Jump to content
A Merry Christmas from Surly Horns to You. ×

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

Uncle Nate

Uncle Nate 2097

Posted
Posted

Anyone listening to today's Monty Show?  He is sharing a rumor that ESPN has reached out to the Big 12 to consider taking Stanford and Cal if/when ACC turns them down.

Over the past year, he has been way more right than he has been wrong.

But I do not see this happening.  I don't bet, but I would bet good money that this will never happen.

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

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Anyone listening to today's Monty Show?  He is sharing a rumor that ESPN has reached out to the Big 12 to consider taking Stanford and Cal if/when ACC turns them down.

Over the past year, he has been way more right than he has been wrong.

But I do not see this happening.  I don't bet, but I would bet good money that this will never happen.

Give their shares for the first season to BYU, Baylor, and TCU.

well, no, fuck the church schools; but it'd still be funny with the Cali high brows.

Edited by slorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CustersDoctor

CustersDoctor 585

Posted
Posted
On 8/21/2021 at 3:22 PM, HornsofBevo said:

If the "alliance" really sees the SEC as so big of threat that they have to have closed door meetings to figure out a counter play then there really are only two things they should do. First, they need to all agree as a collective that they will not schedule any SEC teams out of conference giving the playoff committee no way of comparing the alliance teams to the SEC. Even if most people believed the second place SEC team to be better, it would force the playoff committee to be more even handed when they gave out playoff spots.

Second, if I'm the ACC or the PAC 12 especially, I would look to destroy the Big 12 immediately. Even though they look mostly dead, don't give them time to figure things out. The Pac should at minimum grab Okie lite and Tech which has a strong DFW following and the ACC should grab WVU. Also, I believe when the dust settles, Kansas will be in the BIG 10. That would effectively drain all the value left from the Big 12 and would give the Pac 12 access to the central time zone. 

 

On 8/23/2021 at 8:40 PM, Gaffords said:

It's funny how pissed the Big 10 and Pac are. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it the B10 that sparked this whole thing taking corn while the Pac was in talks with the entire B12 south?  And didn't the B10 make another run at us via tOSU that led to the  DeLoss "we have a tech problem, inferring we aren't moving without a travel partner? (tech back then)

It was bound to happen when it dawned on them that with UT, OU, UF, UG, LSU, and 'bama all in the same conference, the SEC can put a premium game on practically every weekend that can compete with, if not surpass anything the other three conferences can produce.  

Without some major cannibalization taking place, the SEC is poised to leave even the B10 in the dust in T1-T2 contracts long term.  You can bet there is a lot of empty promises being made between the three, as the B10 sharpens it's knife and the other two try to figure out how to mortally wound the other as they hold their breath

 

 

I was digging through 2 year old posts that were made within a month of OUT making their departure plans known and the announcement of the "Alliance". I thought the above posts have held up nicely.

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

Jabberwocky 1666

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Anyone listening to today's Monty Show?  He is sharing a rumor that ESPN has reached out to the Big 12 to consider taking Stanford and Cal if/when ACC turns them down.

Over the past year, he has been way more right than he has been wrong.

But I do not see this happening.  I don't bet, but I would bet good money that this will never happen.

If you look past the recent PR blitz (probably initiated through Cal and Stanford connections) that is trying to keep the idea alive and the public support for the move from Notre Dame (athletic director is a Stanford alumnus) and a few other ACC teams, there is no real incintive for the ACC schools that are voting against the accession of Stanford, Cal, and SMU to change their votes. There just isn't. Accepting these new schools just dilutes revenue and political influence within the conference. If they do eventually change their votes next week, I wouldn't understand the rationale unless it is for some academic reason.

With that being said, I could possibly see some sort of scenario where ESPN would work with Big 12 leadership to let CalFord in for a 10 to 15 MM dollar revenue share. There is most likely a dollar amount that would be low enough to be lucrative for the Big 12, I guess. Possibly for more late night game window options. The thing is, there is going to be a lot of leftover Big 12 content that will be pushed to ESPN +. Maybe the Big 12 could find a way to better monetize that content than just sticking it in ESPN + and paying the production cost, while receiving next to nothing for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
camel at sea

camel at sea 589

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Anyone listening to today's Monty Show?  He is sharing a rumor that ESPN has reached out to the Big 12 to consider taking Stanford and Cal if/when ACC turns them down.

Over the past year, he has been way more right than he has been wrong.

But I do not see this happening.  I don't bet, but I would bet good money that this will never happen.

I don't think you could get the conference cohesion that you want with those two in the fold.  It's already pretty clear that the Big 12 is going to be dealing with "not happy to be here" attitudes from ASU and Utah leadership.

