USC Traveler

Agree with you on all of this. There are rumblings on the 247 AZ board that if 3 of the 4C go B12, UW is a much stronger possibility to go B12 than UO is. Probably wishful thinking by UA fans. Uncle Phil will probably bankroll UO to offset the money difference for a while, as they want the easiest possible playoff path. If they stay put, I can't see UW leaving the other 3 PNW schools and the Bay Area schools. They'll add SDSU and stay at 8, or maybe also add SMU and Tulane.

Yeah- Gene Smith has mentioned a few times how important the BIG alums in LA were as a secondary motivation to expand there. There are four DMAs where more than 1% of the grads from every BIG school reside: NY, LA, DC and...... the Bay Area. Wall St, Hollywood, DC and Silicon Valley. That's one of the reasons I think Stanford will be the choice to come in with ND eventually. // The best of the rest: Chicago- has the highest total number of BIG grads, but less than 1% from MD and RU, so only 12 out of 14 schools. Boston and Denver- 10 out of 14 ATL-9 DFW and Seattle- 8 PHX- 6 No one else above 3 except Houston, which has 4 of 14 schools represented. PDX- not listed Agree that outside of ND, BIG will pursue ACC schools before doing anything else. If ASU had strong academics, they'd be a slamdunk eventually, given the location.

I remember reading that USC and UCLA pushed up the BIG's timetable because they needed to give two years' notice that they were leaving the PAC to avoid any exit penalties. And there are no GOR issues because they're leaving after the GOR expires. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 5-9 weeks. My gut is that CU, UA and ASU go B12, and then the fireworks begin. 50/50 on whether the PNW would follow, or if they'd rather backfill with G5s and have an easier path to the playoffs.

Thanks for the detailed response. Greatly appreciated. I always thought Delaney was brilliant to add RU and MD for the "We've got everything from NY to DC" pitch, but was only thinking of each team/ DMA individually. I hadn't thought about the indirect effect on a place like Philly of adding MD and Rutgers, or the PSU fans in DC, but it makes perfect sense. They all work together to make the BIG's claims in each area stronger. And as you, Steve and Hurt all point out, that's the opposite situation for the BIG in DFW. Too far down the pecking order. Agree with your list of potential future BIG markets.

Great stuff brother. Thanks for all the details. NY state vs TX breakdown, BIG demographics in NY, etc all makes a ton of sense. I had always thought there were clauses in these contracts that guaranteed in-market rates in the local DMA, and getting the rest of a state was a series of negotiations. As you said "The more people want it, the more you can charge." But when I saw the BIG was in-market throughout NY state, I started wondering if those contracts were by state instead of DMA. Your "croutons on a salads" analogy for NY is perfect.

You make great points about the CFB demographics in NYC- absolutely dominated by the BIG, which is exactly the opposite of the situation in DFW, where the BIG is probably a distant 3rd behind the B12 and SEC.

Thanks for your thoughts my friend. My mom had a great run. She was physically and mentally doing very well into her late '80s. Things started slipping the last few years, but it was only at the very end (when she was 91) that things really deteriorated sharply. She was truly blessed, and it was an incredible blessing for us that we were able to be there for her those last few years. Got to be there for the people that were there for you. I think we see the UNC/UVA situation the same way. My take: they'll hang on in the ACC as long as possible, as they enjoy running things, and neither is seriously pursuing a National Title in football. As long as they can tell themselves that the ACC is a peer conference to the BIG and SEC (despite the financials) they will stay. Once the GOR gets closer to the end and it becomes clear that FSU and Clemson are going to leave, UNC/UVA will leave also, as they're not going to want to be the kings of a second-rate conference. I've always thought they'll go BIG (no matter what their fans want) because of the mindset you described above. That's UVA 100%.

Joe- what did you think about Swarbrick and Jenkins NYT op-ed ? On the ND 247 board, a lot of posters seemed to think it was another step in Swarbrick laying the groundwork to wave the white flag and tell donors in a couple of years that ND won't be able to generate the money necessary to compete if they stay independent, and that ND therefore needs to join the BIG. I know you personally hate the idea of joining the BIG, but what do you think Swarbrick's endgame is for op-ed and public comments over the last 12-18 months ?

