1. The SEC did not start, nor is it behind, Florida State's desire to leave. The Big 10 is.

2. How did the Big 10 kill the PAC 12? They went after 2 of their top 4 revenue producing schools, but also a complete removal of their top market.

3. The ACC is under attack, but not by the SEC which would have been quite content to remain at 16. But the taking of Oklahoma and Texas so destabilized the valuation difference between the SEC and Big 10, that the Big 10 chose to go national to try to overcome it. They thought this time Notre Dame would buy in monetizing their efforts to assimilate the key PAC 12 schools.

When Notre Dame did not commit, the pause button was hit on Washington and Oregon, but the fatal blow had been struck to the PAC 12.

4. If the Big 10 lands Florida State they are hoping the kill shot on the ACC will be Miami tagging along. And they hope that losing the two Florida schools, your largest market, will finally force Notre Dame into joining by removing their reason for remaining attached to the ACC. Make no mistake, the ACC is under attack, but by the Big 10. A crippled ACC should make it easier to pick off North Carolina and Virginia too. This is their game plan. Clemson, I remain to be convinced of, but the other is clear.

5. I doubt ESPN would be complicit with this. Moving to a 2 power conference league of 24 schools each I could see. Giving up their advertising dominance along the Eastern Seaboard South of Virginia all the way to the Keys and through the Southeast into the Southwest is not their objective. Breaking that dominance is FOX's objective and by proxy the objective of the Big 10.

6. This is the only reason a viable defensive move becomes a merger. And it is an excellent strategy for the ACC, SEC, and ESPN. If ESPN can hold the line on their control over these 2 plus regions, the Big 10 gambit will fall under the weight of its travel, lack of cohesion, and poor overall quality of product.

7. Why did the Big 10 do this? Because during COVID Ohio State, Nebraska, and Iowa had serious talks with the SEC about partnering for that season, but those talks sparked some other considerations. If to the top quality of product for a breakaway upper tier is the network's objective, then separating the top 7 or 8 of the now Big 18, from a rump of 8 to 10 underperformers, is more lucrative than separating the top 12 of the SEC from the bottom four. The top 12 of the SEC are all in the top 25 of earners in the nation. This move by the Big 10 is about long-term survival, no matter how financially healthy they are. If consolidation by brand is the goal, they are the conference with the second largest disparity between the top 3 to 4 brands in terms of total value versus the rest of their conference. Only Texas and Oklahoma had a greater disparity. Michigan and Ohio State represent 36.7% of the total value of the Big 10. Add Penn State and Wisconsin and it is approaches 60%. That is a fatal flaw.

1. The SEC did not start, nor is it behind, Florida State's desire to leave. The Big 10 is.

....


But the taking of Oklahoma and Texas so destabilized the valuation difference between the SEC and Big 10, that the Big 10 chose to go national to try to overcome it.




Soooooo ...... tell me how the SEC didn't start the destabilization again???

(07-05-2022 07:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Miami doesn't bring enough.

NEVER GONNA LIVE THIS DOWN

(08-07-2023 04:42 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  1. The SEC did not start, nor is it behind, Florida State's desire to leave. The Big 10 is.

....


But the taking of Oklahoma and Texas so destabilized the valuation difference between the SEC and Big 10, that the Big 10 chose to go national to try to overcome it.




Soooooo ...... tell me how the SEC didn't start the destabilization again???

I was referring to seeking Florida State. That Texas and Oklahoma's move provoked the Big 10 is true. But tell me who raided the ACC? It sure as hell wasn't the SEC was it! Where again did Maryland go? As a Cardinal fan surely, you can appreciate the distinction.

How would an SEC/ACC merger work? Full or partial? Who’s left out? I don’t see a full merger but maybe key brands in the southern flank. Where does Louisville land with the B12 filling up? Is FSU posturing to strengthen the ACC hand in negotiations with ESPN?

