Realignment talk not going away

[Huckleberry 32661]

Damn I was hoping Texas State would luck out but not looking likely apparently. 

[thunderlounge 7701]

1 hour ago, Ojo Rojo said:

So, yeah, two conferences with a combined 48 teams or so.

48 seems to be a magic number, in terms of antitrust. 
 

You can still allow the rest of what is currently fbs to have a playoff to play-in for a spot in the football playoff, and have a 32 team playoff for 16 spots in the bb tourney. 
 

Lotta possible new revenue streams to be had.  

[Evil Bill Obrien 3104]

43 minutes ago, bullet said:

https://sports.yahoo.com/go-west-the-next-wave-of-realignment-is-in-memphis-hands-135625431.html

Article today.  Apparently its all on Memphis.  PAC wants Memphis, Tulane, USF and UTSA.  Projecting $12-$15 million total conference distributions (TV, NCAA bb, etc.).  Memphis isn't thrilled and worried about the validity of the projections.

 

Yeah read that a little while ago, kind of crazy that new-PAC is basically hinging on a Memphis school that will bolt to the ACC first chance that its given (once FSU and Clemson get out) but such is college football realignment... USF to the new-PAC is amusing as well, good luck with flights from Tampa to Pullman/Corvalis for non-rev sports.

 

19 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Damn I was hoping Texas State would luck out but not looking likely apparently. 

Been fairly surprised by realignment before, so still think there's a chance of Texas State in the new-PAC hopefully with UTSA, but would take joining the AAC with them and Rice and UNT at incrementally more money than the SBC as a decent consolation prize. Whatever happens I at least have more trust/faith in the current University administration to navigate this than those in charge previously. Not going to be waiting around for some conference to ask for their slide deck like Larry Teis...  

Edited September 20 by Evil Bill Obrien
Larry Teis slander

['stache 21729]

Yeah, I'm not sure the travel costs are worth it, especially since the media bump is speculation at this point. I'd probably stay if I were Memphis and others, including UTSA. 

[TKthunder2 4973]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

One elephant in the room in the future is the quality gap between the Big 10 and SEC.  The Big 10 just isn't that deep with elite teams.  2/3rds of the league are Big 12/ACC schools with nicer, richer parents.  The SEC is about 25% schools that fit that bill, by comparison.

I agree with your premise, but disagree that the gap is as big as 25% low quality in SEC vs 66% low quality in the Big Ten. Don’t get me wrong, the Big Ten is weaker pound for pound but it’s likely 25% vs 40%.

There are 24 FBS home stadiums with 70k+ capacity where the college team is the main tenant. (#25 drops to 66k -Virginia Tech)

Of those, the SEC has 11, and the Big Ten has 10. (Others are FSU, Clemson, ND)

The top 30 public athletic departments revenue for 2023:

SEC has 14 and the Big Ten has 12 (Others are UVA, FSU, Clemson, Louisville)

Since the start of the BCS 22 teams have played in a CFP or BCSNCG. The SEC has 8 while the Big Ten had 7. (Others FSU, VT, Miami, Clemson, ND, Cincy, TCU)

These numbers fairly are similar but when you remember that the Big Ten has 18 teams while the SEC only has 16 their differences are more apparent.

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

1 minute ago, TKthunder2 said:

I agree with your premise, but disagree that the gap is as big as 25% low quality in SEC vs 66% low quality in the Big Ten. Don’t get me wrong, the Big Ten is weaker pound for pound but it’s likely 25% vs 40%.

There are 24 FBS home stadiums with 70k+ capacity where the college team is the main tenant. (#25 drops to 66k -Virginia Tech)

Of those, the SEC has 11, and the Big Ten has 10. (Others are FSU, Clemson, ND)

The top 30 public athletic departments revenue for 2023:

SEC has 14 and the Big Ten has 12 (Others are UVA, FSU, Clemson, Louisville)

Since the start of the BCS 22 teams have played in a CFP or BCSNCG. The SEC has 8 while the Big Ten had 7. (Others FSU, VT, Miami, Clemson, ND, Cincy, TCU)

These numbers fairly are similar but when you remember that the Big Ten has 18 teams while the SEC only has 16 their differences are more apparent.

