(07-31-2017 05:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-31-2017 03:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(07-31-2017 02:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-31-2017 01:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  [quote='JRsec' pid='14473286' dateline='1501471535']

First, the AAC gets roughly 2 million per school for its TV rights. The Old Big East earned much more. Could it be that the what the G conferences have lost in revenue the P conferences have made? And it could it be that the extra amount in our raises has been generated by content? I think both answers are, "yes".

Secondly, did I not suggest that the remnants of the Big 12 would be rolled over into the AAC (fully ESPN owned) and that the exit fees would provide them with a nice nest egg? And did I not suggest that the AAC would be elevated to a P status, but one that did not earn as much as the other 4, but earned more than the 2 million a year that they get now?

Thirdly, I have no doubt but what the networks have a final number of schools in mind. It could be 60, 64, or 72. But, whatever the number they will want a structure that would be guaranteed to engage all 4 regions of the country through the semifinals of the CFP. This would be optimum for generating advertising revenue.

Therefore I don't see much difference in a 4 x 15, 4 x 16, or a 4 x 18 as far as the structure goes. It does not even have to be symmetrical. we could have 3 conferences of 16 and a conference of 12 or 14 and be just fine.

Just 20 years ago we had 6 power conferences where every conference was making n the 20's roughly. Now we could have 4 conferences where the payout is 50 million in 2 of them and 35 million in the other two. But the rich are richer and the poor are making less. By design? Probably. I think in the end this divide will lead to a G5 playoff structure and then the P4 will by necessity become exclusive.

As far as pairings go I would suggest that West Virginia will indeed head to the ACC and the Big 10 and SEC would account for 4 more Big 12 schools for a total of 5.

If the PAC want's a Texas presence maybe they place 7. If not the remaining 5 would head to the AAC, or possibly as you suggest take the best of the AAC and form a new Big 12 conference.

Yes, but what I'm getting at is that this 5th league may very well be guaranteed a spot in the playoff.

And I'm saying that I think the CFP will expand to 8 almost purely as a means of generating some extra revenue for the networks. I think the playoff expands because there's so little in the way of innovation that the networks can employ to extract more cash out of the game. Creating more Power vs Power match-ups is one way and that's not too hard as long as everyone agrees to do it, but 1) I think the schools are more likely to agree to that if a league full of weaker members is inside the fold and considered viable for P vs P games while 2) it creates additional cover for this new cartel if more members are added rather than subtracted as that will create a modicum of opportunity for upward mobility within the ranks of major college athletics.

Let's say it's 6 current Big 12 members plus 3 AAC members and 3 Western schools including BYU that get together to form a 5th league. The networks won't have to spend nearly as much on the rest of the Big 12 properties if they allow the top 4 brands to leave. I think they'd rather limit it to 4 because those are essentially the only brands that could make expansion for the other Power leagues worth it. Additionally, the more current Big 12 members get into the SEC, B1G, ACC, or PAC then the more you're going to have to pay these leagues to make it worth their while. There's no need to spend that extra cash if you set up a system that takes care of the 6 Big 12 leftovers that the other leagues really don't want in the first place.

-So the other Power leagues agree to take the 4 top brands in the Big 12 because the money is worthwhile.

-You reduce your investment in the Big 12 by allowing those 4 to leave and replacing them with spare parts from the G5.

-The networks have the option of moving a few Big 12 properties into the AAC, but they'd have to increase the contract for that entire league significantly. No need to do that when most of the value of that league is concentrated in a handful of programs. Instead, move those handful of programs into the Big 12 because you're going to have to pay the Big 12 remnants decent money in order for everyone not to be pissed off. Albeit, they'll be spending a little more on certain schools...to cover the entry of the AAC and possibly MWC schools.

-ESPN will likely still own the rest of the AAC and the vast majority of the G5 at very low cost, but they'll be maximizing their investment by quite likely owning a G5 playoff. Their investment will be girded by the likelihood of FCS squads continuing to make a push to enter the G5 ranks...because there'll be so much extra money in the G5 contracts including the playoff.

-Ultimately, the networks cash in on the investment by expanding the playoff to 8. This new Big 12 gains automatic entry along with the other Power leagues.

-The structural benefit to this 5th league is that it allows the networks to maintain greater control. The more consolidation there is, the more power slips through the networks' fingers because content is more concentrated.

-Assuming there is an all Power vs Power schedule, the 5th league guarantees a few more wins for the big boys and therefore less disruption to the current power structure.

That's what I meant by elevating the AAC, or as you suggest a new conference formed from the best of the three and B.Y.U.. If their champ is viable in a year when another of the P conferences might have a 3 loss champ then it serves the purposes well, especially as a legal buffer since you will have elevated virtually all of the schools which might have a case for having been excluded: Connecticut, South Florida, Central Florida, Houston, E.C.U., B.Y.U., and possibly Cincinnati (if they aren't ACC bound). The only reason I suggested the AAC is because it is fully ESPN held and when those brands like Baylor, Kansas State, Texas Tech, and T.C.U. move to the new conference it can't be a rebuilt Big 12 if ESPN is looking for sole ownership of Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas product. A rebuilt Big 12 would contractually be 50% FOX owned (unless we wait until 2024). B.Y.U. is already under ESPN contract, and a new one at that.

So we are really not disagreeing on this. It would be like what we have now, only more concentrated at the top, and more inclusive in the new conference.

Remember too that Wichita has partially joined the AAC and Tulsa is already in it. So by directing the Big 12 remnant there ESPN gains full control of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas as states and markets (should Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas the schools wind up in ESPN hands.

If Fox doesn't want to get "blocked out" of the southeastern markets, they should probably outbid CBS for that SEC Teir I contract. Then they wouldn't have to waste money overpaying AAC schools in a rebuilt Big 12. If CBS did lose the SEC Teir I contract, I assume they would either bid on the half of the Big Ten contract ABC doesn't want to match Fox's payments for or just not broadcast FBS games on CBS.

FOX can't offer the SEC what it loves most about the CBS games, a unique national time slot. NBC and ABC could. I expect ABC to be the main competitor for CBS next go around. And I expect the boost for those T1 rights to be sizable.
[/quote

It'll be huge with an open market bidding war and another Teir I addition like an OU or a Texas. Then in a decade, imagine reopening the contracts with the additions of say FSU and Virginia Tech.