Realignment talk not going away

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

26 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

I'd like to see the XII add Utah and the Arizonas, to get to 16, and then be the first to go to pods and have its own 4-team conference playoff.

I'm not sure if the expanded playoff really allows for this. That's a lot of potential games you are asking your champion to play, especially if you are unlikely to get a playoff bye. 

[USC Traveler 488]

4 hours ago, bullet said:

I've seen enough reliable people say it that I think UW and Oregon, as part of the Big 10 (not as part of the Pac 10) bring enough to justify addition.  They just don't bring up the average any noticeable amount.  So it would be a strategic addition to dominate the west coast and get more playoff spots.  They aren't going to bring bunches more money to anyone.  Cal and Stanford were definitely dilutive.

Thamel, Feldman, Olson, etc  have all reported multiple times that the PNW schools would be dilutive.  And unless they change the playoff to 12 at-large berths (possible), the math of the 12 team/ 6 champ format means the BIG and SEC will get 3 in most years, but not more.  That means if UO or UW make the playoff, they are taking a spot away from an existing BIG team.  They're not adding playoff spots- they're taking them away.

BIG will already dominate the West Coast media attention through USC, UCLA and existing BIG schools playing out West on a regular basis.

The PNW schools don't help the LA schools with travel and make all existing BIG members travel out West twice as often, but with no boost in recruiting or alum engagement.  All in all- less money for BIG schools, travel to the PNW, less games on linear for mid-lower tier BIG teams, more playoff competition for BIG teams.

Even if all of that wasn't the case, why would the BIG add PNW schools now and take up valuable slots before seeing what happens in the ACC ?  

They won't.  2036 isn't far away in realignment terms, and there is real smoke around FSU doing something as early two weeks from now.

//

You might have missed my earlier post to you about a bet for a burger and a beer at a future UT-USC game that Stanford will be in the BIG before UO.

I'll go you one better- I'll bet you that ND, Stanford and some ACC schools all get into the BIG before UO.  

I think I'll win because I doubt UO is ever getting into the BIG.

[USC Traveler 488]

4 hours ago, bullet said:

They had a whole presentation on the possibility of leaving for the Big 12 covered on the Shaggy board.  Their president Barron, formerly a UT prof,  had no interest and proceeded to lock them in for 20 years to the ACC.  One of the 247/365 blogger types was at the meeting and did a report on it.  Clemson discussed it at several board meetings.  Doesn't mean there will be any action.

You should listen to the first 15 minutes of that FSU podcast that I posted the link for a page or two back.  Feels very different this time around.

[USC Traveler 488]

2 hours ago, Magus Ossis said:

Assuming Oregon joins the B12, they will be subject to a significant financial hit if and when they desire to break their membership agreement to leave for the B1G. Because their move would not significantly increase the per-team value of either TV contract, no network is likely going to be motivated to ‘underwrite’ much of the cost/penalty. A cagey league, warned by this round of shuffling, could and likely would work to complete future deals and accompanying GORs early enough that the penalty is magnified. An Oregon motivated to escape the Pac would have little leverage for a carve-out when signing up. Even should the B1G decide at some post-B12-join date that they do want Oregon enough to offer, plucking them would be very unlike how easily they acquired Nebraska. A landscape change even more fundamental than this one might be required to allow future defections from now-stabilized conferences as the escalation of conference contracts continues. ACC may already be locked up too tightly for early departures much before GOR expiration, and even MWC’s terms at present may prove strong enough to wound Pac deeply based on awkward timing.

Really good points across the board here.  

The only thing I would disagree with is that if I was the B12, I'd give schools a reasonable out clause to go to the BIG/SEC.

That way you can easily consolidate the "best of the rest", most of whom will never get into the BIG/SEC anyway.

It would allow the B12 to strike a death blow on the PAC and, eventually, the ACC, as it would ensure that it's the place to land for schools like UL and Pitt.

Edited July 29, 2023 by USC Traveler

[Magus Ossis 2858]

1 hour ago, closetojumping said:

Is it even possible to have a GOR past a media deal? Seems unlikely. Oregon and Washington could safely join knowing the GOR expires in 2031 and they can talk to the Big 10 anytime they like. The Big 10 will be renegotiating their deal ahead of that same deadline. 

If Arizona and Oregon/UW break away to the Big 12, it seems like the obvious move to avoid the MWC penalties is to merge the conferences. Form a “Pac 16” with 5-6 of those schools and SMU. Maybe Stanford and Cal just bow out of football rather than go that route, but it seems like that would make a lot of sense for ASU, Utah, Wazzou, and Oregon State. That probably gets around $15M/school doesn’t it? If the PNW powers leave the Pac 9, what the hell is left for a media deal otherwise? Arguably less than AAC money. 

