(12-12-2023 08:20 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 06:30 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  The combined market of NC and Va. represent 20 Million people, which is the largest unaligned or heavily influenced market (SEC/B1G) left in the country.

If those core ACC schools (located in NC and Va.) decide to stay together in the ACC and the B1G and SEC still want to expand, other than new markets, what are their needs?

The SEC perceives that the need/want: a) a second school in Florida and b) a basketball school to be a rival for Kentucky.

The B1G (other than markets) is probably set.

Besides NC and VA? (which I think will be split between the two: NC/NC State and VT, and VA and Duke, respectively. Though I've seen people suggest that the Big10 might end up with VA, NC/NC State, Duke.)

I think both want into Florida. (If espn and the SEC don't find a way to make FSU happy, I think they're making a huge mistake.)

After that, it's really just guesswork. The main question being do the conferences feel the need to bring schools in-house for games, or are they fine with a P4 situation.

And I think that will come down to logistics and what happens with pay for play, etc.

Splitting Carolina/State and UVa/VaTech gives each conference a watered down product that won't pay for itself at this point in the game. I don't know why I have to keep explaining that to people.

There should be a simple formula stickied on this forum that is required reading.

Any school joining the SEC and Big Ten needs to drive the current media revenue up to the point which every current member sees an increase in their payout.

The last schools that were invited were pretty huge, that is not a coincident. It took Oklahoma and Texas to drive SEC revenue up, and it took UCLA and USC to drive up Big Ten revenues. UO and UW got partial shares and I've been telling everyone to pay attention how the Big Ten negotiations go next round. Because they absolutely have to get a deal which pays those two equal revenue with everyone else. FOX is not on the hook to increase their deal in order to pay them equal shares. I repeat, FOX is not on the hook to increase their deal in order to pay them equal shares. In fact, we might see Amazon decide to come in the market (we know they're interested) and take over the Big Ten increasing shares because they can. Where does that leave FOX?

Your first sentence in your response - I think you're wrong there.

For one thing it's a bit of an over-simplification.

A school can potentially play any other school regardless of what conference they are in.

And while it may be "nice" to add existing past rivals, adding a school to a conference is about how they matchup to that conference, not necessarily how they match up with whoever joins along with them.

There are (will be) 18 members of the Big10 and 16 of the SEC. While caring about NC's rivals (for example) may be a discussion point, there are quite a few other things conferences tend to be concerned with.

As for who gets invited, I see a lot tossed around about words like "revenue" and such.

But how a school makes money for the others in the conference isn't a single line plus or minus on a balance sheet.

And trying to compare situations with different schools is more than a little complicated. Circumstances can make those choices vary by quite a bit.

We know this if for no other reason that the Big10 said "no" to WA and OR under one set of circumstances, and later said "yes" under a different set of circumstances.

And with due respect to Boise State - under previous circumstances in years past, they were a top pick for realignment for certain conferences. And of late, that hasn't seemed to as much be the case. If only based upon the various short lists we've seen of late.

Or look at what has happened with San Diego State.

Or on the converse, SMU has been "the bridesmaid but not the bride" in a lot of realignment scenarios. But adjust the circumstances - and now they are joining the ACC.

So things like FSU's rebuff from the CFP could contribute to circumstances. Will they? I don't know. This could be a flash in the pan, or something more. But as they already wanted out of the ACC, I think this just adds incentive to the motivating forces, which wish to leave.

Would the SEC take them? In my opinion, very likely. Looking past the rhetoric, and looking at the entirety of schools that the SEC comprises, I think they are an easy yes.

But this of course presumes that recent events have not burnt bridges.

This would not be the first time FSU made choices based upon circumstances of the moment (like staying in the ACC, and signing - and later signing the re-up - of the GoR).

The SEC is a conference that I think it's fair to say, values football a lot. And so too, institutional "fit" - however one defines that.

And most lists I have seen (over years), suggest that the short list to the SEC should be FSU, Clemson, and VT. With various suggestions on the 4th school. That said, I think VT is 50/50 whether it's able to tag along to an SEC invite or if it stays in the ACC. And I've seen arguments that maybe Clemson has started to slip enough on the field to question whether they get an invite.