I don't think the Big 10 has a ton of low quality, but more like a ton of average-ish.  Once you get past maybe 4-5 schools out of 18, the profiles of many of the schools are more like the Big 12 and ACC than they are the top of the league.  After Ohio State, the Big 10 probably doesn't have a single team capable of winning the national title.  Maybe USC?  The SEC has 4-5.  Iowa was supposed to be pushing for an at large playoff spot and lost at home to the team picked 6th in the Big 12.

Part of the reason they have that many of the top 30 public athletic departments is because they're so well compensated for having Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State previously (and now have USC in that mix).  The SEC is a far more even collection of schools, IMO.

[Left Coast 863]

Don’t forget Oregon, they always seem to be in the mix.

[closetohumping 17354]

['stache 21729]

A little cloaky but I lol'd.

[LTbear 4152]

#Calgorithm has been great

[zlavydra 2116]

Fuck Baylor. Whatever is worst for Dave Bliss U. is my preference m

[TKthunder2 4973]

7 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I don't think the Big 10 has a ton of low quality, but more like a ton of average-ish.  Once you get past maybe 4-5 schools out of 18, the profiles of many of the schools are more like the Big 12 and ACC than they are the top of the league.  After Ohio State, the Big 10 probably doesn't have a single team capable of winning the national title.  Maybe USC?  The SEC has 4-5.  Iowa was supposed to be pushing for an at large playoff spot and lost at home to the team picked 6th in the Big 12.

Part of the reason they have that many of the top 30 public athletic departments is because they're so well compensated for having Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State previously (and now have USC in that mix).  The SEC is a far more even collection of schools, IMO.

I have zero love for the Big Ten but I disagree with your assessment. If we’re just going off who can win a national title, then yeah it’s a down year for the Big Ten, but even then they have more than Ohio St. Penn St, USC, Oregon, and maybe even Nebraska (look at their schedule) could all be playoff teams. But when we’re talking about realignment, year to year isn’t that important as you can discount Michigan’s value just because they are down a little a year after winning it all.

To your tier list, sure, the Big Ten has 5 blueblood or near blueblood schools in Ohio St, Michigan, Penn St, USC, and Nebraska that the Big 12 has no chance to match but they also have another 5 schools that would still clearly at the very top of the upper echelon of the Big 12.

You might be able to argue that Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, Michigan St, and Iowa wouldn’t be number one in the Big 12, but even if true, they would absolutely be in the top quartile at a minimum.

[Steelers Roll Left 1142]

Yeah, sounds like some network needs to step up and put a bullet in the head of The PAC once and for all….

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

9 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

I have zero love for the Big Ten but I disagree with your assessment. If we’re just going off who can win a national title, then yeah it’s a down year for the Big Ten, but even then they have more than Ohio St. Penn St, USC, Oregon, and maybe even Nebraska (look at their schedule) could all be playoff teams. But when we’re talking about realignment, year to year isn’t that important as you can discount Michigan’s value just because they are down a little a year after winning it all.

To your tier list, sure, the Big Ten has 5 blueblood or near blueblood schools in Ohio St, Michigan, Penn St, USC, and Nebraska that the Big 12 has no chance to match but they also have another 5 schools that would still clearly at the very top of the upper echelon of the Big 12.

You might be able to argue that Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, Michigan St, and Iowa wouldn’t be number one in the Big 12, but even if true, they would absolutely be in the top quartile at a minimum.

Nebraska would have gotten skull fucked by half the Big 12 over the last decade.  I’m not sure they would be a Top 5 Big 12 team this year.

The schools in your 2nd paragraph would absolutely be among the better Big 12 programs, but not a single one of them would run the place on a year in year out basis.

There are 4 Big 10 schools (out of 18) clearly a tier ahead of the Big 12/ACC.  The SEC is more like 8 out of 16.  I think that gap will show in playoff selections and lead to some resentment of some kind.

