(08-01-2016 07:06 PM)L-yes Wrote:  Does Mickey really want to pay premiums for the Ames Iowa, BFE Texas and Morganhole backwater markets? Like I said, you can pay for the brands you want and give peanuts to the markets that are filler like Manhattan, Kansas. The B12 is a problem child that needs to be put to sleep.

You're not paying a premium if:
1) You consolidate your power over the most important parts of CFB, creating total dominance of the market
2) You expand the playoff, giving you a bevy of new high profile high viewership games
3) You stabilize the landscape to provide a solid foundation to avoid a major asset or assets evaporating Big East style


It's pretty trivial for ESPN to form a megaconference at this point. They have all the assets. The only question is who could feasibly be reshuffled in their best interests?

Megaconference #1: ACC + SEC + Big 12 TX/OU teams

Swing Teams: Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Pittsburgh, UCONN, Nebraska, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State

Megaconference #2: Pac-12 + B1G


If Fuhrer Mickey allows the most logical realignment to take place, then you'd end up with:

ACC + SEC + Big 12 + Nebraska "The ESPN/ABC Megaconference"
Pac-12 + B1G + ND + Cuse + BC + UCONN "The FOX/NBC Megaconference"

Fleshing out the ACC in this future you get:

#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

You'd have four television channels (isn't that convienent ... ESPN already has two for the SECN and is adding at least one more for the ACCN...) thusly:

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

We can tentatively call this "The Big Southeastern Atlantic Conference" or Big SAC just for the lulz.

(08-02-2016 07:36 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 09:14 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 08:19 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 07:31 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 07:23 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Lets say 2-4 teams leave the B12. Due to the GOR they leave their TV rights. Not having enough teams to satisfy their current TV contract they bring in 4 replacements. Wouldn't this change in conference membership kick in a clause in the contract for the networks to renegotiate the contract so they could pay them pennies on the dollar? What value would the GOR fall under for the departing schools? Would the remainders have a legal case against the departing schools?

The Big 12 has ten members. This is something I haven't seen mentioned anywhere else. The grant of rights from the universities is to the conference, not the member institutions. In order for a conference to exist as recognized by the NCAA it must have a minimum of 8 members. If the B12 lost 3 members it would no longer be a college athletics conference with NCAA sanction. If it is dissolved by attrition I don't see how the GORs would be enforceable or have any weight to them at all.

Except precedent suggests the NCAA would give the remaining teams sufficient time to replace departing members in order that the conference not be resolved. Assuming any new members would grant their rights, then the departing members rights would remain with the B12.

What precedent? The Big East was a hybrid conference that had plenty of members even after the ACC raid.

The WAC is the most obvious example. Between 2012 and 2013 it lost all of its members except New Mexico St. The NCAA grandfathered the conference and let it rebuild with seven new members.

The American relied on similar grandfathering. After it lost the C7, it was down to three long term members. Because it was an existing conference (as a continuation of the old Big East), it was allowed to backfill and maintain its status.

Here's an example of clauses written in these contracts that effectively terminate the television deals due to attrition in the ranks;

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...ng-sources

(08-02-2016 11:48 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 07:06 PM)L-yes Wrote:  Does Mickey really want to pay premiums for the Ames Iowa, BFE Texas and Morganhole backwater markets? Like I said, you can pay for the brands you want and give peanuts to the markets that are filler like Manhattan, Kansas. The B12 is a problem child that needs to be put to sleep.

You're not paying a premium if:
1) You consolidate your power over the most important parts of CFB, creating total dominance of the market
2) You expand the playoff, giving you a bevy of new high profile high viewership games
3) You stabilize the landscape to provide a solid foundation to avoid a major asset or assets evaporating Big East style


It's pretty trivial for ESPN to form a megaconference at this point. They have all the assets. The only question is who could feasibly be reshuffled in their best interests?

Megaconference #1: ACC + SEC + Big 12 TX/OU teams

Swing Teams: Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, Pittsburgh, UCONN, Nebraska, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State

Megaconference #2: Pac-12 + B1G


If Fuhrer Mickey allows the most logical realignment to take place, then you'd end up with:

ACC + SEC + Big 12 + Nebraska "The ESPN/ABC Megaconference"
Pac-12 + B1G + ND + Cuse + BC + UCONN "The FOX/NBC Megaconference"

Fleshing out the ACC in this future you get:

#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

You'd have four television channels (isn't that convienent ... ESPN already has two for the SECN and is adding at least one more for the ACCN...) thusly:

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

We can tentatively call this "The Big Southeastern Atlantic Conference" or Big SAC just for the lulz.

As I've stated previously, where I see this going beginning with the SEC and ACC first under the ESPN umbrella is a unifying structure that will ultimately supplant the NCAA. The shift to a professional type structure where you have AFC/NFC type relationships between the power conferences that create premium content for the conference networks and the most premium content possible for the revenue producing sports.

