Realignment talk not going away

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

Pac 12 fans are amusing

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

I didn't see this posted but maybe it was....

 

 

 

[Josef Pwag 1715]

 

[GreenspointTexas 9546]

God colorado is fucking pathetic

 

and the big 12 is even more pussy for wanting them back

 

that god we are leaving this shithole

[DanTheHorn 4884]

14 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

God colorado is fucking pathetic

 

and the big 12 is even more pussy for wanting them back

 

that god we are leaving this shithole

The program had a good run from 1989 to 1996 and then Rick really screwed it up. Gary Barnett did OK trying to recover but thank god the group that wanted him lost out to the group that wanted Mack. Then they hired Dan Hawkins and he was lousy and probably looked good at Boise because he had Chris Peterson. After that they did not recover. So I hope the move is good for them because watching that program during their run was exciting.

 

Edited July 27, 2023 by DanTheHorn

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

17 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

God colorado is fucking pathetic

 

and the big 12 is even more pussy for wanting them back

 

that god we are leaving this shithole

You're such a dumbass. All the Big 12 needed was for 1 to jump ship to start the chain reaction. Colorado was the catalyst and if Big 12 can get a school like Oregon to jump to them, even if temporary for the Big 12's next contract length that is a win for the Big 12. Big 12/Colorado literally destabilized the PAC even further and only made their contract negotiation even more difficult with only 9 teams. 

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

 

 

[Deej 76398]

So Colorado has destroyed two conferences now? I thought Texas was the team that did that?

[BigHornedLurker 1888]

Honestly big12 football will be awesome to watch if the domino's fall 

I think we're naturally seeing how the acc will break up as well 

I still think we'll see either relegation or breakaway at some point , but I think the writing is on the wall for 3 super leagues 

[gatormarc 904]

13 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

This isn't a new thing.

Cal and Stanford have been in the AmEast for  Field Hockey since 2015 since there are no west coast conferences for Field Hockey.

[TonyTexas 10467]

Twitterverse is saying Arizona to the Big 12 is next. 

[Js1 84995]

Is there a bigger culture shock within the same conference as CU and WV? 

Edited July 27, 2023 by Js1

[DanTheHorn 4884]

32 minutes ago, Deej said:

So Colorado has destroyed two conferences now? I thought Texas was the team that did that?

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Is there a bigger culture shock within the same conference as CU and WV? 

Well, at least they have mountains to talk about.

[GreenspointTexas 9546]

43 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

You're such a dumbass. All the Big 12 needed was for 1 to jump ship to start the chain reaction. Colorado was the catalyst and if Big 12 can get a school like Oregon to jump to them, even if temporary for the Big 12's next contract length that is a win for the Big 12. Big 12/Colorado literally destabilized the PAC even further and only made their contract negotiation even more difficult with only 9 teams. 

No shit. Im saying the big 12 could have gone after other pac 12 schools instead of them. They are arguably a bottom 2-3 athletics program In the pac. There were better options that would have jumped ship first, ie - the zona schools

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

4 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Well, at least they have mountains to talk about.

Drugs, too.

[DanTheHorn 4884]

1 minute ago, GreenspointTexas said:

No shit. Im saying the big 12 could have gone after other pac 12 schools instead of them. They are arguably a bottom 2-3 athletics program In the pac. There were better options that would have jumped ship first, ie - the zona schools

I predict you're going to lose this one @GreenspointTexas and you are not going to understand why.

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

3 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

No shit. Im saying the big 12 could have gone after other pac 12 schools instead of them. They are arguably a bottom 2-3 athletics program In the pac. There were better options that would have jumped ship first, ie - the zona schools

You're just showing your stupidity even more. You needed 1 to drop, Colorado is a former big 12 member and arguably the easiest target for that jump to happen which is what we're seeing currently. Now you go hunting for the real prizes that are Arizona, Washington, Oregon, or maybe even Stanford. 

Edited July 27, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[gatormarc 904]

7 minutes ago, GreenspointTexas said:

They are arguably a bottom 2-3 athletics program In the pac. 

It's all relative. Colorado may have finished a very poor 61st place putting them next to last in that Pac but that puts them in the top half of the new Big 12.