I suppose a GOR to the league could be independent in time (longer) than existing contracts the league makes to monetize the rights, but my thought was that the league could try to negotiate early, trying to ensure that they were never within a short enough interval of the contract expiry that anyone could leave cheaply. It would raise the question of what happens if everybody but the PNW is ready to replace a contract expiring, eg in 2031, for one expiring in 2037.

[USC Traveler 488]

BIG expansion info from a poster on the PSU 247 board who seems to be connected and is well-respected by their board:

Quote

 

I want to share a few things regarding expansion. 

1. Neither the Presidents or AD's are looking for any more expansion for the next few years. Folks should expect 4-6 years of the new scheduling format before any changes are made. The new Commish is really focused on this and fully integrating USC/UCLA into the conference. 

2. My expectation is the next wave of expansion will likely hit around 2029/2030. I don't expect any more west coast expansion from the Big Ten. Warren could not find any media partners willing to pay enough to make it work and nobody thinks that changes any time soon. USC/UCLA does not want any more PAC teams. Travelling to Oregon and Washington is pretty much the same for them as travelling to Mid-west so the theory that they want more Pacific Coast programs to lower travel cost is bunk. The next round of expansion will focus on ND and ACC teams down the Atlantic Coast. 

3. My info comes from PSU so it may be skewed toward their preferences but everything I hear suggests UVA and UNC would be the first targets. Younger, growing metro areas down the I-95 corridor with lots of B1G alumn transplants living and moving in that direction. FSU is another strong possibility. In the past, I was told that the B1G was not at all interested in Miami but very recently was told that their admission to the AAU is a game changer. I was told that VA Tech and GA Tech were long-shot possibilities to round out expansion. From what I understand, Clemson is not on the radar unless a media partner really, really pushes it. My prediction would be that as we get closer to 2030 the next round of expansion will be UVA, UNC, FSU & Miami + Notre Dame. 

4. That gets us back to Notre Dame. The expectation of AD's and Presidents is that ND will finalize a deal wiht NBC that takes them out to roughly the same time as the B1G media deal. At that point, if they are not willing to jump into conference completely, the thought is that B1G will move forward with poaching the ACC and that ND at that point will set up a scheduling agreement with Big Ten. The example of what that would look like was given to me was: 8 games, 4 home, 4 away and would be against big brands that the networks want. Something like PSU, OSU, UM, MSU, Wiscy, NW, Neb, USC. Apparently one of the big snags with NBC negotiations has been ND's terrible schedule when it comes to ratings. NBC wants more games against Big Ten teams which would be much better for ratings than just a bunch of scrub ACC teams and the service academies. (GO NAVY!)

5. Bonus PSU content: this is not completely about expansion but relevant to the topic: PSU folks have been very pleasantly surprised by how enthusiastic NBC (also CBS to a lesser extent) is about Penn State and even the new Commish has taken notice as he has been smoothing over the TV schedule stuff. NBC wants as many PSU games as possible and their execs have told the Commish that they feel Penn State is the key to big ratings in the large metro areas of the East Coast. The reason I bring it up in this thread is that it has been suggested to me that the next round of expansion will be focused on finding good pairings with PSU down the I-95 corridor. Essentially the status quo is now becoming USC, OSU, UM and PSU as the 4 major national brands with USC anchoring the west coast, OSU and UM the midwest and PSU anchoring the East Coast, with those 4 schools kind of elevating the TV ratings when they match up with the "lesser" programs in their regions. That dynamic will probably shape the next round of expansion quite a bit.

 

 

[Al_4_ISU 12487]

BIG expansion info from a poster on the PSU 247 board who seems to be connected and is well-respected by their board:

