Gee: Big 12 puts expansion on hold

[michaelwalkerbr]

In 'Gee speak', even if everything attributed was a direct quote from him it would not change anything. He qualified his statements with "at this time." There are not now nor have there ever been plans by the Big 12 to expand. But there may be after next month. He did not comment on the results of the studies, nor will he. We will not really know until those meetings take place.

He did not reveal any secrets or divulge anything new. He merely shut down the question. Give him credit.

 

[Buckaineer]

The point is people are running around trying to claim expansion is dead or on hold, when the commissioner has told everyone the issue will be decided upon this summer--not yesterday in an unrelated meeting not involving the bulk of the BIG 12.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

I understand that, Buck. But that was classic E Gordon Gee. What he said was technically correct as of this moment and Mr. Madia bit on it. Nothing in the article is incorrect as of April, 2016. But as we both know, that could change next month or even this Summer. That's why ESPN and others didn't pick it up.

 

[topdecktiger]

For the last time--schools in NO other P5 conferences get tier 3 money. Not one other P5 conferences schools get that money. Its a 100% lie to claim they do. UNC having a radio deal is not the same thing as the LHN or Sooner sports tv. Its not the same thing as Texas Tech or Kansas State or some others having games on TELEVISION that they get paid for. Yes an Alabama, or UNC or a few schools here and there have nice radio, internet etc. deals--and so do BIG 12 schools have those deals IN ADDITION TO the tv deals they have. Some make more money than others. Some BIG 12 deals are written into the same contracts with some of their other revenues such as radio--but they are NOT the same thing and no one else has those deals.
BIG 12 schools are making from $15 million per year to $2 million per year on these TELEVISION deals. Many are making in the $4 million per year range.

As to the article, you are fabricating that the writer is making the statements attributed to Gee from an interview. The article isn't an interview with Gee, its from sitting at an event at which Gee spoke. Saying its from an interview and direct quotes from Gee just illustrates that you lack basic comprehension. As far as expansion--the conference has stated they will make decisions on these issues in May. Why someone from the ACC is on a BIG 12 board trying to declare BIG 12 expansion is dead just makes no sense at all--but I'm not going to be insulted by someone clearly trying to lie and misinform people about the BIG 12. The BIG 12 meetings are still on and until the conference indicates otherwise so is expansion despite your desperate desire that it not be.

The ACC payouts are lower than BIG 12 payouts. So are Pac 12 payouts. The disparity will grow each year. Since the ACC doesn't post their revenues as the other conferences do we'll have to wait for tax time to show the difference. WVU as a partial share member made more totat revenue than 7 of the 12 Pac 12 schools and at least 5 ACC schools including North Carolin, VT and Clemson in the last report on revenues from USA today.

To further illustrate the idiocy of your "tier 3 " comments which ACC schools don't have--their "tier 3 tv product is sublicensed to Raycom and Fox sports, North Carolina had $35,278,904 in Rights and Licensing for the last report from 2015 from USA today while WVU had $35,857,157 in the same rights and licensing--at a PARTIAL share from the BIG 12. If UNC got $11 million from their supposed tier 3 then they only got a little over $24 million in total ACC payouts (and that was with the Orange Bowl payout) WVU had nearly that much in partial payment from the BIG 12 while the BIG 12s top schools made from more than $25 million to $27 million without the Sugar Bowl payout which is far higher than the Orange payout--$40 million to $27.5 million.

No, you are simply wrong. Tier 3 includes RADIO and MULTIMEDIA. You are the one lying when you try to claim that radio and multimedia don't count as Tier 3. They do. Now regarding the rest of your point about Tier 3, Texas is the only school that gets close to $15 million. The other schools are nowhere near that. The other problem is, you aren't publishing the total Tier 3 contracts. What is the actual total when TV and radio are combined? Again, I will point out, West Virginia gets $9 million TOTAL. That INCLUDES TV, along with radio and multimedia. Point being, West Virginia is still getting a majority of its Tier 3 money from radio, and not television. That just underscores the point I made that the TV rights aren't worth very much.

