the organizations’ commitment to increasing opportunities for a more diverse student-athlete base and to expanding coaching opportunities for women."
USC just has way too many better options, UCLA too, though to a lesser extent. Arizona and ASU don't really add much in media value.
