Fox and ESPN, in an effort to minimize extra contract payouts, concoct a scheme and make their pitches to the rich conferences. The pitch involves some concessions by the rich, but ultimately most parties come out ahead.

Instead of passively conceding to legal obligations and paying $25M per team to B-12 for 2-4 additional squads, they find homes for all B12 members in the other 4 rich conferences. This guarantees pay stability or raises for most legacy B12 teams.

B-10
----

Texas: They thumb their noses at A&M and go to B-10.
LHN + B-10 prorated pay = B-10 full payout. Texas gets a pro-rated B-10 payout until their Longhorn deal expires. After LHN expiry, full B-10 $.

Oklahoma: avoid perceived tougher CFB gauntlet thru SEC, renew Nebraska rivalry.

K-State: geographic link to Okla/Tex, strong FB tradition.

Iowa St: geography makes sense, strong bball squad.

SEC
----
Kansas: instant rivalry w Kentucky, duopoly of SEC hoops.

Ok St: cultural fit, strong FB and BB

WV: cultural fit, strong FB and BB. (behavioral clause for fans)

ACC
----
Houston, TCU, Baylor, Tex Tech

Four teams in Texas, all successful in FB, BB, or both.

P-12
-----
status quo

END RESULTS:
Houston get country club invite.
Networks don't pay much more.
3 huge conferences each run their conglomerates like two 8 or 9 team sub-conferences.

The poor stay poor.

You are late to this. Lol

Why would the SEC do this exactly? Not really much incentive for them other than Kansas basketball, which doesn't exactly move the meter.

I think at least one of UT or OU would have to go to the SEC for SEC to agree. I could see SEC making a play for both. Also, remember that the LHN is an ESPN product. ESPN owns both the ACC and SEC totally. That makes it more likely that UT ends up in the SEC.

This is the essence of why these scenarios don't work.

They all assume that one P5 gets all the best remaining brands while the other 3 inexplicably agree to settle for the leftovers and take the political baggage off their hands to make it possible

The answer is "nope"

(08-29-2016 08:42 PM)Hashtag Wrote:  Fox and ESPN, in an effort to minimize extra contract payouts, concoct a scheme and make their pitches to the rich conferences. The pitch involves some concessions by the rich, but ultimately most parties come out ahead.

Instead of passively conceding to legal obligations and paying $25M per team to B-12 for 2-4 additional squads, they find homes for all B12 members in the other 4 rich conferences. This guarantees pay stability or raises for most legacy B12 teams.

B-10
----

Texas: They thumb their noses at A&M and go to B-10.
LHN + B-10 prorated pay = B-10 full payout. Texas gets a pro-rated B-10 payout until their Longhorn deal expires. After LHN expiry, full B-10 $.

Oklahoma: avoid perceived tougher CFB gauntlet thru SEC, renew Nebraska rivalry.

K-State: geographic link to Okla/Tex, strong FB tradition.

Iowa St: geography makes sense, strong bball squad.

SEC
----
Kansas: instant rivalry w Kentucky, duopoly of SEC hoops.

Ok St: cultural fit, strong FB and BB

WV: cultural fit, strong FB and BB. (behavioral clause for fans)

ACC
----
Houston, TCU, Baylor, Tex Tech

Four teams in Texas, all successful in FB, BB, or both.

P-12
-----
status quo

END RESULTS:
Houston get country club invite.
Networks don't pay much more.
3 huge conferences each run their conglomerates like two 8 or 9 team sub-conferences.

The poor stay poor.

Why would the ACC do that?

(08-29-2016 09:03 PM)Justme Wrote:  I think at least one of UT or OU would have to go to the SEC for SEC to agree. I could see SEC making a play for both. Also, remember that the LHN is an ESPN product. ESPN owns both the ACC and SEC totally. That makes it more likely that UT ends up in the SEC.

Yeah. No way they would settle for less than one of UT/OK.

(08-29-2016 08:42 PM)Hashtag Wrote:  Fox and ESPN, in an effort to minimize extra contract payouts, concoct a scheme and make their pitches to the rich conferences. The pitch involves some concessions by the rich, but ultimately most parties come out ahead.