You are also wrong about what the ACC paid out last year. This is from a story about Georgia Tech's athletic department:

GTAA's revenue base is concentrated in athletics-related activities but is somewhat diversified by source. Operating revenue sources include distributions from its athletic conference (Atlantic Coast Conference, or ACC), seat and ticket sales, advertising and sponsorships, student athletic fees, and gifts. Membership in the ACC provides for lucrative media contracts and corporate advertising and sponsorship agreements. GTAA's ACC distributions accounted for 41.2% of fiscal 2015 operating revenues and increased over 40% from 2014 to $27.3 million, mainly due to a broadcasting agreement with ESPN and the College Football Playoff structure. Premium lease fees and ticket sales made up the second and third largest sources at 14.4% and 13.3%, respectively.http://www.businesswire.com/news/ho...ffirms-Georgia-Tech-Athletic-Associations-Rev

$27 million is what the Big 12 schools got in 2015 as well.

One last point on the OP's article. You are the one that's wrong.

“I think it has helped a lot,” West Virginia University president E. Gordon Gee told WVSports.com on Saturday night, after speaking during an Intercollegiate Athletics Panel in Morgantown.

You are the one that can't read. Gee was interviewed by Madia, specifically for WVSports.com, AFTER, AFTER he gave the speech. So no, you are wrong. Madia didn't just copy down Gee's remarks from a general speech. He specifically interviewed Gee. I'll make a prediction. I'll predict you won't admit you are wrong on this point, even though I was able to clearly demonstrate with evidence from the article that your point was incorrect.

 

[topdecktiger]

I understand that, Buck. But that was classic E Gordon Gee. What he said was technically correct as of this moment and Mr. Madia bit on it. Nothing in the article is incorrect as of April, 2016. But as we both know, that could change next month or even this Summer. That's why ESPN and others didn't pick it up.

To be honest, that's not what happened. I'll ask the same question to you. What are you going to say if the May meeting comes and goes, and there isn't expansion?

 

[dave]

Its not a "perfectly honest article". At best its poor journalism. You don't inject your opinions into an article, you provide quotes and statements from the people that supposedly made them.

It doesn't matter if you want what he says to be, stop trying to rewrite the article to be some truth when its just the writers opinion and not based on what the president of WVU stated.

You keep calling everyone dumb for not comprehending something. Look in the mirror. There were hundreds of people at the event and then there is you trying to make it go away. You dont like the article. Tough fukn shit.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

To be honest, that's not what happened. I'll ask the same question to you. What are you going to say if the May meeting comes and goes, and there isn't expansion?

That is exactly what happened. Have you been reading and listening to Dr. Gee for 25 or so years as I have? If the conference votes against expansion, I'm fine with it. I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I was a writer for so long I remember what can happen. E Gordon Gee did not create a scoop, period. He played with those asking the questions and stopped the discussion. I personally believe expansion would be beneficial, but I haven't seen a damn one of those studies! Either way, WVU is doing OK.

To directly answer your question, I'll say, "Madia nailed that one!"

 

[dave]

That is exactly what happened. Have you been reading and listening to Dr. Gee for 25 or so years as I have? If the conference votes against expansion, I'm fine with it. I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I was a writer for so long I remember what can happen. E Gordon Gee did not create a scoop, period. He played with those asking the questions and stopped the discussion. I personally believe expansion would be beneficial, but I haven't seen a damn one of those studies! Either way, WVU is doing OK.

To directly answer your question, I'll say, "Madia nailed that one!"

Imo you are exactly right. That is why Gee said what he said.

 

[Buckaineer]

I understand that, Buck. But that was classic E Gordon Gee. What he said was technically correct as of this moment and Mr. Madia bit on it. Nothing in the article is incorrect as of April, 2016. But as we both know, that could change next month or even this Summer. That's why ESPN and others didn't pick it up.

