USC Traveler

Tried to add this as an edit the above but wasn't quick enough: Mandel's longstanding smug superiority regarding the PAC is actually a good reflection of the mindset of the idiotic WAC-PAC Presidents, who have always seen the BIG as their only peer conference, looking down their noses at the SEC and B12 due to academic snobbery, coastal elitism and religious intolerance. It's why they're now in this position, as opposed to being in a conference with UT, OU, aggy, Tech, etc. And btw, with USC and UCLA still in the conference. They are reaping what they have sowed for the last 13 years. Even further back actually, when Stanford nuked UT as a PAC member back in the day.

I think he's suffering from cognitive dissonance- he's lived in the Bay Area for a while now, and can't comprehend that a conference he saw as above the B12 and on par with the rest of the P5 is now a complete joke. He doesn't seem to be able to conceive that the B12 is in a much stronger position than the WAC10 thanks to fanbases that care and smart moves by management (expansion and jumping the line to extend their deal) in the wake of UT and OU leaving. What's amazing is that he fails to see all of this, despite decades of bad management by the WAC10, leading to the exit of the only football blueblood and bellcow, and losing all access to the LA market with the only hoops blueblood leaving as well. He's probably been getting fed BS by Klownkoff and his cronies for months, and is now shellshocked to see what's really happening.

He really is. When he said CU leaving wouldn't hurt the PAC and that the four PNW schools plus Utah was a strong enough core to keep the PAC intact, I realized that he was in an extreme state of denial. An interesting question is who is living deeper in fantasyland ? Klownkoff, or his media water boys like Mandel, Wilner and Canzano ?

Agreed. I think that's exactly why we've heard about how UNC and UVA are top priorities for SEC's next round of expansion. Will be quite a battle with the BIG. That's why I think UNC and UVA will have the leverage to bring Duke along wherever they end up. Even if UVA and UNC go BIG, Sankey can counter with VT, NC State and KU. The first two are better football fits in the SEC, and with OU in the conference, KU isn't really that much of a reach in terms of travel. Having KU and UK in the same conference would bring real value.

If it's only CU and UA, PNW will probably feel like they can backfill with SDSU and SMU and stay at 10, with easier playoff access offsetting revenue and exposure differences, but it would really come down to just how bad is the PAC's deal at that point.

I was working on the assumption that UW and UO would push to have CA schools in the conference as a condition of them joining. CA is the prime recruiting territory for both schools- they're not going to want to abandon that. I can't see them joining B12 without CA schools. Also- believe it or not, Bob Thompson (former Fox Sports President) said a while back the Stanford and Cal actually have more tv value than UW and UO. That was in the context of BIG membership so Bay Area market for BTN is obviously a big part of that calculation, but I still found that interesting.

Agree 100% with the first part. B12 would be smart to take the 8 PAC schools not named Wazzu or OSU and establish themselves as the #3 conference with no real competitor in terms of future status. As for the PNW schools, I'd think the 4C schools leaving would force them to go B12 at that point. It was interesting to hear Mandel on his podcast yesterday, though. He was saying that, putting Stanford and Cal aside, with Utah wanting to hang onto the PAC no matter what, the PNW schools plus Utah was a strong enough core to keep the PAC intact. Five schools. I just don't see it. They'd be much better off in an expanded B12, with guarantees that they're all in the same division, or pods. UW and UO would love to be in a pod with Cal and Stanford or SDSU in that scenario.

To your KU and UK examples above, UNC and UVA would fit perfectly into those roles in the BIG or SEC.

It would, but don't you think B12 would rather take all 4 ? That would give them 7 schools for the late night window (including BYU). Add Cal and SDSU for CA access and you've got 9 teams that can play in that window. If each of those teams plays 3 times in that window, that would fill up 14 weeks of AfterDark games without involving anyone East of CU. Seems like that would be revenue neutral, and possibly additive, for the B12, especially when adding in UW, UO, Utah vs existing B12 schools.