 
I want to share a few things regarding expansion. 
1. Neither the Presidents or AD's are looking for any more expansion for the next few years. Folks should expect 4-6 years of the new scheduling format before any changes are made. The new Commish is really focused on this and fully integrating USC/UCLA into the conference. 
2. My expectation is the next wave of expansion will likely hit around 2029/2030. I don't expect any more west coast expansion from the Big Ten. Warren could not find any media partners willing to pay enough to make it work and nobody thinks that changes any time soon. USC/UCLA does not want any more PAC teams. Travelling to Oregon and Washington is pretty much the same for them as travelling to Mid-west so the theory that they want more Pacific Coast programs to lower travel cost is bunk. The next round of expansion will focus on ND and ACC teams down the Atlantic Coast. 
3. My info comes from PSU so it may be skewed toward their preferences but everything I hear suggests UVA and UNC would be the first targets. Younger, growing metro areas down the I-95 corridor with lots of B1G alumn transplants living and moving in that direction. FSU is another strong possibility. In the past, I was told that the B1G was not at all interested in Miami but very recently was told that their admission to the AAU is a game changer. I was told that VA Tech and GA Tech were long-shot possibilities to round out expansion. From what I understand, Clemson is not on the radar unless a media partner really, really pushes it. My prediction would be that as we get closer to 2030 the next round of expansion will be UVA, UNC, FSU & Miami + Notre Dame. 
4. That gets us back to Notre Dame. The expectation of AD's and Presidents is that ND will finalize a deal wiht NBC that takes them out to roughly the same time as the B1G media deal. At that point, if they are not willing to jump into conference completely, the thought is that B1G will move forward with poaching the ACC and that ND at that point will set up a scheduling agreement with Big Ten. The example of what that would look like was given to me was: 8 games, 4 home, 4 away and would be against big brands that the networks want. Something like PSU, OSU, UM, MSU, Wiscy, NW, Neb, USC. Apparently one of the big snags with NBC negotiations has been ND's terrible schedule when it comes to ratings. NBC wants more games against Big Ten teams which would be much better for ratings than just a bunch of scrub ACC teams and the service academies. (GO NAVY!)
5. Bonus PSU content: this is not completely about expansion but relevant to the topic: PSU folks have been very pleasantly surprised by how enthusiastic NBC (also CBS to a lesser extent) is about Penn State and even the new Commish has taken notice as he has been smoothing over the TV schedule stuff. NBC wants as many PSU games as possible and their execs have told the Commish that they feel Penn State is the key to big ratings in the large metro areas of the East Coast. The reason I bring it up in this thread is that it has been suggested to me that the next round of expansion will be focused on finding good pairings with PSU down the I-95 corridor. Essentially the status quo is now becoming USC, OSU, UM and PSU as the 4 major national brands with USC anchoring the west coast, OSU and UM the midwest and PSU anchoring the East Coast, with those 4 schools kind of elevating the TV ratings when they match up with the "lesser" programs in their regions. That dynamic will probably shape the next round of expansion quite a bit.
 

 

Seems pretty logical. I wonder if the SEC fights to get some of those Southern ACC schools? I always figured if they wanted FSU and Clemson, they’d have gone after them previously.

I also wouldn’t be surprised to see the Big 10 stop with ND. Depends on what the networks want.

This would all but guarantee a world where you have 3 monster conferences. Big 10, SEC, and Big 12 that absorbs ACC leftovers.

[Hurtlocker 2213]

5 hours ago, Dbeasy said:

Are there exit fees for Big 12 members going forward?

Yes, the Big 12 by laws are not like the Pac's, they state 2 years of revenue, plus damages, plus GoR considerations.

Everything's negotiable, Texas/OU got out for like a little over one year of revenue, but it's not a good agreement for a temporary visit.

[Hurtlocker 2213]

2 hours ago, SurlyGator said:

I think the B12 should go in the opposite direction on GOR restrictions.  Take away the penalty to leave.  The only destination anyone would leave for would be the B1G or the SEC.  If dropping the exit fee meant you could have Oregon and Washington for a decade or more, and the B1G came calling, wish them well and send them on their way.  In the meantime, you added a lot of value to the B12 during the time they were there.  The networks might even sweeten the pot a little on the front end if they knew they could pull teams out later.

If you want some sort of "repayment" for the lost value from a team leaving, maybe put in the contract that if a team leaves the B12 gets a percentage of future conference payouts from that team's new conference.  B12 needs to think outside the box here.

Like pro soccer.    A club can purchase a player from a club for a higher contract, but the current contract holder gets a 30% transfer fee.

 

Edited July 29, 2023 by Hurtlocker

[Hurtlocker 2213]

31 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

BIG expansion info from a poster on the PSU 247 board who seems to be connected and is well-respected by their board:

 

This is about the most legit sounding expansion stuff I've heard in a while.  One third of the US lives in the I95 corridor, far more than the Pacific Northwest, and UVA/UNC reside right in the area the Big Ten doesn't control.

[Hurtlocker 2213]

Big 12 expansion: Conference prefers to add one more school after Colorado with Arizona seen as favorite

Not really much new, outside confirmation that FOX/ESPN is fronting P5 expansion and Texas/OU buyouts were invested in boosting the new 4 additions until the media contract extension officially starts in 2025.

Quote

The Big 12's preference, for now, is to add only one more school to get to 14 members in this round of conference realignment, sources close to the situation tell CBS Sports. While adding up to three more schools and expanding to 16 remains a possibility, the league intends to wait at least a few days to let the migration of Colorado sink in before considering next steps.

