Realignment talk not going away

[HookEm 2432]

Attendance matters way more than stadium size. 

I think you could take the 20 year attendance numbers and you would have a pretty good proxy for program value.  Even better, take 80% football attendance + 10% basketball attendance + 10% academic ranking and you would have a pretty good model. 

[LTbear 4044]

1 minute ago, HookEm said:

Attendance matters way more than stadium size. 

I think you could take the 20 year attendance numbers and you would have a pretty good proxy for program value.  Even better, take 80% football attendance + 10% basketball attendance + 10% academic ranking and you would have a pretty good model. 

Ya that would probably come out pretty well, with only a couple of outliers (South Carolina and Miami come to mind, in different directions).

['stache 21520]

OSU sold out of season tickets a month ago. Without OU or TX on the schedule? Must be an accounting error, lol. Please don't include basketball attendance. Ours is shit, because the team has been shit for most of the last 20 years.

[Saint Austin 735]

So today isn't the big day?

[Al_4_ISU 12229]

12 minutes ago, statsman said:

I was replying to Al, once again, bemoaning that the IR8 had the rotten luck of not getting to be in the B1G or SEC, as the reason they have to sweat major conference membership. I know that nobody in the IR8 wants to ever reflect that their marginal position may be due to decisions they made, and not just pure bad luck. But, this is a Texas board, so I won’t apologize for not sharing the IR8 perspective. 
 
So, in arguing for the B12 and its continued relevance, you’re going with stadiums. Uh-huh. First, OSU’s stadium, may be “updated”, but while putting in boxes, they forgot to fix its biggest flaw- the ridiculously unsafe sidelines. That’s not an endearing trait, like a beauty flaw. It’s a cleft palate that has horribly not been repaired. 
 
Oh, and Baylor. That’s a new stadium, built on the heels of the Briles run. They can’t fill the upper deck against anyone but Texas or OU, and those teams are not on the schedule anymore. (Did I mention that Baylor games were on streaming five weeks in a row last year?)

Funny thing about those stadiums- they’re not that big. They don’t need to be. The PAC refugees will be bringing in the league’s biggest stadiums. Shoot, right now UTSA plays in a stadium larger than any IR8 team. Those SEC and B1G bottom dwellers all have bigger stadiums than the biggest B12 stadiums. 
 
It’s ok. You matter. You’re a big deal. It’s just bad luck that you’re not pulling $60M or $100M per year like an SEC or B1G team. 

Every school outside of the Big 10 and SEC that’s not a blue blood is in the same spot as we are.

You desperately want me to say “Texas and OU are big meanies for not hanging around” and that’s not at all what I’m saying.  USC, Oregon, FSU, Clemson all feel the same way.  The SEC has a much higher ratio of contributor programs than the Big 10, so that situation is different.

Again, my point was that the taker programs in the SEC and Big 10 are just guys born on on third thinking they hit a triple.  The only decision those schools made to get themselves here was joining the conference they did 150 years ago.  We ARENT a big deal, and neither are 2/3rds of the Big 10.  But they get paid like it because of the ones who are.

[Crockett 455]

 

[notre dame joe 171]

18 hours ago, 'stache said:

I think it's all just chatter. If FSU and Clemson themselves put it out there, it's a negotiating tactic to continue pressing how unhappy they are with the ACC right now, not because there is any legitimate chance of them joining the XII. 

We agree on that, and likely driving slightly buzzed.

[Texas Wahoo 3376]

lol.  Swaim claiming everyone is joining the Big 12  

 

 

[LTbear 4044]

 

[CustersDoctor 582]

On 7/12/2024 at 11:15 AM, 'stache said:

If that's the direction, and if the SEC and BIG are both done (I doubt it but we're just speculating here), it'll likely be more than FSU and Clemson, and the Big 12 would ultimately become essentially two conferences under common administration. Big 12 is currently at 16, if you add 8, it breaks down into two 12 team "divisions" (essentially two conferences). With each side being 12, the name continues to make sense too (the Big 12s). 

Big XII East: WVU, Cincy, UCF, UH, FSU, Clemson, UNC, Duke, UVA, VT, GT, Miami (maybe Louisville instead of Miami). 

