Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,317
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 152
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #11
Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
(09-06-2017 08:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  B1G:
East: Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers
South: Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue
North: Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Wisconsin
West: Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Northwestern

Why Notre Dame and Kansas?

If we move to a P4 model and Notre Dame has to go all in the money is better in the Big 10. The Big 10 offers them another New England division in which to showcase their school. It will likely offer a scheduling alliance with the PAC. And Notre Dame can schedule SEC schools to play in Florida and Georgia. And the academic consortium would be a plus and all of their sports would be together again.

Kansas? It's their overarching preference.

SEC:
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina
North: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
South: L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
West: Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Why? Oklahoma and Oklahoma State need to stay together and Oklahoma gives us all we need to carry DFW completely with A&M.

PAC:
East: Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
West: California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford

Why? Because Texas is a pain the rear and the PAC is the only one who has really shown enough interest to take some of the Pals. They pick up two AAU schools and 33.5 million viewers.

ACC:
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Syracuse
West: Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
East: Duke, Clemson, North Carolina, Virginia
South: Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, T.C.U.

Why West Virginia and T.C.U.? West Virginia reconnects them, offers a solid baseball, basketball and football program. Reestablishes the backyard brawl. And T.C.U. fits in with a conference where it is connected to F.S.U. by an interstate and to Miami and Georgia Tech by major airports. And the ACCN will need the DFW metro to add cash to their pockets.

That places 9 Big 12 schools. It makes the Big 10 carriage within their footprint complete which raises their leverage within their own footprint. IT gives the ACC the footprint expansion it needs for its network. The SEC gets what it is really going after without offending A&M. And the PAC gets enough to improve their carriage. And Texas like the Elves in the Lord of the Rings goes into the West hopefully never to be heard from again.

Baylor won't go quietly into that good night. And while I agree that Texas to the PAC makes dividing the B12 easier, it doesn't solve the poor home schedule problem that 10th reiterates the Longhorns are experiencing.

Let Texas go to the B1G. It will work out for them about as well as Nebraska, but they can tell everyone about the smart friends they are hanging out with.
09-07-2017 09:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,650
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
ESPN's plan to conquer the world?

If we go back to a previous discussion about ESPN's desire to acquire markets and content then that might lead us down a different track. I suppose it could be true that ESPN would just assume squeeze FOX out of the next realignment which means both the B1G and PAC could suffer in the arms race.

The B1G still has a lot of money to offer, but maybe ESPN hasn't brought the big guns out yet? Maybe ESPN has been biding their time so that they could make a full bore effort to land the properties they most want rather than diversifying their portfolio...which seemed to be their strategy when content was much cheaper to acquire.

The B1G has already essentially sided with FOX even though they're still selling content to ESPN although even their more limited partnership with ESPN could change in 6 years. The PAC is currently split, but they're probably better off siding more with FOX because they will get more favorable time slots and promotion. ESPN will use their prime slots, by contrast, to promote the bigger games in the East and relegate more PAC games to the late night slot. The late night slot is great for fans, but probably bad for exposure where the PAC is concerned. FOX can dedicate a great deal more coverage to the PAC in other words if for no more reason than they simply don't have a lot of content under their umbrella. In the same vein, the PAC will probably find it easier to partner with the B1G if both of them are working for the same company.

So I could see the PAC selling out to FOX because A) FOX has a lot of experience with making regional networks work whereas ESPN focuses on national channels and probably doesn't want to add another linear channel to their lineup anyway and B) it could help facilitate some sort of merger or extended partnership between the two leagues as neither are going to have great expansion options outside of that prospect.

As a side note, I would expect to see FOX go hard after the Mountain West in the next go around just so they can have more content in that region of the country...

So let's say ESPN makes a huge play for the SEC 1st Tier content so that they can have the top games from both the SEC and ACC on ABC or ESPN every week rather than sharing with CBS. It also means they'll have the ability to dedicate the first 2 weeks of the season to more cross-conference games if both leagues' rights are secured in totality. As it stands, CBS doesn't even begin their coverage until Week 2 and they're unlikely to expand that effort even if the SEC expands and has more games to offer. With both leagues under the same roof, the flexibility in creating content is maximized. This is also why grabbing Notre Dame from NBC is important.

In fact, I wouldn't be shocked to see ESPN encourage certain additions just so the PAC or B1G won't land much extra content. Which brings us to why ESPN will want Texas and Oklahoma so bad as well and might be willing to pull out all the stops to get them.

1) I think ESPN will try to split TX up so they don't have to deal with a more powerful SEC.
2) ESPN will continue the practice of encouraging SEC and ACC schools to play more out of conference games against each other. (The announcement came yesterday that Alabama would be playing Miami in 2021 in Atlanta...that's after Bama has already agreed to play Louisville next year and Duke the year after that.)
3) ESPN will try to acquire as much content as they can out of the Big 12 at the expense of the B1G and PAC.

