(04-13-2016 07:51 AM)SeaBlue Wrote:  Bluevod ‏@Bluevodreal 12h12 hours ago
@schadec15 Put a fork in the ACC.

Bluevod has been all over the place on Twitter.

It concerns me that he was very specific with that comment. Sad day if he's right about that. And if he's wrong, it will be hard to forgive him for being so reckless with his comments.

Get the hook out of your mouth you're being trolled. The SEC and Big 10 are not about to expand in any large way out of the ACC and if we did it likely would never be the way Bluevod is projecting.

ESPN & FOX aren't going to let property go to one another. If ESPN cuts ACC property they will just shelter the ones they want fuller access to in the SEC which means we would likely get basketball first schools for the SECN. That is the conference network from which ESPN earns the most.

If that ever happened I would think that Virginia Tech and N.C. State would be the likeliest schools to the Big 10 along with Pitt, Syracuse or B.C. if you wanted any of them.

You would likely have a shot at N.D. if the PAC doesn't sell part of its rights to either ESPN or FOX and try to absorb Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. I imagine the SEC would get stuck with North Carolina and Duke and that we might consolidate brands with Clemson and Florida State. But, even that kind of expansion would be somewhat far fetched.

I look more toward the Big 10 picking up two and the SEC picking up two should anything happen to the ACC and for FOX and ESPN to agree to keep 50% of the Big 12 each. That will allow FOX some schools to push in the Southeast because in that event I could see the Big 10 picking up both Virginia schools and the SEC getting UNC & Duke. The best of the rest would prop up Texas and Oklahoma and the PAC would likely stay about where it is.

Outside of something like that we stay where we are. So 10% chance we both both expand to 16 and the Big 12 becomes the compromise conference of FOX and ESPN. And a 90% chance nothing happens.

No way the B1G takes VTech or NC State. Doesn't fit the academic profile, the football brands are not big enough, and the schools don't command the local market enough to justify expansion. It's UVA or UNC in the South or no expansion at all. Pittsburgh and Syracuse adds nothing to TV footprint.

B1G would take OU & Kansas before what you mentioned.

I can't speak anything to Bluevodreal, apparently he's a Michigan insider. I'm not sure if he's a troll.

(04-13-2016 08:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Get the hook out of your mouth you're being trolled.

Oh, you mean biting down isn't the best idea?

My take on Bluevod has been that he's not worth listening to unless he says something very direct. He just said something direct. I might have to downgrade my position.

(04-13-2016 09:00 AM)akhosrof Wrote:  No way the B1G takes VTech.

Virginia Tech is a strong candidate. If VA can't be had, Tech has a lot going for them. Probably only happens if paired with a stronger academic/athletic brand.

(02-14-2016 01:52 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I'm over Notre Dame. If they want to join the Big Ten, then the conference will make room if they can but the Big Ten won't wait for them.

Florida State, I imagine, is not good enough on their own academically, not to mention their location of being on an island. They would certainly need one of Georgia Tech or Miami to be added along with themselves to tag along to satisfy the academics (assuming that Miami is regarded as good enough to cover for Florida State). I don't think the conference would want to have a "West Virginia" problem of having Florida State on an island, but would Miami and/or Georgia Tech leave the ACC without additional friends? I don't think so. North Carolina is likely the grand prize that the Big Ten would want from the ACC. I don't think there is a package of schools to bring North Carolina to the Big Ten that the Big Ten would approve, i.e. Wake Forest. UNC cares enough about Wake Forest that they agreed to play each other as a non-conference football opponents because they weren't playing enough since they are in opposite divisions.

I don't think Oklahoma is good enough on their own and would need the cover of another academic school to get Big Ten entrance. I'm not sure that Kansas is good enough cover for them, just as I am not sure Miami is good enough for Florida State. Likewise with UNC, I don't think there is a combination of schools that would be sexy enough for Texas to join the Big Ten that would be acceptable to the Big Ten. Texas plays what, like 9 games of their schedule in the state of Texas? At best, Texas would have four home conference games, the Red River Rivalry (which would replace the fifth home game in a 9 game conference schedule), and three non-conference games in-state.

