Realignment talk not going away

[BluTechsan 393]

Yeah there’s no way the wild card Giants could ever beat the undefeated Brady led Patriots...

[Hurtlocker 2212]

52 minutes ago, hawkfan said:

It seems pretty clear to me at this point we will end up with 3 super conferences - the B1G, the SEC, and the P5 leftovers which will form their own league that will be worth of watching and granting access to a 12-16 school playoff.

I think those 60-ish schools breaking away and agreeing to only play each other under a new governance structure is where this heads eventually.

I could see eventually where they agree to an NFL-like preseason where power programs could host a couple pre-season games against G5/FCS schools that are used strictly to evaluate their roster.

Ha, yeah, the irony being we likely have more teams involved now than less.   Even if the Big Ten and Big 12 split the Pac 12, the remaining P4 will still run the show.   They'll just not share it with the "G5" any longer.

If you got rid of all conferences and said, "You need to spend $100m in athletics a year to join this tier" I would guess less than a handful of teams from the current P5 wouldn't ante up.  And those that already spend more than they make would find a way to spend more to join because the exposure for their university is too great to lose out on.   It becomes a marketing expense.

[camel at sea 589]

1 hour ago, hawkfan said:

It seems pretty clear to me at this point we will end up with 3 super conferences - the B1G, the SEC, and the P5 leftovers which will form their own league that will be worth of watching and granting access to a 12-16 school playoff.

I think those 60-ish schools breaking away and agreeing to only play each other under a new governance structure is where this heads eventually.

I could see eventually where they agree to an NFL-like preseason where power programs could host a couple pre-season games against G5/FCS schools that are used strictly to evaluate their roster.

I'm not convinced that it won't be four conference under two primary corporate umbrellas (FOX and Disney.)  

The big issue with the B1G in going beyond 20 members is that it likely requires cable boxes to fund it, or Notre Dame, to make the money work.  The cable boxes are going away and ND can just say no.  The ACC schools with enough value to make that a close call for the B1G, without the Irish, would all probably rather be in the SEC than in the Big Ten. 

In 2032, with cable on its last legs, can the Big Ten make expansion beyond 20 work if 1) ND says no, and 2) the SEC preemptively adds FSU, Miami, Clemson, and VaTech?  I don't think they can.  Would ND continue to be part of the ACC, as an indy, under those circumstances?  Probably.  It's still a great academic, geographic, and Olympic sports fit.  Football is probably still palatable even with those four all gone.  

[bullet 1596]

6 hours ago, ChickenNuggets said:

Wouldn't that dilute the value of the TV contracts were the SEC to expand? Why spread the same market across more schools - I'm not sure they add that much value and likely would lead to diminishing returns. Also, it would seriously complicate scheduling when you consider all the existing rivalry games. I just don't think the school presidents in the existing conferences are eager to bring in more at this time. I haven't looked closely at the economics of it all, but that would be my concern with expansion.

Looking at the Big 10 TV deal.  They've got 3 prime OTA windows.  I don't see how adding more schools (unless they are a ratings juggernaut like ND) doesn't just dilute value.  You can't create a 4th prime window.  The NFL already has Sunday (and Monday and they're taking over Thursday).  10:30 is too late for the east coast.  Friday is a poor night for TV viewing.

[Satchel 6938]

7 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

The Big 10 - home to such bastions of non-MAGAness as Iowa, Nebraska, Indiana, and Ohio.

To my knowledge, they don’t share a forum on which they try their damnest to out racist and out dumb each other. That’s the sole province of the MAGA Conference.

[utee94 15821]

Will you fucktards take your stupid ass takes to the Cloak Room?  Nobody here gives a shit.

 

 

[statsman 5462]

2 hours ago, bullet said:

Looking at the Big 10 TV deal.  They've got 3 prime OTA windows.  I don't see how adding more schools (unless they are a ratings juggernaut like ND) doesn't just dilute value.  You can't create a 4th prime window.  The NFL already has Sunday (and Monday and they're taking over Thursday).  10:30 is too late for the east coast.  Friday is a poor night for TV viewing.

I don’t think having more great matchups, per week, than prime time slots, is the competitive weakness you think it is. 

[Lou_Sassle 2875]

3 hours ago, Satchel said:

To my knowledge, they don’t share a forum on which they try their damnest to out racist and out dumb each other. That’s the sole province of the MAGA Conference.

