I think movement to 20 is possible for the B1G but it may take dissolution of both the ACC and B1g XII. The scenario would be something like UVA, UNC, Duke and Georgia Tech to the B1G and VT, NC State, Clemson and FSU to the SEC to knock out the ACC. Then maybe Kansas and Oklahoma to the B1G to get to 20. If the SEC wanted to go to 20 it could add a couple schools, like maybe West Virginia and TCU.

That leaves a lot of former Big XII teams and ACC teams, plus a few AAC teams like Cincinnati and UConn, and others like BYU, still outside the new "Power 3" conferences of the B1G, SEC and PAC. The 'leftovers' could form their own conference, ND and Texas could go independent for football and join the new conference for other sports.

The path to the playoffs would be three spots taken by the champs of the B1G, SEC and PAC, with the 4th spot reserved for ND, Texas, the new conference champ or a lesser conference champ in order to avoid some legal issues.

Although it seems more likely than not that conference realignment would play out differently than that, the scenario is not all that far fetched.

(03-06-2016 08:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  PAC:
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Utah, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California, Colorado, U.C.L.A., U.S.C.
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Florida State, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

New Conference:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
East Carolina, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, *Memphis, Wake Forest
Baylor, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Houston, T.C.U., Texas Tech

*You could arguably substitute Central Florida / South Florida / or Tulane here.

You would get your academic grouping that finishes out the Big 10's Northeast footprint.

You would get the strongest football programs with new markets for the SEC.

The PAC gets brands they need, and the central time zone slots they also need, and perhaps ESPN/and or FOX carriage help and involvement.

The New Conference would consist of schools relatively within the same economic spectrum and would become a barrier conference and the source for OOC scheduling. But they would have enough bonafide brands to stand on their own.

Thoughts?

I'm going on the assumption that none of this happens until the end of the GORs. How about this?

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State to the PAC. It's a nice simple 18 team alignment.

North: Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, California, Stanford
South: UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado
East: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State

All of a sudden the PAC Networks become much more profitable. ESPN buys in and utilizes the LHN for other content.

The B1G adds Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Syracuse, UConn, and Boston College

The SEC adds Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Louisville, NC State, and Virginia Tech

At this point, I think we still end up with what might be considered a Power 5. I don't think schools from the central portion of the country will combine with East Coast schools even though it makes sense on some levels. Reorganizing into more regional conferences could be better for schools that don't really line up culturally and don't have a huge financial motivation to create another conglomerate conference. The travel would certainly be better if nothing else.

A new Big 12...

West: BYU, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico, TCU, SMU
East: Baylor, Houston, Tulsa, Memphis, Iowa State, Tulane

A new ACC with a very basketball-centric feel...

North: UMass, Buffalo, Temple, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Cincinnati
South: Miami, Central Florida, South Florida, Georgia State, East Carolina, Old Dominion

The problem with trying to pick pieces of the ACC core is that it is pretty interconnected and interdependent at this point.

It is vastly easier to just take the whole nucleus and everything tied at the hip to it. But you have to completely rethink the conference model to accomplish that.

UNC-NCST-Duke are probably more or less a package deal. UVA is very strongly connected to that and if you take UVA you'll be taking VT too whether you like it or not. And by the time you've rounded up this group they're going to demand to bring Georgia Tech with them. And with GT you'll have a VERY vocal call for Clemson to come along... and then you're looping in Clemson and FSU too. Now if you're willing to take all 8 -- essentially the modern football era ACC 9 minus Wake -- you can probably do that. The ACC southern schools vastly outnumber and really don't care all that much for the northern schools. They were added purely for TV markets -- but how is that working out for ya without an ACCN? Wake and Miami are small privates without the big checkbook of a Duke. And, sad as it is to say about Miami, Duke may have better prospects than both in football.

At this point, you're so close to achieving all sport dominance and political union and maxing out revenue, you may as well go for it:


#TeamMegaconference
Atlantic Division: UVA, VT, UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Pitt, WVU, UofL
Coastal Division: Clemson, USC-E, UGAg, GT, TN, FSU, UF, Auburn, UK
Southeastern Division: Alabama, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas, TAMU, Texas, Vandy, Miami
Plains Division: Baylor, TCU, TTU, OU, Oklahoma St, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska

Permanent Rivals:
Duke-GT, TN-VT, FSU-Miami, Clemson-NCST, UNC-SC, UofL-UK, Auburn-Alabama, Vandy-WF, Texas-OU, TAMU-TCU, Baylor-TTU, OklahomaSt-Arkansas, UVA-Mizzou, Nebraska-UGAg (Corndawgs!), UF-LSU, Pitt-KState, Ole Miss-Kansas, WVU-MissState

No more OOC football schedules. You replace the spring game with a FCS preseason game that doesn't count in the standings -- guaranteed 7th home season ticket for everybody. Your division is most of who you play -- and it turns out most of who you are even interested in playing in the first place. This means maximum fan interest which means maximum ticket sales and maximum eyeballs on TV/streaming. At this point you have the scale and inventory to roll four deep with TV channels:

Atlantic: Charlotte, NC || Coastal: Atlanta, GA || Southeastern: Birmingham, AL || Plains: Dallas, TX

The B1G and Pac-12 and ND and the ACC Northern flank all join hands and go finish their formal marriage that's been brewing in Pasadena for decades anyway.













