Either Cincy or Boise … One or the Other


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

(07-31-2021 01:40 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 09:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I fully expect Bedlam to continue as an OOC game.
It's obviously in everyone's interest to do so.

So was Texas A&M-Texas.
Or Kansas-Missouri.
Or Nebraska-Oklahoma...

Pistols Firing Blog: OU President, AD Says Sooners Want to Continue Bedlam After SEC Move

"OU Athletic Director Joe Castiglione said it ought to keep going like with rivalries between Iowa and Iowa State and Florida and Florida State--schools from same state but in different conferences."

"We want the Bedlam rivalry to continue well past the expiration of this media rights agreement. We want to play Oklahoma State in every sport in every year."

The TV audience for the 2020 OU/OSU game was 4.1M. The OU/OSU game was/is the B12's strongest tv conference game after OU/Texas.

(07-31-2021 08:49 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  4 year average attendance by capacity. If the presumed floor is 43, 000 per game, the schools in bold cannot get there with their current facilities.

One thing that's really interesting to me is how in college realignment chatter, everyone uses attendance as a sign of the support they have, and the fan base they have.

On a pro sports business conversations, every single new baseball stadium and football stadium and basketball/hockey arena that has opened over the last 20 years or so has been SMALLER than the one that opened before it, with the idea of raising demand for tickets and therefore increasing revenue.

Lower attendance at smaller schools isn't necessarily a bad thing. And Conference realignment is a two-way street. You CANNOT just consider what a school IS in their lesser conference, because changing conferences changes what a school is.

The revenue difference when you get "called up" to a bigger TV contract can be transformative, generates booster excitement and help you grow your program.

It's not a LARGE percentage of what factors conferences look for, but it's dumb to not include it. People have thought UCF was a potential sleeping giant for decades because they've LOOKED like a Power 5 campus this whole time. The running joke is that "UCF stands for Under Construction Forever" and people compared that to Miami -- which in their football heyday was building stuff on campus left and right.

(07-31-2021 02:36 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 08:49 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  4 year average attendance by capacity. If the presumed floor is 43, 000 per game, the schools in bold cannot get there with their current facilities.

One thing that's really interesting to me is how in college realignment chatter, everyone uses attendance as a sign of the support they have, and the fan base they have.

On a pro sports business conversations, every single new baseball stadium and football stadium and basketball/hockey arena that has opened over the last 20 years or so has been SMALLER than the one that opened before it, with the idea of raising demand for tickets and therefore increasing revenue.

Lower attendance at smaller schools isn't necessarily a bad thing. And Conference realignment is a two-way street. You CANNOT just consider what a school IS in their lesser conference, because changing conferences changes what a school is.

The revenue difference when you get "called up" to a bigger TV contract can be transformative, generates booster excitement and help you grow your program.

It's not a LARGE percentage of what factors conferences look for, but it's dumb to not include it. People have thought UCF was a potential sleeping giant for decades because they've LOOKED like a Power 5 campus this whole time. The running joke is that "UCF stands for Under Construction Forever" and people compared that to Miami -- which in their football heyday was building stuff on campus left and right.

Lower attendance is a bad thing. It almost always comes with lower ticket prices as well.

Pro leagues are downsizing because they want to increase prices to astronomical levels. And a bigger proportion of revenue comes from TV.

(07-30-2021 04:02 PM)Rob3338 Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 12:47 PM)Thewavefan Wrote:  Lol that’s hilarious. Tulane will be a major player in this round of realignment. We are the total package, academics and markets control the bus. Tulane is a power program and it’s about time we start to act like it.

Are you just making an ass of yourself or do you actually believe the mindless rubbish you spout? If it is just a mindless joke please tell us.

Combining this with what I said above...

I DON'T think that Tulane will be extremely high on the list of schools to invite, but I DO think that Tulane is a VERY UNDERRATED candidate based on what people look for in conference realignment.

There's a reason they're in the AAC NOW over a bunch of other schools that seemed like BETTER candidates BACK THEN, TOO. And the AAC money has been transformative for them compared to their C-USA revenues.

When I lived in NOLA, their budget was like $15 million and they got $1 million from TV. But now they get $7 million from TV and their budget is closer to $30m than $15m. New football stadium, basketball arena, etc.