Big XII West:  UU, BYU, AU, ASU, CU, OSU, KU, ISU, Tech, TCU, BU.

Dos Equis Conference FTW. And though I hate Cal and Stanford, they have far better TV metrics than UH, CINCY or GT. Drop those three in favor of Cal,  Stanford and Cuse. I'd keep Louisville & Miami both over Duke. 

The left behind will be: GT, UH, CINCY, DUKE, WAKE, BC & KST. 

SMU Don't get no mention here, they absolutely don't belong.

[Al_4_ISU 12229]

Scheer was very well connected in the Pac 12 demise.  I still can’t see this happening, but if the SEC and Big 10 don’t want them…

[JFKFC 4875]

3 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Scheer was very well connected in the Pac 12 demise.  I still can’t see this happening, but if the SEC and Big 10 don’t want them…

I would have bet the farm against this. Wow. Yormark is a God tier executive if he pulls this off.

[Al_4_ISU 12229]

41 minutes ago, JFKFC said:

I would have bet the farm against this. Wow. Yormark is a God tier executive if he pulls this off.

Someone in that thread made an interesting point:  if they can use the private equity to buy off FSU and Clemson, the gain in the next TV contract can probably more than offset their payments back to PE.  Or that’s what Yormark would be attempting.

[thunderlounge 7619]

Not like they can really stay where they’re at, knowing the bones of the acc are rotting. They have to save face and leave at some point.  Where the fuck else they gonna go?
 

If the SEC/b1g don’t want them, yormark has little to do with it other than to nod and say yes. 
 

Not like it’s some kinda big miracle pull. He’s just the lucky fucker sitting in the catbird seat.

[gatormarc 897]

13 minutes ago, thunderlounge said:

Not like it’s some kinda big miracle pull. He’s just the lucky fucker sitting in the catbird seat.

Maybe there's something to be said for not being Jim Phillips or Larry Scott or Bob Bowlsby.

[Satchel 6901]

1 hour ago, thunderlounge said:

Not like they can really stay where they’re at, knowing the bones of the acc are rotting. They have to save face and leave at some point.  Where the fuck else they gonna go?
 

If the SEC/b1g don’t want them, yormark has little to do with it other than to nod and say yes. 
 

Not like it’s some kinda big miracle pull. He’s just the lucky fucker sitting in the catbird seat.

If the Sec commissioner croaked tomorrow, Yormark would be the at the top the candidate list.

[gatormarc 897]

[gatormarc 897]

[gatormarc 897]

 

[Longboard Horn 39843]

[Gidnik 3242]

 

 

[gatormarc 897]

3 hours ago, Longboard Horn said:

Funny though they left out Penn State (1990), FSU (1991), Virginia Tech (2004), and Pittsburgh (2013)

[Evil Bill Obrien 2914]

On 7/13/2024 at 5:33 PM, CustersDoctor said:

The left behind will be: GT, UH, CINCY, DUKE, WAKE, BC & KST. 

 

It may not happen soon, but this is a decent list of schools that better learn American/Sunbelt Buddy…eventually

[Al_4_ISU 12229]

On 7/13/2024 at 5:33 PM, CustersDoctor said:

Dos Equis Conference FTW. And though I hate Cal and Stanford, they have far better TV metrics than UH, CINCY or GT. Drop those three in favor of Cal,  Stanford and Cuse. I'd keep Louisville & Miami both over Duke. 

The left behind will be: GT, UH, CINCY, DUKE, WAKE, BC & KST. 

SMU Don't get no mention here, they absolutely don't belong.

I don't think KSU belongs on that list, but agree on the others.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

Couple catch ups:

One, the Big 12 Network vote was a long time ago and it wasn't Dodds, though he was the only supporter, it was the assistant Commish of the Big 12 at the time who pitched the idea for the conference network and whose name slips my mind after all these years.  The biggest issue at the time though is they couldn't make the money work, which is why it failed.    Not only did it require a sizable investment per school to wire and set up, at a time when most schools where only making like $9m a year from the conference, but it was projected to be a yearly money loser as well because cable rights hadn't exploded yet.   The exec left after the vote to go help the Big Ten form their network in 2004, which used Delaney's muscle to solve a bunch of the issues up front, including bringing on a media partner from the start (Fox) who gave each school a signing bonus to pay for the infrastructure.   And even then, BTN didn't make money for a decade until 2015, a year after they added Rutgers and Maryland and renegotiated their carriage deals on the east coast.   