I'm definitely not under any illusion about TCU delivering DFW. They clearly don't. What would matter in this scenario is your second point. With the decline in cable tv sets, how much does adding big DMAs (or states) matter for BTN ? The US had just over 100m cable households 10 years ago, and about 1/3 of those have cut the cord since then. That still leaves about 67m cable HHs. That number will keep declining, but where does it bottom out ? 50m ? 40m ? I know getting BTN in SoCal at in-network rates created a lot of value for the BIG in adding the LA schools, even with cable's decline, so it will be interesting to see what HL thinks about where all of this is going. Cable is never going to be what it once was, it's not going to disappear entirely. Where is bottoms out, and how that affects BTN and SECN moving forward is the big question.

We all would have said the same thing about Rutgers before they were added. It wouldn't be about TCU's fan support. I know they're a drop in the bucket vs UT/OU/aggy/Tech in that regard. Think Rutgers and MD. Neither has any real fan support, but getting BTN in-market rates in those DMAs has been a gold mine. BIG fans don't like the additions, but the BIG admins love cashing those checks. Getting in-market rates in DFW alone would be a big increase in $$$, but if BTN got in-market rates throughout all of TX, the money would be truly massive. It's all in the contracts, and if adding RU got BTN in-market in all of NY state, I would think BIG/FOX could do the same in TX. I'll defer to @Hurtlocker on his take here. I know the MSOs would push back, but it seems like FOX would have the leverage to make it happen, as they did in NY. // Also- the only scenario where this would make sense is if the BIG is at an odd number after adding ND, Stanford and ACC teams. Someone else would need to be added as a warm body for scheduling purposes, just like Mizzou was added to the SEC. The candidates for that final slot will all have warts. But realignment has always been driven by money, and if BTN got in-market rates throughout TX by adding a school in the state, that's going to bring more $$$ than anyone else that would be vying for that slot. And with TCU, as opposed to Rutgers and MD, if they continue building their program, they would slot into the middle tier of the BIG competitively, instead of the bottom.

Good stuff bullet. Thanks for posting. What TCU has accomplished over the last 15 years is really impressive. If the BIG had ND and Stanford in the fold, and was able to add UNC, UVA, Duke, GT and Miami, they'd be at 23. (FSU, Clemson, VT, NC St to the SEC). For the 24th BIG team, I think TCU would have a real shot vs UW, UO, CU, etc. The massive BTN $$$, recruiting access and alum engagement in the metroplex, plus ease of travel for BIG schools would be a tough combination for the schools further West to beat. And if BTN got in-market rates in all of TX by adding TCU, that feels like a slam dunk. @Hurtlocker , given what we know of BTN in NY state via Rutgers, do you think adding TCU would get BTN in-state throughout TX ? // Adding the above schools would give the BIG the top 6 media markets, and 8 of the top 10, with Houston (#7) and Boston (#9) being the exceptions. UW fits the BIG institutional profile perfectly, but their location and lack of recruiting works against them, and the positives of getting into DFW for BTN, recruiting, etc, seem hard to pass up., esp if TCU continues to have success on the field. Their trendline has been headed up more sharply than anyone else's over the last 15 years.

Klownkoff and the Pac Presidents might be the only group of decision-makers on this planet that would be stupid enough to put their games on Apple with a $99 sub fee (if it's anything like the MLS deal). They have always been delusional about the value of the conference, the importance of football, and the size/engagement level of their fans. I will LOL for a long time if they do a deal on Apple, even if ESPN takes a game for the AfterDark slot. "Woo hoo! We're on linear when most of the country isn't watching!!!" 🤣

You're right about the fragmentation. It's always been very fragmented in NOVA, even when I was growing up in the 70's and '80's. VT had a strong following in Tidewater for decades, as a lot of the students and most of VT's top players came from Newport News, Hampton, Norfolk and VB. If VT had kept it rolling in the late Beamer years and after he retired, they could have had a kept a good grip on fans outside of NOVA. I've got a lot of family in Tidewater, and they are all still big on VT (some of them are grads), and when we were taking care of my mom for a few years in Williamsburg, VT was the school that I saw by far the most people repping (outside of William and Mary, obviously). But after my mom passed, we haven't been back, and during those 5 years, things have been pretty bleak for the Hokies, so I'd imagine they have faded some, even in Tidewater. // My assumption has always been that BIG adding MD got them in-state rates in MD and DC, but not in NOVA, since MD is the flagship of the state of MD- not VA. After reading that adding Rutgers got the BIG all of NY state, though, maybe BTN is getting in-state rates in NOVA. Do you know for sure ? If BTN is already in NOVA at in-market rates, then the value for the BIG of getting BTN $ throughout the rest of the state isn't as large as it would be if they were adding the entire state, but it's probably still more than worth it for the increased $$$, recruiting exposure, and alum engagement. Most importantly, when Clemson and FSU eventually leave, I have no doubt that UVA, UNC and Duke will all end up in the same place, so the BIG or SEC will need to add all three if they want to pull the ACC apart. If the BIG was able to get those 3, adding GT and Miami would make a lot of sense. And of course FSU would be the biggest prize if UF and SEC coaches are able to keep them out. So to me, adding UVA means you're also adding UNC, which more than makes it worth it, even with Duke leveraged in as a tag-along. It's going to be fascinating to watch it all play out.

