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?

(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?

It depends what your objective is. To make 4 strong viable leagues? No this doesn't work. I don't think Texas and OU want to get west anymore because they would be worried about exposure. Texas A&M would be playing in eastern markets and Texas west coast markets. I don't think they would go for that, but maybe a 6 team pod helps because you probably only play 2 road games on the west coast at late times and maybe it could be negotiated they have to start by a certain time CST like 7pm or 7:30 CST(which would be a 5 or 5:30 p.m. game out there. I'm positive Texas at the least would require Texas Tech to replace KSU or ISU.

I think for college football to be better you need 4 strong leagues and that probably means Texas & OU need to anchor an expanded Big 12.

I believe we will get to four major conferences. I think it will be the result of the movement of a few other major programs. The resulting fallout will create the opportunities to change the way we view college football. I hope it does not occur too fast. I am afraid of a major upheaval all at once. This should be allowed to play out on it's own as opposed to forcing one big change. This is a very traditional sport. Let things play out. I still think the ACC survives as a major conference, with the PAC eventually causing the destruction of the Big XII as we know it. They have no other choice as their options are limited now. They have to go central time zone. JMHO.

(03-07-2016 02:32 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I believe we will get to four major conferences. I think it will be the result of the movement of a few other major programs. The resulting fallout will create the opportunities to change the way we view college football. I hope it does not occur too fast. I am afraid of a major upheaval all at once. This should be allowed to play out on it's own as opposed to forcing one big change. This is a very traditional sport. Let things play out. I still think the ACC survives as a major conference, with the PAC eventually causing the destruction of the Big XII as we know it. They have no other choice as their options are limited now. They have to go central time zone. JMHO.

The Big 12 footprint is too small for a network and there are no viable candidates for expansion. The ACC can't utilize its footprint and there aren't any viable expansion candidates for them either. IMO both of those conferences are inherently weak.

The model I presented has three competitive conferences and a buffer conference. The buffer conference is comprised of schools that do not spend what it takes to compete in the other three, but are either historically D1 or are G5 that have proven themselves worthy. I think such a conference is needed, merited, and would be accepted by those in it. After all it beats the hell out of the alternative now doesn't it?

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

(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

So you are suggesting Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State and Virginia to the SEC.
Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse and Boston College to the Big 10.
Pittsburgh, Louisville, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson and Florida State to the Big 12.

Yeah, I think we would consider doing that. We would be adding 3 AAU schools. That would give us 7. If we partnered with the Big 12 academically they would have 5 with the additions of Georgia Tech and Pitt so that would give our consortium 12.

Way back at the beginning of the thread on the Big 12 and probably in the ACC one these concepts are kicked around. I have a hidden thread on this board that precisely goes to the heart of obtaining a large AAU consortium from among Southern schools. I plan on making it appear when realignment happens again. It's the one that GTS got his big plan from. He can see it.

But yes I think that is more viable without the market model than it was with it.

(03-07-2016 02:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 02:32 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  I believe we will get to four major conferences. I think it will be the result of the movement of a few other major programs. The resulting fallout will create the opportunities to change the way we view college football. I hope it does not occur too fast. I am afraid of a major upheaval all at once. This should be allowed to play out on it's own as opposed to forcing one big change. This is a very traditional sport. Let things play out. I still think the ACC survives as a major conference, with the PAC eventually causing the destruction of the Big XII as we know it. They have no other choice as their options are limited now. They have to go central time zone. JMHO.

The Big 12 footprint is too small for a network and there are no viable candidates for expansion. The ACC can't utilize its footprint and there aren't any viable expansion candidates for them either. IMO both of those conferences are inherently weak.

The model I presented has three competitive conferences and a buffer conference. The buffer conference is comprised of schools that do not spend what it takes to compete in the other three, but are either historically D1 or are G5 that have proven themselves worthy. I think such a conference is needed, merited, and would be accepted by those in it. After all it beats the hell out of the alternative now doesn't it?

I think the Big XII will end up being a buffer conference for D1 schools left behind after the moves by schools like OU.

(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?

Put ND as affiliated with the "New Conference", not as a football member.

No to ND to the Big Ten. Ever.

(03-08-2016 08:34 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(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?

Put ND as affiliated with the "New Conference", not as a football member.

No to ND to the Big Ten. Ever.

Trade Georgia Tech for ND. That'd be a pretty good set up.

(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.

(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?

For the B1G, swap Georgia Tech for Notre Dame. ND will stay independent if at all possible and they could do so by getting a deal from the New Conference like they have with the ACC today. The B1G seems to be past the ND fascination. Even if ND was available, the B1G might decide instead to add the Atlanta media market and Georgia recruiting market by picking up Georgia Tech, one of the top 5 engineering schools in the US.