While it's true that ESPN owns the CFP and they're not likely to give that up anytime soon, it's also true that ESPN can't afford to buy every league and ensure that each league acquires its preferred targets and adds conference semis. Too much money for one and with competitors in the market now, ESPN simply doesn't have that level of control anymore.

Even though it's not as cost effective and possibly not as profitable as an addition of conference semis would be, I'm going to bet that ESPN lobbies for an expansion of the CFP.

1) If the SEC and ACC grow significantly while the B1G and PAC don't really grow as much then ESPN is going to want more of their in-house properties to be in the playoffs as it is self-perpetuating marketing if nothing else.
2) If ESPN is to be successful in their effort to create more cross-conference content and perhaps even an exclusive Power v Power schedule then they need a system that doesn't punish teams for losing big games out of conference. They need 8 teams in the CFP in other words.
3) And perhaps most importantly, ESPN would wholly own an expanded CFP whereas they would have to split a system of conference semis and CCGs with FOX.

While the current format of the CFP has been helpful in marginalizing the Big 12(and I'm not sure that hasn't been by design), that format won't be conducive to helping the biggest brands stay on top in a world of "very, very large conferences." While it would be best for competition's sake if the CFP had a champs only model, it probably wouldn't be best for ESPN's bottom line.

It would also create the possibility that an AAC school could make the playoffs and that's also good for ESPN's bottom line as it generates story lines...the Boise State factor. If ESPN is going to make the AAC somewhat relevant and perhaps add a few Big 12 schools to its roster then that league needs a little extra juice.

With 8 spots available, I wouldn't be shocked to see everyone suggest an auto-bid system for the Power leagues. The AAC probably wouldn't get one, but a strong champ could get in the playoffs at that point. Voila, ESPN has added value to a product without significantly raising its payouts.

So how about this?

SEC takes BYU, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and West Virginia

West: BYU, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas
South: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss
South: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia

Why?

Oklahoma and Oklahoma State- Pretty obvious here, but these schools give the SEC strong brands and greater access to TX fans.

BYU- Y'all, I know it's crazy, but ESPN is going to risk losing this content unless they find a decent home for them. They have a national fan base, which is very valuable for streaming, and the PAC or B1G just isn't going to take them. I'm not sure the SEC would either, but if they were based in a Western division then it could work as far as travel goes. Theoretically, they could go to the American, but there's a good chance they would rather remain independent and maintain more control over their schedule if they're not going to be guaranteed top level match-ups. Especially in an era when Power leagues are talking about playing more Power games and possibly splitting from the G5, the prospect of BYU not having very many decent teams on their schedule is real...which means ESPN loses one way or the other. Most SEC teams would only have to travel to Provo on rare occasions. Their contract with ESPN expires after 2019. That date could be significant for several reasons.

TCU- As ESPN splits the state of TX between the SEC and ACC, this move makes a lot of sense as it gives the SEC a direct presence in DFW. While the OK schools will give the SEC a greater penetration in the market, there's a lot to be said for a quality program in the center of the media hub. Remember that there are more people in DFW than in all of OK.

Kansas- Fairly obvious as it gives the SEC a new market, a renewed rivalry for the region, and a much needed blue blood in basketball. It's also an AAU school.

West Virginia- A nice regional complement for the SEC as their fan base stretches well into the Mid Atlantic and through much of Appalachia. ESPN could be interested in making sure that these media markets aren't as saturated with ACC schools as they could be. Even though WV is a different state, many of their fans reside outside of it. That and the only real rivals WVU has in the ACC are Pitt and VT. These games could be scheduled regularly as part of the SEC/ACC regular tilts. WVU's content value by comparison would be better utilized against an SEC schedule as opposed to an ACC schedule.


ACC takes Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Texas, Texas Tech, Houston, and UConn

Why?

Notre Dame- They need Southern exposure. The best way to get that is to make sure a healthy portion of your conference games are against those teams. ND is one of the biggest content multipliers in the sport and keeping that content in the ESPN family will be pivotal.

Cincinnati- While promoting UC will cost money, they help deliver the state of OH when it comes to maximizing ND's audience. The many Irish fans of OH will pay money for an ACC Network as long their favorite school is involved. UC also helps give ND a recruiting presence in OH.

Texas and Texas Tech- UT is obvious here, but I'm betting that they will require some regional partners so they don't have to give up playing local rivals. Texas Tech is the most logical choice as they have always been connected to UT and the state politicos will want them together.

