If Swanigan doesn't go Purdue that is just utterly preposterous

[Foolmeoncefan]

If there was ever a school for Swanigan it is Purdue hands down for basketball. The last time Purdue got a chance at a recruit like this it was Glenn Robinson. Need I say more. The good thing about going to Purdue is that they are probably in the best exposure conference for basketball. TV exposure goes without saying. This year's team though is particularly appealing because they were in the NCAA tourney and are undoubtedly going next year. He'll have a chance to be featured on a big stage, but not as just another player on a great team, but the greatest young player on a great team. You see the problem with going to Duke/Kentucky type programs is that there are a lot of other all-american players on the roster. If you are looking at NBA you better be willing to sit the bench at a place that reloads top 25's and spits them out or share time like it's girly time. Nobody should want to lick boots like some of Kentucky's players do waisting their talent as nobody seconds to all the reload "replacement" talent that dissolves yoeeee status. Being out shined by the others. Being second nobody remembazzzz. That is what happens so much to all these guys that go Kentucky just to say it, or places of that stature. Granted these programs gravitate the best. And the best of the best gets on the NBA top tier style. There is far too often though talent that is no doubt top tier that never gets a chance to shine while they are busy being time shared like a vacation. Which is why if I were Swanigan I'd be putting Purdue down as my overwhelming number one choice. He'd have the whole state behind him at Purdue as a hero. And when teams think about playing Purdue they'd be thinking about playing him guaranteed style. Featured as a star in his own kingdom. Featured on the highlight reals like Glenn Robinson was every night. Not just one of the guys. The top guy. Which is why if I were a betting guy I'd say this guy goes Purdue. Money is about name recognition. If you are good enough to be the best guy on Kentucky's roster go there. If you are just another top 25 player then go to Purdue where you can build a legacy. Where everybody knows yoe name. Don't be no sucka mc now y'all, Don't be no sukaaa mc.

 

[nat100]

This may be one of the more ridiculous posts i have seen .

There were second teamers at UK that will be drafted this year. Cal and coach K get players drafted. They win in March and April.

 

[StateStreet123]

Wow, that was a mouthful.

 

[Travisty13]

I can tell you must be a big fan by misspelling Glenn's name repeatedly.

 

[Foolmeoncefan]

This may be one of the more ridiculous posts i have seen .

There were second teamers at UK that will be drafted this year. Cal and coach K get players drafted. They win in March and April.

Yah they get payers drafted, but look at who goes to those schools and doesn't get drafted. It's easy if you are the top guy at Duke, but what about the guy who went there that could of been legacy good at another school and got noticed instead of being second best nobody remembers no NBA. A classic Tom Brady operation. He barely got a chance at Michigan and was out shined by a freshman QB. If Brady would have went to another school he probably would have been a number 1 draft pick. Instead he ended up being a figurative waste of talent in college and a 5th round draft pick taking a suckers share (at that time before he became a superstar). The point of course that if you are the best basketball player in yoe state don't pull a Tom Brady operation and get suckered in a fad and go to Michigan for football or Kentucky for basketball. Fads are for the costume party or shopping for shirts at the mall. Go build your own way. Go to a place where you can stand out and your chances increase infinitely. A king in your own kingdom or horse with your number on it, once the race is over nobody remembers yoe name. Which would you choose? I'd take Purdue on this one all the way. Programs like Duke or Kentucky are pompous coach operations. In my opinion of course. The whole country is so tired of hearing about those arrogance operations. Its all too boring. Let's make this interesting for once and see a school take down a pompous coach operation hardball style. Just once. Is that too much to ask?

