(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 09:15 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 09:03 AM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 07:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  What I'm thinking is ... let's say that Stanford, Oregon, Cal and UW do leave for the B1G.

Now, the PAC is dead. So what next?

Sure, the nB12 could extend an invite to the four corners, who then join.

But what if the four corners say to themselves "we're more valuable than any four nB12 schools, so rather than us coming to them, they come to us, and we don't need all of them"?

Maybe a conference that looks like this ...

Arizona State
Arizona
Colorado
Utah
Kansas
Kansas State
Texas Tech
Baylor
Oklahoma State
TCU
BYU
Iowa State


IMO, this conference, call it what you want - could have more media value than a 16-team nB12. And if so, I don't think nB12 exit fees are a significant barrier to entry. You don't let $80m stand in the way of a more-profitable conference.

No?

What about Washington State and Oregon State?

Quo is saying the PAC died and the traditional Big12 members left the Big12 to join a new conference formed by the 4 Corners (Arizona, ASU, Utah, and Colorado)

Which is still preposterous.

Big 12 members:
- Lose their Texas and OU exit fees and GOR leverage
- Have to pay Exit fees of their own to WVU, Houston, Cincy, and UCF
- Lose the Eastern Time Zone

///

Even if we lived out the Quo's dream scenario...
WVU, Cincy, Houston, and UCF is a strong enough core to invite SMU, Memphis, ECU, and Tulane whose only purpose is to survive till 2030s for next round of realignment. This Big 12 Zombie Conference still has autonomy status, all the exit fees from most of the members leaving, and Texas/OU GOR leverage.

The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued) and not significantly more than Houston, Cincinnati and UCF. And from a recruiting standpoint the 4 corners have significantly less value. The proposal makes zero sense.

Without the top PAC schools, the 4 corners are not valuable. Basically mountain west dna. Not setup well to succeed either. I’m not sure they add value to a conference outside of the benefits of consolidation into a single leftover conference

After what came out today, at best the B1G would only consider Washington and Oregon if anyone.

(09-01-2022 07:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  What I'm thinking is ... let's say that Stanford, Oregon, Cal and UW do leave for the B1G.

Now, the PAC is dead. So what next?

Sure, the nB12 could extend an invite to the four corners, who then join.

But what if the four corners say to themselves "we're more valuable than any four nB12 schools, so rather than us coming to them, they come to us, and we don't need all of them"?

Maybe a conference that looks like this ...

Arizona State
Arizona
Colorado
Utah
Kansas
Kansas State
Texas Tech
Baylor
Oklahoma State
TCU
BYU
Iowa State


IMO, this conference, call it what you want - could have more media value than a 16-team nB12. And if so, I don't think nB12 exit fees are a significant barrier to entry. You don't let $80m stand in the way of a more-profitable conference.

No?

First off---I doubt all the 4 corners schools are each more valuable than any B12 rump school.

Secondly, even if the your "4-corners plus" version can actually deliver a higher per school payout---I think we both know it would be a marginal difference and not worth 80 million in today's dollars for a tiny incremental income stream paid over decades with increasingly less valuable inflation degraded dollars (not to mention an uncertain college football future landscape).

The reality is the CURRENT nBig12 will probably have a substantially higher payout than the Pac-12 rump (without USC,UCLA, Oregon, and Washington+ a few MW teams). So, its not the nBig12 teams that would be under the gun facing a substantial media value cut----its the Pac12 teams.....and if a 4-corner school doesnt want to make the jump, I suspect Cal or Stanford, or Washington St, or Oregon St would absolutely LOVE to take their seat in the Big12 lifeboat----or the Big12 could just stand pat as they are under no pressure to do anything that doesnt improve their current position.

(09-01-2022 12:54 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 10:17 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 08:31 AM)Poster Wrote:  A group of 4 teams "swallowing" a group of 12 teams is completely unprecedented.

It would be 4 swallowing "8."

And that has three big precedents.

In 2012-13, 3 Big East schools (Cincinnati, USF, and UConn) "swallowed" 7 C-USA teams and 2 independents that C-USA would have loved to have (Temple and Navy).

It wasn't all at once, but the first event was. In negotiations from November 2011-March 2012, the 5 remaining Big East schools (including Louisville and Rutgers, who hadn't left yet) received commitments from 8 schools: 4 from C-USA (UCF, Memphis, Houston, SMU), 2 independents (Temple, Navy), and 2 from the MWC (Boise and SDSU, who backed out 1 year later).

In 2012, 4 C-USA schools swallowed 5 of the 9 Sun Belt schools.