(08-07-2023 06:46 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How would an SEC/ACC merger work? Full or partial? Who’s left out? I don’t see a full merger but maybe key brands in the southern flank. Where does Louisville land with the B12 filling up? Is FSU posturing to strengthen the ACC hand in negotiations with ESPN?

going public ...
airing grievances ...
top brass reflects fan base wishes ...
they want out ...
in no uncertain terms ...

NSYNC

(08-07-2023 06:46 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How would an SEC/ACC merger work? Full or partial? Who’s left out? I don’t see a full merger but maybe key brands in the southern flank. Where does Louisville land with the B12 filling up? Is FSU posturing to strengthen the ACC hand in negotiations with ESPN?

If JR is right, FSU may be posturing to sabotage ACC attempts to expand (on orders from the Big Ten).

ESPN could halt the entire process.

All they would have to do is give all of the schools in the ACC a small raise and provide a path for increased revenue

(08-07-2023 08:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 06:46 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How would an SEC/ACC merger work? Full or partial? Who’s left out? I don’t see a full merger but maybe key brands in the southern flank. Where does Louisville land with the B12 filling up? Is FSU posturing to strengthen the ACC hand in negotiations with ESPN?

If JR is right, FSU may be posturing to sabotage ACC attempts to expand (on orders from the Big Ten).

You'll know on the 15th who they are working for if they give notice. Shortly after secret talks will lead to public talks which will be called the first talks. If those talks are with the Big 10 then you had better add Stanford and Cal and ask for an extension of the ACC grant of rights with a newly adjusted amount, or merge with the SEC, because it means Miami and possibly Clemson could be next.

If they have talks with the SEC, it means ESPN was giving them the wink so they could do some product rearranging. If so, they likely are taking nobody with them, and I look for Kansas to be their travel companion to the SEC.

ESPN has kept Kansas with a little extra assistance on the T3 while they were in the Big 12, I think the Mouse has wanted them fully for some time now. It didn't happen in 2012, so I think they are trying to land them sometime soon.

IF the SEC has any second Florida school it will help with the scheduling issue. I had hoped we would pick up South Florida and Kansas so it would not involve another conference or be sticky. Plus, USF would be grateful and that goes a long way for good future relations. With an SEC brand they would catch up soon enough. If it's FSU that's okay, Miami would have given us new reach, but the Noles deliver far more of the viewers than the other two.

I don't think the SEC has ever actively sought an SEC school besides Clemson in '91 and now that U.S.C. east is with us that's not a high priority either. The preference in the conference was to finish with Texas and Oklahoma. I knew when the Big 10 took USC and UCLA it was going bigger because there was no way that taking just the two to the West would be profitable long term. You alienate the rest of the West Coast fans, only have fickle L.A. fans, and you can't monetize them effectively with only two. That meant the Big 10 had to expand further. Oregon and Washington coming into the Big 10 at 31 million each and not moving to a full cut until the next contract renewal meant they weren't done. They want Notre Dame so very badly they needed to acquire what the ACC had to offer that they didn't. Name games in Florida and Georgia which were stipulated to Mike Slive by Swarbrick when Swarbrick visited Slive in 2011 before becoming affiliated with the ACC. He wanted to know if Slive would schedule games in Florida and Georgia with Notre Dame if things fell through in the ACC. The Georgia series was scheduled.

The Big 10 will seek a Florida School and possibly Georgia Tech to try to lure them. FSU wanted assurance to keep an in-state rival is what I hear, that means Miami.

Those moves damage not only the ACC, but the SEC in that it impacts our ad rates for advertising in Florida. Georgia Tech wouldn't impact our rates in Georgia where the Dawgs hold 85% of the state viewership.

This is one reason why I believe ESPN has been in touch with Sankey to discuss all options to stop it. Merger being perhaps the best, but essentially tuning up the exit costs on an FSU move to FOX / B1G or offering them a reduced out if they move to the SEC being the least impactful. Least because if they go that route the SEC won't be taking anyone else unless the Big 10 tries to break through again.