 

[Travisty13]

You clearly never watched Brady in college. He was the reason Henson sat most of his 1st 2 years. They played together in '98 and '99. Brady's 2 year combined stats: 618 attempts, 4,644 yards, 30 TDs, and 16 INTs. Henson's: 134 attempts, 779 yards, 6 TDs, 3 INTs. So your analogy of Brady was outshined by a higher rated QB has no merit. Brady was a slightly above average QB that was rail thin and very little athletic ability, which is why he was a 6th round pick. Had nothing to do with what school he went to. He probably was drafted solely on the fact he was successful at a major college football program and not some mid-major program. You have no clue what you're even rambling about nor do you have any facts to back up what you're rambling about.

 

[Cleanface]

I've loved the original, the first edit, the second edit, and the third edit of the OP.

Just beautiful internet.

What happened to the phrase "patsy lickers"??? And wtf does it mean?? You used it like three times in your original, original, original post. I think probably something along the lines of "punk-ass boot lickers" but wanted to double check.

Keep up the great work.

 

[Kesselschmiede]

I've loved the original, the first edit, the second edit, and the third edit of the OP.

Just beautiful internet.

What happened to the phrase "patsy lickers"??? And wtf does it mean?? You used it like three times in your original, original, original post. I think probably something along the lines of "punk-ass boot lickers" but wanted to double check.

Keep up the great work.

All that editing and he still can't figure out what a paragraph is.

 

[bodog57]

This is utterly preposterous.

 

[GemstateBoiler]

If there was ever a school for Swanigan it is Purdue hands down for basketball. The last time Purdue got a chance at a recruit like this it was Glenn Robinson. Need I say more. The good thing about going to Purdue is that they are probably in the best exposure conference for basketball. TV exposure goes without saying. This year's team though is particularly appealing because they were in the NCAA tourney and are undoubtedly going next year. He'll have a chance to be featured on a big stage, but not as just another player on a great team, but the greatest young player on a great team. You see the problem with going to Duke/Kentucky type programs is that there are a lot of other all-american players on the roster. If you are looking at NBA you better be willing to sit the bench at a place that reloads top 25's and spits them out or share time like it's girly time. Nobody should want to lick boots like some of Kentucky's players do waisting their talent as nobody seconds to all the reload "replacement" talent that dissolves yoeeee status. Being out shined by the others. Being second nobody remembazzzz. That is what happens so much to all these guys that go Kentucky just to say it, or places of that stature. Granted these programs gravitate the best. And the best of the best gets on the NBA top tier style. There is far too often though talent that is no doubt top tier that never gets a chance to shine while they are busy being time shared like a vacation. Which is why if I were Swanigan I'd be putting Purdue down as my overwhelming number one choice. He'd have the whole state behind him at Purdue as a hero. And when teams think about playing Purdue they'd be thinking about playing him guaranteed style. Featured as a star in his own kingdom. Featured on the highlight reals like Glenn Robinson was every night. Not just one of the guys. The top guy. Which is why if I were a betting guy I'd say this guy goes Purdue. Money is about name recognition. If you are good enough to be the best guy on Kentucky's roster go there. If you are just another top 25 player then go to Purdue where you can build a legacy. Where everybody knows yoe name. Don't be no sucka mc now y'all, Don't be no sukaaa mc.

Okay, I get your point. I bet you don't have a twitter account. There's a character limit there. Need I say more.

 

[nat100]

Anyone remember that Illuminati guy who used to post here and over on the journal courier board? Yeah, this roughly reminds me of that guy. If only this one had the stick figure illustrations.

 

[boilerzz]

OP, please tell me you're not a Purdue fan. And never, ever, ever tell me if you are a Purdue grad.

 

[SNU0821]

OP, please tell me you're not a Purdue fan. And never, ever, ever tell me if you are a Purdue grad.

When I read his first post my original thought was "he's not a PU fan." No way. I mean, we all have our crazies, but good Lord. This one went way over the top. It was entertaining though. I honestly hope he believes what he's writing.