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

If the significance of the Big 12 poaching a school from the Pac 12 (that isn't Wazzu or Oregon State) isn't abundantly obvious, I don't know why you'd even bother posting in this thread.

The Big 12 has been kicked around for 15 years.  The bulk of the schools for years had to sit there and listen to talking heads and blue blood fanbases tell us we were worthless participants that had no value and didn't deserve to exist.  We were left on the roadside for dead, for what appeared to be the last time in '21.  The Pac had a million opportunities to kill the Big 12, and didn't do it.  It's a real life version of the scene in so many action movies where the plucky hero lays there wounded and the bad guy sits around, laughing and taunting our nearly dead protagonist, only for them to find some object lying around, to allow them to kill the cackling bad guy.  

Colorado was the object laying around, and it appears that against all odds, the Big 12 is not only going to survive, but kill off one of their chief historical antagonists in the process.

[Deej 76398]

8 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

You're just showing your stupidity even more. You needed 1 to drop, Colorado is a former big 12 member and arguably the easiest target for that jump to happen which is what we're seeing currently. Now you go hunting for the real prizes that are Arizona, Washington, Oregon, or maybe even Stanford. 

I feel like Stanford would drop football before they'd join the Big 12. 

[Josef Pwag 1715]

2 minutes ago, Deej said:

I feel like Stanford would drop football before they'd join the Big 12. 

It is hard to put into words how much I want Stanford to be conference partners with Texas Tech. 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

2 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

It is hard to put into words how much I want Stanford to be conference partners with Texas Tech. 

The only thing better would be Stanford applying to get into the Big 12 and being told no.

[Js1 84995]

3 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

It is hard to put into words how much I want Stanford to be conference partners with Texas Tech. 

Boulder/Palo Alto and Morgantown/Lubbock/Waco

[Hurtlocker 2208]

Yeah, should this be legit, it isn't USC or Texas moving, but its still a major deal.   Its passing the instability hat to the Pac 12, who now will have lost three members in a year with little to no options to stop the bleeding.    They could have stuck together at ten, but at nine, they can't.   

Colorado doesn't have the brand value of Texas, but it has a brand value and that is leaps and bounds ahead of any G5 school.   So not only did the B12 pick up a geographically attached Power Five school, it destabilized the Pac12 even more.

The probability of other Pac schools now reaching out to the B12 are much, much greater than they were last week.  And while nailing down an Oregon/Washington would possibly even add more value, just grabbing Arizona adds more brand cache to the conference.

The Pac, on the other hand, is painted into a corner, literally.   There are no P5 schools available to them to expand with.   SDSU or SMU don't bring same value, let alone increasing it.  So of the 9 who are left, how confident are you on your future?   Its a bad place to be.

[LTtxfan 48823]

[Hank Chinaski 6310]

38 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Is there a bigger culture shock within the same conference as CU and WV? 

I remember being giddy - when it seemed possible that we’d move to the PAC with the ags - at the idea of a swarm of aggie hayseeds descending on the Bay Area or Seattle en masse. Doing their midnight yelling thing in LA somewhere. Etcetera and so forth.

Edited July 27, 2023 by Hank Chinaski

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

10 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Yeah, should this be legit, it isn't USC or Texas moving, but its still a major deal.   Its passing the instability hat to the Pac 12, who now will have lost three members in a year with little to no options to stop the bleeding.    They could have stuck together at ten, but at nine, they can't.   

Colorado doesn't have the brand value of Texas, but it has a brand value and that is leaps and bounds ahead of any G5 school.   So not only did the B12 pick up a geographically attached Power Five school, it destabilized the Pac12 even more.

The probability of other Pac schools now reaching out to the B12 are much, much greater than they were last week.  And while nailing down an Oregon/Washington would possibly even add more value, just grabbing Arizona adds more brand cache to the conference.

The Pac, on the other hand, is painted into a corner, literally.   There are no P5 schools available to them to expand with.   SDSU or SMU don't bring same value, let alone increasing it.  So of the 9 who are left, how confident are you on your future?   Its a bad place to be.

Notre Dame is the only school left outside of the Big 10 and SEC with this kind of brand.

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

17 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

It is hard to put into words how much I want Stanford to be conference partners with Texas Tech. 

