Jump to content

Realignment talk not going away

The Tower

By The Tower
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Recommended

Posted by Sandbagging Steve,

How many teams will be left when the dust settles in a few years? I think there's a way for all the teams to still have some involvement. I will explain that at the end of this list. Here's my list of the top 32 programs and a list if it goes to 48. There's some debate if it goes to 48, but not much debate if it stops at 32. I guess one could debate Arizona State, but that's about it. The top 32 at least come close to carrying their own weight. Everyone below that line is losing money for t

This is great content for free.

Recommended by immamac

  • Hook 'Em

6 reactions

Go to this post
  • Replies 36.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bullet

    1514

  • Hurtlocker

    1324

  • Al_4_ISU

    1085

  • BurntOrange&White

    978

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Hiphopopotamos
Hiphopopotamos
MAUFRAIS
MAUFRAIS

Aggy should abstain so the vote is 13-0 and then we can then brand it on their dog.

jofus
jofus

Posted Images

bullet

bullet 1630

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

As always, I appreciate your thoughtful posts.

I agree that MSU losing UM is the biggest obstacle by far to a 1-8-8.  No question.  That was in one of my first posts about this.

How much juice does MSU have ?  And how much does Fox want that game vs full rotation ?  

OSU-PSU got dropped, which was a much bigger game ratings-wise, although it doesn't have the history or in-state aspect of UM-MSU.

Part of the OSU-PSU game becoming every other year is neither OSU nor PSU wanted it annually.  They wanted some schedule relief.

BIG had previously said they only made rivals permanent if both schools agreed.  If UM (with a nudge from Fox) says they no longer want MSU, is MSU asked to make a sacrifice "for the good of the conference" ?  Same for Iowa-MN and Iowa-WI ?   Little Brown Jug is no longer played annually, despite the history, and there are a few others like that.

//

As for SC vs UW and UO.  If all four former PAC schools play each other every year, that's less games where they're matched up vs OSU, UM and PSU.

Isn't the biggest value for Fox to have more of the "Rose Bowl Rematches" and less "PAC Rematches" ?

Obviously, 3-7-7 solves all of this, and Fox would love an extra conference game, but that would be idiotic with the SEC at 8.

Will be fascinating to see how it plays out.  

And if FSU says they're leaving the SEC in the next week, all of this will go out the window anyway.🤣

 

I think if you kill the rivalries, you kill what makes college football special.  It is what has made the SEC valuable.  And it makes schools in the Big 10 other than Ohio St., Michigan and Penn St. valuable.  And it drives attendance, which still matters to revenue.

I think Penn St. is nuts not to try to keep Ohio St. every year.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Welshy

Welshy 914

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Interesting post-mortem on the Pac-12 media deal saga by Ourand of SBJ

Summary of media offers from this & other sources:

1) Amazon: “Never submitted a bid”

2) NBC: “Never submitted a bid.” This despite the Pac-12 approaching them 3 different times per Ross Dellenger. Hey! “No means No,” right?

3) Fox: $3.5-4M/team AAV for “13 B-package football games per yr” (likely late windows FS1 content)

4) CBS: only recent offer was for 5 total Basketball games per year; no bid amount given.

5) ESPN: -recent offer: “small bid for Pac-12 rights” (this has been widely rumored to be $9M/team AAV for the Tier 1 content) -original ESPN offer, during the exclusive negotiating window over a yr ago, was a “significant package.” Others described this as “the same deal the Big12 later accepted”… I assume this is the ~$20M AAV/team that ESPN will paying the Big12. Fox would have likely paid for FB/BB content as well, but since their inventory is more BB-heavy, I doubt Fox would have paid the $11.7M AAV to the Pac-12 that they are paying the Big12 who offers better BB brands & more inventory. I’d assume any combined offer would have been around $27-8M/yr, but was Fox or the Pac-12 themselves not willing to “play ball” with one another from the start? Was the relationship too damaged due to Fox being viewed as complicit with the B1G’s poaching of USC/UCLA, and swooning over Ore/UW?

6) CW: Not mentioned in article but had been in negotiations/discussions at least once. Unclear if they submitted a bid.

7) AppleTV+: $23M/team AAV with all streaming content (no linear) but subscription incentives to boost payouts beyond that baseline This last one was the best they could do, was presented to the presidents last week, and was the straw that finally broke the camel’s back.