Instead of passively conceding to legal obligations and paying $25M per team to B-12 for 2-4 additional squads, they find homes for all B12 members in the other 4 rich conferences. This guarantees pay stability or raises for most legacy B12 teams.

B-10
----

Texas: They thumb their noses at A&M and go to B-10.
LHN + B-10 prorated pay = B-10 full payout. Texas gets a pro-rated B-10 payout until their Longhorn deal expires. After LHN expiry, full B-10 $.

Oklahoma: avoid perceived tougher CFB gauntlet thru SEC, renew Nebraska rivalry.

K-State: geographic link to Okla/Tex, strong FB tradition.

Iowa St: geography makes sense, strong bball squad.

SEC
----
Kansas: instant rivalry w Kentucky, duopoly of SEC hoops.

Ok St: cultural fit, strong FB and BB

WV: cultural fit, strong FB and BB. (behavioral clause for fans)

ACC
----
Houston, TCU, Baylor, Tex Tech

Four teams in Texas, all successful in FB, BB, or both.

P-12
-----
status quo

END RESULTS:
Houston get country club invite.
Networks don't pay much more.
3 huge conferences each run their conglomerates like two 8 or 9 team sub-conferences.

The poor stay poor.

This is nuts in so many ways. It's much more likely KU goes to the B1G and KState to SEC. OU could go either way.

The ACC would much prefer UConn over any of those 2nd or 3rd tier Texas schools. I doubt that they'd want any Texas school but UT and A&M. More likely the P12 moves into Texas with those schools and pairs them with AZ schools in a division.

Not much in that scenario for the ACC or SEC. Kansas State to the B1G is unlikely, especially without Kansas. And why is the PAC sitting out a golden opportunity to bulk up? We already know the league has room to grow and is interested in some B12 schools.

A 20-team conference would be a scheduling and revenue nightmare and I don't see the appeal for fans.

I know my opinion is in the minority here, but I don't think the Big 12 is going to dissolve. I think it's much more likely that the P5 will break away from the NCAA, take all the schools with it, and probably a few more, up to 72 or 80 total. Then the P5 will merge into one negotiating entity, as it was when the NCAA had control of it before the BCS, and re-form into 4 more cohesive geographic groups of 18 or 20 each, with 9 or 10-team divisions. What they name those 4 groups doesn't matter.

The CCGs then become the de facto playoff quarterfinals, and the 4 Champs advance to the CFPs.

(08-29-2016 09:05 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  This is the essence of why these scenarios don't work.

They all assume that one P5 gets all the best remaining brands while the other 3 inexplicably agree to settle for the leftovers and take the political baggage off their hands to make it possible

The answer is "nope"

Exactly. And to top it off, if you spread them around, you have to assume UT and OU are willing to be split. I think they find it beneficial to be together.

Actually, the P5 will rebel against both Fox and ESPN if it went down this way. Big 10 will swoop in and take any east coast schools that get voted into the AAU. Cincinnati, UConn and UMass. all could get that status.

Plus, Slive and Scott both said that there are several G5 schools that could be brought into the P5 when they grow larger. They are in the MWC and AAC. UMass, Cincinnati, UConn and Memphis have a long history of playing sports with the P5 schools for a long time. Boise State, Air Force, BYU, San Diego State, Army and Navy are also schools that could be part of the P5 in the future. The commishes of these P5 schools know which G5 schools that could bring in more money for their conferences respectfully.

(08-30-2016 08:48 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I know my opinion is in the minority here, but I don't think the Big 12 is going to dissolve. I think it's much more likely that the P5 will break away from the NCAA, take all the schools with it, and probably a few more, up to 72 or 80 total. Then the P5 will merge into one negotiating entity, as it was when the NCAA had control of it before the BCS, and re-form into 4 more cohesive geographic groups of 18 or 20 each, with 9 or 10-team divisions. What they name those 4 groups doesn't matter.

The CCGs then become the de facto playoff quarterfinals, and the 4 Champs advance to the CFPs.

I don't see the SEC or Big 10 giving up their current advantages to negotiate as a group. Maybe in 20 years when the market is different.

