What do you have against Iowa State, FiniteManWorks? Not notch AAU school, good athletic programs, solid market. K-State is a little shakier on the academics but still they too our better choices than New Mexico.

Like I said before:
Colorado
Iowa State
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
Rice
Texas
Texas A&M

That is as close to the Big 10 as Texas can get in their region.

Not exactly. I think if UT and OU get thier way in the Big XII or some new conference and the championship game takes place between the #1 and #2 finisher in a conference, it would make the entire thing a lot less controversial to not split into 2 conferences and just play an 11 game in-conference schedule. Some bigwigs in the Big 10 like that as a plan if they ever get ND.

Concerning the schools that might be shed by the Big IXX...they are what they are. Iowa St. may be a pretty good acedemic school, but fairly or not, they are one of the main reasons the conference is viewed as second rate. (I do acknowledge that is not fair to the school.) However much you squint, you can't ignore the fact the top school in the state is in the Big 10. The second school in the state is not. It is an obvious support for the idea that the Big XII is second rate to the Big 10 and a constant reminder that although the Big XII is better than the SWC, UT is still in a second rate conference. It is one thing to bring in a second school when you already have the #1 school in a state. It is entirely something else when you don't.

I really don't know if the MWC would stretch well beyond their footprint for two solid middle of the country schools. Maybe they would take them and Baylor on to cut out the travel to Texas. I don't know how that would work out, or if it could. The MWC is a very frugal collection of schools. They would have to see if the prestige those schools and their media markets would make it worthwhile; If those schools would bring in more BCS money; If at the end of the day the money lost by splitt shares and increased travel would be made up by increased revenue. If it seemed it would, they would. If not, I think they'd pass.




If those schools are part of a voting block that prevents the Texas and Oklahoma schools from enacting changes that enhance their ability to play for national titles, it does make enough sense. The bottom line is that UT and A&M will be opinionated big wheels in any conference. It doesn't have to be the Big XII. Tech and the Oklahoma schools seem to share UT's viewpoint and those 5 schools are a signifigant block.

If the 3 schools diminish the league's national standing in some various areas as well as allow the other schools to thwart attempts by the Texas/Oklahoma block to enact positive changes, they may find themselves on the outside looking in.

Well the Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa State is a fairly good block as well. Colorado and Baylor are the ones that normally deterime what gets done in the conference. They are normally the swing votes.

I don't think Big XII is going to break up. Also I don't believe it is under the Big Ten. The only way they are is academically and market size. In the Big 4 sports (football, mens and women's basketball, and baseball) the Big XII is the most dominant conference in all the nation.

The crux of your arguements seem to be that Memphis and UNM have less to offer than Iowa St. and Kansas. That may be true, but it doesn't answer the question of whether they are percieved as adding sufficient value to the conference vs. taking on a more "reasonable" member. There are all kinds of factors that figure in to who gets into a conference and who doesn't. There are reasons the MWC really likes Boise St. and not Fresno St. Yet we can both create arguements for each school.

I am trying to construct my arguements within the framework of a potential course of action the Texas and OKlahoma schools are reportedly considering. Your arguements seem to boil down to the fact that you think the Big XII is the best option for those schools. That may be, but if rumors are around that UT and Oklahoma might be talking about their options, they have to beleive there MIGHT be a better option out there. I am trying to find that better option that some in their camp see. Just pointing out why Iowa State is a good Div I school really doesn't accomplish much towards that goal.




Fair enough. I concede that although Memphis is in a great media market (a geographically compressed market with 1.2M people),
[back after posting reference materials]
they are (like TCU) at least second (possibly third or fouth) fiddle in their own market.





I would call this an opinion or even possibly a "spin" presented as fact, depending on your motivation. In the most literal sense your statement is untrue. UNM is in the albequeque market #47, 650K households. Iowa State is in the Des Moines-Ames market, 412K households. If you want to include surrounding communities and media markets, it would be more honest to your readers to state the logic you are using to make your conclusions and allow them to evaluate the accuracy for themselves. You will note that I have stated many times that I didn't have some information on me and I could be wrong. I don't have a problem with anyone providing me information that makes me change my mind, but I do kind of resent a less than honest approach to debate. We are all here because we are interested in the topic. If you think I am here to bash Iowa St and K St., you are mistaken. There is no reason for loaded statements (if that was intended) to defend Iowa St against unfair criticism. If it was unintentionally misleading or poorly stated that's fine (I do that too), just please realize I am not out to bash any school (with the exception of SMU). If it makes sense to evaluate other markets under the Iowa State media market umbrella, I don't have a problem with that, but you should state that is what you are doing.