If it goes that route it upholds ESPN willingness to impose much higher costs on anyone attempting to leave the Disney family for another network. I doubt Miami would raise half a billion to get out and Georgia Tech couldn't afford it.

If Stanford and Cal come on board, you get to add money to the ACCN and pick up a time slot which should boost you some.

That's why I think the travel mate would be a blue blood basketball program, like Kansas. But we'll see.

Anyway, this is the way I read the tea leaves and there is a potentially costly threat. Since Big 10 social media influencers started the FSU and Clemson with Oregon and Washington a couple of weeks ago I think you have your smoking gun. The SEC which was not looking to expand would just be a convenient way to blunt the attempt.

(08-07-2023 09:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 08:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 06:46 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How would an SEC/ACC merger work? Full or partial? Who’s left out? I don’t see a full merger but maybe key brands in the southern flank. Where does Louisville land with the B12 filling up? Is FSU posturing to strengthen the ACC hand in negotiations with ESPN?

If JR is right, FSU may be posturing to sabotage ACC attempts to expand (on orders from the Big Ten).

You'll know on the 15th who they are working for if they give notice. Shortly after secret talks will lead to public talks which will be called the first talks. If those talks are with the Big 10 then you had better add Stanford and Cal and ask for an extension of the ACC grant of rights with a newly adjusted amount, or merge with the SEC, because it means Miami and possibly Clemson could be next.

If they have talks with the SEC, it means ESPN was giving them the wink so they could do some product rearranging. If so, they likely are taking nobody with them, and I look for Kansas to be their travel companion to the SEC.

ESPN has kept Kansas with a little extra assistance on the T3 while they were in the Big 12, I think the Mouse has wanted them fully for some time now. It didn't happen in 2012, so I think they are trying to land them sometime soon.

IF the SEC has any second Florida school it will help with the scheduling issue. I had hoped we would pick up South Florida and Kansas so it would not involve another conference or be sticky. Plus, USF would be grateful and that goes a long way for good future relations. With an SEC brand they would catch up soon enough. If it's FSU that's okay, Miami would have given us new reach, but the Noles deliver far more of the viewers than the other two.

I don't think the SEC has ever actively sought an SEC school besides Clemson in '91 and now that U.S.C. east is with us that's not a high priority either. The preference in the conference was to finish with Texas and Oklahoma. I knew when the Big 10 took USC and UCLA it was going bigger because there was no way that taking just the two to the West would be profitable long term. You alienate the rest of the West Coast fans, only have fickle L.A. fans, and you can't monetize them effectively with only two. That meant the Big 10 had to expand further. Oregon and Washington coming into the Big 10 at 31 million each and not moving to a full cut until the next contract renewal meant they weren't done. They want Notre Dame so very badly they needed to acquire what the ACC had to offer that they didn't. Name games in Florida and Georgia which were stipulated to Mike Slive by Swarbrick when Swarbrick visited Slive in 2011 before becoming affiliated with the ACC. He wanted to know if Slive would schedule games in Florida and Georgia with Notre Dame if things fell through in the ACC. The Georgia series was scheduled.

The Big 10 will seek a Florida School and possibly Georgia Tech to try to lure them. FSU wanted assurance to keep an in-state rival is what I hear, that means Miami.

Those moves damage not only the ACC, but the SEC in that it impacts our ad rates for advertising in Florida. Georgia Tech wouldn't impact our rates in Georgia where the Dawgs hold 85% of the state viewership.

This is one reason why I believe ESPN has been in touch with Sankey to discuss all options to stop it. Merger being perhaps the best, but essentially tuning up the exit costs on an FSU move to FOX / B1G or offering them a reduced out if they move to the SEC being the least impactful. Least because if they go that route the SEC won't be taking anyone else unless the Big 10 tries to break through again.