There's no issue with anything Gee said whatsoever. Its actually some new information regarding expansion.
Here is what Gee said:

I think it has helped a lot,” (speaking of ability to have conference CCG)

“In the Big 12, it helps us in the fact that we don’t have to expand in order to be able to have a conference championship game. I think everyone is now working very hard to keep us together. I would have said maybe two years ago there was a real possibility of a disruption, but I feel that it’s much less now.”

“I think we’re a very stable league,” Gee said. “And I think that we’d only speak about expansion if it makes sense.” (they are speaking about expansion, in fact they are meeting about it according to the commissioner and others in May and June)

and this new, but important information regarding expansion:

“We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,”

No problem at all with any of that--they've said that not being forced into a hurried expansion was important and that the 10 team CCG allowed for that before. But Gee also stated before re: the 10 team CCG:

“With 10 teams, it would be unwieldy,” he said. “I don’t think we could. Well, we could, but I don’t think it’s wise. It would be kind of a shotgun marriage.”

- See more at: wvgazettemail.com/article/20150723/GZ02/150729694#sthash.HJ23IXHI.dpuf

and here is what the article in questions WRITER said:

Gee says the Big 12 isn't looking to expand at this time. -- photo caption

One school president and two athletic directors from three different power five programs believe conference realignment and expansion is on hold. (later quote from an ACC AD, no quote from Gee on this at all)

Because the proposal was adopted, it is now playing a key role in keeping the current state of the Big 12, ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC as is. ( not sure where this is derived from about the 10 team CCG ruling, Gee states being able to play a 10 team CCG helped alot, nowhere does he state in the article expansion is on hold because of it)

Gee also serves on the Big 12 expansion committee. At this time, the league does not have plans to move to twelve schools. (This is somewhat true, the decisions are slated for May/June meetings and this summer which hasn't changed).

The expansion committee still does research on potential future members, but none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members. (again an off the wall statement attributed to nothing--as shown above, Gee didn't say this, he reportedly said QUOTE
“We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,”
UNQUOTE. Not sure how you derive "none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members" from that?

 

[topdecktiger]

That is exactly what happened. Have you been reading and listening to Dr. Gee for 25 or so years as I have? If the conference votes against expansion, I'm fine with it. I really don't have a dog in this fight, but I was a writer for so long I remember what can happen. E Gordon Gee did not create a scoop, period. He played with those asking the questions and stopped the discussion. I personally believe expansion would be beneficial, but I haven't seen a damn one of those studies! Either way, WVU is doing OK.

To directly answer your question, I'll say, "Madia nailed that one!"

That's your interpretation, and I disagree with it. I find from some of the specifics Madia mentioned, based on the interview with Gee, that Gee gave Madia a straight answer. I really don't care what Gee did for 25 years. Nothing in that article, or anything else that has gone on with this expansion business, leads me to believe that Madia's article is inaccurate. It makes perfectly logical sense that when the numbers are crunched, adding BYU/Cincinnati/UConn/USF would not be that beneficial. I see no reason to doubt what Madia wrote.

 

[topdecktiger]

The expansion committee still does research on potential future members, but none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members. (again an off the wall statement attributed to nothing--as shown above, Gee didn't say this, he reportedly said QUOTE
“We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,”
UNQUOTE. Not sure how you derive "none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members" from that?

Because you are assuming that the only thing Gee said to Madia was what was quoted in the article.

 

[Buckaineer]

You keep calling everyone dumb for not comprehending something. Look in the mirror. There were hundreds of people at the event and then there is you trying to make it go away. You dont like the article. Tough fukn shit.

No one from the event is saying Gee said anything like what the "report" says--except the WRITER. That's the point. The writer isn't even saying Gee said it but you want to attack me for pointing out Gee hasn't said what the writer is purporting? Who was at the meeting and what VERBATIM did Gee say about these things because what the writer quoted is NOT Gee stating expansion is on hold. Since the meetings aren't happening until May with the membership there's no reason Gee would say that--no decisions have been made at this point. Period.