(A lot of people seem to think I have a problem with Iowa St. and K St. --- I really don't. Frankly Iowa St. would make a fine Big 10 school, but time has conspired against them. Again, I am looking for what UT and OU might be looking at as their option to the Big XII. If that option HAS to consider Iowa State because they are too darned worthy not to be considered, I have no problem with that.)

First of all, you don't just "do a split" of all state TV markets to come up with market share (although it isn't a totally meritless "quick and dirty" looking at Iowa markets) . A dominant school in a region generally owns their native media market.

Iowa is the dominant school in the state. Iowa St., however, is a very strong #2 and in a better domestic media market (#73 Des Moines-Ames 412,230 0.376). How close is Iowa to the Des Moines-Ames Media Market? Less than 100 miles? Presumably Iowa grads flock to majory cities in the region. I would say Iowa State owns their domestic media market, but not as strongly as some other schools do. I can live with your split of TV households in Iowa for these reasons. New Mexico is whole a different scenario though.




This is a very inaccurate view of UNM and their market. UNM is in Albequeque, the largest city in their media market. The next largest city is Santa Fe---also in northern New Mexico. NM State is 30 miles from El Paso and the Texas (southern) border. Withe the exception of El Paso, NM St. is pretty isolated from large communities. Presumably a large portion of State's alumni come from or live in El Paso (a different media market). NM St. is a small public school. If I recall enrollments correctly, NM St. is either half or less than half the enrollment of UNM. Additionally, NM St. is in the lowly WAC, not the top level Pac 10. The New Mexico situation is obviously not a direct parallel to Iowa/Iowa St's. The impression your statements give is that you are splittling state markets for both schools and that is how you reach your conclusion that Iowa State has the better market. I would say that is a skewering of media numbers.




Again, acedemics did not spare Rice the axe. I personally like large universities, but I think media markets and national reputation/excellence in sports would carry more weight. I don't see a huge difference between K St., UNM, or Iowa St.'s history of athletic success. They are all schools who have had moments of success, but have generally throughout their history been conference also-rans.




Again, this is either spin or just a weak arguement. Are you really suggesting that a handful of non-division one schools and one of the weakest schools in Division 1 combine to equal the effect of a rival Big 10 school? New Mexico totally owns the Albequeque market that makes up the vast majority of the state (having lived in New Mexico, I'd guess about 90% of the state's population). You want to talk penentration, that is as good as it gets. You can't get more penetration than dominance in by far the largest city in the market and the source of most market broadcasts with no competition.




From the way I am looking at it, I don't see much of a difference between those schools and UNM in terms of media share. They are second schools. UNM is a flagship. Again, it isn't that Iowa State is a bad school Division I school. I am only making the point that there isn't something irreplaceable about these schools.




You are being unneccessarily sly here again. #66 Wichita-Hutchinson Plus is 445K households that is not "comparable" to Albequeque market #47, 650K households. The New Mexico market is almost 50% larger and while it is true that they do have followings in KC, Kansas is closer and already provides #1 ownership of that market.





This screams of defending your school. KSU has been a good football school for the last decade, but they were pretty forgettable before that. Iowa St. ? before my time. if the arguement is that those schools have a ton more 6-5 finishes vs. UNM's 3-8 finishes....I have a hard time caring.




I think you misunderstood my point. UT & AM WANTED to join the PAC 10, but were blocked by Baylor and tech alums working together in the state legislature. I just wanted to provide clarity. Since then the realities have changed. Tech has improved dramatically since then and UT alums love being in the same conference as OU. UT and A&M alums don't want to get away from Tech, OU, or OSU. The Pac 10 is not on UT and A&M's radar. Your arguement on the Pac 10 displays a lack of understanding on how the Pac 10 is constructed. The Pac 10 likes bookends who dominate regions/states, have top programs, and are great acedemic schools. UT & A&M fit all the criteria and could walk into the PAC 10 tomorrow, but they are the ONLY schools in the western half of the US who could do that. To say that because UNM can't get into the PAC 10 they are an inferior school is just asinine. Who would they go in with? NM st.? I doubt K St. AND the flagship school KANSAS could get into the PAC 10. That doesn't mean they both suck and that Kansas doesn't deserve to be in a Big 10/Pac 10 level conference.