If it goes that route it upholds ESPN willingness to impose much higher costs on anyone attempting to leave the Disney family for another network. I doubt Miami would raise half a billion to get out and Georgia Tech couldn't afford it.

If Stanford and Cal come on board, you get to add money to the ACCN and pick up a time slot which should boost you some.

That's why I think the travel mate would be a blue blood basketball program, like Kansas. But we'll see.

Anyway, this is the way I read the tea leaves and there is a potentially costly threat. Since Big 10 social media influencers started the FSU and Clemson with Oregon and Washington a couple of weeks ago I think you have your smoking gun. The SEC which was not looking to expand would just be a convenient way to blunt the attempt.

So you think the SEC will only add 2? Any chance for the Magnificent 7? What if the B1G adds 4-6 for 24?

I guess we'll find out in 7 days.

(08-07-2023 11:08 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 09:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 08:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 06:46 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How would an SEC/ACC merger work? Full or partial? Who’s left out? I don’t see a full merger but maybe key brands in the southern flank. Where does Louisville land with the B12 filling up? Is FSU posturing to strengthen the ACC hand in negotiations with ESPN?

If JR is right, FSU may be posturing to sabotage ACC attempts to expand (on orders from the Big Ten).

You'll know on the 15th who they are working for if they give notice. Shortly after secret talks will lead to public talks which will be called the first talks. If those talks are with the Big 10 then you had better add Stanford and Cal and ask for an extension of the ACC grant of rights with a newly adjusted amount, or merge with the SEC, because it means Miami and possibly Clemson could be next.

If they have talks with the SEC, it means ESPN was giving them the wink so they could do some product rearranging. If so, they likely are taking nobody with them, and I look for Kansas to be their travel companion to the SEC.

ESPN has kept Kansas with a little extra assistance on the T3 while they were in the Big 12, I think the Mouse has wanted them fully for some time now. It didn't happen in 2012, so I think they are trying to land them sometime soon.

IF the SEC has any second Florida school it will help with the scheduling issue. I had hoped we would pick up South Florida and Kansas so it would not involve another conference or be sticky. Plus, USF would be grateful and that goes a long way for good future relations. With an SEC brand they would catch up soon enough. If it's FSU that's okay, Miami would have given us new reach, but the Noles deliver far more of the viewers than the other two.

I don't think the SEC has ever actively sought an SEC school besides Clemson in '91 and now that U.S.C. east is with us that's not a high priority either. The preference in the conference was to finish with Texas and Oklahoma. I knew when the Big 10 took USC and UCLA it was going bigger because there was no way that taking just the two to the West would be profitable long term. You alienate the rest of the West Coast fans, only have fickle L.A. fans, and you can't monetize them effectively with only two. That meant the Big 10 had to expand further. Oregon and Washington coming into the Big 10 at 31 million each and not moving to a full cut until the next contract renewal meant they weren't done. They want Notre Dame so very badly they needed to acquire what the ACC had to offer that they didn't. Name games in Florida and Georgia which were stipulated to Mike Slive by Swarbrick when Swarbrick visited Slive in 2011 before becoming affiliated with the ACC. He wanted to know if Slive would schedule games in Florida and Georgia with Notre Dame if things fell through in the ACC. The Georgia series was scheduled.

The Big 10 will seek a Florida School and possibly Georgia Tech to try to lure them. FSU wanted assurance to keep an in-state rival is what I hear, that means Miami.

Those moves damage not only the ACC, but the SEC in that it impacts our ad rates for advertising in Florida. Georgia Tech wouldn't impact our rates in Georgia where the Dawgs hold 85% of the state viewership.

This is one reason why I believe ESPN has been in touch with Sankey to discuss all options to stop it. Merger being perhaps the best, but essentially tuning up the exit costs on an FSU move to FOX / B1G or offering them a reduced out if they move to the SEC being the least impactful. Least because if they go that route the SEC won't be taking anyone else unless the Big 10 tries to break through again.

