TKthunder2

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/texas-a-m-shuts-down-controversial-12th-man-nil-fund-after-irs-threatens-foundations-nonprofit-status/

ISU to Colorado was what 10 hours? Back when they took buses and not planes. I get where you’re coming from (and the regionally is one of the reasons I’m glad Texas landed in the SEC while Texas is it’s own region we share some traits with the PAC/B8/SEC but nothing with the Big Ten) but when LA to NYC takes around 5 hours it’s a different landscape than when these regional conferences that primarily traveled by bud were formed.

I agree in spirit, but honestly we’re talking about a single rivalry here Michigan/MSU. The others aren’t important in the long term (Iowa can have Nebraska every year and rotate Wisc/Minn every other years and now get more home games from Michigan/Ohio St/Penn St/USC as a consolation prize). USC/UCLA, UW/UO, Neb/Iowa, Wisc/Minn, IL/NW, IND/Purdue, tOSU/Mich, PSU/MSU, Rut/MD would all be preserved. Only Michigan v Michigan State as an instate rivalry would go from annual to every other year. Is that one rivalry big enough to stop this train? We’re at least thinking about it, so maybe…

That doesn’t make the statement he thinks it does. Iowa/MichiganSt/Purdue/Rutgers all played at the same time a drew 1.47 million viewers ALTOGETHER. That’s less than 370,000 viewers per game if you average it out. Ohio State (who also was opposite a rating giant of Bama@UT) averaged out to 700k and Michigan averaged out to 500k, both more than Iowa/ISU (who were opposite Tenn@Pitt)

I agree with this. The Big 12 has visibility. Just like TCU this year their ratings went from 1 million viewers then they beat Oklahoma and jumped to 2 million then they beat Texas and jumped to 4 million in their final 2 games. I can easily see the same thing happening with nearly any Big 12 favor of the year though I do think without being able to beat UT/OU and easier access to the playoff that 4 million viewers will be rare and infrequent.

Fuck pods.

And that’s fair. But the main point now in the world of streaming is who has an invested fan base that brings the eyeballs. Stadium capacity that gets utilized (not UCLA) is going to be an indicator of who the major targets are.

Again this is just plain wrong. Clemson has a top 15 stadium by capacity, is top 15 is all time wins, and has the most ACC titles. While Dabo has been great for Clemson you can’t assign him credit for all of that. There are 24 teams with home stadiums with 70k+ seats. 21 of those are current/future members of the BigTen/SEC. The other 3? Clemson 81,500 Florida State 79,500 Notre Dame 77,600 These are the top football schools left on the board. This shouldn’t really be an argument here.

Those athletes can transfer anywhere. Texas, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio State and many other can pump out Olympic athletes just as well as Stanford and Cal.

People who say things like this are just repeating media talking points and do not have a clear understanding of UT/OU’s agreement with the Big 12. Oklahoma didn’t pay shit. The EXIT FEES was supposed to be more than $80 million (2 year’s payout) and it was settled for $50 million. Texas and Oklahoma didn’t pay anything extra to get out of the GOR and leave early. We SETTLED on paying $30 million less than the contractually upon amount. The only thing that allowed us to leave early was changing the order of the home and home between Michigan and Texas (they now host first) other than that nothing was paid by the schools. (ESPN may have given the Big12 a more favorable TV deal and had to pay FOX some money but that’s still not UT/OU).

It was rumored the SEC was looking at adding UNC/Duke before they took aggy. Seriously though, if the power conferences are eventually moving away from the NCAA in full, which also means the tournament, adding UNC/Duke and maybe even Kansas could be very beneficial for the conference, whose biggest weakness has been basketball. That also the same reason the Big 12 is focusing so heavily on basketball. They hope by having the hands down undisputedly BEST basketball league with Kansas, Gonzaga, UConn, Arizona, and maybe Duke that they would at least be able to join the B1G/SEC in the event of a full divorce from the NCAA. When you look at the big picture through that point of view, the BY’s vision for the Big12 and that he is STILL pushing for UConn and Gonzaga to join as #17-18 doesn’t look as crazy as it sounds.

I let it go the first few times you said this but UNC is NOT joining the Big 12. The SEC/B1G will have a knife fight over who gets the Tar Heels. Virginia is nearly in the same boat. The ONLY way they could get FSU is if they take them while their GOR is still tied up in the courts. Clemson is likely the best the Big 12 could get and that is still a very long shot. Miami, Georgia Tech, Duke, NC State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, and Wake Forest are all realistic Big 12 candidates (not that they’d want all of them) ND, UNC, UVA, FSU, Clemson are not.

Cutting SJSU and their barely 20k seat stadium makes sense if you’re partnering with Cal/Stanford who are already in the Bay Area. Not sure I understand the logic of cutting Hawaii’s fb only membership but I guess if it doesn’t bring in money then it makes sense. I am a little puzzled with them listing Nevada as one to cut. Who did they piss off? You keep New Mexico, Wyoming, and Utah State but dump Nevada. Must be more to that story.

