(04-27-2017 08:02 PM)ColKurtz Wrote: (04-27-2017 02:10 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote: ACC gives Texas a Notre Dame type deal.
Probably
Quote:ACC + Texas & Notre Dame (Texas gets to play 6 non-conference games a year against Oklahoma, Texas A&M, TCU, Baylor, etc.) They will also allow ND & Texas to count their game as one of the 6 ACC games.
Possibly
Quote:ACC also adds Cincinnati and UConn.
Not going to happen. Adding UT would take ACC to 16 teams, 14 football. Absolutely no reason to go to 18 teams when there exists a potential for ND and UT to be full members at some point it the future. Even less so when those teams are Cincy and UConn, who would not add nearly enough to revenue.
Quote: Big Ten adds Kansas and Missouri
If UT left, not unreasonable. Mizzou adds nothing to SEC.
Quote:SEC adds Oklahoma, West Virginia , and yes East Carolina (they have to get into the North Carolina market and the bite the bullet and it pays off big time!)
Why would SEC go to 17? The carriage market, the reason the SEC wants the NC and/or VA market, is looking shakier by the day. I wish ECU hadn't been left out in the early rounds of BCS/P5 expansion, but the future is looking grim for anyone not already in the P5, and some already in (cough, K-State/TCU/Baylor)
Quote: PAC-12 adds Texas Tech, Houston, Oklahoma State, and TCU.
Not out of the question if B12 collapses and UT goes to ACC, SEC and B1G go to 16 teams, but that's the only scenario where this makes any sense.
Moreover, if UT leaves the B12, a lot of people just assume the leftovers will get picked up. I don't think that's true. 14 football teams is already unwieldy in the sense playing cross-divisional opponents is rare. 16 gets makes it worse and gets to the point where it's 2 conferences that have little to do with each other. But pods, right? Don't see a lot of momentum in that direction. ESPN revenue declining each year, so having less mouths to feed might take precedence over picking up leftovers.
Well, a lot has changed in the past 5 years or so. First, there is a reasonable chance that the PACNetwork could be picked up by FOX. They fired their director, but more importantly stated that their new priority for broadcast material would be revenue sports as opposed to Olympic sports. This is exactly the kind of change in focus that you would take if you were considering turning the inventory and control over to a broadcast network that makes its revenue from advertising. And that move would most certainly help them with their carriage issues which have inhibited their ability to monetize their product.
Now if FOX were to gain that conference network they would have two.
So far ESPN and FOX have split rights in the Big 12 50/50 with regard to T1 & T2 inventory. ESPN holds the LHN & Kansas T3 and FOX holds OU's T3 rights. They both currently lease PAC material 50/50.
ESPN doesn't want to give up Texas and the LHN contract expires in 2031 well beyond the T1 and T2 rights to the Big 12 which expire in 2024-5.
Texas doesn't want to travel to the ACC for minor sports and doesn't want independence since what they want is a conference made up of other Texas schools and close neighbors. But, they don't want to cut themselves off from the TV revenue gravy train either.
Oklahoma and Kansas want to find a landing spot where they can get OSU and KSU a home as well, and Iowa State is a good product in search of a home. Then there is the problem of all of Texas's other state Big 12 schools and where to put them.
If FOX lands the PAC Network all of these problems go away. Why? Because heretofore FOX couldn't place 5 Big 12 schools in the Big 10. Only two of them actually met the Big 10's requirements and Texas wasn't going to go for two reasons (1) They prefer to stay at home and play their buddies. & (2) ESPN was not going to let them go to a competitor while under contract.
But now that FOX can place 5 and since both FOX and ESPN essentially hold 50% of the rights to both the PAC and Big 12 and if FOX has control of the PACN and insists upon some Central Time Zone game slots through which they can expand the # of games the PAC can televise on a Saturday then they will be able to place those Big 12 schools not taken by the Big 10 or ESPN.