But those 3 aside, everyone seems to be looking at the state of North Carolina. For reasons similar to why politicians in the last several years have - it is a growing state with interesting demographics.

So I'm going to call out this argument of needing to be a "bigger school than x" as nonsense.

I don't know what the P2 will do. It's very possible they'll stand pat with the hands they have. But I wouldn't bet the house on it...

(12-11-2023 04:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Likelihood is pretty low. ESPN is telling the SEC they are happy, and that more than 16 is "a consortium, not a conference" (Peter Thamel) which is "hard to keep together" (translation, we at ESPN would not oppose breaking the SEC up if it gets too big; side note, the B1G may already be too big). Finally ESPN says, "the SEC is happy at 16" (translation, ESPN is happy with the SEC at 16)...

...In the end, we are probably only going to see a small number of schools move. The very high valuation requirements of the SEC simply limit the number who could move to maybe two, and only if ESPN agrees. If an ACC school tries to go to the B1G, do not expect ESPN to make it easy for them to join their competitor's league. In short the majority of the 7 will still be in the ACC seven years from now.

Here's how I see it:

1. Financial issues at Disney rule out moving a bunch of ACC teams to the SEC at this time.

2. ESPN would prefer to keep the ACC intact for the full duration of the contract, so they will work small deals (e.g. sell off some ACC rights to The CW, etc.) to keep ACC schools within about $20M/year of the SEC (note: the gap is not and never has been $40M -- that is a projection which, IMO, will never happen).

3. I agree that if any ACC team wants to move to the Big Ten, there will be no discount -- it will cost the full buyout price.

JMO, of course.

(12-12-2023 08:43 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 08:38 AM)ren.hoek Wrote:  The post-Texas/OU Big12 will be in worse shape.

All I know is it’s not going to sit right with the P2 if subpar Big 12/ACC champs are consistently outside the top 10. ...

It would rankle a lot worse if they were guaranteed a home game QF rather than just a bye into a neutral site game ... the #1 or #2 at-large SEC or Big Ten team that wins through to the #3 or #4 final against an under-top-10 ACC/Big12 champion sure isn't going to be crying.

Indeed, the #1 at-large team that hosts a Go5 champion and then plays against an under-top-10 ACC/Big12 champion? Will they be crying? In the Ozzie phrase, they'd be laughing.

(12-12-2023 09:38 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  ....
2. ESPN would prefer to keep the ACC intact for the full duration of the contract, so they will work small deals (e.g. sell off some ACC rights to The CW, etc.) to keep ACC schools within about $20M/year of the SEC (note: the gap is not and never has been $40M -- that is a projection which, IMO, will never happen).
....

And does your IMO come with a guarantee—perhaps in the form of a Get Out Of The GoR Early card if it doesn't pan out?

Um, no. Not precisely.

Preventing the opening of a gap of such scale is why Florida State signed that grant of rights their conference partners wanted and so often thank—oh, excuse me, mock—them for in the first place. Yet here we all are, facing a gaping chasm in revenues anyway.

The $40M gap projection is based on B1G numbers. The SEC doesn't get as much as the B1G, but in the ACC we understand these things, don't we? Look who the SEC's media partner is.

After gazing at the map for a few days, I cant help but to notice how the SEC has done a masterful job of its acquisitions. Its secured a perimeter around its footprint. A footprint that makes for easy travel for all sports.

Did the B1G want into Texas? Well their choice now is Rice.

How about the south? Tulane and Georgia Tech are the options.

Where it starts to get interesting, and where you will likely see an SEC focus, is along the east coast and possibly Florida. In FLorida, FSU is by far the best add available, but its not AAU. Without being AAU, the SEC may believe they wont be able to go to the B1G. However, FSU is one of the few schools left that would immediately add value to the SEC and B1G, and you certainly dont want the B1G to blink and take them anyway. That would be a huge coup in a state you would like the B1G to stay out of. If the B1G ending up grabbing FSU and Miami, the SEC's stranglehold on FLorida is gone.

