Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Buckaineer" data-source="post: 129517870" data-attributes="member: 1428007">This is an opinion piece, not a fact filled article.The writer accuses the BIG 12 of creating its &quot;psychological disadvantage&quot; while proclaiming the BIG 12 can't do this, that or the other as other conferences have done, not based on fact, but the writers opinion.&nbsp; That is EXACTLY what Boren was referring to in the first place.He again makes the claim of the BIG 12 being $9 million behind the SEC(based on an error filled CBS article) when in reality we don't know the numbers for SEC schools from tax reports, just what they reported--and the writer dismisses BIG 12 tier 3 revenues.&nbsp; Also left out is what BIG 12 schools were paid in NCAA revenues, while the SEC numbers included that.&nbsp; Again, this type of yellow journalism is exactly the sort of psychological disadvanatage Boren referenced.The writer speculates the BIG 12 won't be able to get a network going because decades ago as the first one the Big Ten took a couple of years to get theirs up and running.&nbsp; That doesn't mean the BIG 12 TODAY won't be able to do exactly what the SEC did with theirs.He claims certain schools don't bring this or that--not based on real numbers, but again on his OPINION.&nbsp; Where's the data that backs up his claim of households they &quot;bring&quot;.&nbsp; It's all just made up opinion with not one piece of evidence to back it up.One must keep in mind that CBS LOVES the SEC and carries virtually 0 BIG 12 product.&nbsp; They obviously see an expanded, networked BIG 12 as a threat and are trying to stop that in its tracks.&nbsp; Next time rather than giving their opinion perhaps they should present some facts along with that.&nbsp; The BIG 12s leaders are doing just that--and aren't going to be swayed by anti BIG 12 rhetoric and opinion from someone that doesn't use facts and figures.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Buckaineer, post: 129517870, member: 1428007"] This is an opinion piece, not a fact filled article. The writer accuses the BIG 12 of creating its "psychological disadvantage" while proclaiming the BIG 12 can't do this, that or the other as other conferences have done, not based on fact, but the writers opinion. That is EXACTLY what Boren was referring to in the first place. He again makes the claim of the BIG 12 being $9 million behind the SEC(based on an error filled CBS article) when in reality we don't know the numbers for SEC schools from tax reports, just what they reported--and the writer dismisses BIG 12 tier 3 revenues. Also left out is what BIG 12 schools were paid in NCAA revenues, while the SEC numbers included that. Again, this type of yellow journalism is exactly the sort of psychological disadvanatage Boren referenced. The writer speculates the BIG 12 won't be able to get a network going because decades ago as the first one the Big Ten took a couple of years to get theirs up and running. That doesn't mean the BIG 12 TODAY won't be able to do exactly what the SEC did with theirs. He claims certain schools don't bring this or that--not based on real numbers, but again on his OPINION. Where's the data that backs up his claim of households they "bring". It's all just made up opinion with not one piece of evidence to back it up. One must keep in mind that CBS LOVES the SEC and carries virtually 0 BIG 12 product. They obviously see an expanded, networked BIG 12 as a threat and are trying to stop that in its tracks. Next time rather than giving their opinion perhaps they should present some facts along with that. The BIG 12s leaders are doing just that--and aren't going to be swayed by anti BIG 12 rhetoric and opinion from someone that doesn't use facts and figures. [/QUOTE]

Name