Houston- ESPN needs to split content in TX so that neither the SEC or ACC gets a strong majority of the product. In the event Baylor is relegated to the American then it makes economic sense to elevate Houston and cash in on a massive market. UH is also a public school with a growing alumni base so there's probably more cash to be made with Power status for UH than with Power status for Baylor. After all, Baylor has done very little with their advantages over the last 20 something years. Getting UH into the Power leagues is a sneaky way for the TX politicos to advance their state while simultaneously abandoning Baylor for PR purposes. The state loses no exposure and in fact gains it as far as prestige for the state system. And apparently there's also a large contingent of UH grads in the Legislature so UH is growing in influence.

UConn- A runner-up in the last round of ACC expansion, they fit well into the ACC culture and help offset all these football first additions. It also gives the ACC more coverage in the NYC market. UConn may also be a target of the B1G and snapping them up guarantees greater content and market penetration for ESPN.


American takes Iowa State, Kansas State, and Baylor

Why?

While promoting a few schools will cost more money, demoting a few others will help pay the bills. It will also help more evenly distribute markets across the 3 leagues.
09-07-2017 10:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 811
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 31
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
(09-07-2017 09:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Before joining the ACC Swarbrick visited Slive. He essentially wanted some leverage and a safety net if negotiations didn't go well with the ACC, and he wanted the scoop on the ACC. The safety net aspect was centered around a scheduling agreement with SEC schools that were in the areas in which N.D. wanted a presence, namely Georgia and Florida. The only thing the mid Atlantic states provide them is a strong base for their lacrosse, which the Big 10 took a major step toward providing when John's Hopkins affiliated with them for that sport.

Remember too what added Value and Stability to the ACC, Notre Dame. Notre Dame does for the Big 10 what ESPN wants to gain by holding onto Texas. It gives the Big 10 control over add rates within their footprint essentially giving them a monopoly through the Northern Midwest.

I'm thinking ESPN is realizing that another major brand in the SEC adds significantly to content value. Possibly more than 5 games does with the ACC. I also think they are realizing that Texas is so toxic in behavior and productivity in actual sports performance that perhaps they are best treated by utilizing them to try to build into the draw out West. Texas has been trying to twist ESPN a bit through the threat of the Big 10. Delany knows that Texas is a major brand but the Big 10 if given a choice would probably much rather have Notre Dame. And by placing Texas in the PAC ESPN and FOX continue to share 50/50 rights and if the PACN can shift to ESPN that may be enough to get it done as it would involve utilizing the transformation of the LHN.

So FOX gains N.D.. The Big 10 gains N.D. N.D. makes significantly more money because they are worth significantly more to the Big 10. The ACCN gets entry into a much more viable market, but does so in a non threatening way to the SEC. Texas is removed like Napoleon to Elba Island in the West. A&M is happy. The two Oklahomas stay together and play a more regional schedule. And 9 of the Big 12 schools are placed. T.C.U. has no travel difficulty since Miami & Georgia Tech are all direct domestic flights and F.S.U. is down I10. And there is no reason not to bundle the SECN and ACCN.

I only have read about how ND used the Big XII and the ACC against each other for leverage. I did not read about the SEC angle since I've thought that ND wouldn't fit a southern conference any more than they'd fit a Midwestern conference. But figuring out the Domers is complicated enough. 03-wink

I'm not sure whether the ACC would find WVU and TCU more palatable than 5 games/yr against ND but I guess if they're assured of stability over the long term then it shouldn't matter either way. Still, ND already has a binding contract with the ACC until 2036.
09-07-2017 10:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,376
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 670
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
(09-07-2017 10:41 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(09-07-2017 09:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Before joining the ACC Swarbrick visited Slive. He essentially wanted some leverage and a safety net if negotiations didn't go well with the ACC, and he wanted the scoop on the ACC. The safety net aspect was centered around a scheduling agreement with SEC schools that were in the areas in which N.D. wanted a presence, namely Georgia and Florida. The only thing the mid Atlantic states provide them is a strong base for their lacrosse, which the Big 10 took a major step toward providing when John's Hopkins affiliated with them for that sport.

Remember too what added Value and Stability to the ACC, Notre Dame. Notre Dame does for the Big 10 what ESPN wants to gain by holding onto Texas. It gives the Big 10 control over add rates within their footprint essentially giving them a monopoly through the Northern Midwest.

I'm thinking ESPN is realizing that another major brand in the SEC adds significantly to content value. Possibly more than 5 games does with the ACC. I also think they are realizing that Texas is so toxic in behavior and productivity in actual sports performance that perhaps they are best treated by utilizing them to try to build into the draw out West. Texas has been trying to twist ESPN a bit through the threat of the Big 10. Delany knows that Texas is a major brand but the Big 10 if given a choice would probably much rather have Notre Dame. And by placing Texas in the PAC ESPN and FOX continue to share 50/50 rights and if the PACN can shift to ESPN that may be enough to get it done as it would involve utilizing the transformation of the LHN.

