kujay

i love the conference dumping on nebraska and colorado like they were nothing. colorado has sucked at football lately but they were a pretty big deal in the '90s when they had kordell stewart et al. if they can get things turned around athletically, that loss will be a lot more important than dan beebe is making it sound. You're right, but it's no surprise they would come out with this attitude publicly. Put up the strong front, "everything's fine," Baghdad Bob thing.

Doesn't BYU already have it's own TV network? Or is that part of a larger mormon channel that shows BYU games sometimes?

Wow, so divisions again then? AF in the north with Oklahoma? Interesting.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/big-12-realignment/2010/jun/14/big-12-on-the-verge-of-survival/ I asked my guy about that, and he says no, that it's only going to be a 10 team conference. No additions. Who knows, the rumors have been rampant the last week and a half. Yeah it doesn't make any sense to me.

From the KUsports blog, and odd: http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/big-12-realignment/2010/jun/14/big-12-on-the-verge-of-survival/

What station are you listening to?

Good. I know Snood thinks otherwise, but I think this is good for KU. It was very possible they were going to get left out of the Pac-10 too, so I'll take the bird in the hand.

Better to lose in the Fiesta bowl than squeak out a win in the Emerald bowl. Even better if you didn't have to cheat to get there. I was actually being serious. Seeing ND obliterated in games people already resent them being in doesn't help anything. I wasn't sure if you were serious or not. Since you are, I don't agree at all. ND doesn't (and shouldn't) give a damn about the millions of us out there who resent them. The BCS bowls are insane exposure that funnel in tons of money and recruits.

For the love of god I'm not shocked at anything. For teams like ND and Nebraska, with the prestige they have, their value isn't necessarily tied to their continued and constant success on the field. That's all I was saying. I'll speak more slowly next time. you can speak as fast or slow as you like, but the more logical the better. ND and Nebraska have, for comparison's sake, been better than half the teams in the Big Ten in the last 10 years. A conference looking to improve itself might seek out teams with rabid fan bases that have prestige and recent success (being at least in the top half of its current members would likely fit this definition). But it's more about the prestige than being better than Purdue and Indiana. Done with this.

For the love of god I'm not shocked at anything. For teams like ND and Nebraska, with the prestige they have, their value isn't necessarily tied to their continued and constant success on the field. That's all I was saying. I'll speak more slowly next time.

Ehh. Nebraska hasn't been that important to college football in awhile. I think the last notable thing they did was piss everyone off by going to the national championship game in 2001 or so. I was thinking about this too, but it seems the legacy or "presence" of the program has more to do with actual, present-day success. Look at ND. They haven't done [expletive] lately, but everyone is still fretting over them. Over the last 10 years, Nebraska's CFB record is 3rd in the new Big Ten, better than PSU and UM. And which team will win more games in 2010: UM or Nebraksa? Do you really not know why conferences covet ND football or are you just trying to sound stupid? Did I not reference the reason in my post? And I sound stupid...

Ehh. Nebraska hasn't been that important to college football in awhile. I think the last notable thing they did was piss everyone off by going to the national championship game in 2001 or so. I was thinking about this too, but it seems the legacy or "presence" of the program has more to do with actual, present-day success. Look at ND. They haven't done [expletive] lately, but everyone is still fretting over them.

That's a good point. I think if we were having this conversation two years from now, when he'll only have four years left on his deal (sweet jesus), maybe somebody would be willing to take him without dumping a bad contract in return. But right now it probably just won't happen. That's why it's so complicated with Dale Tallon. Yeah, he did so many great things that helped us get a cup, but he took a giant dump all over the 2010-11 Chicago Blackhawks.

This is tough. Campbell showed his worth in the playoffs. And I think a #3 (though he's arguably the 4th best d-man on the team behind Hammer) defenseman is harder to come by than a 3rd or 4th line winger. So I would lean toward keeping him. I also don't think the situation is quite as dire as Kyle suggests, especially if Huet is banished to Rockford. No question that Campbell was excellent in the playoffs. But if we have to part with all of those guys that Kyle suggested, I'd be willing to take the hit and get rid of Campbell's contract over getting rid of all of those other players. But it's not all of them vs. Campbell. Madden is gone no matter what. So is Sopel. He mentioned Buff, Sharp, Versteeg, Niemi and Hammer. It's probably any two of these guys vs. Campbell. I don't buy that they all have to go.

