Realignment talk not going away

[DFW Horn 6123]

7 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Funny thing is though, the old big 12 needed inventory, but if Texas and OU stayed would have been making about $65m on the new contract, a 13% dif and not even noticed in the total revenue.  Quite likely they could have lured in LA to make more.

At the end of the day though, this was about a recruiting war that the SEC was winning.  Doesn't matter if adding USC would have added the same money, its a rounding error.   Its about negating 

Better to be affiliated with a league and region where the top recruits play and college football really matters to people. CA has talent, but they're not nearly as passionate about CFB. Too many recreational options? Or maybe west-coasters just don't GAF unless their team is top-tier.

Edited March 5, 2023 by DFW Horn

[DFW Horn 6123]

5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Yup, I'd assume it would just be like that until next negotiation

 

Making less than Purdue, Northwestern, and Rutgers is a slap in the face, but it's still better than going down with the ship. Desperate times

[statsman 5456]

Utah, UA, ASU and CU would be thrilled to be in the B12 with its better media contracts; they don’t care about GoR because they know they’re not attractive to other conferences anyway. 
 
Stanford, Cal, UW and Oregon are different. They are more valuable properties (better markets-except for Oregon-better recognition, better history, higher program ceilings). There is just no way that are willing to agree to the GOR that the B12 would (justifiably) insist on. 
 
(The B12 is very much starting to look like a “good west Texas marriage”- a union between parties that realize they have no better options). 
 
Is there any way the four old PAC members can make a go of it, separately? Without having to add blahs like SMU?

[DFW Horn 6123]

1 minute ago, statsman said:

Utah, UA, ASU and CU would be thrilled to be in the B12 with its better media contracts; they don’t care about GoR because they know they’re not attractive to other conferences anyway. 
 
Stanford, Cal, UW and Oregon are different. They are more valuable properties (better markets-except for Oregon-better recognition, better history, higher program ceilings). There is just no way that are willing to agree to the GOR that the B12 would (justifiably) insist on. 
 
(The B12 is very much starting to look like a “good west Texas marriage”- a union between parties that realize they have no better options). 
 
Is there any way the four old PAC members can make a go of it, separately? Without having to add blahs like SMU?

No

I suspect all 4 will take a cut-rate offer from the B1G, if offered. WSU and OSU will be MWC bound soon.

[LTbear 4168]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

Utah, UA, ASU and CU would be thrilled to be in the B12 with its better media contracts; they don’t care about GoR because they know they’re not attractive to other conferences anyway. 
 

Inaccurate. Colorado and Utah both believe they'd be attractive to the B1G.

Note I'm not saying that they ARE, but that a very, very large percentage of them BELIEVE they are (or could be).

[FartingDreamer 138]

2 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

Better to be affiliated with a league and region where the top recruits play and college football really matters to people. CA has talent, but they're not nearly as passionate about CFB. Too many recreational options? Or maybe west-coasters just don't GAF unless their team is top-tier.

One exception would be Oregon. Eugene is a passionate anomaly on the west coast when it comes to college football.   They love their ducks over there.

1 hour ago, LTbear said:

Inaccurate. Colorado and Utah both believe they'd be attractive to the B1G.

Note I'm not saying that they ARE, but that a very, very large percentage of them BELIEVE they are (or could be).

And they are delusional.

Edited March 5, 2023 by FartingDreamer

['stache 21800]

Klaviklov is a fucking clown, possibly worse than Bowsby.

 

[Vertigo 20276]

1 hour ago, LTbear said:

Inaccurate. Colorado and Utah both believe they'd be attractive to the B1G.

Note I'm not saying that they ARE, but that a very, very large percentage of them BELIEVE they are (or could be).

They are the honey boo boo of college football.

[TKthunder2 4985]

3 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

No

I suspect all 4 will take a cut-rate offer from the B1G, if offered. WSU and OSU will be MWC bound soon.

No, they will raid the MWC. NCAA tournament payout and Bowl contracts still make the entity of the PAC12 more valuable. They’ll grab the best 8-10 MWC/AAC schools and the MWC will be back filling with UTEP/NMSU and anyone from CUSA/FCS that will join…same as it ever was.

['stache 21800]

1 hour ago, Vertigo said:

They are the honey boo boo of college football.

At least CU can blame the weed for being fat.

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

3 hours ago, 'stache said:

Klaviklov is a fucking clown, possibly worse than Bowsby.

 

When Kliavkoff was hired, Feldman and Mandel went on a 30 minute rant about how he was a genius because he started Hulu and would save the PAC 12. Horrible take from the bad take artists. 

[Trojan Man 429]

12 hours ago, TrashMaster G said:

You think USC and UCLA would have chosen the Big 12 over the B1G????