And I don't see such a small breakaway. When they reduce the size of the top division, its still been to around 90. The CFA was 85. I don't think all the "lesser" conferences are going away. The AAC and MWC schools will stay in a top division if they want to and can afford to. Back in the 90s, the CUSA (now effectively AAC) and WAC (now effectively MWC) were treated the same as the BCS conferences in the NCAA structure. The MAC and Big West (scattered to MWC, Sun Belt and CUSA) were given fewer votes. There have been 24 schools move up in the last 25 years (about half in the last 5) and only Boise, USF, UCF and UConn aren't Sun Belt, MAC, CUSA or independent.

(08-30-2016 08:48 AM)TripleA Wrote:  [...] I don't think the Big 12 is going to dissolve. [...]

There's room for an ongoing mid-continent league with Texas as its center of gravity.

Fans around the country will tune in to see two teams from Alabama face off. If they will do that, there's no reason they won't tune in to see teams from Texas beat up on each other. The teams just have to be good.

When it gets to the point that fans are talking about Kansas or Oklahoma to the ACC... no. There's no need for that kind of crazy.

Right, so one or two leagues get all the best teams and the rest of us take the leftovers just out of the goodness of our hearts?

I've said this for a long time and I will keep saying even though many people refuse to accept it: The 4x16 or 4×20 model the people keep pushing is a pipe dream and represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how the system works.

Major college athletics is not run under an umbrella organization – it just isn't. The NCAA pretends to oversee it but anyone with a brain in their head and who regularly reads websites or newspapers knows that is a straight up myth.

Major college athletics – specifically, major college football – is run a lot like professional boxing: every man for himself. It does not run like the NFL or MLB or the NBA or the NHL – where one central entity is guiding all of these moves. It is truly the wild, wild West.

Once you understand that reality, it becomes very clear that there will never be a nice tidy system. It has never existed in the history of college football and it will not exist going forward either.

Where is Notre Dame going to go?

How will the Pac-12 expand if all of the most attractive brands seem dead set on going east? What are they going to do, take San Diego State, Fresno State, Hawaii and Boise State because they fit geographically?

Puh-lease.

These conference commissioners all work together but none of them trusts each other as far as they can throw them – and for good reason. Any one of them would cut the others' throats in a heartbeat if given the opportunity.

We are actually in a period of relative stability. Assuming these GOR's hold up, after this upcoming Big 12 expansion, we should not have much major movement for the next 10–15 years. I think that's what has the candidates for that promotion so nervous. They know this is the last plane out of Saigon and if they are not on it, it could be curtains for them over the long haul.

To me, the choices should be BYU and Cincinnati. However, I would not be surprised to see Houston work its way in there instead of one of those two programs.

I still think the Big 12 should expand by four teams and take all three of the aforementioned candidates plus Connecticut.

I say that because that would allow them to keep all five Texas schools and the two Oklahoma schools together in a single division. That would be a very good way to get that model voted in.

Also, by expanding by those four teams, you would really undercut the G5 as a potential threat as you will have taken what are clearly the four most valuable properties out there. Really, the only schools left on the outside at that point that are legitimately potential P5 programs would be UCF, USF, maybe Memphis, and perhaps a small handful of western schools (Colorado State, Boise State, etc.).

Four teams is definitely the wisest long-term approach, IMO. However, the Big 12 never takes the long-term view. If they did, they would not be in this mess in the first place, would they?

Let ESPN and Fox sue you. They are going to lose. Also, don't worry about injuring either of those relationships. As long as you have Oklahoma and Texas in your league, trust me when I tell you they will get over it when those contracts expire in 10 years or so. And if they don't get over it, trust me when I tell you that some other major media entity will step up and be more than willing to pay you what you are worth.

Finally, and this may be the most important point of all, understand that if Oklahoma and/or Texas leaves your conference, it doesn't matter how nicely you play with ESPN and/or Fox now, they are DEFINITELY going to screw you over.

In other words, get every nickel you possibly can now and worry about the next contract in 2025. That would be my advice to the Big 12.

Then again, my dimestore advice to them a few years ago when they were arguing over whether to add West Virginia or Louisville was to add both - plus Cincinnati - and they blew that off too.

