Monday, June 07, 2010

This Is How You Build A Mon-Con


"Mon-Con" is short for Monster Conference, by the way. Over the weekend, reports were leaked from the Pac-10 meetings that a doin's were a-transpirin'. And when details emerged, I freely admit that my pants got a bit tighter. Yeah, the Big Ten may add Rutgers and Nebraska and Missouri, but it doesn't really do much for the quality of play in the conference. Rutgers is just a cash grab. Pac-10 Commish Larry Scott has the right idea though. Make your schools an assload of cash, own every media market west of the Mississippi River, and watch your league quickly make the SEC look like the ACC. Because that is what will happen if Larry gets what he wants. And he should. Here is why.

The Big 12 is dying. Everyone wants out except those backwoods schools in Kansas. There is no money to be made there and everyone else around them is wiping their asses with $100 bills. I find it funny that the Big 12 is trying to threaten Missour-ah and Nebraska eventhough they have no ground to stand on.

The Big Ten would rather have New York than the dust bowl. And that's fine. They can't add on 6 teams anyway. Fortunately, the Pac-10 can.

If you think that the Big Ten Network makes a shitload of money while generally restricted to the Midwest, imagine what a Pac-16 Network would make considering that it would go from Houston to Denver to Seattle to fucking Mexico. It would dwarf the money that the Big Ten Network brings in. And that's not a slight on the BTN. There's just more money in California and Texas and the Pacific Northwest.

Let's just forget about the initial proposal of adding Utah and Colorado because that helps them in no way and was brought up just to be rejected. Let's also discredit the notion that the Texas government will want them to take Baylor. Fuck you. Baylor should be in the Sun Belt anyway. The Pac-10 would be adding Oklahoma, Okie St, Texas, Texas Tech, A&M, and Colorado. You split it up into a north and a south. You take the three Texas schools, 2 Oklahomos, 2 Arizonas, and UCLA for the South. You have the Buffs, two Warrrrshingtons, two Oregons, Cal, Stansbury, and USC in the North. The winner of that conference is playing for a national title in football EVERY year. That is a monster.

Of course, the Pac 10 school fatcats are apparently not keen on Scott's plan. And that makes sense because they must be retarded and fail to see how much goddamn money this would bring them. Do they even HAVE a TV contract right now?

I love this. I hope it happens yesterday. For too long, west-coasters have bitched about an East Coast bias. Well, if they aren't going to pay attention to you, make them pay attention to you. Form the biggest and best conference ever. Or continue to be lazy pieces of shit and accept your crappy Oregon teams losing to shitty teams in the Rose Bowl.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

--Of all of the hot tail out in Cali...THIS is the photo you use today?? I would have to think that there is much more to choose from than that..lol.

--The Pac-16 will definately be a cash cow if/when this goes down...

--LWM

GMoney said...

Sorry about that. I was too busy toggling between the Stanley Cup game, the NBA game, and Ice Road Truckers last night.

Tony B. said...

All this conference shifting might end up getting UC Davis into the WAC so they would be playing actual Division I football. I'm in on this.

Anonymous said...

Ice Road Truckers is a great show!!!

Totally understand now, by the lack of time!!

--LWM

Anonymous said...

I think the Pac-10 doing what they did this past week really changed the bargaining atmosphere. However, I somewhat disagree with you on the money aspect of a Pac 16 TV network. You have to remember that most of the country's population is east of the Mississippi and the states that make up the Rocky Mountains have very little population/money. Further, even though Texas and California have money, only the state of Texas adds a boatload of monetary and demographic value. The Pac 10 already has the California Market and it is shit, because they don't take football or basketball as seriously out there as we do in the midwest, with the exception of a few schools.

-Lil' Strut

Tony B. said...

Really Lil' Strut? Nobody in California takes football or basketball as seriously as you great fans in the midwest? That might be most retarded thing I've ever read on this blog comment section.

GMoney said...

Yeah, LS, you may be a bit out of your element with those claims.

Dallas, Houston, Austin, SA, Denver, Seattle, SF, LA, Phoenix...those cities have money. They aren't popping up on the poverty lists any time soon.

Anonymous said...

My reasoning for why is this: Look at the size of the stadiums out there. They are dwarfs compared to a lot of the stadiums in the Big 10. That tells you enough about the demand for football in the midwest compared to the far west. Football is the major moneymaker of any large division 1 athletic department. Football is simply taken more seriously at the collegiate level in the midwest than it is in the west.

To aid in my argument, based on the assumption that football is the biggest revenue producer of any respectable athletic program, I give you this link that shows the top revenue producing athletic departments in the country as of the 2007-08 year:

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/62825

Look at the rankings. The highest ranked Pac 10 team is Stanford at 18. There are 6 big ten teams ahead of them, and Notre Dame for the sake of the midwest argument. In fact, 4 of the top 6 revenue earning programs in the country are from the Big 10. It also breaks it down by sport. The big 10 has 3 of the top 10 earners in basketball, the Pac 10 has 1. In football, the Big 10 has 3 of the top 10 earners again, the Pac 10 has none.

Who is retarded now?

-Lil' Strut

Anonymous said...

G$,

Of all the cities you mentioned, most of them already have major football programs in their area that they do not support nearly as much as the football programs in the midwest.

Dallas (No major team)
Austin (Texas - well supported)
Houston (no major team)
San Antonio (basically part of Mexico)
Denver (Colorado - not a big revenue earner)
Seattle (Washington - not a big revenue earner)
SF (Cal, Stanford in the area - neither big revenue earners compared to the big 10)
LA (UCLA and USC - oddly enough, neither are in the top 10 of either major sport in my link)
Phoenix (ASU - not a big revenue earner)

- Lil' Strut

GMoney said...

Not to go all Cowherd on you here, but my point is not about fan passion and it never was, just that there is money in those cities (specifically corporate money). Basing a collegiate TV network in those cities would be HUGE for revenues for the schools. BTN basically gets their money from Chicago, Indy, and Columbus now. And they are doing great with that. Can you not see how a Pac-16 Network would be a force financially? You just finished law school so I know you aren't that stupid.

Anonymous said...

I agree that it would be financially advantageous to all involved. However, I would not say that, "It would dwarf the money that the Big Ten Network brings in" as you said. In fact, based on the link I provided, even if they added the teams they are attempting to add, that may bring in more revenue than the big ten as a whole, but the Big Ten would still have more heavy hitters at the top. When you couple that with the fact that the Big Ten is splitting their revenues with less universities, I wouldn't call it a wash, but it would be close.

-Lil' Strut

GMoney said...

Let's be honest, these faggots aren't going to do shit.

Anonymous said...

I think lil strut was pretty accurate, Tony. West coasters don't have the same passion for sports as Midwestern or Southern people. USC dowsnt even sell out their games when they're struggling.

Dut

MUDawgfan said...

Let's be honest, these faggots aren't going to do shit.


Smartest thing I've read on the subject for two weeks.

Anonymous said...

Tony, don't try to act like Cali is really where it is at. As a former resident of the Sacramento area, much like you, we both know the truth. There is no real fan base for college sports there. Sure, USC is big, but that will fall off when they start sucking again. Lil Strut is right, the sports fans are not in Cali. In Arizona, Oregon, etc...yeah. But not Cali.