 

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

WelfareBuysMyWeed 5663

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

I don't think you could get the conference cohesion that you want with those two in the fold.  It's already pretty clear that the Big 12 is going to be dealing with "not happy to be here" attitudes from ASU and Utah leadership.

 

But our resident tech tards said that the Big 12 won and is now full of flowers and love and sunshine??

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky 1666

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

I don't think you could get the conference cohesion that you want with those two in the fold.  It's already pretty clear that the Big 12 is going to be dealing with "not happy to be here" attitudes from ASU and Utah leadership.

 

Kyle Whittingham knows next to nothing about the future of conference realignment. However, I will agree with him in that there will probably be more movement before the new CFP contract is renegotiated in 2026. Utah will not likely be part of that movement though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
camel at sea

camel at sea 589

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, WelfareBuysMyWeed said:

But our resident tech tards said that the Big 12 won and is now full of flowers and love and sunshine??

Yeah.  They've got work to do.  ASU is mostly one person throwing a massive temper tantrum.  So once their president moves on, they'll probably settle in.  Utah, though... they've been hostile about the Big 12 at every level (admin, media, fans, HC apparently) since the idea first got floated.  It might have been better to leave them adrift for a few years until they were humbled into a more realistic understanding of their actual value.  

  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
oSuJeff97

oSuJeff97 3439

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
25 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Yeah.  They've got work to do.  ASU is mostly one person throwing a massive temper tantrum.  So once their president moves on, they'll probably settle in.  Utah, though... they've been hostile about the Big 12 at every level (admin, media, fans, HC apparently) since the idea first got floated.  It might have been better to leave them adrift for a few years until they were humbled into a more realistic understanding of their actual value.  

Yeah like WTF, Utah?

You've been a P5 school for like 5 fucking seconds. If you hate the Big 12 so much go fuck off back to the Mountain West. FFS.

  • Hook 'Em 11
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
berlinerbaer

berlinerbaer 692

Posted
Posted
On 8/24/2023 at 7:10 PM, redswingline said:

Their best shot was 2004 when A-aron was playing QB.

Problem is they had to play USC, who was in its best run ever (2002-2008).

If I recall A-aron got Cal to 1st and goal near the end of the game, but couldn't get it punched in.

I don't want to get all technical or anything but Cal was co-champions with SC back in '06. Finished the year pushing aggy's shit in.

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

notre dame joe 205

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Incredulity said:

ummm....no

4 titles between 67-78

 

 

and I am no USC fan.

Me neither but SC would have been favored against the actual BCS champion 2003 - 2008.

3 hours ago, slorch said:

Give their shares for the first season to BYU, Baylor, and TCU.

well, no, fuck the church schools; but it'd still be funny with the Cali high brows.

Hey did CA ever resolve that boycott of however many states?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
notre dame joe

notre dame joe 205

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

If you look past the recent PR blitz (probably initiated through Cal and Stanford connections) that is trying to keep the idea alive and the public support for the move from Notre Dame (athletic director is a Stanford alumnus) and a few other ACC teams, there is no real incintive for the ACC schools that are voting against the accession of Stanford, Cal, and SMU to change their votes. There just isn't. Accepting these new schools just dilutes revenue and political influence within the conference. If they do eventually change their votes next week, I wouldn't understand the rationale unless it is for some academic reason.

With that being said, I could possibly see some sort of scenario where ESPN would work with Big 12 leadership to let CalFord in for a 10 to 15 MM dollar revenue share. There is most likely a dollar amount that would be low enough to be lucrative for the Big 12, I guess. Possibly for more late night game window options. The thing is, there is going to be a lot of leftover Big 12 content that will be pushed to ESPN +. Maybe the Big 12 could find a way to better monetize that content than just sticking it in ESPN + and paying the production cost, while receiving next to nothing for it.

Our boards are about a day to 6 months behind.  I have only read domers wondering if our *rivalry* with Stanford will be broken up by SMU. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redswingline

redswingline 1124

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, berlinerbaer said:

I don't want to get all technical or anything but Cal was co-champions with SC back in '06. Finished the year pushing aggy's shit in.

2004, 2006... that's 17 and 19 years ago respectively, since Cal could compete with the best in the conference.

It all centers around this:  Cal won't be sniffing a P5 conference championship any time soon.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullet

bullet 1631

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, camel at sea said:

I don't think you could get the conference cohesion that you want with those two in the fold.  It's already pretty clear that the Big 12 is going to be dealing with "not happy to be here" attitudes from ASU and Utah leadership.

 

Whittingham will be retired by then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullet

bullet 1631

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

Cal and Stanford to the ACC is the height of all of this realignment madness.