 

[mathboy]

If there was ever a school for Swanigan it is Purdue hands down for basketball. The last time Purdue got a chance at a recruit like this it was Glenn Robinson. Need I say more. The good thing about going to Purdue is that they are probably in the best exposure conference for basketball. TV exposure goes without saying. This year's team though is particularly appealing because they were in the NCAA tourney and are undoubtedly going next year. He'll have a chance to be featured on a big stage, but not as just another player on a great team, but the greatest young player on a great team. You see the problem with going to Duke/Kentucky type programs is that there are a lot of other all-american players on the roster. If you are looking at NBA you better be willing to sit the bench at a place that reloads top 25's and spits them out or share time like it's girly time. Nobody should want to lick boots like some of Kentucky's players do waisting their talent as nobody seconds to all the reload "replacement" talent that dissolves yoeeee status. Being out shined by the others. Being second nobody remembazzzz. That is what happens so much to all these guys that go Kentucky just to say it, or places of that stature. Granted these programs gravitate the best. And the best of the best gets on the NBA top tier style. There is far too often though talent that is no doubt top tier that never gets a chance to shine while they are busy being time shared like a vacation. Which is why if I were Swanigan I'd be putting Purdue down as my overwhelming number one choice. He'd have the whole state behind him at Purdue as a hero. And when teams think about playing Purdue they'd be thinking about playing him guaranteed style. Featured as a star in his own kingdom. Featured on the highlight reals like Glenn Robinson was every night. Not just one of the guys. The top guy. Which is why if I were a betting guy I'd say this guy goes Purdue. Money is about name recognition. If you are good enough to be the best guy on Kentucky's roster go there. If you are just another top 25 player then go to Purdue where you can build a legacy. Where everybody knows yoe name. Don't be no sucka mc now y'all, Don't be no sukaaa mc.

Well, I get what you are trying to say. If a good player go to one of the basketball factory schools, his talent never gets the chance to develop, especially if he is not a top 3 type talent. When you don't get to develop and you don't get to showcase your talent because you are not playing, your talent goes to waste.

Yes, I am sure some folks can point to a non-starter that somehow got in the NBA draft, but I will venture a guess that they didn't stick, and if they did, they waited several years for a good paycheck. On the other hand, a talented kid that gets to develop as a starter, and gets to showcase his talents will be much more likely to get a good shot at the NBA.

The conclusion of this logic is don't go to UK or Duke, instead, go to Purdue because you will develop better and get the chance to showcase your talent. You will be the one talked about in scouting reports, and not the other kid who was the #1 player, under whose shadow you might have to live, should you go to UK.

Did I get the idea?

 

[sixpackpete]

Well, I get what you are trying to say. If a good player go to one of the basketball factory schools, his talent never gets the chance to develop, especially if he is not a top 3 type talent. When you don't get to develop and you don't get to showcase your talent because you are not playing, your talent goes to waste.

Yes, I am sure some folks can point to a non-starter that somehow got in the NBA draft, but I will venture a guess that they didn't stick, and if they did, they waited several years for a good paycheck. On the other hand, a talented kid that gets to develop as a starter, and gets to showcase his talents will be much more likely to get a good shot at the NBA.

The conclusion of this logic is don't go to UK or Duke, instead, go to Purdue because you will develop better and get the chance to showcase your talent. You will be the one talked about in scouting reports, and not the other kid who was the #1 player, under whose shadow you might have to live, should you go to UK.

Did I get the idea?

MB,
And I think that there is an argument that could be made that Purdue is even a better place than that.

CS would be, as stated, on everyone's radar on every Sports broadcast concerning Purdue. HOWEVER underlying that would be a cast of very good teammates who are all going to work hard, cannot be left to cover CS, AND while being stars in their own right will not overshadow the coverage he will receive. AJ, Raph, Vince, etc are already a solid group but will not get the press that CS will but they will have games that they will quietly dominate while CS will get the majority of the mention.

It is really a win/win for him to come to Purdue. Have top notch teammates to share the work load without having to share the limelight.