You don't need to pay $30,000,000 to Ames, Iowa for that.

(08-02-2016 12:00 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 07:36 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 09:14 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 08:19 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 07:31 PM)L-yes Wrote:  The Big 12 has ten members. This is something I haven't seen mentioned anywhere else. The grant of rights from the universities is to the conference, not the member institutions. In order for a conference to exist as recognized by the NCAA it must have a minimum of 8 members. If the B12 lost 3 members it would no longer be a college athletics conference with NCAA sanction. If it is dissolved by attrition I don't see how the GORs would be enforceable or have any weight to them at all.

Except precedent suggests the NCAA would give the remaining teams sufficient time to replace departing members in order that the conference not be resolved. Assuming any new members would grant their rights, then the departing members rights would remain with the B12.

What precedent? The Big East was a hybrid conference that had plenty of members even after the ACC raid.

The WAC is the most obvious example. Between 2012 and 2013 it lost all of its members except New Mexico St. The NCAA grandfathered the conference and let it rebuild with seven new members.

The American relied on similar grandfathering. After it lost the C7, it was down to three long term members. Because it was an existing conference (as a continuation of the old Big East), it was allowed to backfill and maintain its status.

Here's an example of clauses written in these contracts that effectively terminate the television deals due to attrition in the ranks;

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...ng-sources

What does that have to do with whether a conference could continue to exist?

And that isn't "clauses written in these contracts", suggesting all such media contracts have them. That is a clause written into this one contract because of special circumstances.

(08-02-2016 02:37 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 12:00 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 07:36 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 09:14 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 08:19 PM)ken d Wrote:  Except precedent suggests the NCAA would give the remaining teams sufficient time to replace departing members in order that the conference not be resolved. Assuming any new members would grant their rights, then the departing members rights would remain with the B12.

What precedent? The Big East was a hybrid conference that had plenty of members even after the ACC raid.

The WAC is the most obvious example. Between 2012 and 2013 it lost all of its members except New Mexico St. The NCAA grandfathered the conference and let it rebuild with seven new members.

The American relied on similar grandfathering. After it lost the C7, it was down to three long term members. Because it was an existing conference (as a continuation of the old Big East), it was allowed to backfill and maintain its status.

Here's an example of clauses written in these contracts that effectively terminate the television deals due to attrition in the ranks;

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...ng-sources

What does that have to do with whether a conference could continue to exist?

And that isn't "clauses written in these contracts", suggesting all such media contracts have them. That is a clause written into this one contract because of special circumstances.

You don't think the networks protect themselves from this kind of exposure? LOL

(08-02-2016 12:06 PM)L-yes Wrote:  You don't need to pay $30,000,000 to Ames, Iowa for that.

Everybody will still make more money anyway. And if you don't, I hope you are willing to pay FAR more money than that to pay off all the politicians to go along with it. Because if you think state and federal political critters won't get involved you're fooling yourself.

(08-02-2016 02:59 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 02:37 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 12:00 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 07:36 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 09:14 PM)L-yes Wrote:  What precedent? The Big East was a hybrid conference that had plenty of members even after the ACC raid.

The WAC is the most obvious example. Between 2012 and 2013 it lost all of its members except New Mexico St. The NCAA grandfathered the conference and let it rebuild with seven new members.

The American relied on similar grandfathering. After it lost the C7, it was down to three long term members. Because it was an existing conference (as a continuation of the old Big East), it was allowed to backfill and maintain its status.

Here's an example of clauses written in these contracts that effectively terminate the television deals due to attrition in the ranks;

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...ng-sources

What does that have to do with whether a conference could continue to exist?

And that isn't "clauses written in these contracts", suggesting all such media contracts have them. That is a clause written into this one contract because of special circumstances.

You don't think the networks protect themselves from this kind of exposure? LOL

Well, you can laugh all you want. It doesn't make your "example" relevant to the question of whether the NCAA would change the status of the conference.

As far as what the networks do to protect themselves, it would appear they didn't do much of a job protecting themselves in the B12 case. And I'm pretty sure there is no such clause in, say, the B1G contract. The way the networks protect themselves is largely by insisting on having a GoR in place if they have concerns about potential defections. I suspect the language in the AAC contract is unusual, if not unique.

It would be interesting to see what the Big XII media contracts look like, but I don't think anyone outside the conference or the media partners know what language it contains. It isn't a public document.

(08-02-2016 03:12 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 02:59 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 02:37 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 12:00 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 07:36 AM)orangefan Wrote:  The WAC is the most obvious example. Between 2012 and 2013 it lost all of its members except New Mexico St. The NCAA grandfathered the conference and let it rebuild with seven new members.

The American relied on similar grandfathering. After it lost the C7, it was down to three long term members. Because it was an existing conference (as a continuation of the old Big East), it was allowed to backfill and maintain its status.