The B1G would want to add another 2 eastern seaboard schools to ease travel for those two, which is where a UNC and Virginia would make sense. So I believe it makes the most sense for the B1G to target FSU, Miami, UNC, and Virginia.

Which is why I dont think the SEC will sit on their hands. They could scuttle that plan from the B1G by simply taking UNC and FSU. While the B1G could still expand into the region, its not nearly as pretty and the revenue of the schools available arent nearly as great. So while they could still grab Virginia and Miami, the options of Duke, GT, and USF are nowhere nears as great as UNC and FSU.

(12-11-2023 03:36 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(12-11-2023 03:32 PM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  What is the point of all of this?

To create what?

Pangea!

Just Kidding...

I think 2 Major Conferences for 2 Major Networks is what we were working toward.

SEC with Disney (ABC/ESPN)
B1G with FOX

Mission Accomplished

They are trying to create NFL2. It will never work. The last expansion was the Jump the Shark moment with PAC schools in the B10.

There won't be enough money to support an NFL2. The country will not support 2 professional football leagues.

(12-12-2023 09:38 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-11-2023 04:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Likelihood is pretty low. ESPN is telling the SEC they are happy, and that more than 16 is "a consortium, not a conference" (Peter Thamel) which is "hard to keep together" (translation, we at ESPN would not oppose breaking the SEC up if it gets too big; side note, the B1G may already be too big). Finally ESPN says, "the SEC is happy at 16" (translation, ESPN is happy with the SEC at 16)...

...In the end, we are probably only going to see a small number of schools move. The very high valuation requirements of the SEC simply limit the number who could move to maybe two, and only if ESPN agrees. If an ACC school tries to go to the B1G, do not expect ESPN to make it easy for them to join their competitor's league. In short the majority of the 7 will still be in the ACC seven years from now.

Here's how I see it:

1. Financial issues at Disney rule out moving a bunch of ACC teams to the SEC at this time.

2. ESPN would prefer to keep the ACC intact for the full duration of the contract, so they will work small deals (e.g. sell off some ACC rights to The CW, etc.) to keep ACC schools within about $20M/year of the SEC (note: the gap is not and never has been $40M -- that is a projection which, IMO, will never happen).

3. I agree that if any ACC team wants to move to the Big Ten, there will be no discount -- it will cost the full buyout price.

JMO, of course.

Generally agree. Although, I have no idea about any ESPN-ACC agreement on keeping payouts in the general ballpark of SEC media rights. The new performance incentive payouts and new member buy-ins suggests that the ACC is working hard to help traditional football powers.

With regards to the OP…many ACC programs are willing to do whatever it takes to get P2 media payouts. FSU has been vocal in suggesting that they’ll go solo, or with a partner (Clemson), or a quartet (Clemson, UNC, ?), or a group (Magnificent 7). The problem is that none of the options makes financial sense for ESPN and/or the leftover ACC members.

How much money will the schools move away from their traditional rivals? The Big East in the ACC lost their rivals, and they were slowly dying a death in that conference. West Virginia went downhill in the Big 12 because they don't have their rivals in Louisville, Virginia Tech, Rutgers, Boston College, Pitts, Miami, Syracuse, USF, Notre Dame, etc.

Would the PAC 12 school fans show up to any games against the Big 10 or Big 12? Or will they stay home since you don't have the traditional rivalries? Oregon and Oregon State, Washington and Washington State, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are the types of games that draws a lot of fans to go to their games. Greed killed those rivalry games.

(12-12-2023 09:37 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 08:20 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 06:30 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-12-2023 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  The combined market of NC and Va. represent 20 Million people, which is the largest unaligned or heavily influenced market (SEC/B1G) left in the country.

If those core ACC schools (located in NC and Va.) decide to stay together in the ACC and the B1G and SEC still want to expand, other than new markets, what are their needs?

The SEC perceives that the need/want: a) a second school in Florida and b) a basketball school to be a rival for Kentucky.

The B1G (other than markets) is probably set.