 

[bullet 1596]

10 hours ago, FartingDreamer said:

 

This succinctly sums up my point in a nutshell.

 

https://www.cougarboard.com/board/message.html?id=29157648&tab=top10

"The NFL is a better on-field product than CFB, and its not particularly close. So the casual football fan without any ties to a university tends to watch the NFL. As you remove more & more schools from the highest level of CFB the fans who follow those programs interest in their team wanes. And when fans stop caring about their own programs they aren't going to watch your programs either, which impacts your viewership significantly. So without a robust and relevant FBS, the B1G & SEC will no longer attract the viewership to warrant these huge TV deals. Andy's point about CFP access is a good one, because even as the B1G/SEC separate themselves financially, so long as there is a clear path to a national championship the other schools & fans will remain engaged despite being at a disadvantage".

I think college football is a far superior product.  All the NFL has is more talent.  That doesn't necessarily make for entertaining games.  In fact, it decreases it.  The talent disparity is what allows for explosive plays.

[FartingDreamer 138]

3 minutes ago, bullet said:

I think college football is a far superior product.  All the NFL has is more talent.  That doesn't necessarily make for entertaining games.  In fact, it decreases it.  The talent disparity is what allows for explosive plays.

Agreed, on CFB being a much better more interesting game then the NFL.  

[notre dame joe 187]

On 8/24/2022 at 1:02 PM, LTbear said:

Man, if the B1G does take more PAC teams, George Kliavkoff is going to be REALLY pissed at the Big XII.

Pretty hard to unify the conference around a banner that reads No blocking our exits.

[Deej 76768]

27 minutes ago, bullet said:

I think college football is a far superior product.  All the NFL has is more talent.  That doesn't necessarily make for entertaining games.  In fact, it decreases it.  The talent disparity is what allows for explosive plays.

So you're a big fan of the Harlem Globetrotters?

[bullet 1596]

8 hours ago, Zinhead said:

If you break down the colleges in the SEC into three tiers based on value, you get the following:

Top Tier – Alabama, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, Texas

MidTier – Auburn, Mizzou, Tennessee, Texas A&M

Low Tier – Arkansas, Kentucky, Ole Miss, MSU, South Carolina, Vanderbilt

In order to add value to the conference, any additions would have to be above the Mid-Tier line, or bring in new markets. Going through the ACC schools, FSU and Clemson meet the SEC mid-tier, but they don’t add new markets. UNC also meets the mid-tier line, while Virginia would be toward the low end of the mid-tier, but both bring in large new markets.

None of the other ACC schools do much for the SEC as they compare unfavorably to the current mid-tier SEC schools in terms of value and market.  Schools like VT and NCST are similar to OKState, TTU and Iowa State, strong football centric schools that are saddled with below median valuations.

Also, while the BIG has restricted distributions to new members in order to make them financially viable, the SEC has never done this. All of the recent SEC additions were admitted as full members. The addition of Arkansas and South Carolina allowed for the creation of the new conference championship which paid their way in. Texas A&M and Missouri were mid-Tier schools that brought new markets and were financially additive to the conference, and Texas and Oklahoma both are top tier schools with new markets.

Given these factors, if the SEC misses on UNC/UVA once the ACC Gore expires, I don’t think they will expand.

If you are talking economic value, LSU drops down to the mid-tier.  And Missouri drops to the low tier.  In football, things I've seen rank Missouri only ahead of UK and Vandy.

[bullet 1596]

8 hours ago, camel at sea said:

A clear path doesn't have to be a realistic path.  Those are two different things.  The Cincinnati Bearcats played in the CFP last year.  Their path was clear, even if winning the whole thing once they got there was unrealistic.  If you kick those mid tier schools to to the curb, and they don't have even an unrealistic path, why would their fans continue to watch?  Fans of those type of schools comprise a significant percentage of the "casual" fans.

Put this idea in another area:  Creighton basketball draws 17K for home games.  Those are serious CBB fans who watch other big games when said games are on.  Are they ever going to win a natty at Creighton?  Probably not.  But they have a clear path via the tourney.  Don't give them access to the NCAA tourney and their fans lose interest.  The sport loses some of its "casual" fans.  Cut too many fanbases like that out of the process and it's death by many cuts.

