For the sake of reviewing expansion, what's the most financial benefit on a per school basis if B1G were to add Texas and Notre Dame? The reason I picked them is I would think that they represent the maximum upside available; not that anyone should necessarily be added. On the back of a napkin, I can't figure how adding either of them or anybody else doesn't just add more mouths to feed with minimum to no financial benefit to projected $40 million plus /school now. I would think that SEC is in similar situation

What's the driving force for why conferences should expand at all at this point? I get the whole networks and their angles, but hasn't the dust even settled on that front for 10 years or so?

I'd take any combination of Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Vandy, or Virginia.

(04-05-2015 11:02 PM)Strut Wrote:  For the sake of reviewing expansion, what's the most financial benefit on a per school basis if B1G were to add Texas and Notre Dame? The reason I picked them is I would think that they represent the maximum upside available; not that anyone should necessarily be added. On the back of a napkin, I can't figure how adding either of them or anybody else doesn't just add more mouths to feed with minimum to no financial benefit to projected $40 million plus /school now. I would think that SEC is in similar situation

What's the driving force for why conferences should expand at all at this point? I get the whole networks and their angles, but hasn't the dust even settled on that front for 10 years or so?

It HAS pretty much settled. The only place it hasn't is on this Board and a few bloggers who, IMO, post and tweet a constant cornucopia of baseless drivel. Sort of like the folks who believe the government is hiding alien spaceships in Area 51, where, despite common sense and all evidence to the contrary, they persist in believing this idiocy.

A couple points to consider:

-Notre Dame is a member of the ACC except FB where they play a partial schedule. Today's ACC with Syracuse, Pitt, BC, Miami and Florida State is a group of schools they want to be associated with on the field. They have 0 incentive to disrupt that.

-Texas is in Austin which is not far from Mexico. Arizona, UCLA and USC are also located pretty close to Mexico. If Texas felt compelled to join another conference they could package deal with another Texas school or Oklahoma to the PAC. The PAC is a better football conference anyways so why would they want to link up with the B1G who would never accept a second Texas school as part of the deal.

Sixteen teams, four divisions, Conference Championship games in football expand to become Conference Tournaments for football.

Conference Championship games bring in 20 million now for The Big Ten and PAC as a reference. Divisional champ semifinal games should be able to bring in 15 million each for a grand total of 50 million just from the Networks for Broadcasting Rights to these games. That is just the broadcasting rights money. There is a lot more to it than that.

That is just the surface, there is a whole lot more to it than that but that's the first step to understanding. This next expansion brings a whole lot more with it.

I'm more of the opinion that recent events serve to validate what is instead of drive a new round of realignment.

(04-05-2015 11:19 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  It HAS pretty much settled. The only place it hasn't is on this Board and a few bloggers who, IMO, post and tweet a constant cornucopia of baseless drivel. Sort of like the folks who believe the government is hiding alien spaceships in Area 51, where, despite common sense and all evidence to the contrary, they persist in believing this idiocy.

Forget TV networks and such... it's those Area 51 aliens who are driving conference realignment!

I think that the SEC will be the first to expand. With the new commish coming in he will want to make his mark on the conference. The combination of Cincinnati, SMU, and the Big 12 program are all possible candidates for the SEC's final two spots. I actually prefer Cincy and SMU as they both open up opportunities to weaken other conferences and add new markets.

University of Texas is in the Central time zone basically in the southern middle of the country geographically. They can go any direction they want and go to any conference they want. This is one reason that that TCU , for example, could go from the SWC to WAC to CUSA to MWC to Big East to Big 12.

I have a hunch in 10 years that Texas will warm to the idea of the SEC. Mizzou and A&M have boosted the academic profile of the SEC, and cultural differences between the South and rest of country are gradually going away, as already seen in North Carolina, Virginia and Florida.

Things really are settled as far as one of the power 5 conferences raiding another for awhile. Four of the conferences have grant of rights which basically lock everything down until they come closer to expiring in a decade and the SEC isn't loosing anyone anyway. The Big 12 is the only one I see with even a small chance at expanding, but I think they are content as is for the time being.