TL;DR Version: Notre Dame will probably always have a spot saved for them or room will be made. Florida State would need to tag-along with a top notch academic or be in a group of academics to be invited while bringing a nearby partner. Oklahoma is probably not good enough on their own but require less help than FSU. Texas and UNC may be pipe dreams because the Big Ten can't offer them a package that checks off every box.

(04-13-2016 07:12 AM)akhosrof Wrote:  

(04-13-2016 07:02 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-12-2016 08:48 PM)akhosrof Wrote:  I put this in another topic but the thoughts belong in this discussion:

If the B1G is to make another move, #15 has to be a game changer from a brand perspective: Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame. If the conference cannot get one of these three, don't expand. If it can, #16 can be more focused on expanding the TV market footprint. The exception to this rule would be a UNC/UVA combo, where the combined TV market trumps football brand. Although, I don't think state politics allows UNC or UVA to leave their other state schools (and maybe this is the case with Oklahoma and Kansas as well).

To me, if the B1G can grab Notre Dame, the logical partner is UConn. From a scheduling perspective: 16 in pods of 4 is much easier to schedule than 14 (in two divisions) for both football and basketball. Pods work out perfectly:

1. Mid-Atlantic 2. Northeast
Connecticut Michigan
Maryland Michigan State
Penn State Notre Dame
Rutgers Ohio State

3. Midwest 4. West
Illinois Iowa
Indiana Minnesota
Northwestern Nebraska
Purdue Wisconsin

For a 9 game conference football schedule, each team plays their pod then plays ever other team in the conference bi-annually. For an 18 game conference basketball schedule, you play a home and home with your pod, then play every other team once. These pods are the best combination of rivalries and geography. A four year football player gets to see every campus in the B1G.

So the question remains: why would ND join the B1G. We are talking LONG TERM perspective here. The B1G and SEC (and maybe the PAC 12) create a revenue gap so large compared to the other conferences that ND is incentivized to join to maintain competitive spending.

Maybe there is synergy between the B1G and Notre Dame to create greater value for the B1G Network than ND or the B1G can find anywhere else. A win win for both sides.

Also: the college football playoff expands to 6 or 8 so each conference champion gets an automatic bid. Therefore, ND can play a tough OOC schedule against USC, Stanford and Navy, in addition to nine conference games (or ND could rotate Stanford and USC bi-annually). ND could get into the playoff as a wild card or by winning the B1G, as losing a game or two isn't the end of the world like it is now in college football.

In the end money trumps all. If the ACC falls significantly behind the B1G and SEC, ND will have a choice to make.

Btw this is coming from an IU alum who hates ND. If I had my way, I would like the conference to simply add OU and Kansas, put Purdue in the east division, and be done with realignment forever.

ND gets most of its TV money from NBC, not from the ACC/ESPN.

Exactly, and they still aren't receiving more in TV money than Indiana or Purdue (I believe both schools receive more, however it's hard to verify given ND is a private school). The NBC money on its own wasn't enough and the school had to concede five football games to the ACC to supplement. I haven't done an analysis on what those five games are worth, and if that could possibly negatively impact a new NBC deal given the low football brand perception within the ACC (outside of FSU and Clemson).

Could Notre Dame make more money in the B1G as a full member? Probably not enough now to give up football "independence". But ten years from now? At the rate things are going the revenue gap could be very large. And that argument goes for Notre Dame and the SEC/Pac 12 as well. I'm sure either conference would accept Notre Dame as a full member and the school would receive much higher TV revenues in either of those conferences than it could from "independence" and NBC.

The ACC move had little to do with money. ND only makes about $3-4 million a year from the ACC/ESPN deal.

The ACC move was more for bowl bids, other sports finding a P5 home and staying out of the clutches of Jim Delany, plus playing games/having more exposure in the Southeast recruiting grounds.

ND knew then that it would make more TV money by joining the Big Ten. It did not. It moved to the East/Southeast with the ACC deal.

The rumor mill says that ND gets about $23 million/year from the new 10 year NBC deal that began in 2015.

The people who think that it bothers ND that Indiana and Purdue make more in the Big Ten don't understand ND and its stance regarding the football program.

People thought that Delany had ND "checkmated" in 2010 with the BTN money. People were wrong then, too.

(04-13-2016 10:27 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-14-2016 01:52 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I'm over Notre Dame. If they want to join the Big Ten, then the conference will make room if they can but the Big Ten won't wait for them.