I don't think the administration would have done it for academic and coastal elitism reasons, but as I've said before I would have much preferred USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington to the original Big 12 over joining the B1G.  If I found a genie in a bottle that's the realignment I'd wish for.  Even those 4 to the Big 12 as it existed 5 years ago would have still been good with me.  Then add BYU and Utah to get to 16 and watch the B1G and SEC scramble to find 15th and 16th teams worth a damn with the ACC still off the table and the Big 12 stabilized.  Super conferences are super because of the teams at the top and a conference featuring Oklahoma/Texas/USC would have printed just as much money as Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State or Alabama/Georgia/LSU.  If OU, UT and USC could all get their shit together at the same time like in the 2000s their conference would give the SEC a run for their prestige money.

2 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

No, they will raid the MWC. NCAA tournament payout and Bowl contracts still make the entity of the PAC12 more valuable. They’ll grab the best 8-10 MWC/AAC schools and the MWC will be back filling with UTEP/NMSU and anyone from CUSA/FCS that will join…same as it ever was.

If that happens the Pac needs to have its power status revoked and the number of CFP autobids has to shrink to 5.  Keeping it at 6 in that scenario means giving two midmajor conferences autobids.  Oregon State would be positioned well to become the dominant midmajor team and get the 5th autobid more often than not if they can keep their head coach.  He's turning Oregon State into a really solid program and he played QB there so he might be the rare individual who views it as a destination job.

19 hours ago, Gidnik said:

at the 7 minute mark

Gross, I hope to get through at least one media contract at 16 teams before expanding again.  I want to play all the B1G teams a few times first, plus I want Oregon and Washington out in the cold for a cycle so they can get it through their heads they aren't USC's equals like they told themselves they were in the Pac 12.  Hopefully that will humble them a bit for when they do get invited to the party.

[notre dame joe 187]

On 3/4/2023 at 2:43 PM, Texas Wahoo said:

USC Michigan will pretty much always be big, but is tOSU UCLA really that big after the newness factor goes away?  It will do numbers because all tOSU games do, but is it better than tOSU vs Wisconsin or Nebraska?

No.

23 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Agree, historically UCLA is not even in the top half of the new Big Ten. They are more comparable to Iowa or Purdue than Michigan State or Wisconsin.

 

Not even similar.  It is very hard to name another famous program that sits in the heart of a top 5 recruiting territory and made a history of underachievement.  Maybe Georgia Tech.

[notre dame joe 187]

14 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

yes, if Texas/OU asked

but they went to the B1G AFTER Texas/OU went to the SEC

In the SC/UCLA -> Big12 scenario they almost have to take ASU as well.  You don't leave an enormous public school in a top 10 metro area as a gap in your footprint. 

[Trojan Man 429]

44 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

Not even similar.  It is very hard to name another famous program that sits in the heart of a top 5 recruiting territory and made a history of underachievement.  Maybe Georgia Tech.

Most people think joining the B1G will doom UCLA to a 6 win ceiling but I think UCLA has massive growth potential.  Their main problems have been shitty leadership and lack of funds limiting their coaching hire options.  They solved the first problem by replacing their previous terrible AD with a guy who was assistant AD at Ohio State for nearly a decade then AD at Boston College for a few years.  It was a similar problem USC had with hiring an unqualified alum athlete to run the department and like USC UCLA went outside the family for the replacement.  B1G membership will solve their money problem.  Being 1 of only 2 teams west of the Rockies with super conference membership should give them a serious recruiting boost.  It already helped them flip a 5* QB from Oregon in the 2023 cycle.  There is no reason UCLA shouldn't have at least Wisconsin-level success.

[bullet 1596]

On 3/4/2023 at 4:43 PM, Texas Wahoo said:

USC Michigan will pretty much always be big, but is tOSU UCLA really that big after the newness factor goes away?  It will do numbers because all tOSU games do, but is it better than tOSU vs Wisconsin or Nebraska?

Who else would UCLA get?  And Ohio St. having Michigan, Penn St. AND USC would be too much.  Its the same strategy of connecting the old Big 10 with new markets.

I always thought Michigan-USC and Ohio St.-UCLA as fixed were likely scenarios.

[bullet 1596]

On 3/4/2023 at 5:43 PM, TKthunder2 said:

Agree, historically UCLA is not even in the top half of the new Big Ten. They are more comparable to Iowa or Purdue than Michigan State or Wisconsin.

 

Historically, UCLA is well up there.  Unless you limit your history to this century, in which case your statement would be correct.  They have really struggled the last couple of decades.

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

2 minutes ago, bullet said:

Who else would UCLA get?  And Ohio St. having Michigan, Penn St. AND USC would be too much.  Its the same strategy of connecting the old Big 10 with new markets.