Two, this drop by Scheer is a bit nuts.   Per someone's point above, he was accurate on the Pac 12 news for a while.   He has some big feeders in the AZ world and is not prone to random speculation.    He has further tweets/comments/replys that mention:

Quote

It’s 100 percent real but there’s a lot of moving parts, starting with the lawsuits. There’s confidence it will go the way everybody wants except the ACC itself.

Quote

"You mentioned Oregon state getting a look but they aren’t a priority.. is that as a pair with WSU or by themselves?"    Washington State was not mentioned to me

...

Louisville is in a good place with the Big 12. Will have more information later this week

...

"Do you think we could see an announcement of intent to leave by one of them before 8/1? Does something need to break before the new ACC additions have voting rights, or does that not matter?"    I would be shocked if anything is imminent. It’s a long game from what I’ve been told

---

Late Kick Josh has been teasing the same thing for a few weeks.    

 

[BigHornedLurker 1883]

1 hour ago, Hurtlocker said:

 

Its like the inversion of prestige world wide 

[Texas Wahoo 3376]

1 hour ago, Hurtlocker said:

Couple catch ups:

One, the Big 12 Network vote was a long time ago and it wasn't Dodds, though he was the only supporter, it was the assistant Commish of the Big 12 at the time who pitched the idea for the conference network and whose name slips my mind after all these years.  The biggest issue at the time though is they couldn't make the money work, which is why it failed.    Not only did it require a sizable investment per school to wire and set up, at a time when most schools where only making like $9m a year from the conference, but it was projected to be a yearly money loser as well because cable rights hadn't exploded yet.   The exec left after the vote to go help the Big Ten form their network in 2004, which used Delaney's muscle to solve a bunch of the issues up front, including bringing on a media partner from the start (Fox) who gave each school a signing bonus to pay for the infrastructure.   And even then, BTN didn't make money for a decade until 2015, a year after they added Rutgers and Maryland and renegotiated their carriage deals on the east coast.   

Two, this drop by Scheer is a bit nuts.   Per someone's point above, he was accurate on the Pac 12 news for a while.   He has some big feeders in the AZ world and is not prone to random speculation.    He has further tweets/comments/replys that mention:

Late Kick Josh has been teasing the same thing for a few weeks.    

 

The theory here is that the ACC loses nine teams:

Miami, FSU, Clemson, UNC, NC State, UVA, Va Tech, Louisville, and Stanford.

['stache 21520]

25 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

The theory here is that the ACC loses nine teams:

Miami, FSU, Clemson, UNC, NC State, UVA, Va Tech, Louisville, and Stanford.

Stanford would go independent before daring to associate with such peasants. The Big 12 would take them and would make more sense on every level, but they prefer the smell of their own farts too much. 

[Evil Bill Obrien 2914]

44 minutes ago, BigHornedLurker said:

Its like the inversion of prestige world wide 

Poverty World Wide

[LTbear 4044]

9 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Stanford would go independent before daring to associate with such peasants. The Big 12 would take them and would make more sense on every level, but they prefer the smell of their own farts too much. 

[statsman 5354]

35 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Stanford would go independent before daring to associate with such peasants. The Big 12 would take them and would make more sense on every level, but they prefer the smell of their own farts too much. 

Somebody got their feelings hurt at the 2012 Fiesta Bowl. 

