2022 Badger Football Thread

TW said:
At the present time, with two divisions, the "big 3 or 4" in the Big 10 actually play each other every year because they play one game against each team in their division. If you do away with divisions, they won't have that luxury of "landmark games," either from a school or network perspective, because the rotation of opponents would eliminate anywhere from 2 to 4 of those games every year. So, the argument of creating "quality match ups" is absurd.

Now, if they said the wanted to maintain those rivalries, they've done nothing more than tell everyone it's nothing more than a glory grab, because they feel they have the right to "own it all."

If I was any school, outside of the top 4, I'd tell them to suck eggs. It's nothing more than a power grab.

There's nothing about the idea that's even logical.
Click to expand...
Absurd no. Just look at what the ACC did.

Each school has “rivalry” games each year and those are locked in the rest is rotational. So UM/OSU, UM/PSU, OSU/PSU, UM/MSU won’t go away. Neither will Iowa / Wisconsin or Wisconsin/ Minnesota or Purdue / Indiana. No conference or network in their right mind would lose those matchups. Last year UM, OSU, PSU and MSU played in 5 of the 10 most watched games in college football in 2021. 3 of those 5 were conference games. To note 4 were SEC games and 1 ACC game. The most watched was a B1G game

If your an executive at FOX and your wish list for the B1G championship game is OSU vs Iowa or Northwestern or OSU vs Penn State what’s your pick. If your Kevin Warren and your negotiating media rights your going to split up rivals or marquee matchups? With the NCAA restrictions over re: divisions the conferences now have the luxury of the 2 best teams playing for a championship
 
If Michigan vs OSU is a rivalry game every year, why would it behoove the conference, or the media to have them play again in Indy at the end of the year? That's what you're suggesting, isn't it?

This rush to make this change reminds me of baseball and how they ballyhooed how inter-league play was going to boost attendance and TV audiences across the board. It did, for a short period of time, but now it's so old hat that nobody gives a rip. Yet, here we are, listening to people who want to rediscover the wheel, as if they have a better way than round. Please! Spare me the rhetoric. It will happen with college football too.

If the networks are going to dictate "who" gets to play in championship games, why the hell do teams even play the season? Just let OSU and Michigan play each other to see who's king of the hill. Nobody else matters.

So, where we heading here? Reality TV? They want a Mich vs OSU final, so they tell the officials to insure those two teams end up at the top of the heap? Now, assume that OSU beat them 56-0 earlier in the season, and they're going to play for the championship. Tell me about that "massive TV audience" that's going to want to watch that one.

It's all BS, and the media is gaining too damned much control over everything, including playing of the game. Pretty soon they'll have officials deciding outcomes so they can get that "perfect championship game."

This is all BS. Defend it all you want, but what I said is facts.

Now, let's go back in time, to when they split into two divisions, and the "reasoning" they said they did it. It created guarantees where natural rivalries could be played, and offered diversified opportunities for schools to actually get a shot at winning a championship. It was going to boost viewership, because teams that were not as great at recruiting as Michigan and OSU. It was going to boost the TV worthiness of teams. The same sell they used to divide MLB into divisions.

Now, they want to reverse it because the networks want to play with how it's all offered. Of course, down the road, they'll whine and cry again about how it's hurt their ratings across the board, and want it changed back, and the colleges will make it sound like they're doing it to "help the rivalries," which they've already destroyed.

As far as I'm concerned, the media should be just that, not the dictator of what plays out on the field, but they're only a couple of steps away from having officials decide the outcome on the field, for "the good of the game."
 
TW said:
If Michigan vs OSU is a rivalry game every year, why would it behoove the conference, or the media to have them play again in Indy at the end of the year? That's what you're suggesting, isn't it?

This rush to make this change reminds me of baseball and how they ballyhooed how inter-league play was going to boost attendance and TV audiences across the board. It did, for a short period of time, but now it's so old hat that nobody gives a rip. Yet, here we are, listening to people who want to rediscover the wheel, as if they have a better way than round. Please! Spare me the rhetoric. It will happen with college football too.