I always thought Michigan-USC and Ohio St.-UCLA as fixed were likely scenarios.

I doubt Michigan cares who they play. They just want a game in LA. But doesn't Michigan also play Penn State every year? 

[flatdawgs 1277]

Come on, Trojan Man - nobody at UW thinks of USC as an equal. Part of the Pac's problem is that USC is, and has always been, the conference's only blueblood. When you suck, there's nothing else to fill the gap in national relevance. UW is a strong "next tier" program, but there's no delusion of bluebloodery at Montlake. It's a place where you can be in the conversation. It's not a place where you will be the conversation every single season. USC most definitely is.

Much as I hate what's happening with CFB in general, if it's a $40 MM vs $25 MM offer until the next contract, UW and UO would be fools not to jump - and if that's what Fox wants, they're going to get it regardless of some punitive desire for a perceived slight.

[DFW Horn 6123]

5 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

No, they will raid the MWC. NCAA tournament payout and Bowl contracts still make the entity of the PAC12 more valuable. They’ll grab the best 8-10 MWC/AAC schools and the MWC will be back filling with UTEP/NMSU and anyone from CUSA/FCS that will join…same as it ever was.

Whatever

New PAC will still be a shit salad no matter who's left in it.

[Trojan Man 429]

23 minutes ago, bullet said:

Who else would UCLA get?  And Ohio St. having Michigan, Penn St. AND USC would be too much.  Its the same strategy of connecting the old Big 10 with new markets.

I always thought Michigan-USC and Ohio St.-UCLA as fixed were likely scenarios.

I think the most tactical, fairest way to break it down while still making big bucks for the networks breaks down like this:

Michigan: Ohio State, Michigan State, cupcake (Minnesota or Northwestern most likely)

Ohio State: Michigan, Penn State, cupcake (maybe Illinois, they play for a trophy)

Penn State: Ohio State, USC, cupcake (probably Maryland)

USC: UCLA, Penn State, cupcake (Nebraska or Northwestern)

This guarantees 5 annual major games for the networks evenly split at 2 apiece among the top 4 B1G teams (Ohio State/Michigan, Michigan/Michigan State, Ohio State/Penn State, Penn State/USC, USC/UCLA) without overloading any one team's locked in games.  Matchups like Ohio State/USC and Michigan/Penn State would still happen 2 out of every 4 years, giving networks more than just 5 of those prime games they want.

Michigan getting Ohio State, Michigan State and USC yearly would be just as much overkill as Ohio State drawing Michigan, Penn State and USC.  If the goal is to maximize your playoff berths and thus playoff revenue you don't want all your best teams knocking each other out of contention every year.  There's a reason entire presidential terms can pass without a single regular season game between Alabama and Georgia.  Padding the schedules a bit for the bluebloods helps the networks too.  11-0 Michigan vs 11-0 Ohio State draws higher ratings than 8-3 Michigan vs 9-2 Ohio State.

Just now, flatdawgs said:

Come on, Trojan Man - nobody at UW thinks of USC as an equal. Part of the Pac's problem is that USC is, and has always been, the conference's only blueblood. When you suck, there's nothing else to fill the gap in national relevance. UW is a strong "next tier" program, but there's no delusion of bluebloodery at Montlake. It's a place where you can be in the conversation. It's not a place where you will be the conversation every single season. USC most definitely is.

Much as I hate what's happening with CFB in general, if it's a $40 MM vs $25 MM offer until the next contract, UW and UO would be fools not to jump - and if that's what Fox wants, they're going to get it regardless of some punitive desire for a perceived slight.

My problem isn't really with Washington.  It's mostly Oregon, Oregon State and Washington State.  I detest sharing a conference with those 3.  But all the PNW schools formed their own little clique to run the Pac 12 for their benefit, often at the expense of USC and UCLA, and Washington was part of that clique.  It rubbed me the wrong way that the California schools were split up in division alignments to appease the PNW schools by giving them more access to CA for recruiting, then they acted like it was a gift from the conference to guarantee USC/UCLA could keep playing Cal/Stanford yearly.  That arrangement was what the LA schools received in return for equal revenue sharing, which is a pretty lopsided tradeoff.  Meanwhile the PNW schools didn't have to give anything up for that extra CA access or to keep annually playing their regional foes since those 4 teams were always in the same division.  This is the same reason the Pac 12 hamstrings itself with 9 conference games.  9 games made sense for the round robin in the Pac 10 days, but it stayed at 9 games after expanding to 12 teams to benefit the PNW schools with more CA games.  The Pac 12 had to eat more losses, get worse rankings and lower its chances at a CFP bid to help the PNW schools.  This recurring theme of going out of the way to help everyone else in the conference, usually the PNW schools, while the Pac 12 never did a fucking thing to help the LA schools and continually took LA for granted got old.