Florida State, I imagine, is not good enough on their own academically, not to mention their location of being on an island. They would certainly need one of Georgia Tech or Miami to be added along with themselves to tag along to satisfy the academics (assuming that Miami is regarded as good enough to cover for Florida State). I don't think the conference would want to have a "West Virginia" problem of having Florida State on an island, but would Miami and/or Georgia Tech leave the ACC without additional friends? I don't think so. North Carolina is likely the grand prize that the Big Ten would want from the ACC. I don't think there is a package of schools to bring North Carolina to the Big Ten that the Big Ten would approve, i.e. Wake Forest. UNC cares enough about Wake Forest that they agreed to play each other as a non-conference football opponents because they weren't playing enough since they are in opposite divisions.

I don't think Oklahoma is good enough on their own and would need the cover of another academic school to get Big Ten entrance. I'm not sure that Kansas is good enough cover for them, just as I am not sure Miami is good enough for Florida State. Likewise with UNC, I don't think there is a combination of schools that would be sexy enough for Texas to join the Big Ten that would be acceptable to the Big Ten. Texas plays what, like 9 games of their schedule in the state of Texas? At best, Texas would have four home conference games, the Red River Rivalry (which would replace the fifth home game in a 9 game conference schedule), and three non-conference games in-state.

TL;DR Version: Notre Dame will probably always have a spot saved for them or room will be made. Florida State would need to tag-along with a top notch academic or be in a group of academics to be invited while bringing a nearby partner. Oklahoma is probably not good enough on their own but require less help than FSU. Texas and UNC may be pipe dreams because the Big Ten can't offer them a package that checks off every box.

(04-13-2016 07:12 AM)akhosrof Wrote:  

(04-13-2016 07:02 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-12-2016 08:48 PM)akhosrof Wrote:  I put this in another topic but the thoughts belong in this discussion:

If the B1G is to make another move, #15 has to be a game changer from a brand perspective: Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame. If the conference cannot get one of these three, don't expand. If it can, #16 can be more focused on expanding the TV market footprint. The exception to this rule would be a UNC/UVA combo, where the combined TV market trumps football brand. Although, I don't think state politics allows UNC or UVA to leave their other state schools (and maybe this is the case with Oklahoma and Kansas as well).

To me, if the B1G can grab Notre Dame, the logical partner is UConn. From a scheduling perspective: 16 in pods of 4 is much easier to schedule than 14 (in two divisions) for both football and basketball. Pods work out perfectly:

1. Mid-Atlantic 2. Northeast
Connecticut Michigan
Maryland Michigan State
Penn State Notre Dame
Rutgers Ohio State

3. Midwest 4. West
Illinois Iowa
Indiana Minnesota
Northwestern Nebraska
Purdue Wisconsin

For a 9 game conference football schedule, each team plays their pod then plays ever other team in the conference bi-annually. For an 18 game conference basketball schedule, you play a home and home with your pod, then play every other team once. These pods are the best combination of rivalries and geography. A four year football player gets to see every campus in the B1G.

So the question remains: why would ND join the B1G. We are talking LONG TERM perspective here. The B1G and SEC (and maybe the PAC 12) create a revenue gap so large compared to the other conferences that ND is incentivized to join to maintain competitive spending.

Maybe there is synergy between the B1G and Notre Dame to create greater value for the B1G Network than ND or the B1G can find anywhere else. A win win for both sides.

Also: the college football playoff expands to 6 or 8 so each conference champion gets an automatic bid. Therefore, ND can play a tough OOC schedule against USC, Stanford and Navy, in addition to nine conference games (or ND could rotate Stanford and USC bi-annually). ND could get into the playoff as a wild card or by winning the B1G, as losing a game or two isn't the end of the world like it is now in college football.

In the end money trumps all. If the ACC falls significantly behind the B1G and SEC, ND will have a choice to make.

Btw this is coming from an IU alum who hates ND. If I had my way, I would like the conference to simply add OU and Kansas, put Purdue in the east division, and be done with realignment forever.

ND gets most of its TV money from NBC, not from the ACC/ESPN.

Exactly, and they still aren't receiving more in TV money than Indiana or Purdue (I believe both schools receive more, however it's hard to verify given ND is a private school). The NBC money on its own wasn't enough and the school had to concede five football games to the ACC to supplement. I haven't done an analysis on what those five games are worth, and if that could possibly negatively impact a new NBC deal given the low football brand perception within the ACC (outside of FSU and Clemson).