If the networks are going to dictate "who" gets to play in championship games, why the hell do teams even play the season? Just let OSU and Michigan play each other to see who's king of the hill. Nobody else matters.

So, where we heading here? Reality TV? They want a Mich vs OSU final, so they tell the officials to insure those two teams end up at the top of the heap? Now, assume that OSU beat them 56-0 earlier in the season, and they're going to play for the championship. Tell me about that "massive TV audience" that's going to want to watch that one.

It's all BS, and the media is gaining too damned much control over everything, including playing of the game. Pretty soon they'll have officials deciding outcomes so they can get that "perfect championship game."

This is all BS. Defend it all you want, but what I said is facts.

Now, let's go back in time, to when they split into two divisions, and the "reasoning" they said they did it. It created guarantees where natural rivalries could be played, and offered diversified opportunities for schools to actually get a shot at winning a championship. It was going to boost viewership, because teams that were not as great at recruiting as Michigan and OSU. It was going to boost the TV worthiness of teams. The same sell they used to divide MLB into divisions.

Now, they want to reverse it because the networks want to play with how it's all offered. Of course, down the road, they'll whine and cry again about how it's hurt their ratings across the board, and want it changed back, and the colleges will make it sound like they're doing it to "help the rivalries," which they've already destroyed.

As far as I'm concerned, the media should be just that, not the dictator of what plays out on the field, but they're only a couple of steps away from having officials decide the outcome on the field, for "the good of the game."
Click to expand...
Yes that’s what I am suggesting and if you don’t think Fox or ESPN or CBS control things well not sure what to tell you. The “media” is not dictating what teams play, they what the best matchups. They pay an obscene amount of money in rights fees that goes to institutions, like about $80m per school in the B1G. You don’t think the media played a part in B1G expansion? Bet your Bucky Badger beer mug they did.

Why an OSU / UM rematch? 15.1m people watched the 2021 game in Ann Arbor. #1 viewed game in college football in 2021. Iowa / OSU in Indy drew 11.7m. That’s a significant decrease. Also, only 8 of the 11 B1G title games drew over 10m viewers. A prime Saturday night game with potentially a CFP berth on the line that number is north of 15m. Point #2. No B1G title game has ever sold out. You don’t think UM/OSU sells that place out? And it’s not exclusive to Michigan. Penn State would have the same draw and probably MSU also.

So yeah if your Kevin Warren your pushing for the best possible matchup not some OSU / Northwestern blow out of Wisconsin getting boat raced or lord forbid Purdue or Nebraska. One more nugget. 5 of the 6 largest TV markets and alumni bases are East schools. So yeah eyeballs matter

Media dictates who plays on SNF , MNF in the NFL. Media dictates who get NBA games on TNT and ESPN. Media dictates who’s on Sunday Night Baseball.
 
FlaPack said:
Media dictates who plays on SNF , MNF in the NFL. Media dictates who get NBA games on TNT and ESPN. Media dictates who’s on Sunday Night Baseball.
Click to expand...

Not totally true, is it? The media does have input into the match ups for Monday, Thursday, and Sunday night games, as well as end of season schedules on Saturdays, etc, but they don't create the specific match ups. The match ups are determined by the previous season records, and developed accordingly, including inter-league play, and inter-divisional play, etc. From that buffet, the media gets to pick and choose which ones take center stage.

But, with DI football, the format you suggest as right will create a large number of non-revenue games that not enough people will watch, to make it a valid offering. In the end, it would be nothing more than a showcase for 3 or 4 teams in the Big 10, and the rest would be cannon fodder, and their games considered irrelevant, and eventually disappearing from TV.