Baylor/BYU/TCU would be funnier 

[Laxtonto 11901]

So if the PAC lose at least 2, most likely 4, does the resulting mush mash they throw together enough to keep G5 status? How would this change the math in the CFP payout?

At what point is it more valuable to the rest college football to just let them die as a conference? I know it would help the MWCs per team payout, but with UW and Oregon floating around as a wild card there is just enough payout inversion hanging out that it is hard to just let the PAC die.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

36 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

If the significance of the Big 12 poaching a school from the Pac 12 (that isn't Wazzu or Oregon State) isn't abundantly obvious, I don't know why you'd even bother posting in this thread.

The Big 12 has been kicked around for 15 years.  The bulk of the schools for years had to sit there and listen to talking heads and blue blood fanbases tell us we were worthless participants that had no value and didn't deserve to exist.  We were left on the roadside for dead, for what appeared to be the last time in '21.  The Pac had a million opportunities to kill the Big 12, and didn't do it.  It's a real life version of the scene in so many action movies where the plucky hero lays there wounded and the bad guy sits around, laughing and taunting our nearly dead protagonist, only for them to find some object lying around, to allow them to kill the cackling bad guy.  

Colorado was the object laying around, and it appears that against all odds, the Big 12 is not only going to survive, but kill off one of their chief historical antagonists in the process.

You are 99% correct.

The first object the Big 12 found was cutting in front of the Pac12 to do a TV deal (that was the ax to the foot of the PAC12).  The Colorado deal is picking up the sword and stabbing them with it while they are still looking at their wounded foot with an ax in it.  The next school that jumps will be the Big 12 taking that sword and slicing off the Pac12's head with it.

Edited July 27, 2023 by Uncle Nate

[Uncle Nate 2097]

14 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Baylor/BYU/TCU would be funnier 

The Holy Shit Rivalries

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

3 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

So if the PAC lose at least 2, most likely 4, does the resulting mush mash they throw together enough to keep G5 status? How would this change the math in the CFP payout?

At what point is it more valuable to the rest college football to just let them die as a conference? I know it would help the MWCs per team payout, but with UW and Oregon floating around as a wild card there is just enough payout inversion hanging out that it is hard to just let the PAC die.

From rom a cost and business standpoint ESPN and FOX  would save money by adding 3-4 teams to the Big 12 than negotiating a full conference deal with the pac12

Colorado is getting full payout at around 31.7 million...so lets look at the numbers: Colorado + 3 more Pac 12 teams at 31.7 million comes out to 126.8 million. The Big 12's new deal is a 6 year deal through 2031. The full payout of 4 new members for 6 years is roughly 761 million. Compare that to a whole new deal with Pac 12 and teams earning 30 million a year over the course of the same time that is 1.8 billion. The networks are essentially saving 1 billion dollars.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

11 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Notre Dame is the only school left outside of the Big 10 and SEC with this kind of brand.

Yeah and they're not available.   Oregon/Wash are the two biggest brands in the Pac, but Colorado/Arizona are in the tier right below them.  If you get Arizona you could be done, looks good on a map, better brands than Houston, and increases your footprint in more populated areas.

At that point, will Oregon and Washington want to wait it out 6 years for a B1G invite when one may never come?  ND is the crown jewel of their desire and may want UVA/UNC over you, not to mention Stanford in your own conference.  Also, the B1G, like the SEC, has absolutely ZERO need to expand past 16.  They control the current narrative and literally any add besides ND waters down their power.

So do you sit it out adding Boise's and SMUs and the like, or do you make the jump to your second-best long-term option, though best short term, and become THE brand in a 16 team conference that gives you games you can win all over the nation?

The fact that the Pac allowed itself to get here is a stunning failure, far worse than the old B12 being unable to work as a team.   Instead of working against each other, they destroyed what they had as a team.  And now a couple will have an option and are fighting against teammates to survive.  Whoever doesn't win out has no option left, but relegation.

 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

From rom a cost and business standpoint ESPN and FOX  would save money by adding 3-4 teams to the Big 12 than negotiating a full conference deal with the pac12

Colorado is getting full payout at around 31.7 million...so lets look at the numbers: Colorado + 3 more Pac 12 teams at 31.7 million comes out to 126.8 million. The Big 12's new deal is a 6 year deal through 2031. The full payout of 4 new members for 6 years is roughly 761 million. Compare that to a whole new deal with Pac 12 and teams earning 30 million a year over the course of the same time that is 1.8 billion. The networks are essentially saving 1 billion dollars.