Besides NC and VA? (which I think will be split between the two: NC/NC State and VT, and VA and Duke, respectively. Though I've seen people suggest that the Big10 might end up with VA, NC/NC State, Duke.)

I think both want into Florida. (If espn and the SEC don't find a way to make FSU happy, I think they're making a huge mistake.)

After that, it's really just guesswork. The main question being do the conferences feel the need to bring schools in-house for games, or are they fine with a P4 situation.

And I think that will come down to logistics and what happens with pay for play, etc.

Splitting Carolina/State and UVa/VaTech gives each conference a watered down product that won't pay for itself at this point in the game. I don't know why I have to keep explaining that to people.

There should be a simple formula stickied on this forum that is required reading.

Any school joining the SEC and Big Ten needs to drive the current media revenue up to the point which every current member sees an increase in their payout.

The last schools that were invited were pretty huge, that is not a coincident. It took Oklahoma and Texas to drive SEC revenue up, and it took UCLA and USC to drive up Big Ten revenues. UO and UW got partial shares and I've been telling everyone to pay attention how the Big Ten negotiations go next round. Because they absolutely have to get a deal which pays those two equal revenue with everyone else. FOX is not on the hook to increase their deal in order to pay them equal shares. I repeat, FOX is not on the hook to increase their deal in order to pay them equal shares. In fact, we might see Amazon decide to come in the market (we know they're interested) and take over the Big Ten increasing shares because they can. Where does that leave FOX?

Your first sentence in your response - I think you're wrong there.

For one thing it's a bit of an over-simplification.

A school can potentially play any other school regardless of what conference they are in.

And while it may be "nice" to add existing past rivals, adding a school to a conference is about how they matchup to that conference, not necessarily how they match up with whoever joins along with them.

There are (will be) 18 members of the Big10 and 16 of the SEC. While caring about NC's rivals (for example) may be a discussion point, there are quite a few other things conferences tend to be concerned with.

As for who gets invited, I see a lot tossed around about words like "revenue" and such.

But how a school makes money for the others in the conference isn't a single line plus or minus on a balance sheet.

And trying to compare situations with different schools is more than a little complicated. Circumstances can make those choices vary by quite a bit.

We know this if for no other reason that the Big10 said "no" to WA and OR under one set of circumstances, and later said "yes" under a different set of circumstances.

And with due respect to Boise State - under previous circumstances in years past, they were a top pick for realignment for certain conferences. And of late, that hasn't seemed to as much be the case. If only based upon the various short lists we've seen of late.

Or look at what has happened with San Diego State.

Or on the converse, SMU has been "the bridesmaid but not the bride" in a lot of realignment scenarios. But adjust the circumstances - and now they are joining the ACC.

So things like FSU's rebuff from the CFP could contribute to circumstances. Will they? I don't know. This could be a flash in the pan, or something more. But as they already wanted out of the ACC, I think this just adds incentive to the motivating forces, which wish to leave.

Would the SEC take them? In my opinion, very likely. Looking past the rhetoric, and looking at the entirety of schools that the SEC comprises, I think they are an easy yes.

But this of course presumes that recent events have not burnt bridges.

This would not be the first time FSU made choices based upon circumstances of the moment (like staying in the ACC, and signing - and later signing the re-up - of the GoR).

The SEC is a conference that I think it's fair to say, values football a lot. And so too, institutional "fit" - however one defines that.

And most lists I have seen (over years), suggest that the short list to the SEC should be FSU, Clemson, and VT. With various suggestions on the 4th school. That said, I think VT is 50/50 whether it's able to tag along to an SEC invite or if it stays in the ACC. And I've seen arguments that maybe Clemson has started to slip enough on the field to question whether they get an invite.

But those 3 aside, everyone seems to be looking at the state of North Carolina. For reasons similar to why politicians in the last several years have - it is a growing state with interesting demographics.

So I'm going to call out this argument of needing to be a "bigger school than x" as nonsense.

I don't know what the P2 will do. It's very possible they'll stand pat with the hands they have. But I wouldn't bet the house on it...

I’m sorry, do you know how to write paragraphs?

