(04-23-2016 11:48 AM)johnbragg Wrote: (04-23-2016 11:37 AM)Kittonhead Wrote: Delany isn't that likeable but he's delivered for the B1G.
With the most revenue per school will the B1G have to expand though in 2025? I think the pressure is going to be more on the PAC and ACC to try and keep up with the B1G and SEC.
It ain't about *have to* expand. It's about *can* you expand in a way that adds value. PAC adding UNLV or Hawaii or Boise State or New Mexico doesn't do diddly to close the gap with the B1G and SEC. EVen adding Oklahoma doesn't do much. The only PAC move that closes the gap is the Texahoma PAC-16.
And now the Big Ten is in position to bring Texas and either Oklahoma or Kansas into the fold towards the end of the Big 12 GOR.
EDIT: Or UNC. Or UVA.
Quote:I like a PAC expansion move. Oklahoma and Kansas can help them athletically and are "T-Shirt" athletic schools that will drive conference network numbers. They can do it without loading into Texas which is not want the Arizona schools want.
If Oklahoma and/or Kansas are jailbreaking or waiting out the GOR, it's to join the Big Ten, not the PAC.
Quote:B12 is going to get squeezed I'm afraid. Texas may play them off with the ACC so they can keep their TV rights to themselves. TV revenue will be flat for this conference, the sick man of the P5.
The salient feature of the landscape is not that the Big 12 is noticeably weaker than the ACC. It's the gulf between the Big Ten & SEC and everybody else.
1) Expansion is driven almost exclusively by envy. The SEC signed a big contract with ESPN right before realignment. Nick Saban was interviewed as realignment was starting up and said the main reason they are expanding is because other conferences want what we have.
The SEC set the bar and the B1G, PAC, ACC all expanded to try and match it. Now the B1G has put the bar as if not higher than the SEC and the PAC/ACC especially have pressure to meet and perhaps can meet it.
2) Oklahoma would take a PAC offer. Utah and Colorado were able to get into the PAC over the jockeying that resulted in the failed Texas expansion but once in they shut the door on Texas. Oklahoma/Kansas is one way to expand without Texas in a way that brings value. The B1G is more focused on plucking ACC schools with bigger TV markets but again they don't have to expand as the market leader.
3) There are really 3 situations: B1G/SEC situation where they're at the top food chain. The PAC/ACC situation where they want to catch the B1G/SEC. Then there is the B12 where its about preservation because they are unable to increase value.
If the PAC could get Oklahoma/Kansas and the ACC a ND type deal with Texas its make it more of a 4 conference race with the B12 reduced to tweener status.
PAC (Oklahoma, Kansas)
ACC (Texas non-FB)
B12 (BYU, Colorado St, Houston, Cincinnati, UConn)
AAC (Army)
MWC (UTEP)
Resolved a bunch of issues:
1) PAC network getting off the ground.
2) A better long term home for Texas.
3) BYU finds a P5 home.
4) Army finds a conference.
5) UTEP moves west.
Its not to say the B1G wouldn't feel compelled to expand again but with the PAC/ACC putting more distance on the B12 and getting more TV $$$ as a result the attraction to move to the B1G will be far less.