Here's an example of clauses written in these contracts that effectively terminate the television deals due to attrition in the ranks;

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...ng-sources

What does that have to do with whether a conference could continue to exist?

And that isn't "clauses written in these contracts", suggesting all such media contracts have them. That is a clause written into this one contract because of special circumstances.

You don't think the networks protect themselves from this kind of exposure? LOL

Well, you can laugh all you want. It doesn't make your "example" relevant to the question of whether the NCAA would change the status of the conference.

As far as what the networks do to protect themselves, it would appear they didn't do much of a job protecting themselves in the B12 case. And I'm pretty sure there is no such clause in, say, the B1G contract. The way the networks protect themselves is largely by insisting on having a GoR in place if they have concerns about potential defections. I suspect the language in the AAC contract is unusual, if not unique.

It would be interesting to see what the Big XII media contracts look like, but I don't think anyone outside the conference or the media partners know what language it contains. It isn't a public document.

I suppose we'll find out soon.

I can't claim at all to have any insider knowledge, but those that think ESPN is free to do as it will with conferences are forgetting they are not the only player in televising games as evidenced by the recent reports saying Fox would gladly pick up the B12 conference should ESPN decide not to.

There are probably other dynamics in play, but I don't think ESPN has the clout or leverage that some think.

(08-01-2016 07:09 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 05:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 05:13 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  The SEC already rejected the OU/OSU combo.

There is some talk that Texas wants a campus in Houston. That is the reason they are allegedly promoting Houston (political favors from Houston and state government).

To your point, ESPN/Fox can give the existing 10 teams an extra $2 million per year (same amount they would have made with expansion) for a lot less than the $60-$100 million the additions might cost.

Except when we rejected the OU/OSU combo the first time we thought all options were on the table. Now if the Big 12 is the final set of options and Texas heads your way or to the PAC the last remaining prize is OU. O.S.U. is the 3rd best funded athletic department in the Big 12. They are broad based in sports including basketball which we need. And that allows us to double dip in the DFW market with annual games. So Wolfman, I wouldn't rule it out.

My understanding is that the SEC has a prohibition against two universities in the same state being admitted. AU/Bama and Vandy/UT are the only exceptions due to their being founding members. And to think, Tulane willingly left the SEC. My goodness.

Then you have a very common misunderstanding. There is no prohibition against second schools from states even now. When the SEC needed to open its renegotiation clause for the last big pay boost with Missouri and A&M we had to meet the terms of that clause which required two new markets. Slive promised the presidents that those restrictions would be lifted for future expansion which could include an instate rival provided their content value was a plus for the conference.

The "gentlemen's agreement" is a misstatement of Slive's request to activate the renegotiation clause in 2012. Like so many things it has taken on a life of its on because of idiots on the internet. So much so, that now it is only the AD's and University Presidents who are likely to know the truth.

Now that the market model is beginning to fade, content will be the reason for most additions in the future because content will always sell regardless of the pay model.

(08-03-2016 08:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 07:09 PM)L-yes Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 05:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-01-2016 05:13 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  The SEC already rejected the OU/OSU combo.

There is some talk that Texas wants a campus in Houston. That is the reason they are allegedly promoting Houston (political favors from Houston and state government).

To your point, ESPN/Fox can give the existing 10 teams an extra $2 million per year (same amount they would have made with expansion) for a lot less than the $60-$100 million the additions might cost.

Except when we rejected the OU/OSU combo the first time we thought all options were on the table. Now if the Big 12 is the final set of options and Texas heads your way or to the PAC the last remaining prize is OU. O.S.U. is the 3rd best funded athletic department in the Big 12. They are broad based in sports including basketball which we need. And that allows us to double dip in the DFW market with annual games. So Wolfman, I wouldn't rule it out.

My understanding is that the SEC has a prohibition against two universities in the same state being admitted. AU/Bama and Vandy/UT are the only exceptions due to their being founding members. And to think, Tulane willingly left the SEC. My goodness.

Then you have a very common misunderstanding. There is no prohibition against second schools from states even now. When the SEC needed to open its renegotiation clause for the last big pay boost with Missouri and A&M we had to meet the terms of that clause which required two new markets. Slive promised the presidents that those restrictions would be lifted for future expansion which could include an instate rival provided their content value was a plus for the conference.

The "gentlemen's agreement" is a misstatement of Slive's request to activate the renegotiation clause in 2012. Like so many things it has taken on a life of its on because of idiots on the internet. So much so, that now it is only the AD's and University Presidents who are likely to know the truth.

Now that the market model is beginning to fade, content will be the reason for most additions in the future because content will always sell regardless of the pay model.

To the point about content, it's why I think we'll see the SEC/ACC Networks and conferences have a more structured relationship/alliance across all sports. It's a winner for everyone.