Realignment talk not going away

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

 

[BurntOrange&White 39930]

3 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

 

 

 

 

Not having a legitimate linear partner and the main buyer of rights wants all of it on their streaming service. Not only that but they want to create a super complicated system with potential subs with linear partner, i don't see that working where a linear partner has to buy specific games while Apple owns the whole thing.....that's a R-I-P for the P-A-C

Edited April 21, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[USC Traveler 488]

On 4/19/2023 at 9:17 PM, Hurtlocker said:

NoVA now, but was down at the beach last week!

And I'd agree with you on the B1G, but, as you know, VA is weird.   Its biggest single town is Richmond, which is around the size of Fresno and home to VCU and Richmond, and VA's two biggest metro areas are either a conglomeration of towns (Norfolk, etc) or the outside of a major metro (NoVa).   The B1G already has the DMV with Maryland, which means the 6m other people in the state are around several solid conclaves under the size of like Des Moines or Toledo.   Add to that that all the old, little state schools are exploding in enrollment because UVA keeps its enrollment small, and the population, while large, is fractured.   Tech is wedged into the far corner of the state away from about anything.    Around me, there are just as many JMU fans, which cannot build fast enough to keep up, as there are UVA and Tech and Mason is now the largest state school - which doesn't even have a football team.   Most follow the NFL.   

But, there isn't a single school in VA that has a passion around it that rivals the SEC, Big Ten or even the Big 12.

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.  

[USC Traveler 488]

24 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

 

Not having a legitimate linear partner and the main buyer of rights wants all of it on their streaming service. Not only that but they want to create a super complicated system with potential subs with linear partner, i don't see that working where a linear partner has to buy specific games while Apple owns the whole thing.....that's a R-I-P for the P-A-C

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!!!"

🤣

 

[USC Traveler 488]

On 4/19/2023 at 5:30 PM, bullet said:

	AP Poll rankings in the modern era (1968-present, 5 pts for 1st, 4 for 2nd, etc.)	1	2	3	4	5	places	points
1	AL	9	4	1	3	4	21	74
2	OSU	3	5	3	8	5	24	65
3	OU	4	2	9	1	5	21	62
4	USC	3	5	4	3	0	15	53
5	FSU	3	2	5	4	2	16	48
6	Miami	5	4	2	0	1	12	48
7	NE	4	2	3	2	1	12	42
8	PSU	2	3	4	1	3	13	39
9	ND	3	3	0	2	4	12	35
10	TX	2	2	3	2	3	12	34
11	FL	3	1	3	1	3	11	33
12	GA	3	2	1	3	1	10	33
13	UM	1	1	4	2	3	11	28
14	Clemson	3	2	1	1	0	7	28
15	LSU	2	2	1	0	1	6	22
16	AU	1	2	1	1	1	6	19
17	OR	0	3	1	1	1	6	18
18	TN	1	0	1	3	1	6	15
19	CO	1	0	2	1	1	5	14
20	WA	0	2	1	1	1	5	14
21	TCU	0	2	1	0	0	3	11
22	Pitt	1	1	0	1	0	3	11
23	AZ St.	0	1	0	2	0	3	8
24	Utah	0	1	0	1	0	2	6
25	BYU	1	0	0	0	1	2	6
26	Stanford	0	0	1	1	0	2	5
27	SMU	0	1	0	0	1	2	5
28	Mich St.	0	0	1	0	1	2	4
29	Arkansas	0	0	1	0	1	2	4
30	VT	0	1	0	0	0	1	4
31	GT	0	1	0	0	0	1	4

 

All others-15 schools  0-0-1-10-10 21 33

Oregon is 17.  Washington tied for 19.  Then there is a gap to TCU and Pitt.

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.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

49 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

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.

 

TCU, for all its success, has shit for fan support.  Even last year when they were winning the conference they didn't sell out their stadium.  The only time they sell out their basketball arena is if Tech or UT is playing (and they tried to limit the tickets Tech fans could buy even if it meant empty seats).  They are a small private school with a small alumni following whose success on the field has not resulted in a large fanbase.  They don't bring anything to the BIG except for an occasional game in the metroplex for the visiting team.