Could Notre Dame make more money in the B1G as a full member? Probably not enough now to give up football "independence". But ten years from now? At the rate things are going the revenue gap could be very large. And that argument goes for Notre Dame and the SEC/Pac 12 as well. I'm sure either conference would accept Notre Dame as a full member and the school would receive much higher TV revenues in either of those conferences than it could from "independence" and NBC.

The ACC move had little to do with money. ND only makes about $3-4 million a year from the ACC/ESPN deal.

The ACC move was more for bowl bids, other sports finding a P5 home and staying out of the clutches of Jim Delany, plus playing games/having more exposure in the Southeast recruiting grounds.

ND knew then that it would make more TV money by joining the Big Ten. It did not. It moved to the East/Southeast with the ACC deal.

The rumor mill says that ND gets about $23 million/year from the new 10 year NBC deal that began in 2015.

The people who think that it bothers ND that Indiana and Purdue make more in the Big Ten don't understand ND and its stance regarding the football program.

People thought that Delany had ND "checkmated" in 2010 with the BTN money. People were wrong then, too.

I am not refuting anything you say in your post. No doubt the ACC deal is an awesome deal for ND. No other conference would have given ND that deal. Texas tried to recruit ND as a full member to the Big 12. I am positive the B1G could have given ND a similar deal as the ACC but similar to the Pac 12 or SEC, it's full member or nothing.

In fact, the B1G, SEC and Pac 12 prefer ND's deal with the ACC. It means ND is not a full member with another conference.

I mention the IU/Purdue thing because it could be a signal of the power of collective bargaining. How high would NBC go paying for one team? There might be an ceiling that is a lot less than what a conference can negotiate. Independence has its worth/value, but how much is that in relation to a TV revenue gap compared to the SEC/B1G?

Also, there is the possibility of automatic qualifiers if/when the playoff expands to 8 schools. On a smaller scale, Johns Hopkins gave up over 100 years of lacrosse independence because of tournament qualifiers.

On the flip side, cord cutting might be a positive for Notre Dame. Collective bargaining could become a weakness. NBC could create a ND annual streaming package. I am not sure if this would be more profitable or not. All I am saying is never say never on any possibility, including ND joining a conference (whether it's the B1G or SEC). I feel most ND fans have completely blocked this out as any possibility, which is ignorant IMO because no one can predict the future landscape of TV. Heck, football could be extinct in twenty years and none of this will matter and ND will essentially be a full ACC member by default.

I really think Terry is starting to see the light.

(04-12-2016 12:58 PM)AntiG Wrote:  

(04-11-2016 02:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-11-2016 01:18 PM)AntiG Wrote:  I think Oklahoma is a solid bet to eventually join in the next decade or so.

FSU is much, much less likely due to logistics but I don't think that the schools particularly be against adding them, given their rich history of football success ("NCAA Franchise Player"), huge national following, and being in one of the prime market and recruiting states.

I could definitely see the B1G already having a long-term plan in place to try to eventually get to Florida and Texas in a 20-team conference, with perhaps some combination of Oklahoma, Kansas, Rice, Duke, UNC, UVA, GT as stepping stones to take Texas and Florida State from the B12 and ACC.

I don't think Rice has any chance what so ever of being added to the B1G.

KU, OU and UT in the West and UVA, UNC and GT gets you to 20. Where does FSU fit? without GT you have a large gap between UNC and FSU.

Rice I threw in there because they are located right in Houston, are an elite academic institution, AAU, NASA/Govt connection, a huge endowment, and one of the best baseball schools out there. Much like Duke, they'd be a fantastic addition and brings a lot to the table, and essentially is an offset for the non-AAU schools that some of the University presidents and snobby types would poo-poo about if we added Oklahoma or FSU. And unlike the talk in another thread about NYU, Rice has a long and legendary football history (and still are competitive) in a power conference when the SWC was around.