In 2012, 6 MWC schools swallowed 6 of the 9 WAC schools. They wisely did it in stages: they invited 3 schools in the first wave, Hawai'i a couple months later, and SJSU and USU 15 months after that.

In those four instances, the schools swallowing were in a position of strength. Example which could occur. If 6 PAC schools leave for the B1G and Big XII, the remaining four staying will likely swallow up 6 - 8 MWC schools. The PAC has strength if they can keep four or five members. The MWC schools would jump at a PAC with more than just OSU and WSU.

What the OP is proposing is four schools, with no league, telling eight schools in a current league, kick out the other members and we will come and join you. Not going to happen.

FWIW, that is not what I am proposing. I am saying the four corners schools would invite some nB12 schools to leave the nB12 and join a new league, not that they would ask the nB12 to kick out any schools. Just leave them behind.

Sorry if that wasn't clear in the OP.

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively large, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any national advertiser would choose the latter.

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

(09-01-2022 11:42 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 10:39 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 08:44 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Basically a lot of the threads on this board boil down to "can we please design a conference so we can cut out UC, UH and UCF". Alternatively, it's "The BXII (along with UC, UH and UCF) are going to get a $15M a year deal."

It COULD happen though.

If TT, OSU, and Kansas decide to leave, it would destroy the value of the nB12. If they left, everyone else would push each other out of the way to join them.

So if the Four Corners, TT, OSU, and Kansas start seriously talking about forming a new conference, they might get all 5 other B12 left-behinds on board. That would probably negate the B12 exit fee, as the new members are probably not entitled to receiving exit fees yet.

So they could (if they wanted to) replace UC, UH, UCF, and BYU with the Four Corners schools.


The only school unhappy with this scenario might be WVU. So I doubt it will happen, because WVU could always threaten to stay behind and collect a mind-boggling amount of exit fees. $80 million exit fee x 9 schools, plus all NCAA basketball tournament credits, plus negotiated fees to leave early would easily top $1 billion.

One percent chance it COULD happen. Why spend the time trying to figure it out? You can add Cincinnati, UCF, Houston and BYU in addition to West Virginia as an aggrieved party to this fantasy scenario.

"Aggrieved" as in having some legitimate legal claim for damages, or "aggrieved" in the way the Super Bowl loser is aggrieved?

(09-01-2022 01:38 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

Yes. As I said, WVU is severely underrated on these boards. They have been a really good addition, getting the Big 12 coverage in lots of places in the east. WVU fans just care more. And there is a big diaspora. It doesn't matter that Colorado has 3 times as many people as West Virginia when they don't pay attention to CU athletics.

(09-01-2022 02:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:38 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

Yes. As I said, WVU is severely underrated on these boards. They have been a really good addition, getting the Big 12 coverage in lots of places in the east. WVU fans just care more. And there is a big diaspora. It doesn't matter that Colorado has 3 times as many people as West Virginia when they don't pay attention to CU athletics.

I agree that WV is an underrated football brand on these boards. In a way, they've brought that on themselves by being mediocre since joining the Big 12, but that said, they are a state flagship and have a decent modicum of brand value - more than most nB12 schools.

That said, I think the four corners schools are collectively a better brand package than any four nB12 schools. You've got three flagships and a quasi-flaghip in that lineup, all schools with either current or past strength. I don't see any nB12 configuration matching that.

Just MO.

Pac wants to survive and looking at B-12 for inventory.
Pac has to take incremental steps.
Pac -10 expands with BYU & SDST, BYU is not in B-12 yet.
Pac has 2 advantages with TV contract
Pac plays stronger OOC, NBC looking for 10 games to complement ND
Fill up 10:30 time slots.
B-12 exit fee is with OUT, it will drop after OUT leave

Who is saying that the Big 12 will take all of the Four Corner schools? Yormark was clear that the Big 12 will not make dilutive moves. The Big 12 wants 2 or 3 more schools for late night content and new, attractive markets.

How are all Four NOT dilutive to the Big 12?

(09-01-2022 02:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:38 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

Yes. As I said, WVU is severely underrated on these boards. They have been a really good addition, getting the Big 12 coverage in lots of places in the east. WVU fans just care more. And there is a big diaspora. It doesn't matter that Colorado has 3 times as many people as West Virginia when they don't pay attention to CU athletics.

You can make the “diaspora” argument with any school. And as was discussed in Matt’s article (I think - might be someone else), the number of viewers is only part of the equation. Demographics matter a lot, and WVU is not strong in that category. If a firm is trying to enter a new market or grow market share, they will want to do that in a wealthy, growing market.