 

[dave]

There's no issue with anything Gee said whatsoever. Its actually some new information regarding expansion.
Here is what Gee said:

I think it has helped a lot,” (speaking of ability to have conference CCG)

“In the Big 12, it helps us in the fact that we don’t have to expand in order to be able to have a conference championship game. I think everyone is now working very hard to keep us together. I would have said maybe two years ago there was a real possibility of a disruption, but I feel that it’s much less now.”

“I think we’re a very stable league,” Gee said. “And I think that we’d only speak about expansion if it makes sense.” (they are speaking about expansion, in fact they are meeting about it according to the commissioner and others in May and June)

and this new, but important information regarding expansion:

“We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,”

No problem at all with any of that--they've said that not being forced into a hurried expansion was important and that the 10 team CCG allowed for that before. But Gee also stated before re: the 10 team CCG:

“With 10 teams, it would be unwieldy,” he said. “I don’t think we could. Well, we could, but I don’t think it’s wise. It would be kind of a shotgun marriage.”

- See more at: wvgazettemail.com/article/20150723/GZ02/150729694#sthash.HJ23IXHI.dpuf

and here is what the article in questions WRITER said:

Gee says the Big 12 isn't looking to expand at this time. -- photo caption

One school president and two athletic directors from three different power five programs believe conference realignment and expansion is on hold. (later quote from an ACC AD, no quote from Gee on this at all)

Because the proposal was adopted, it is now playing a key role in keeping the current state of the Big 12, ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC as is. ( not sure where this is derived from about the 10 team CCG ruling, Gee states being able to play a 10 team CCG helped alot, nowhere does he state in the article expansion is on hold because of it)

Gee also serves on the Big 12 expansion committee. At this time, the league does not have plans to move to twelve schools. (This is somewhat true, the decisions are slated for May/June meetings and this summer which hasn't changed).

The expansion committee still does research on potential future members, but none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members. (again an off the wall statement attributed to nothing--as shown above, Gee didn't say this, he reportedly said QUOTE
“We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,”
UNQUOTE. Not sure how you derive "none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members" from that?

Madia didnt make anything up. Why would he? His agenda was to report what Gee said.

 

[Buckaineer]

Because you are assuming that the only thing Gee said to Madia was what was quoted in the article.

I'm not "assuming" anything--you are if you are stating Gee said something else to the writer. The writer doesn't state Gee said anything like what he injected into the article, but you "know" he did? No you want him to have said that. You ASSUME he said that. But even the writer isn't claiming he did.

 

[topdecktiger]

no decisions have been made at this point. Period.

Wow. You just criticized the author for stating his "opinion" as fact.......then you turn around and state your opinion as fact. You don't know what decisions have or have not been made. You haven't talked to Bowlsby. You haven't talked to Boren. You haven't talked to Mike Perrin. So what you said is not a fact. Period.

 

[Buckaineer]

Madia didnt make anything up. Why would he? His agenda was to report what Gee said.

Madia apparently added statements to what Gee said. If not, he would have written "Gee also stated" or something to that effect. But WVUs president didn't say what the writer is claiming--the writer is claiming those things-why? You'll have to ask him.

 

[topdecktiger]

I'm not "assuming" anything--you are if you are stating Gee said something else to the writer. The writer doesn't state Gee said anything like what he injected into the article, but you "know" he did? No you want him to have said that. You ASSUME he said that. But even the writer isn't claiming he did.

You don't know what else Gee said to Madia either. You are just assuming that was all he said.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

There's no issue with anything Gee said whatsoever. Its actually some new information regarding expansion.
Here is what Gee said:

I think it has helped a lot,” (speaking of ability to have conference CCG)

“In the Big 12, it helps us in the fact that we don’t have to expand in order to be able to have a conference championship game. I think everyone is now working very hard to keep us together. I would have said maybe two years ago there was a real possibility of a disruption, but I feel that it’s much less now.”