Arizona remains the favorite to fill that 14th spot with Arizona State, Utah and UConn considered other top Big 12 expansion candidates.

Gonzaga, Memphis, San Diego State and UNLV are not considered serious candidates at this point for the Big 12. The league prefers to add a current Power Five school but sees UConn as a top Group of Five option due to its stellar basketball program.

Adding to the wait-and-see aspect, Arizona president Robert Robbins was in London this week representing the school.

This backs up what Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark said earlier this month: He prefers to cap league membership at 14 teams once Texas and Oklahoma depart ahead of the 2024 season. However, that was before Colorado's migration to the Big 12 became official. The pressure points have changed with that reality.

The key date remains July 1, 2024, when the current Pac-12 media rights deal with ESPN and Fox runs out. That expiration, only 11 months from now, has created significant uncertainty around the Pac-12 and was part of the reason Colorado bolted to the Big 12.

Pressure remains on Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff to land a substantial, lucrative media rights deal as soon as possible. Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and other Pac-12 members are waiting to see what Kliavkoff delivers before deciding on their respective futures in the league. 

Furthermore, the Big 12 would need to welcome any additional members from other Power Five conferences by that date in order for those programs to fully access the new rights deal that begins in 2025 and expires in 2031.

"Does the Big 12 believe it has to be an even number [of teams] before the 2024 football season?" a source within the league speculated. "That's exactly where we are. We're in that process of figuring it out. I don't think it's impossible [to play with 13]. Thirteen is not ideal. I don't think you add somebody just to add somebody just to get even numbers."

A couple of industry sources questioned how Colorado was able to obtain a full share of Big 12 media rights revenue ($31.7 million) beginning in 2025. ESPN and Fox have agreed to pay Colorado -- and reportedly any other Power Five addition to the Big 12 -- equal value, which means an extra $190 million paid out per team over those six years.

The eight entrenched Big 12 members helped fund the revenue needed to add BYU, Cincinnati, Houston and UCF to the league. Those four schools will each receive $18 million in 2023 and $19 million in 2024.

So if @USC Traveler's Pedo State info is on the mark and the Big Ten went to 20 with UVA/UNC/FSU/Miami, what would happen next?    With Sankey pretty much saying all he cares about is brands, is there anything left the SEC even gives a shit about?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Tex Long said:

I'd like to see the XII add Utah and the Arizonas, to get to 16, and then be the first to go to pods and have its own 4-team conference playoff.

Hyper-exposure for your best teams... to losses, publicity, and injuries.

Conference Championship games are already on the wane.  Amping them up and even doubling down with semis seems risky at best.

[USC Traveler 488]

24 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

This is about the most legit sounding expansion stuff I've heard in a while.  One third of the US lives in the I95 corridor, far more than the Pacific Northwest, and UVA/UNC reside right in the area the Big Ten doesn't control.

I had the same thought as soon as I read it.  It's the way you'd actually be looking at this if you were the BIG, given their long-term demographics issues.

It also lines up with pretty much everything I've been predicting about future BIG expansion, so there's no cognitive dissonance.  😀

[USC Traveler 488]

9 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Big 12 expansion: Conference prefers to add one more school after Colorado with Arizona seen as favorite

Not really much new, outside confirmation that FOX/ESPN is fronting P5 expansion and Texas/OU buyouts were invested in boosting the new 4 additions until the media contract extension officially starts in 2025.

So if @USC Traveler's Pedo State info is on the mark and the Big Ten went to 20 with UVA/UNC/FSU/Miami, what would happen next?    With Sankey pretty much saying all he cares about is brands, is there anything left the SEC even gives a shit about?

VT and NC State would actually fit in well culturally to the SEC.  Both have die-hard fans and Lane stadium is a great environment.  

Money for SECNet and a direct recruiting presence for SEC schools in those states would also be beneficial.

And neither program would actually threaten the top dogs in the SEC.  They would be like South Carolina, but with more value and better recruiting grounds.

[Tex Long 4446]

21 minutes ago, slorch said:

Hyper-exposure for your best teams... to losses, publicity, and injuries.

Conference Championship games are already on the wane.  Amping them up and even doubling down with semis seems risky at best.

Risking what?

[Hurtlocker 2213]

8 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

I had the same thought as soon as I read it.  It's the way you'd actually be looking at this if you were the BIG, given their long-term demographics issues.