So how do you divide the Big 12? Equitably that's how because they both hold 50%. So if it is a given that ESPN will not relinquish Texas, a school they have spent 15 million on since 2012 just to hold them in place, you are going to have to start with the top product and take geography and history into account and divide it out with Texas in the ESPN corral. Oklahoma is #2 and FOX holds their T3 now. So OU goes FOX. Kansas is #3 and their T3 is with ESPN, but Texas still wants buddies so Kansas goes to FOX, not because they aren't friendly with Texas, but because Texas wants to play other Texas schools. Oklahoma State and Kansas State go with their brothers and Iowa State does because of geography. Texas is joined in ESPN by Texas Tech, T.C.U. and Baylor, and the #4 brand from the Big 12 West Virginia. So in essence the historical divide is used. The former SWC schools go to ESPN and the former Big 8 schools go to FOX with W.V.U. headed to ESPN.
But we aren't done yet. How in the heck do you divide up 4 Texas schools between the SEC and ACC and hold onto Texas? You don't. All four go to the SEC. Why? That's crazy right due to market model right? No. The market model is dead and not needed in the world that is about to be born. ESPN if they have to take the Texas schools to get the Horns to go along can monetize them effectively because each week they play an SEC schedule ESPN has multiple games they can put on the air in which the whole state of Texas, nearly 27 million will be captured for higher regional rates in advertising. And each of those games between already competitive football product drives ratings and raises rates when put against the SEC's present West schools and some of its East schools.
Well doesn't that screw the ACC out of revenue? No. Why? Look for the ACC to add Notre Dame in full (Sorry Terry D.) along with Cincinnati, West Virginia and possibly Connecticut. Why in the hell would they want Cincinnati, West Virginia and Connecticut? Because Cincinnati puts Notre Dame into one of its richest and historical recruiting areas that's why. More importantly it puts the newly formed ACCN in Ohio. West Virginia will be another content multiplier almost as good as Louisville has been. They are solid in hoops and highly competitive and passionate about football. They also travel well, even if they don't always behave when they get there. I said maybe Connecticut. Maybe because it cuts the Big 10 and FOX out of another New England property and they multiply the value of basketball and would provide some of the ACC North with a Vanderbilt / Kentucky type win on the schedule.
But what about losing out on Texas? You won't. If the ACCN and SECN are bundled together at one rate across both footprints what difference does it make where the schools go. Your network would be available from Lubbock to Stores and in New York over to Ohio and South throughout the SEC. We both win as part of the ESPN family.
The Sugar Bowl becomes the ACC / SEC play in game to the National Championship. With 3 divisions of 6 we have an extra round of conference championship games played at neutral sites nearest the higher seed. And the best remaining at large school gets a bid which means that if you are in a tough division you have another shot. And most importantly it means that many more fan bases stay energized deeper into the season in attending, viewing, and traveling to those last few games that if they were out of contention they just might forgo. We both win all the way around and the conferences stay geographically oriented.
But we wouldn't be the only ones doing that. The Big 10 and PAC would as well. So Iowa State and Kansas in the Big 10 wouldn't hurt the Big 10 because they pick up distribution throughout the PAC and vice versa. Both conferences content value goes way up. Their champions meet in the Rose Bowl for the play in to the National Championship Game and then the traditions that made the Rose Bowl return.
The two networks could dedicate 1 OOC game against each others schools. Kansas Missouri returns and Oklahoma Texas remains.
Rivalries are restored. If the two conferences under FOX only want to go to 16 each who cares? As long as each conference enters their champ in the final 4 nobody gains or loses an advantage by numbers, or number of divisions as it becomes a moot point.
Will it happen? The money is there to make it so. The question is simply will the PAC sell a % of its network to FOX and if so, then why not?
Texas would get a division that consisted of Arkansas, Baylor, Texas, T.C.U., Texas A&M and Texas Tech. They keep OU in Dallas every year so basically they get a division instead of a conference, but it is a division of the best of the old SWC. If that doesn't do the trick nothing will.
But somewhere in all of this is the future, and that future in college football terms is not far off.
/
So does the ACC Network become reality after all?