Exactly, and they pay for it with late night games.

Oregon/Washington, if they were two of that four, may actually increase the payout.   If not immediately, definitely in 2031.

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

2 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Yeah and they're not available.   Oregon/Wash are the two biggest brands in the Pac, but Colorado/Arizona are in the tier right below them.  If you get Arizona you could be done, looks good on a map, better brands than Houston, and increases your footprint in more populated areas.

At that point, will Oregon and Washington want to wait it out 6 years for a B1G invite when one may never come?  ND is the crown jewel of their desire and may want UVA/UNC over you, not to mention Stanford in your own conference.  Also, the B1G, like the SEC, has absolutely ZERO need to expand past 16.  They control the current narrative and literally any add besides ND waters down their power.

So do you sit it out adding Boise's and SMUs and the like, or do you make the jump to your second-best long-term option, though best short term, and become THE brand in a 16 team conference that gives you games you can win all over the nation?

The fact that the Pac allowed itself to get here is a stunning failure, far worse than the old B12 being unable to work as a team.   Instead of working against each other, they destroyed what they had as a team.  And now a couple will have an option and are fighting against teammates to survive.  Whoever doesn't win out has no option left, but relegation.

 

This isn't getting enough discussion in the big picture.

There's this assumption that the Big 10 and SEC are just going to grow to some arbitrary number to create a new division, but given that this is all about money, it seems unlikely that the money really backs that.

Outside of Notre Dame, and MAYBE 2-3 ACC schools, additional schools are no longer financially additive to those leagues.  They already have enough blue bloods to demand top dollar and have the biggest say in how the sport is run.  There's a real likelihood that continuing to add schools won't make them any more money, and they can't really get any more power.

There's this assumption that we're heading towards 2 super conferences, but with the exception of Notre Dame, we're kind of already there.  Future growth with the remaining brands is a risk to the bottom line of those 32 schools.

[Josef Pwag 1715]

1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

There's this assumption that the Big 10 and SEC are just going to grow to some arbitrary number to create a new division, but given that this is all about money, it seems unlikely that the money really backs that.

The B1G and SEC will eventually grow to 20 - 24 teams each. Then, their 2 champs will play each other for the national title, and their other team will play each other in all of the meaningful bowls. Those 2 schools will control all of the postseason money that matters. That is how the money backs this scenario. 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

1 minute ago, Josef Pwag said:

The B1G and SEC will eventually grow to 20 - 24 teams each. Then, their 2 champs will play each other for the national title, and their other team will play each other in all of the meaningful bowls. Those 2 schools will control all of the postseason money that matters. That is how the money backs this scenario. 

They can do that with 16

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

2 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

The B1G and SEC will eventually grow to 20 - 24 teams each. Then, their 2 champs will play each other for the national title, and their other team will play each other in all of the meaningful bowls. Those 2 schools will control all of the postseason money that matters. That is how the money backs this scenario. 

Why would they need to add schools to do that?

[Laxtonto 11901]

9 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

From rom a cost and business standpoint ESPN and FOX  would save money by adding 3-4 teams to the Big 12 than negotiating a full conference deal with the pac12

Colorado is getting full payout at around 31.7 million...so lets look at the numbers: Colorado + 3 more Pac 12 teams at 31.7 million comes out to 126.8 million. The Big 12's new deal is a 6 year deal through 2031. The full payout of 4 new members for 6 years is roughly 761 million. Compare that to a whole new deal with Pac 12 and teams earning 30 million a year over the course of the same time that is 1.8 billion. The networks are essentially saving 1 billion dollars.

 

3 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Exactly, and they pay for it with late night games.

Oregon/Washington, if they were two of that four, may actually increase the payout.   If not immediately, definitely in 2031.

This is what makes conference alignment so damn interesting. There is only 2 teams that really move the needle, 4 more that are break even and then the rest that have a variety of warts and issues. 
 