Great stuff sir. Well done. Those kind of facts are just brutal for the PAC.

No doubt that the pro-PAC media types have lost whatever credibility they once had. (Canzano never had any to begin with, so it’s just par for the course.). I wasn’t implying anything positive about the PAC-pumpers. When I talk about the B12’s propaganda campaign, I’m not using it in a negative way. I think it’s been very smart and highly effective to constantly remind the Four Corners that UW and UO would go to the BIG at the drop of a hat and that the other 4C admins are talking to the B12. That keeps everyone on edge, and will help motivate UA and CU to make the move so that they don’t get left out in the cold at some point.

Yes, once Fox had USC and UCLA in the BIG, they clearly had no desire for PAC content. No doubt about that. I agree that it's the networks that are ultimately driving this, but Yormark is doing his part. He's skillfully ridden the wave and is working hand in glove with them (especially ESPN). Once ESPN got the SEC 3:30ET game for 2024, with the LA schools joining the BIG that year, it was clear that ESPN would be motivated to overpay the B12 by some amount on the new deal that would make the B12 agree to let UT and OU leave with a reasonable settlement. It's just good business, and Yormark is smart enough to see the bigger picture. But if you flip things around and Klownkoff was running the B12, I have my doubts about things working out so smoothly He's shown himself to be nothing but an empty suit at every step of the way- a deadly mix of stupidity and arrogance- just like his predecessor. His dealings with ESPN for the PAC rights show a guy who simply doesn't have a clue, which fits right in with everything else he's done since day one. So I do think conference leadership matters. My bet is that Yormark is the media's source for the propaganda, but that he's the frontman working in lockstep with ESPN and Fox. This is straight out of ESPN's playbook after the Big East opted to take their rights to market instead of re-upping with ESPN. ESPN lowballed them and eventually caused an exodus of football schools. ESPN always wants plausible deniability whenever realignment is discussed, so I agree with you that they're doing it through a third party, and Yormark/B12 is the third party that makes the most sense. They're the most motivated to make this happen, and it's easy for Yormmark/B12 ADs to talk to guys like Dodds and McMurphy as part of the normal course of business. How many clicks has Dodds been generating for the last year with his stories ? This has been a gold mine for his business, and having Yormmark/B12 ADs as his sources give him credible cover.

You nailed it- this doesn't get talked about enough. The lower and mid-tier BIG schools don't want to lose relevance and are afraid their games will end up on streaming if too many teams are added. Along with money, lack of recruiting and distance, this was a major reason that the PNW weren't invited to join, and why I don't think they ever will be. The non-FL ACC schools aren't as threatening in FB, and bring more to the table in terms of money and recruiting, so I think they'll have support. FSU and possibly Miami would knock the non-top tier BIG teams down a notch, but the benefits of having more strong FB brands and being in FL would be worth it for the entire conference. I don't see that

Then he’s definitely on Yormark’s payroll, as he and, to a slightly lesser extent, McMurphy have been the two guys who have been banging the drum the most on the death of the P12, B12 talking to Four Corners, and the PNW schools going to the BIG. All of those things are well-suited to keeping the PAC unstable and making the Four Corners schools nervous about other schools leaving. B12 has done a great job winning the propaganda war and helping give cover for the 4C schools to leave whenever Klownkoff presents their “final” tv deal, which will most likely be woefully inadequate.

Yeah- how things play out with the ACC schools is going to be the most fascinating part of the final stage. I have no doubt ND ends up in the BIG, but as you mentioned in your post, the admin mindset at UVA and UNC is very different than the fanbase mindset. I don't know what the donor class at those schools wants, so I feel like it could go either way. Culturally, and in terms of spending priorities, VT and NC St feel much more like SEC schools, while UVA and UNC feel much more like BIG schools. I actually think it would be better for CFB as a whole if UVA/UNC went BIG and VT/NC St went SEC . That would make those rivalries that much spicier.