Texas: Texas is the piece everyone wants and the future of their president's perspective makes the most difference (again talking a decade from now). There's actually arguments to be made for every one of the power 5 conferences for them to join. The Big 12 maybe the only place they can keep the Longhorn Network (which both provides exposure for many UT programs and significant money) and it provides regional feel. The SEC would put them with Texas A&M and give them a lot of significant games. The Big Ten might put them at a distance, but they would stand out very strongly, be in the CIC, and have a lot of exposure in the Midwest and east coast (similar to why the Dallas Cowboys want to be in the east). The PAC-12 would offer for Texas to be the centerpiece of a whole eastern wing so they could both be part of a big conference and have a regional feel. The ACC would probably be the only conference that would let Texas come in for sports other than football and that would allow Texas to be a football independent.

Notre Dame: It needs to be remembered for now that they signed the grant of rights with the ACC too. They didn't give up their football rights, but they did on everything else. This is really where they want to be though. They get good east coast exposure and can't be overly labeled Midwestern if not playing in a Midwestern conference.

(04-06-2015 09:26 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Things really are settled as far as one of the power 5 conferences raiding another for awhile. Four of the conferences have grant of rights which basically lock everything down until they come closer to expiring in a decade and the SEC isn't loosing anyone anyway. The Big 12 is the only one I see with even a small chance at expanding, but I think they are content as is for the time being.

Texas: Texas is the piece everyone wants and the future of their president's perspective makes the most difference (again talking a decade from now). There's actually arguments to be made for every one of the power 5 conferences for them to join. The Big 12 maybe the only place they can keep the Longhorn Network (which both provides exposure for many UT programs and significant money) and it provides regional feel. The SEC would put them with Texas A&M and give them a lot of significant games. The Big Ten might put them at a distance, but they would stand out very strongly, be in the CIC, and have a lot of exposure in the Midwest and east coast (similar to why the Dallas Cowboys want to be in the east). The PAC-12 would offer for Texas to be the centerpiece of a whole eastern wing so they could both be part of a big conference and have a regional feel. The ACC would probably be the only conference that would let Texas come in for sports other than football and that would allow Texas to be a football independent.

Notre Dame: It needs to be remembered for now that they signed the grant of rights with the ACC too. They didn't give up their football rights, but they did on everything else. This is really where they want to be though. They get good east coast exposure and can't be overly labeled Midwestern if not playing in a Midwestern conference.

I seem to recall that the ND agreement with the ACC gave the ACC the right of first refusal (or some other term) if ND decided to join a conference for football. That is, for the length of the current agreement ND is not joining anyone for football except the ACC. Of course, I may have mis-remembered.

(04-05-2015 11:02 PM)Strut Wrote:  For the sake of reviewing expansion, what's the most financial benefit on a per school basis if B1G were to add Texas and Notre Dame? The reason I picked them is I would think that they represent the maximum upside available; not that anyone should necessarily be added. On the back of a napkin, I can't figure how adding either of them or anybody else doesn't just add more mouths to feed with minimum to no financial benefit to projected $40 million plus /school now. I would think that SEC is in similar situation

What's the driving force for why conferences should expand at all at this point? I get the whole networks and their angles, but hasn't the dust even settled on that front for 10 years or so?

What would be the upside for those two schools?

If the big 10 is limiting itself to 16 than it makes it pretty hard to impossible to land the school's it wants. I could see these combos work for the big 10 to get to 16:

1) KU, Missouri
2) KU, OU
3) UVA, Vtech
4) FSU, X

combo 1 is probably the only combo that doesn't blow up other leagues.

(04-05-2015 11:02 PM)Strut Wrote:  For the sake of reviewing expansion, what's the most financial benefit on a per school basis if B1G were to add Texas and Notre Dame? The reason I picked them is I would think that they represent the maximum upside available; not that anyone should necessarily be added. On the back of a napkin, I can't figure how adding either of them or anybody else doesn't just add more mouths to feed with minimum to no financial benefit to projected $40 million plus /school now. I would think that SEC is in similar situation

What's the driving force for why conferences should expand at all at this point? I get the whole networks and their angles, but hasn't the dust even settled on that front for 10 years or so?