So FOX gains N.D.. The Big 10 gains N.D. N.D. makes significantly more money because they are worth significantly more to the Big 10. The ACCN gets entry into a much more viable market, but does so in a non threatening way to the SEC. Texas is removed like Napoleon to Elba Island in the West. A&M is happy. The two Oklahomas stay together and play a more regional schedule. And 9 of the Big 12 schools are placed. T.C.U. has no travel difficulty since Miami & Georgia Tech are all direct domestic flights and F.S.U. is down I10. And there is no reason not to bundle the SECN and ACCN.

I only have read about how ND used the Big XII and the ACC against each other for leverage. I did not read about the SEC angle since I've thought that ND wouldn't fit a southern conference any more than they'd fit a Midwestern conference. But figuring out the Domers is complicated enough. 03-wink

I'm not sure whether the ACC would find WVU and TCU more palatable than 5 games/yr against ND but I guess if they're assured of stability over the long term then it shouldn't matter either way. Still, ND already has a binding contract with the ACC until 2036.

I think it would depend on the valuation given to the ACC for the ACCN. But I did approach it from the perspective of how are they going to get this done in an acceptable way for the conferences, and the networks. Face it, the top priority for ESPN is hanging onto Texas. If we wait until 2024-5 there is no incentive for anyone to work with anyone else. In that case my money would be on an ESPN push for Texa-homa to the SEC. While not ideal it gives them what they want. The top brands in Texas, if not all of them should T.C.U. and Baylor also head to an ESPN held conference, and all of Oklahoma. That gives them exclusivity in the Lone Star state plus Oklahoma and that's roughly 10 schools they have rights to every Saturday in the Fall with exclusivity in reaching the college football market for 32 million.

If that comes to pass the PAC will be essentially frozen where they are now. The Big 10's options would be limited outside of the PAC. And I could see W.V.U., Cinncinnati, Notre Dame and Connecticut essentially closing out the ACC.

But if there is some coordination and cooperation in the moves then ESPN can still hang onto Texas, either as much as they have of them now minus the LHN, or all of them.

I think that has to be their top priority, even more so than Notre Dame. But we'll see. I just wanted to put a new wrinkle in the old conversation. And in doing so I dared to ask this question, "How could ESPN appease both the Big 10 and the SEC?" The reason I posed that question is that clearly those are the two most valuable and stable of the conferences.

It might well wind up being something like Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Texas and Iowa State/Texas Tech to the SEC, Notre Dame and West Virginia to the ACC.

What the PAC does at that point, who knows? But they would really be trailing the rest.
(This post was last modified: 09-08-2017 12:04 AM by JRsec.)
09-08-2017 12:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,847
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 150
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
Regionalism, travel, market....All things that we should account for.

1) the PAC is done...politics will not allow expansion into areas where the political views are not in line.

2)B1G-they need something substantial. Big Ten football has been described as being as exciting as watching paint dry. Even Ohio State/Michigan is a boring game with just a lot of hoopla.
What they need is Nebraska v. Oklahoma, a western anchor rivalry to offer some hope for B1G fans to see something exciting. Throw in Kansas to the B1G too, they are a great afterthought.

3) SEC.....what do you give someone for Christmas when they already have everything? Why something big and flashy, just to make them feel important and then some small trinket because the color is nice. Bring on the oranges: Tejas and Oklahoma State and the political tag along (Texas Tech).
Texas Tech helps make Oklahoma State relevant which in turn helps make Missouri relevant. Oklahoma State also gives the SEC quite a bit of leverage over the B1G/Oklahoma.
But wait that's too many because we all know two things are sure in realignment 1) nobody will go beyond 16 teams and 2) Notre Dame is not going to join a conference unless they have to. The solution of course (as it always has been), is to slide South Carolina back into the ACC.

4)ACC-South Carolina keeps the ACC in a slight numerical advantage over the Big east and completes the the ACC/Big East merger. West Virginia takes the 16th spot to, as someone aptly expressed; "ties the room together".

This scenario give everybody something, but most of all it gives ESPN a dominating position product wise and the positioning of Missouri disrupts the B1G's flow and limits their influence due to a lack of population.
09-08-2017 07:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 418
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
I think there is room for a little growth in the top tier then perhaps a clean break away for football? Create a "FAS" to be above FBS which is above FCS.