Which lets me circle back to capacity/demand. Tulane can be BOTH a school with a small stadium to raise ticket prices, AND a school with a big stadium to have large crowds and big time atmosphere.

Their agreement with the Saints was "you can play at Tulane Stadium (An SEC stadium that hosted the Sugar Bowl, and Super Bowls)... for free, but we get to play at the stadium you're trying to build, because this place is extremely old." And they did for 35 years before building their own on-campus stadium into a tiny footprint.

Tulane can move big games vs Top 25 conference teams to the Super Dome. They can "host" the conference championship in the Superdome (in it or not). NOLA is a GREAT PLACE to put a CCG, or Tournament in pretty much every sport.


Location, academics, facilities... The biggest knock on Tulane is that "But you kind of suck at football." But every time they've found stability in Conference realignment, the football team GOT BETTER.

They were terrible when C-USA was formed, four years after the invite, their 12-0 season.
They were terrible after schools left C-USA for the Big East with 10 straight losing seasons, four years after AAC invite: three straight bowl seasons.

That's "not great" compared to other candidates, but other candidates have been able to out-recruit them for decades and it shows that "Two-way street" aspect off.


Of the AAC candidates to join the Big 12, I'd rank them 5th or 6th.

1 & 2: Cincinnati (pair with WVU) & Houston (bolster Texas after losses)
3. UCF
4. Memphis
5. USF or Tulane, depending on how much the Big 12 values travel partners and guaranteeing games in Florida for recruiting vs adding additional markets.

SMU and Tulsa are BETTER PROGRAMS, but not BETTER CANDIDATES because of who's already in the Big 12 with TCU and Oklahoma State.

Tulane isn't a gorgeous house, but it "has great bones." And that's why the AAC picked it over schools with much better success, or bigger markets/fan bases.

Again, they're not getting a Big 12 invite unless they go to 16 members; but they'll be on the list for spot 14-16 easily.

(07-31-2021 01:40 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 09:32 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I fully expect Bedlam to continue as an OOC game.
It's obviously in everyone's interest to do so.

So was Texas A&M-Texas.
Or Kansas-Missouri.
Or Nebraska-Oklahoma...

IIRC, in those cases, one of the schools didn't want to continue.

I think both OU and OKST want to continue their series.

(07-31-2021 02:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  Lower attendance is a bad thing. It almost always comes with lower ticket prices as well.

Pro leagues are downsizing because they want to increase prices to astronomical levels. And a bigger proportion of revenue comes from TV.

Yeah, that's why there was a part 2 coming.

But like I said, it's a two-way street. Everyone knows that attendance goes up when you play more attractive opponents, or you win more.

Moving to a better conference increases attendance.

(07-31-2021 02:36 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 08:49 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  4 year average attendance by capacity. If the presumed floor is 43, 000 per game, the schools in bold cannot get there with their current facilities.

One thing that's really interesting to me is how in college realignment chatter, everyone uses attendance as a sign of the support they have, and the fan base they have.

That's because in college football, unlike in pro sports, there is an obvious correlation between the power and status and brand value of a school and its home attendance. The leaders in home attendance are schools like Alabama, Michigan, Ohio State, LSU, Georgia, Tennessee, Penn State, Florida, Texas, Texas AM, Auburn, Oklahoma, Notre Dame and Clemson, and those are also almost a whose-who of the blue chip brand names. The schools that draw 75k+ are basically your list of blue-chip brand names.

The only schools that are a real outlier in terms of brand vs attendance are USC and Miami. Their brands are clearly bigger than their attendance, especially USC. But both are in balmy LA and Miami, so that's an obvious factor against them. But the correlation is very strong.

(07-31-2021 03:10 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 02:36 PM)JSchmack Wrote:  

(07-31-2021 08:49 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  4 year average attendance by capacity. If the presumed floor is 43, 000 per game, the schools in bold cannot get there with their current facilities.

One thing that's really interesting to me is how in college realignment chatter, everyone uses attendance as a sign of the support they have, and the fan base they have.

That's because in college football, unlike in pro sports, there is an obvious correlation between the power and status and brand value of a school and its home attendance. The leaders in home attendance are schools like Alabama, Michigan, Ohio State, LSU, Georgia, Tennessee, Penn State, Florida, Texas, Texas AM, Auburn, Oklahoma, Notre Dame and Clemson, and those are also almost a whose-who of the blue chip brand names. The schools that draw 75k+ are basically your list of blue-chip brand names.