It's the only way I can think of to accomplish ALL of the following without leading to political and legal fallout by excluding people:
- Maximize fan interest
--- Maximize gate revenue
--- Maximize TV/streaming revenue
--- Maximize donor revenue
- Political unification of red states
--- Without leaving a P5 behind and thus leading to political fallout like VT to the ACC
- Refocusing of historic and regional rivalries
- Reducing travel time and cost -- most games could be played with the road team going by bus in this league
- Guarantee a 7th home game
- Strong academic base for CIC-esk activities
- Have enough world renowned public programs to provide compelling academic inventory to air during off hours and thus boost channel pick up overseas, in academia, and with groups who would otherwise not be interested in a sports only offering



If you got a better way I'd love to hear it.... but I can't think of one. I need to save this stuff so I can just copy and paste instead of retyping it each time.

(03-11-2016 10:37 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The problem with trying to pick pieces of the ACC core is that it is pretty interconnected and interdependent at this point.

It is vastly easier to just take the whole nucleus and everything tied at the hip to it. But you have to completely rethink the conference model to accomplish that.

UNC-NCST-Duke are probably more or less a package deal. UVA is very strongly connected to that and if you take UVA you'll be taking VT too whether you like it or not. And by the time you've rounded up this group they're going to demand to bring Georgia Tech with them. And with GT you'll have a VERY vocal call for Clemson to come along... and then you're looping in Clemson and FSU too. Now if you're willing to take all 8 -- essentially the modern football era ACC 9 minus Wake -- you can probably do that. The ACC southern schools vastly outnumber and really don't care all that much for the northern schools. They were added purely for TV markets -- but how is that working out for ya without an ACCN? Wake and Miami are small privates without the big checkbook of a Duke. And, sad as it is to say about Miami, Duke may have better prospects than both in football.

At this point, you're so close to achieving all sport dominance and political union and maxing out revenue, you may as well go for it:


#TeamMegaconference
Atlantic Division: UVA, VT, UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Pitt, WVU, UofL
Coastal Division: Clemson, USC-E, UGAg, GT, TN, FSU, UF, Auburn, UK
Southeastern Division: Alabama, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas, TAMU, Texas, Vandy, Miami
Plains Division: Baylor, TCU, TTU, OU, Oklahoma St, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska

Permanent Rivals:
Duke-GT, TN-VT, FSU-Miami, Clemson-NCST, UNC-SC, UofL-UK, Auburn-Alabama, Vandy-WF, Texas-OU, TAMU-TCU, Baylor-TTU, OklahomaSt-Arkansas, UVA-Mizzou, Nebraska-UGAg (Corndawgs!), UF-LSU, Pitt-KState, Ole Miss-Kansas, WVU-MissState

No more OOC football schedules. You replace the spring game with a FCS preseason game that doesn't count in the standings -- guaranteed 7th home season ticket for everybody. Your division is most of who you play -- and it turns out most of who you are even interested in playing in the first place. This means maximum fan interest which means maximum ticket sales and maximum eyeballs on TV/streaming. At this point you have the scale and inventory to roll four deep with TV channels:

Atlantic: Charlotte, NC || Coastal: Atlanta, GA || Southeastern: Birmingham, AL || Plains: Dallas, TX

The B1G and Pac-12 and ND and the ACC Northern flank all join hands and go finish their formal marriage that's been brewing in Pasadena for decades anyway.













It's the only way I can think of to accomplish ALL of the following without leading to political and legal fallout by excluding people:
- Maximize fan interest
--- Maximize gate revenue
--- Maximize TV/streaming revenue
--- Maximize donor revenue
- Political unification of red states
--- Without leaving a P5 behind and thus leading to political fallout like VT to the ACC
- Refocusing of historic and regional rivalries
- Reducing travel time and cost -- most games could be played with the road team going by bus in this league
- Guarantee a 7th home game
- Strong academic base for CIC-esk activities
- Have enough world renowned public programs to provide compelling academic inventory to air during off hours and thus boost channel pick up overseas, in academia, and with groups who would otherwise not be interested in a sports only offering



If you got a better way I'd love to hear it.... but I can't think of one. I need to save this stuff so I can just copy and paste instead of retyping it each time.

That would be the easiest way, not the best way. The problem is whether the network wants to commit to it. Personally, I think we could do very well with less.

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Auburn, Clemson, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Miami
Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Five division champs and three at large enter the conference playoffs. The champion is in the NCG against the winner of what ever conglomeration the North and far West come up with.

3 conferences broken down into a 3x6 divisional format for 54 teams. This consolidates 11 teams. The CFP would have these 3 conference winners & a national wildcard.

PAC
North: Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Washington State, Oregon State

South: USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado

West: Texas, Oklahoma, TT, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Missouri

B1G
West: Nebraska, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern

Central: Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

East: Penn State, Maryland, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, VT

SEC
East: Florida, FSU, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, GT

Central: Alabama, Auburn, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Louisville

West: Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Kentucky

ND remains an independent in football & could qualify for the wildcard spot in the CFP. They join the NBE for all other sports.

Iowa St, TCU, Baylor, Kansas St, Purdue, WF, WV, Rutgers, BC & NC State are joined by BYU, Cincinnati, Houston, UCONN, Memphis & Colorado State in a reformed Big 12(16).

West: TCU, Baylor, Houston, BYU, Kansas State, Iowa State, Purdue, Colorado State

East: WV, Rutgers, WF, BC, UCONN, NC State, Cincinnati, Memphis

The PAC, B1G & the SEC play a 4 team CCG with the 3 division winners & a wildcard. They play their 5 division teams, 1 permanent rival & 1 team from each division for 8 games.

SEC rivals:
FSU & Miami
LSU & Alabama
Florida & Tennessee
UK & Louisville
Clemson & Miss State
Auburn & A&M
SC & Arkansas
Georgia & Ole Miss
GT & Vanderbilt

Win5oo2 great points but Virginia Tech sued to be admitted to get into the ACC so UVA wouldn't let them go the same reason why unc and nc state are joined at the hip. Same thing for Oklahoma and okie state. I think everything is in a holding pattern until Texas makes their move. Then we will get 4 sixteen team conferences.