With a little realignment (up to 74), we get 2 overriding conferences - SEC & B1G. They get split into 4 divisions of 9 each. Each school plays 12 games: 8 divisional games, 2 non-divisional conference games, and 2 OOC games (can be conference opponents but count as OOC). The independents must play a minimum of 13 games to be considered for the CFP. Conferences have 4-team playoffs with each division winner getting in. Here's how I would set it up:

FAS

SEC
West: Arkansas, Baylor, Houston, LSU, Memphis, TCU, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech
Central: Alabama, Auburn, Cincinnati, Kentucky, Louisville, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
North: Duke, East Carolina, Maryland, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Temple, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
South: Central Florida, Clemson, Florida, Florida St, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Carolina, South Florida

B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Oregon St, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington St
Central: Arizona St, Colorado, Kansas, Kansas St, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Utah
North: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Iowa St, Michigan St, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin
East: Boston College, Connecticut, Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia

Independents: BYU, Notre Dame
(This post was last modified: 09-08-2017 09:05 AM by BePcr07.)
09-08-2017 09:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,650
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
(09-08-2017 12:02 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-07-2017 10:41 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(09-07-2017 09:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Before joining the ACC Swarbrick visited Slive. He essentially wanted some leverage and a safety net if negotiations didn't go well with the ACC, and he wanted the scoop on the ACC. The safety net aspect was centered around a scheduling agreement with SEC schools that were in the areas in which N.D. wanted a presence, namely Georgia and Florida. The only thing the mid Atlantic states provide them is a strong base for their lacrosse, which the Big 10 took a major step toward providing when John's Hopkins affiliated with them for that sport.

Remember too what added Value and Stability to the ACC, Notre Dame. Notre Dame does for the Big 10 what ESPN wants to gain by holding onto Texas. It gives the Big 10 control over add rates within their footprint essentially giving them a monopoly through the Northern Midwest.

I'm thinking ESPN is realizing that another major brand in the SEC adds significantly to content value. Possibly more than 5 games does with the ACC. I also think they are realizing that Texas is so toxic in behavior and productivity in actual sports performance that perhaps they are best treated by utilizing them to try to build into the draw out West. Texas has been trying to twist ESPN a bit through the threat of the Big 10. Delany knows that Texas is a major brand but the Big 10 if given a choice would probably much rather have Notre Dame. And by placing Texas in the PAC ESPN and FOX continue to share 50/50 rights and if the PACN can shift to ESPN that may be enough to get it done as it would involve utilizing the transformation of the LHN.

So FOX gains N.D.. The Big 10 gains N.D. N.D. makes significantly more money because they are worth significantly more to the Big 10. The ACCN gets entry into a much more viable market, but does so in a non threatening way to the SEC. Texas is removed like Napoleon to Elba Island in the West. A&M is happy. The two Oklahomas stay together and play a more regional schedule. And 9 of the Big 12 schools are placed. T.C.U. has no travel difficulty since Miami & Georgia Tech are all direct domestic flights and F.S.U. is down I10. And there is no reason not to bundle the SECN and ACCN.

I only have read about how ND used the Big XII and the ACC against each other for leverage. I did not read about the SEC angle since I've thought that ND wouldn't fit a southern conference any more than they'd fit a Midwestern conference. But figuring out the Domers is complicated enough. 03-wink

I'm not sure whether the ACC would find WVU and TCU more palatable than 5 games/yr against ND but I guess if they're assured of stability over the long term then it shouldn't matter either way. Still, ND already has a binding contract with the ACC until 2036.

I think it would depend on the valuation given to the ACC for the ACCN. But I did approach it from the perspective of how are they going to get this done in an acceptable way for the conferences, and the networks. Face it, the top priority for ESPN is hanging onto Texas. If we wait until 2024-5 there is no incentive for anyone to work with anyone else. In that case my money would be on an ESPN push for Texa-homa to the SEC. While not ideal it gives them what they want. The top brands in Texas, if not all of them should T.C.U. and Baylor also head to an ESPN held conference, and all of Oklahoma. That gives them exclusivity in the Lone Star state plus Oklahoma and that's roughly 10 schools they have rights to every Saturday in the Fall with exclusivity in reaching the college football market for 32 million.

If that comes to pass the PAC will be essentially frozen where they are now. The Big 10's options would be limited outside of the PAC. And I could see W.V.U., Cinncinnati, Notre Dame and Connecticut essentially closing out the ACC.

But if there is some coordination and cooperation in the moves then ESPN can still hang onto Texas, either as much as they have of them now minus the LHN, or all of them.

I think that has to be their top priority, even more so than Notre Dame. But we'll see. I just wanted to put a new wrinkle in the old conversation. And in doing so I dared to ask this question, "How could ESPN appease both the Big 10 and the SEC?" The reason I posed that question is that clearly those are the two most valuable and stable of the conferences.