Besides UCLA the Huskies were the only Pac 12 team I was ever excited to play, the rest of the Pac 12 membership is underwhelming.  Washington is the only remaining Pac 12 program I'll miss playing and the only one that is at least in the ballpark with USC in terms of combined academic and football prestige.  There are benefits for USC being in the same conference as UW, unlike Nike University and Oregon State and Washington State who are all leeches from USC's perspective.  Despite wanting some time apart while USC integrates into its new home I do hope UW gets into the B1G eventually.  I wouldn't mind if Stanford or Utah received B1G invitations at some point in the future, but I won't lose sleep if they don't either.  I don't want anything to do with any other Pac 12 schools after 2023, including Oregon.

[TKthunder2 4985]

2 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

It is very hard to name another famous program that sits in the heart of a top 5 recruiting territory and made a history of underachievement.  Maybe Georgia Tech.

Georgia Tech won their last national championship in 1990. Are you aware of this team that plays in College Station, TX ?????

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

35 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Georgia Tech won their last national championship in 1990. Are you aware of this team that plays in College Station, TX ?????

Georgia was a pretty bad underachiever until recently. 

[closetohumping 17435]

56 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

I think the most tactical, fairest way to break it down while still making big bucks for the networks breaks down like this:

Michigan: Ohio State, Michigan State, cupcake (Minnesota or Northwestern most likely)

Ohio State: Michigan, Penn State, cupcake (maybe Illinois, they play for a trophy)

Penn State: Ohio State, USC, cupcake (probably Maryland)

USC: UCLA, Penn State, cupcake (Nebraska or Northwestern)

This guarantees 5 annual major games for the networks evenly split at 2 apiece among the top 4 B1G teams (Ohio State/Michigan, Michigan/Michigan State, Ohio State/Penn State, Penn State/USC, USC/UCLA) without overloading any one team's locked in games.  Matchups like Ohio State/USC and Michigan/Penn State would still happen 2 out of every 4 years, giving networks more than just 5 of those prime games they want.

Michigan getting Ohio State, Michigan State and USC yearly would be just as much overkill as Ohio State drawing Michigan, Penn State and USC.  If the goal is to maximize your playoff berths and thus playoff revenue you don't want all your best teams knocking each other out of contention every year.  There's a reason entire presidential terms can pass without a single regular season game between Alabama and Georgia.  Padding the schedules a bit for the bluebloods helps the networks too.  11-0 Michigan vs 11-0 Ohio State draws higher ratings than 8-3 Michigan vs 9-2 Ohio State.

My problem isn't really with Washington.  It's mostly Oregon, Oregon State and Washington State.  I detest sharing a conference with those 3.  But all the PNW schools formed their own little clique to run the Pac 12 for their benefit, often at the expense of USC and UCLA, and Washington was part of that clique.  It rubbed me the wrong way that the California schools were split up in division alignments to appease the PNW schools by giving them more access to CA for recruiting, then they acted like it was a gift from the conference to guarantee USC/UCLA could keep playing Cal/Stanford yearly.  That arrangement was what the LA schools received in return for equal revenue sharing, which is a pretty lopsided tradeoff.  Meanwhile the PNW schools didn't have to give anything up for that extra CA access or to keep annually playing their regional foes since those 4 teams were always in the same division.  This is the same reason the Pac 12 hamstrings itself with 9 conference games.  9 games made sense for the round robin in the Pac 10 days, but it stayed at 9 games after expanding to 12 teams to benefit the PNW schools with more CA games.  The Pac 12 had to eat more losses, get worse rankings and lower its chances at a CFP bid to help the PNW schools.  This recurring theme of going out of the way to help everyone else in the conference, usually the PNW schools, while the Pac 12 never did a fucking thing to help the LA schools and continually took LA for granted got old.

Besides UCLA the Huskies were the only Pac 12 team I was ever excited to play, the rest of the Pac 12 membership is underwhelming.  Washington is the only remaining Pac 12 program I'll miss playing and the only one that is at least in the ballpark with USC in terms of combined academic and football prestige.  There are benefits for USC being in the same conference as UW, unlike Nike University and Oregon State and Washington State who are all leeches from USC's perspective.  Despite wanting some time apart while USC integrates into its new home I do hope UW gets into the B1G eventually.  I wouldn't mind if Stanford or Utah received B1G invitations at some point in the future, but I won't lose sleep if they don't either.  I don't want anything to do with any other Pac 12 schools after 2023, including Oregon.

AS an outsider, I always liked watching Oregon play.

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

I want the PAC to continue to exist for late night games. 
 

I love waking up at 11 am and watching game until after midnight. 
 

I guess I’d get a pretty similar product with BYU home night games in the Big 12. 