“I think we’re a very stable league,” Gee said. “And I think that we’d only speak about expansion if it makes sense.” (they are speaking about expansion, in fact they are meeting about it according to the commissioner and others in May and June)

and this new, but important information regarding expansion:

“We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,”

No problem at all with any of that--they've said that not being forced into a hurried expansion was important and that the 10 team CCG allowed for that before. But Gee also stated before re: the 10 team CCG:

“With 10 teams, it would be unwieldy,” he said. “I don’t think we could. Well, we could, but I don’t think it’s wise. It would be kind of a shotgun marriage.”

- See more at: wvgazettemail.com/article/20150723/GZ02/150729694#sthash.HJ23IXHI.dpuf

and here is what the article in questions WRITER said:

Gee says the Big 12 isn't looking to expand at this time. -- photo caption

One school president and two athletic directors from three different power five programs believe conference realignment and expansion is on hold. (later quote from an ACC AD, no quote from Gee on this at all)

Because the proposal was adopted, it is now playing a key role in keeping the current state of the Big 12, ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC as is. ( not sure where this is derived from about the 10 team CCG ruling, Gee states being able to play a 10 team CCG helped alot, nowhere does he state in the article expansion is on hold because of it)

Gee also serves on the Big 12 expansion committee. At this time, the league does not have plans to move to twelve schools. (This is somewhat true, the decisions are slated for May/June meetings and this summer which hasn't changed).

The expansion committee still does research on potential future members, but none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members. (again an off the wall statement attributed to nothing--as shown above, Gee didn't say this, he reportedly said QUOTE
“We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,”
UNQUOTE. Not sure how you derive "none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members" from that?

Buck, Madia extrapolated on what he honestly interpreted. It happens. Gee chose his words very carefully not to violate the agreement to have one voice. Believe me, there are things going on he is dying to talk about, but he will honor his agreement just like the fellow from Oklahoma.

FOIA requests to potential additions is the gold mine everyone is looking for. I got the Big 12 GOR using that route.

 

[Buckaineer]

Wow. You just criticized the author for stating his "opinion" as fact.......then you turn around and state your opinion as fact. You don't know what decisions have or have not been made. You haven't talked to Bowlsby. You haven't talked to Boren. You haven't talked to Mike Perrin. So what you said is not a fact. Period.

Bowlsby has talked to EVERYONE via the major sports media and told everyone the conference will be meeting about these issues in May/June. Are you really that dense or are you just attempting to twist the truth again to fit your agenda?

 

[topdecktiger]

Madia apparently added statements to what Gee said. If not, he would have written "Gee also stated" or something to that effect. But WVUs president didn't say what the writer is claiming--the writer is claiming those things-why? You'll have to ask him.

No, again that's your assumption. Just because he didn't write "Gee stated" is not proof that the Madia made up the statements on his own.

 

[Buckaineer]

Buck, Madia extrapolated on what he honestly interpreted. It happens. Gee chose his words very carefully not to violate the agreement to have one voice. Believe me, there are things going on he is dying to talk about, but he will honor his agreement just like the fellow from Oklahoma.

FOIA requests to potential additions is the gold mine everyone is looking for. I got the Big 12 GOR using that route.

Madia wrote what he wanted to be, that is irresponsible journalism at best. His statements aren't the statement of WVUs president and the meetings the BIG 12 will have aren't on hold and neither is expansion.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

You don't know what else Gee said to Madia either. You are just assuming that was all he said.

Tiger, I don't have to assume. I've been in Madia's shoes. Gee was not talking to Madia, nor does Madia claim he did. There was nothing 'off the record'. The smoke will clear after next month's meetings, what is the big deal?