The biggest question is whether Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas really want to go west. With the B1G and SEC at 18, the B1G would at least offer spots to two of the three and the SEC would certainly try for at least Oklahoma. I think the chance to keep playing most of their games closer to home, and getting the bigger SEC/B1G payouts will keep them out of the PAC.

I agree, though, that regardless of how the final realignment shakes out, there's almost certainly going to be one or two 'leftovers' conference full of good schools with good athletic programs that, for one reason or another, just don't make the cut for the SEC, B1G or PAC.

(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

About UNC. The assumption that UVA and Duke would follow UNC might be misplaced. UVA thinks of itself as a public Ivy League type school and Duke is one of the top academic institutions in the US. Likewise, Georgia Tech is a top 5 engineering school. I think it's very possible, if realignment seems inevitable, that UVA, Duke and Georgia Tech go to UNC and say "We want to go to the B1G, the better academic conference, many of whom are our peer institutions," - and the three of them push UNC that direction. I don't think they will blindly follow UNC to the SEC just because UNC fans might prefer the SEC over the B1G, when their administrations would almost certainly prefer the B1G for academic reasons.

Regarding Syracuse and Boston College. The B1G will not take them. They are neither academic or athletic compelling additions. Both will wind up, as JR has them, in some sort of island of misfit toys conference full of teams that didn't make the cut for the SEC, B1G or PAC.

(03-09-2016 01:00 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  About UNC. The assumption that UVA and Duke would follow UNC might be misplaced. UVA thinks of itself as a public Ivy League type school and Duke is one of the top academic institutions in the US. Likewise, Georgia Tech is a top 5 engineering school. I think it's very possible, if realignment seems inevitable, that UVA, Duke and Georgia Tech go to UNC and say "We want to go to the B1G, the better academic conference, many of whom are our peer institutions," - and the three of them push UNC that direction. I don't think they will blindly follow UNC to the SEC just because UNC fans might prefer the SEC over the B1G, when their administrations would almost certainly prefer the B1G for academic reasons.

Regarding Syracuse and Boston College. The B1G will not take them. They are neither academic or athletic compelling additions. Both will wind up, as JR has them, in some sort of island of misfit toys conference full of teams that didn't make the cut for the SEC, B1G or PAC.

The issue with UVA and Duke is this...

1) I doubt that Duke is getting picked up by anyone unless UNC wants them in as a combo. In that scenario, Duke really isn't in a strong position to bargain.

2) Both UVA and UNC consider themselves Public Ivies, but the Big Ten is more of a research based conference. UVA and UNC don't really fit the mold actually other than the fact they are AAU. They don't need the CIC, which is highly overrated anyway.

3) It's not that I couldn't see UNC and UVA in the B1G, but they will both fear their in-state rivals in the SEC with newfound exposure and money. Oddly enough, Virginia Tech is actually more of an institutional fit for the B1G.

I focused in on UNC because they are the linchpin with regard to whether the ACC stays together. If UNC isn't leaving then the others don't have much of a reason to leave either...other than schools like FSU and Clemson.

As for Georgia Tech, I'm not sure they want to travel that far outside their region.

Of course, I could be wrong in all this.

How about a P4 1/2? FSU, Clemson, GT, VT, Louisville & Miami to the Big 12(16). Break into 2 divisions & play an 8 game schedule, 7 division plus 1 rotating crossover.

East- FSU, Clemson, GT, VT, Miami, Louisville, WV & TCU

West- Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas St & Iowa State

NC, Duke, Virginia, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, NC State, BC & WF stay in the ACC with a partial ND. They add Georgetown, Villanova, Providence, Seton Hall & St John's for all but football.

(03-09-2016 09:23 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How about a P4 1/2? FSU, Clemson, GT, VT, Louisville & Miami to the Big 12(16). Break into 2 divisions & play an 8 game schedule, 7 division plus 1 rotating crossover.

East- FSU, Clemson, GT, VT, Miami, Louisville, WV & TCU

West- Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, TT, Baylor, Kansas, Kansas St & Iowa State

NC, Duke, Virginia, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, NC State, BC & WF stay in the ACC with a partial ND. They add Georgetown, Villanova, Providence, Seton Hall & St John's for all but football.

That 6 should allow the Big 12 to get a network and have a very competitive tv deal for tier 1 & 2. I also think this Big 12 would be best for college football overall, not that I necessarily think tobacco road would stick in a league like that.

(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?

Texas would want TTU instead of KSU (most likely since the PAC would have KU already) or ISU, and both might be out for a 3rd TX school (Houston makes a lot of sense). In the end Texas will get at least 1, maybe 2, additional TX schools in that league.

Let me revisit my theory...

I don't think UNC pulls the trigger on the B1G. They could have gone already along with UVA if they really wanted to do that. I think they have too many reasons not to and one of them is their connection with NC State. Securing the future of itself, Duke, and NC State in the SEC solves a lot of problems and allays a lot of concerns both politically and financially. It probably also makes ESPN happy.