 

[SNU0821]

Well, I get what you are trying to say. If a good player go to one of the basketball factory schools, his talent never gets the chance to develop, especially if he is not a top 3 type talent. When you don't get to develop and you don't get to showcase your talent because you are not playing, your talent goes to waste.

Yes, I am sure some folks can point to a non-starter that somehow got in the NBA draft, but I will venture a guess that they didn't stick, and if they did, they waited several years for a good paycheck. On the other hand, a talented kid that gets to develop as a starter, and gets to showcase his talents will be much more likely to get a good shot at the NBA.

The conclusion of this logic is don't go to UK or Duke, instead, go to Purdue because you will develop better and get the chance to showcase your talent. You will be the one talked about in scouting reports, and not the other kid who was the #1 player, under whose shadow you might have to live, should you go to UK.

Did I get the idea?

Or...You do go to UK or Duke and play along side some of that talent and get to a National Championship, or a Final Four. Good example, Greyson Allen from Duke. The kid didn't play a ton last year at like 10 minutes a game. He was a Top 30 recruit. But when he got in, he maximized his time. Look at how he blew up in the tourney. They way you lined it out doesn't always hold water.

 

[BoilerDeac]

I kind of understand what the OP saying, although he presented it terribly. Why go and split time, or even miss time, when you can go to a less elite program and be 'the man?' Look at guys like Poythress, Wiltjer, even Derek Willis (to an extent)! I know it may sound a bit ridiculous, but there is a slightly valid point here...

 

[nat100]

Poythress tore his ACL and Willis gave up when Del forced him to go to UK.

There are plenty of examples of bench players going in the first round. Calipari gets people drafted. If thats what CS wants, it would not be preposterous to go to UK. Especially with everyone leaving this year.

 

[mathboy]

Poythress tore his ACL and Willis gave up when Del forced him to go to UK.

There are plenty of examples of bench players going in the first round. Calipari gets people drafted. If thats what CS wants, it would not be preposterous to go to UK. Especially with everyone leaving this year.

Calipari, himself, does not get people drafted. The high end players he recruits would probably go directly to the NBA if they could. Cal babysits them for 12 months, and gives them easy classes (if any at all) to putz through. He is a good enough saleman to attrach a number of high end players. His "sales pitch" is that he gets them to the NBA, which is like taking credit for making the sun rise.

I think UK would be a poor choice for Caleb. He needs to have more development, and he needs a good year with a S&C coach. At UK he will get pushed to the bench by more skilled kids who are in better shape. Both California and Purdue would be far better choices for him.

 

[nat100]

1) Calipari has an effective offense that showcases skilled guards (obviously doesnt help CS) and gets the players to play good defense. The notion that Cal doesnt help them is in itself preposterous
2) Who at UK will push him to the bench? This notion has been floated, i want to know who. Seems to be more board narrative than anything else.

 

[Foolmeoncefan]

You clearly never watched Brady in college. He was the reason Henson sat most of his 1st 2 years. They played together in '98 and '99. Brady's 2 year combined stats: 618 attempts, 4,644 yards, 30 TDs, and 16 INTs. Henson's: 134 attempts, 779 yards, 6 TDs, 3 INTs. So your analogy of Brady was outshined by a higher rated QB has no merit. Brady was a slightly above average QB that was rail thin and very little athletic ability, which is why he was a 6th round pick. Had nothing to do with what school he went to. He probably was drafted solely on the fact he was successful at a major college football program and not some mid-major program. You have no clue what you're even rambling about nor do you have any facts to back up what you're rambling about.

Drew Henson made Tom Brady ride pine and started over him. That was the beginning of the season Tom's senior yr. He was out shined. Then Brady bounced back. I told u all that before. Fact. If this basketball player wants to be just another horse serving a pompous coaches desires go to Cal. Go to Kentucky. Go lick their boots. If you want to be the king of your own castle and be remembered then go to Purdue.

 

[nat100]

Go lick their boots.