 

If I'm a fox lawyer, owing 1 cool billion in legal settlements after news shenanigans, I'm shitting my pants with "speculation" I tampered with the outcome of this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hagbard Celine

Hagbard Celine 11258

Posted
Posted
On 8/5/2023 at 10:26 PM, DixonHur said:

Sorry, I guess I'm just bitter, because I wanted Texas in the PAC-12.  Football aside, I'd rather Texas be associated with schools, like Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA and even USC, as opposed to Alabama, Mississippi...and basically anyone that isn't Vanderbilt.

i think you'll find gata, georgia and klan people, in addition to vandy, are kinda like us

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hagbard Celine

Hagbard Celine 11258

Posted
Posted
On 8/6/2023 at 10:23 AM, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

the last comment may have been missed and deserves surly memorialization:

"This is the Apple Corporation.  They have the technology to Star Trek beam it in to your brain and immediately digitizing it, transforming it into technomagic."

 

Tim beams Technomagic

 

that's a shirt, with a Pac-4 logo

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TKthunder2

TKthunder2 5059

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, bullet said:

I think if you kill the rivalries, you kill what makes college football special.  It is what has made the SEC valuable.  And it makes schools in the Big 10 other than Ohio St., Michigan and Penn St. valuable.  And it drives attendance, which still matters to revenue.

I think Penn St. is nuts not to try to keep Ohio St. every year.

I agree in spirit, but honestly we’re talking about a single rivalry here Michigan/MSU. The others aren’t important in the long term (Iowa can have Nebraska every year and rotate Wisc/Minn every other years and now get more home games from Michigan/Ohio St/Penn St/USC as a consolation prize).

USC/UCLA, UW/UO, Neb/Iowa, Wisc/Minn, IL/NW, IND/Purdue, tOSU/Mich, PSU/MSU, Rut/MD would all be preserved. Only Michigan v Michigan State as an instate rivalry would go from annual to every other year.

Is that one rivalry big enough to stop this train? We’re at least thinking about it, so maybe…

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
USC Traveler

USC Traveler 488

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, hawkfan said:

The biggest disagreement I think we have is that if you follow the money, 10/11 conference games will be inevitable. 

The networks don't give a fuck about 3/4 OOC games, most of which are against bumfuck FCS University. 

Agreed.  It's only a matter of time before they're all playing 10 conference games.  It's stupid if the BIG goes to 10 now, though with the SEC at 8.

 

39 minutes ago, bullet said:

I think if you kill the rivalries, you kill what makes college football special.  It is what has made the SEC valuable.  And it makes schools in the Big 10 other than Ohio St., Michigan and Penn St. valuable.  And it drives attendance, which still matters to revenue.

I think Penn St. is nuts not to try to keep Ohio St. every year.

Seems like Franklin wanted to avoid OSU.  OSU already has UM, so they don't want to be at a disadvantage with UM and PSU as their locked rivals.  

PSU got USC as one of its "two play" teams.  Terrible terminology- it's the teams that play for four years straight, but which aren't permanent rivals.  

It helps their playoff chances to play every other year.  Allows OSU to alternate PSU and USC, and allows PSU to alternate OSU and UM.

//

Having said all of that, I agree with you that rivalries are a big part of what makes CFB special.  I'd rather see that game every year.

If the BIG does go to 3-7-7 while the SEC is still at 8 games, my consolation is that it will preserve all rivalries and give us more great games to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gatormarc

gatormarc 937

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, nunna yo bizness said:
8 hours ago, hawkfan said:

 

Expand  

Tough shit for them.  Nobody forced them to schedule MOO and N.Ill. noncon games.  For that matter nobody forced them into the shitty ACC either.  They had their choice of any conference.  Don't expect too many tears shed for those fuckers.

To be fair, 24 hours ago they had a home game vs Miami on there as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BachelorTrek

BachelorTrek 3321

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

the last comment may have been missed and deserves surly memorialization:

"This is the Apple Corporation.  They have the technology to Star Trek beam it in to your brain and immediately digitizing it, transforming it into technomagic."

