forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

Advertisement
Mi.Cane said:
It’s beautiful up here in October/November :)
Click to expand...
Obviously not pertinent to football but there are plenty of areas around the Great Lakes that are awesome in the summer too. The country by and large would never guess correctly that some of the photos of the dunes are actually from that area.
 
Tad Footeball said:
Obviously not pertinent to football but there are plenty of areas around the Great Lakes that are awesome in the summer too. The country by and large would never guess correctly that some of the photos of the dunes are actually from that area.
Click to expand...
Absolutely man. When we retire we won’t leave Michigan until after December at the earliest. It’s beautiful up north in the summer with the lakes and dunes and skiing in the winter.

I still can’t believe all the Miami people wearing hooded sweatshirts when we come down for games. As I’m sweating out of every single pore in my body!

It’s crazy the wide range of climates the human body can get used to.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Last edited:
Gables Cane said:
Interesting read.

I appreaciate the attempt to “rack and stack” the candidates using verifiable data. The results are surprising and I would not have predicted that little brother (f$u) would be the best candidate for the BIG10.

I don’t agree with their conclusions, but I am biased.
Click to expand...
Really no benefit to adding Utah or Oklahoma State. The Big Ten would be better served adding markets at this point rather than “good” athletic schools.
 
Tony4Miami said:
Long read but good break downs

fivethirtyeight.com

Where Should The Big Ten Expand Next? We Crunched The Numbers.

Which schools should the Big Ten poach next?
fivethirtyeight.com fivethirtyeight.com
Click to expand...
Interesting read, the problem with this analysis in my opinion is how they weigh the different criteria. For sports the used a 3x multiplier for football and a 2x multiplier for basketball. That should be probably be closer to 5 to 2 given the economics of the 2 sports.

On top of that they weighed cultural fit as equal to sports and markets. In my opinion all of this is heavily motivated by $ and the cultural fit aspect is not an equal motivator in decision making. Just my 2 cents.
 
I agree that the methodology used in the rankings is open to criticism. For example, in determining each candidate’s market rating (a characteristic the authors say probably carries more weight than academic reputation), the calculation takes into account each state’s population growth until 2040. You would think South Florida is likely to grow at a faster rate than the panhandle. Yet, both schools likely receive the same “bump” from Florida’s population growth. Be that as it may to have fsu ranked higher than Miami as a sports market is a real head scratcher (not questioning the math, but rather “how” they reached their conclusion is suspect).

The article also says “fsu has a pretty good academic ranking” based on its USNWR ranking. Anybody who thinks fsu is good academic school need look no further than their recent scholarship offer communication.
 
Advertisement
Gables Cane said:
I agree that the methodology used in the rankings is open to criticism. For example, in determining each candidate’s market rating (a characteristic the authors say probably carries more weight than academic reputation), the calculation takes into account each state’s population growth until 2040. You would think South Florida is likely to grow at a faster rate than the panhandle. Yet, both schools likely receive the same “bump” from Florida’s population growth. Be that as it may to have fsu ranked higher than Miami as a sports market is a real head scratcher (Not questioning the math, but “how” they determined fsu is a better market).

The article also says “fsu has a pretty good academic ranking” based on its USNWR ranking. Anybody who thinks fsu is good academic school need look no further than their recent scholarship offer communication.
Click to expand...
This was exactly my first thought.
 
Tony4Miami said:
Long read but good break downs

fivethirtyeight.com

Where Should The Big Ten Expand Next? We Crunched The Numbers.

Which schools should the Big Ten poach next?
fivethirtyeight.com fivethirtyeight.com
Click to expand...
The most important quote in the whole article is "Then again, its (Miami) market rating is well above the current Big Ten average, which probably matters most for the league."

The point is media negotiation and Miami lifts the average which makes the whole pie and all the individual pieces bigger.
 
Yoyo82 said:
Our very own Radakovich was at Clemson when it happened. And he was even part of the playoff selection committee from 2014-2017. So he had a lot of influence.