[Trojan Man 429]

14 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

AS an outsider, I always liked watching Oregon play.

Oregon is a good TV draw.  But they weren't valuable enough to help the Pac 12 keep pace with the B1G/SEC, they aren't valuable enough to increase the size of everyone's slice of the B1G pie and they bring nothing to their conference when it comes to recruiting, academic prestige and major markets.  If they were in the B1G they'd be fighting Wisconsin/Michigan State/Iowa/Nebraska if they ever get good again for 5th place in terms of ratings appeal and they would water down the frequency of the best games.  Playing enough quality opponents that voters/the committee/the CFB public will respect was a major problem in the Pac 12, which gave Oregon more value there since they were one of the few Pac 12 teams outsiders watched.  But that won't be a problem in the B1G, which takes away a lot of the appeal for adding Oregon.

USC vs Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State would all do better ratings than USC vs Oregon.  I have no interest in drawing fewer games vs the B1G bluebloods just to play fucking Oregon every year.  USC playing B1G bluebloods is a mutually beneficial event.  USC playing Oregon is a parasitic event where all the benefits of that game flow to Oregon while USC gets nothing out of it.  That kind of one way relationship is a major reason USC left the Pac 12.  Any new Western additions to the B1G also add the threat of more 10:30 PM Eastern kickoffs, something else USC and UCLA wanted to minimize when changing conferences.  Home games against Maryland or Indiana type teams might still kick off at 10:30 PM ET, but the home games against upper and middle tier B1G teams will never be that late.  If Oregon joins I can already see networks putting Ohio State/Penn State in prime time leading into USC/Oregon in B1G after dark.  Fuck that shit.

2 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I want the PAC to continue to exist for late night games. 
 

I love waking up at 11 am and watching game until after midnight. 
 

I guess I’d get a pretty similar product with BYU home night games in the Big 12. 

If the Pac 12 dies it doesn't mean the universities in it will no longer exist.  Some of their teams would join the Big 12 and keep playing late night games.  Others would be in the MWC or some kind of Pac/MWC hybrid and play late night games there.  The Arizona schools aren't allowed to play day games at home early in the season because of the heat so you can count on them to keep playing late night games no matter what.

[camel at sea 589]

18 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

yes, if Texas/OU asked

but they went to the B1G AFTER Texas/OU went to the SEC

They announced the B1G move after.  I'm not sure that an agreement wasn't in place before the Texas/OU SEC deal.  The only reason we found out about the SEC move in '21 was because aggy leaked it.  Otherwise that probably stays quiet for another year or two.  

I assume SC knew that they were B1G bound when they put the brakes on PAC plans to raid the Irate8.  

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

5 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

They announced the B1G move after.  I'm not sure that an agreement wasn't in place before the Texas/OU SEC deal.  The only reason we found out about the SEC move in '21 was because aggy leaked it.  Otherwise that probably stays quiet for another year or two.  

I assume SC knew that they were B1G bound when they put the brakes on PAC plans to raid the Irate8.  

Can we make USC the realignment villain? Texas could use a break. 

[Hagbard Celine 10852]

9 hours ago, FartingDreamer said:

One exception would be Oregon. Eugene is a passionate anomaly on the west coast when it comes to college football.   They love their ducks over there.

And they are delusional.

utah <- colorado <- corn

pedder -> maryland -> rutgers

maryland was like adding northwestern

rutgers was like adding klan aggy (impact not meme)

utah would be 3x the impact of maryland and rutgers combined, colorado even bigger

[DFW Horn 6123]

Quote

USC vs Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State would all do better ratings than USC vs Oregon.  I have no interest in drawing fewer games vs the B1G bluebloods just to play fucking Oregon every year.  USC playing B1G bluebloods is a mutually beneficial event.

Maybe USC/UCLA has a "gentlemen's agreement" with the B1G to not add any more PAC teams short-term, if ever? 😜

[kopp0e 1135]

Two random tweets from folks that (may) have a finger on the pulse of ongoing in PAC & ACC respectively:
 

 

A mock-up of prospective 24-team SEC with four permanent rivals for all teams vs other 20 foes in 4 years:

SEC West: 4 permanent rivals & compete vs 5 SEC foes per season/ 3 out-of-conference games: 12 total...