[Deej 76156]

2 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Couple catch ups:

One, the Big 12 Network vote was a long time ago and it wasn't Dodds, though he was the only supporter, it was the assistant Commish of the Big 12 at the time who pitched the idea for the conference network and whose name slips my mind after all these years.  The biggest issue at the time though is they couldn't make the money work, which is why it failed.    Not only did it require a sizable investment per school to wire and set up, at a time when most schools where only making like $9m a year from the conference, but it was projected to be a yearly money loser as well because cable rights hadn't exploded yet.   The exec left after the vote to go help the Big Ten form their network in 2004, which used Delaney's muscle to solve a bunch of the issues up front, including bringing on a media partner from the start (Fox) who gave each school a signing bonus to pay for the infrastructure.   And even then, BTN didn't make money for a decade until 2015, a year after they added Rutgers and Maryland and renegotiated their carriage deals on the east coast.   

Two, this drop by Scheer is a bit nuts.   Per someone's point above, he was accurate on the Pac 12 news for a while.   He has some big feeders in the AZ world and is not prone to random speculation.    He has further tweets/comments/replys that mention:

Late Kick Josh has been teasing the same thing for a few weeks.    

 

That looks like a conference aggy might be able to win more than once every 25 years. 

Narrator: "It's not."

['stache 21520]

4 minutes ago, statsman said:

Somebody got their feelings hurt at the 2012 Fiesta Bowl. 

Lol, wut?

I like Stanford and if they BIG won't take them, they should be in the Big 12, not the fucking ACC.

[DFW Horn 6028]

2 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

All Coasts Conference?

 

Edited July 15 by DFW Horn

[The Original Greaser Bob 2685]

20 minutes ago, statsman said:

Somebody got their feelings hurt at the 2012 Fiesta Bowl. 

That's bullshit.  

(But fuck Coach Shaw.)

[CustersDoctor 582]

If I had a 'LOCKED ON SURLY' podcast here's my my new fanboy clickbait  proposal. The Big12 & the ACC have the votes to dissolve both conferences. Then they can merge into one big conference while cutting the schools that are dilutive. The Big12 will get 2/3 vote to dissolve from these 11 schools. TECH, OSU, ISU, WVU, AST, UA, UU, BYU, CU, Kansas & TCU.

The ACC will get 2/3 vote from these 12 schools. UM, FSU, CLEM, UNC, UV, VT, UL, PITT, NCST, CUSE, CAL & Stanford. 

That's 23 schools. Getting to 24 would seem more complete. So pick one of the left behind to get to 24. KST, BU, UH, CINCY, UCF, BC, GT, DUKE, WAKE, SMU.

The hardest for me leave out were 1. KST, They're competitive in everything. But they don't deliver great ratings in anything. And the state of Kansas has a small footprint. 2. UCF, they have had a growth plan for over a decade and have done a darn good job of climbing their way up. 3. Duke, they deliver big time on the #2 sport. 

This new 24 team conference gets a really good deal because they'll rid themselves of ratings disasters. There won't be any schools in that upper tier like what the B1G has, but the B1G has these super low performers: Northwestern, Maryland & Rutgers. And these not so great performers: Purdue, Indiana and Illinois.

[mdmost 42316]

Sorry F$U, you only get the Big 12 if you really want to push that GOR.

 

[Al_4_ISU 12229]

Sorry F$U, you only get the Big 12 if you really want to push that GOR.
 

A well connected ISU guy said yesterday that the SEC has vetted FSU and Clemson and neither one is additive. Big 10 still cares about playing school and neither is AAU.

Makes me think the SEC is done unless they can add Notre Dame. Also reinforces no Big 12 school is getting any kind of call from them (time to accept reality KU fans).

I think Big 10 still might want UNC/UVA/Miami. FSU and Clemson need to decide if being in the Big 12 is better than being in the ACC minus them.

[mdmost 42316]

1 minute ago, Al_4_ISU said:

A well connected ISU guy said yesterday that the SEC has vetted FSU and Clemson and neither one is additive. Big 10 still cares about playing school and neither is AAU.

Makes me think the SEC is done unless they can add Notre Dame. Also reinforces no Big 12 school is getting any kind of call from them (time to accept reality KU fans).

I think Big 10 still might want UNC/UVA/Miami. FSU and Clemson need to decide if being in the Big 12 is better than being in the ACC minus them.

I know everyone here loves the ideas of these massive conferences and we're probably headed that way eventually. But I firmly believe most of the conferences got what they wanted and are fine with staying with their current numbers. Anything over 16 is just unwieldy. The Big 10 only cares about getting Notre Dame and they're willing to wait. Notre Dame would never entertain the SEC. 