Well they wouldn't get an invite because they would easily be the worst athletic program in the conference without question. The SWC disbanded almost 30 years ago and in the last decade they weren't very competitive. Rice has a 0.01% chance of ever being added. it doesn't fit anywhere in the B1G model. It's not a large state school, it's a small private school, on the gulf coast and with poor athletics. Baseball doesn't count. It's one thing to say AAU and academics matter but not so much that they will go ahead and march out a school who has no chance to compete. UT, OU, KU, UVA, UNC, GT even FSU and UConn all have a chance. Hell i'd even say WVU has a better chance of a B1G invite than Rice, because at the end of the day it's an athletic conference and thats what the TV partners are paying for.

Rice has a whopping 6000 students in that school. It would be a small school in the Big East let alone the Big Ten.

(02-14-2016 01:52 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I'm over Notre Dame. If they want to join the Big Ten, then the conference will make room if they can but the Big Ten won't wait for them.

Florida State, I imagine, is not good enough on their own academically, not to mention their location of being on an island. They would certainly need one of Georgia Tech or Miami to be added along with themselves to tag along to satisfy the academics (assuming that Miami is regarded as good enough to cover for Florida State). I don't think the conference would want to have a "West Virginia" problem of having Florida State on an island, but would Miami and/or Georgia Tech leave the ACC without additional friends? I don't think so. North Carolina is likely the grand prize that the Big Ten would want from the ACC. I don't think there is a package of schools to bring North Carolina to the Big Ten that the Big Ten would approve, i.e. Wake Forest. UNC cares enough about Wake Forest that they agreed to play each other as a non-conference football opponents because they weren't playing enough since they are in opposite divisions.

I don't think Oklahoma is good enough on their own and would need the cover of another academic school to get Big Ten entrance. I'm not sure that Kansas is good enough cover for them, just as I am not sure Miami is good enough for Florida State. Likewise with UNC, I don't think there is a combination of schools that would be sexy enough for Texas to join the Big Ten that would be acceptable to the Big Ten. Texas plays what, like 9 games of their schedule in the state of Texas? At best, Texas would have four home conference games, the Red River Rivalry (which would replace the fifth home game in a 9 game conference schedule), and three non-conference games in-state.

TL;DR Version: Notre Dame will probably always have a spot saved for them or room will be made. Florida State would need to tag-along with a top notch academic or be in a group of academics to be invited while bringing a nearby partner. Oklahoma is probably not good enough on their own but require less help than FSU. Texas and UNC may be pipe dreams because the Big Ten can't offer them a package that checks off every box.

(04-13-2016 12:29 PM)SeaBlue Wrote:  I really think Terry is starting to see the light.

Ha!

(04-13-2016 09:57 AM)SeaBlue Wrote:  

(04-13-2016 09:00 AM)akhosrof Wrote:  No way the B1G takes VTech.

Virginia Tech is a strong candidate. If VA can't be had, Tech has a lot going for them. Probably only happens if paired with a stronger academic/athletic brand.

I agree with this. In time they will easily surpass Nebraska academically. AAU status is not far fetched, just a decade or so off perhaps.

But if money is what the Big 10 and the SEC want then all we need is a close scheduling agreement. The nation will tune in to watch every time no matter the game, or combatants. I think ESPN knew that when they put two Big 10 guys on the Finebaum show and started taking calls from Ohio and Michigan. There is the future for generating revenue. The Harbaugh vs SEC thing just adds fuel to the fire. If an SEC team plays the ACC we expect to win and dread a loss. If an SEC team plays the Big 12 we want the win but not as much as we dread a loss. But if an SEC team plays the Big 10 it's do or die. Lot's of passion and money is found in do or die. It's compelling T.V.!

Good post JRsec! I like the way you put it. Not sure I agree with your assessment on V-Tech academically, but that's another matter. Remember when there was talk of a football B1G-SEC challenge? I love the idea.

IMO the B1G and SEC are in a prisoner's dilemma. The SEC would love to grab Oklahoma. The B1G would like Oklahoma (and Kansas), but would LOVE UNC and UVA. The SEC would love UNC and UVA as well.

From the B1G's perspective: do you grab Oklahoma and Kansas now if you have the chance, or do you wait and see if you can get UNC and UVA. If you wait, what if the SEC grabs Oklahoma and the possibility of adding UNC and UVA never comes to fruition? If you get Oklahoma and Kansas now, you might be stuck at 16.