It also lines up with pretty much everything I've been predicting about future BIG expansion, so there's no cognitive dissonance.  😀

Haha, true.   I still don't see how they bring that value...and this is coming from someone who is paying for a Hoo to go to school.   WVU has a far more rabid fanbase than Virginia and gets more media exposure in that 300 miles of campus window where most schools get their kids.    I went to the ND/UVA game in Charlottesville and it maybe had 50k at start and was down to 30k by half.   Basketball, on the other hand...

Also, i know what you're saying, but I don't subscribe much to those "demographic issues".   The rust belt been hit hard by the manufacturing decline, but its still growing slowly and there is still a fuck ton of people, infrastructure, and money already there.   The growth of brands in the south has little to do with population increases, if it did UCF would be the new Michigan.  What has changed is media exposure and the B1G was the first to capitalize on that, followed by the SEC, and will continue to do so.   There will be 100m more people in the US over the next 25-30 years.   The rust belt and LA aren't going to become ghost towns while Nashville becomes the next Tokyo.   And even if it did, that doesn't mean Vandy is going to turn into USC.

[John80 157]

The SEC area already has good recruiting and population growth and 16 schools is perfect for the 9 nine game schedule the SEC will eventually have. I'm confident that the SEC will never have more than 9 conference games. 

[Tex Long 4446]

1 hour ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

I'm not sure if the expanded playoff really allows for this. That's a lot of potential games you are asking your champion to play, especially if you are unlikely to get a playoff bye. 

How does "the expanded playoff" get into the "allow" business? And, yeah, that's  three games instead of one for the B1G and SEC and ACC, so more megabucks for members to split. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, John80 said:

The SEC area already has good recruiting and population growth and 16 schools is perfect for the 9 nine game schedule the SEC will eventually have. I'm confident that the SEC will never have more than 9 conference games. 

That’s how I feel too. That November cupcake ain’t magically disappearing.  Its presence is absolutely strategic. 

[TonyTexas 10530]

IDK if it this is just trolling but would be hilarious if true. 

 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

Risking what?

Losses and injury.  Further exposure.  Less is more to the big dawgs.  Pay attention to how they run things. 

[Hurtlocker 2213]

2 minutes ago, slorch said:

Losses and injury.  Further exposure.  Less is more to the big dawgs.  Pay attention to how they run things. 

Yeah that's how the first round byes got in.    They could have gone to 16, but if you are going to take the $20-30m for a CCG, might as well give your winner a breather so all the other scraps need to beat themselves up to play you.

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

8 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

How does "the expanded playoff" get into the "allow" business? And, yeah, that's  three games instead of one for the B1G and SEC and ACC, so more megabucks for members to split. 

The member schools would need to agree to the extra game. I just don't see them wanting a 17 game season.

[Tex Long 4446]

Just now, slorch said:

Losses and injury.  Further exposure.  Less is more to the big dawgs.  Pay attention to how they run things. 

Oh, please. The "big dawgs" in this scenario are the entertainment people, the ones who write the checks out of advertising profits. Three CCG instead of one is manna from heaven for them. For the players, it's one extra game and that's if they win the first one.

[Tex Long 4446]

2 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

The member schools would need to agree to the extra game. I just don't see them wanting a 17 game season.

Where do you come up with 17 games? It's one extra game. UGA and TCU played 15 total. Actually TCU played 14, not in CCG. Meatchicken played 14 also. 

[Hurtlocker 2213]

4 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

Where do you come up with 17 games? It's one extra game. UGA and TCU played 15 total. Actually TCU played 14, not in CCG. Meatchicken played 14 also. 

TCU lost to KState in the CCG last year.

[Frieda’s Boss 181]

51 minutes ago, John80 said:

 …and 16 schools is perfect for the 9 nine game schedule…

I’m sorry, but this is the thing that I absolutely hate about the direction CFB went in. 10 teams is perfect for a 9 game conference schedule. What’s the point of being in the same league if you don’t play each other?  I know I’m old guy yelling at clouds about this, but it’s really not that hard (TWSS). 

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

Oh, please. The "big dawgs" in this scenario are the entertainment people, the ones who write the checks out of advertising profits. Three CCG instead of one is manna from heaven for them. For the players, it's one extra game and that's if they win the first one.

SEC is dead-set on 8 conference games and you want other conferences to further expose their contenders.  That’s fucked up. 
 

Until there is some uniformity of scheduling structure, your double weekends of pod playoffs would be an idiotic move for a non SEC Conference.  That’s why it is allowed. 

[Frieda’s Boss 181]

1 hour ago, USC Traveler said:It also lines up with pretty much everything I've been predicting about future BIG expansion, so there's no cognitive dissonance.  😀

I’m glad you mentioned this, because I was going to say of course this guy makes sense, his ‘what I’m hearing’ is probably what he read here from you…

Your animosity toward Oregon is clear, but how do you feel about adding UW and Stanford?  Now you really capture the west coast, academics/research claims of the Big are actually met, two tech hubs with a lot of Big alums, etc.?  Inevitably the Big will eventually want “Big 10 After Dark” and without more west coast representation, are you going to be happy with all USC home games being 7:30pm kickoffs?