Now with your new commissioner, I could see him thinking Clemson and Notre Dame are no brainers and they are for the Big 12. But man, scheduling is going to be a bear and you're going to have to make some tough choices on how to balance that out with traditional rivalries. Plus, I really don't think Fox is going to want to spend more money on the Big 12. ESPN won't be happy that they're losing the 2 biggest football draws. 

[gatormarc 897]

To me, the key takeaway is:

- FSU and/or Clemson are not enough to do the expansion thing again right now.

unless...

- The ACC blows up and then SEC/B1G/Big 12 may take some risks to keep up with each other.

I could also see that neither the SEC or the B1G see the additive value now, but may see it don the line and feel no need to speed up the timetable which could also explain their annoyance that FSU/Clemson.

Both have already stretched their TV contracts: SEC with still negotiating a 9 game schedule and B1G giving partial memberships to Oregon and Washington until their next contract.

['stache 21520]

Sounds like bs coach speak. FSU is definitely additive. If Clemson's run is over and isolated I can see them being borderline. But LOL at either conference (BIG especially) calling them "disruptive partners." The BIG literally just killed another conference and has poached from the other two over in recent years. That's disruptive as fuck. They did it for money which is understandable. FSU and Clemson want out because of money which should be understandable. It feels to me that they pissed ESPN off by questioning the bs contract they are locked into which pays them far less than everyone else for a much longer time. It's shady as shit that they had to sue to see the media contract to which they are bound. All they had to say was "we are not looking to add teams that are bound by other obligations." At this point I just don't see anything happening for a while. If ESPN is mad at them, they aren't paying them to move to any other conference including the Big 12.

Edited July 16 by 'stache

[mdmost 42316]

Agreed. There's no TV money to add teams right now. ABC/ESPN might be done with TV contracts for a time. I think it might hinge of how well the standalone ESPN product does when it comes to market in 2025-2026. Fox might want to add more but I doubt it. CBS, NBC are both spoken for. The Big 12 might have a hard time getting good TV spots now regardless. 

[statsman 5354]

If FSU and Clemson are not additive to the SEC, they’re sure as hell not additive to the B1G, who makes about 25% more per year, per school (pending renegotiation to 9 SEC league game schedules). Plus, squeezing two teams in plays hell with schedules. SEC fans are already bitching about losing favorite games. 
 
A year ago, I couldn’t figure out why FSU and Clemson were trying to hard to break the GoR unless they had a guaranteed landing spot. It still doesn’t make sense. Did they think that it was enough to make themselves available, and then wait for the offers to roll in? Bad idea. 

[BigHornedLurker 1883]

It makes 0 financial sense to add FSU , Clemson, or whoever to any conference if its dilutive. 

What AD in their right mind is going to sign off on 'lets pay to add this team to the conference' . Just go play that team OOC if you want to play them so bad. 

Now maybe Conferences move back towards uneven distribution which could solve some of the Vanderbilt and Illinois type situations, and take some schools that way but otherwise no one is taking schools out of the good of their hearts.

Edited July 16 by BigHornedLurker

[Hurtlocker 2208]

24 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

To me, the key takeaway is:

- FSU and/or Clemson are not enough to do the expansion thing again right now.

unless...

- The ACC blows up and then SEC/B1G/Big 12 may take some risks to keep up with each other.

I could also see that neither the SEC or the B1G see the additive value now, but may see it don the line and feel no need to speed up the timetable which could also explain their annoyance that FSU/Clemson.

Both have already stretched their TV contracts: SEC with still negotiating a 9 game schedule and B1G giving partial memberships to Oregon and Washington until their next contract.

Yeah, with you.   Kinda been saying this for a while.  FSU/Clemson are big enough to make the B12 more money, but not to make SEC/B1G money.    The only chance the B12 has to get close, and it wouldn't be at, but close, like within 20%, would be if FSU/Clemson also could pull ND to the B12 with them.   Then the question becomes, who is the fourth, and, honestly, I don't honestly believe that matters.   Louisville, Pitt, VTech, Miami, sure.