 

[topdecktiger]

Bowlsby has talked to EVERYONE via the major sports media and told everyone the conference will be meeting about these issues in May/June. Are you really that dense or are you just attempting to twist the truth again to fit your agenda?

Bowlsby has not told the media EVERYTHING he knows. For example, has he told anyone what he has discussed with Del Conte, who said he prefers 10 teams? No Bowlsby hasn't. Also, you keep harping on the spring meeting in May. The Big 12 always has a spring meeting. They would still have it, even if there wasn't anything about expansion. The fact that the spring meeting is going on doesn't prove anything one way or another. It's not like if the conference wasn't going to expand, they would cancel the meeting. They will still hae it either way.

I'm still waiting for you to admit you were wrong about Madia not interviewing Gee.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

Madia wrote what he wanted to be, that is irresponsible journalism at best. His statements aren't the statement of WVUs president and the meetings the BIG 12 will have aren't on hold and neither is expansion.

They are indeed on hold, until the May meetings. You know that. Madia fell into a journalist's trap, cut him some slack.

 

[Buckaineer]

No, again that's your assumption. Just because he didn't write "Gee stated" is not proof that the Madia made up the statements on his own.

No its a fact. Read the article. Exactly as I stated. You are putting assumptions on why he wrote what he wrote. I simply state the truth--he didn't attribute ANY of those statements to GEE via a quote from Gee or a comment such as "Gee went on to state" or "President Gee let it be known that".

Gee made his comments and the writer wrote what he wanted, put the two together and here we are.

Again, no official from the BIG 12 or national sports writers are corroborating any such thing as BIG 12 expansion being on hold or data confirming that expansion isn't worth it as the writer puts out there--and WVUs president certainly didn't state that.

 

[topdecktiger]

Tiger, I don't have to assume. I've been in Madia's shoes. Gee was not talking to Madia, nor does Madia claim he did. There was nothing 'off the record'. The smoke will clear after next month's meetins, what is the big deal?

No, you don't know that. Sorry, you don't. I didn't claim Gee told Madia anything "off the record." I'm telling you just because Madia didn't type something as a direct quote, that doesn't mean he didn't hear it from Gee. For example, Madia wrote that the studies have shown that expansion won't benefit the Big 12 financially. Just because Madia didn't print Gee's actual quote doesn't mean Gee didn't still say that. What I'm saying is, you are assuming that Madia printed every quote he got from Gee. What I'm telling you is, it's just as likely that Madia has additional on-the-record quotes from Gee, but simply didn't print every single one of them. That's not at all unusual .

 

[Buckaineer]

They are indeed on hold, until the May meetings. You know that. Madia fell into a journalist's trap, cut him some slack.

The problem with the writing is his injecting of untrue statements such that the data shows expansion is not worth it. That's just not true--in fact its not clear that the membership that will decide the issue has been given the full data from the analysts at this point. Commissioner Bowlsby stated that in the May meeting there will be a "data dump" where this information will be delivered and gone over. How then could it already have shown that its "not worth it"? But that is what the writer claims and such writing is irresponsible.

Beyond that is the writer creating the impression the conference has already decided to delay expansion. Its not delayed or on hold---the data hasn't even all been collected or analyzed at this point, let alone decisions made based on that. Its "in progress", not on hold at all.

 

[topdecktiger]

No its a fact. Read the article. Exactly as I stated. You are putting assumptions on why he wrote what he wrote. I simply state the truth--he didn't attribute ANY of those statements to GEE via a quote from Gee or a comment such as "Gee went on to state" or "President Gee let it be known that".

Gee made his comments and the writer wrote what he wanted, put the two together and here we are.

Again, no official from the BIG 12 or national sports writers are corroborating any such thing as BIG 12 expansion being on hold or data confirming that expansion isn't worth it as the writer puts out there--and WVUs president certainly didn't state that.

No, sorry. You don't know how many comments Gee made to the author. You are just assuming that the only comments Gee made to the reporter were the ones Madia printed.