Yeah, that illuminati weirdo was a big fan of this phrase.

 

[Foolmeoncefan]

1) Calipari has an effective offense that showcases skilled guards (obviously doesnt help CS) and gets the players to play good defense. The notion that Cal doesnt help them is in itself preposterous
2) Who at UK will push him to the bench? This notion has been floated, i want to know who. Seems to be more board narrative than anything else.

While agree the coaches have had success along with a track record of rules violations at other schools, at least in Calipari's case, the question is do you go there to those type schools to be replaced by better talent in a yr? If ur not good enough for NBA after 1 yr then go to purdue.

 

[droski]

The good thing about going to Purdue is that they are probably in the best exposure conference for basketball. TV exposure goes without saying.

no one watches regular season college basketball regardless of conference.

 

[mathboy]

1) Calipari has an effective offense that showcases skilled guards (obviously doesnt help CS) and gets the players to play good defense. The notion that Cal doesnt help them is in itself preposterous
2) Who at UK will push him to the bench? This notion has been floated, i want to know who. Seems to be more board narrative than anything else.

I do understand your perspective, and I don't really agree with it. Cal is a good X & O coach, but I don't think he materially improves the play of his individual players. We can just agree to disagree on htis issue.

However, let's talk about #2. I think you might be over-estimating Swanigan's skill. Isn't he the #25 player in this year's class. I am not going to look up UK last 2 classes, but I will bet there are a few #1-#24 playes already on the team, and there are a few #1-#24 players for 2016 being recruited by UK. Those are the kids you might expect to push him toward the bench.

Of course, Swanigan's play and practice efforts can change that, but that's just speculation. I think a reasonable argument can be made that UK is not a good place for his talents because of the other kids around him. I will also add to that argument your perspective on UK being guard-oriented on offense.

 

[SNU0821]

I do understand your perspective, and I don't really agree with it. Cal is a good X & O coach, but I don't think he materially improves the play of his individual players. We can just agree to disagree on htis issue.

However, let's talk about #2. I think you might be over-estimating Swanigan's skill. Isn't he the #25 player in this year's class. I am not going to look up UK last 2 classes, but I will bet there are a few #1-#24 playes already on the team, and there are a few #1-#24 players for 2016 being recruited by UK. Those are the kids you might expect to push him toward the bench.

Of course, Swanigan's play and practice efforts can change that, but that's just speculation. I think a reasonable argument can be made that UK is not a good place for his talents because of the other kids around him. I will also add to that argument your perspective on UK being guard-oriented on offense.

Swanigan is #19 according to Rivals. UK has Skal who's like #10 or something who is a center. I'm not sure who they have at PF next year, but I would guarantee Swanigan would get major minutes. Look at how many bigs they had last year and all of them saw good minutes. Was it 35 a game? No. But they also had 3 or 4 bigs. If they have 2 next year, Swanigan will get lots of minutes and a chance to play with some really talented kids.

Also, Cal does a very good job of developing the players he has. I just don't think it's going to be as easy to see a dramatic difference in just one year. To insinuate that he doesn't develop them much is a little crazy, if you ask me. It's not going to look like JJ here at Purdue or Oladipo at IU because they were in college for a long time.

To say UK isn't good place for him is nonsense. He'll be showcased all year with UK who plays in a weak conference, a ton of their games are on national television and they will almost certainly make the NCAA Tournament. UK would be just as good of a place for him as any other.

 

[Schnelk]

"no one watches regular season college basketball regardless of conference."

Seriously??? You obviously are not from the Midwest.

 

[droski]

"no one watches regular season college basketball regardless of conference."

Seriously??? You obviously are not from the Midwest.

I take it you don't look at college basketball regular season ratings. Thursday night football games between ball state and Toledo get better ratings than the highest rated big 10 regular season game of the year.

 

[LafayetteBear]

OP, please tell me you're not a Purdue fan. And never, ever, ever tell me if you are a Purdue grad.