No, they’ve had very little football and basketball success other than a recent E8 run that they put together after only making the tournament by winning their conference, and a handful of above average years of football in the 2000-2010s. They had a great opportunity to make something of their program that every program West of the Rockies would have killed for and they did nothing with it, Their peers institutions are in the Mountain West where their stadium would be middle of the pack behind New Mexico, Colorado St, Fresno St and Boise St. OSU/WSU have the 2nd and 3rd smallest football stadiums in the Power 5 only missing out on the #1 spot due to Wake Forest (who we all know won’t make to cut when the ACC breaks up). In this case the water is simply finding its natural level. Cal and Stanford (despite their institutional incompetence) could realistically be in the Big Ten. WSU/OSU have no chance.

The Big Ten cares about 3 things: Athletic prestige, media markets, and academics (in that order). Athletically speaking there is only ND and the ACC remaining. ND, FSU/Clemson, UNC/Miami end of list. Sure other universities have acceptable programs (Duke/Kansas basketball for example) that can help their cause but the Big Ten does not care, you’ll need to lead off your PowerPoint presentation with something other than your athletic success. Media markets: Unless they can pull UT/aggy there is no one that will give them a notable Texas presence. Top Non-Texas markets they don’t have: Atlanta, Miami, Phoenix, Boston, San Francisco which is why they’ll have interest in GT, Miami, Arizona St, Boston College (very dark horse), and Stanford/Cal. Academics: Stanford, Cal, ND, BC, UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami With this basic understanding it seems obvious that adding ND (the biggest piece of the board) and Stanford (big market, great academics, no encumbrances) is the easiest move in the board to get to 20. When they go to 24, some combo of UNC, FSU, Miami, UVA, GT. If they can only land GT/Miami, then they move into their more fringe candidates like Arizona St, Boston College, Duke, Kansas, Colorado, and Utah

If they could find a way to dump San Jose State (don’t need a 3rd Bay Area school) and replace with SMU that would optimal. But with the MWC exit fee and short timeline I don’t see how that plays.

Does anyone find it humorous that the 4 schools left in the PAC are the two smartest highest level research universities in Silicon Valley that only want to associate with non religious AAU schools…and a pair of rural non AAU ag schools? If you were to list all former PAC12 schools on a spectrum Cal/Stanford would be in one side and WSU/OSU would be on the other.

Interesting take from local news out in Cal. Gives a pretty good synopsis but obviously doesn’t elaborate too much on how Cal/Stanford own a lot of blame for the situation and generally puts it on the ‘conference’

So next year… B1G: 18 SEC: 16 B12: 16 ACC: 14+ND nonfb PAC: 4 MWC: 11+Hawaii fb AAC: 14 (Navy fb & Wichita St nonfb) SBC: 14 MAC: 12 CUSA: 10 Ind: 4 (ND, Army, UConn, UMass)

Yeah that’s about $140million the MWC schools would have to payout plus $40million the AAC schools would have to payout to join WSU/OSU/Cal/Stanford. Those fees are more than Apple will pay for this new conference makeup. A PAC/MWC merger seems like the obvious choice at this point: Hawaii, SDSU, Fresno, SJSU, Cal, Stanford, OrSU, WSU, Boise, Nevada, UNLV, Utah St, Wyo, CO St, Air Force, New Mexico They keep A5 status and can negotiate a new TV deal and likely get someone in the playoff in 24/25.

Its not bad, but would be so much better if they could send those Eastern teams to the ACC. Not going to convince me otherwise.

Other than the value of Purdue and Rutgers was taken into consideration by FOX/CBS/NBC when they made their new deal and Oregon/Washington were not??? I think Oregon/Washington can ask for the same shares they’d receive in the Big 12 now as a junior members, with the understanding that they get full shares when the next contract is negotiated. That is a win/win for both parties. UO/UW get Big 12 level money without having to join the Big 12 and gets to participate in a Power 2 conference with future full membership and full shares, and the Big Ten adds two second tier brands to their conference and gets more money in the short term as their buy-in. Literally helps everyone other than USC/UCLA who don’t have a vote.

Except you have 2 with all the big time major brands and 2 with the mid tier brands. If Notre Dame, Oregon, Washington, Florida St, Clemson, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia and a few others all join the P2 it really would make a lot of sense to combine the Big 12 and the best or the ACC (sorry Wake/BC) and maybe a select team or two from the MWC/AAC and go to market as a single fb conference with two large divisions while maintaining other sports in a more geographically friendly setup.

Maybe, but with ESPN holding their tier 2 and 3 rights it made a lot of sense in the short term. I haven’t got into all the specifics before because until this last Big Ten deal the numbers for the SEC were just bonkers comparatively speaking so it wasn’t worth a lot of scrutiny. Often the conference with the newest deal makes the most money. Still, personally not upset if the SEC makes a little less money than the conference that has to fly from LAX to EWR for conference games (and maybe soon from SEA to MIA as well).

FOX has to pay more to get them. They know the Big Ten won’t let them in without $. They also bring two new markets under the BTN in market rate and offer more late kick options which is appealing for FS1. Oregon/Washington have options and so does the Big Ten in a late night package for ESPN. If they deliver that value at half cost and keep them away from ESPN then it’s a pretty solid deal. On the SEC, ESPN gets no new markets or carriage agreements, and the SEC has no other options. ESPN is playing hardball because they can and because they think the SEC will eventually go to 9 conference games on their own because they value their #2 rivalries too much. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? If the SEC stands pat at 8 games two years in a row and big time rivalry games get skipped then you might see them actually be willing to pony up. Until then, 8 games while keeping the rivals intact is a weak bluff.