[bullet 1596]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/pac-12-gutting-mountain-west-sparks-fresh-realignment-stress-at-schools-outside-power-four/ar-AA1qRIQw

 

"...The first level of those concerns revolves around simple math: Until the Pac-12 lands a media deal, there’s no guarantee of a significant increase from what Memphis makes in the American Athletic (estimated to be in the $8 million-$9 million range). But the valuations being discussed for the new Pac-12 by its media consultants in the $10 million-$12 million range are only theoretical at this point, and may not make a meaningful difference financially when you consider increased travel costs.

Crucially, though, maximizing the value of the new Pac-12 is also going to depend on selling a true “best of the rest” configuration that Memphis and others would need to commit to with a Grant of Rights agreement that locks them into the league for the length of the contract.

That illustrates the other reason why patience may win out at Memphis. After an unsuccessful pursuit of Big 12 membership, school officials there are now eyeing the ACC as a potential landing spot in the next handful of years....

The Pac-12’s resurrection, though, has forced Group of Five administrators to acknowledge the reality that either one of the current leagues will fold or more FCS members are going to be brought up to FBS to backfill amidst the game of musical chairs.

Both options are bad, but the latter may be worse...."

 

[Lonestar88 4585]

 

[GJ Winne 166]

On 9/20/2024 at 11:44 AM, Huckleberry said:

Damn I was hoping Texas State would luck out but not looking likely apparently. 

The only way I would have wanted to move would be if we ended up w/ the right combination of teams.  I really like the Sun Belt, and not just for football.  12 teams in bowl games last year; Baseball, Softball, Volleyball were all 4 bid NCAAs. Hoops is weak - 1 bid ea for M/W.  We are on an island in Texas, but that doesn't bother me as much as it does others.  We have UTSA schedule through like 2031 and I'd think that continues in perpetuity.

[Texas Wahoo 3382]

 

 

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

13 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

 

 I said when the Mountain West teams joined that the AAC teams would be idiotic to leave considering they make the most of the g6 teams. 

They should target Texas State....

 

[billfromlaketravis 11328]

26 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

Question for the thread, why is Memphis automatically included in every conference expansion conversation? Is Jimmy Sexton their agent? 
 

It’s not a large TV market in a pretty poor city. Moderately successful football and hoops programs. I just don’t get it. 
 

I guess Nevada and SJSU just need to hang around the basket until Cal and Stanford give the PAC a firm no. 

[Lonestar88 4585]

 

[billfromlaketravis 11328]

13 minutes ago, Lonestar88 said:

 

Live look at Yormark: 

[Lonestar88 4585]

21 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 I said when the Mountain West teams joined that the AAC teams would be idiotic to leave considering they make the most of the g6 teams. 

They should target Texas State....

 

UTSA is the only one that might’ve made sense to move since they still aren’t getting a full share of the AAC tv deal, and they’re the closest geographically. I still think they made the right decision to stay.

 

4 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Question for the thread, why is Memphis automatically included in every conference expansion conversation? Is Jimmy Sexton their agent? 
 

It’s not a large TV market in a pretty poor city. Moderately successful football and hoops programs. I just don’t get it. 
 

I guess Nevada and SJSU just need to hang around the basket until Cal and Stanford give the PAC a firm no. 

We’re talking college not the pros. Memphis is a big market for a college team, a lot of colleges are in the middle of nowhere.

Also market doesn’t mean anything if the people in it don’t actually care about the teams. San Jose State is in the Bay Area, but no one in the Bay gives a shit about them, so who cares? 

When you combine market size and people in said market actually caring about them, Memphis is clearly one of the top G5 programs still available.

It’s not like there are a ton of top notch candidates left, the G5 have been raided multiple times in the last decade, these are the best of the leftovers.
 

 

[NCMountaineer 99]

On 9/20/2024 at 12:21 PM, Al_4_ISU said:

I don't get the impression that there's much of a UH fanbase to even give a shit about who they play.  My guess is the schools they want to play the most are in the SEC already anyhow.

