Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="billsin01, post: 309999, member: 837"]
You may be right. Who knows?
 
My point is this: Conferences need one of two things to remain viable long-term. Those two things are:
 
1) A mutually beneficial financial arrangement in which all parties feel that they are worth more banded together than they are alone or grouped with a different set of schools AND that they are getting their fair share for what they bring to the table.
 
or
 
2) Some set of circumstances that bands the schools together and makes the conference worth more in a big picture scenario than simply relying on the TV deal. (i.e. Big East hoops)
 
Option 1 is great but extremely difficult (impossible) to cultivate in a long-term sense b/c even with expensive opt-outs, etc., the connection is purely financial. One school sees an opportunity, jumps ship and it's more conference merry-go-rounds. Option 2 seems less realistic today, but I really think these TV deals are bubbles -- they look great right now but what are networks going to think when they see what will almost certainly be mediocre ratings for most of these games?
 
So if all the haves band together, then that's fine but it's a more long-range conference or two and maybe a more sustainable plan. At this point schools are just bouncing all over for a quick payday and conferences like the ACC are expanding with no particular idea where the new teams will fit. And, meanwhile, the ACC's own schools are thinking of jumping ship.
 
So the conclusion, so far as I see it, is that regardless of who ends up where, bloated conferences with lots of mouths to feed and backs to pat and huge increases in travel costs are in no way, shape, or form built for any sort of stability.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?