PE could finance this and make their money back in a 2030+ media deal (like 5% return for 20 years, which are how a lot of sports investments have been set up).   I don't think they could pull ND, but Comcast investors could be institutional players in whatever offering is opened up.   They could tier this by broadcast window too to ensure ND made the most to lure them in, which NBC would want to guarantee their involvement, which is also how FSU would get their money, everyone else would just have their boats rise with the tide of being successful and getting on a higher T1 package.    Speculative, yes, but possible.   Still, even with this, you're not getting the entire conference to the B1G level.   Not enough brands, not enough markets, but maybe 2x today, on average, which everyone would gladly take.

Still, the only way I see this GoR being broken is if the rumors are true that the ACC did not sign the extension with ESPN from 2027 on.  No one wants to see a GoR challenged and defeated because all of the conferences are using them to inflate their earnings by reducing risk.   If the B1G or SEC cannot promise that Texas and Ohio State won't pull their rights back at any time for any reason, then their media contracts have ZERO value.

On your unless - 

• I can see this, like grabbing Oregon/Washington.    I could see the B1G getting to 20 by adding UVA/UNC and "playing school" as @Al_4_ISU said, at a lower rate.   Adding Virginia and North Carolina and the combined 20m people to their footprint.  Would the SEC do the same with VTech/NCState?    VTech makes the most sense to me, with the Bristol connection and hopping football when winning, but they clearly don't need to.
• The 9 game schedule for the SEC is the wild card here.  The B1G makes more than the SEC on three aspects; market, brands, 9 games.  Even with that, the SEC is within range.   The problem is they have all their ducks aligned with the mouse now and the Mouse believes it already bought everything and has already said so.   The SEC rightly believes that 8 games against each other are better than 16 games against FCS teams.   They're not wrong, but because of how they're all on the Mouse, they don't have leverage.   All of those FCS games go on the SEC Network, and people pay carriage for them.   There are already other games on the same days the Mouse has slotted into the big payment games, so, in their eyes, they don't have more big payment slots to offer.    This also highlights why the Mouse is not trying to push expansion after Texas/Oklahoma (though why they thought the world would hold pat is beyond me).
• The next rights deals are going to be very interesting and it would not surprise me in the slightest if we do not see and alignment if media contracts under the CFP somewhere around 2035, for all 3 conferences and 60 some schools, where payment has two aspects; 50% participation + 50% performance (e.g. where did you play and how did you rate in that play).   The big brands who win out and get 10-15m per game will make bank and the 0-12 lessers will get some take home pay for their beatings and to have been on all streaming.

 

[Al_4_ISU 12229]

If Florida State isn't moving the SEC's financial needle, I can't see VA Tech or NCSU doing it.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

6 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

If Florida State isn't moving the SEC's financial needle, I can't see VA Tech or NCSU doing it.

Pardon, i meant like the previous...at a greatly reduced in.    If that starts to crumble there will be a fire sale.   If you offer what they're making to just have a stable residence, people will jump.

['stache 21520]

How long do Oregon and Washington get half shares? Surely they'll get full shares after a few years. I never understood how a short term discount makes sense. If they don't add long term I don't see how a short term deduction makes much sense. It feels more like taking a few extra bucks off the top short term due to their desperation.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

3 minutes ago, 'stache said:

How long do Oregon and Washington get half shares? Surely they'll get full shares after a few years. I never understood how a short term discount makes sense. If they don't add long term I don't see how a short term deduction makes much sense. It feels more like taking a few extra bucks off the top short term due to their desperation.

Until the next media deal

['stache 21520]

Just now, Hurtlocker said:

Until the next media deal

OK, that makes some sense.

On another note, do Grants of Rights even matter anymore outside of locking the ACC in and causing shit for FSU and Clemson? BIG and SEC never needed them because nobody is leaving. Big 12's didn't exactly do much except when OU and Texas agreed to stay for an extra decade. Nor did it matter to the PAC which is now dead. Nobody in the Big 12 is a threat to leave anymore because BIG and SEC aren't interested and there is no alternative league (PAC is dead, ACC is on life support and making less).