(01-20-2016 08:46 AM)omniorange Wrote: Brands have always been important. The problem has been that once you get past the elite brand names (in whichever sport), the next level down brand names are likely going to be dicey. What follows is obviously my opinion and I readily admit I may be missing some as I drink my morning coffee or that I, myself, don't see team 'x' as either elite brand name or next level down brand name. So posters who read this please try not to get too upset if I left your favorite program out. It may have been that I simply forgot them or we simply will need to agree to disagree since it is only a matter of opinion.
In the model you envision developing JR assuming that the PAC is truly "safe" from poaching, I see the elite name brands in football not in the SEC, B1G, or PAC as ND, Texas, FSU, and Oklahoma.
At the next level down, the best of the rest brands currently are Clemson and probably Miami should they get back somewhat to the Miami of old. VT, WVU, and BYU are possibilities here as well.
The elite name brands in bb not currently in the SEC, B1G, or PAC are UNC, Duke, Kansas, Louisville, UConn, and SU.
At the next level down, some of the best of the rest brands don't even play FBS football - Georgetown, Villanova, Cincinnati, NC State, Marquette, WVU, and Gonzaga.
JR, I don't see a significant difference between the B12 and the ACC to be honest. Assuming neither the B1G nor the SEC poach the most valuable brands, then a merger of the two seems the best outcome for both. But would the SEC and B1G allow such a merger to take place.
A league with the 16 best of the B12 and the best of the ACC would likely prove a challenge to the top dog status of the current Greater 2. And would likely take over the top spot if ND joined as a full member of the new conference.
Cheers,
Neil
Neil while I think you could get quite a nice conference through a merger it is not the Big 10 and SEC's decision to make. It is the decision of the Big 12 and ACC as negotiated by ESPN and FOX.
I strongly suspect that the SEC could be salved with the additions of N.C. State and perhaps even Miami since we don't have a South Florida presence.
That would leave Kansas (not needed in the merger for football brands with an ACC contingent that included its old core of strong basketball brands), and Virginia Tech to give the Big 10 a football program to challenge in the East. And I might add one that also has strong alumni numbers and provides him with a large population Eastern state. Then merge something like the following:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Duke, North Carolina, Syracuse, Virginia
Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, West Virginia
*Notre Dame as a partial.
Is that something you would have in mind? I think that workaround would satisfy the SEC & Big 10 without robbing the top brands (other than Kansas hoops).
The problems here: Pitt, B.C., Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Maybe Delany could add Pitt & B.C. and the SEC could pick up Georgia Tech & Wake? But I don't see an incentive unless the networks paid both of us to do it. For that matter even if you replace Georgia Tech and Wake with West Virginia and Pitt and let the SEC add those markets it still comes down to whether we are paid to take them.
But for the sake of geographical divisions I don't see too many places to tweak it.
And the greatest obstacle is that both FOX and ESPN may or may not want more exclusive rights to some brands and they may or may not want the overhead.
/
Realignment Is In a Paradigm Shift. It Will Alter Candidates & Vulnerabilities