Again, this is a stupid arguement. Does a new SWC need to be IDENTICAL to the Big 10? No. I have never suggested that. I have only said that something that is at the level of the Big 10 or Pac 10 is what UT and A&M think their schools deserve as a permanent home. The physical state Texas isn't going anywhere. So what is your point? If your point is that you can't put the state of Texas next to populous states like Illinois --- OK you have made your point.

Atlanta, Phoenix, Chicago, and LA are red herrings, but at least the Western cities can be forgiven as you didn't understand my point bout the PAC 10. Have I ever said that the Big XII doesn't make sense as a media conference? No. I have only said it can be improved upon. Iowa State is a good Division I School, but for a primarily southern Conference it does stretch the footprint. The Denver, St. Louis, and Kansas City markets are already secured by flagships Colorado, Kansas, and Missou. U of Arkansas flat out owns all of the state's media markets with apologies to Ark St. LSU comes close to doing the same in Lousiana being at least a strong #2 in all Louisiana markets. And UNM we have already talked to death.





TCU is argueably the #2 or #3 team in Fort Worth. No point in letting them in --- you already have the market. I suggested the schools I did working from the concept that UT and OU would want to be in a 12 team conference. Maybe that isn't what they are thinking? who knows?




And you don't appear to be reading my posts, just launching bitter, inaccurate defenses of the the Big XII as currently composed and of Iowa State and Kansas State as institutions, even though I have nothing personal against them. If you go back and re-read my post you will see that I never suggested bringing in Tulane AND LSU, only that if LSU declined, Tulane would be a solid fallback. I stand by that. New Orleans would be a great city to pull in. But there is a huge differnce between a team that is #1 in new orleans and #2 in the rest of Louisiana and a team that is #2 in New Orleans and and afterthought in the rest of the state. Tulane would be a developmental project, but one worth taking on.




Dude, you sound like all the Houston and TCU fans I used to talk with before the SWC folded. Good luck with your schools.

For easy access and reference I am linking this here.

http://www.nielsenmedia.com/DMAs.html
Nielsen Media Research Local Universe Estimates* (US)

*Estimates used throughout the 2004-2005 television season which starts on September 20, 2004