(03-11-2016 10:37 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The problem with trying to pick pieces of the ACC core is that it is pretty interconnected and interdependent at this point.

It is vastly easier to just take the whole nucleus and everything tied at the hip to it. But you have to completely rethink the conference model to accomplish that.

I'm all on board with a mega conference and on a personal note I am very impressed that you've gone to the trouble of drawing up graphs.

I'd do it with one simple rule...take all the rivals.

Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Louisville from the ACC

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor from the Big 12

I doubt we could pull Nebraska from the Big Ten though.

4 divisions of 8 with 7 division games. As many as 2 permanent rivals and a rotation using the other 3 games...one from each of the other divisions.

I like your other ideas as well.

(03-12-2016 09:06 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 10:37 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The problem with trying to pick pieces of the ACC core is that it is pretty interconnected and interdependent at this point.

It is vastly easier to just take the whole nucleus and everything tied at the hip to it. But you have to completely rethink the conference model to accomplish that.

I'm all on board with a mega conference and on a personal note I am very impressed that you've gone to the trouble of drawing up graphs.

I'd do it with one simple rule...take all the rivals.

Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Louisville from the ACC

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor from the Big 12

I doubt we could pull Nebraska from the Big Ten though.

4 divisions of 8 with 7 division games. As many as 2 permanent rivals and a rotation using the other 3 games...one from each of the other divisions.

I like your other ideas as well.

I like this idea as well. It would look something like this:

North: Tennessee, North Carolina, Duke, WF, NC State, Virginia, VT, Louisville

East: Florida, FSU, Miami, Georgia, GT, South Carolina, Clemson, Vandy

South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, A&M, Arkansas, UK

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State

(03-12-2016 11:23 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 09:06 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 10:37 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The problem with trying to pick pieces of the ACC core is that it is pretty interconnected and interdependent at this point.

It is vastly easier to just take the whole nucleus and everything tied at the hip to it. But you have to completely rethink the conference model to accomplish that.

I'm all on board with a mega conference and on a personal note I am very impressed that you've gone to the trouble of drawing up graphs.

I'd do it with one simple rule...take all the rivals.

Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Louisville from the ACC

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor from the Big 12

I doubt we could pull Nebraska from the Big Ten though.

4 divisions of 8 with 7 division games. As many as 2 permanent rivals and a rotation using the other 3 games...one from each of the other divisions.

I like your other ideas as well.

I like this idea as well. It would look something like this:

North: Tennessee, North Carolina, Duke, WF, NC State, Virginia, VT, Louisville

East: Florida, FSU, Miami, Georgia, GT, South Carolina, Clemson, Vandy

South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, A&M, Arkansas, UK

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State

If you want to know if it is feasible then find out the following:

1. The highest viewership for each of the schools involved averaged over the last couple of years should be sufficient.

2. Add the total viewer numbers for all of the 32 schools.

3. Multiply that total by 1.50 carriage fee. I figure if the mega conference is the only game across the Eastern Seaboard through Texas to the Great Plains then a bump of .20 cents in value over what the SECN presently gets is legitimate.

4. Multiply that number by 12 for the monthly charges to equal a year's revenue.

5. Divide that total by 33 (the conference gets a share for overhead).

6. Determine if that total is higher than the present SEC payout.

7. Then look at that mean and see how many schools pay their own way.

8. If the total is more than 35 million per school it is possible.

(03-12-2016 01:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 11:23 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 09:06 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 10:37 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The problem with trying to pick pieces of the ACC core is that it is pretty interconnected and interdependent at this point.

It is vastly easier to just take the whole nucleus and everything tied at the hip to it. But you have to completely rethink the conference model to accomplish that.

I'm all on board with a mega conference and on a personal note I am very impressed that you've gone to the trouble of drawing up graphs.

I'd do it with one simple rule...take all the rivals.

Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Louisville from the ACC

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor from the Big 12

I doubt we could pull Nebraska from the Big Ten though.

4 divisions of 8 with 7 division games. As many as 2 permanent rivals and a rotation using the other 3 games...one from each of the other divisions.

I like your other ideas as well.

I like this idea as well. It would look something like this:

North: Tennessee, North Carolina, Duke, WF, NC State, Virginia, VT, Louisville

East: Florida, FSU, Miami, Georgia, GT, South Carolina, Clemson, Vandy

South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, A&M, Arkansas, UK

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State

If you want to know if it is feasible then find out the following:

1. The highest viewership for each of the schools involved averaged over the last couple of years should be sufficient.

2. Add the total viewer numbers for all of the 32 schools.

3. Multiply that total by 1.50 carriage fee. I figure if the mega conference is the only game across the Eastern Seaboard through Texas to the Great Plains then a bump of .20 cents in value over what the SECN presently gets is legitimate.

4. Multiply that number by 12 for the monthly charges to equal a year's revenue.

5. Divide that total by 33 (the conference gets a share for overhead).

6. Determine if that total is higher than the present SEC payout.

7. Then look at that mean and see how many schools pay their own way.

8. If the total is more than 35 million per school it is possible.

What did you come up with?

(03-12-2016 04:23 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 01:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 11:23 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 09:06 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-11-2016 10:37 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The problem with trying to pick pieces of the ACC core is that it is pretty interconnected and interdependent at this point.

It is vastly easier to just take the whole nucleus and everything tied at the hip to it. But you have to completely rethink the conference model to accomplish that.

I'm all on board with a mega conference and on a personal note I am very impressed that you've gone to the trouble of drawing up graphs.

I'd do it with one simple rule...take all the rivals.

Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Louisville from the ACC

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor from the Big 12

I doubt we could pull Nebraska from the Big Ten though.