(09-01-2022 11:55 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The Big East and the AAC both got an auto-bid on Day 1. So the NCAA does make exceptions.

For these purposes, Day 1 of the AAC and Day 1 of the "new" Big East are not the same day.

Day 1 of the AAC for "getting auto-bid" purposes was when the old Big East was formed ... pro forma, "AAC" was a name change, not a change of conference.

So it is only the Big East that got an auto-bid on Day 1, under the new continuity rules.

Of course, they had a basis for their waiver application ... operating in line with by-laws explicitly set up in light of the old continuity rules ... that wouldn't apply to the hypothetical "Great Pacific West Conference" ...

... but in the hypothetical I posed, the point was that not getting an auto-bid from Day 1 would not be the same serious impediment as it would be for an FBS conference without so much basketball prowess. If they were granted a waiver, all the better.

Quote: I have long thought that a "Southwest Conference" with USC, UCLA, Texas, Oklahoma, the Four Corners, BYU, and Texas Tech would be culturally cohesive. And possibly to top conference overall, especially if they added Oregon/Washington/Texas A&M/Kansas.

Yes, that was part of the hypothetical, though I was noting it at a point in time when Texas A&M was already in the SEC, so didn't have them as part of the mix.

______________________

(09-01-2022 02:21 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  You can make the “diaspora” argument with any school. ...

Sure, but the strength of the argument depends on the strength of the emotional attachment of the diaspora with the school in question. From my experience when I was working in a warehouse in Northeast Ohio, I believe it's pretty strong in the WVU case.

(09-01-2022 02:21 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 02:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:38 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

Yes. As I said, WVU is severely underrated on these boards. They have been a really good addition, getting the Big 12 coverage in lots of places in the east. WVU fans just care more. And there is a big diaspora. It doesn't matter that Colorado has 3 times as many people as West Virginia when they don't pay attention to CU athletics.

You can make the “diaspora” argument with any school. And as was discussed in Matt’s article (I think - might be someone else), the number of viewers is only part of the equation. Demographics matter a lot, and WVU is not strong in that category. If a firm is trying to enter a new market or grow market share, they will want to do that in a wealthy, growing market.

Hence the absolutely woeful WSJ valuation of WVU which was worst in the P5 when we had 65 schools in it and could still easily be the worst of the now 69 member P5 (while it lasts).

Yes, they have a large diaspora and passionate fans, but because of the breadth of their diaspora they are statistically insignificant in any particular market sampling.

Product wise they are competitive in major revenue sports. Their numbers are simply obscured because so few stay in West Virginia.

(09-01-2022 02:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:38 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

Yes. As I said, WVU is severely underrated on these boards. They have been a really good addition, getting the Big 12 coverage in lots of places in the east. WVU fans just care more. And there is a big diaspora. It doesn't matter that Colorado has 3 times as many people as West Virginia when they don't pay attention to CU athletics.

One of my observations after posting on this board for over a decade is the over-valuing of teams in large and/or wealthy markets and trashing schools in supposed "less sophisticated markets". Do people not realize that people in some of the "lesser sophisticated markets" are the ones who actually watch football religiously? We have seen a number of studies on this board the past few months and the data is pretty clear that Colorado's TV ratings aren't very good.

These media entities aren't going to put money on a contract because a school is AAU and there are more people earning higher salaries residing in those markets.

(09-01-2022 02:40 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 02:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:38 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

Yes. As I said, WVU is severely underrated on these boards. They have been a really good addition, getting the Big 12 coverage in lots of places in the east. WVU fans just care more. And there is a big diaspora. It doesn't matter that Colorado has 3 times as many people as West Virginia when they don't pay attention to CU athletics.

One of my observations after posting on this board for over a decade is the over-valuing of teams in large and/or wealthy markets and trashing schools in supposed "less sophisticated markets". Do people not realize that people in some of the "lesser sophisticated markets" are the ones who actually watch football religiously? We have seen a number of studies on this board the past few months and the data is pretty clear that Colorado's TV ratings aren't very good.

These media entities aren't going to put money on a contract because a school is AAU and there are more people earning higher salaries residing in those markets.

Exactly. I believe Birmingham Alabama is the biggest jewel regarding media markets because the percentage of that market that watches college football is huge. This is what drives college football media money. Not academics or perceived rich areas.

(09-01-2022 01:22 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:54 PM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 10:17 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 08:31 AM)Poster Wrote:  A group of 4 teams "swallowing" a group of 12 teams is completely unprecedented.