Where are you in Tidewater ? I spent about half my time growing up in VA Beach, with the other half up in NOVA. I agree about the UVA and UNC programs, but I think the money to be made by BTN in those states, recruiting (both athletes and regular students) and alum engagement will make them attractive for the BIG. Similar calculation for adding GT I would think, and if the BIG could get FSU and Miami, that would be a no brainer. It would bring two very solid football brands to help offset dilution of the product, and getting into FL would obviously be huge for all the above reasons. Most importantly, if ND is still holding out, the ACC being carved up by the BIG and SEC sends ND to the BIG.

Agree 100%. Landing ND will be expansion priority 1-100 until it happens. No other non-P2 school delivers anywhere near the value ND does. The only way I see anyone being added before ND would be if ND hangs on in the ACC till the bitter end, and the BIG (along with the SEC) adds some ACC schools to make the conference collapse, leaving ND no realistic alternative to the BIG. Other than that scenario, there's no reason for the BIG to add anyone else before ND.

You're hitting on something that most people don't think about- there is an opportunity cost for the BIG (and the networks) to expand further. A big part of why the BIG is moving to a 3-6-6 is so the networks get annual rotating games between the big brands. With 16 teams, it's the perfect format. At 18 teams, you can still have that rotation with a 3-7-7 schedule, and teams can still have 7 home games (including 2 OOC games). If it's ND and Stanford to 18, BIG (and tv partners) would be guaranteed OSU-UM, USC-ND, plus USC-OSU/UM and ND-OSU/UM every year. That's four blockbuster games, plus games with PSU, MSU, Wisc, etc. That is the perfect scenario for the BIG/tv partners. There's no rush to add anyone before ND is ready, as no one else delivers anywhere near the value that ND and a partner do at 17 and 18.

It's really clean the way you have it set up, and accomplishes the main goals: maximize CFP slots (by not overloading the big dogs), preserve rivalries, and achieve competitive balance (when the rest of the schedule each year is factored in). As for USC's schedule, your scenario is a huge improvement over the PAC in 3 out of the 4 years, but I think the BIG will alternate two years on and two years off for the non-rival teams. I also think they'll have ND @ USC in the years when OSU and UM aren't @USC, so there's one top tier matchup on the home schedule every year. Having ND + Wiscy and UCLA +OSU/UM is great balance in terms of fan interest, and by flipping Nebraska and Iowa, even year four looks great. Year 1: Ohio St, Purdue, Rutgers, NW, UCLA Year2: ND, Wisconsin, Penn St, Minnesota, Illinois, (USC plays OSU at the Horseshoe) Year 3:UM, UCLA, Northwestern, Iowa, Maryland Year 4: ND, Wisconsin, Michigan St, Nebraska, Indiana (USC plays UM in the Big House)

They've had 9 months to get the lower and mid tier BIG schools on board. If the PNW schools were worth what you think they are, they'd be in by now. And that's even assuming OSU, UM, PSU want to travel to the PNW every other year, which is highly doubtful. The money's not there. That's what Thamel, Auerbach, Olson, etc have all reported. // The guy you trust the most (McMurphy) had no inclination that USC and UCLA were going to the BIG. No legacy media people knew. The BIG added USC and UCLA in complete silence, just like they did Nebraska, RU and MD, - 100% stealth. But a month after USC was added, all of a sudden McMurphy has sources letting him know minute details of the BIG's deliberations about UW/UO ? Yes- every source has an agenda, so the question is always "Who benefits from this leak ?" The answer is the B12. Ever notice that McMurphy and Dodds are the media guys who have promoted "BIG talking to UW/UO" consistently ? They're both B12 guys. Yormark has skillfully used the media as a disinformation tool to destabilize the PAC by keeping the Four Corners schools nervous about UW/UO leaving. // I agree that most of this stuff you can see coming for miles, and that UT and USC were either going to team up in a conference or go SEC/BIG respectively. Also agree that UNC and UVA are going to be a battle between SEC and BIG. The two biggest states that don't have an SEC or a BIG team currently.

100% correct, and you picked two perfect examples. It will be 3-6-6 when all is said and done. Too much money to be made (increases in tv and ticket sales) by going to 9, and 3-6-6 is the right format. Can't wait to see what the SEC and BIG permanent rivals are.