 

[LTbear 4171]

46 minutes ago, Tex Long said:

TCU played 14, not in CCG. 

[66BUFF 2565]

On 7/28/2023 at 12:16 PM, Chewbacca said:

I don't think CU ever allowed prop 48 kids, but I'm not 100% on that.

Had some in the 80's.  JJ Flannigan was a prop 48

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

1 hour ago, Tex Long said:

Where do you come up with 17 games? It's one extra game. UGA and TCU played 15 total. Actually TCU played 14, not in CCG. Meatchicken played 14 also. 

12 game regular season, 2 games for conference championship, 3 games for the playoffs.

[Hurtlocker 2213]

42 minutes ago, Frieda’s Boss said:

I’m glad you mentioned this, because I was going to say of course this guy makes sense, his ‘what I’m hearing’ is probably what he read here from you…

Your animosity toward Oregon is clear, but how do you feel about adding UW and Stanford?  Now you really capture the west coast, academics/research claims of the Big are actually met, two tech hubs with a lot of Big alums, etc.?  Inevitably the Big will eventually want “Big 10 After Dark” and without more west coast representation, are you going to be happy with all USC home games being 7:30pm kickoffs?

 

I don't think the B1G needs "after dark".    They own the three most powerful windows in Fox at Noon, CBS at 3:30 and NBC at night.   ABC gives competition in Prime, but USC should help there.   7:30 eastern NBC games are only 4:30 Pacific and NBC is leading in with a ND game at 3:30.   

After dark has value, but not B1G/SEC value.   More T2 value, and only really for ESPN, who puts sports on all day, as opposed to Fox/NBC/CBS

[notre dame joe 196]

3 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

BIG will already dominate the West Coast media attention through USC, UCLA and existing BIG schools playing out West on a regular basis.

In Socal perhaps.  NorCal won't pay much attention.

 

2 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

 The growth of brands in the south has little to do with population increases, if it did UCF would be the new Michigan.

It's why Pitt will never be Auburn again.  I think you are underestimating that.  It's not just growing but growing with young adults.

8 hours ago, bullet said:

The point is that Stanford could easily be replaced by Cal.  Or even UCLA.

Yeah but Stanford will remain Stanford.  Schools want to associate with them and they will get one of the last spots. 

[chase25 2048]

 

 

[chase25 2048]

2 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

VT and NC State would actually fit in well culturally to the SEC.  Both have die-hard fans and Lane stadium is a great environment.  

Money for SECNet and a direct recruiting presence for SEC schools in those states would also be beneficial.

And neither program would actually threaten the top dogs in the SEC.  They would be like South Carolina, but with more value and better recruiting grounds.

North Carolina and Virginia are both better fits culturally in the SEC. I doubt the SEC would even consider VT and NC State. 

Virginia and North Carolina are probably the only two schools left that I could see the SEC adding if the ACC were to dissolve and even then they may not see a need for it. 

If the B1G is able to poach Florida State and Clemson, the SEC may feel a need to counter to get to 18 as well but the SEC will probably wait for that domino to fall

[Al_4_ISU 12487]

8 minutes ago, chase25 said:

North Carolina and Virginia are both better fits culturally in the SEC. I doubt the SEC would even consider VT and NC State. 

Virginia and North Carolina are probably the only two schools left that I could see the SEC adding if the ACC were to dissolve and even then they may not see a need for it. 

If the B1G is able to poach Florida State and Clemson, the SEC may feel a need to counter to get to 18 as well but the SEC will probably wait for that domino to fall

I don’t think they’re dumb enough to chase an arbitrary # if it doesn’t improve the $/school

[TKthunder2 4997]

1 hour ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

12 game regular season, 2 games for conference championship, 3 games for the playoffs.

You clearly have no idea how pods work.

It does NOT mean a 4 team playoff for a CCG.

Pod1 and Pod2 make a single year division, Pod3 and Pod4 make the other division. The best team in these single year divisions play ONE CCG.

Next year you change the pods around…

Pod1/Pod3 in a division, Pod2/Pod4 in the other…

year after that Pod1/Pod4 v Pod2/Pod3…

rinse and repeat 

[Laxtonto 12121]

2 hours ago, TonyTexas said:

IDK if it this is just trolling but would be hilarious if true. 