4 divisions of 8 with 7 division games. As many as 2 permanent rivals and a rotation using the other 3 games...one from each of the other divisions.

I like your other ideas as well.

I like this idea as well. It would look something like this:

North: Tennessee, North Carolina, Duke, WF, NC State, Virginia, VT, Louisville

East: Florida, FSU, Miami, Georgia, GT, South Carolina, Clemson, Vandy

South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, A&M, Arkansas, UK

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State

If you want to know if it is feasible then find out the following:

1. The highest viewership for each of the schools involved averaged over the last couple of years should be sufficient.

2. Add the total viewer numbers for all of the 32 schools.

3. Multiply that total by 1.50 carriage fee. I figure if the mega conference is the only game across the Eastern Seaboard through Texas to the Great Plains then a bump of .20 cents in value over what the SECN presently gets is legitimate.

4. Multiply that number by 12 for the monthly charges to equal a year's revenue.

5. Divide that total by 33 (the conference gets a share for overhead).

6. Determine if that total is higher than the present SEC payout.

7. Then look at that mean and see how many schools pay their own way.

8. If the total is more than 35 million per school it is possible.

What did you come up with?

I've been visiting grand children and doing taxes. When I have some time I might get around to it. My point however is that I don't expect it will be feasible. The TV draw for Vandy and Wake for instance simply isn't there. Vandy is at least grandfathered in. I also have some serious doubts about schools #3 & 4 from large states.

But if you can average at least what the SEC is scheduled to make this year ($35 million) then you have something. We might go large if it doesn't cost existing SEC schools money.

(03-12-2016 05:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:23 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 01:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 11:23 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 09:06 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'm all on board with a mega conference and on a personal note I am very impressed that you've gone to the trouble of drawing up graphs.

I'd do it with one simple rule...take all the rivals.

Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and Louisville from the ACC

Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor from the Big 12

I doubt we could pull Nebraska from the Big Ten though.

4 divisions of 8 with 7 division games. As many as 2 permanent rivals and a rotation using the other 3 games...one from each of the other divisions.

I like your other ideas as well.

I like this idea as well. It would look something like this:

North: Tennessee, North Carolina, Duke, WF, NC State, Virginia, VT, Louisville

East: Florida, FSU, Miami, Georgia, GT, South Carolina, Clemson, Vandy

South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, A&M, Arkansas, UK

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State

If you want to know if it is feasible then find out the following:

1. The highest viewership for each of the schools involved averaged over the last couple of years should be sufficient.

2. Add the total viewer numbers for all of the 32 schools.

3. Multiply that total by 1.50 carriage fee. I figure if the mega conference is the only game across the Eastern Seaboard through Texas to the Great Plains then a bump of .20 cents in value over what the SECN presently gets is legitimate.

4. Multiply that number by 12 for the monthly charges to equal a year's revenue.

5. Divide that total by 33 (the conference gets a share for overhead).

6. Determine if that total is higher than the present SEC payout.

7. Then look at that mean and see how many schools pay their own way.

8. If the total is more than 35 million per school it is possible.

What did you come up with?

I've been visiting grand children and doing taxes. When I have some time I might get around to it. My point however is that I don't expect it will be feasible. The TV draw for Vandy and Wake for instance simply isn't there. Vandy is at least grandfathered in. I also have some serious doubts about schools #3 & 4 from large states.

But if you can average at least what the SEC is scheduled to make this year ($35 million) then you have something. We might go large if it doesn't cost existing SEC schools money.

Yeah, it would probably be more beneficial to come up with some sort of merged networks than expanding that large. Maybe let the state schools split what their state makes from the network if you do something like that.

(03-12-2016 07:14 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:23 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 01:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 11:23 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I like this idea as well. It would look something like this:

North: Tennessee, North Carolina, Duke, WF, NC State, Virginia, VT, Louisville

East: Florida, FSU, Miami, Georgia, GT, South Carolina, Clemson, Vandy

South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, A&M, Arkansas, UK

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State

If you want to know if it is feasible then find out the following:

1. The highest viewership for each of the schools involved averaged over the last couple of years should be sufficient.

2. Add the total viewer numbers for all of the 32 schools.

3. Multiply that total by 1.50 carriage fee. I figure if the mega conference is the only game across the Eastern Seaboard through Texas to the Great Plains then a bump of .20 cents in value over what the SECN presently gets is legitimate.

4. Multiply that number by 12 for the monthly charges to equal a year's revenue.

5. Divide that total by 33 (the conference gets a share for overhead).

6. Determine if that total is higher than the present SEC payout.

7. Then look at that mean and see how many schools pay their own way.

8. If the total is more than 35 million per school it is possible.

What did you come up with?

I've been visiting grand children and doing taxes. When I have some time I might get around to it. My point however is that I don't expect it will be feasible. The TV draw for Vandy and Wake for instance simply isn't there. Vandy is at least grandfathered in. I also have some serious doubts about schools #3 & 4 from large states.

But if you can average at least what the SEC is scheduled to make this year ($35 million) then you have something. We might go large if it doesn't cost existing SEC schools money.

Yeah, it would probably be more beneficial to come up with some sort of merged networks than expanding that large. Maybe let the state schools split what their state makes from the network if you do something like that.

Lenville if you merged the Big 12 into both the SEC and ACC, swapped some duplicated state teams, and enhanced both conferences markets and content, then you could bundle the two networks across the combined footprints.

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt

ACC East:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Louisville, N.C. State

SEC Central:
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

ACC Central:
Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

ACC West:
Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Gone are Boston College, Iowa State and Wake Forest who arguably provide some of the weaker numbers of the present Big 12 and ACC combined. Those are numbers that are weak in wins, weak in attendance (except for Iowa State), weak in viewership.