And I'm STILL waiting for you to admit that you were wrong in saying Madia didn't interview Gee. You keep ignoring that.

 

[topdecktiger]

The problem with the writing is his injecting of untrue statements such that the data shows expansion is not worth it. That's just not true--in fact its not clear that the membership that will decide the issue has been given the full data from the analysts at this point. Commissioner Bowlsby stated that in the May meeting there will be a "data dump" where this information will be delivered and gone over. How then could it already have shown that its "not worth it"? But that is what the writer claims and such writing is irresponsible.

Beyond that is the writer creating the impression the conference has already decided to delay expansion. Its not delayed or on hold---the data hasn't even all been collected or analyzed at this point, let alone decisions made based on that. Its "in progress", not on hold at all.

Sorry, you do not know for a fact the state of the studies. You have not seen them, so you do not know whether they have been completed or not.

 

[Buckaineer]

No, you don't know that. Sorry, you don't. I didn't claim Gee told Madia anything "off the record." I'm telling you just because Madia didn't type something as a direct quote, that doesn't mean he didn't hear it from Gee. For example, Madia wrote that the studies have shown that expansion won't benefit the Big 12 financially. Just because Madia didn't print Gee's actual quote doesn't mean Gee didn't still say that. What I'm saying is, you are assuming that Madia printed every quote he got from Gee. What I'm telling you is, it's just as likely that Madia has additional on-the-record quotes from Gee, but simply didn't print every single one of them. That's not at all unusual .

You are making something up to excuse bad journalism and misleading statements that is what you are doing.
What you assume is NOT in the article.
Madia isn't even stating in the article that every quote he got from Gee is in the article and no one said they were--but he put some quotes in there and none of the actual quotes even imply the conclusions he drew from them. And he didn't put even one quote from Gee purporting what is claimed.

bottom line--the BIG 12 meetings are still happening and according to the conference commissioner at that time the membership will get the data that is still being collected and begin to make decisions on it. It hasn't been done yet and we'll know when it has because the national sports media is going to report it.

 

[Buckaineer]

Sorry, you do not know for a fact the state of the studies. You have not seen them, so you do not know whether they have been completed or not.

Commisioner Bowlsby stated PUBLICLY. AGAIN. PUBLICLY that the work is being done by the hired experts and that a "data dump" will be done at the May/June meetings.

I know you like to play make believe, but those are what you call FACTS. Stop trying to talk about the BIG 12 because its clear with every statement you are full of it and have no idea about anything regarding this conference-nor should you as an ACC fan.

 

[topdecktiger]

You are making something up to excuse bad journalism and misleading statements that is what you are doing.
What you assume is NOT in the article.
Madia isn't even stating in the article that every quote he got from Gee is in the article and no one said they were--but he put some quotes in there and none of the actual quotes even imply the conclusions he drew from them. And he didn't put even one quote from Gee purporting what is claimed.

bottom line--the BIG 12 meetings are still happening and according to the conference commissioner at that time the membership will get the data that is still being collected and begin to make decisions on it. It hasn't been done yet and we'll know when it has because the national sports media is going to report it.

No, it wasn't bad journalism. The guy interviewed Gee, and wrote an article based on what he was told. You are just mad because it looks bad for expansion.

The spring meeting was going to happen either way, regardless of expansion. The real bottom line was believing this pipe dream that BYU/Cincinnati/UConn/UCF were some kind of pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

 

[michaelwalkerbr]

No, you don't know that. Sorry, you don't. I didn't claim Gee told Madia anything "off the record." I'm telling you just because Madia didn't type something as a direct quote, that doesn't mean he didn't hear it from Gee. For example, Madia wrote that the studies have shown that expansion won't benefit the Big 12 financially. Just because Madia didn't print Gee's actual quote doesn't mean Gee didn't still say that. What I'm saying is, you are assuming that Madia printed every quote he got from Gee. What I'm telling you is, it's just as likely that Madia has additional on-the-record quotes from Gee, but simply didn't print every single one of them. That's not at all unusual .