The only schools that are a real outlier in terms of brand vs attendance are USC and Miami. Their brands are clearly bigger than their attendance, especially USC. But both are in balmy LA and Miami, so that's an obvious factor against them. But the correlation is very strong.

With the exception of Notre Dame, those coincidentally are all big state schools with large alumni bases and lots of dollars to spend.

*** SMUstang ***

(07-31-2021 12:19 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(07-30-2021 07:26 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The coming Big 12 legal action makes this more than a cut and dried scenario. Without the pending legal action, I believe The Big 12 could have had their pick of AAC and MWC programs, even perhaps BYU. There’s a pecking order in college football and The Big 12 is or was above The AAC. I don’t believe they were on the field, after you got past Oklahoma, the remaining Big 12 even with Texas was pretty average. Much like The ACC without Clemson.

With The Big 12 alienating ESPN, it’s going to be a tough call for schools to jump to a conference with such an uncertain future. If ESPN walks away from the remaining 8 schools in 2025, and their newly invited conference mates, where will they take their broadcast rights? If FOX says thanks but no thanks where does The Big 12 go?
Sinclair? TBS?

The Big 12 is in a tough spot. I admire Bowlsby for fighting back but question timing. I realize it may have hurt his case but I don’t understand why he didn’t wait until he had AAC teams ready to join before dropping news of the legal action.

There's still NBC Sports and CBS Sports. If they're looking for product, the Big 12 may work out but, they need teams outside a few states with larger TV markets, like Cincinnati, Memphis and UCF. Of course, a merger with the AAC is not out of the question. Interesting times!

NBC is only in the game because it has some control of its content: ND football and some other football games. NBC isn’t stuck with all the other conference content that just fills spaces. And that’s what ESPN and Fox are getting stuck with in these conference network deals. CBS less so, but, I think that’s what the SEC was getting from ESPN: more money and all the content so they could get better football pickings. CBS was like, fine…we fold.

So that’s what I think it will take for the Big XII to lure NBC or CBS…just some of the football. And that’s where it can get messy or ugly (I mean, for starters, without Texas and OU, what would those two want? This is where someone like AFA and/or Navy would help, but those two aren’t ratings mega-gold). Their control over the dial like they have now on ABC, ESPN, ESPN 2, Fox, and FS1? And hoops? No more.

(07-29-2021 10:48 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 10:19 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 10:11 AM)solohawks Wrote:  It will be fascinating if they can pick of any schools in ESPN's AAC since they have planted themselves pretty firmly in the non ESPN camp of college sports.

That's not happening, especially with the cease and desist.

They won't be getting BYU either another ESPN exclusive partner. The spite will ensure it.

So if they are looking, its Army or the MW.

Boise and AFA are the best odds right now.

I'm going completely the opposite direction on this one.

24 hours ago, I would have believed that the Big 12 would expand with the minimum number of schools possible. Maybe Cincinnati plus BYU.

Today, I think they're going to smack the AAC *HARD*. The AAC tried to present themselves as a threat and, to the extent that it was even credible, the Big 12 is going to strip mine anyone of value from the AAC.

Cincinnati will likely be fine coming out of this here. Houston and UCF will probably be fine, too. Memphis is at least in the green room.

However, any schadenfreude from the bottom half of the AAC is WILDLY misplaced. Up to this point, the Big 12 has been convincing themselves that none of the AAC schools had any value. Now, I think they're going to convince themselves to take any AAC school that would have ANY value.

Nothing is going to happen to ESPN. However, the AAC tried to fire a preemptive strike since they knew that they were at risk of losing schools to the Big 12 and I think it's going to backfire badly. The Big 12 was going to be reluctant on expansion 24 hours ago, but now I think they're COMPLETELY motivated to take any value from the AAC possible.

Poor UConn.

Someone noted above that the AAC's notice period is 27 months. That amends my guess as to when the Big 12 will start getting serious about expansion. I previously said about 2 years from now - with this new knowledge, I'm guessing 9 months prior to that. So next fall or winter.

American window bit more flexible since only talking traditional buy out and not a grant of rights (where only way out is to buy back your media rights or wait till they expire). It will be much more expensive to go early still but not to the same degree as others.