Now you play everyone in your division (5 games), 1 permanent rival, and two each year from each of the other two divisions, and two cross conference games for a total of 12 games all either in conference (10) or cross conference (2). The cross conference games may rotate or be dedicated to two rivals.

Now you package the two networks across their combined footprints and offer them each for 1.50 or combined for 2.50. We make a killing.

(03-12-2016 08:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 07:14 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 05:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 04:23 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 01:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If you want to know if it is feasible then find out the following:

1. The highest viewership for each of the schools involved averaged over the last couple of years should be sufficient.

2. Add the total viewer numbers for all of the 32 schools.

3. Multiply that total by 1.50 carriage fee. I figure if the mega conference is the only game across the Eastern Seaboard through Texas to the Great Plains then a bump of .20 cents in value over what the SECN presently gets is legitimate.

4. Multiply that number by 12 for the monthly charges to equal a year's revenue.

5. Divide that total by 33 (the conference gets a share for overhead).

6. Determine if that total is higher than the present SEC payout.

7. Then look at that mean and see how many schools pay their own way.

8. If the total is more than 35 million per school it is possible.

What did you come up with?

I've been visiting grand children and doing taxes. When I have some time I might get around to it. My point however is that I don't expect it will be feasible. The TV draw for Vandy and Wake for instance simply isn't there. Vandy is at least grandfathered in. I also have some serious doubts about schools #3 & 4 from large states.

But if you can average at least what the SEC is scheduled to make this year ($35 million) then you have something. We might go large if it doesn't cost existing SEC schools money.

Yeah, it would probably be more beneficial to come up with some sort of merged networks than expanding that large. Maybe let the state schools split what their state makes from the network if you do something like that.

Lenville if you merged the Big 12 into both the SEC and ACC, swapped some duplicated state teams, and enhanced both conferences markets and content, then you could bundle the two networks across the combined footprints.

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt

ACC East:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Louisville, N.C. State

SEC Central:
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

ACC Central:
Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

ACC West:
Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Gone are Boston College, Iowa State and Wake Forest who arguably provide some of the weaker numbers of the present Big 12 and ACC combined. Those are numbers that are weak in wins, weak in attendance (except for Iowa State), weak in viewership.

Now you play everyone in your division (5 games), 1 permanent rival, and two each year from each of the other two divisions, and two cross conference games for a total of 12 games all either in conference (10) or cross conference (2). The cross conference games may rotate or be dedicated to two rivals.

Now you package the two networks across their combined footprints and offer them each for 1.50 or combined for 2.50. We make a killing.

Done. The ACC & SEC would do well if they let us take charge.

(03-12-2016 08:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Lenville if you merged the Big 12 into both the SEC and ACC, swapped some duplicated state teams, and enhanced both conferences markets and content, then you could bundle the two networks across the combined footprints.

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt

ACC East:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Louisville, N.C. State

SEC Central:
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

ACC Central:
Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

ACC West:
Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Gone are Boston College, Iowa State and Wake Forest who arguably provide some of the weaker numbers of the present Big 12 and ACC combined. Those are numbers that are weak in wins, weak in attendance (except for Iowa State), weak in viewership.

Now you play everyone in your division (5 games), 1 permanent rival, and two each year from each of the other two divisions, and two cross conference games for a total of 12 games all either in conference (10) or cross conference (2). The cross conference games may rotate or be dedicated to two rivals.

Now you package the two networks across their combined footprints and offer them each for 1.50 or combined for 2.50. We make a killing.

I really like that actually.

When talking about the price of the networks, and this is assuming a streaming model emerges, then I really think we could do better than $2.50. For example, Netflix costs me about $8 a month and I think it costs a little more now for new subscribers. The kicker is that they provide no live sports content.

Sports fans are notorious for paying more for their preferred content. Now, I'm not saying we could pull down $8 a month per subscriber, but if people are willing to pay that for movies and TV, much of which is not new content, then I think we could really be sitting pretty.

Also, even with a streaming model you can sell ads because there's no reason to leave money on the table. The events are live whether they are being streamed or not.

(03-13-2016 06:20 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 08:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Lenville if you merged the Big 12 into both the SEC and ACC, swapped some duplicated state teams, and enhanced both conferences markets and content, then you could bundle the two networks across the combined footprints.

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt

ACC East:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Louisville, N.C. State

SEC Central:
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

ACC Central:
Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

ACC West:
Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Gone are Boston College, Iowa State and Wake Forest who arguably provide some of the weaker numbers of the present Big 12 and ACC combined. Those are numbers that are weak in wins, weak in attendance (except for Iowa State), weak in viewership.

Now you play everyone in your division (5 games), 1 permanent rival, and two each year from each of the other two divisions, and two cross conference games for a total of 12 games all either in conference (10) or cross conference (2). The cross conference games may rotate or be dedicated to two rivals.

Now you package the two networks across their combined footprints and offer them each for 1.50 or combined for 2.50. We make a killing.

I really like that actually.

When talking about the price of the networks, and this is assuming a streaming model emerges, then I really think we could do better than $2.50. For example, Netflix costs me about $8 a month and I think it costs a little more now for new subscribers. The kicker is that they provide no live sports content.

Sports fans are notorious for paying more for their preferred content. Now, I'm not saying we could pull down $8 a month per subscriber, but if people are willing to pay that for movies and TV, much of which is not new content, then I think we could really be sitting pretty.

Also, even with a streaming model you can sell ads because there's no reason to leave money on the table. The events are live whether they are being streamed or not.