The OP may be a Purdue fan (love his enthusiasm), but it is obvious to me that he is not a Purdue grad.

I haven't the foggiest notion of where Swanigan ends up (probably Purdue or Cal but who knows?). Regardless, his recruitment has been so crazy that, IMO, it has gone past frustrating to absurdly entertaining. Personal chef, guaranteed playing time, handlers, etc. LOL, wonder what rumor will come out next.

 

[Heller]

Swanigan is #19 according to Rivals. UK has Skal who's like #10 or something who is a center. I'm not sure who they have at PF next year, but I would guarantee Swanigan would get major minutes. Look at how many bigs they had last year and all of them saw good minutes. Was it 35 a game? No. But they also had 3 or 4 bigs. If they have 2 next year, Swanigan will get lots of minutes and a chance to play with some really talented kids.

Also, Cal does a very good job of developing the players he has. I just don't think it's going to be as easy to see a dramatic difference in just one year. To insinuate that he doesn't develop them much is a little crazy, if you ask me. It's not going to look like JJ here at Purdue or Oladipo at IU because they were in college for a long time.

To say UK isn't good place for him is nonsense. He'll be showcased all year with UK who plays in a weak conference, a ton of their games are on national television and they will almost certainly make the NCAA Tournament. UK would be just as good of a place for him as any other.

I disagree. I think Trey Lyles would have been a much higher draft choice if he had gone to Indiana than he will be at KY. And that's what a lot of the KY kids are chasing, money.

 

[Travisty13]

I take it you don't look at college basketball regular season ratings. Thursday night football games between ball state and Toledo get better ratings than the highest rated big 10 regular season game of the year.

That's not even close to true. Since you're a Cal fan, I'll use your team as an example. Cal/USC on a Thurs night, on Nov. 13, got 1.27 million viewers on ESPN. That's 2 major markets (LA and San Fran/Oakland) colleges going head to head. Wisconsin vs Michigan got 2.0 million on ESPN on a Saturday, Jan 24th (was just a random picked game, not the highest of the season). If you need links for proof I'll gladly add them.

Edited part: And in case you wanted to argue the Cal/USC game was a late one and that's why it was low viewership, the game the week before which was Clemson/Wake Forest (one being a highly ranked team) only got a 1.9 million viewers.

 

[droski]

That's not even close to true. Since you're a Cal fan, I'll use your team as an example. Cal/USC on a Thurs night, on Nov. 13, got 1.27 million viewers on ESPN. That's 2 major markets (LA and San Fran/Oakland) colleges going head to head. Wisconsin vs Michigan got 2.0 million on ESPN on a Saturday, Jan 24th (was just a random picked game, not the highest of the season). If you need links for proof I'll gladly add them.

Edited part: And in case you wanted to argue the Cal/USC game was a late one and that's why it was low viewership, the game the week before which was Clemson/Wake Forest (one being a highly ranked team) only got a 1.9 million viewers.

the average purdue basketball game on national tv gets a .47 share.

http://www.nycbuckets.com/2013/06/diving-into-college-basketballs-ratings-game/

reruns of the golden girls do better than that.

btw this is not intended as a denigration of your program at all. the same is true throughout all of college basketball.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Interesting numbers, Travisty, but much as I hate to admit it, Cal has stunk in football the last several years, and was unlikely to draw a lot of eyeballs in a mismatch against the Trojans. (In fact, USC was up roughly 23-0 in the second quarter of that game, and many of the fans who had been watching probably tuned out at that point. Wonder when Nielsen complied its rating for that game.) USC was not a contender for the football NC last season, and couldn't draw significant eyeballs on its own (i.e., in a mismatch game).

Wisconsn, OTOH, was a Final Four team this last season, and the single biggest draw among BIG hoops teams. A more "apples to apples" comparison would involve a BIG basketbball game matching teams like Illinois, Minnesota, Rutgers, or your own Boilermakers against, say, tOSU (a good but not great basketball team).