 

[TKthunder2 4997]

2 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Haha, true.   I still don't see how they bring that value...and this is coming from someone who is paying for a Hoo to go to school.   WVU has a far more rabid fanbase than Virginia and gets more media exposure in that 300 miles of campus window where most schools get their kids.    I went to the ND/UVA game in Charlottesville and it maybe had 50k at start and was down to 30k by half.   Basketball, on the other hand...

FSU/Clemson and UNC/UVA are obviously the top candidates for the SEC. If they get those and chose to go past 20 to 22 or 24 I could see a school like West Virginia checking a lot of boxes, along with Kansas/Duke.

[Hurtlocker 2213]

5 minutes ago, chase25 said:

North Carolina and Virginia are both better fits culturally in the SEC. I doubt the SEC would even consider VT and NC State. 

Virginia and North Carolina are probably the only two schools left that I could see the SEC adding if the ACC were to dissolve and even then they may not see a need for it. 

If the B1G is able to poach Florida State and Clemson, the SEC may feel a need to counter to get to 18 as well but the SEC will probably wait for that domino to fall

While I agree they won't add VTech/NCSt, both of those schools are likely closer cultural fits to the SEC than UNC/UVA, who both view themselves as the oldest and most premier "public Ivys"

 

19 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

It's why Pitt will never be Auburn again.  I think you are underestimating that.  It's not just growing but growing with young adults.

Pitt won't be Auburn again due to the fact that Western Pennsylvania is no longer the top recruiting hotbed it was in the 70s, which has been replaced by SE belt of talent that Auburn resides within.

Not that it doesn't still have a lot of talent, but it's not the same talent, providing athletic freaks in specific positions, like Dline, that you need for today's game.

And agree on young adults, but demographics are not cut and dry.   Just because people moved to Georgia doesn't mean they're all Georgia fans in the way that they could be Falcon fans.   College fanaticism tends to be generational.   Population growth is definitely helping the SEC schools with increased admissions and more households for the SECN, but population isn't a negative factor for the B1G, was my point.   They have more population and generational fans than any other conference and the gap between them and the SEC is immense.  

Someone posted another stat that shows this well.   The SEC has dominated championships for the past twenty years.  Big brands are being created because of that.   The B1G still makes more money.

[Hurtlocker 2213]

7 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

FSU/Clemson and UNC/UVA are obviously the top candidates for the SEC. If they get those and chose to go past 20 to 22 or 24 I could see a school like West Virginia checking a lot of boxes, along with Kansas/Duke.

I don't disagree, but the original question was "if the B1G grabbed UNC/UVA/FSU/Miami, would the SEC even give a shit about anything left from the ACC?"

[CustersDoctor 584]

On 7/27/2023 at 7:43 PM, Trey3216 said:

They’ve been great lackeys, but the move all along has been Colorado/Arizona/Oregon/Washington.  
then try to add 2-4 basketball only schools (UCONN/Gonzaga and 2 more bball powers).   If you get to 16 with 4 adds for Bball, you get a conference round robin for bball and a convenient scheduling format for 16 fb teams.  
 

then Yormark gets his dream for a value add on the basketball end of the spectrum.   

The model for the BIG18 works incredibly well, though eighteen probably wouldn't work elsewhere. In the B18, You would have three regions of 6 teams. The West: BYU, UU, UO, UW, UA, AST. The North: Kansas, KST, ISU, Cincy, WVU, CU. The South: Tech, OST, TCU, BU, UH, UCF. So, Annually Tech would play five games in their region and One road game in the west and host one west team AND they'd play one North team at home and one on the road. UO would play their 5 western rivals each season, then host one south team and visit one south team, host one North team and visit one North team. Therefore west of the rockies teams will only have to travel East of the rockies twice a season. West of the Rockies teams will have 2 meaningful games a season in the CTZ while hosting multiple East of the rockies teams. This greatly reduces the old PAC12 teams isolation. During the 6 year term of the current media rights deal, Tech would play each west school at home once and on the road once and each North school at home once and on the road once.

[TKthunder2 4997]

14 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

I don't disagree, but the original question was "if the B1G grabbed UNC/UVA/FSU/Miami, would the SEC even give a shit about anything left from the ACC?"

Okay…

So Clemson/NCSU/VT/WVU…

That doesn’t really move the needle the same way.

Long term getting into those markets may help, but that would be painful in the short term so I think it would be unlikely.

They could get by without FSU or UNC but not both.

FSU/Clemson/NCSU/VT works…

UVA/UNC/Clemson/Duke works…

[Tex Long 4446]

Yeah, I phased out on TCU - shows how much I give a fuck about  them. The point remains, though - namely that it's only one extra game. 