They were not going to settle for measly Cincinnati and Louisville whenever they had Florida State and Clemson lined up, or the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Dallas Cowboys, or some completely delusional plan like that. I knew that was a mistake at the time and it appears to be a big blunder in retrospect.

They really do need to do a much better job of long-range planning and that can only start by them finally being honest with themselves about their possibilities as well as their limitations.

(08-30-2016 08:58 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-30-2016 08:48 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I know my opinion is in the minority here, but I don't think the Big 12 is going to dissolve. I think it's much more likely that the P5 will break away from the NCAA, take all the schools with it, and probably a few more, up to 72 or 80 total. Then the P5 will merge into one negotiating entity, as it was when the NCAA had control of it before the BCS, and re-form into 4 more cohesive geographic groups of 18 or 20 each, with 9 or 10-team divisions. What they name those 4 groups doesn't matter.

The CCGs then become the de facto playoff quarterfinals, and the 4 Champs advance to the CFPs.

I don't see the SEC or Big 10 giving up their current advantages to negotiate as a group. Maybe in 20 years when the market is different.

And I don't see such a small breakaway. When they reduce the size of the top division, its still been to around 90. The CFA was 85. I don't think all the "lesser" conferences are going away. The AAC and MWC schools will stay in a top division if they want to and can afford to. Back in the 90s, the CUSA (now effectively AAC) and WAC (now effectively MWC) were treated the same as the BCS conferences in the NCAA structure. The MAC and Big West (scattered to MWC, Sun Belt and CUSA) were given fewer votes. There have been 24 schools move up in the last 25 years (about half in the last 5) and only Boise, USF, UCF and UConn aren't Sun Belt, MAC, CUSA or independent.

Yeah, your first line is the big drawback in my mind, too. But not necessarily a deal breaker. The advantage of negotiating as a single entity has to lift the total high enough to somehow compensate the top 2 conferences (or at least the top teams there and elsewhere) to make it worthwhile. Maybe some sort of bonus system for top performers, as they are the ones who lift everybody's pay day in the first place.

But I do think the P5 has this plan on the drawing board, whether it happens exactly like that, or not.

As for the total number in the breakaway, yeah, Bowlsby mentioned it could be as many as 100. The Memphis president said 80. If they plan to take over BB (I think they do), then they need to leave at large spots for teams like some in the Big East, A10, WCC, too.

At any rate, I don't think the breakaway will be 4 x 16, and I don't think any teams will be left behind.

That's about as close as you can get to split the big brands up equally.
Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State to PAC-16
Oklahoma, West Virginia to SEC
Kansas, Iowa State to Big Ten
Notre Dame, Connecticut to ACC

SEC or B1G: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas plus West Virginia (if SEC) or UConn (if B1G)
PAC: TCU, Houston, Oklahoma St., Kansas St.
AAC: Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa St. (and WVU, if B1G gets TX, OK, KS)

Thanks to the presidents for considering our 1st proposal.
We really don't want to pay 4 deserving teams like UCONN, Memphis, Cincy, and Houston. Here is our best offer to facilitate a smooth transition for the legacy B-12 squads:

B-10: Texas, Okla, Ok St, Iowa St

We believe Texas and Oklahoma are most strongly considering B-10.
B-10, in order to most easily accommodate this dissolution, will also need to welcome 2 of the non-blue chippers:

SEC: TCU, Kansas, K-State, WV

SEC, half your conference is already blue chippers.
No ultra premium brand additions, but TCU makes a nice pairing w Tex A&M.
WV and Kansas are good sports brands.
K-State is a concession, although good in FB with an avid fan base.

ACC: Tex Tech, Baylor, Houston, UCONN

3 Texas teams is good for recruiting, Houston is #4 city in US, UCONN has lots of NYC alums and really makes a lot of sense.

Please approve so we don't have to pay the B-12 $100M extra per year.

Love,
ESPN & Fox

(08-30-2016 09:04 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  Right, so one or two leagues get all the best teams and the rest of us take the leftovers just out of the goodness of our hearts?

I've said this for a long time and I will keep saying even though many people refuse to accept it: The 4x16 or 4×20 model the people keep pushing is a pipe dream and represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how the system works.