The TV side gets more of the big brand on big brand games by moving the big brands into the B1G and SEC, expanding the playoff, etc.  None of that has to mean eliminating the 1-2M viewer games (viewer numbers which are also hard to achieve otherwise) by cutting the B12/PAC/ACC out of the top tier.  

That one report said 50% of CF fans follow one of the top 16 programs and 92% follow the P5.  Fact is, a lot of the G5 fans are also big fans of P5 schools.  I'd bet virtually all the Jax St., UAB and USA fans also follow either Alabama or Auburn.  Most of the Louisiana school's fans follow LSU.

[utee94 15821]

19 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Don’t be mad. I’m just keeping real, as most of you did before Texas and OU joined MAGA.

Negged and reported fucking idiot.  Take it to CR.  

[Satchel 6938]

1 minute ago, utee94 said:

Negged and reported fucking idiot.  Take it to CR.  

My opinion about the Sec is just as valid, and perhaps more rooted in reality than much of what is being dreamed up in this thread. It’s not like this board was not teeming with anti Sec’ers mere months ago.

[utee94 15821]

3 minutes ago, Satchel said:

My opinion about the Sec is just as valid, and perhaps more rooted in reality than much of what is being dreamed up in this thread. It’s not like this board was not teeming with anti Sec’ers mere months ago.

You can be as anti-SEC as you want.  Just keep your stupid fucking political takes on the right forum. Nobody here cares what your political affiliation is.   I never voted for that guy but I don't want to see his bullshit or yours on the football board.  This isn't difficult stuff.  

Cloak Room is that way ------------->

 

Edited August 26, 2022 by utee94

[Valmy77 13226]

The SEC and the Big 10 suck and I hate them.

But we failed to beat them, so we must join them.

At least we are joined with our three traditional rivals.

[Satchel 6938]

Just now, utee94 said:

You can be as anti-SEC as you want.  Just keep your stupid fucking political takes on the right forum. Nobody here cares what your political affiliation is.   I never voted for that guy but I don't want to see his bullshit or yours on the football board.  This isn't difficult stuff.  

Cloak Room is that way ------------->

 

Have you even read the aggy thread? Be consistent. 

 

[utee94 15821]

Just now, Satchel said:

Have you even read the aggy thread? Be consistent. 

 

SHUT

THE

FUCK

UP

 

[Satchel 6938]

2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

The SEC and the Big 10 suck and I hate them.

But we failed to beat them, so we must join them.

At least we are joined with our three traditional rivals.

Now, that’s the kind of realism I can support.

[Satchel 6938]

1 minute ago, utee94 said:

SHUT

THE

FUCK

UP

 

There is no limit to the amount and kind of criticism I can hurl at the b12 in this forum. That same liberty should available to me when I want to drag the Sec.

[bullet 1596]

3 hours ago, statsman said:

I don’t think having more great matchups, per week, than prime time slots, is the competitive weakness you think it is. 

The point is that you can't monetize them.  They aren't that valuable on FS1.

[ChickenNuggets 1626]

9 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Have you even read the aggy thread? Be consistent. 

 

I called out politics on the aggy thread too.. Take that shit elsewhere amigo. Or get your ass banished. People don't give a shit about that here. Not the place...

[bullet 1596]

1 hour ago, Deej said:

So you're a big fan of the Harlem Globetrotters?

They're great fun!  Spent most of my recess in 6th grade doing nothing but fancy passes after going to see the Globetrotters.  My kids loved them too.

[bullet 1596]

16 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Have you even read the aggy thread? Be consistent. 

 

I don't know why anyone would want to read the aggy thread.

[Satchel 6938]

Just now, ChickenNuggets said:

I called out politics on the aggy thread too.. Take that shit elsewhere amigo. Or get your ass banished. People don't give a shit about that here. Not the place...

What shit, specifically? I don’t understand why you’re more upset about the mere mention of racism than you appear to be about a very popular Sec board that proudly traffics in it? It’s not exactly a secret. In fact, it’s one of the most popular forums 

 

2 minutes ago, bullet said:

I don't know why anyone would want to read the aggy thread.

Well, clearly some have since it’s almost 900 pages long.