It might well wind up being something like Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Texas and Iowa State/Texas Tech to the SEC, Notre Dame and West Virginia to the ACC.

What the PAC does at that point, who knows? But they would really be trailing the rest.

My trouble with believing Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten is I just can't see them agreeing to do it. They might get paid a little more, but at what cost?

I don't think ESPN would want to give them up anyway, but ND's interests are best served by remaining in the ACC. While the B1G would love to have them for the reasons you are stating, ND would be limiting their exposure to a region of the country that has demographic issues.

In the ACC, they not only have direct access to talent, but they also have exposure in numerous growing markets in the South without sacrificing exposure in the Northeast. If you throw Texas into the mix of the ACC then I think their decision is even easier. That and they will always have scheduling flexibility in the ACC to schedule the CA schools.

If they move to the B1G by contrast then they will have the occasional game in SEC or ACC country, but most of their games will be in the Midwest where they already rule the roost so to speak. They'll have to split a limited number of OOC games between CA, TX, FL, and GA instead of having almost all of them in a given year.

I could maybe see ESPN trying to find a way to appease the Big Ten, but I don't think Notre Dame would go along with it.
09-08-2017 11:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,376
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 670
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
(09-08-2017 11:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(09-08-2017 12:02 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-07-2017 10:41 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(09-07-2017 09:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Before joining the ACC Swarbrick visited Slive. He essentially wanted some leverage and a safety net if negotiations didn't go well with the ACC, and he wanted the scoop on the ACC. The safety net aspect was centered around a scheduling agreement with SEC schools that were in the areas in which N.D. wanted a presence, namely Georgia and Florida. The only thing the mid Atlantic states provide them is a strong base for their lacrosse, which the Big 10 took a major step toward providing when John's Hopkins affiliated with them for that sport.

Remember too what added Value and Stability to the ACC, Notre Dame. Notre Dame does for the Big 10 what ESPN wants to gain by holding onto Texas. It gives the Big 10 control over add rates within their footprint essentially giving them a monopoly through the Northern Midwest.

I'm thinking ESPN is realizing that another major brand in the SEC adds significantly to content value. Possibly more than 5 games does with the ACC. I also think they are realizing that Texas is so toxic in behavior and productivity in actual sports performance that perhaps they are best treated by utilizing them to try to build into the draw out West. Texas has been trying to twist ESPN a bit through the threat of the Big 10. Delany knows that Texas is a major brand but the Big 10 if given a choice would probably much rather have Notre Dame. And by placing Texas in the PAC ESPN and FOX continue to share 50/50 rights and if the PACN can shift to ESPN that may be enough to get it done as it would involve utilizing the transformation of the LHN.

So FOX gains N.D.. The Big 10 gains N.D. N.D. makes significantly more money because they are worth significantly more to the Big 10. The ACCN gets entry into a much more viable market, but does so in a non threatening way to the SEC. Texas is removed like Napoleon to Elba Island in the West. A&M is happy. The two Oklahomas stay together and play a more regional schedule. And 9 of the Big 12 schools are placed. T.C.U. has no travel difficulty since Miami & Georgia Tech are all direct domestic flights and F.S.U. is down I10. And there is no reason not to bundle the SECN and ACCN.

I only have read about how ND used the Big XII and the ACC against each other for leverage. I did not read about the SEC angle since I've thought that ND wouldn't fit a southern conference any more than they'd fit a Midwestern conference. But figuring out the Domers is complicated enough. 03-wink

I'm not sure whether the ACC would find WVU and TCU more palatable than 5 games/yr against ND but I guess if they're assured of stability over the long term then it shouldn't matter either way. Still, ND already has a binding contract with the ACC until 2036.

I think it would depend on the valuation given to the ACC for the ACCN. But I did approach it from the perspective of how are they going to get this done in an acceptable way for the conferences, and the networks. Face it, the top priority for ESPN is hanging onto Texas. If we wait until 2024-5 there is no incentive for anyone to work with anyone else. In that case my money would be on an ESPN push for Texa-homa to the SEC. While not ideal it gives them what they want. The top brands in Texas, if not all of them should T.C.U. and Baylor also head to an ESPN held conference, and all of Oklahoma. That gives them exclusivity in the Lone Star state plus Oklahoma and that's roughly 10 schools they have rights to every Saturday in the Fall with exclusivity in reaching the college football market for 32 million.

If that comes to pass the PAC will be essentially frozen where they are now. The Big 10's options would be limited outside of the PAC. And I could see W.V.U., Cinncinnati, Notre Dame and Connecticut essentially closing out the ACC.