[USC Traveler 488]

18 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

 

TCU, for all its success, has shit for fan support.  Even last year when they were winning the conference they didn't sell out their stadium.  The only time they sell out their basketball arena is if Tech or UT is playing (and they tried to limit the tickets Tech fans could buy even if it meant empty seats).  They are a small private school with a small alumni following whose success on the field has not resulted in a large fanbase.  They don't bring anything to the BIG except for an occasional game in the metroplex for the visiting team.

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.

Edited April 21, 2023 by USC Traveler
clarity

[Uncle Nate 2097]

7 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

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.

As an outsider to Texas, and specifically the DFW market, you don't realize that TCU really doesn't deliver the DFW market.  Just like UH doesn't really deliver the Houston market. And the television market dynamics from when Rutgers and Maryland were added to the BIG are no longer the reality in 2023.  Cable packages have changed...it's no longer about tv sets in the MSA.  So you can't use the Rutgers comparison to TCU.

And this guy is dead on point.  This team just played in the NC game, and yet they still have to do squirrely shit like this:

 

 

[notre dame joe 186]

15 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

The PAC12 only had 2 top 5 conference games last year (omitting USC v UCLA) both were the 4th most watched games of the week. 1 of those featured an LA school (USC/Utah) and the other was Oregon/Washington and BOTH were over the air on FOX.

note the Big 12 (omitting RRSO) had 4 top 5 conference games, 2 that did not include UT/OU (TCU/ISU and OSU/KSU) and 2 that included Texas.  The ACC had 3 all Clemson games.

Other than those 2, the PAC’s top rated game of the week included 2 #7 games (both featured LA schools and both were on FOX), 3 #8 games (1 LA, 1 on ABC-UO/OSU), and 3 #9 games (2 LA, 1 on FOX). And anything NOT on OTA on FOX/ABC was on ESPN late night window where they were the only P5 game and got a bonus bump which now is in competition with the Big 12 (Baylor/BYU was the third highest game in the late kick window this year).

Take away their exclusive P5 late night window, FOX OTA, and the LA schools and they have no chance. This is their last big time contract. If they can’t get a good deal now they never will and in 10 years they’ll be significantly behind not just the SEC/B1G but also the B12/ACC.

ND@SC slightly edged out the Iron Bowl this year.  Partially because SC was still playoff-live.

[USC Traveler 488]

13 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

As an outsider to Texas, and specifically the DFW market, you don't realize that TCU really doesn't deliver the DFW market.  Just like UH doesn't really deliver the Houston market. And the television market dynamics from when Rutgers and Maryland were added to the BIG are no longer the reality in 2023.  Cable packages have changed...it's no longer about tv sets in the MSA.  So you can't use the Rutgers comparison to TCU.

And this guy is dead on point.  This team just played in the NC game, and yet they still have to do squirrely shit like this:

 

 

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.

[USC Traveler 488]

9 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

ND@SC slightly edged out the Iron Bowl this year.  Partially because SC was still playoff-live.

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 ?

[TKthunder2 4985]

47 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

ND@SC slightly edged out the Iron Bowl this year.  Partially because SC was still playoff-live.

That was not a PAC12 conference game. OOC games can vary wildly and aren’t something you can count on year to year so when comparing conferences you typically only count conference games.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

3 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

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.  

1) sorry to hear about your mom man, even if it wasn't recent

2) Tech support seems heavily catered to winning and that kind of ended when Beamer retired.   I don't see the swell any more and I know a lot of alumni.   The kids that are going there, that I anecdotally know through families, are generally going due to some sort of military connection.  UVA and Tech are not growing as fast as other fast growing states.   If you look at bama, they've nearly doubled in size in the past decade or so.   UVA keeps its enrollment tethered to like freshman housing or something.  They're still only like 23k, with 16k undergrad, Tech is nearly twice that big, but both could easily be in the 50s.   Instead of going there, those kids are now at JMU (up to 22k) and Mason (nearing 40k).   To your point though Tech is much better represented in the south - like Roanoke or the Cheasapeake metro.

3) Since Maryland is located in the DMV, they get the Washington AND Baltimore DMAs.   Though they get a teeny tiny crumb of the local attention which is dominated by the pro teams.  Hell, even Georgetown is likely talked about more in the area then any of the P5 programs who get mention, but kind of a passing mention.   The media messaging feels like "College sports, isn't it cute?"

4) Likely agree with Duke, but I know UNC/UVA are connected at the hip, so you're spot on there.   They hate Duke in basketball, but the connection is the elder state schools.  Whatever happens they'll stay together.   Notice that UNC and UVA are not the entities concerned about ACC payments.   