Perhaps though, UVA is not as interested in that prospect as UNC is. They have political and financial concerns of their own, but I remember Mr. SEC talking about UVA trying to work on getting UVA and VT into the B1G a few years back. I bring it up because I saw the idea mentioned on Twitter again yesterday. Securing itself and VT in the B1G is probably attractive to all parties.

Let's assume for sake of argument that Notre Dame wants Southern exposure more than really anything else and would join a league that presented them with that option as long as there was nowhere else to go. The key factor in forcing ND to join a league is that all the Power leagues have to be strong enough and prosperous enough that adding ND as a partial actually hurts their brand more than helping it.

So enter ESPN with their plans...

Both ESPN and FOX still want to save the Big 12. FOX wants Eastern content. The LHN could probably more easily be converted into a Big 12 Network than an ACC Network. Texas probably doesn't want to join the ACC and travel half way across the country to play schools it doesn't really care about playing, but would probably be more amicable to adding a few ACC schools that could solidify the Big 12's future.

What does the SEC need? What saves the Big 12? What forces Notre Dame into a conference where its rights can be secured by ESPN? What can the B1G do in response?

The B1G takes Virginia, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, and UConn. What the B1G accomplishes is the domination of the NY market. They conquer new territory in VA. They possess, unequivocally, the best basketball league in the nation.

The Big 12 lands Florida State, Clemson, Louisville, and Pittsburgh. The LHN is converted to a Big 12 Network. FOX gets their content. ESPN gets to keep more content.

What ESPN comes up with and the SEC goes along with is this...

North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, Miami, and Notre Dame. The SEC gains several strong brands and new territory. They up their academic credentials. ESPN keeps key content and lands the white whale. The SEC takes GT to keep them from the B1G. Miami offers access to a mostly untapped market.

Thoughts?

What would the SEC gain by taking 3 Carolina teams? I think that NC would separate from NC State if they were going to a better conference. For example if NC went to the SEC then they would let NC State go to the Big 12.

NC, Duke & Virginia will stick together. GT would stick with FSU & Clemson if they moved.

If the ACC were to split up I could see this scenario play out. NC, Duke, Virginia & Syracuse to the B1G. FSU, Clemson, GT & VT to the SEC. Miami, NC State, Louisville & Pittsburgh to the Big 12. If ND also joined the Big 12 then BC could be 16. ND will not join the B1G & the SEC doesn't offer northeast presence, this Big 12 would offer them what the ACC does but as a full member. If 18 then two from Cincinnati, UCONN, Houston, BYU, Colorado State, ECU, USF, UCF, Temple & Memphis.

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

Central: Alabama, Tennessee, VT, Auburn, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

West: LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, A&M, Ole Miss, Miss State

Big 18
East: Notre Dame, Louisville, TCU, Pittsburgh, NC State, Miami, BC, WV

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

B1G
East: Penn State, NC, Duke, Virginia, Syracuse, Maryland

Central: Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Rutgers, Illinois, Northwestern

West: Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Indiana, Purdue

The possible scenarios are endless.

(03-10-2016 08:44 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The B1G takes Virginia, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, and UConn. What the B1G accomplishes is the domination of the NY market. They conquer new territory in VA. They possess, unequivocally, the best basketball league in the nation.

The Big 12 lands Florida State, Clemson, Louisville, and Pittsburgh. The LHN is converted to a Big 12 Network. FOX gets their content. ESPN gets to keep more content.

What ESPN comes up with and the SEC goes along with is this...

North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, Miami, and Notre Dame. The SEC gains several strong brands and new territory. They up their academic credentials. ESPN keeps key content and lands the white whale. The SEC takes GT to keep them from the B1G. Miami offers access to a mostly untapped market.

Thoughts?

UVA trying to get UVA and VT into the B1G? Man I wish Mr. SEC still posted somewhere; here, a poorly updated blog....something would be nice. Anyway, I just don't see the B1G adding a non-AAU school with the current group of presidents and their voting pattern. IF anything, I think the B1G will repeat it's expansion plans the same as when Rutgers and Maryland were added; have one school waiting in the wings (RU) and when a second school finally agrees to expansion (UMD) announce them both at the same time.

Your picks make sense for the B12 if the LHN is in fact converted into the B12N. This summer could be an all or nothing depending on how Texas decides on the LHN conversion. If LHN is converted, then I could see the B12 grabbing a FSU, Clemson or a BYU in a move to 12 or 14 depending on what the numbers look like. That move would also devalue the ACC and open them up to more deflections. If the LHN remains the LHN, then I expect OU to leave and possibly one more, WVU if OU goes to the SEC, and expansion is dead for quite some time.