 

But would they?  That gives them games in excellent recruiting locations and their only close opponent.  Outside of Cincy, they aren't driving anywhere anyhow.

Yeah we kinda don't give a shit if that's what we'd be stuck with, it's mostly just a numbers game. We'd have been stuck either way outside of UConn being the team that was brought in during the last round instead of UH. I think most of our base is assuming/anticipating the next round bringing in Louisville, Pitt, VT, and NCSU presuming the SEC doesn't take the last two there.

[bullet 1596]

43 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Question for the thread, why is Memphis automatically included in every conference expansion conversation? Is Jimmy Sexton their agent? 
 

It’s not a large TV market in a pretty poor city. Moderately successful football and hoops programs. I just don’t get it. 
 

I guess Nevada and SJSU just need to hang around the basket until Cal and Stanford give the PAC a firm no. 

Best TV ratings of the G5 (excluding military academies).  Best upward potential.  They have drawn 45k in the past in good years.  Hoops is really good.  How many schools outside the P6 have been to two national title games?

[bullet 1596]

Other sources (less reliable than McMurphy) have said the Gonzaga deal isn't done yet, but they are talking.

I'm inclined to go with McMurphy-all the i's haven't been dotted and the t's crossed, but its likely done.

Dellenger is saying AFA is committed to the MWC and not going to AAC.

Sounds like a bit of a standoff between the 6Pac and MWC8.

 

[TKthunder2 4973]

1 minute ago, bullet said:

Best TV ratings of the G5 (excluding military academies).  Best upward potential.  They have drawn 45k in the past in good years.  Hoops is really good.  How many schools outside the P6 have been to two national title games?

They have a large corporate sponsor with FedEx and their NIL game is one of the best in the G5.

I mean outside of the service academies, who else East of Texas really moves the football needle now in the G5: USF…Tulane…East Carolina??? Just not a lot of great options.

[TKthunder2 4973]

25 minutes ago, bullet said:

Other sources (less reliable than McMurphy) have said the Gonzaga deal isn't done yet, but they are talking.

I'm inclined to go with McMurphy-all the i's haven't been dotted and the t's crossed, but its likely done.

Dellenger is saying AFA is committed to the MWC and not going to AAC.

Sounds like a bit of a standoff between the 6Pac and MWC8.

 

The MWC will likely have nearly $200 million in exit fees to distribute. I assume Air Force would likely want their share of that money before they bolt. They already play Army/Navy every year so no real reason to rush.

If the American conference is holding together, then the PAC will go after Utah State first as their 7th members, then offer UNLV the final 8th spot in hopes that gives them enough cover the breakaway from Nevada-Reno.

That would put the PAC12 at 8 teams:

Boise St, Colorado St, Fresno St, Oregon St, San Diego St, UNLV, Utah St, and Washington St

Then the Mountain West would be down to 5 full members plus Hawaii football only: Air Force, Nevada-Reno, New Mexico, San Jose St, Wyoming, and Hawaii football

They need to add 3 full members, 2 of which must have football.

UTEP and New Mexico St are the obvious candidates but the MWC has been dismissive of them for the last 20 years so they may think they are “too good” for them. But then again, beggars can’t be choosers.

FCS Sacramento State University has been lobbying for a spot as they want to move to FBS. I also assume (if Utah St is truly gone) that WAC FCS schools Utah Tech (formerly Dixie St) and Southern Utah might get a look too.

There might be a non football school like Utah Valley which could be added to offset Hawaii if they want to keep their membership/footprint tight.

Edited September 23 by TKthunder2

['stache 21729]

What does the Sunbelt distribute annually? Could PAC turn to Tx St now that the AAC schools are off the table?

[Lonestar88 4585]

The PAC-12 screwed up imo. If they had just taken 8 MWC teams from the start, those 8 teams could've voted to dissolve the MWC and the PAC wouldn’t owe anyone any money. Now we’re talking about them taking 6 MWC teams anyway.

They’re  going to pay a shit ton of money for the right to take 2 less MWC teams.

[Saint Austin 739]

1 minute ago, Lonestar88 said:

They’re  going to pay a shit ton of money for the right to take 2 less MWC teams.