 

Tim beams Technomagic

 

that's a shirt, with a Pac-4 logo

Technomages.gif.5bd59b309fab943cd203cd24a4c524a2.gif

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
thunderlounge

thunderlounge 8414

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

the last comment may have been missed and deserves surly memorialization:

"This is the Apple Corporation.  They have the technology to Star Trek beam it in to your brain and immediately digitizing it, transforming it into technomagic."

 

Tim beams Technomagic

 

that's a shirt, with a Pac-4 logo


New motto?

“Star Trek beaming it into your brain”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5693

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

 

They fought against adding UT and OU, and would never even consider adding other B12 schools and BYU due to coastal elitism and religious bigotry.

The idea of programs getting paid what they're worth in a free market was inconceivable in Berkeley. 

Cal is the epitome of the arrogance, entitlement and elitism that doomed the PAC.  I'm glad they're getting left behind.  Fuck Cal.

 

I get what you’re saying, but a school not wanting to affiliate with Baylor is actually admirable and fwd thinking 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullet

bullet 1630

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

Agreed.  It's only a matter of time before they're all playing 10 conference games.  It's stupid if the BIG goes to 10 now, though with the SEC at 8.

 

Seems like Franklin wanted to avoid OSU.  OSU already has UM, so they don't want to be at a disadvantage with UM and PSU as their locked rivals.  

PSU got USC as one of its "two play" teams.  Terrible terminology- it's the teams that play for four years straight, but which aren't permanent rivals.  

It helps their playoff chances to play every other year.  Allows OSU to alternate PSU and USC, and allows PSU to alternate OSU and UM.

//

Having said all of that, I agree with you that rivalries are a big part of what makes CFB special.  I'd rather see that game every year.

If the BIG does go to 3-7-7 while the SEC is still at 8 games, my consolation is that it will preserve all rivalries and give us more great games to watch.

Well Franklin also wanted to avoid his Vandy players getting arrested for rape.  Think he probably interfered more in that particular case than Briles ever did in any single case.  Guess he's a good fit for Pedo St.

Just now, bullet said:

Well Franklin also wanted to avoid his Vandy players getting arrested for rape.  Think he probably interfered more in that particular case than Briles ever did in any single case.  Guess he's a good fit for Pedo St.

Those of us old enough remember how Paterno avoided playing Texas in the Cotton Bowl and then whined when Texas remained at #1 after beating Notre Dame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullet

bullet 1630

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, statsman said:

I get what you’re saying, but a school not wanting to affiliate with Baylor is actually admirable and fwd thinking 

But they wanted to affiliate with Pedo St. and Michigan St. along with the school that enabled Lawrence Phillips.

I guess they wanted to be with schools that avoided getting punished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BurntOrange&White

BurntOrange&White 41883

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

 

I'm still struggling to see how this one makes any logistical and financial sense, outside the ACC network getting a bump in Cali.

Just my opinion but I think this PAC 12 exploration by the ACC is that they're doing so to make it as to where their GOR needs more votes to dissolve and to block FSU from gaining votes to dissolve the GOR?

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zhorn96

Zhorn96 1835

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Just my opinion but I think this PAC 12 exploration by the ACC is that they're doing so to make it as to where their GOR needs more votes to dissolve and to block FSU from gaining votes to dissolve the GOR?

how many votes do they need?  I thought I saw it was 3/4s of the league... they dont need to add Cal/Furd to block that with those numbers.  Maybe its if 50%.  Maybe

Edited by Zhorn96
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, hawkfan said:

The biggest disagreement I think we have is that if you follow the money, 10/11 conference games will be inevitable. 

The networks don't give a fuck about 3/4 OOC games, most of which are against bumfuck FCS University.  In a 24 school conference they'll prefer 10/11 weeks of prime match ups, and once the ACC dies, it doesn't really matter what the SEC does, 4-6 schools are getting in the playoff from the B1G regardless of their record - I think it's likely that in the near future the schedules get tougher and we regularly see 9-3 or 8-4 teams make the playoff.  And the SEC will increase their number of conference games because they'll want ESPN to pay them more.

With respect to scheduling, I still think an NFL style schedule is easiest to follow for fans.  It also promotes more stability and regional flavor that made college football historically great.  With 11 conference games, you can get into 4 divisions of 6 schools, you play the 5 other schools in your division every year, then you rotate the opposite division you play every season.  