The networks are better off if the Pac12 dies. So is the G5 conferences as a whole from a CFP perspective. The MWC would directly benefit if the Pac12 dies. The only one suffering an irrevocable loss are the remains of the Pac12, but it’s the desire of many university not to have anyone suffer. 
 

Unfortunately, the desire not to be the bad guy is going fuck this up for everyone else.

[oSuJeff97 3435]

19 hours ago, statsman said:

And now, your stadium is the worst in the B12, with dangerously small sidelines, endangering players on and off the field. 
 
I don’t intend to be insulting, but just stating a fact. 

Yes the sidelines are so dangerous that zeros of players have actually been injured because of the sidelines in the past 80 years.

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

3 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Why would they need to add schools to do that?

They wouldn't and I think they'd actually lose money going that route. The best route would be 4 18-20 team conferences with it's conference championship games essentially being part of the playoff. 

I never understand the aspect of this thread when actual news and stuff is happening people still want to post future speculation. Just post the now and what's happening currently....you'll have another year or years to go into speculation on the future of conferences.

[BachelorTrek 2920]

5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I never understand the aspect of this thread when actual news and stuff is happening people still want to post future speculation. Just post the now and what's happening currently....you'll have another year or years to go into speculation on the future of conferences.

People want to get their stream-of-consciousness thoughts out there -- or else they may forget it over the course of a year. Lulz.

[Trey3216 15321]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

Is there a bigger culture shock within the same conference as CU and WV? 

John Denver scoffs 

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

They wouldn't and I think they'd actually lose money going that route. The best route would be 4 18-20 team conferences with it's conference championship games essentially being part of the playoff. 

I never understand the aspect of this thread when actual news and stuff is happening people still want to post future speculation. Just post the now and what's happening currently....you'll have another year or years to go into speculation on the future of conferences.

I don't think they'll shut off access to the playoff either.  It will be so rare that a Big 12 or ACC school wins the national championship, that it's worth the Big 10 and SEC's time/$ to not have to deal with some kind of fight or suit from those leagues, which would happen if they say "we're not playing you".

It's just kind of fan fiction for dorks who get off on relegation.  The Big 10 and SEC have what they want (with the exception of Notre Dame), and until there's a major incentive to change, they won't.

When USC, UT, and OU were outside of that circle, they had something to chase.  Something that could grow their revenue.  They have it now, they'll have the bulk of the playoff money, and by letting some other leagues in, they'll keep the playoff interest as high as possible, which means more $.

[Frank Drebin 5618]

Good for the Big 12. Yormark has done a great job.  Wish we had someone like him 15 years ago.   
 

I am happy about SEC move because we get old rivals back.  But the Big 12 could have been great.  

[tx ind 6987]

Pac commish be like

[Josef Pwag 1715]

27 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Why would they need to add schools to do that?

There is a critical mass of schools that has to be reached. I don't think it is an exact number...but there is a logical range. You can't leave too many historically relevant (and/or 'recent' national title winners) out of the B1G/SEC. When the winners of these 2 conference play each other, you want a national consensus that no school from an outside conference has a legitimate claim that, in any way, they could be conceived as a peer football team and a legitimate claimant to a national title. 

[Josef Pwag 1715]

19 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I don't think they'll shut off access to the playoff either. 

There won't be a playoff. The B1G champ will play the SEC champ and those 2 conferences will declare that school to be the national champion. That is all that matters. No one will care that Texas Tech beat Oregon State in the Crocs Bowl.

['stache 21729]

27 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

 

This is what makes conference alignment so damn interesting. There is only 2 teams that really move the needle, 4 more that are break even and then the rest that have a variety of warts and issues. 
 

The networks are better off if the Pac12 dies. So is the G5 conferences as a whole from a CFP perspective. The MWC would directly benefit if the Pac12 dies. The only one suffering an irrevocable loss are the remains of the Pac12, but it’s the desire of many university not to have anyone suffer. 
 

Unfortunately, the desire not to be the bad guy is going fuck this up for everyone else.

What I find truly interesting is were talking about who doesn't move the needle for the massive payouts in the BIG and SEC such that UO and UW might be on the outside looking in, and yet middling nobodies like Indiana and South Carolina are already in the FYPM club. The economics of it make zero sense. In today's landscape the BIG would probably happily swap out Purdue and Rutgers for UO and UW.