[bullet 1596]

A Wilner/Swaim tweet hopefully I won't get negged on.  Don't remember if this was posted here (Wilner starting to face reality):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jon Wilner

 

@wilnerhotline

·

10h

 

The ACC and the Pac-12 have the same destiny (bc they possess schools coveted by the Big Ten and/or SEC). Could be different timelines, or everything crumbles together. Moves by Fox/B1G may result in ESPN deciding the ACC's GoR no longer serves its business model

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FOLLOWED By:

 

 

Jon Wilner

 

@wilnerhotline

·

5h

 

Prediction: If this prediction is true, Wilner will, in fact, only be covering UNLV home games - all sports - and staying at the Aria (penthouse, comped)

Quote Tweet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GREG SWAIM 

 

@GSwaim

· 22h

Prediction: @wilnerhotline will be covering the #MWC exclusively in the near future, and will report often how the MWC will be poaching the #SEC and #B1G.

[statsman 5462]

22 minutes ago, bullet said:

The point is that you can't monetize them.  They aren't that valuable on FS1.

Why? Say, on one weekend, the B10 top game is Ohio State vs. Wisconsin. It’s #2 game is Michigan vs. Illinois. Its third is USC vs. Nebraska. It’s fourth is PSU vs. Iowa. That’s a game that will draw a lot of viewers. If it’s in FS1, you don’t think they can sell ads for more money than they can charge for ads for an Arizona vs. Oregon State game?

[Horn of Gabriel 1614]

10 hours ago, BluTechsan said:

Yeah there’s no way the wild card Giants could ever beat the undefeated Brady led Patriots...

CSB!  Now do the version where there's no salary cap, no CBA, unlimited free agency, and the wild card Giants are located in Waco.

[Horn of Gabriel 1614]

11 hours ago, Zinhead said:

The four team playoff gives teams that have made it into the playoff a big boost in recruiting, which then improves their chances of getting back into the playoffs. This feedback loop is why we see the same teams in the playoff every year. Unless a draft is instituted or a head coach changes, the feedback loop is difficult to break since talent accumulation (recruiting) is so important to college football. However, expanding the playoff to 12 or 16 schools will also expand the teams that can benefit from this feedback loop. The talent that is currently concentrated in the top 5-6 schools will be diffused to a group of 10 or 15 that will likely be playoff regulars. In this scenario, with talent more spread out than it currently is, it is much more likely that a BYU, Baylor, Cincy, or OK State level school can take advantage of HOF coach and make a deep run into the playoffs.  

I agree with the theory that an expanded playoff will widen the pool of teams who benefit from the feedback loop.  I disagree that those teams are going to be ones listed or those like them; it will in fact be a wider collection of blue bloods and near blue bloods: Alabama, Clemson, OSU, Georgia will be joined by Florida, Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, Michigan, etc

[Hurtlocker 2212]

8 hours ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

I agree with the theory that an expanded playoff will widen the pool of teams who benefit from the feedback loop.  I disagree that those teams are going to be ones listed or those like them; it will in fact be a wider collection of blue bloods and near blue bloods: Alabama, Clemson, OSU, Georgia will be joined by Florida, Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, Michigan, etc

They already are.

[bullet 1596]

11 hours ago, statsman said:

Why? Say, on one weekend, the B10 top game is Ohio State vs. Wisconsin. It’s #2 game is Michigan vs. Illinois. Its third is USC vs. Nebraska. It’s fourth is PSU vs. Iowa. That’s a game that will draw a lot of viewers. If it’s in FS1, you don’t think they can sell ads for more money than they can charge for ads for an Arizona vs. Oregon State game?

Because FS1 games draw a fraction of what OTA games draw and significantly less than ESPN, regardless of who is on them.

[Texzilla58 4735]

That one report said 50% of CF fans follow one of the top 16 programs and 92% follow the P5.  Fact is, a lot of the G5 fans are also big fans of P5 schools.  I'd bet virtually all the Jax St., UAB and USA fans also follow either Alabama or Auburn.  Most of the Louisiana school's fans follow LSU.

Lots of college educated folks forget that most of the big programs likely have more fans that have little to no college than actual alum fans. Arkansas is a perfect example of this, and I’d surmise that the majority of Longhorn fans are not alums, but attended smaller schools or none at all. Do they make huge donations? No. Do they deliver eyeballs and buy apparel? In spades.