Whoever grabs UVA and/or UNC first between the B1G and SEC will be first to those markets (from a TV network perspective). A subsequent move of adding V-Tech and/or NC State by the second network will be at risk for market over saturation. Would cable networks in those areas pay double rights fees for the SEC Network with UNC/UVA and THEN for the B1G Network with NC State/V-Tech (or vice versa with the B1G first)? NO WAY! That's part of the reason we haven't seen the ACC Network is because of the SEC overlap in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. The addition of Texas A&M by the SEC was BRILLIANT as it got the conference first to market before the Big XII could create a network.

This is why UVA and UNC are the much preferred first choice, and why IMO the conference that is second WILL NOT add V-Tech or NC State.

(04-13-2016 05:46 PM)akhosrof Wrote:  Good post JRsec! I like the way you put it. Not sure I agree with your assessment on V-Tech academically, but that's another matter. Remember when there was talk of a football B1G-SEC challenge? I love the idea.

IMO the B1G and SEC are in a prisoner's dilemma. The SEC would love to grab Oklahoma. The B1G would like Oklahoma (and Kansas), but would LOVE UNC and UVA. The SEC would love UNC and UVA as well.

From the B1G's perspective: do you grab Oklahoma and Kansas now if you have the chance, or do you wait and see if you can get UNC and UVA. If you wait, what if the SEC grabs Oklahoma and the possibility of adding UNC and UVA never comes to fruition? If you get Oklahoma and Kansas now, you might be stuck at 16.

Whoever grabs UVA and/or UNC first between the B1G and SEC will be first to those markets (from a TV network perspective). A subsequent move of adding V-Tech and/or NC State by the second network will be at risk for market over saturation. Would cable networks in those areas pay double rights fees for the SEC Network with UNC/UVA and THEN for the B1G Network with NC State/V-Tech (or vice versa with the B1G first)? NO WAY! That's part of the reason we haven't seen the ACC Network is because of the SEC overlap in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. The addition of Texas A&M by the SEC was BRILLIANT as it got the conference first to market before the Big XII could create a network.

This is why UVA and UNC are the much preferred first choice, and why IMO the conference that is second WILL NOT add V-Tech or NC State.

Remember one other thing about the ACC with regard to this discussion. The ACC has the largest footprint in a dying model. But they only have saturation in 3 states out of that large footprint (Virginia, North Carolina, and Massachusetts). They are second to the SEC in South Carolina (slightly), Georgia (85-15%), behind the Cats in Kentucky and below the Gators in Florida. In New York nobody carries the market, Pitt doesn't hold a candle to Penn State, and Notre Dame is not all in and is now shared as a partial by the Big 10.

People lament the Big 12's footprint size but they do carry each of their 5 states with the exception of Iowa. That's a better rate of saturation by far than the ACC.
The reason the ACC is so tough to crack is because if the Big 10 or SEC get a toehold in Virginia or North Carolina (even with a little brother) the ACC has nothing left to sell. In other words, "They're toast."

Good points. Even if the SEC/B1G takes UNC & UVA, I don't think the ACC is dead. There is enough demand for the second tier schools, they simply won't have a network and will see a decreased payout. Speaking of which, the Big 12 is the only conference to lose members (and overall loss from a brand perspective) and not receive a decreased payout. I can understand why some of the members don't want to expand and dilute payouts, even if it is a long-term risk of stability.

On the NYC-area. No one owns the market, but if I had to take an educated guess, the most popular teams based on alumni presence, geography and brand name are likely (no particular order): Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, and Penn State, with Rutgers a distant fifth by default. The B1G was smart to parlay Rutgers given the heavy B1G alumni presence and fan base in the area. Made it worth it for cable networks. For point of reference, Rutgers has sold out home games versus Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State so far (Wisconsin as well, which has a decent NYC-alum presence).

Likewise with Boston, Notre Dame is likely the most popular team in that market.

(04-13-2016 06:47 PM)akhosrof Wrote:  Good points. Even if the SEC/B1G takes UNC & UVA, I don't think the ACC is dead. There is enough demand for the second tier schools, they simply won't have a network and will see a decreased payout. Speaking of which, the Big 12 is the only conference to lose members (and overall loss from a brand perspective) and not receive a decreased payout. I can understand why some of the members don't want to expand and dilute payouts, even if it is a long-term risk of stability.