 

[TKthunder2 4973]

40 minutes ago, 'stache said:

What does the Sunbelt distribute annually? Could PAC turn to Tx St now that the AAC schools are off the table?

IIRC (and I could be a bit out of date but I’m not going to look these up manually)

AAC $11 million per school

MWC $ 8 million per

SBC/MAC $3 million

CUSA $2 million

 

edit: used ChatGPT and updated my numbers which were close enough

Edited September 23 by TKthunder2

[TKthunder2 4973]

8 minutes ago, Lonestar88 said:

The PAC-12 screwed up imo. If they had just taken 8 MWC teams from the start, those 8 teams could've voted to dissolve the MWC and the PAC wouldn’t owe anyone any money. Now we’re talking about them taking 6 MWC teams anyway.

They’re  going to pay a shit ton of money for the right to take 2 less MWC teams.

Sounds like they did all of this just to get away from Nevada-Reno (because apparently they have just stopped investing as much in athletics after they got the MWC invite) and San Jose St (because they think they have a one in a million chance at getting Cal or Stanford back).

New Mexico and Wyoming are well liked institutions but in small markets which probably hurt their projected per school payout from a new TV deal.

No one seems to have an issue with Air Force at all, and they could drop Hawaii at anytime since they are not a full member.

So the PAC12 is paying out around $200 million in order to get rid of 4 members only a single one of which the other teams seem not to like.

WSU/OSU could have joined the MWC and kept that $100 million windfall and had the best facilities and NIL in the conference for the next decade and keep them in conversation annually for a playoff spot that could possibly turn into a P4 invite…

But instead, they chose this rebuild the PAC12 path where they will pay out a bunch of money to “lesser” schools and be in a conference of their peers that will have more motivated fan/donor support while WSU/OSU fans/alumni are still sad and unmotivated, which in turn will push WSU/OSU to the middle of the pack where they fall into even further obscurity.

Which would have been the better investment?

[BurntOrange&White 39270]

I think UNLV and Texas State make most sense 

[LTbear 4152]

47 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Sounds like they did all of this just to get away from Nevada-Reno (because apparently they have just stopped investing as much in athletics after they got the MWC invite) and San Jose St (because they think they have a one in a million chance at getting Cal or Stanford back).

New Mexico and Wyoming are well liked institutions but in small markets which probably hurt their projected per school payout from a new TV deal.

No one seems to have an issue with Air Force at all, and they could drop Hawaii at anytime since they are not a full member.

So the PAC12 is paying out around $200 million in order to get rid of 4 members only a single one of which the other teams seem not to like.

WSU/OSU could have joined the MWC and kept that $100 million windfall and had the best facilities and NIL in the conference for the next decade and keep them in conversation annually for a playoff spot that could possibly turn into a P4 invite…

But instead, they chose this rebuild the PAC12 path where they will pay out a bunch of money to “lesser” schools and be in a conference of their peers that will have more motivated fan/donor support while WSU/OSU fans/alumni are still sad and unmotivated, which in turn will push WSU/OSU to the middle of the pack where they fall into even further obscurity.

Which would have been the better investment?

Agreed with all this. It's a pretty insane moving around of money to get a marginally better MWC. I'm betting they really believed they could get Memphis + friends and build what would have been the clear-cut best G5, which would have been the obvious favorite for the 5th conference champ spot in the playoffs each year. 

[LTbear 4152]

McMurphy and Dellenger reporting that UNLV and Air Force are staying MWC. Utah State has received offer from PAC.

So uh, the PAC, without UNLV, or Memphis, or Tulane, or UTSA... I mean wow, how much money did you spend to marginally upgrade your average team rating. Swing and a miss. 

['stache 21729]

I think those numbers about buyouts and exit fees are complete bullshit. The way this has played out makes no sense otherwise. You’re talking about a few million extra per year in tv money at most even if they got Memphis etc. 