The cost of SECN per month could double and I wouldn't care. I remember paying $50 to watch Arkansas play a nonconference game against some unknown football team. I was so disappointed in the production quality. It was the late 2000's and here I am watching a standard definition feed with horrible announcers, those guys may have had one or two seasons of High School experience at best, and I shelled out $50 for this guarranteed win. (I won't call them that anymore after last season

I'm quite happy with the network. Only issue I see is the service provider dedicating enough channels to show all the football games at the same time as opposed to just showing the local or the one expected to have the highest ratings.

(03-13-2016 07:13 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 06:20 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 08:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Lenville if you merged the Big 12 into both the SEC and ACC, swapped some duplicated state teams, and enhanced both conferences markets and content, then you could bundle the two networks across the combined footprints.

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt

ACC East:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Louisville, N.C. State

SEC Central:
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

ACC Central:
Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

ACC West:
Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Gone are Boston College, Iowa State and Wake Forest who arguably provide some of the weaker numbers of the present Big 12 and ACC combined. Those are numbers that are weak in wins, weak in attendance (except for Iowa State), weak in viewership.

Now you play everyone in your division (5 games), 1 permanent rival, and two each year from each of the other two divisions, and two cross conference games for a total of 12 games all either in conference (10) or cross conference (2). The cross conference games may rotate or be dedicated to two rivals.

Now you package the two networks across their combined footprints and offer them each for 1.50 or combined for 2.50. We make a killing.

I really like that actually.

When talking about the price of the networks, and this is assuming a streaming model emerges, then I really think we could do better than $2.50. For example, Netflix costs me about $8 a month and I think it costs a little more now for new subscribers. The kicker is that they provide no live sports content.

Sports fans are notorious for paying more for their preferred content. Now, I'm not saying we could pull down $8 a month per subscriber, but if people are willing to pay that for movies and TV, much of which is not new content, then I think we could really be sitting pretty.

Also, even with a streaming model you can sell ads because there's no reason to leave money on the table. The events are live whether they are being streamed or not.

The cost of SECN per month could double and I wouldn't care. I remember paying $50 to watch Arkansas play a nonconference game against some unknown football team. I was so disappointed in the production quality. It was the late 2000's and here I am watching a standard definition feed with horrible announcers, those guys may have had one or two seasons of High School experience at best, and I shelled out $50 for this guarranteed win. (I won't call them that anymore after last season

I'm quite happy with the network. Only issue I see is the service provider dedicating enough channels to show all the football games at the same time as opposed to just showing the local or the one expected to have the highest ratings.

For over four decades I gave to the Greater Auburn Fund, or some other facsimile, and then bought tickets for an ungodly amount. Inflation has taken its toll. Originally our donation requirements were $500, then later $1000 and now $1500 and that is just for the privilege of buying a pair of ticket books at normal price. So you can figure that fans sitting from the bend of the end zone to the 20's and in the upper decks at Bryant Denny and Jordan Hare are all paying about $2500 a year for two tickets counting the required donation. And those are the cheap seats! Just between Auburn and Alabama that's 180,000 folks paying asinine sums for 7 games a year. Do you think they would give a hoot if their SECN cost them $60.00 a year? They can't even buy a team jersey for that! It's by far less than they would pay for concessions at the stadium for half of the season.

It's cheaper than going to Burger King or McDonald's for a regular hamburger and a drink twice a month. The SECN is a super bargain for a $1.30. So yeah if we had the top brands of the Big 12 / ACC / and SEC to jazz up content and the footprint of those three conferences even $5.00 a month would be dirt cheap.

(03-08-2016 04:13 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 03:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've been thinking about what moves from the ACC make the most sense not necessarily in terms of what works for the SEC's goals, but what environment the politics will create.

Here's what I think I know...

1) The UNC administration would probably prefer the Big Ten, but fans and big money donors want the SEC.

2) Duke and Virginia probably move wherever UNC is moving.

3) One of the reasons UNC doesn't want to move to the Big Ten is because they are scared of NC State in the SEC. The new money and exposure for the Wolfpack could possibly lead them to surpass UNC in prestige and fan support. I imagine this is why the UNC Board refused the SEC when they wanted to talk to NC State several years ago.

4) The Research Triangle is so called for a reason. They have a very close relationship and while academic associations don't depend on athletic associations, they do have a correlation.

5) Politically speaking, if UNC moved to the SEC without NC State then there could be some sort of revolt. NCSU would end up in some sort of Big 12/ACC leftover league most likely. That wouldn't be terrible for them, but it wouldn't be as good as the SEC. Worse yet, it would place NCSU on a different trajectory than UNC. That sort of move by UNC would be seen as directly harmful to the interests of NC State. For the two to be conference members so long, for NCSU to be denied the opportunity to move to the SEC at an earlier time, and then for UNC to take the spot would be quite the scandal. It would be a political nightmare. I'm not sure I can buy UNC leaving NC State behind under these circumstances.

Now, what if the SEC took UNC, Duke, and NC State? Is that the most profitable move for the SEC? No. Are those the conditions that UNC would demand so as to cover all their bases? Possibly. Now certainly UNC would rather just stay in the ACC with all their traditional rivals, but that probably isn't going to happen in the long haul. Like Texas though, UNC probably wants to take care of some of its instate rivals for political purposes if for no other reason. Virginia probably comes along as well.

Would this benefit the SEC? I think so and here are the reasons I think that.

1) While Virginia Tech would probably go to the Big Ten, the state of NC is protected from B1G invasion. Not only does the SEC get to expand its territory, but it gets to expand its hegemony.

2) Gaining 4 strong academic schools, 3 AAU, really helps accomplish some of our secondary goals.

3) We also get 4 strong basketball brands and other brands in minor sports that provide good content for the SEC Network year round.

