Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

jcyclonee

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
23,282
26,194
113
Minneapolis
Seems like the Big Ten is going to accomplish that with their model.
You would think so but I'm not sure it will work for Iowa when they have 3 protected rivalries. They really should stop pretending Iowa and Nebraska are rivals.

Nebraska seems to see Wisconsin as their natural rival when Rutgers seems to be more so at their current level.
 

TXCyclones

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 13, 2011
11,415
12,628
113
TX
Anybody suspect that ISU would be ranked #2 in revenue in the new B12? Right behind KU.

 

RustShack

Chiefs Dynasty
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 27, 2010
13,939
8,445
113
Overland Park
You would think so but I'm not sure it will work for Iowa when they have 3 protected rivalries. They really should stop pretending Iowa and Nebraska are rivals.

Nebraska seems to see Wisconsin as their natural rival when Rutgers seems to be more so at their current level.
There’s a chance a 16 team Big12 goes with three protected rivals, and not everyone is going to have 3 actual rivals to choose. So they will be forced to make new ones.
 

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
10,930
14,044
113
What a scam. Most profitable non profits. :)
Well, technically revenue =/= profits.

But if your point is that these "non profits" are maybe not quite the same animals as the American Lung Association or St. Judes Childrens Hospitals... that's a bullseye.
 

DSMCy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 1, 2013
5,813
7,616
113
West Des Moines
There’s a chance a 16 team Big12 goes with three protected rivals, and not everyone is going to have 3 actual rivals to choose. So they will be forced to make new ones.
I think you could do something like 1 protected rival and 2 "travel partners", where you play those 3 teams each year.
I know a lot aren't but I'm a big fan of the pods with these big conferences.
Group teams geographically so they at least have 3 games a year that are relatively close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CascadeClone

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
75,952
66,439
113
LA LA Land
Well, technically revenue =/= profits.

But if your point is that these "non profits" are maybe not quite the same animals as the American Lung Association or St. Judes Childrens Hospitals... that's a bullseye.

The headline of the USA Today link was great though "most profitable".
 

3GenClone

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2009
6,432
4,077
113
Columbus, OH
Here is the total breakdown.

This is a great article to review and adds some additional details:

  • The "Total Allocated" bracket is "The sum of student fees, direct and indirect institutional support and state money allocated to the athletics department, minus certain funds the department transferred back to the school."
  • The "Percent Allocated" bracket is "Percent of revenues from allocated sources"


The Big 12 did very well, specifically Kansas State which didn't need any financial support from the university ($0). Kansas and ISU were at 1.28% ($1.5 million) and 1.66% ($1.8 million), respectively.

Texas Tech at 5.29% ($5.8 million), West Virginia at 8.45% ($8.8 million), and Oklahoma State at a surprising 12.46% ($13 million)

The incoming Big 12 programs should be excited at their financial future: 62.05% of Houston's revenues came from allocated sources ($48 million). UCF is at 54.69% ($48 million) and Cinci is at 32.29% ($26 million). I could see UCF and Houston surge into the top 40 once they start making Big 12 money and ease their financial burden on the university.
 

Jer

CF Founder, Creator
Feb 28, 2006
23,595
23,482
10,030
Anybody suspect that ISU would be ranked #2 in revenue in the new B12? Right behind KU.

I pay no attention to these as the fine print speaks volumes to what they really mean, and even then they usually don't represent that either.

Remember a similar "study" a few weeks ago that showed us wildly ahead of Ohio State and others for "market value" or whatever, largely based on "revenue"?

Revenue can take many forms and be masked and/or routed through various channels to avoid counting as pure revenue on AD financials. Not saying Iowa State isn't healthy, but consume alongside a truckload of Morton Sea Salt.
 

alarson

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 15, 2006
59,612
74,457
113
Ankeny
Exactly. I really appreciate Pollard recognizing during the first realignment apocalypse that ISU would have been in MWC due to the lack of investment in the facilities and coaches and with the last 10 years proactively invested to raise the profile and lower the potential of regulation of ISU when the next major realignment occurs.

While I absolutely believe the facilities upgrades have been necessary for the program, i'm not sure they're all that relevant to conference realignment. ISU's danger comes down to the fact that it exists in a smaller state and its best geographic alternative conference already has a member in the state with much more football success. We could upgrade everything to top notch in the facilities department and it wouldn't change that.
 

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
10,930
14,044
113
I pay no attention to these as the fine print speaks volumes to what they really mean, and even then they usually don't represent that either.

Remember a similar "study" a few weeks ago that showed us wildly ahead of Ohio State and others for "market value" or whatever, largely based on "revenue"?

Revenue can take many forms and be masked and/or routed through various channels to avoid counting as pure revenue on AD financials. Not saying Iowa State isn't healthy, but consume alongside a truckload of Morton Sea Salt.
As someone with an MBA (ie know a little about a lot) - when it comes to financial statements and what they REALLY tell you -- it's all in the fine print. Could not agree more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jer

1UNI2ISU

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2013
9,104
12,223
113
Waterloo
You would think so but I'm not sure it will work for Iowa when they have 3 protected rivalries. They really should stop pretending Iowa and Nebraska are rivals.

Nebraska seems to see Wisconsin as their natural rival when Rutgers seems to be more so at their current level.
Iowa, even with the 3 protected rivals, plays every other Big Ten team in the first two years and they have the least flexibility.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: jcyclonee

Clonefreeeek

Member
Dec 19, 2019
182
-45
18
24
Anybody suspect that ISU would be ranked #2 in revenue in the new B12? Right behind KU.

Up 21 million from 2019-2020 year...16 million for 2018-2019
 
  • Like
Reactions: Acylum

BMWallace

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
Sep 11, 2011
1,543
2,932
113
Chicago, IL
Anybody suspect that ISU would be ranked #2 in revenue in the new B12? Right behind KU.

Among the public institutions, sure. But I would imagine the 3 privates are all above us, especially BYU with the LDS behind them.
 

SCNCY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 11, 2009
10,718
8,529
113
37
La Fox, IL
Anybody suspect that ISU would be ranked #2 in revenue in the new B12? Right behind KU.


Not sure what this would have looked like the past several years. But hopefully the trend we usually see around the country continues and that means we are an upper half team in football every year. I don't want to be the new Texas in the new Big 12.
 

flycy

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2008
2,340
2,520
113
Crescent, IA
circumstances.

P.S. this didn't happen last week but several weeks ago the ASU athletic director said ASU is staying in the P12. Not sure if they change their tune if UA and CU leave, but for now they seem set in staying even with a bad deal.
Well I'm convinced now, ASU to the Big 12 is a done deal.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Remo Gaggi

Nolaeer

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2012
790
963
93
Just curious, you can only pick 1:
4 corners schools or
Pitt, Louisivlle, VT, and NC state