Remember when Louisville was all the rage. People had them going everywhere. Then they fell off the planet. I would love to be in a conference with them again.
I think that the next 10 years matter. Big12 is going to get raided again and I would really like Houston to be at the top of the list.
But if it doesnât and this is as high as we go⊠We go get get teams that are rivals to Big12 members and start marketing the shitt out of ourselves.
Answer: they got promoted precisely because they were the biggest and best BRANDS available in the G5 for the Big 12 to choose from.
Thatâs why SMU and SDSU got left behind, regardless of their markets.
Because their brands were worse.
In our case, we also had some political power on our side.
Thatâs also why no P5 will ever take Rice, despite the fact that itâs in the same market as Houston.
Itâs because their football and basketball brands really suck.
No.
The B1G already said no to Kansas and Iowa State.
One of the main reasons the Big 12 will remain stable is because none of its remaining brands are big enough to interest either the B1G or SEC.
You have to have both⊠good, well known interesting brand in a good market. And⊠often a geographical angle⊠either a key expansion area or a good fit with existing members depending on the strategic direction of the selecting confernence.
Are they booting Purdue and Rutgers?
No. Off course media market is essential to advertisers and especially local advertisers.
Itâs too hard to boot somebody.
But when it comes to ADDING somebodyâŠ.
BRANDS MATTER MOST these days.
Did you read the article.
That "brand " was close to shutting down their athletic program because it was a huge money pitt
The Big 10 needâs inventory for the late time slot. They canât just have USC and UCLA playing at 9 every Saturday.
They will add Oregon, Washington, and possibly Stanford and Cal.
They canât have just two teams out west.
I suspect the reason they stopped was their attorneys told them they were facing the mother of tortuous interference with a contract law suit if they added more schools.
1 Like
The brands the Big 12 took were the four best in the G5.
BYU: only G5 ever to win a football Natty; nationwide religious subway alumni fan base, 60K+ average football attendance
Cincy: only G5 to make the BCS playoff, six final fours and two natties in BBall
UCF: JAN 1st bowl wins and self-proclaimed national title
UH: Major bowl victories including one as recently as 2015, six Final Fours in basketball including one as recently as 2021.
THOSE are the kinds of BRANDS that are P5 worthy.
Had a lot less to do with markets.
AgainâŠ.if markets were the most important thing: Rice and Temple would already be in the P5.
2 Likes
You are still dodging the question.
UCLA was a money losing brand but happens to sit in a huge market.
Same for UH- we lose money, have attendance issues, but sit in a huge market.
Your brand > market argument isnât holding up
UCLAâs brand pedigree in basketball is unmatched.
Easily the best and most recognized in the PAC.
Likewise for USC in football.
Thatâs why the B1G took them.
Case closed.
BRANDS MATTER MOST!!!
As youâve said a million trillion times- Basketball doesnât drive this realignment talk- Football does.
The fact is that UCLA football is not as valuable, of a brand, as Oregon football
UCLA lucked out because USC demanded they come with them .
The B1G is NOT done on western expansion
The B1G has said otherwise.
Washington and Oregon have both been DENIED.
Washingtonâs Seattle market didnât help them.
NDâŠ.with a much bigger BRAND, is their main target.
Still doesnât prove your point
UCLA is money losing foorball brand and had huge attendance issues, last season, after the B1G 10 invitation was announced
The Big 10 is going to expand again out west. That is a certainty.
AgainâŠ.which basketball brand out there on the West Coast is bigger than UCLAâs?
Case closed.
BRANDS MATTER!!!
Not in my view.
They got what they wanted out of USC and UCLA.
They saw little in Washington or Oregon that they liked.
You canât just have two teams in a time slot.