Now let me lay out a thought process that some in the halls of ESPN management might be thinking...or at least a few ideas that make sense to me. We know the world of streaming is coming and the era of market-first expansion is pretty much done. ESPN, however, has a vested interest in storing quality ACC products in the SEC to maintain full control over them. They also might have an interest in preserving the Big 12 as a member of a Power 4. Converting the LHN into a Big 12 Network would probably be a lot more cost effective and politically expedient than trying to work out some sort of conglomeration between the Big 12 and ACC powers.

Assuming both ESPN and FOX are interested in a Power 4 rather than a Power 3 then it makes sense to strengthen the Big 12 of which FOX owns half. FOX needs to give up some 3rd Tier rights in order for a Big 12 Network to happen. I could very much see them being interested in this as long as they can continue to get half of the Big 12 rather than no piece of a conference that would no longer exist. They need content to compete. They also want content in Eastern markets. Coincidentally, a Big 12 Network needs Eastern markets and quality schools to truly be viable. Additions of Cincinnati and UConn don't get the job done in the long haul although such moves would show a strong commitment to preserving the league in the future.

So what if we go back to that great white whale of a rumor, the idea that Florida State and Clemson move to the Big 12? It makes a lot of sense for a lot of different reasons. ESPN doesn't really want to pay the SEC more than they are currently getting. They certainly don't want to do it before the contract expires in 2034. While certain schools like FSU and Clemson would be very valuable to the SEC in a streaming-centered world, the league is at the mercy of the networks for the most part. The SEC isn't going to add anyone without a pay raise...certainly not. But ESPN isn't going to be interested in maxing out the SEC either. They need cash to maintain a Big 12 and offer it a network. They want a slice of the Big Ten. They want a slice of Notre Dame. There is a convergence of interests however if the SEC conquers NC and VA but leaves other products for the Big 12. What could the SEC gain by going along with this? Perhaps the SEC looks at this as a long game...

1) The SEC doesn't want the Big Ten horning in on our territory. The ACC is already there though so someone will be. ESPN isn't going to let the SEC take 10 and really solidify its region. Would the SEC then prefer the Big 12 to occupy that spot, especially considering the partnership the two leagues have formed in recent years? I think there are a lot more benefits to that.

2) The SEC needs to up its academic credentials. We have plenty of football content and our position for the future is secure. Perhaps it's wiser to focus on shoring up our weaknesses rather than our strengths.

3) Having some sort of rivals challenge with the Big 12 will make for great television and offer interchangeable content for the SEC and Big 12 Networks. A similar deal could be done with the ACC, but there would be a lot more fluff and a lot fewer rivalries renewed. This includes the Sugar Bowl deal and the basketball challenge among other potential scheduling opportunities.

ESPN saves money by not starting an ACC Network, by splitting costs of the Big 12 with FOX, and probably by splitting costs of the Big Ten with FOX. They also preserve content by owning a Big 12 Network, storing products in the SEC, and perhaps by finally forcing Notre Dame into a conference.

That last part could look something like this.

The Big Ten already limits itself with regard to expansion targets so there aren't a heck of a lot of schools in the ACC or Big 12 it would take anyway. If they take Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Boston College, and Notre Dame then they pretty much get what they want. Why would ND join the Big Ten though? Because the ACC no longer exists and a new expanded Big 12 is so strong it isn't willing to give them a sweetheart deal.

The Big 12 could take Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Louisville, and Pittsburgh. That's a very solid 16. Notre Dame, if it wants good football competition has no real choice but to join the B1G. They could join the SEC, of course, but I truly see them being leery of the level of competition. Considering how long they've held out on independence, I don't think money is their biggest concern. If Southern exposure is their biggest concern then that's even better for ESPN. The SEC won't have a problem finding a 20th if ND gives us a call. I don't really expect that though.

SEC = 18
Big Ten = 18


Big 12 = 16
PAC 12 = 12

IF AND ONLY IF those schools went to the Big 12, I could see ND preferring the Big 12 at that point due to ND fans despising the B1G and that Big 12 would give them a lot more access to where football recruits live. Not a given and the B1G still could be the favored choice by something like 60/40 or 65/35 but I wouldn't set it in stone. Texas, Florida & Georgia are better than any B1G state for football recruits.

For efficiency I still like the 3 x 20 model where all three conferences with networks are utilized. While this alignment may not be easy to obtain I hope you can see the advantages:

PAC 20:

Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal

Iowa State, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Colorado, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah

SEC:

Clemson, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, N.C. State

Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi, Mississippi State

Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, T.C.U., Texas A&M

Big 20:

Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue

Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin


Out: Baylor, Boston College, Wake Forest, Louisville, Pittsburgh

(03-16-2016 11:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-08-2016 04:13 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 03:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've been thinking about what moves from the ACC make the most sense not necessarily in terms of what works for the SEC's goals, but what environment the politics will create.

Here's what I think I know...

1) The UNC administration would probably prefer the Big Ten, but fans and big money donors want the SEC.

2) Duke and Virginia probably move wherever UNC is moving.

3) One of the reasons UNC doesn't want to move to the Big Ten is because they are scared of NC State in the SEC. The new money and exposure for the Wolfpack could possibly lead them to surpass UNC in prestige and fan support. I imagine this is why the UNC Board refused the SEC when they wanted to talk to NC State several years ago.

4) The Research Triangle is so called for a reason. They have a very close relationship and while academic associations don't depend on athletic associations, they do have a correlation.

5) Politically speaking, if UNC moved to the SEC without NC State then there could be some sort of revolt. NCSU would end up in some sort of Big 12/ACC leftover league most likely. That wouldn't be terrible for them, but it wouldn't be as good as the SEC. Worse yet, it would place NCSU on a different trajectory than UNC. That sort of move by UNC would be seen as directly harmful to the interests of NC State. For the two to be conference members so long, for NCSU to be denied the opportunity to move to the SEC at an earlier time, and then for UNC to take the spot would be quite the scandal. It would be a political nightmare. I'm not sure I can buy UNC leaving NC State behind under these circumstances.