Yep.  Jumping the shark.  And its happening.  Appears to be just internal ACC haggling over how to divide the spoils.  How do you split up the $30 million left after giving everyone money for extra travel costs.

 

 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/d...r-AA1fMGAl

"Atlantic Coast Conference athletic directors held a video call to discuss — again — the possibility of adding California, Stanford and SMU to the league and what to do with the extra revenue that could come with expansion.

The ACC's university presidents and chancellors have the final say on expansion and the full board was not involved in Thursday night's talks. As of Friday morning, the next formal meeting of ACC leadership had not been scheduled....


At issue in the ACC is how that money will be distributed, according to multiple people who have been involved in the discussions, all speaking to AP on condition of anonymity to share private internal discussions.

With Florida State, Clemson, Miami and North Carolina leading the push, ACC leaders earlier this year agreed to a “ success incentive initiative” that would allow schools to earn more of the money generated from their own postseason performances in football and men's basketball, plus other potential bonuses.

The amount of expansion-generated revenue that goes toward the incentive initiative as opposed to being distributed equally among members is a key issue that could determine whether Phillips can get the required 12 of the 15 schools to approve adding new members, a person briefed on the ACC’s talks told AP...."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crockett

Crockett 517

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Kyle Whittingham isn’t wrong, but he’s talking about the Big 10 and SEC taking the top ACC brands, and the Big 12 getting the rest.  Not Utah moving up

He's also talking about Utah moving to greener pastures. Why else would the rivalry not be "permanent"? As long as Utah is in the Big 12 it would be. Whitt is a graduate from the Urban Meyer School of Civility.

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12665

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Crockett said:

He's also talking about Utah moving to greener pastures. Why else would the rivalry not be "permanent"? As long as Utah is in the Big 12 it would be. Whitt is a graduate from the Urban Meyer School of Civility.

 

That’s what he means.

That isn’t what will happen.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
USC Traveler

USC Traveler 488

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

Things getting weird on Twitter. San Fransisco reporter now chirping about CalFord...

 

 

This smells like BS from Cal to try to put pressure on the ACC.

ESPN has much greater motivation to put Stanford, Cal, and SMU in the ACC.  If the existing ACC schools agree to split the extra tv $ plus playoff $ in a way that would give FSU and Clemson enough extra money to keep them in the ACC, that would be a huge win for ESPN.

ESPN has the ACC at a bargain price, and would be smart to do what they need to do to keep the ACC intact as long as possible, even if it means throwing in a little more money for theses extra three teams.  They'll get some more late night inventory for late Friday and Saturday slots, plus the in-market cable rates for ACCNet to help offset the cost, and that cost would be well worth it to keep the ACC intact for as long as possible.

And when FSU/Clemson/etc eventually leave, ESPN will use the composition clause in the deal to sharply reduce the deal with the remaining teams, so it's all upside with no downside for ESPN.  Phillips probably has no idea of the endgame here.  He seems a lot like Klownkoff- clueless and out of touch.

 

The only thing adding the PAC4 to the B12 does for ESPN is it gives them more inventory for late night windows.  No ACCNet bump, and more importantly, it doesn't help them with FSU and Clemson.  Outside of ND, those two schools get the highest tv ratings of any 2024 non-BIG/SEC school except ND.  For ESPN, the longer those schools are in the ACC, the better.

Again, this smells like BS from Cal.  

Stanford has Condi Rice applying pressure.  SMU has W Bush.  Cal has........ Michael Silver of the SF Chronicle.  🤣

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky 1666

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

 

This smells like BS from Cal to try to put pressure on the ACC.

ESPN has much greater motivation to put Stanford, Cal, and SMU in the ACC.  If the existing ACC schools agree to split the extra tv $ plus playoff $ in a way that would give FSU and Clemson enough extra money to keep them in the ACC, that would be a huge win for ESPN.

ESPN has the ACC at a bargain price, and would be smart to do what they need to do to keep the ACC intact as long as possible, even if it means throwing in a little more money for theses extra three teams.  They'll get some more late night inventory for late Friday and Saturday slots, plus the in-market cable rates for ACCNet to help offset the cost, and that cost would be well worth it to keep the ACC intact for as long as possible.

And when FSU/Clemson/etc eventually leave, ESPN will use the composition clause in the deal to sharply reduce the deal with the remaining teams, so it's all upside with no downside for ESPN.  Phillips probably has no idea of the endgame here.  He seems a lot like Klownkoff- clueless and out of touch.