Major college athletics is not run under an umbrella organization – it just isn't. The NCAA pretends to oversee it but anyone with a brain in their head and who regularly reads websites or newspapers knows that is a straight up myth.

Major college athletics – specifically, major college football – is run a lot like professional boxing: every man for himself. It does not run like the NFL or MLB or the NBA or the NHL – where one central entity is guiding all of these moves. It is truly the wild, wild West.

Once you understand that reality, it becomes very clear that there will never be a nice tidy system. It has never existed in the history of college football and it will not exist going forward either.

Where is Notre Dame going to go?

How will the Pac-12 expand if all of the most attractive brands seem dead set on going east? What are they going to do, take San Diego State, Fresno State, Hawaii and Boise State because they fit geographically?

Puh-lease.

These conference commissioners all work together but none of them trusts each other as far as they can throw them – and for good reason. Any one of them would cut the others' throats in a heartbeat if given the opportunity.

We are actually in a period of relative stability. Assuming these GOR's hold up, after this upcoming Big 12 expansion, we should not have much major movement for the next 10–15 years. I think that's what has the candidates for that promotion so nervous. They know this is the last plane out of Saigon and if they are not on it, it could be curtains for them over the long haul.

To me, the choices should be BYU and Cincinnati. However, I would not be surprised to see Houston work its way in there instead of one of those two programs.

I still think the Big 12 should expand by four teams and take all three of the aforementioned candidates plus Connecticut.

I say that because that would allow them to keep all five Texas schools and the two Oklahoma schools together in a single division. That would be a very good way to get that model voted in.

Also, by expanding by those four teams, you would really undercut the G5 as a potential threat as you will have taken what are clearly the four most valuable properties out there. Really, the only schools left on the outside at that point that are legitimately potential P5 programs would be UCF, USF, maybe Memphis, and perhaps a small handful of western schools (Colorado State, Boise State, etc.).

Four teams is definitely the wisest long-term approach, IMO. However, the Big 12 never takes the long-term view. If they did, they would not be in this mess in the first place, would they?

Let ESPN and Fox sue you. They are going to lose. Also, don't worry about injuring either of those relationships. As long as you have Oklahoma and Texas in your league, trust me when I tell you they will get over it when those contracts expire in 10 years or so. And if they don't get over it, trust me when I tell you that some other major media entity will step up and be more than willing to pay you what you are worth.

Finally, and this may be the most important point of all, understand that if Oklahoma and/or Texas leaves your conference, it doesn't matter how nicely you play with ESPN and/or Fox now, they are DEFINITELY going to screw you over.

In other words, get every nickel you possibly can now and worry about the next contract in 2025. That would be my advice to the Big 12.

Then again, my dimestore advice to them a few years ago when they were arguing over whether to add West Virginia or Louisville was to add both - plus Cincinnati - and they blew that off too.

They were not going to settle for measly Cincinnati and Louisville whenever they had Florida State and Clemson lined up, or the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Dallas Cowboys, or some completely delusional plan like that. I knew that was a mistake at the time and it appears to be a big blunder in retrospect.

They really do need to do a much better job of long-range planning and that can only start by them finally being honest with themselves about their possibilities as well as their limitations.

Not everyone will find a home but not all will get left behind either.

Say Texas goes to the PAC. They'll ask for TT and get them. What if they as for TCU also? Probably get them. Then either Kansas St. or Kansas will get 16 by default.
What if Texas wants B1G, They'll get TT to go with them.
So OU would likely join the SEC and OSU w/ them.

Or all 4 of OU, OSU, UT, TT go to the PAC.

That would leave Baylor, Iowa St., WVU, Kansas St., maybe Kansas and TCU. Houston*, Cincy*, then add USF, UCF, Memphis, UConn.

If all 4 went to the Pac would the B1G feel KU and UConn deserve 2 spots to get up to 16? Would the SEC feel WVU and Baylor or TCU worthy to keep up w/ the others?

If Pac took UT, TT and SEC took OU, OSU. KU, UConn to the B1G? Would that PAC feel 16 works better for a split and keep up w/ the others also taking KSU & TCU?