I'm late to this conversation and don't have the patience to read all the pages and catch up, but I figure I would add a couple of thoughts...

We're already seeing SEC and ACC schools schedule each other more often out of conference. I don't think there's any way that's a coincidence. The two leagues not only are fairly close geographically, but they are primarily owned by the same network. More games in-house for ESPN means more money.

Ultimately, the two league networks will end up being bundled together to some significant degree. I don't know exactly what that will look like, but I would be surprised if it didn't include some extensive cross-conference content that would be interchangeable as far as what network ESPN shows it on.

I can buy that ESPN is bullish on an ACC Network. I don't think they would have agreed to it unless they thought they could make money. But what ESPN will end up doing is making sure the two conferences and therefore the two networks are intertwined with one another. It's the best way to secure product and cooperation in the long term.

I can see the state of TX being split between the SEC and ACC so that both leagues have an even greater political relationship. With that said, I don't think UT ends up in the ACC, but I could be wrong. I wouldn't be at all shocked to see TCU go to the ACC though.

Here's just a thought: wouldn't it be more profitable for ESPN and the schools involved if they could pry the most valuable parts of the Big 12 and ACC into a larger collegiate sports banner? Right now, both of those leagues significantly lag in revenue behind the SEC and Big Ten and most of that value comes from a few key members. Take those few key members out and consolidate them into a mega conference with 4-6 divisions and the subsidized dollars that went to the hanger on members now go into the pockets of Texas, Oklahoma, Florida St, Clemson, etc.

The Big 12 GOR is pretty much toast when it expires making that obstacle easily cleared and the ACC's could be circumvented to provided that you get 10 members to sign off on it.

(07-07-2017 01:09 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'm late to this conversation and don't have the patience to read all the pages and catch up, but I figure I would add a couple of thoughts...

We're already seeing SEC and ACC schools schedule each other more often out of conference. I don't think there's any way that's a coincidence. The two leagues not only are fairly close geographically, but they are primarily owned by the same network. More games in-house for ESPN means more money.

Ultimately, the two league networks will end up being bundled together to some significant degree. I don't know exactly what that will look like, but I would be surprised if it didn't include some extensive cross-conference content that would be interchangeable as far as what network ESPN shows it on.

I can buy that ESPN is bullish on an ACC Network. I don't think they would have agreed to it unless they thought they could make money. But what ESPN will end up doing is making sure the two conferences and therefore the two networks are intertwined with one another. It's the best way to secure product and cooperation in the long term.

I can see the state of TX being split between the SEC and ACC so that both leagues have an even greater political relationship. With that said, I don't think UT ends up in the ACC, but I could be wrong. I wouldn't be at all shocked to see TCU go to the ACC though.

I agree with your line of thinking but not with your splits. It would make more sense to have some shifting in house between the three conferences to get a better more popular and thus more profitable offering. You can then have all of college football carved up into FOX running the blue states and ESPN running the red states (both somewhat ironic, don't you think?)

Fuhrer Mickey operates the Big 12 + ACC South + SEC ... and it has four 24/7 channels with regional headquarters. It has a perfect scheduling split of 9 teams per division. This also means the return of the home-and-home round robin in basketball.

Atlantic Division: UVA, VT, UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Pitt, WVU, UofL
TV Channel Headquarters: Charlotte, NC

Coastal Division: Clemson, USC-E, UGAg, GT, TN, FSU, UF, Auburn, UK
TV Channel Headquarters: Atlanta, GA

Southeastern Division: Alabama, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas, TAMU, Texas, Vandy, Miami
TV Channel Headquarters: Birmingham, AL

Plains Division: Baylor, TCU, TTU, OU, Oklahoma St, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska
TV Channel Headquarters: Dallas, TX



FOX operates the Pac-12 + B1G + ACC North + ND + Some callups

Northeastern Division: Syracuse, Boston College, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, UCONN, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State
TV Channel Headquarters: New York City, NY

Midwest Division: Michigan State, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Iowa, Iowa State, Purdue, Wisconsin, Minnesota
TV Channel Headquarters: Chicago, IL

Northwest Division: Washington, Washington State, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, BYU, Utah State, Nevada
TV Channel Headquarters: Denver, CO or Seattle, WA

Southwest Division: SDSU, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford, UNLV, Arizona, Arizona State, Hawaii
TV Channel Headquarters: Los Angeles, CA


If money is the ONLY GOAL .... and you also are avoiding political fallout .... it's hard to come up with an alignment that is more profitable. This pretty much maxes out everybody's revenue potential.