[Zinhead 42]

10 hours ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

I agree with the theory that an expanded playoff will widen the pool of teams who benefit from the feedback loop.  I disagree that those teams are going to be ones listed or those like them; it will in fact be a wider collection of blue bloods and near blue bloods: Alabama, Clemson, OSU, Georgia will be joined by Florida, Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, Michigan, etc

I was not saying that BYU, Baylor, Cincy, or OK State would become playoff regulars because of the feedback loop. The schools that will make regular playoff appearances will be the same 15 schools with high blue chip ratios. 

What I am saying is that with an expanded playoff, the concentrated blue chip ratio of the Alabama, OSU and Georgia's will fall, there will likely be several schools in the BYU, Baylor, Cincy, or OK State range that, with a great a coach and a generational recruiting class, can can catch lighting in a bottle and win some playoff games. Here is a list of non-blue chip schools that would have been favored in at least the opening playoff game of an expanded playoffs.

2014 - Baylor, TCU

2015 - Iowa, Stanford

2017 - Wisconsin

2021 - Cincinnati, Baylor

[Zinhead 42]

14 hours ago, bullet said:

If you are talking economic value, LSU drops down to the mid-tier.  And Missouri drops to the low tier.  In football, things I've seen rank Missouri only ahead of UK and Vandy.

The point of the list was to determine the median SEC school. Putting six schools in the top tier and six in the lower tier leaves four schools to form the SEC median.  In terms of on-field results LSU (three natties in 20 years) is easily superior to the schools ranked below them.  They also carry the entire state by themselves. 

Missouri has two SEC championship game appearance in the past decade, and brings two major metros in St. Louis and Kansas City. That is better than any of the six schools in the lower tier. 

[LTbear 4168]

15 hours ago, bullet said:

That one report said 50% of CF fans follow one of the top 16 programs and 92% follow the P5.  

Same "report" said Syracuse was one of the top 15 fanbases. So...

[thunderlounge 7825]

1 hour ago, Zinhead said:

Missouri has two SEC championship game appearance in the past decade, and brings two major metros in St. Louis and Kansas City. That is better than any of the six schools in the lower tier.

Missouri does not “bring” KC. Nor do they really “bring” STL. 
 

In terms of maybe forcing SECN onto the lower cable tier for more scratch? Maybe.

 

 

[camel at sea 589]

17 hours ago, bullet said:

That one report said 50% of CF fans follow one of the top 16 programs and 92% follow the P5.  Fact is, a lot of the G5 fans are also big fans of P5 schools.  I'd bet virtually all the Jax St., UAB and USA fans also follow either Alabama or Auburn.  Most of the Louisiana school's fans follow LSU.

Yeah.  The discussion keeps veering off course though because one person will be talking about a breakaway that doesn't include USA... and then another will equate that with decreasing the top tier down to under 50 programs and leaving out ISU, Tech, or Oklahoma State.  Those are not the same type of cuts.  

[Texzilla58 4735]

The point of the list was to determine the median SEC school. Putting six schools in the top tier and six in the lower tier leaves four schools to form the SEC median.  In terms of on-field results LSU (three natties in 20 years) is easily superior to the schools ranked below them.  They also carry the entire state by themselves. 
Missouri has two SEC championship game appearance in the past decade, and brings two major metros in St. Louis and Kansas City. That is better than any of the six schools in the lower tier. 

You’re making the assumption that a program like Mizzou actually owns those markets. The reality is “don’t give a shit” is the overriding fan base in Missouri. As a program the school is closer in value and rev to Indiana or Illinois. Arkansas surpasses it by far in program value.

We get used to the giant size of Texas. Midwest metro areas pull from a similar size map but it includes several more states.

[bullet 1596]

17 hours ago, statsman said:

Why? Say, on one weekend, the B10 top game is Ohio State vs. Wisconsin. It’s #2 game is Michigan vs. Illinois. Its third is USC vs. Nebraska. It’s fourth is PSU vs. Iowa. That’s a game that will draw a lot of viewers. If it’s in FS1, you don’t think they can sell ads for more money than they can charge for ads for an Arizona vs. Oregon State game?

No.  Just using 11/13 as an example.  FS1 games drew 538k (ASU-UW), 476k (WVU-KSU),  and 144k (USU-SJSU) on Saturday.  The worst network game (TCU-Okie St.) was 1.37 million.  FS1 just isn't going to do that great no matter who is on it.