If it goes that route it upholds ESPN willingness to impose much higher costs on anyone attempting to leave the Disney family for another network. I doubt Miami would raise half a billion to get out and Georgia Tech couldn't afford it.

If Stanford and Cal come on board, you get to add money to the ACCN and pick up a time slot which should boost you some.

That's why I think the travel mate would be a blue blood basketball program, like Kansas. But we'll see.

Anyway, this is the way I read the tea leaves and there is a potentially costly threat. Since Big 10 social media influencers started the FSU and Clemson with Oregon and Washington a couple of weeks ago I think you have your smoking gun. The SEC which was not looking to expand would just be a convenient way to blunt the attempt.

So you think the SEC will only add 2? Any chance for the Magnificent 7? What if the B1G adds 4-6 for 24?

I guess we'll find out in 7 days.

It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that our B1G AD turned ACC commish is working with the B1G. You couldn’t ask for a better gobetween.

(08-08-2023 12:58 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 11:08 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 09:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 08:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 06:46 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  How would an SEC/ACC merger work? Full or partial? Who’s left out? I don’t see a full merger but maybe key brands in the southern flank. Where does Louisville land with the B12 filling up? Is FSU posturing to strengthen the ACC hand in negotiations with ESPN?

If JR is right, FSU may be posturing to sabotage ACC attempts to expand (on orders from the Big Ten).

You'll know on the 15th who they are working for if they give notice. Shortly after secret talks will lead to public talks which will be called the first talks. If those talks are with the Big 10 then you had better add Stanford and Cal and ask for an extension of the ACC grant of rights with a newly adjusted amount, or merge with the SEC, because it means Miami and possibly Clemson could be next.

If they have talks with the SEC, it means ESPN was giving them the wink so they could do some product rearranging. If so, they likely are taking nobody with them, and I look for Kansas to be their travel companion to the SEC.

ESPN has kept Kansas with a little extra assistance on the T3 while they were in the Big 12, I think the Mouse has wanted them fully for some time now. It didn't happen in 2012, so I think they are trying to land them sometime soon.

IF the SEC has any second Florida school it will help with the scheduling issue. I had hoped we would pick up South Florida and Kansas so it would not involve another conference or be sticky. Plus, USF would be grateful and that goes a long way for good future relations. With an SEC brand they would catch up soon enough. If it's FSU that's okay, Miami would have given us new reach, but the Noles deliver far more of the viewers than the other two.

I don't think the SEC has ever actively sought an SEC school besides Clemson in '91 and now that U.S.C. east is with us that's not a high priority either. The preference in the conference was to finish with Texas and Oklahoma. I knew when the Big 10 took USC and UCLA it was going bigger because there was no way that taking just the two to the West would be profitable long term. You alienate the rest of the West Coast fans, only have fickle L.A. fans, and you can't monetize them effectively with only two. That meant the Big 10 had to expand further. Oregon and Washington coming into the Big 10 at 31 million each and not moving to a full cut until the next contract renewal meant they weren't done. They want Notre Dame so very badly they needed to acquire what the ACC had to offer that they didn't. Name games in Florida and Georgia which were stipulated to Mike Slive by Swarbrick when Swarbrick visited Slive in 2011 before becoming affiliated with the ACC. He wanted to know if Slive would schedule games in Florida and Georgia with Notre Dame if things fell through in the ACC. The Georgia series was scheduled.

The Big 10 will seek a Florida School and possibly Georgia Tech to try to lure them. FSU wanted assurance to keep an in-state rival is what I hear, that means Miami.

Those moves damage not only the ACC, but the SEC in that it impacts our ad rates for advertising in Florida. Georgia Tech wouldn't impact our rates in Georgia where the Dawgs hold 85% of the state viewership.

This is one reason why I believe ESPN has been in touch with Sankey to discuss all options to stop it. Merger being perhaps the best, but essentially tuning up the exit costs on an FSU move to FOX / B1G or offering them a reduced out if they move to the SEC being the least impactful. Least because if they go that route the SEC won't be taking anyone else unless the Big 10 tries to break through again.