IMO, the B1G and its network footprint could still gain a ton by expanding into:

Texas (26 million population, including #5 Dallas, #10 Houston, #33 San Antonio, #39 Austin markets). Best candidate: Texas

Florida (19.8 million population, including #13 Tampa, #16 Miami, #18 Orlando, #38 West Palm Beach, and #48 Jacksonville markets). Best candidates: Florida, Florida St., Miami

Georgia (10 million population, including #9 Atlanta market). Best candidate: Georgia Tech

North Carolina (9.9 million population, including #24 Charlotte, #25 Raleigh-Durham, and #46 Greensboro markets). Best candidates: UNC, Duke

Virginia (8 million population, including #8 DC, #42 Norfolk, and #57 Richmond markets). Best candidate: UVA

Tennessee (6.5 million population, including #29 Nashville and #50 Memphis markets). Best candidate: Vanderbilt

Missouri (6 million population, including #21 St. Louis and #31 Kansas City markets). Best candidate: Missouri

Oklahoma (3.8 million population, including #44 Oklahoma City and #60 Tulsa markets). Best candidate: Oklahoma

Kansas (2.9 million population, including #31 Kansas City and #65 Wichita markets). Best candidate: Kansas

The current B1G footprint covers about 85 million population. [Minnesota (5.5), Wisconsin(5.7), Iowa (3.1), Nebraska (1.8), Illinois (12.8), Indiana(6.6), Michigan (9.9), Ohio (11.5), Pennsylvania (12.7), New Jersey (8.9), Maryland (5.9).]

A 6-team expansion with UVA, UNC, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Florida or Florida St., and Missouri in the west, would add about 60 million population to increase the B1G footprint to about 145 million. That's growing the B1G network footprint by about 70% (from 85 to 145) but only growing conference membership by about 43% (from 14 to 20).

That would make a lot of sense, even at the $40 million per school level. And, by adding Missouri and the southern schools, you bring along regionality and rivalries. Not only do you increase B1G network subscribers, even with tier 1 and 2 games on ESPN/ABC, the B1G network would have some pretty good inventory and ratings.

(04-06-2015 10:02 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 11:02 PM)Strut Wrote:  For the sake of reviewing expansion, what's the most financial benefit on a per school basis if B1G were to add Texas and Notre Dame? The reason I picked them is I would think that they represent the maximum upside available; not that anyone should necessarily be added. On the back of a napkin, I can't figure how adding either of them or anybody else doesn't just add more mouths to feed with minimum to no financial benefit to projected $40 million plus /school now. I would think that SEC is in similar situation

What's the driving force for why conferences should expand at all at this point? I get the whole networks and their angles, but hasn't the dust even settled on that front for 10 years or so?

What would be the upside for those two schools?

Exactly. ND's best interests are satisfied by the situation they have now. Texas' best next move is probably a ND-type deal if they can find one that suits them.

(04-06-2015 05:54 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 11:19 PM)Eagle78 Wrote:  It HAS pretty much settled. The only place it hasn't is on this Board and a few bloggers who, IMO, post and tweet a constant cornucopia of baseless drivel. Sort of like the folks who believe the government is hiding alien spaceships in Area 51, where, despite common sense and all evidence to the contrary, they persist in believing this idiocy.

Forget TV networks and such... it's those Area 51 aliens who are driving conference realignment!

If only somebody could fly a shuttle up to their mother ship and download a computer virus using 1996 Apple technology, then we could finally put all this realignment business behind us. From henceforth, it will be known as our own Independence Day!

(04-06-2015 12:36 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-06-2015 10:02 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 11:02 PM)Strut Wrote:  For the sake of reviewing expansion, what's the most financial benefit on a per school basis if B1G were to add Texas and Notre Dame? The reason I picked them is I would think that they represent the maximum upside available; not that anyone should necessarily be added. On the back of a napkin, I can't figure how adding either of them or anybody else doesn't just add more mouths to feed with minimum to no financial benefit to projected $40 million plus /school now. I would think that SEC is in similar situation

What's the driving force for why conferences should expand at all at this point? I get the whole networks and their angles, but hasn't the dust even settled on that front for 10 years or so?

What would be the upside for those two schools?

Exactly. ND's best interests are satisfied by the situation they have now. Texas' best next move is probably a ND-type deal if they can find one that suits them.

Finding a ND type deal is pretty iffy for Texas. The Irish get all sports except football into a P5 league that makes geographic sense for them. For which conference does it make sense to give Texas a home for their other sports?