That would be worth it for the aggy meltdown alone, when they finally realized their true place in the SEC pecking order- right next to Mizzou.😂

I tend to think SEC coaches would be much more concerned about legitimizing FSU as an SEC team than they would be about OSU and UM having a game in FL every three years, but your point is valid. There's a lot of meat on the bone to chew on in that debate. Agreed on GT. No shot at the SEC. And Miami may very well prefer the BIG. They were in the Big East by themselves, so the geographic isolation wouldn't be anything new. Even with FSU in conference, they're still geographically isolated now.

The mod on the AZ board has said for months that it was going to be UA and CU, and the biggest skeptic flipped a full 180 today, talking about the fact that he of all people got this info is some sort of act of God. CU's prior B12 ties, lack of success in the PAC, AD debt and Coach Prime's TX ties all point towards B12. They're all-in on Prime to try to position themselves for a future BIG invite. They have a 10 year window to have any shot whatsoever, and need money plus exposure, which they're not going to get in the WAC10. UA's high level of unhappiness with PAC leadership has been second only to USC over the last 10 plus years. Hoops first school, and next closest after CU to the B12. B12 makes all the sense in the world for them- more money, better exposure, and exponentially better games in the sport they care about the most. // ASU won't be far behind those two, and may even come along with them, as the more schools that leave at once, the more it destabilizes the WAC-PAC. B12 definitely wouldn't say "No" to ASU. Adding all three puts a lot of pressure on Utah, UW and UO. I think they all end up in B12 at that point, bringing Cal along to keep a recruiting presence in CA. Cal is completely fucked financially, so they'll have to say yes. Academic snobbery only goes so far. Cal joining would also get SDSU to join if offered. Stanford becomes the big question mark. Do they do independent with a scheduling agreement with the BIG that ensures they come in as ND's partner when that inevitably happens ?

Agree 100%. There is a pot of gold down the line where the expanded P2 and B12 take control of the tournament. This is probably why they’re talking about going to 80 teams- they’ll run the tournament, but give every conference winner an autobid to ensure Cinderella stories and avoid lawsuits. Have you heard anything from Sankey on this, or are you saying “watch what he says in the future” ?

There’s no doubt the conference office would take them. Would the actual schools (who all recruit in FL) want to turn FSU and Miami into much more formidable competitors by making them SEC members ? If the SEC keeps them out, they’re much easier to recruit against in the BIG, which SEC coaches will portray as a second-rate conference, much as they do with the ACC now. Would Saban, Smart, Freeze, etc and their successors rather recruit against them as BIG or SEC members. I have no doubt as to the answer. Sankey has a lot of sway, but he ultimately works for the schools. If they don’t want it to happen, then it won’t happen. FSU isn’t UT. It’s definitely not a slam dunk.

This is a potential problem, but this is one of the reasons I don't think Vandy, MS State, UK, IN, NW, Rutgers, etc will get kicked out of their conferences in the future as a lot of people have predicted. Those teams are getting paid to take the Ls, as Bud Elliot says. NFL has 32 teams. So will the BIG/SEC in 2024, with many of those in markets without an NFL team. There's room for more expansion. With a BIG18/20/24 and SEC18/20/22, we'd end up with somewhere between 36-44 teams, with both conferences having a number of teams getting paid to take Ls and keep the top brands's records looking better.

I don't think ESPN is under any delusion that the ACC is going to last past 2036. They see where this is going, and are a huge force that has driven consolidation. As you pointed out, they are retrenching their spending on sports rights, and the ACC is a bargain. They have no motivation to give that up. When the ACC comes apart, if ESPN and Sankey can get the schools on board to offer FSU, FSU will go SEC, no matter how they feel about ESPN. The big question I keep coming back to is will the SEC schools want to add FSU and Clemson and make them much more formidable as competitors ? None of us know the answer, and it will be a long time before we find out imo.