If it goes that route it upholds ESPN willingness to impose much higher costs on anyone attempting to leave the Disney family for another network. I doubt Miami would raise half a billion to get out and Georgia Tech couldn't afford it.

If Stanford and Cal come on board, you get to add money to the ACCN and pick up a time slot which should boost you some.

That's why I think the travel mate would be a blue blood basketball program, like Kansas. But we'll see.

Anyway, this is the way I read the tea leaves and there is a potentially costly threat. Since Big 10 social media influencers started the FSU and Clemson with Oregon and Washington a couple of weeks ago I think you have your smoking gun. The SEC which was not looking to expand would just be a convenient way to blunt the attempt.

So you think the SEC will only add 2? Any chance for the Magnificent 7? What if the B1G adds 4-6 for 24?

I guess we'll find out in 7 days.

It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that our B1G AD turned ACC commish is working with the B1G. You couldn’t ask for a better gobetween.

Take that to the bank! If the ACC gets nuked by expansion he knows he has a job back home.

(08-07-2023 02:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. The SEC did not start, nor is it behind, Florida State's desire to leave. The Big 10 is.

2. How did the Big 10 kill the PAC 12? They went after 2 of their top 4 revenue producing schools, but also a complete removal of their top market.

3. The ACC is under attack, but not by the SEC which would have been quite content to remain at 16. But the taking of Oklahoma and Texas so destabilized the valuation difference between the SEC and Big 10, that the Big 10 chose to go national to try to overcome it. They thought this time Notre Dame would buy in monetizing their efforts to assimilate the key PAC 12 schools.

When Notre Dame did not commit, the pause button was hit on Washington and Oregon, but the fatal blow had been struck to the PAC 12.

4. If the Big 10 lands Florida State they are hoping the kill shot on the ACC will be Miami tagging along. And they hope that losing the two Florida schools, your largest market, will finally force Notre Dame into joining by removing their reason for remaining attached to the ACC. Make no mistake, the ACC is under attack, but by the Big 10. A crippled ACC should make it easier to pick off North Carolina and Virginia too. This is their game plan. Clemson, I remain to be convinced of, but the other is clear.

5. I doubt ESPN would be complicit with this. Moving to a 2 power conference league of 24 schools each I could see. Giving up their advertising dominance along the Eastern Seaboard South of Virginia all the way to the Keys and through the Southeast into the Southwest is not their objective. Breaking that dominance is FOX's objective and by proxy the objective of the Big 10.

6. This is the only reason a viable defensive move becomes a merger. And it is an excellent strategy for the ACC, SEC, and ESPN. If ESPN can hold the line on their control over these 2 plus regions, the Big 10 gambit will fall under the weight of its travel, lack of cohesion, and poor overall quality of product.

7. Why did the Big 10 do this? Because during COVID Ohio State, Nebraska, and Iowa had serious talks with the SEC about partnering for that season, but those talks sparked some other considerations. If to the top quality of product for a breakaway upper tier is the network's objective, then separating the top 7 or 8 of the now Big 18, from a rump of 8 to 10 underperformers, is more lucrative than separating the top 12 of the SEC from the bottom four. The top 12 of the SEC are all in the top 25 of earners in the nation. This move by the Big 10 is about long-term survival, no matter how financially healthy they are. If consolidation by brand is the goal, they are the conference with the second largest disparity between the top 3 to 4 brands in terms of total value versus the rest of their conference. Only Texas and Oklahoma had a greater disparity. Michigan and Ohio State represent 36.7% of the total value of the Big 10. Add Penn State and Wisconsin and it is approaches 60%. That is a fatal flaw.

There are anti-trust laws to guard any business except college football. The key to stop B1G abusing its monopoly power might be Syracuse. ACC should use Syracuse's contact to ask Biden to do his job.