RANK Designated Market Area (DMA) TV Homes % of US
1 New York 7,355,710 6.712
2 Los Angeles 5,431,140 4.956
3 Chicago 3,417,330 3.118
4 Philadelphia 2,919,410 2.664
5 Boston (Manchester) 2,391,840 2.183
6 San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,359,870 2.153
7 Dallas-Ft. Worth 2,292,760 2.092
8 Washington, DC (Hagrstwn) 2,241,610 2.045
9 Atlanta 2,059,450 1.879
10 Detroit 1,943,930 1.774
11 Houston 1,902,810 1.736
12 Seattle-Tacoma 1,690,640 1.543
13 Tampa-St. Pete (Sarasota) 1,671,040 1.525
14 Minneapolis-St. Paul 1,665,540 1.52
15 Phoenix (Prescott), AZ 1,596,950 1.457
16 Cleveland-Akron (Canton) 1,556,670 1.42
17 Miami-Ft. Lauderdale 1,496,810 1.366
18 Denver 1,401,760 1.279
19 Sacramnto-Stktn-Modesto 1,315,030 1.2
20 Orlando-Daytona Bch-Melbrn 1,303,150 1.189
21 St. Louis 1,216,700 1.11
22 Pittsburgh 1,186,010 1.082
23 Baltimore 1,087,730 0.993
24 Portland, OR 1,086,900 0.992
25 Indianapolis 1,053,020 0.961
26 San Diego 1,025,730 0.936
27 Hartford & New Haven 1,017,530 0.928
28 Charlotte 1,004,440 0.917
29 Raleigh-Durham (Fayetvlle) 966,720 0.882
30 Nashville 916,170 0.836
31 Kansas City 894,580 0.816
32 Milwaukee 886,770 0.809
33 Cincinnati 883,230 0.806
34 Columbus, OH 867,490 0.792
35 Greenvll-Spart-Ashevll-And 813,210 0.742
36 Salt Lake City 800,000 0.73
37 San Antonio 748,950 0.683
38 Grand Rapids-Kalmzoo-B.Crk 732,600 0.668
39 West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce 729,010 0.665
40 Birmingham (Ann and Tusc) 717,300 0.655
41 Norfolk-Portsmth-Newpt Nws 707,750 0.646
42 Harrisburg-Lncstr-Leb-York 702,590 0.641
43 New Orleans 675,760 0.617
44 Memphis 658,250 0.601
45 Oklahoma City 655,250 0.598
46 Buffalo 651,970 0.595
47 Albuquerque-Santa Fe 649,680 0.593
48 Greensboro-H.Point-W.Salem 648,860 0.592
49 Providence-New Bedford 644,980 0.589
50 Louisville 637,680 0.582
51 Las Vegas 614,150 0.56
52 Jacksonville, Brunswick 613,000 0.559
53 Wilkes Barre-Scranton 592,560 0.541
54 Austin 567,870 0.518
55 Albany-Schenectady-Troy 555,640 0.507
56 Dayton 537,710 0.491
57 Little Rock-Pine Bluff 531,770 0.485
58 Fresno-Visalia 527,770 0.482
59 Knoxville 513,630 0.469
60 Tulsa 510,960 0.466
61 Richmond-Petersburg 509,860 0.465
62 Charleston-Huntington 508,750 0.464
63 Mobile-Pensacola (Ft Walt) 492,070 0.449
64 Lexington 481,120 0.439
65 Flint-Saginaw-Bay City 479,520 0.438
66 Wichita-Hutchinson Plus 445,690 0.407
67 Roanoke-Lynchburg 445,670 0.407
68 Ft. Myers-Naples 444,130 0.405
69 Green Bay-Appleton 433,640 0.396
70 Toledo 432,430 0.395
71 Honolulu 417,120 0.381
72 Tucson (Sierra Vista) 417,070 0.381
73 Des Moines-Ames 412,230 0.376
74 Portland-Auburn 409,060 0.373
75 Rochester, NY 396,880 0.362
76 Omaha 396,460 0.362
77 Syracuse 395,400 0.361
78 Springfield, MO 388,530 0.355
79 Paducah-Cape Girard-Harsbg 384,860 0.351
80 Spokane 384,060 0.35
81 Shreveport 382,700 0.349
82 Champaign&Sprngfld-Decatur 382,460 0.349
83 Columbia, SC 374,680 0.342
84 Huntsville-Decatur (Flor) 370,160 0.338
85 Madison 364,000 0.332
86 Chattanooga 353,210 0.322
87 South Bend-Elkhart 332,860 0.304
88 Cedar Rapids-Wtrlo-IWC&Dub 331,610 0.303
89 Tri-Cities, TN-VA 329,910 0.301
90 Burlington-Plattsburgh 329,200 0.3
91 Jackson, MS 327,670 0.299
92 Colorado Springs-Pueblo 313,170 0.286
93 Harlingen-Wslco-Brnsvl-McA 312,300 0.285
94 Davenport-R.Island-Moline 309,900 0.283
95 Waco-Temple-Bryan 308,970 0.282
96 Baton Rouge 306,910 0.28
97 Johnstown-Altoona 300,850 0.274
98 Savannah 293,170 0.267
99 Evansville 289,840 0.264
100 El Paso (Las Cruces) 288,440 0.263
101 Charleston, SC 282,740 0.258
102 Youngstown 281,340 0.257
103 Lincoln & Hstngs-Krny Plus 275,230 0.251
