(09-08-2017 12:02 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-07-2017 10:41 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(09-07-2017 09:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Before joining the ACC Swarbrick visited Slive. He essentially wanted some leverage and a safety net if negotiations didn't go well with the ACC, and he wanted the scoop on the ACC. The safety net aspect was centered around a scheduling agreement with SEC schools that were in the areas in which N.D. wanted a presence, namely Georgia and Florida. The only thing the mid Atlantic states provide them is a strong base for their lacrosse, which the Big 10 took a major step toward providing when John's Hopkins affiliated with them for that sport.

Remember too what added Value and Stability to the ACC, Notre Dame. Notre Dame does for the Big 10 what ESPN wants to gain by holding onto Texas. It gives the Big 10 control over add rates within their footprint essentially giving them a monopoly through the Northern Midwest.

I'm thinking ESPN is realizing that another major brand in the SEC adds significantly to content value. Possibly more than 5 games does with the ACC. I also think they are realizing that Texas is so toxic in behavior and productivity in actual sports performance that perhaps they are best treated by utilizing them to try to build into the draw out West. Texas has been trying to twist ESPN a bit through the threat of the Big 10. Delany knows that Texas is a major brand but the Big 10 if given a choice would probably much rather have Notre Dame. And by placing Texas in the PAC ESPN and FOX continue to share 50/50 rights and if the PACN can shift to ESPN that may be enough to get it done as it would involve utilizing the transformation of the LHN.

So FOX gains N.D.. The Big 10 gains N.D. N.D. makes significantly more money because they are worth significantly more to the Big 10. The ACCN gets entry into a much more viable market, but does so in a non threatening way to the SEC. Texas is removed like Napoleon to Elba Island in the West. A&M is happy. The two Oklahomas stay together and play a more regional schedule. And 9 of the Big 12 schools are placed. T.C.U. has no travel difficulty since Miami & Georgia Tech are all direct domestic flights and F.S.U. is down I10. And there is no reason not to bundle the SECN and ACCN.

I only have read about how ND used the Big XII and the ACC against each other for leverage. I did not read about the SEC angle since I've thought that ND wouldn't fit a southern conference any more than they'd fit a Midwestern conference. But figuring out the Domers is complicated enough.

I'm not sure whether the ACC would find WVU and TCU more palatable than 5 games/yr against ND but I guess if they're assured of stability over the long term then it shouldn't matter either way. Still, ND already has a binding contract with the ACC until 2036.

I think it would depend on the valuation given to the ACC for the ACCN. But I did approach it from the perspective of how are they going to get this done in an acceptable way for the conferences, and the networks. Face it, the top priority for ESPN is hanging onto Texas. If we wait until 2024-5 there is no incentive for anyone to work with anyone else. In that case my money would be on an ESPN push for Texa-homa to the SEC. While not ideal it gives them what they want. The top brands in Texas, if not all of them should T.C.U. and Baylor also head to an ESPN held conference, and all of Oklahoma. That gives them exclusivity in the Lone Star state plus Oklahoma and that's roughly 10 schools they have rights to every Saturday in the Fall with exclusivity in reaching the college football market for 32 million.

If that comes to pass the PAC will be essentially frozen where they are now. The Big 10's options would be limited outside of the PAC. And I could see W.V.U., Cinncinnati, Notre Dame and Connecticut essentially closing out the ACC.

But if there is some coordination and cooperation in the moves then ESPN can still hang onto Texas, either as much as they have of them now minus the LHN, or all of them.

I think that has to be their top priority, even more so than Notre Dame. But we'll see. I just wanted to put a new wrinkle in the old conversation. And in doing so I dared to ask this question, "How could ESPN appease both the Big 10 and the SEC?" The reason I posed that question is that clearly those are the two most valuable and stable of the conferences.

It might well wind up being something like Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Texas and Iowa State/Texas Tech to the SEC, Notre Dame and West Virginia to the ACC.

What the PAC does at that point, who knows? But they would really be trailing the rest.

My trouble with believing Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten is I just can't see them agreeing to do it. They might get paid a little more, but at what cost?

I don't think ESPN would want to give them up anyway, but ND's interests are best served by remaining in the ACC. While the B1G would love to have them for the reasons you are stating, ND would be limiting their exposure to a region of the country that has demographic issues.

In the ACC, they not only have direct access to talent, but they also have exposure in numerous growing markets in the South without sacrificing exposure in the Northeast. If you throw Texas into the mix of the ACC then I think their decision is even easier. That and they will always have scheduling flexibility in the ACC to schedule the CA schools.

If they move to the B1G by contrast then they will have the occasional game in SEC or ACC country, but most of their games will be in the Midwest where they already rule the roost so to speak. They'll have to split a limited number of OOC games between CA, TX, FL, and GA instead of having almost all of them in a given year.

I could maybe see ESPN trying to find a way to appease the Big Ten, but I don't think Notre Dame would go along with it.