 

[Travisty13]

the average purdue basketball game on national tv gets a .47 share.

http://www.nycbuckets.com/2013/06/diving-into-college-basketballs-ratings-game/

reruns of the golden girls do better than that.

btw this is not intended as a denigration of your program at all. the same is true throughout all of college basketball.

Your article is from 2013. That was 2 years ago and coming off a 15-17 season. Of course no one watched. Give me an example from this year.

 

[droski]

Your article is from 2013. That was 2 years ago and coming off a 15-17 season. Of course no one watched. Give me an example from this year.

given the fact that includes fans of people you were playing against, I hardly think it's invalid and I very much doubt last year was materially higher. it's just not a very popular sport outside of the tournament and "tv exposure" would be a ludicrous reason to pick any college over another.

 

[Travisty13]

Interesting numbers, Travisty, but much as I hate to admit it, Cal has stunk in football the last several years, and was unlikely to draw a lot of eyeballs in a mismatch against the Trojans. (In fact, USC was up roughly 23-0 in the second quarter of that game, and many of the fans who had been watching probably tuned out at that point. Wonder when Nielsen complied its rating for that game.) USC was not a contender for the football NC last season, and couldn't draw significant eyeballs on its own (i.e., in a mismatch game).

Wisconsn, OTOH, was a Final Four team this last season, and the single biggest draw among BIG hoops teams. A more "apples to apples" comparison would involve a BIG basketbball game matching teams like Illinois, Minnesota, Rutgers, or your own Boilermakers against, say, tOSU (a good but not great basketball team).

OK how about this, LSU/Texas A&M on Thanksgiving, 2 of the biggest viewership colleges still only got a 2.91 million viewers.

 

[Travisty13]

given the fact that includes fans of people you were playing against, I hardly think it's invalid and I very much doubt last year was materially higher. it's just not a very popular sport outside of the tournament and "tv exposure" would be a ludicrous reason to pick any college over another.

Especially coming from a pac-12 fan. Love to see how those schools get "TV exposure". Know how many times I saw Cal on TV last year? 0. I couldn't even tell you if you were on national television. But b1g/acc basketball gets viewers way more than pac-12. Therefore, he'd get more tv exposure.

Edit: plus read your previous statement. "I take it you don't look at college basketball regular season ratings. Thursday night football games between ball state and Toledo get better ratings than the highest rated big 10 regular season game of the year." Well I just looked at regular season ratings and showed you more people watch college basketball than some Thursday night games. You can say "Purdue gets less viewers than the Golden Girls" to paraphrase you, but that's not what you said. B1G gets plenty of viewers.

 

[droski]

Especially coming from a pac-12 fan. Love to see how those schools get "TV exposure". Know how many times I saw Cal on TV last year? 0. I couldn't even tell you if you were on national television. But b1g/acc basketball gets viewers way more than pac-12. Therefore, he'd get more tv exposure.

I hate to break it to you, but I didn't watch any purdue games last year either. Every Cal basketball game last year was on some form of national television. Yes the ACC and Big 10 get more viewers, a lot more by percentage, but you are still talking about peanuts. Does the extra say 100,000 people that would watch a purdue game compared to cal REALLY benefit him? The scouts will watch MAC basketball if there is legit nba talent there.

 

[droski]

OK how about this, LSU/Texas A&M on Thanksgiving, 2 of the biggest viewership colleges still only got a 2.91 million viewers.

here is the average rating for big 10 basketball game by channel:

even the top end network game puts it in the same category as a bowl game against eastern Kentucky and central michigan.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/

 

[Kesselschmiede]

here is the average rating for big 10 basketball game by channel:

even the top end network game puts it in the same category as a bowl game against eastern Kentucky and central michigan.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/

That is not an accurate graph as a lot of games are televised on the B1G network. Where is that bar?