No disrespect, Tiger; that's not only unusual, it's unheard of. You get as many quotes as you can and use them all. As a writer, your primary objective is being accurate and the number of reads you get. You would almost kill for a printable quote no one else has. When Gee actually said, “We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,” Madia or somebody did or should have immediately asked, "President Gee, what did those analytics reveal?" I'll bet he would not have answered that question.

 

[topdecktiger]

Commisioner Bowlsby stated PUBLICLY. AGAIN. PUBLICLY that the work is being done by the hired experts and that a "data dump" will be done at the May/June meetings.

I know you like to play make believe, but those are what you call FACTS. Stop trying to talk about the BIG 12 because its clear with every statement you are full of it and have no idea about anything regarding this conference-nor should you as an ACC fan.

You are again assuming that the studies will be kept under lock and key, and won't be revealed until the meeting. It's already come out that the studies have indicated that a CCG would be beneficial to the Big 12 for making the playoffs. By your logic, that shouldn't have come out until this "data dump" in May.

I'm not the one who's living in the land of make believe. You are going to be sorely disappointed in May.

 

[dave]

Madia apparently added statements to what Gee said. If not, he would have written "Gee also stated" or something to that effect. But WVUs president didn't say what the writer is claiming--the writer is claiming those things-why? You'll have to ask him.

How do you know what Gee said? I didnt realize quotation marks were the only literary method to relay information. Were you there Saturday? I know a handful of people who were there. They said Madia's story was money. Maybe they are in on the great conspiracy too.

 

[topdecktiger]

No disrespect, Tiger; that's not only unusual, it's unheard of. You get as many quotes as you can and use them all. As a writer, your primary objective is being accurate and the number of reads you get. You would almost kill for a printable quote no one else has. When Gee actually said, “We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,” Madia or somebody did or should have immediately asked, "President Gee, what did those analytics reveal?" I'll bet he would not have answered that question.

No, it's not. I read articles like that all the time. All you have to do is open the newspaper and you can randomly find articles written in a similar fashion.

 

[Buckaineer]

No disrespect, Tiger; that's not only unusual, it's unheard of. You get as many quotes as you can and use them all. As a writer, your primary objective is being accurate and the number of reads you get. You would almost kill for a printable quote no one else has. When Gee actually said, “We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,” Madia or somebody did or should have immediately asked, "President Gee, what did those analytics reveal?" I'll bet he would not have answered that question.

Exactly and that's the point. Madia makes it seem as though Gee DID answer the question when he states emphatically:
"The expansion committee still does research on potential future members, but none of the data is substantial enough for the league to pull the trigger on adding any new members."

The conference-again according to the commissioner of the BIG 12-has NOT gone over this data and will not until the end of May/beginning of June.

 

[Buckaineer]

How do you know what Gee said? I didnt realize quotation marks were the only literary method to relay information. Were you there Saturday? I know a handful of people who were there. They said Madia's story was money. Maybe they are in on the great conspiracy too.

Go back to school and they will teach you how to write an article and credit the person you claim made certain remarks. Not my desire or intention to teach you this but its commonly understood.

 

[Buckaineer]

No, it's not. I read articles like that all the time. All you have to do is open the newspaper and you can randomly find articles written in a similar fashion.

You mean you read blogs and message board posts like that all the time

 

[dave]

No disrespect, Tiger; that's not only unusual, it's unheard of. You get as many quotes as you can and use them all. As a writer, your primary objective is being accurate and the number of reads you get. You would almost kill for a printable quote no one else has. When Gee actually said, “We’ve done all the analytics of what adding several teams would mean and what it would look like going into subdivisions,” Madia or somebody did or should have immediately asked, "President Gee, what did those analytics reveal?" I'll bet he would not have answered that question.

This wasnt a q and a. Gee said what he said and that was the end.