Now, what if the SEC took UNC, Duke, and NC State? Is that the most profitable move for the SEC? No. Are those the conditions that UNC would demand so as to cover all their bases? Possibly. Now certainly UNC would rather just stay in the ACC with all their traditional rivals, but that probably isn't going to happen in the long haul. Like Texas though, UNC probably wants to take care of some of its instate rivals for political purposes if for no other reason. Virginia probably comes along as well.

Would this benefit the SEC? I think so and here are the reasons I think that.

1) While Virginia Tech would probably go to the Big Ten, the state of NC is protected from B1G invasion. Not only does the SEC get to expand its territory, but it gets to expand its hegemony.

2) Gaining 4 strong academic schools, 3 AAU, really helps accomplish some of our secondary goals.

3) We also get 4 strong basketball brands and other brands in minor sports that provide good content for the SEC Network year round.

Now let me lay out a thought process that some in the halls of ESPN management might be thinking...or at least a few ideas that make sense to me. We know the world of streaming is coming and the era of market-first expansion is pretty much done. ESPN, however, has a vested interest in storing quality ACC products in the SEC to maintain full control over them. They also might have an interest in preserving the Big 12 as a member of a Power 4. Converting the LHN into a Big 12 Network would probably be a lot more cost effective and politically expedient than trying to work out some sort of conglomeration between the Big 12 and ACC powers.

Assuming both ESPN and FOX are interested in a Power 4 rather than a Power 3 then it makes sense to strengthen the Big 12 of which FOX owns half. FOX needs to give up some 3rd Tier rights in order for a Big 12 Network to happen. I could very much see them being interested in this as long as they can continue to get half of the Big 12 rather than no piece of a conference that would no longer exist. They need content to compete. They also want content in Eastern markets. Coincidentally, a Big 12 Network needs Eastern markets and quality schools to truly be viable. Additions of Cincinnati and UConn don't get the job done in the long haul although such moves would show a strong commitment to preserving the league in the future.

So what if we go back to that great white whale of a rumor, the idea that Florida State and Clemson move to the Big 12? It makes a lot of sense for a lot of different reasons. ESPN doesn't really want to pay the SEC more than they are currently getting. They certainly don't want to do it before the contract expires in 2034. While certain schools like FSU and Clemson would be very valuable to the SEC in a streaming-centered world, the league is at the mercy of the networks for the most part. The SEC isn't going to add anyone without a pay raise...certainly not. But ESPN isn't going to be interested in maxing out the SEC either. They need cash to maintain a Big 12 and offer it a network. They want a slice of the Big Ten. They want a slice of Notre Dame. There is a convergence of interests however if the SEC conquers NC and VA but leaves other products for the Big 12. What could the SEC gain by going along with this? Perhaps the SEC looks at this as a long game...

1) The SEC doesn't want the Big Ten horning in on our territory. The ACC is already there though so someone will be. ESPN isn't going to let the SEC take 10 and really solidify its region. Would the SEC then prefer the Big 12 to occupy that spot, especially considering the partnership the two leagues have formed in recent years? I think there are a lot more benefits to that.

2) The SEC needs to up its academic credentials. We have plenty of football content and our position for the future is secure. Perhaps it's wiser to focus on shoring up our weaknesses rather than our strengths.

3) Having some sort of rivals challenge with the Big 12 will make for great television and offer interchangeable content for the SEC and Big 12 Networks. A similar deal could be done with the ACC, but there would be a lot more fluff and a lot fewer rivalries renewed. This includes the Sugar Bowl deal and the basketball challenge among other potential scheduling opportunities.

ESPN saves money by not starting an ACC Network, by splitting costs of the Big 12 with FOX, and probably by splitting costs of the Big Ten with FOX. They also preserve content by owning a Big 12 Network, storing products in the SEC, and perhaps by finally forcing Notre Dame into a conference.

That last part could look something like this.

The Big Ten already limits itself with regard to expansion targets so there aren't a heck of a lot of schools in the ACC or Big 12 it would take anyway. If they take Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Boston College, and Notre Dame then they pretty much get what they want. Why would ND join the Big Ten though? Because the ACC no longer exists and a new expanded Big 12 is so strong it isn't willing to give them a sweetheart deal.

The Big 12 could take Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Louisville, and Pittsburgh. That's a very solid 16. Notre Dame, if it wants good football competition has no real choice but to join the B1G. They could join the SEC, of course, but I truly see them being leery of the level of competition. Considering how long they've held out on independence, I don't think money is their biggest concern. If Southern exposure is their biggest concern then that's even better for ESPN. The SEC won't have a problem finding a 20th if ND gives us a call. I don't really expect that though.

SEC = 18
Big Ten = 18


Big 12 = 16
PAC 12 = 12

IF AND ONLY IF those schools went to the Big 12, I could see ND preferring the Big 12 at that point due to ND fans despising the B1G and that Big 12 would give them a lot more access to where football recruits live. Not a given and the B1G still could be the favored choice by something like 60/40 or 65/35 but I wouldn't set it in stone. Texas, Florida & Georgia are better than any B1G state for football recruits.

For efficiency I still like the 3 x 20 model where all three conferences with networks are utilized. While this alignment may not be easy to obtain I hope you can see the advantages:

PAC 20:

Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal

Iowa State, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Colorado, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah

SEC:

Clemson, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, N.C. State

Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi, Mississippi State

Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, T.C.U., Texas A&M

Big 20:

Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue

Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin


Out: Baylor, Boston College, Wake Forest, Louisville, Pittsburgh

This gets a NO vote from me.