(07-07-2017 09:13 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's just a thought: wouldn't it be more profitable for ESPN and the schools involved if they could pry the most valuable parts of the Big 12 and ACC into a larger collegiate sports banner? Right now, both of those leagues significantly lag in revenue behind the SEC and Big Ten and most of that value comes from a few key members. Take those few key members out and consolidate them into a mega conference with 4-6 divisions and the subsidized dollars that went to the hanger on members now go into the pockets of Texas, Oklahoma, Florida St, Clemson, etc.

The Big 12 GOR is pretty much toast when it expires making that obstacle easily cleared and the ACC's could be circumvented to provided that you get 10 members to sign off on it.

As of the figures released today the worst laggard is the PAC and not by a small margin any longer. The ACC passed them with some distance. But your premise has merit if the result is consolidation. I think we are still a decade or so away from that. But clearly there aren't many brands in the Big 12 and they probably could do better elsewhere, but they have to want to do it.

(07-07-2017 09:54 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(07-07-2017 01:09 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'm late to this conversation and don't have the patience to read all the pages and catch up, but I figure I would add a couple of thoughts...

We're already seeing SEC and ACC schools schedule each other more often out of conference. I don't think there's any way that's a coincidence. The two leagues not only are fairly close geographically, but they are primarily owned by the same network. More games in-house for ESPN means more money.

Ultimately, the two league networks will end up being bundled together to some significant degree. I don't know exactly what that will look like, but I would be surprised if it didn't include some extensive cross-conference content that would be interchangeable as far as what network ESPN shows it on.

I can buy that ESPN is bullish on an ACC Network. I don't think they would have agreed to it unless they thought they could make money. But what ESPN will end up doing is making sure the two conferences and therefore the two networks are intertwined with one another. It's the best way to secure product and cooperation in the long term.

I can see the state of TX being split between the SEC and ACC so that both leagues have an even greater political relationship. With that said, I don't think UT ends up in the ACC, but I could be wrong. I wouldn't be at all shocked to see TCU go to the ACC though.

I agree with your line of thinking but not with your splits. It would make more sense to have some shifting in house between the three conferences to get a better more popular and thus more profitable offering. You can then have all of college football carved up into FOX running the blue states and ESPN running the red states (both somewhat ironic, don't you think?)

Fuhrer Mickey operates the Big 12 + ACC South + SEC ... and it has four 24/7 channels with regional headquarters. It has a perfect scheduling split of 9 teams per division. This also means the return of the home-and-home round robin in basketball.

Atlantic Division: UVA, VT, UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Pitt, WVU, UofL
TV Channel Headquarters: Charlotte, NC

Coastal Division: Clemson, USC-E, UGAg, GT, TN, FSU, UF, Auburn, UK
TV Channel Headquarters: Atlanta, GA

Southeastern Division: Alabama, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas, TAMU, Texas, Vandy, Miami
TV Channel Headquarters: Birmingham, AL

Plains Division: Baylor, TCU, TTU, OU, Oklahoma St, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska
TV Channel Headquarters: Dallas, TX



FOX operates the Pac-12 + B1G + ACC North + ND + Some callups

Northeastern Division: Syracuse, Boston College, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, UCONN, Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio State
TV Channel Headquarters: New York City, NY

Midwest Division: Michigan State, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Iowa, Iowa State, Purdue, Wisconsin, Minnesota
TV Channel Headquarters: Chicago, IL

Northwest Division: Washington, Washington State, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, BYU, Utah State, Nevada
TV Channel Headquarters: Denver, CO or Seattle, WA

Southwest Division: SDSU, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford, UNLV, Arizona, Arizona State, Hawaii
TV Channel Headquarters: Los Angeles, CA


If money is the ONLY GOAL .... and you also are avoiding political fallout .... it's hard to come up with an alignment that is more profitable. This pretty much maxes out everybody's revenue potential.

Maybe one day, but I don't see this happening anytime soon. Traditionally, movement has been incremental. Whether that's by design or not, I don't know. Anyway, I think both ESPN and FOX will try to hang onto as much inventory as they possibly can. In the end, they are the ones competing with one another.

ESPN made a significant effort to protect a number of Northeastern properties and I don't see the networks making a trade for market share.

I think ESPN holds the upper hand ultimately because they've built the better infrastructure. They can provide exposure that FOX can't and exposure for these school is about as important as the money.