But if there is some coordination and cooperation in the moves then ESPN can still hang onto Texas, either as much as they have of them now minus the LHN, or all of them.

I think that has to be their top priority, even more so than Notre Dame. But we'll see. I just wanted to put a new wrinkle in the old conversation. And in doing so I dared to ask this question, "How could ESPN appease both the Big 10 and the SEC?" The reason I posed that question is that clearly those are the two most valuable and stable of the conferences.

It might well wind up being something like Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Texas and Iowa State/Texas Tech to the SEC, Notre Dame and West Virginia to the ACC.

What the PAC does at that point, who knows? But they would really be trailing the rest.

My trouble with believing Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten is I just can't see them agreeing to do it. They might get paid a little more, but at what cost?

I don't think ESPN would want to give them up anyway, but ND's interests are best served by remaining in the ACC. While the B1G would love to have them for the reasons you are stating, ND would be limiting their exposure to a region of the country that has demographic issues.

In the ACC, they not only have direct access to talent, but they also have exposure in numerous growing markets in the South without sacrificing exposure in the Northeast. If you throw Texas into the mix of the ACC then I think their decision is even easier. That and they will always have scheduling flexibility in the ACC to schedule the CA schools.

If they move to the B1G by contrast then they will have the occasional game in SEC or ACC country, but most of their games will be in the Midwest where they already rule the roost so to speak. They'll have to split a limited number of OOC games between CA, TX, FL, and GA instead of having almost all of them in a given year.

I could maybe see ESPN trying to find a way to appease the Big Ten, but I don't think Notre Dame would go along with it.
I disagree for these reasons:

1. Even if the Big 10's TV revenue is only 10 million a year more (by 2018 it's more like 17 million a year more) the Gross Total Revenue of the Big 10 is 28 million more per school. Why? Venue size and travel crowd size of the Big 10 schools. They could keep USC, Navy (as long as G5 games are permitted) and still have one annually with the Southeast.

2. The majority of their students come from the Northeast and the Northern Midwest. The Big 10 has a major presence in both.

3. Recruiting states in the ACC? I'll take who are Georgia and Florida for $500.00 Alex. Virginia and North Carolina pale compared to the two mentioned. As long as they play Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, or Miami they are fine. And one thing you forget is that as a member of the Big 10 they will have much more freedom in scheduling those games than as a member of the ACC where 3 of those schools are regulated by the conference's rotation and where both Florida and Georgia have historically reserved their OOC P game for Georgia Tech and Florida State out of the ACC.

So I just don't find your argument here compelling. And what should happen if football declines in popularity due to CTE's? Would Notre Dame still have needs in the ACC? I doubt it.

Notre Dame needs independence for notoriety. It distinguishes them from everyone else. They can get a presence with the region that gives them the majority of their enrollment from either the Big 10 or ACC by playing in a Northeastern division of either. They can derive academic prestige from either, but it is a deeper association in the Big 10, and a more compatible association in the ACC. What they can't get from both is revenue in equal amounts. The Big 10 is clearly better positioned financially and it is a significant difference of around 170 million dollars per decade in just TV money alone. Add in the increased ticket % at away games in much larger venues and in the size of travel crowds coming into South Bend and there simply isn't a viable comparison to be made.
(This post was last modified: 09-08-2017 11:28 AM by JRsec.)
09-08-2017 11:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 418
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
(09-08-2017 11:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  My trouble with believing Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten is I just can't see them agreeing to do it. They might get paid a little more, but at what cost?

I don't think ESPN would want to give them up anyway, but ND's interests are best served by remaining in the ACC. While the B1G would love to have them for the reasons you are stating, ND would be limiting their exposure to a region of the country that has demographic issues.

In the ACC, they not only have direct access to talent, but they also have exposure in numerous growing markets in the South without sacrificing exposure in the Northeast. If you throw Texas into the mix of the ACC then I think their decision is even easier. That and they will always have scheduling flexibility in the ACC to schedule the CA schools.

If they move to the B1G by contrast then they will have the occasional game in SEC or ACC country, but most of their games will be in the Midwest where they already rule the roost so to speak. They'll have to split a limited number of OOC games between CA, TX, FL, and GA instead of having almost all of them in a given year.

I could maybe see ESPN trying to find a way to appease the Big Ten, but I don't think Notre Dame would go along with it.

If the ACC can get Texas to join, then Notre Dame may be in as well. I'd love to see a pod with Notre Dame, Texas, and Miami.
09-08-2017 11:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,650
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Another Realignment Thread: Why? Just Because
(09-08-2017 11:25 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-08-2017 11:03 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  My trouble with believing Notre Dame goes to the Big Ten is I just can't see them agreeing to do it. They might get paid a little more, but at what cost?