Side note, I was in Elliot's offices this morning and literally everyone I talked to at some point said, "We're not going to win any national championships around here any time soon, but we're going to do things the right way."  Like it was on a press release.   The wording was nearly always identical.  Totally different mindset than most SEC schools.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

3 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

 

 @Hurtlocker  , given what we know of BTN in NY state via Rutgers, do you think adding TCU would get BTN in-state throughout TX ?

 

No, not the entire state.   They're in Texas already, and the DFW DMA would bump, but the entire state of Texas is a bit harder to read.    There is literally nothing else in New York.   Once you have NYC, everything else is like croutons on a salad.   Gaining San Antonio, Austin and Houston would be a serious negotiation with providers in that area.  Similarly, USC doesn't get them max local rates in all of Cali either.  

This is the same math with the ACC teams.   FSU doesn't get you the entire state of Florida at local rates any more than Syracuse gets you all of New York.   If it did the ACC network would be swimming in cash.   It gets you Tallahassee and any metro close.   For instance, WVU is in the Pittsburgh DMA. Penn State gets Pittsburgh and Philly.   They're big enough brands with big fan bases in those metros that are relatively close - e.g. the group that may actually drive to a game, so they have big local rates that stretch further than you'd imagine.   Georgia Tech would technically get you Atlanta and Miami - er, Miami, but FSU doesn't get you BTN's highest rates in all of Florida like Ohio State does for Ohio or Penn State for Pennsylvania.  

The more people want it, the more you can charge.   This is part of the negotiation process.   The BTN may want the highest rate in every local market, but they do kind of need to do some work for that too.   Rutgers doesn't just get big rates in NYC because they're Rutgers, they get it because there is a metric fuck ton of Big Ten grads in the NYC/Philly/DC metroplex.    Are there a ton of Big Ten alumni in Tampa....Orlando...Houston?   If the answer is no the bump is much harder to come by.

Think of it this way.  When you're in the market you plant a flag that provides a bigger bonus.   The more eyeballs you can pull out of that market, the more you can charge.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Hurtlocker

[Loose Stool 112]

LOLZ - No shortage of comedy here:

 

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1649501682290806784

 

Edited April 21, 2023 by Loose Stool

[Hurtlocker 2212]

5 minutes ago, Loose Stool said:

LOLZ - No shortage of comedy here:

 

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1649501682290806784

 

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

NYC has 8.5 million people

NYC  is not a huge college football town per capita

But NYC is a college football town when looking at raw numbers compared to other cities and even states

The vast majority of NYC fans come from the B1G, especially tOSU, Michigan, and Penn State.

Rutgers gives the B1G members a game close to NYC, which assisted in pulling in the entire DMA

Rutgers alone gives the B1GN nothing

Rutgers also gives the B1G games played in a solid recruiting territory, although I'm not sure they've actually capitalized on that any more than before adding Rutgers

I think it's easy to see how a huge flagship university (Maryland) in a populated but small land area could pull in some solid numbers for the B1GN

TCU does not have these advantages

 

[Satchel 6925]

TCU is a better fit for the Sec.

[KaiserSoze 998]

4 minutes ago, Satchel said:

TCU is a better fit for the Sec.

Because of all the racism?

[TKthunder2 4985]

3 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Notice that UNC and UVA are not the entities concerned about ACC payments. 

So we agree on most of your points however I think you’re off on UNC.

UNC's Cunningham joins call for unequal revenue distribution among ACC schools

[TKthunder2 4985]

NYC is nearly 9 million people, NJ itself is #11 in population with over 9 million people, the CSA of NYC/NJ is over 23 million.

The State of Maryland is 7 million and DC/Baltimore metro which includes areas of Northern Virginia is 10 million

Penn State already had a claim on Philadelphia and their metro of 7 million but it was fairly weak but now with Rutgers/Maryland the Big Ten can basically claim (and will have metrics to prove) the entire area from DC to NYC as their footprint and will be able to charge additional carriage rates for their network.

That will not happen with TCU. There is too much competition in Texas and SEC/Big12 will control the vast majority of the market share. With just TCU, I’m not even sure they could get in market rates in Dallas likely just Fort Worth.

The top markets left to the Big Ten are San Francisco, New England/Boston, Atlanta, Miami (& Orlando indirectly), Phoenix, Seattle, Denver, Portland, Charlotte, Salt Lake, Kansas City. so PAC or ACC or Kansas.