(08-08-2023 03:53 AM)ArQ Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 02:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. The SEC did not start, nor is it behind, Florida State's desire to leave. The Big 10 is.

2. How did the Big 10 kill the PAC 12? They went after 2 of their top 4 revenue producing schools, but also a complete removal of their top market.

3. The ACC is under attack, but not by the SEC which would have been quite content to remain at 16. But the taking of Oklahoma and Texas so destabilized the valuation difference between the SEC and Big 10, that the Big 10 chose to go national to try to overcome it. They thought this time Notre Dame would buy in monetizing their efforts to assimilate the key PAC 12 schools.

When Notre Dame did not commit, the pause button was hit on Washington and Oregon, but the fatal blow had been struck to the PAC 12.

4. If the Big 10 lands Florida State they are hoping the kill shot on the ACC will be Miami tagging along. And they hope that losing the two Florida schools, your largest market, will finally force Notre Dame into joining by removing their reason for remaining attached to the ACC. Make no mistake, the ACC is under attack, but by the Big 10. A crippled ACC should make it easier to pick off North Carolina and Virginia too. This is their game plan. Clemson, I remain to be convinced of, but the other is clear.

5. I doubt ESPN would be complicit with this. Moving to a 2 power conference league of 24 schools each I could see. Giving up their advertising dominance along the Eastern Seaboard South of Virginia all the way to the Keys and through the Southeast into the Southwest is not their objective. Breaking that dominance is FOX's objective and by proxy the objective of the Big 10.

6. This is the only reason a viable defensive move becomes a merger. And it is an excellent strategy for the ACC, SEC, and ESPN. If ESPN can hold the line on their control over these 2 plus regions, the Big 10 gambit will fall under the weight of its travel, lack of cohesion, and poor overall quality of product.

7. Why did the Big 10 do this? Because during COVID Ohio State, Nebraska, and Iowa had serious talks with the SEC about partnering for that season, but those talks sparked some other considerations. If to the top quality of product for a breakaway upper tier is the network's objective, then separating the top 7 or 8 of the now Big 18, from a rump of 8 to 10 underperformers, is more lucrative than separating the top 12 of the SEC from the bottom four. The top 12 of the SEC are all in the top 25 of earners in the nation. This move by the Big 10 is about long-term survival, no matter how financially healthy they are. If consolidation by brand is the goal, they are the conference with the second largest disparity between the top 3 to 4 brands in terms of total value versus the rest of their conference. Only Texas and Oklahoma had a greater disparity. Michigan and Ohio State represent 36.7% of the total value of the Big 10. Add Penn State and Wisconsin and it is approaches 60%. That is a fatal flaw.

There is anti-trust laws to guard any business except college football. The key to stop B1G abusing its monopoly power might be Syracuse. ACC should use Syracuse's contact to ask Biden to do his job.

smh

(08-08-2023 04:59 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(08-08-2023 03:53 AM)ArQ Wrote:  

(08-07-2023 02:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. The SEC did not start, nor is it behind, Florida State's desire to leave. The Big 10 is.

2. How did the Big 10 kill the PAC 12? They went after 2 of their top 4 revenue producing schools, but also a complete removal of their top market.

3. The ACC is under attack, but not by the SEC which would have been quite content to remain at 16. But the taking of Oklahoma and Texas so destabilized the valuation difference between the SEC and Big 10, that the Big 10 chose to go national to try to overcome it. They thought this time Notre Dame would buy in monetizing their efforts to assimilate the key PAC 12 schools.

When Notre Dame did not commit, the pause button was hit on Washington and Oregon, but the fatal blow had been struck to the PAC 12.

4. If the Big 10 lands Florida State they are hoping the kill shot on the ACC will be Miami tagging along. And they hope that losing the two Florida schools, your largest market, will finally force Notre Dame into joining by removing their reason for remaining attached to the ACC. Make no mistake, the ACC is under attack, but by the Big 10. A crippled ACC should make it easier to pick off North Carolina and Virginia too. This is their game plan. Clemson, I remain to be convinced of, but the other is clear.