I like the 4Pod idea. It's nine conference games, the other three teams in your pod, two each in the other three pods. Two reasonable scheduling methods. One, play home-and-home with the other pods, so you play one pair two years in a row and then switch to the other two teams in those pods. Two, switch to the other pods' two teams every year, with the home-away switching. I like the latter scheme, which makes any must-have so-called rivalry games no more than one extra year away, and then only if they're in another pod... and maybe the rivals will meet in a CCG anyway.

 

[Gidnik 3285]

 

[Gidnik 3285]

Quote

 

Do you feel that you have been misled by your sources inside the Pac-12?— @KenRhodes23

Not at all, and here’s the reason: To a significant extent, our coverage of the media rights process has leaned into 1) sources in the sports media industry who are unaffiliated with the conference, and 2) on-the-record comments by the university presidents.

That reliance on industry sources is precisely why the Hotline has viewed Pac-12 survival as no more than a 4-point favorite over extinction — that’s roughly equivalent to a 60 percent probability — throughout the spring and summer. (The line has been lowered to 2.5 points following Colorado’s departure, by the way.)

It’s why we have always described a media deal that satisfied the 10 schools as “the most likely outcome” and not as a given.

And it’s why we have written ad nauseam since January that time and risk move in lockstep: The longer Kliavkoff waited to secure a deal, the greater the risk of presidential panic or external forces leading to defections and possible implosion.

I won’t get into details about Hotline sources for obvious reasons. But hopefully, that explanation provides some context on our coverage.

 

There is no way wilner is serious here

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/07/29/mailbag-next-steps-for-oregon-and-uw-the-bay-area-void-arizonas-role-the-40-million-question-expansion-options-and-more/

[Tex Long 4446]

2 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

12 game regular season, 2 games for conference championship, 3 games for the playoffs.

 

Well, hell, with the 12-team playoff, you're already at 16 and that's if you make the top 4. If you don't, it's 17 to the Final. From there, it's one more  game with a PodPlayoff. You should be complaining about 18, not 17.

Won't someone think of the children?

 

[Hurtlocker 2213]

5 minutes ago, Gidnik said:

There is no way wilner is serious here

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/07/29/mailbag-next-steps-for-oregon-and-uw-the-bay-area-void-arizonas-role-the-40-million-question-expansion-options-and-more/

That article is full of gems:

"There’s also the competitive issue: Would the likes of Oklahoma State and Baylor welcome two heavyweight football programs that would make playoff access exponentially more difficult for the existing Big 12 members?"

Because they've never played a schedule with the likes of Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska on it.   But sure, pitch Oregon as the Brady led Pats.

"From the perspective of the two schools, there are innumerable reasons to decline the Big 12 option. The first, of course, is geography. Can you imagine Washington sending its athletes (in all sports) to Ames, Orlando, Cincinnati and Lubbock on a weekly basis?"

He goes on to point out that doing it in the B1G gets more money so that makes it ok, but his argument is basically it is better to wall off easy travel at the expense of better competition.   Though, i think we all have started to notice most of his info comes from Oregon State.

"If the Pac-12 loses the Four Corners schools, leaving just the Pacific Northwest quartet and the Bay Area teams, two scenarios would exist:

1. The conference reforms by adding the likes of Boise State and San Diego State to create a league of eight or 10 teams.

2. The Huskies, Ducks and perhaps Cal and Stanford agree to join the Big Ten, likely for reduced revenue shares, thus expediting the creation of the Big Ten’s eight-team western division (with the Los Angeles schools).

The latter scenario feels more plausible and yet, at the same time, not all that plausible."

Outside the Big Ten being positioned as the white knight saving the damsel in distress, San Deigo is around 1200-1300 miles from Seattle, while Ames, and around 7 other schools, are around 1700.   Nothing is close as an option.

"Either way, Kliavkoff’s strategy was to draft off the Big Ten’s negotiated figure of more than $60 million per school per year. Our sources in the media industry were skeptical of the approach and suggested ESPN would be, as well. However, it’s difficult to know what price point would have been acceptable to Oregon and Washington, for instance.

Then the Big 12, desperate for security, renewed its agreement with ESPN and Fox at $31.7 million per school per year. Suddenly, a floor was set for the Pac-12."

I read this to be "We asked for $50m in extension phase and were offered $32m.   We went to market and the B12 took our $32m, fuckers"

 

[LTbear 4171]

29 minutes ago, Gidnik said:

There is no way wilner is serious here

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/07/29/mailbag-next-steps-for-oregon-and-uw-the-bay-area-void-arizonas-role-the-40-million-question-expansion-options-and-more/

Oh, but he is.