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

[TKthunder2 4985]

Jon Wilner blog article

https://sports360az.com/2023/04/hotline-mailbag-worst-case-scenario-for-the-pac-12-outlook-for-oregon-and-uw-valuation-rumors-expansion-candidates-and-more/

 

[notre dame joe 186]

On 4/21/2023 at 11:46 AM, USC Traveler said:

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 ?

The op-ed was vanilla and probably went through 20 drafts from an outside firm.  None of the critics seem to have read it.  However they are not tone deaf.  Jack and Jenkins were not speaking from a position of strength.  I don't see how the op-ed can be a CR indicator compared to how they just moved our Hockey from the East to the BUG. 

[Satchel 6925]

On 4/21/2023 at 7:04 PM, KaiserSoze said:

Because of all the racism?

Mostly because of their obsession with better thanness. It’s the Sec’s brand.

[FartingDreamer 138]

On 4/17/2023 at 12:10 PM, USC Traveler said:

I'm with you.  If they add teams, that would be covered under whatever expansion provisions are in the contract.

If a merger would somehow invalidate the GOR, schools like Wake, BC, Cuse, etc aren't going to vote for it, as FSU, Clemson, etc would bolt at the first opportunity, with some of the remnants getting left behind entirely.

Schools like VT and NC St aren't assured of a landing place in the P2.  If UNC and UVA go SEC, they're not getting into the BIG.  Louisville, Pitt no shot.

I don't think the votes are there for anything that would allow teams to escape.  

There won't be any less then a P3, and VT along with NCST, Pitt, etc likely land in the B12, solidifying it as a third power conference.

 

On 4/20/2023 at 8:35 AM, closetohumping said:

Utah gets the California kids who couldn't get into the UC system.

They also get the many kids that didn't/couldn't get into BYU.  It's pretty much a Plan B institution.  

On 4/21/2023 at 11:54 AM, USC Traveler said:

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.

 

On 4/21/2023 at 1:05 PM, USC Traveler said:

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.

TCU doesn't bring that much of the DFW market, nor do they have the potential to.

[DFW Horn 6123]

9 hours ago, FartingDreamer said:

TCU doesn't bring that much of the DFW market, nor do they have the potential to.

TCU was just the best available at the time if you're willing to overlook Louisville.

Other Big 12 schools, OU and OSU in particular, need to recruit DFW. TCU wasn't a tough sell to them, among others. I honestly don't know what DeLoss was thinking at the time with no Big 12 Network to sell. 

Edited April 23, 2023 by DFW Horn

[camel at sea 589]

2 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

TCU was just the best available at the time if you're willing to overlook Louisville.

Other Big 12 schools, OU and OSU in particular, need to recruit DFW. TCU wasn't a tough sell to them, among others. I honestly don't know what DeLoss was thinking at the time with no Big 12 Network to sell. 

If you can't add a blueblood, the next best thing is adding a program that wins football games.  TCU has played eleven seasons in the Big 12 and has four Top 10 finishes in that span (two top 3 finishes.)  From the conference perspective, the Frogs have been a great addition. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

38 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

If you can't add a blueblood, the next best thing is adding a program that wins football games.  TCU has played eleven seasons in the Big 12 and has four Top 10 finishes in that span (two top 3 finishes.)  From the conference perspective, the Frogs have been a great addition. 

Exactly, and they happen to play in DFW, which allows all the other teams in the league to get games in Texas and, at the time, keep at least two games in Texas per year for recruiting once the Aggy's left.   They were a no brainer add and definitely have pulled their weight in football, being the only Big 12 team to make the CFB Champ game, while growing basketball to compete.   They pull solid ratings too.

[Vertigo 20276]

40 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

If you can't add a blueblood, the next best thing is adding a program that wins football games.  TCU has played eleven seasons in the Big 12 and has four Top 10 finishes in that span (two top 3 finishes.)  From the conference perspective, the Frogs have been a great addition. 

TCU had the benefit of a great AD and a hall of fame head football coach for a decade. This last season was the culmination of that era. Dykes is never again going to assemble a team with that much talent for a variety of reasons:

1. Texas has it's shit together. There will be no more Quentin Johnsons falling in their laps because of dumbassery.

2. Texas and OU in the SEC once again knocks TCU down a tier in recruits minds.

3. Dykes will have diminishing returns over time. He is not a program builder like Patterson.

4. TCU is not going to be a consistent major player in NIL due to the alumni base.

5. The transfer portal is not going to save them consistently. There is no way to predict the level of talent available at areas of need like you can in recruiting. Just ask michigan state how portal first strategies can affect you year over year.