5. I doubt ESPN would be complicit with this. Moving to a 2 power conference league of 24 schools each I could see. Giving up their advertising dominance along the Eastern Seaboard South of Virginia all the way to the Keys and through the Southeast into the Southwest is not their objective. Breaking that dominance is FOX's objective and by proxy the objective of the Big 10.

6. This is the only reason a viable defensive move becomes a merger. And it is an excellent strategy for the ACC, SEC, and ESPN. If ESPN can hold the line on their control over these 2 plus regions, the Big 10 gambit will fall under the weight of its travel, lack of cohesion, and poor overall quality of product.

7. Why did the Big 10 do this? Because during COVID Ohio State, Nebraska, and Iowa had serious talks with the SEC about partnering for that season, but those talks sparked some other considerations. If to the top quality of product for a breakaway upper tier is the network's objective, then separating the top 7 or 8 of the now Big 18, from a rump of 8 to 10 underperformers, is more lucrative than separating the top 12 of the SEC from the bottom four. The top 12 of the SEC are all in the top 25 of earners in the nation. This move by the Big 10 is about long-term survival, no matter how financially healthy they are. If consolidation by brand is the goal, they are the conference with the second largest disparity between the top 3 to 4 brands in terms of total value versus the rest of their conference. Only Texas and Oklahoma had a greater disparity. Michigan and Ohio State represent 36.7% of the total value of the Big 10. Add Penn State and Wisconsin and it is approaches 60%. That is a fatal flaw.

There is anti-trust laws to guard any business except college football. The key to stop B1G abusing its monopoly power might be Syracuse. ACC should use Syracuse's contact to ask Biden to do his job.

smh

Hey, don't laugh. He rented a house there 55 years ago. Connections like that run deep. /s

The B10 is the enemy of the ACC. Always has been.

The SEC is the frenemy of the ACC. Always has been.

Just because JR is a SEC homer to the max does not make him wrong on this point. It's a sociocultural thing, rooted in changing demographics.

The Big 10 is Chicago at its heart culturally and geographically extending to a ring that runs from Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, Iowa City, Minneapolis and back to Chicago. Rutgers, Penn State, Nebraska, MD, are not part of the cultural heart of the Big 10.

The heart of the ACC is the Tidewater Atlantic with the center between Richmond and Greensboro. FSU, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Miami, and Louisville are not part of this heart. GT has been integrated into the heart.

Stabs at the heart don't work that's why the stabs are at the periphery.

In a way, it's just another Civil War type battle of attrition between two very different cultures.

The SEC has NEVER made a move against the ACC.

1. They don't have to
2. They gain nothing by it
3. And a strong ACC helps them defend their turf

The B10 is a real villain.

(08-08-2023 11:22 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  The B10 is a real villain.

1. The Big 10 began targeting schools in stable conferences when they added Nebraska.
2. That triggered TAMU, Mizzou, and Colorado to run.
3. They thought that would shake Texas loose, but it did not.
4. Then they sought to target the ACC and thereby apply the kill shot to the Big East.
5. They caused MD and Rutgers to move, killing off the Big East and sending Louisville to the ACC.
6. They tampered with the P12's tv renewal by taking UCLA and USC.
7. That triggered Colorado to move again
8. That triggered UA to move which fully destabilized the PAC allowing the Big 10 to kill it by taking Washington and Oregon cheap.
9. Now they seek to destabilize the ACC by sweet talking it's intellectually weakest member

10. The next B10 play is to destabilize the core of the ACC in attempt to cut the Gordian Knot. They will do this sometime in the next 4-5 years by tinkering with VT and NC State in an effort to shake UNC.

(08-08-2023 11:22 AM)random asian guy Wrote:  The B10 is a real villain.

Is the Big 10 the real villain? Or, just the unwitting face of the real villain. The conflict between ESPN and Fox vying for sports media domination.