Arizona- Arizona State/ Kansas/ LSU/ Mississippi State

Arizona State- Arizona/ Colorado/ Texas A&M/ Ole Miss

Colorado- Arizona State/ Oklahoma/ Texas/ Missouri

Kansas- Missouri/ Oklahoma/ Arizona/ Mississippi State

Missouri- Kansas/ Colorado/ Arkansas/ Mississippi State

Oklahoma- Colorado/ Kansas/ Missouri/ Texas

Arkansas- Texas/ Texas A&M/ LSU/ Ole Miss

Texas- Colorado/ Oklahoma/ Texas A&M/ Arkansas

Texas A&M- Texas/ LSU/ Arkansas/ Arizona State

LSU- Texas A&M/ Arkansas/ Ole Miss/ Arizona

Ole Miss- Mississippi State/ LSU/ Arkansas/ Arizona State

Mississippi State- Ole Miss/ Missouri/ Kansas/ Arizona


SEC East: 4 permanent rivals & compete vs 5 SEC foes per season/ 3 out-of-conference games: 12 total...

Alabama- Auburn/ Tennessee/ Florida/ Vanderbilt

Auburn- Alabama/ Georgia/ South Carolina/ NC State

Florida- Florida State/ Georgia/ Tennessee/ Alabama

Florida State- Florida/ North Carolina/ Virginia/ Vanderbilt

Georgia- Florida/ Auburn/ South Carolina/ NC State

South Carolina- North Carolina/ Georgia/ Auburn/ Kentucky

Tennessee- Vanderbilt/ Alabama/ Kentucky/ Florida

Vanderbilt- Tennessee/ Kentucky/ Alabama/ Florida State

Kentucky- Tennessee/ Vanderbilt/ Virginia/ South Carolina

Virginia- North Carolina/ Kentucky/ NC State/ Florida State

North Carolina- NC State/ Virginia/ Florida State/ South Carolina

NC State- North Carolina/ Virginia/ Georgia/ Auburn
 

Currently it seems B1G is dealing with a bit of headache from the 3-6-6 model as well, may be easier by 2030s..?

[bullet 1596]

4 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I doubt Michigan cares who they play. They just want a game in LA. But doesn't Michigan also play Penn State every year? 

Their 3 rivals will include Ohio St. and Michigan St.  So if they get USC they will not play Penn St.

[bullet 1596]

2 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Georgia was a pretty bad underachiever until recently. 

Ignoring the last 3 years:  2007, 2017 #2, 2002 #3, 2019 #4, 2013, #5, 2003, 2004, 2018 #7, 2015, #9, 2015, #10

That is underachiever?

[notre dame joe 187]

4 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Georgia Tech won their last national championship in 1990. Are you aware of this team that plays in College Station, TX ?????

I don't know if College Station has an identity outside of the university but no one says A&M is a local monopoly. 

2 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

utah <- colorado <- corn

pedder -> maryland -> rutgers

maryland was like adding northwestern

rutgers was like adding klan aggy (impact not meme)

utah would be 3x the impact of maryland and rutgers combined, colorado even bigger

Valpo?  https://blog.history.in.gov/ku-klux-u-how-the-klan-almost-bought-a-university/

[Rimbo 25915]

On 3/4/2023 at 11:32 AM, Parliament said:

So do Texas/OU take a look at staying in the new B12?  Maybe there's enough money to stay?  Would be easier to win football games there.

[66BUFF 2562]

5 hours ago, Rimbo said:

 

[closetojumping 62568]

10 hours ago, camel at sea said:

They announced the B1G move after.  I'm not sure that an agreement wasn't in place before the Texas/OU SEC deal.  The only reason we found out about the SEC move in '21 was because aggy leaked it.  Otherwise that probably stays quiet for another year or two.  

I assume SC knew that they were B1G bound when they put the brakes on PAC plans to raid the Irate8.  

Okay, man. Come the fuck on. No one expects to sit on something like a UT/OU move to the SEC for a fucking year. Same for USC/UCLA to the B1G. That’s not how it works. I get that most folks have never been in an M&A situation like that, but you don’t have to delve into fan fiction on this level either way. 

As soon as a LOI was signed, the half life on that information was less than a week without aggie involvement, less than a day with it. They had to notify the schools in prep for a formal vote. The shit went public almost immediately thereafter. 

[hookemATL 11707]

15 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

Maybe Georgia Tech.

Jackets have more recent national title than the Catholics. Wreck ‘em!

[statsman 5456]

There is a lot of disparaging of the PAC. I was looking at this valuation of football programs (I don’t care if it’s a few years old; teams don’t rise and fall dramatically in a few years):

https://graphics.wsj.com/table/NCAA_2019
 
The remaining PAC schools compare well to the remaining B12 schools. UW does look like the best of both leagues. The main problem the PAC has is a poor media contract. The best advantage the B12 has is a good media contract. If the PAC figures out how to solve that (I recommend they look at scheduling to improve the value, as the SEC does with its week 1 and 2 league games), they’ll be fine. 
 
I also notice that the least valuable programs in the B12 are the recent additions. (SMU and SDSU would be the PAC’s least valuable, by a lot, if they were added). Conferences are diluting their value as they try to maintain size. 