On the NYC-area. No one owns the market, but if I had to take an educated guess, the most popular teams based on alumni presence, geography and brand name are likely (no particular order): Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, and Penn State, with Rutgers a distant fifth by default. The B1G was smart to parlay Rutgers given the heavy B1G alumni presence and fan base in the area. Made it worth it for cable networks. For point of reference, Rutgers has sold out home games versus Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State so far (Wisconsin as well, which has a decent NYC-alum presence).


Likewise with Boston, Notre Dame is likely the most popular team in that market.

I think the only reason the Big 12 kept their payout is because neither FOX nor ESPN wanted the main properties to bolt for the PAC where the networks don't own a percentage of the action. So they paid to keep status quo.

(04-13-2016 09:57 AM)SeaBlue Wrote:  

(04-13-2016 09:00 AM)akhosrof Wrote:  No way the B1G takes VTech.

Virginia Tech is a strong candidate. If VA can't be had, Tech has a lot going for them. Probably only happens if paired with a stronger academic/athletic brand.

Va Tech to me fits better with the SEC.

(04-13-2016 06:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-13-2016 05:46 PM)akhosrof Wrote:  Good post JRsec! I like the way you put it. Not sure I agree with your assessment on V-Tech academically, but that's another matter. Remember when there was talk of a football B1G-SEC challenge? I love the idea.

IMO the B1G and SEC are in a prisoner's dilemma. The SEC would love to grab Oklahoma. The B1G would like Oklahoma (and Kansas), but would LOVE UNC and UVA. The SEC would love UNC and UVA as well.

From the B1G's perspective: do you grab Oklahoma and Kansas now if you have the chance, or do you wait and see if you can get UNC and UVA. If you wait, what if the SEC grabs Oklahoma and the possibility of adding UNC and UVA never comes to fruition? If you get Oklahoma and Kansas now, you might be stuck at 16.

Whoever grabs UVA and/or UNC first between the B1G and SEC will be first to those markets (from a TV network perspective). A subsequent move of adding V-Tech and/or NC State by the second network will be at risk for market over saturation. Would cable networks in those areas pay double rights fees for the SEC Network with UNC/UVA and THEN for the B1G Network with NC State/V-Tech (or vice versa with the B1G first)? NO WAY! That's part of the reason we haven't seen the ACC Network is because of the SEC overlap in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. The addition of Texas A&M by the SEC was BRILLIANT as it got the conference first to market before the Big XII could create a network.

This is why UVA and UNC are the much preferred first choice, and why IMO the conference that is second WILL NOT add V-Tech or NC State.

Remember one other thing about the ACC with regard to this discussion. The ACC has the largest footprint in a dying model. But they only have saturation in 3 states out of that large footprint (Virginia, North Carolina, and Massachusetts). They are second to the SEC in South Carolina (slightly), Georgia (85-15%), behind the Cats in Kentucky and below the Gators in Florida. In New York nobody carries the market, Pitt doesn't hold a candle to Penn State, and Notre Dame is not all in and is now shared as a partial by the Big 10.

People lament the Big 12's footprint size but they do carry each of their 5 states with the exception of Iowa. That's a better rate of saturation by far than the ACC.
The reason the ACC is so tough to crack is because if the Big 10 or SEC get a toehold in Virginia or North Carolina (even with a little brother) the ACC has nothing left to sell. In other words, "They're toast."

In NYC Rutgers is in the market while Cuse is 6+ hours away. The University of maryland is closer to NYC than Cuse.

(04-14-2016 11:35 AM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  In NYC Rutgers is in the market while Cuse is 6+ hours away. The University of maryland is closer to NYC than Cuse.

Yup, Syracuse is not even close to the NYC, its basically the equivalent of talking about adding USC in order to get into San Francisco Bay Area, or UTEP to get into Houston or Dallas. The only FBS schools in the NYC DMA are Rutgers and Army, with UConn and Temple just outside of the area cutoff.

With the talk of Auburn to the SEC East and Mizzou to the SEC West... I wonder if the SEC would add Oklahoma and Kansas. Oklahoma and Kansas reunite with Mizzou and A&M in the SEC West, along with LSU, Arkansas and the Mississippi schools. Alabama and Auburn move to the SEC East.

From a historical rivalries perspective, makes a lot of sense. Better integrates the old Big XII schools. Keeps rivalries in the East alive.

