 |
|
Would like to see more 2 for 1 options but maybe
Posted on: January 19, 2019 at 10:44:28 CT
alwaysright MU
Posts:
48929
Member For:
16.95 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
the market just isn't working that way these days. Edicts like having to play a P5 team each year have other impacts on the system.
I said for a long time our non-con should be:
1 - P5 bottom feeder
1 - MAC/WAC type league mid-level team
1 - MAC/WAC bottom feeder
1 - Sunbelt or other low level team
0 - D1AA
8 years ago, this was not a big logistical problem. But today it seems like it is getting harder. Plus, they simply do not want to give up the 1AA game.
I do not have a problem with Mizzou playing some road games. Purdue, Colorado are good ideas for 1/1 trades. I have no problem with the BYU situation.
I do not hate the idea, but am generally not in favor of 1/1 deals with teams like Mid Tenn or UMass. In one manner it can be a good thing. You get a little credit for playing a road game, but it's a game you SHOULD win without concern. 2/1 would be a lot better, and while we may have to bump the ante a little, it should be dramatically cheaper than trying to buy just one game. In theory, on a % basis, UMass should make more off us coming there for a game than we make off of them coming to CoMo. They are not a draw for us, but any P5 team should be a reason for them to sell out, even at an elevated ticket price.
Obviously at this point, the 1/1 with P5 teams is a given. Therefore, in any given year, we're only massaging 3 games to the schedule. And while I do not like it, we're going to keep buying a 1AA game each year, so we're really down to 2 games per year in question. I guess we could put the Illinois game back in StL each year instead of P5 1/1, but the last I saw the new series is a home and home setup.
Out of those two games in question, I'd like to see us buy games when we can or work 2/1.
One thing that I am a proponent of is a "challenge" series with the ACC. There is some pressure for the SEC to go to 9 league games, but that actually reduces TV inventory and would, theoretically, have negative impact money. A series between the SEC would produce some good matchups (some of which are already set) that are good TV draws and it would create some extra exposure in good recruiting grounds. I would not do it as a 1 or 2 week event, but the games could be spread throughout the season.
I said for a long time our non-con should be:
1 - P5 bottom feeder
1 - MAC/WAC type league mid-level team
1 - MAC/WAC bottom feeder
1 - Sunbelt or other low level team
0 - D1AA
8 years ago, this was not a big logistical problem. But today it seems like it is getting harder. Plus, they simply do not want to give up the 1AA game.
I do not have a problem with Mizzou playing some road games. Purdue, Colorado are good ideas for 1/1 trades. I have no problem with the BYU situation.
I do not hate the idea, but am generally not in favor of 1/1 deals with teams like Mid Tenn or UMass. In one manner it can be a good thing. You get a little credit for playing a road game, but it's a game you SHOULD win without concern. 2/1 would be a lot better, and while we may have to bump the ante a little, it should be dramatically cheaper than trying to buy just one game. In theory, on a % basis, UMass should make more off us coming there for a game than we make off of them coming to CoMo. They are not a draw for us, but any P5 team should be a reason for them to sell out, even at an elevated ticket price.
Obviously at this point, the 1/1 with P5 teams is a given. Therefore, in any given year, we're only massaging 3 games to the schedule. And while I do not like it, we're going to keep buying a 1AA game each year, so we're really down to 2 games per year in question. I guess we could put the Illinois game back in StL each year instead of P5 1/1, but the last I saw the new series is a home and home setup.
Out of those two games in question, I'd like to see us buy games when we can or work 2/1.
One thing that I am a proponent of is a "challenge" series with the ACC. There is some pressure for the SEC to go to 9 league games, but that actually reduces TV inventory and would, theoretically, have negative impact money. A series between the SEC would produce some good matchups (some of which are already set) that are good TV draws and it would create some extra exposure in good recruiting grounds. I would not do it as a 1 or 2 week event, but the games could be spread throughout the season.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
- 
Would like to see more 2 for 1 options but maybe - alwaysright MU - 1/19 10:44:28