104 Ft. Wayne 271,890 0.248
105 Greenville-N.Bern-Washngtn 270,200 0.247
106 Springfield-Holyoke 267,500 0.244
107 Ft. Smith-Fay-Sprngdl-Rgrs 267,030 0.244
108 Myrtle Beach-Florence 265,370 0.242
109 Tallahassee-Thomasville 259,720 0.237
110 Lansing 259,240 0.237
111 Tyler-Longview(Lfkn&Ncgd) 254,170 0.232
112 Traverse City-Cadillac 249,450 0.228
113 Montgomery-Selma 247,800 0.226
114 Reno 246,700 0.225
115 Augusta 246,620 0.225
116 Sioux Falls(Mitchell) 242,930 0.222
117 Peoria-Bloomington 242,020 0.221
118 Fargo-Valley City 235,490 0.215
119 Macon 230,000 0.21
120 Eugene 229,360 0.209
121 SantaBarbra-SanMar-SanLuOb 224,710 0.205
122 Boise 223,890 0.204
123 Lafayette, LA 220,740 0.201
124 Monterey-Salinas 218,450 0.199
125 Columbus, GA 208,860 0.191
126 Yakima-Pasco-Rchlnd-Knnwck 207,180 0.189
127 La Crosse-Eau Claire 206,490 0.188
128 Bakersfield 194,180 0.177
129 Corpus Christi 193,290 0.176
130 Amarillo 190,120 0.173
131 Chico-Redding 189,310 0.173
132 Columbus-Tupelo-West Point 187,650 0.171
133 Wausau-Rhinelander 181,780 0.166
134 Rockford 181,180 0.165
135 Monroe-El Dorado 176,380 0.161
136 Duluth-Superior 175,030 0.16
137 Topeka 171,470 0.156
138 Beaumont-Port Arthur 168,740 0.154
139 Columbia-Jefferson City 167,390 0.153
140 Wilmington 163,560 0.149
141 Medford-Klamath Falls 162,260 0.148
142 Erie 158,910 0.145
143 Sioux City 157,340 0.144
144 Wichita Falls & Lawton 156,300 0.143
145 Lubbock 152,620 0.139
146 Joplin-Pittsburg 152,310 0.139
147 Albany, GA 151,970 0.139
148 Bluefield-Beckley-Oak Hill 148,760 0.136
149 Terre Haute 146,860 0.134
150 Salisbury 146,510 0.134
151 Bangor 144,740 0.132
152 Wheeling-Steubenville 144,330 0.132
153 Rochestr-Mason City-Austin 142,570 0.13
154 Binghamton 141,350 0.129
155 Anchorage 139,960 0.128
156 Biloxi-Gulfport 137,590 0.126
157 Minot-Bismarck-thingyinson 135,760 0.124
158 Odessa-Midland 135,450 0.124
159 Palm Springs 135,190 0.123
160 Panama City 134,770 0.123
161 Sherman, TX-Ada, OK 123,540 0.113
162 Gainesville 116,670 0.106
163 Abilene-Sweethingyer 112,950 0.103
164 Idaho Falls-Pocatello 112,700 0.103
165 Clarksburg-Weston 109,480 0.1
166 Utica 106,690 0.097
167 Quincy-Hannibal-Keokuk 105,070 0.096
168 Hattiesburg-Laurel 104,800 0.096
169 Missoula 103,810 0.095
170 Billings 102,370 0.093
171 Yuma-El Centro 99,490 0.091
172 Dothan 98,850 0.09
173 Elmira (Corning) 98,270 0.09
174 Jackson, TN 94,770 0.086
175 Watertown 94,390 0.086
176 Alexandria, LA 94,350 0.086
177 Lake Charles 94,240 0.086
178 Rapid City 93,220 0.085
179 Jonesboro 93,100 0.085
180 Marquette 91,100 0.083
181 Harrisonburg 85,550 0.078
182 Bowling Green 81,470 0.074
183 Greenwood-Greenville 78,160 0.071
184 Meridian 72,280 0.066
185 Charlottesville 69,930 0.064
186 Lafayette, IN 65,060 0.059
187 Parkersburg 64,790 0.059
188 Great Falls 64,650 0.059
189 Grand Junction-Montrose 63,650 0.058
190 Laredo 62,720 0.057
191 Twin Falls 59,940 0.055
192 Eureka 58,380 0.053
193 Butte-Bozeman, MT 57,680 0.053
194 Lima 54,200 0.049
195 Cheyenne, WY-Scottsbluff, 53,920 0.049
196 San Angelo 53,530 0.049
197 Bend, OR 52,550 0.048
198 Casper-Riverton 51,850 0.047
199 Mankato 51,390 0.047
200 Ottumwa-Kirksville 51,190 0.047
201 St. Joseph 48,740 0.044
202 Zanesville 33,240 0.03
203 Presque Isle 31,840 0.029
204 Fairbanks 31,640 0.029
205 Victoria 30,180 0.028
206 Helena 25,360 0.023
207 Juneau, AK 25,070 0.023
208 Alpena 17,930 0.016
209 North Platte 15,590 0.014
210 Glendive 5,150 0.005
Total 109,590,170 100
Notes:
NSI® and DMA® are registered trademarks of Nielsen Media Research, Inc.
Nielsen Media Research is a trademark of Nielsen Media Research, Inc.