Those numbers, and the context of how they compare to other games that day, are brutal. You'd make a good trial lawyer my friend. // I do think FSU and Miami will be worth the type of money that other BIG teams get- not because of their tv value alone, but their holistic value- massive new state for BTN, and access to FL recruiting (for both athletes and students), in addition to the value they would bring as a tv draw vs OSU, UM, USC, PSU. None of those things apply to the SEC, though, as they are already in FL, and as you pointed out in an earlier post, the SEC will already have 8 top tiers brands when UT and OU join. The BIG only has four- OSU, UM, USC, PSU. There is a clear drop to Wiscy, MSU, NE and IA, so adding FSU and Miami to BIG slate would be a bigger boost for the BIG than for the SEC. I agree with TK, though, that the BIG would prefer not to add them on an island. The BIG's best shot at landing the FL schools would be to bring in all of UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU and Miami as a block. This would end the ACC and force ND to the BIG. On the whole, the BIG would gain a lot of value adding all of those states for the markets and recruiting. It will be interesting to see how much playing defense is worth to ESPN/SEC in 10-12 years when the ACC deal starts getting closer to the end.

My version- "Google Texas Tech co-eds and then google aggy Jizz Jars. "

It's crazy that people are trying to push that storyline. I think of UT going to the SEC as getting their #2 and #3 rivals back.

I think the football schools will leave the ACC as soon as they can, and for UVA and UNC will go BIG or SEC at that point- the money difference and perception of being in the top tier will be too much to pass up. But I agree that ESPN has zero motivation to let schools out of the GOR, so I don’t think any of this happens until the mid 2030s, when the GOR is close to expiring.

😂 For me, I love them. I just don’t know how popular they are with kids from the Deep South.

No doubt- I was factoring that in. Because that is the question. My pitch as an SEC coach- "Do you want to eat southern food and play in warm weather vs UGA, LSU, UT and OU, or do you want to eat bratwurst and play in the snow in Michigan and Minnesota ?"

This is a big part of what makes realignment so fascinating- different motivations and goals for different parties that are involved. No doubt the SEC office and ESPN will want FSU and Miami in the SEC- for all the reasons you and I have listed. But I keep coming back to the fact that Sankey ultimately works for the schools, and the schools will look at this from a "What's best for us ?" pov. If you're an SEC school, it will be a lot easier to recruit against FSU if they're in the BIG than if they're in the SEC. They don't need FSU to get access to FL- they already have it. If FSU is in the SEC, they become much more formidable to recruit against. Same goes for Miami. There is strategic value for the conference in keeping the BIG out of FL, but I think coaches and ADs are going to be more concerned about turning FSU into a legit competitor vs how many 4-5 stars they'll lose to the BIG. I have no idea how it will turn out, but I think it's going to be a battle within the SEC. // Agreed on Miami- their admin, student base, donors, etc are more aligned culturally to the BIG than the SEC. // I do think SEC fans will be excited about Clemson joining because they've been a legit competitor to the SEC, whereas most SEC fans I know don't think much of FSU. Look at them as a little brother. The conference office will want both- but Clemson and FSU in the SEC makes them both tougher competitors and guarantees more losses within the SEC for the existing teams. Not a slamdunk for the SEC schools to add them the way adding UT and OU was.

I forgot about that one!😂 The list is so long it becomes hard to keep them all straight.

Agreed. It will be just another NY6 bowl for this next CFP cycle. In the long run, I think we're eventually headed to an AFL (BIG)- NFL (SEC) model, with the Rose and Sugar as CCGs for the B18/20/24 and the SEC18/20/22. 8 team playoff in each conference, with early rounds on campus or in ATL, DFW, Indy and Vegas. Winners of Rose and Sugar meet in the "Super College Bowl" Once the players become employees, the money differences are going to become too great between the BIG/SEC and the B12 and WAC10/ACC remnants. The B12 (especially if Yormark sticks around) is in a great position to absorb all the schools that have value that don't make it into the BIG/SEC, and create a coast to coast league that would have a lot of value to media companies. Current B12 (perhaps minus TCU), plus Four Corners, UW, UO, Cal, SDSU, Louisville, Pitt, and possibly VT and NC State.) Fill in with Memphis and USF types to get to 24 teams- create four regional divisions, but with NFL-style regular cross-over. That's a fun group of teams to watch that would pull enough ratings to bring in solid money.