And actually it wasn't a bad deal at the time. The problem with it is it's length..20 years? How shortsighted and dumb to sign a 20 year deal and not have some kind of protection to ensure it grows with market conditions. Should have had a clause that guaranteed the deal distributed at least 80% of the most valuable league or something like that so we'd never be too far behind.
Click to expand...
Well that’s a definition of a bad deal… you can’t parse it
 
Advertisement
Yoyo82 said:
The most important quote in the whole article is "Then again, its (Miami) market rating is well above the current Big Ten average, which probably matters most for the league."

The point is media negotiation and Miami lifts the average which makes the whole pie and all the individual pieces bigger.
Click to expand...
Especially if Big Ten has put in his TV deal a scale for every team they add. The cake gets bigger no matter what team they add (if I'm not wrong).

The cake will get much bigger with the Miami market in it.
 
Gables Cane said:
Interesting read.

I appreaciate the attempt to “rack and stack” the candidates using verifiable data. The results are surprising and I would not have predicted that little brother (f$u) would be the best candidate for the BIG10.

I don’t agree with their conclusions, but I am biased.
Click to expand...
It's just common sense. It almost feels like the writer put together metrics that meet the outcome he was hoping for.

I give them credit for dicing everything into metrics, it's smart and probably the way the league heads are reviewing expansion candidates to some extent, but your assessment is only as good as your metrics. And this guy's are questionable.

Miami has to be one of the most attractive schools "on the table" if you're the Big Ten. We've got the brand, we're in the most talented part of the country, our school is now financially committed to being the best, we're a giant market in a new state. And maybe most attractive of all compared to a school like FSU, Miami has one of the biggest, busiest airports in the country.

Think about it. You're trying to create a super league and you're the school president of Minnesota or USC. Would you rather add programs that all of your sports teams can get to quickly and easily, or would you rather your teams have to travel 20 hours before they get on the field? You can get direct flights to most of the country from Miami every day. Trying to connect small regional towns to other small regional towns across the country requires 2-3 connecting flights and atleast 2-4 hours bus rides. The Big Ten didn't have to invite UCLA, but they did, and their location is a big reason why. Same for a school like Rutgers. Watch and see if they don't end up inviting GT (again) as well.

Don't get me wrong, Clemson and FSU have strong brands and aren't going to be left out. But Miami is an easy sell and a more attractive overall package, perhaps the most attractive school to the Big Ten left on the board aside from ND. But hey I'm biased too.
 
Last edited:
BioCane said:
It's just common sense. It almost feels like the writer put together metrics that meet the outcome he was hoping for.

I give them credit for dicing everything into metrics, it's smart and probably the way the league heads are reviewing expansion candidates to some extent, but your assessment is only as good as your metrics. And this guy's are questionable.

Miami has to be one of the most attractive schools "on the table" if you're the Big Ten. We've got the brand, we're in the most talented part of the country, our school is now financially committed to being the best, we're a giant market in a new state. And maybe most attractive of all compared to a school like FSU, Miami has one of the biggest, busiest airports in the country.

Think about it. You're trying to create a super league and you're the school president of Minnesota or USC. Would you rather add programs that all of your sports teams can get to quickly and easily, or would you rather your teams have to travel 20 hours before they get on the field? You can get direct flights to most of the country from Miami every day. Trying to connect small regional towns to other small regional towns across the country requires 2-3 connecting flights and atleast 2-4 hours bus rides. The Big Ten didn't have to invite UCLA, but they did, and their location is a big reason why. Same for a school like Rutgers. Watch and see if they don't end up inviting GT (again) as well.

Don't get me wrong, Clemson and FSU have strong brands and aren't going to be left out. But Miami is an easy sell and a more attractive overall package, perhaps the most attractive school to the Big Ten left on the board aside from ND. But hey I'm biased too.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.

Still prefer the SEC, but the B1G would be a very good consolation prize
 
Advertisement
Back
Top