I don't think ESPN would want to give them up anyway, but ND's interests are best served by remaining in the ACC. While the B1G would love to have them for the reasons you are stating, ND would be limiting their exposure to a region of the country that has demographic issues.

In the ACC, they not only have direct access to talent, but they also have exposure in numerous growing markets in the South without sacrificing exposure in the Northeast. If you throw Texas into the mix of the ACC then I think their decision is even easier. That and they will always have scheduling flexibility in the ACC to schedule the CA schools.

If they move to the B1G by contrast then they will have the occasional game in SEC or ACC country, but most of their games will be in the Midwest where they already rule the roost so to speak. They'll have to split a limited number of OOC games between CA, TX, FL, and GA instead of having almost all of them in a given year.

I could maybe see ESPN trying to find a way to appease the Big Ten, but I don't think Notre Dame would go along with it.
I disagree for these reasons:

1. Even if the Big 10's TV revenue is only 10 million a year more (by 2018 it's more like 17 million a year more) the Gross Total Revenue of the Big 10 is 28 million more per school. Why? Venue size and travel crowd size of the Big 10 schools. They could keep USC, Navy (as long as G5 games are permitted) and still have one annually with the Southeast.

2. The majority of their students come from the Northeast and the Northern Midwest. The Big 10 has a major presence in both.

3. Recruiting states in the ACC? I'll take who are Georgia and Florida for $500.00 Alex. Virginia and North Carolina pale compared to the two mentioned. As long as they play Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, or Miami they are fine. And one thing you forget is that as a member of the Big 10 they will have much more freedom in scheduling those games than as a member of the ACC where 3 of those schools are regulated by the conference's rotation and where both Florida and Georgia have historically reserved their OOC P game for Georgia Tech and Florida State out of the ACC.

So I just don't find your argument here compelling. And what should happen if football declines in popularity due to CTE's? Would Notre Dame still have needs in the ACC? I doubt it.

Notre Dame needs independence for notoriety. It distinguishes them from everyone else. They can get a presence with the region that gives them the majority of their enrollment from either the Big 10 or ACC by playing in a Northeastern division of either. They can derive academic prestige from either, but it is a deeper association in the Big 10, and a more compatible association in the ACC. What they can't get from both is revenue in equal amounts. The Big 10 is clearly better positioned financially and it is a significant difference of around 170 million dollars per decade in just TV money alone. Add in the increased ticket % at away games in much larger venues and in the size of travel crowds coming into South Bend and there simply isn't a viable comparison to be made.

1. But as you said, it depends on how valuable the ACCN is. If both ND and Texas are a part of the ACC then the difference in money might not be so steep. And when it comes to the money, there's the influence of the networks particularly ESPN in this case. Do they have to give up ND to appease the B1G? Are they even interested in appeasing the B1G? Not that any network is going to pay more than they have to, but if money is a driving issue for Notre Dame then I would expect ESPN to get creative. They did so for Texas.

2. The B1G does have a major presence in both of those regions, yes, but the ACC has a major presence in the Northeast so there's no significant difference for that region. I don't see the lack of being in a Midwestern conference hurting ND's recruiting efforts in that specific region of the country either. They've never been in the B1G and it hasn't hurt them on that front yet. They are, after all, only a couple of hours away from major Midwestern population centers. The only region where ND would gain exposure in the B1G that they don't already have is in the Plains states.

3. As far as football goes, yes, FL and GA are the key states in the ACC, but there's a broader demographic issue at play. The Southern markets, including NC and VA, are growing significantly both economically and population wise. People are leaving the Midwest and this trend may continue for some time. Especially if TX is added to the list then ND is sacrificing prime exposure in some of the most significant markets in the country in exchange for a cash infusion that may not even last. So I don't think it's just a matter of whether football is a driving economic force.

If the game of football dies then most of the advantages that the B1G brings will die with it...no more full stadiums or hoards of traveling fans. In that scenario, the only real advantage the B1G would offer is easier travel for the sports teams. That might be enough, but we're talking about a very different economic world in this hypothetical and I think it would be hard to predict all the consequences.

I agree that their independence is important, but I think ND would rather remain affiliated with the ACC as opposed to joining the B1G in full. The ACC won't do anything to chase them off and FOX isn't powerful enough to strong arm ESPN into doing anything they don't want to do. In other words, I think the only thing that forces ND to join any conference is a new dynamic where only conference champs are rewarded with a playoff bid. There's no guarantee we'll see that.

Remember that Notre Dame signed a deal with the ACC stretching into the 2030s. If they did ever consider the B1G then I think we're a long time away from that. The B1G may be paying more now, but that may not be the case in 20 years if all the demographic trends continue.
09-08-2017 12:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.