[closetohumping 17435]

11 hours ago, kopp0e said:

Two random tweets from folks that (may) have a finger on the pulse of ongoing in PAC & ACC respectively:
 

 

A mock-up of prospective 24-team SEC with four permanent rivals for all teams vs other 20 foes in 4 years:

SEC West: 4 permanent rivals & compete vs 5 SEC foes per season/ 3 out-of-conference games: 12 total...

Arizona- Arizona State/ Kansas/ LSU/ Mississippi State

Arizona State- Arizona/ Colorado/ Texas A&M/ Ole Miss

Colorado- Arizona State/ Oklahoma/ Texas/ Missouri

Kansas- Missouri/ Oklahoma/ Arizona/ Mississippi State

Missouri- Kansas/ Colorado/ Arkansas/ Mississippi State

Oklahoma- Colorado/ Kansas/ Missouri/ Texas

Arkansas- Texas/ Texas A&M/ LSU/ Ole Miss

Texas- Colorado/ Oklahoma/ Texas A&M/ Arkansas

Texas A&M- Texas/ LSU/ Arkansas/ Arizona State

LSU- Texas A&M/ Arkansas/ Ole Miss/ Arizona

Ole Miss- Mississippi State/ LSU/ Arkansas/ Arizona State

Mississippi State- Ole Miss/ Missouri/ Kansas/ Arizona


SEC East: 4 permanent rivals & compete vs 5 SEC foes per season/ 3 out-of-conference games: 12 total...

Alabama- Auburn/ Tennessee/ Florida/ Vanderbilt

Auburn- Alabama/ Georgia/ South Carolina/ NC State

Florida- Florida State/ Georgia/ Tennessee/ Alabama

Florida State- Florida/ North Carolina/ Virginia/ Vanderbilt

Georgia- Florida/ Auburn/ South Carolina/ NC State

South Carolina- North Carolina/ Georgia/ Auburn/ Kentucky

Tennessee- Vanderbilt/ Alabama/ Kentucky/ Florida

Vanderbilt- Tennessee/ Kentucky/ Alabama/ Florida State

Kentucky- Tennessee/ Vanderbilt/ Virginia/ South Carolina

Virginia- North Carolina/ Kentucky/ NC State/ Florida State

North Carolina- NC State/ Virginia/ Florida State/ South Carolina

NC State- North Carolina/ Virginia/ Georgia/ Auburn
 

Currently it seems B1G is dealing with a bit of headache from the 3-6-6 model as well, may be easier by 2030s..?

[Uncle Nate 2097]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

There is a lot of disparaging of the PAC. I was looking at this valuation of football programs (I don’t care if it’s a few years old; teams don’t rise and fall dramatically in a few years):

https://graphics.wsj.com/table/NCAA_2019
 
The remaining PAC schools compare well to the remaining B12 schools. UW does look like the best of both leagues. The main problem the PAC has is a poor media contract. The best advantage the B12 has is a good media contract. If the PAC figures out how to solve that (I recommend they look at scheduling to improve the value, as the SEC does with its week 1 and 2 league games), they’ll be fine. 
 
I also notice that the least valuable programs in the B12 are the recent additions. (SMU and SDSU would be the PAC’s least valuable, by a lot, if they were added). Conferences are diluting their value as they try to maintain size. 

So much this.  

[TKthunder2 4985]

46 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

So much this.  

Yes, if you’re adding from the G5 (or adding schools like Maryland and Rutgers) you are diluting your product. Full Stop.

Big12/PAC12 merger dropping WVU and Baylor (or Oregon State) would have been the best scenario, but the timing just didn’t work out.

[bullet 1596]

22 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Yes, if you’re adding from the G5 (or adding schools like Maryland and Rutgers) you are diluting your product. Full Stop.

Big12/PAC12 merger dropping WVU and Baylor (or Oregon State) would have been the best scenario, but the timing just didn’t work out.

True, but at the same time, those schools have more value in the P5 than the AAC or MWC.  Pac 12 certainly doesn't look any better than the R8 in those 2018 valuations.  Thy look pretty comparable.  But the Pac doesn't want to play games at 9 a.m.  That is a permanent handicap for them.

[statsman 5456]

Yea, and the R8 doesn’t have a single program as good as UW. That may be a feature for the B12 and not a bug. 

[BurntOrange&White 39930]

Lets see those values of Oregon St, Washington St, Cal, etc whenever the big 12 poaches the 4 corner shools or half of them or Oregon/Washington leave for the BIG. 


 

[statsman 5456]

A few years ago, there were about 65 programs in the P5 (plus ND), and there was thought that there should be a super-division of 40 or so schools. Then you have some realignment, some backfill from G5 and now the P5 is set to have about 70 schools (before the PAC reaches down and grabs some more). 
 