Now I just don't ever see the SEC adding six more members, especially if three schools (UNC/NCSt/Duke) are from the same new state, two (GT/Miami) are from states we already collect the maximum subscription fees for but don't add to Tier 1 or Tier 2 rights and Notre Dame who has no need to give up football independence unless the playoffs consist of conference champs only.

What I could see unfolding is LHN transitions into the B12N. B12 goes shopping and adds four: FSU, BYU, Clemson, and Cincy. ACC is devalued. I'll say ESPN tries to adjust the payout to a lower amount which causes more deflections. I think UVA bounces to the B1G and brings GT as VT doesn't get the votes needed due to lack of AAU membership. At which point VT joins the SEC at 15. The remaining ACC schools (BC, WF, Pitt, 'cuse, L'ville, UM, UNC, NCSt, & Duke) plus ND look at their options and decide their landing spots. SEC goes to 18 with the research triangle (UNC, Duke, NC State), the B12 goes to 16 by adding value (L'ville), markets(Syracuse) and rivalries (Boise State (per BYU's request), Pitt). Notre Dame continues to play football at the highest level but moves all other sports back to the Big East/AAC or equivolent.

(03-10-2016 09:40 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(03-10-2016 08:44 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The B1G takes Virginia, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, and UConn. What the B1G accomplishes is the domination of the NY market. They conquer new territory in VA. They possess, unequivocally, the best basketball league in the nation.

The Big 12 lands Florida State, Clemson, Louisville, and Pittsburgh. The LHN is converted to a Big 12 Network. FOX gets their content. ESPN gets to keep more content.

What ESPN comes up with and the SEC goes along with is this...

North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, Miami, and Notre Dame. The SEC gains several strong brands and new territory. They up their academic credentials. ESPN keeps key content and lands the white whale. The SEC takes GT to keep them from the B1G. Miami offers access to a mostly untapped market.

Thoughts?

UVA trying to get UVA and VT into the B1G? Man I wish Mr. SEC still posted somewhere; here, a poorly updated blog....something would be nice. Anyway, I just don't see the B1G adding a non-AAU school with the current group of presidents and their voting pattern. IF anything, I think the B1G will repeat it's expansion plans the same as when Rutgers and Maryland were added; have one school waiting in the wings (RU) and when a second school finally agrees to expansion (UMD) announce them both at the same time.

Your picks make sense for the B12 if the LHN is in fact converted into the B12N. This summer could be an all or nothing depending on how Texas decides on the LHN conversion. If LHN is converted, then I could see the B12 grabbing a FSU, Clemson or a BYU in a move to 12 or 14 depending on what the numbers look like. That move would also devalue the ACC and open them up to more deflections. If the LHN remains the LHN, then I expect OU to leave and possibly one more, WVU if OU goes to the SEC, and expansion is dead for quite some time.

Now I just don't ever see the SEC adding six more members, especially if three schools (UNC/NCSt/Duke) are from the same new state, two (GT/Miami) are from states we already collect the maximum subscription fees for but don't add to Tier 1 or Tier 2 rights and Notre Dame who has no need to give up football independence unless the playoffs consist of conference champs only.

What I could see unfolding is LHN transitions into the B12N. B12 goes shopping and adds four: FSU, BYU, Clemson, and Cincy. ACC is devalued. I'll say ESPN tries to adjust the payout to a lower amount which causes more deflections. I think UVA bounces to the B1G and brings GT as VT doesn't get the votes needed due to lack of AAU membership. At which point VT joins the SEC at 15. The remaining ACC schools (BC, WF, Pitt, 'cuse, L'ville, UM, UNC, NCSt, & Duke) plus ND look at their options and decide their landing spots. SEC goes to 18 with the research triangle (UNC, Duke, NC State), the B12 goes to 16 by adding value (L'ville), markets(Syracuse) and rivalries (Boise State (per BYU's request), Pitt). Notre Dame continues to play football at the highest level but moves all other sports back to the Big East/AAC or equivolent.

If the ACC is breached then I too believe we go to 18, but not with the same sets of choices you give.

If UVa, UNC & Duke go to the Big 10 I expect the 4th to depend upon whether this set of moves takes us to a 4 champs only playoff. If it does then I expect N.D. to be the 4th to the Big 10. If not they may or may not join a conference. Then perhaps the Big 10 goes after Georgia Tech.

If so the SEC will take Virginia Tech and N.C. State for the markets and Florida State and Clemson for the brands. We are moving toward a more content driven pay model and that lone justifies the moves.

If U.N.C., Duke, and Virginia decide to come to the SEC I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Notre Dame's interest if again it is champs only. Without an ACC the SEC gets N.D. into Texas, Florida, and Georgia while giving them the lacrosse and basketball and Olympic sports they also like with their continued affiliation with the aforementioned. If they don't express interest then we could go after Florida State or Miami, or Georgia Tech for another AAU school.

What I don't see however is movement to 20 by anyone.