as well as the DMA map cybercat found (and his later moded one with scholes and state boundaries overlaid) that has fallen off the the real site. [If those were removed for a reason or by cybercat on purpose, please let me know and I will remove them.] I am posting them here to try and better illustrate my thought process.

FMW, I had nothing to do with removing these maps. I suspect it occurred as a result of disk space maintenance on this site.

Unlike a lot of the other stuff, I think this is a very strong point you make. Buying power could very much effect the equation for an advertiser and as such for the networks. I am not prepared to just blindly "trust you" that there is a pronounced and impactful difference in buying power between New Mexico and Kansas and Iowa as I am not an economist and because there are variables that I don't have the training to interpret. (ex. how does the fact that there are rich californians who commute scattered through Albequeque and Santa Fe affect those numbers?) And frankly, because some of the things you have pushed out as factual have been at minimum poorly stated.

It is a good point though, and one I hope a true media expert who works in New Mexico from time to time or maybe someone who works for one of the large networks might see and answer.

Again, with no disrespect intended, I think you are being shortsighted here. TODAY, that is a terriffic solid statement. I am going to throw out a couple of quick and dirty over-generalizations. The motivations of conference changes in the 1990's were to escape dying conferences and to find a stable conference home. The motivations of the changes in the aughts seemed to be more about BCS access. I think the next round of changes are going to be the dropping of weak members from strong conferences --- the rich not sharing their cash.





I am guessing you posted this before I conceded memphis, so I won't jump on you again. I have no affiliation with memphis. You didn't mention them, but I will also tell you I have no affiliation with Tulane either. My only affiliation with UNM is that I lived in Carlsbad, NM when I was 10. At that point my oldest brother drank away 6+ years "attending" UNM. I have not been to UNM campus since I was 13 and was last in albequeque 7 years ago. I think UNM makes a lot more geographical sense for the Texas schools (cheaper), has similar offerrings (although admittedly not as good of a acedemic institution), and they won't vote against them.

When fostering a rebellion, you need people who will get your back. Based on what I have read about UNM, they would be a very pliable and agreeable candidate.

No sir, I am not. Mr. Stockdill's original map was found on line and this was a handy overlay another poster made. While I freely acknowledge the overlay is not designed for the level of detail or debate we are steering into, it does give a clear view of where I am coming from and does provide a clear basis for the questions that your statements have generated for me.




Yes, maps can lie. Again these maps and the media markets were posted to illustrate the origins of where my questions about several statements you have offered as fact originate from.

I am not by any means an expert on this stuff. My actual training with media markets is pretty much limited to "intro to advertising" --- a course I took 14 years and at least 2000 beers ago. I had forgotten all about that stuff before I found the map thread a couple years ago. Since then i have read some on-line and refreshed a bit, but I am still no media expert. But I have never presented myself as one.

You have made statements that indicate you are an expert with media markets nationally, but the statements on the surface seem a little contrary to the numbers. So I questioned them.

I have no doubt that you know the markets in Iowa, but frankly if you are based in that region and/or an alum of one of those schools you should come clean. You have more or less presented yourself as a expert on media markets nationally, but frankly the take on New Mexico seems a little off for someone who does the majority of their work nationally, but wouldn't seem too off from someone who does most of their work in the Kansas/Iowa region. And that is fair. We all make mistakes (suggesting Memphis? :) ) Anyone who is reading this thread wants to hear the contributions you can make with your knowledge, but hopefully without unneccessarily stilting the information to "protect" local interests.

Aside from attending UT years ago, I have no influence on anyone and no connection to any of the schools. I just a bum with too much time at work. You don't have to protect any schools from me. Well... maybe SMU.




This is very fair. I would think that we really need an economist to look at those numbers as well (again, not me :) ) to interpret them with cost of living in each area in mind. Other things that we cannot truely be privy to in our evaluations are things like family size, what kinds of advertizers what to put ads up, what they are looking for in an audience....

For example, if Samuel Adams wants to buy ads they would probably prefer the midwestern audience. If a lower level beer (Coors for example) wanted to advertise, they might actually prefer a poorer target audience in a region that is probably on average less educated. I see a lot more Coors ads than Samual Adams ads in my sports shows, but Coors also has a much larger advertising budget. So who knows.

Anyway, my point is that there are points and counterpoints to a lot of these things we have discussed. I think that the MWC schools probably did a hugely in detail media evaluation before setting up that conference. I don't think the BIG XII REQUIRED that level of research. A blind monkey could see the Big XII would be a very solid conference.

Texas and A&M essentially bring all Texas media markets. Oklahoma and OSU bring all Oklahoma media markets. Just evaluate that total and see where they sit as a conference in terms of TV sets. This is the point I am trying to get accross. They can make any conference. In terms of revenue, the other schools --- to a point ---don't even matter. Now are the Kansas City, Denver, and St Louis markets desireable? sure. I have no doubt Texas and OU want to keep Colorado, Kansas, and Missouri in the fold.

I just don't think the idea of landing the second school to pull the same market is going to be a concept that survives the next shift among the top conferences.