B1G would then have to make a strong power play for UVA and one of UNC/ND. Maybe UConn if things don't workout. Does Texas come into play if Oklahoma and Kansas leave the Big XII for the SEC?

Once again prisoner's dilemma between the SEC and B1G. Waiting for that first chip to fall!

(04-14-2016 04:34 PM)akhosrof Wrote:  With the talk of Auburn to the SEC East and Mizzou to the SEC West... I wonder if the SEC would add Oklahoma and Kansas. Oklahoma and Kansas reunite with Mizzou and A&M in the SEC West, along with LSU, Arkansas and the Mississippi schools. Alabama and Auburn move to the SEC East.

From a historical rivalries perspective, makes a lot of sense. Better integrates the old Big XII schools. Keeps rivalries in the East alive.

B1G would then have to make a strong power play for UVA and one of UNC/ND. Maybe UConn if things don't workout. Does Texas come into play if Oklahoma and Kansas leave the Big XII for the SEC?

Once again prisoner's dilemma between the SEC and B1G. Waiting for that first chip to fall!

I don't think Kansas wants the SEC or the SEC wants Kansas. Slive and now Sankey have bot reiterated that we will only add within our cultural demographic. Oklahoma works. Kansas doesn't.

I do think the SEC will go all out on the Sooners. The reason is purely economic. Oklahoma not only gives us control of a relatively small state, but they also deliver the DFW Metroplex which gives them a status much like taking the 3rd best Texas program but also giving you 3.3 million viewers in Oklahoma. Add to that their national brand status which multiplies content value and you have a winner. That's the same reason the Big 10 would consider them.

If the market models change away from the footprint model don't be surprised if the SEC cools a little on Virginia Tech and N.C. State. N.C. State doesn't give you North Carolina. Virginia Tech does give you roughly half of Virginia. But neither has great ratings. They don't have bad ratings, just not strong ones.

At that point Florida State becomes a better option for the SEC. They give the SEC effective control of over 80% of the college football viewers in Florida and they add solid content value. So failing anyone breaking up the North Carolina / Virginia clique, I look for the real war between the SEC and Big 10 to be over Oklahoma.

For the Big 10 they represent the only legitimate bait to attract Bevo. For the SEC they represent the most economically viable option we have. The SEC isn't after Texas, but if they wanted in with the Sooners I'm sure we would find them a spot. I think the same is true of the Big 10.

Oklahoma and Texas fit the Big 10 better than Virginia and North Carolina. The fit the culture of the SEC better than North Carolina and Virginia who also do not fit the culture of the Big 10.

If the Big 10 would take a great compromise with the SEC and would make an exception on contiguity for Texas then the Big 10 could move to 16 with Kansas and Texas (both AAU) and the SEC could move to 16 with Oklahoma and Florida State and we would both be very well served.

With Texas and Kansas in the Big 10 and the SEC taking Oklahoma and Florida State here is what would happen. The values of the SEC and Big 10 grow to well over 40 million. The ACC value is diminished with the loss of Florida State.

That means that N.D. would have to go all in to save the ACC and even then they would lag significantly in revenue, or that N.D. would be forced to through in with the Big 10. If they do then likely you get a Virginia school with them.

North Carolina and Duke would likely throw in with the SEC. If the SEC goes to 20 it is then with Virginia Tech and Clemson. If the Big 10 goes to 20 it is then with N.C. State and Georgia Tech.

Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Louisville, Miami, Boston College, and possibly Wake Forest now join with Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, T.C.U., Baylor, and West Virginia who then add Connecticut, Cincinnati, Houston, and B.Y.U. to go to 16 and remain a P conference.

Likely? To 16 & 18 yes, and maybe. To 20 with a new conference being formed? Possible, not Probable.

B1G & SEC collusion? Haha I love it!

Good points on Oklahoma and the DFW area. Oklahoma's largest alumni base is in Dallas. As you mentioned, that would be a major get for the B1G as the SEC Network is already in Texas.

I still think 16 is the sweet spot. While on the topic of collusion, I think Oklahoma and Kansas to the B1G and UNC/UVA to the SEC would produce ideal results for both conferences.

At that point could there be a Big XII/ACC merger? Would Texas go west with TTU to the PAC 12? Or would each conference try and stick with what they have?