A couple of conflicting thoughts-no Conference wants to be diluted to minor status and no Conference wants to lose what is considered critical mass. If the PAC decides to add SMU and SDSU, they have just as much right to a seat in P5 (and the CFP) as the B12. 
 

(It looks to me that fans of the B12 disparaging WSU and Oregon State is very much an example of the pot calling the kettle black)

Edited March 6, 2023 by statsman

[Al_4_ISU 12452]

2 minutes ago, statsman said:

A few years ago, there were about 65 programs in the P5 (plus ND), and there was thought that there should be a super-division of 40 or so schools. Then you have some realignment, some backfill from G5 and now the P5 is set to have about 70 schools (before the PAC reaches down and grabs some more). 
 
A couple of conflicting thoughts-no Conference wants to be diluted to minor status and no Conference wants to lose what is considered critical mass. If the PAC decides to add SMU and SDSU, they have just as much right to a seat in P5 (and the CFP) as the B12. 
 

(It looks to me that fans of the B12 disparaging WSU and Oregon State is very much an example of the pot calling the kettle black)

I feel bad for Washington State and Oregon State in all of this (because we've been there), but a lot of their metrics don't look like they're all that committed to major college sports.  Their stadiums and arenas are tiny.  Close to MWC capacity than Big 12.

['stache 21800]

Are WSU and ORST really bringing down the value that much? UO and UW are in the BIG conversation. Heard Stan and Cal mentioned too. The four corners appear to be valued similar to the XII contract. That's everyone, so why is the PAC as is struggling to get a contract? I can see Cal also bringing it down because I haven't heard them mentioned in anything important sportswise in at least a decade. Stanford seems like it has value, they have had decent football and basketball and are a leader in overall sports titles. 

[TKthunder2 4985]

Oregon State is basically K State without any football success and in a worse time zone. The state of Oregon is small, has very little recruiting or market value and the ducks basically dominate that market.

Washington State is a little better, but their stadium is the smallest at 32k by 8k seats.

In this instance, the Big 12 fans are right.

Edited March 6, 2023 by TKthunder2

[TrashMaster G 17551]

15 hours ago, kopp0e said:

Two random tweets from folks that (may) have a finger on the pulse of ongoing in PAC & ACC respectively:
 

 

A mock-up of prospective 24-team SEC with four permanent rivals for all teams vs other 20 foes in 4 years:

SEC West: 4 permanent rivals & compete vs 5 SEC foes per season/ 3 out-of-conference games: 12 total...

Arizona- Arizona State/ Kansas/ LSU/ Mississippi State

Arizona State- Arizona/ Colorado/ Texas A&M/ Ole Miss

Colorado- Arizona State/ Oklahoma/ Texas/ Missouri

Kansas- Missouri/ Oklahoma/ Arizona/ Mississippi State

Missouri- Kansas/ Colorado/ Arkansas/ Mississippi State

Oklahoma- Colorado/ Kansas/ Missouri/ Texas

Arkansas- Texas/ Texas A&M/ LSU/ Ole Miss

Texas- Colorado/ Oklahoma/ Texas A&M/ Arkansas

Texas A&M- Texas/ LSU/ Arkansas/ Arizona State

LSU- Texas A&M/ Arkansas/ Ole Miss/ Arizona

Ole Miss- Mississippi State/ LSU/ Arkansas/ Arizona State

Mississippi State- Ole Miss/ Missouri/ Kansas/ Arizona


SEC East: 4 permanent rivals & compete vs 5 SEC foes per season/ 3 out-of-conference games: 12 total...

Alabama- Auburn/ Tennessee/ Florida/ Vanderbilt

Auburn- Alabama/ Georgia/ South Carolina/ NC State

Florida- Florida State/ Georgia/ Tennessee/ Alabama

Florida State- Florida/ North Carolina/ Virginia/ Vanderbilt

Georgia- Florida/ Auburn/ South Carolina/ NC State

South Carolina- North Carolina/ Georgia/ Auburn/ Kentucky

Tennessee- Vanderbilt/ Alabama/ Kentucky/ Florida

Vanderbilt- Tennessee/ Kentucky/ Alabama/ Florida State

Kentucky- Tennessee/ Vanderbilt/ Virginia/ South Carolina

Virginia- North Carolina/ Kentucky/ NC State/ Florida State

North Carolina- NC State/ Virginia/ Florida State/ South Carolina

NC State- North Carolina/ Virginia/ Georgia/ Auburn
 

Currently it seems B1G is dealing with a bit of headache from the 3-6-6 model as well, may be easier by 2030s..?

Real stuff has happened and more real stuff is about to happen.  All of this crap reads like the realignment fan fiction from 3 or 4 years ago.