I'm my example, Great Plains plays Pacific in 2024 (and Atlantic plays Great Lakes the same year), the team with the best records on each pairing meet in the CCG - you get a true conference champion decided on the field every year.  Every school plays every other school once every three years (in other divisions) and completes a home and home with all the other schools on a six year rotation.

 

That all might be worth it just to watch SEC heads explode.   "We goin' from 8 to 11 conference games?   Can we play A&M twice?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5693

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bullet said:

But they wanted to affiliate with Pedo St. and Michigan St. along with the school that enabled Lawrence Phillips.

I guess they wanted to be with schools that avoided getting punished.

Oh, was Baylor ever punished? My perception is that they paid through the nose to bury the story and avoid having to answer to anyone on it, so they could get back to being holier than thou. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gatormarc

gatormarc 937

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:
9 minutes ago, Zhorn96 said:

hoe many votes do they need?  I thought I saw it was 3/4s of the league... they dont need to add Cal/Furd to block that with those numbers.  Maybe its if 50%.  Maybe

I think FSU vote + 8 more if I recall. 

That's only to dissolve the league (and it's debatable if 50%+1 is sufficient as no specific % is listed but other matters of membership require 75%) and presumably get them out of the Exit Fee, it doesn't touch the GoR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hurtlocker

Hurtlocker 2219

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I think FSU vote + 8 more if I recall. 

Seems more like 12, if you round up, which is 3/4ths of the schools.   If they added Stanford and Cal it would be 13.   

Some light reading: ACC Constitution and Bylaws

Excerpts:

98f51839a96986a479132ece068b55fd.png

Need to do it before hand too, because once you say you're leaving you lose your vote and all rights on future revenue - also need to do it by next week:

0edafea4e949720764317e3a858298bc.png

cfb90f600b2fcf6d01135a95a4602d6a.png

Also, GoR isn't in the constitution/bylaws because it is a separate agreement binding the rights to 2036 regardless of if the member withdraws from the conference.   Here's the initial GoR, which was extended from 2027 to 2036 to make the ACC Network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CustersDoctor

CustersDoctor 585

Posted
Posted
On 8/7/2023 at 9:46 AM, Gene Parmesan said:

College graduates are a minority in the college fan population.  Much like the NFL fan population.  Maybe the college graduate turns his nose up to NFL fans, but in reality he is surrounded by just as many morons.

I think one of the attendance and fanbase problems that Cal, Stanford and SMU have is that they have ZERO appeal outside their graduates. And they make Zero effort to engage outsiders, in fact they prefer that people who don't look like their graduates not come to their games. UT has quiet a few non alumni at their games. I live in Lubbock and my guesstamet is that 30% of their crowd didn't go to college and 40% didn't go to Tech. But Tech makes a broad appeal locally. Including organizations like Raider Rojos. Cal and Stanford's elitist snobbery has come around to bite them in the ass.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
redswingline

redswingline 1124

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, CustersDoctor said:

I think one of the attendance and fanbase problems that Cal, Stanford and SMU have is that they have ZERO appeal outside their graduates.

I can see that. However, that applies to probably half (if not more) of the schools in P5.

I would also think that when you are competing with NFL teams, it's a tough road. i.e. the 49ers/Raiders/Cowboys are all in the same city or right down the road from those 3 schools you listed.

I would venture to guess that most of the huge-fanbase college programs don't have to compete with NFL teams for fans.

Edited by redswingline
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't think Cal or Stanford either one are 'boring' opponents, whether it is basketball or football either one.  They definitely have tradition in their own right, with cats like McCaffrey, Rahgahs, BeastMode, etc, etc through the years in the NFL.

Edited by slorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jasper_Jester

Jasper_Jester 356

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, slorch said:

I don't think Cal or Stanford either one are 'boring' opponents, whether it is basketball or football either one.  They definitely have tradition in their own right, with cats like McCaffrey, Rahgahs, BeastMode, etc, etc through the years into.

There are currently two Cal Alumni starting QBs in the NFL. And Stanford has a ton of alumni currently on NFL rosters. historically, these schools pump out a surprising number of NFL players.

But, living in the Bay Area, it is true that there is basically no outreach to the surrounding community to engage in the sport. It is like they are trying to keep it a secret that there are two NFL factories nearby.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...