It would be 4 swallowing "8."

And that has three big precedents.

In 2012-13, 3 Big East schools (Cincinnati, USF, and UConn) "swallowed" 7 C-USA teams and 2 independents that C-USA would have loved to have (Temple and Navy).

It wasn't all at once, but the first event was. In negotiations from November 2011-March 2012, the 5 remaining Big East schools (including Louisville and Rutgers, who hadn't left yet) received commitments from 8 schools: 4 from C-USA (UCF, Memphis, Houston, SMU), 2 independents (Temple, Navy), and 2 from the MWC (Boise and SDSU, who backed out 1 year later).

In 2012, 4 C-USA schools swallowed 5 of the 9 Sun Belt schools.

In 2012, 6 MWC schools swallowed 6 of the 9 WAC schools. They wisely did it in stages: they invited 3 schools in the first wave, Hawai'i a couple months later, and SJSU and USU 15 months after that.

In those four instances, the schools swallowing were in a position of strength. Example which could occur. If 6 PAC schools leave for the B1G and Big XII, the remaining four staying will likely swallow up 6 - 8 MWC schools. The PAC has strength if they can keep four or five members. The MWC schools would jump at a PAC with more than just OSU and WSU.

What the OP is proposing is four schools, with no league, telling eight schools in a current league, kick out the other members and we will come and join you. Not going to happen.

FWIW, that is not what I am proposing. I am saying the four corners schools would invite some nB12 schools to leave the nB12 and join a new league, not that they would ask the nB12 to kick out any schools. Just leave them behind.

Sorry if that wasn't clear in the OP.

Quo, this is like me proposing a scenario where I will win the next powerball. There are simply millions of statistical reasons why it won't happen.

In the context of your argument, there are 640 million (exits fees for 8) + 120 million reasons (exit fees for OUT) + who knows how many other reasons (NCAA left over credits).

Just not gonna happen and you know it lol.

(09-01-2022 07:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  What I'm thinking is ... let's say that Stanford, Oregon, Cal and UW do leave for the B1G.

Now, the PAC is dead. So what next?

Six remaining schools decide to merge the PAC, and all its assets, into the Big XII. Say "a merger of equals" if that helps.

(09-01-2022 07:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  What I'm thinking is ... let's say that Stanford, Oregon, Cal and UW do leave for the B1G.

Now, the PAC is dead. So what next?

Sure, the nB12 could extend an invite to the four corners, who then join.

But what if the four corners say to themselves "we're more valuable than any four nB12 schools, so rather than us coming to them, they come to us, and we don't need all of them"?

Maybe a conference that looks like this ...

Arizona State
Arizona
Colorado
Utah
Kansas
Kansas State
Texas Tech
Baylor
Oklahoma State
TCU
BYU
Iowa State


IMO, this conference, call it what you want - could have more media value than a 16-team nB12. And if so, I don't think nB12 exit fees are a significant barrier to entry. You don't let $80m stand in the way of a more-profitable conference.

No?

Eight Big XII schools merge with 4 PAC schools. It was done with all Big 8 schools merging with 4 SWC schools. Nah.

(09-01-2022 02:21 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 02:05 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:38 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 01:28 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(09-01-2022 12:59 PM)bullet Wrote:  The 4 corners have no more value than WVU (probably a little less-WVU gets significantly undervalued)

This is a terrible take. West Virginia is one of the poorest states and is one of three states that shrunk at the 2020 census. Utah, Arizona, and Colorado are comparatively wealthy, comparatively wealthy, and some of the quickest growing states in the country.

Any advertiser would choose the latter.

Except that WVU also turns on TV sets reliably in both the Pittsburgh and DC markets which have wealth and also has as strong of a national brand with a program that's top 25 all time wins and won 3 BCS bowls.

Yes. As I said, WVU is severely underrated on these boards. They have been a really good addition, getting the Big 12 coverage in lots of places in the east. WVU fans just care more. And there is a big diaspora. It doesn't matter that Colorado has 3 times as many people as West Virginia when they don't pay attention to CU athletics.

You can make the “diaspora” argument with any school. And as was discussed in Matt’s article (I think - might be someone else), the number of viewers is only part of the equation. Demographics matter a lot, and WVU is not strong in that category. If a firm is trying to enter a new market or grow market share, they will want to do that in a wealthy, growing market.

WV owns the state. Its not just the disapora of WVU alums. Wealthy can be a factor. But beer companies, couch companies and lighter fluid companies love West Virginia!