Well I think we can take Directv as the best example. They have the B10 Network. But they don't have any other conference networks. Who else has one? So if there is a B12 Network it is reasonable to think they would carry it, but the regional cable companies outside of the Midwest? I highly doubt it.

who's watching? The state of Texas and the other 14 people in the Big 12 footprint? No cable carriers will feel compelled to carry a Big 12 network outside of those areas. So are you telling me that if someone like Kevin Durant shows up at a school in this league again (which will happen), he's going to be broadcast nationally playing against EVERY school in the league. Now the lesser teams (not talking about KSU as our entire bball schedule was televised last year) like Baylor get broadcast nationally, and gets some exposure. People WILL watch that just to see someone like Durant. I get where you're coming from, but you can't be so short sighted about it. it's not just about kevin durant; the big ten network televises field hockey and soccer and volleyball and women's basketball. of course a men's basketball player who is the best player in the country is going to be a big deal, but people on the east and west coast and in the great lakes/ohio valley aren't going to want to pay an extra .75 to 1.00 to have the big xii network on their cable provider. the high profile big xii games (texas-ou, texas-kansas basketball, etc) are going to be broadcast nationally and nobody is really going to care if they miss out on ksu-baylor. the big ten network isn't included by most cable providers in the northeast and mid-atlantic states, and there are tons of big ten grads in those places. I'm curious to know what type of ratings the smaller sports get on the B10 network. Who in the hell watches field hockey?

Definitely not. But if the money is there, the league will stay together.

This is tough. Campbell showed his worth in the playoffs. And I think a #3 (though he's arguably the 4th best d-man on the team behind Hammer) defenseman is harder to come by than a 3rd or 4th line winger. So I would lean toward keeping him. I also don't think the situation is quite as dire as Kyle suggests, especially if Huet is banished to Rockford.

who's watching? The state of Texas and the other 14 people in the Big 12 footprint? No cable carriers will feel compelled to carry a Big 12 network outside of those areas. This I agree with. I'm not the biggest college sports fan and certainly have no interest beyond basketball and football. Despite having it for about two years, I've watched the B10 Network one time. Near the end of the Michigan-App State game. That's it. Of course I would watch a B12 Network if KU basketball or football was on, but I'm skeptical of how well it would do.

If KU really was poised to get the last Pac 10 invite, this whole thing hurts KU more than anything, imo. Now Utah gets invite to #12. Big 12 breaks up again in 3-5 years. The same suspects travel west. aTm goes SEC. KU gets nothing. Not if the TV contract situation works out the way it seems Beebe is promising. I know what you're saying, I just think the Pac-10 would be a terrible option. Late night games, no exposure on the east coast in terms of recruiting. This is a much better option, even if the league is not as competitive.

Seems to me if the B12 does end up surviving as 10, Pac-10 has gone through a lot of effort to get Colorado and probably Utah. That's great for Utah, I suppose good for CU (academically, anyway), but the Pac-10 seems like the loser here.

From a KUsports.com blog:

That doesn't make sense. They aren't trying to extract money from the Hawks by showing him to be a wallflower. They are trying to extract money from the Hawks by suggesting that he's a contrarian (I guess) who won't take less just to stay with the Hawks because they are a good team and won the Cup. Sounds like pretty standard posturing to me.

I can't even tell what's news anymore, but ESPN.com replaced the "Texas to Pac-10" link at the top of the headlines with this: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5285680 So if this Brown guy really is just a mouthpiece for UT, are they angling for a better deal from the Pac-10?

It's funny how this whole thing has Mizzou fans, K-State fans and KU fans largely on the same side. Almost feeling warm and fuzzy. Almost.