Edited September 23 by 'stache

[Lonestar88 4585]

5 minutes ago, LTbear said:

McMurphy and Dellenger reporting that UNLV and Air Force are staying MWC. Utah State has received offer from PAC.

So uh, the PAC, without UNLV, or Memphis, or Tulane, or UTSA... I mean wow, how much money did you spend to marginally upgrade your average team rating. Swing and a miss. 

UNLV choosing to stay in the MWC is a legitimate surprise. These teams must be hearing terrible things about the potential PAC tv deal.

[Lonestar88 4585]

Utah State but no UNLV is crazy.

Edited September 23 by Lonestar88

[LTbear 4152]

14 minutes ago, Lonestar88 said:

UNLV choosing to stay in the MWC is a legitimate surprise. These teams must be hearing terrible things about the potential PAC tv deal.

Lots of chatter online that UNLV and UN-R are somewhat tied.

[pops 6971]

10 minutes ago, Lonestar88 said:

Utah State but no UNLV is crazy.

Utah state only makes 7.  I still think the pac gets to 10. UNLV plus some combo of unr/wyo/New Mexico/air force. I will don't understand why the pac didn't just take 8 to begin with that would have wiped out all of the fees. They must have thought they could get those AAC schools. Just dumb. 

[Al_4_ISU 12394]

Why don’t these morons just merge?  This is getting dumb as fuck.

[pops 6971]

3 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Why don’t these morons just merge?  This is getting dumb as fuck.

Because their shits all regarded. They only needed a 75 percent vote of members to dissolve. No one wanted San Jose. I get keeping the pac name but just invite the 8 or 9 mwc teams that make sense, they vote to dissolve the conference and there are no buyout fees and the pac starts with a couple hundred million or whatever they are collecting, in the bank. Really really dumb. 

[Lonestar88 4585]

 

[TKthunder2 4973]

34 minutes ago, pops said:

Because their shits all regarded. They only needed a 75 percent vote of members to dissolve. No one wanted San Jose. I get keeping the pac name but just invite the 8 or 9 mwc teams that make sense, they vote to dissolve the conference and there are no buyout fees and the pac starts with a couple hundred million or whatever they are collecting, in the bank. Really really dumb. 

Once the others declare their intent to leave they can’t vote to dissolve. The only way they get out of the fees now is if they do a full merger.

Also San Jose State is a VERY attractive member. The only reason they likely weren’t included is that they think they might get Cal and Stanford back who would NOT want to share a conference with SJSU who they think is basically a JUCO.

Edited September 23 by TKthunder2

[TKthunder2 4973]

1 hour ago, Lonestar88 said:

UNLV choosing to stay in the MWC is a legitimate surprise. These teams must be hearing terrible things about the potential PAC tv deal.

They aren’t choosing to stay. They politically have trouble leaving Nevada-Reno. Rumor is Reno stopped investing in athletics after they got the MWC invite and has done next to nothing to improve. That has irritated the MWC members so they don’t want to invite them and UNLV can’t easily leave them.

If the PAC gets to 7, I assume they would give UNLV an ultimatum, join now or never, which might give them enough cover to leave Reno. I’d bet if they stay on this path that UNLV will be #8.

[pops 6971]

5 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Once the others declare their intent to leave they can’t vote to dissolve. The only way they get out of the fees now is if they do a full merger.

Also San Jose State is a VERY attractive member. The only reason they likely weren’t included is that they think they might get Cal and Stanford back who would NOT want to share a conference with SJSU who they think is basically a JUCO.

Cal and Stanford are never joining a conference with Boise and some cal state schools. Ever. And how is San Jose attractive? And don't give me metro tv numbers. Those don't matter when none of those TV's are tuned in to watch any San Jose sports. 

[TKthunder2 4973]

47 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Why don’t these morons just merge?  This is getting dumb as fuck.

This is really the best option now, if they can’t get Memphis and their pals.

WSU/OSU just need to accept their new place in the MWC and enjoy their $100 million payout.

[JFKFC 4878]

32 minutes ago, Lonestar88 said:

 

[Magus Ossis 2769]

Pac should just come crawling to the MWC and offer a merger.