 

The only thing adding the PAC4 to the B12 does for ESPN is it gives them more inventory for late night windows.  No ACCNet bump, and more importantly, it doesn't help them with FSU and Clemson.  Outside of ND, those two schools get the highest tv ratings of any 2024 non-BIG/SEC school except ND.  For ESPN, the longer those schools are in the ACC, the better.

Again, this smells like BS from Cal.  

Stanford has Condi Rice applying pressure.  SMU has W Bush.  Cal has........ Michael Silver of the SF Chronicle.  🤣

Again, what is the incentive for the "no votes" to change their votes? 

Say that CalFord get 10MM per year each for joining the ACC, and SMU gets nothing. How would the conference come to an agreement in spreading the rest of the 52MM per year pro rata revenue, and why would that satisfy all the "no votes"? 

Would schools like NC, NC State, FSU, Miami, Virginia, Virginia Tech and Clemson also receive a negotiated, clear exit ramp for leaving the conference early?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
USC Traveler

USC Traveler 488

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

Again, what is the incentive for the "no votes" to change their votes? 

Say that CalFord get 10MM per year each for joining the ACC, and SMU gets nothing. How would the conference come to an agreement in spreading the rest of the 52MM per year pro rata revenue, and why would that satisfy all the "no votes"? 

Would schools like NC, NC State, FSU, Miami, Virginia, Virginia Tech and Clemson also receive a negotiated, clear exit ramp for leaving the conference early?

 

I agree.  That's the key hurdle.  That's why I said in the previous post: "If the existing ACC schools agree to split the extra tv $ plus playoff $ in a way that would give FSU and Clemson enough extra money to keep them in the ACC, that would be a huge win for ESPN."

If they have $55m in extra revenue to work with, the existing schools could agree to divide the money based on tv ratings in a way that sent the vast majority of the money to FSU and Clemson.  $20m+/yr each would put Clemson and FSU closer to an even footing with the BIG/SEC.  Combine that with what they've already agreed to on the playoff money, and there would be years with Clemson/FSU in the playoff where they could make more than a BIG/SEC team.

With the 12 team format starting next year, FSU and Clemson could cash in on playoff money on a regular basis.

I think this is why FSU has been so vocal in public- to scare the schools that will be left behind into agreeing to something like this.

It's well worth it if you're BC, Cuse, Wake, etc. to keep Clemson and FSU in the ACC and keep cashing their current checks as long as possible.

 

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

LTtxfan 50036

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, John80 said:

If the ACC cared about Stanford and Cal they would be in the conference now with full shares. There aren't any major conferences that cares about Stanford and Cal and I don't know if their egos allows them to realize and accept this reality.

If Calford and smu buy their way into ACC, then yeah there might be a conference that cares... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
notre dame joe

notre dame joe 205

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

Again, what is the incentive for the "no votes" to change their votes? 

Say that CalFord get 10MM per year each for joining the ACC, and SMU gets nothing. How would the conference come to an agreement in spreading the rest of the 52MM per year pro rata revenue, and why would that satisfy all the "no votes"? 

Would schools like NC, NC State, FSU, Miami, Virginia, Virginia Tech and Clemson also receive a negotiated, clear exit ramp for leaving the conference early?

It would be easier to vote to dissolve so the smaller schools could form a new conference with Calford.

 

Agree on the above as it comes straight out of Art of the Deal, Calford is reminding the ACC that they have other options, even if said option is just a theory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texas Wahoo

Texas Wahoo 3631

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

 

I agree.  That's the key hurdle.  That's why I said in the previous post: "If the existing ACC schools agree to split the extra tv $ plus playoff $ in a way that would give FSU and Clemson enough extra money to keep them in the ACC, that would be a huge win for ESPN."

If they have $55m in extra revenue to work with, the existing schools could agree to divide the money based on tv ratings in a way that sent the vast majority of the money to FSU and Clemson.  $20m+/yr each would put Clemson and FSU closer to an even footing with the BIG/SEC.  Combine that with what they've already agreed to on the playoff money, and there would be years with Clemson/FSU in the playoff where they could make more than a BIG/SEC team.

With the 12 team format starting next year, FSU and Clemson could cash in on playoff money on a regular basis.

I think this is why FSU has been so vocal in public- to scare the schools that will be left behind into agreeing to something like this.

It's well worth it if you're BC, Cuse, Wake, etc. to keep Clemson and FSU in the ACC and keep cashing their current checks as long as possible.

 

I don’t see why anyone would believe that FSU was staying in the ACC a second longer than they have to. If you give FSU and Clemson 20+, that leaves 12 million for the other 14 schools. I cannot imagine UNC and UVA are going to want to be 20 million behind two conference mates when they may be more valuable to other conferences than Clemson. If you include those schools in the extra money, is VaTech and NCState really going to be okay with that?  

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...