Sadly, Wisconsin would be one of those teams. They suffered through this same situation back a few decades ago, but people who aren't old enough to remember them not getting TV games wouldn't understand. That was when schools like Michigan and OSU built they dynasties, and unless everyone is given equal opportunity to compete, it's going to get worse. Barry Alvarez changed their fortunes because he was considered a "presence" in college football.

Even now, the "media darlings" of OSU and Michigan get 4 and 5 star players on a continuous basis, because of the media, and their constant praise.

As for the NBA, they whored themselves out to the media a long time ago. That's why they have teams that are nothing more than fly specks on a tablecloth.
 
TW said:
Not totally true, is it? The media does have input into the match ups for Monday, Thursday, and Sunday night games, as well as end of season schedules on Saturdays, etc, but they don't create the specific match ups. The match ups are determined by the previous season records, and developed accordingly, including inter-league play, and inter-divisional play, etc. From that buffet, the media gets to pick and choose which ones take center stage.

But, with DI football, the format you suggest as right will create a large number of non-revenue games that not enough people will watch, to make it a valid offering. In the end, it would be nothing more than a showcase for 3 or 4 teams in the Big 10, and the rest would be cannon fodder, and their games considered irrelevant, and eventually disappearing from TV.

Sadly, Wisconsin would be one of those teams. They suffered through this same situation back a few decades ago, but people who aren't old enough to remember them not getting TV games wouldn't understand. That was when schools like Michigan and OSU built they dynasties, and unless everyone is given equal opportunity to compete, it's going to get worse. Barry Alvarez changed their fortunes because he was considered a "presence" in college football.

Even now, the "media darlings" of OSU and Michigan get 4 and 5 star players on a continuous basis, because of the media, and their constant praise.

As for the NBA, they whored themselves out to the media a long time ago. That's why they have teams that are nothing more than fly specks on a tablecloth.
Click to expand...
I never said that media created who plays who. It’s not rocket science that they pick from the league schedule which is determined by a rotating schedule and only 3 games are determined by regular season records. Actually GB schedule is set thru 2027.

What am saying is the scheduling format won’t change one bit. Tier 2 B1G games will go to ESPN / ABC / Fox. Tier 2 games to FS1. Tier 3 to BTN. But BTN will still require each team to get on game on the net. The only thing that changes is who plays in Indy. Instead of east v west it’s the 2 best teams in the conference.

Back in the day for us old folks the only TV options were ESPN & ABC. Fox did not exist then, neither did FS1 or FS2 or BTN. Now all games are available if your 13-0 or 0-13. It’s why the B1G pays out $80m per year

I apologize in advance if that’s the stupidest thing you have ever heard
 
FlaPack said:
I apologize in advance if that’s the stupidest thing you have ever heard
Click to expand...

I didn't mean it to sound as if you were stupid. I was referring to the constant juggling to satisfy the media, and what it will end up doing to a lot of the competition. I realize you go on hard facts, based on statistical information, but where this is heading isn't there in numbers, but it's coming. The split in the Big 10 from the start was to enhance competition, through maintaining those historical confrontations. What's next? Teams like OSU and Michigan will say they don't want to play each other during the regular season, simply because they want to turn their game into a showdown after they play the entire slate. Of course the media will love the little darlings for it.

I'd love to see just how horrible the actual TV ratings are for major league baseball teams, and actual numbers who have signed up for premium packages to get their teams. I know it might be significant for some teams, but for others, pretty dismal.

Also, based on what I've been hearing about Sunday Ticket over the years, it's a falling market. There's a limit as to how deep in people's wallets they're going to get. The rebellion is just starting, and a lot of people will opt out of viewing for a year or two if necessary, until the market corrects.

Yet, when I look at the model, where pro and college sports are going, I see nothing but paid subscriptions down the road to watch you favorite teams.
 
FlaPack said:
And your point is? No divisions is below OSU, Michigan (debatable) , PSU (debatable). Probably on level with MSU so worst case #5 in the league
Click to expand...
Just saying Badgers might not even be a New Years day 6 level then
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top