[Hagbard Celine 10848]

On 4/20/2023 at 3:28 PM, Sandbagging Steve said:

Iowa, Rutgers, Purdue, Indiana, etc. will have very little say in the future of the B1G.

There may come a day when Indiana gets 3 total schools in to the money.  This would also mean getting 2 private schools in to the money.

We're now in to a serious differential in money flowing to institutions of higher education.  With this thought in mind, I submit the following for the consideration of my esteemed comrades.

Your mileage may vary.  The situation is fluid.

 

[Hagbard Celine 10848]

my first takeaway from that map is this:

the b1g should offer BC and Syracuse tomorrow - that takes out 4 Senators and shores up Jersey

the next move when Domer is ready, is to also offer Missouri, UVa, NC, then you look at WVa, VAtech, NCstate, Clemson, GAtech FLstate & Miami

you take all of those and the Senate will never pass Anti-Trust or other Regulation and the permanent disparity is locked in

 

[billfromlaketravis 11444]

57 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

TCU had the benefit of a great AD and a hall of fame head football coach for a decade. This last season was the culmination of that era. Dykes is never again going to assemble a team with that much talent for a variety of reasons:

1. Texas has it's shit together. There will be no more Quentin Johnsons falling in their laps because of dumbassery.

2. Texas and OU in the SEC once again knocks TCU down a tier in recruits minds.

3. Dykes will have diminishing returns over time. He is not a program builder like Patterson.

4. TCU is not going to be a consistent major player in NIL due to the alumni base.

5. The transfer portal is not going to save them consistently. There is no way to predict the level of talent available at areas of need like you can in recruiting. Just ask michigan state how portal first strategies can affect you year over year.

And… DeLoss can’t hold his liquor. CDC could have talked his way into the PUF if he wanted to. 

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

[Hagbard Celine 10848]

But DiStefano said “there’s a very good possibility” the next deal will bring in per-school revenues ranking third among the Power 5 conferences, ahead of the Big 12 and Atlantic Coast conferences.

[billfromlaketravis 11444]

DiStefano is repeating the company line. If the PAC adds SDSU and SMU to get back to 12, there’s no way they surpass $31 million per school. 
 

Colorado was supposed to be the most likely to jump. Probably not what the Big 12 wants to hear right now. 
 

Kliavkoff is contractually obligated to feed the presidents this bullshit, but if he doesn’t deliver, and he probably won’t, there’s going to be a lot of hurt feelings. 

[DFW Horn 6123]

1 hour ago, Hagbard Celine said:

But DiStefano said “there’s a very good possibility” the next deal will bring in per-school revenues ranking third among the Power 5 conferences, ahead of the Big 12 and Atlantic Coast conferences.

This reads like a lot of these PAC assclowns deserve each other.

Or perhaps he's giving CU an out if Klownkoff doesn't deliver?

[Hurtlocker 2212]

3 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

""Nobody’s asked us – I shouldn’t even say that. We’re committed to the Pac-12," he said. "What I’ve said along with the other presidents and chancellors is we’re not going to even think about going anywhere, none of us, until we see what kind of offer we get, and that’s still being worked out. And I’m confident it’s going to be fine.""

 

[Hagbard Celine 10848]

/baghdad bob

[thunderlounge 7813]

Isn’t there a date coming up where beforehand they don’t have an exit fee?

If so, what would happen if said media deal isn’t done before that date?

[TKthunder2 4985]

4 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

my first takeaway from that map is this:

the b1g should offer BC and Syracuse tomorrow - that takes out 4 Senators and shores up Jersey

the next move when Domer is ready, is to also offer Missouri, UVa, NC, then you look at WVa, VAtech, NCstate, Clemson, GAtech FLstate & Miami

you take all of those and the Senate will never pass Anti-Trust or other Regulation and the permanent disparity is locked in

 

I know BC sucks absolute shit right now but they (or UConn) have always been a dark horse candidate for the B1G in my mind.

Notre Dame has lot of history with BC and Boston has some of the most ND fans in the country. The Big Ten also doesn’t have any coverage in New England which makes a BC/ND combo very appealing before you even consider thing like academics and hockey.