[bullet 1596]

3 hours ago, Zinhead said:

The point of the list was to determine the median SEC school. Putting six schools in the top tier and six in the lower tier leaves four schools to form the SEC median.  In terms of on-field results LSU (three natties in 20 years) is easily superior to the schools ranked below them.  They also carry the entire state by themselves. 

Missouri has two SEC championship game appearance in the past decade, and brings two major metros in St. Louis and Kansas City. That is better than any of the six schools in the lower tier. 

Expansion is about economic value.  Otherwise Boise would be in the Big 10.  Missouri is one of the bottom 3 or 4 schools in the SEC along with UK, Vandy and South Carolina.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

32 minutes ago, bullet said:

Expansion is about economic value.  Otherwise Boise would be in the Big 10.  Missouri is one of the bottom 3 or 4 schools in the SEC along with UK, Vandy and South Carolina.

Boise to the Big Ten, you heard it here first!

You're safe, John Wilner.

[Valmy77 13226]

6 hours ago, LTbear said:

Same "report" said Syracuse was one of the top 15 fanbases. So...

Hey upstate New York might have orange Ss everywhere, but who wants to go and check?

[Hurtlocker 2212]

3 hours ago, Valmy77 said:

Hey upstate New York might have orange Ss everywhere, but who wants to go and check?

My neighbor is a Cuse fan.   He cares about football until about the 3rd loss, then its prepping for basketball season.   And while his glad they got a safe landing place in the ACC, they all seem to pine for the glory days of Big East basketball.

[berlinerbaer 678]

My mind's kinda blown that anyone cares about Jon Wilner east of the Rockies.

[statsman 5462]

Joel Klatt (as always) laid it out succinctly. The B10 isn’t picking up UW and Oregon (or Cal and Stanford) if it dilutes their per team payout. (He didn’t address the possibility of a reduced share for them). 
 
He said the strength of the B12 is that the teams all know where they stand- the SEC and B10 don’t  want them. They know they need to stay together. Conversely, thePAC teams will bolt if they can.  
 
He doesn’t see cfb forming a super division; he just sees the SEC and B10 as super-conferences. 

[Zeus 6022]

[bullet 1596]

https://www.denverpost.com/2022/08/28/cu-buffs-csu-rams-football-brands/

Interesting read on CU and CSU.

 

"...As to where the Buffs and Rams go from here, Thompson offers two words of advice:

“Be patient,” said Thompson, who now heads up the Thompson Sports Group. “(For CU, be) flexible and quick to react if necessary. (For CSU), the Mountain West is a place you can compete and thrive, so embrace it.”

So what can Buffs and Rams fans expect from the conference realignment picture in, say, 2030? Get ready for another dose of the unexpected.

Thompson said he thinks in eight years the current round of TV deals that have either been recently announced (Big Ten) or are being hammered out (Pac-12) “will have been renegotiated or will be about to be renegotiated, and we will have another round of realignment either right before or (in 2030).

“CSU (is likely) still in MW, but it might be called PMC — the PacMtn Conference. CU will be in something that starts with the word ‘Big.’ I’m not sure what the number behind it is.”

In other words, buckle up. Because the key to a brighter, more secure football future in Boulder and Fort Collins is more about fixing the present than fixating on the past."

[billfromlaketravis 11467]

On 8/27/2022 at 3:26 PM, statsman said:

Joel Klatt (as always) laid it out succinctly. The B10 isn’t picking up UW and Oregon (or Cal and Stanford) if it dilutes their per team payout. (He didn’t address the possibility of a reduced share for them). 
 
He said the strength of the B12 is that the teams all know where they stand- the SEC and B10 don’t  want them. They know they need to stay together. Conversely, thePAC teams will bolt if they can.  
 
He doesn’t see cfb forming a super division; he just sees the SEC and B10 as super-conferences. 

Gets it, but his opinions are based on the PAC getting a new TV deal. ESPN is their only option. The Mouse has to thread the needle here. Pick up the PAC’s Tier 1 and 2 rights on a deal that isn’t insultingly low to Oregon/Washington/Stanford. Oregon has their ego. Washington has a good TV market. Stanford has to finance Olympic sports. 
 

Do all that and give the PAC a guaranteed playoff spot, and it might keep the remaining 10 together.