The closest PAC school is 1,000 miles away. The furthest is 2,400 miles and two time zones away.

The closest ACC team is 875 miles away, with the two farthest nearly 2,000 miles.

Other than the SEC, the B1G is closest. Nebraska is 820 miles and Rutgers "only" 1720 miles.

Is it worth it to any of those three to send their teams to Austin on a regular basis? Maybe the ACC might consider if if they didn't already have such a deal with Notre Dame. But they do. The ACC doesn't need to strengthen their OOC schedule any more until their mid-level teams get more competitive.

The SEC makes sense geographically, but what possible reason could they have for lending UT a hand in football?

That means that UT's best bet for getting a ND type deal is with the Big 12. I'm at a loss to see that as a win for anybody. And if UT decides to go full indy in football, how much value do they really bring for their other sports in any conference that wouldn't be a sharp downgrade for them? I don't think the Horns have as many options as people give them credit for.

(04-06-2015 01:17 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-06-2015 12:36 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-06-2015 10:02 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(04-05-2015 11:02 PM)Strut Wrote:  For the sake of reviewing expansion, what's the most financial benefit on a per school basis if B1G were to add Texas and Notre Dame? The reason I picked them is I would think that they represent the maximum upside available; not that anyone should necessarily be added. On the back of a napkin, I can't figure how adding either of them or anybody else doesn't just add more mouths to feed with minimum to no financial benefit to projected $40 million plus /school now. I would think that SEC is in similar situation

What's the driving force for why conferences should expand at all at this point? I get the whole networks and their angles, but hasn't the dust even settled on that front for 10 years or so?

What would be the upside for those two schools?

Exactly. ND's best interests are satisfied by the situation they have now. Texas' best next move is probably a ND-type deal if they can find one that suits them.

Finding a ND type deal is pretty iffy for Texas. The Irish get all sports except football into a P5 league that makes geographic sense for them. For which conference does it make sense to give Texas a home for their other sports?

The closest PAC school is 1,000 miles away. The furthest is 2,400 miles and two time zones away.

The closest ACC team is 875 miles away, with the two farthest nearly 2,000 miles.

Other than the SEC, the B1G is closest. Nebraska is 820 miles and Rutgers "only" 1720 miles.

Is it worth it to any of those three to send their teams to Austin on a regular basis? Maybe the ACC might consider if if they didn't already have such a deal with Notre Dame. But they do. The ACC doesn't need to strengthen their OOC schedule any more until their mid-level teams get more competitive.

The SEC makes sense geographically, but what possible reason could they have for lending UT a hand in football?

That means that UT's best bet for getting a ND type deal is with the Big 12. I'm at a loss to see that as a win for anybody. And if UT decides to go full indy in football, how much value do they really bring for their other sports in any conference that wouldn't be a sharp downgrade for them? I don't think the Horns have as many options as people give them credit for.

B10 will only take AAU schools
ACC Virginia,UNC,Duke,Ga Tech and Pitt
SEC Vanderbilt,UFLA,Missouri,texas A&M
B12 texas,Kansas Iowa St

B10 is interested Virginia,UNC,Ga Tech,Texas and Kansas

Notre Dame is in the ACC - done deal.

The best adds for B1G would be Kansas and Missouri as a package - you bring in a rivalry game, two AAU schools, etc.

Second best would be Kansas and Iowa State (if MU is unwilling to leave SEC)

I really think Kansas ends up in the B1G some day.

(04-06-2015 01:17 PM)ken d Wrote:  That means that UT's best bet for getting a ND type deal is with the Big 12. I'm at a loss to see that as a win for anybody. And if UT decides to go full indy in football, how much value do they really bring for their other sports in any conference that wouldn't be a sharp downgrade for them? I don't think the Horns have as many options as people give them credit for.

What about Texas' Olympic sports to the AAC? SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Memphis, and Tulane are all reasonably close for Olympic sports travel. Memphis, Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, SMU, Tulsa, Houston, etc. are legitimate opponents for basketball.

I could see the AAC view an ND type deal with Texas as a good thing for the conference, especially if there were a few football games for the schedule and help to grab some better bowl affiliations. And, the AAc needs a n Olympic sports replacement for Navy in the Central Division. Perfect fit.

Texas might like to have some October and November football games in Texas and Florida built in to the schedule.