 

Not sure what Missouri is doing on your list here.

[Hagbard Celine 10848]

Missouri is a b1g school in everything but sports.  Columbia feels exactly like Iowa City, Champaign-Urbana, Madison, State College and West Lafayette.   Academically and culturally MIssouri belongs in the b1g more so than they were ever a fit in the big8, bdf or secx3.

[TKthunder2 4985]

50 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

Isn’t there a date coming up where beforehand they don’t have an exit fee?

If so, what would happen if said media deal isn’t done before that date?

IIRC they just have to give 12 month’s notice. To avoid any complications they would have to withdrawal from the conference before July 1st. They could still pull out after it just opens them up for violating conference bilaws.

If they don’t have a deal by then…

[billfromlaketravis 11444]

14 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

IIRC they just have to give 12 month’s notice. To avoid any complications they would have to withdrawal from the conference before July 1st. They could still pull out after it just opens them up for violating conference bilaws.

If they don’t have a deal by then…

So July 1 is the real deadline? Interesting. 

[thunderlounge 7813]

50 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

IIRC they just have to give 12 month’s notice. To avoid any complications they would have to withdrawal from the conference before July 1st. They could still pull out after it just opens them up for violating conference bilaws.

If they don’t have a deal by then…

Thanks. I thought I had read something along those lines.

Bottom line being cheapest way out is for a limited time.

Hmmmm.

[TKthunder2 4985]

5 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

Missouri is a b1g school in everything but sports.  Columbia feels exactly like Iowa City, Champaign-Urbana, Madison, State College and West Lafayette.   Academically and culturally MIssouri belongs in the b1g more so than they were ever a fit in the big8, bdf or secx3.

Well…yeah, my geographic OCD would love nothing more than for the B1G to drop their LA dream, send Maryland back to the ACC and add MU, ISU, KU, KSU, ND, Pitt, Syracuse, UConn, BC and have a 24 team conference with every major football school in the Eastern/Central time zone above the Mason-Dixon Line/Missouri compromise.

But as we all know that ain’t happening.

Missouri doesn’t bring enough to the table. They only got a spot in the SEC because the SEC needed a 14th member to round out aggy and they passed the bar as being better than West Virginia.

[BurntOrange&White 39930]

Their current deal ends July 1, 2024. I don’t think it really matters when they announce whether before July 1 this year or not because of the deal expiration so long as they don’t sign a new deal

[Hurtlocker 2212]

28 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

So July 1 is the real deadline? Interesting. 

Yes, basically.  If they have to give a year's notice before their contract ends, that's by the end of June.   Also why there isn't a rush, for the four corners schools.  If the deal comes in by June, win, if it doesn't they know the Big 12 will take them.

Oregon and Washington are in a pinch.   The Big 12 won't offer a temporary fix and the Big Ten doesn't have to do jack shit.   If the B1G doesn't step in with something they'll have to choose between staying with a depleting Pac or a "truck stop" Big 12.

Arizona, Arizona State and Colorado knows they have options.

The rest will be wherever they be, regardless of what it pays.

After July 1st though, things can get tricky if you can't leave your conference, but don't want to sign a GoR.

[TKthunder2 4985]

 

1 hour ago, Hurtlocker said:

After July 1st though, things can get tricky if you can't leave your conference, but don't want to sign a GoR.

It’s not that tricky. TV deals don’t require a GOR. PAC12 gets a less than great TV deal that requires a GOR the others schools won’t sign it and their partners will have to deal without the GOR likely dropping the amount they are willing to pay.

Apple may pay $31million for the whole package of PAC12 games but only with a GOR. Oregon refuses to sign and that number drops to $27million and puts in an renegotiation clause that reduces the value of the deal proportional to the value of any schools lost.

[billfromlaketravis 11444]

3 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

 

It’s not that tricky. TV deals don’t require a GOR. PAC12 gets a less than great TV deal that requires a GOR the others schools won’t sign it and their partners will have to deal without the GOR likely dropping the amount they are willing to pay.

Apple may pay $31million for the whole package of PAC12 games but only with a GOR. Oregon refuses to sign and that number drops to $27million and puts in an renegotiation clause that reduces the value of the deal proportional to the value of any schools lost.

Still the MLS model? $100 for a season subscription? 
 

That would suck for casual PAC viewers like myself.