I’m afraid you’re ignorant to the dynamics of allegiances in North Carolina; you’re not getting the state of NC with just one of those schools. Sorry, it ain’t happening. The stadiums would be a flooded with transplants from elsewhere that still hold those allegiances. We want to play each other, in conference, for conference titles and bragging rights.

As far as the rest of your bullet point thoughts, what are you trying to say? I’m talking about the media deal specifically. If a school doesn’t add to the bottom line, they aren’t getting in. Period. Yes, there are creative ways to suspend that for a few years but in the end they need to make the conference money. This is a very simple concept and it’s why Cincinnati* isn’t in the Big Ten despite checking every other box.

* or Iowa State, or Stanford, or Cal…

(12-11-2023 04:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Likelihood is pretty low. ESPN is telling the SEC they are happy, and that more than 16 is "a consortium, not a conference" (Peter Thamel) which is "hard to keep together" (translation, we at ESPN would not oppose breaking the SEC up if it gets too big; side note, the B1G may already be too big). Finally ESPN says, "the SEC is happy at 16" (translation, ESPN is happy with the SEC at 16).

Beyond that there is the value question. We've all seen the numbers thrown around here, but a consistent group of schools show up as having value: Notre Dame with higher value than the B1G or SEC average, Miami, North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson with value roughly the average of the BIG or SEC (SEC is a little higher per school). The list doesn't go deeper because the other schools lower the average, and this the potential revenue per school of the existing conference members.

Valuation can also include market reach. A negative for Florida State and Clemson is that they are already well within SEC footprint, meaning there is a certain cannibalization of viewers rather than a near full addition of fans. This factor could explain Thamel's (ESPN value) ranking of North Carolina and Virginia (despite not having true SEC valuation level) ahead of Florida State and Clemson (in whatever order you prefer). North Carolina and Virginia are the last two southern states the SEC has yet to plant their flag, and thus virgin territory. ESPN apparently values DMV in much the same way the B1G and FOX value the NYC to DC corridor such that Rutgers and Maryland has outsized value. (It should always be noted that Rutgers has paid off handsomely for the BTN in carriage fees and eyeballs for B1G games, never mind the product that is Rutgers athletics; this result is probably why see Virginia's outsized value ESPN talking points imply.) Note, Finebaum also lists UNC as the top target (another ESPN voice).

Curiously missing from the discussion are high value private schools Notre Dame and Miami, perhaps also Duke in that list. Notre Dame seems to be conceded to NBC and ultimately the B1G, and simply outside the SEC mindset (obviously not outside the B1G mindset as they built in a payout for the Irish if they had joined). Notre Dame reupping with NBC sends the message that they don't plan to go anywhere for awhile, a don't call us, we'll call you message to interested conferences. Miami's omission is more curious, as they are both southern and pretty much virgin territory you'd think. Apparently that view of Miami is not shared, or the school just doesn't align with how the SEC views itself.

B1G voices seem to see the same list, but without Clemson (not fitting B1G image of itself I suspect) and variably mentioning Miami, with Duke or Georgia Tech getting the odd mention (rather unlikely), and Virginia less interest than the SEC reveals (this might be an incorrect read).

The above is important, because the networks pay for expansion. The SEC and B1G do nothing without the full support and underwriting of their network providers. Yormack and the Big 12 have also stayed within the parameters of what FOX and ESPN agreed to fund (turning away Oregon State and San Diego State for example). FOX only funding a sub 50% for UW and Oregon, is an example of these limits. It's a mistake to think this doesn't matter, or to downplay it. ESPN is publicly suggesting the parameters and limits for the SEC.
 
All this review of chatter and my quick look at metrics, suggests only some of the "7" actually have any real hypergamous possibilities. Many fan bases of schools that don't have such a chance still hope they'll somehow get lucky; we saw this with Oklahoma State fans, we say this with Cal regents and backers, and still with some Washington State and Oregon State supporters; and we are seeing it among NC State and VT supporters as well. (I like this modern dating analogy, with schools searching for new conferences being like women, and conferences like men, with schools all wanting to "marry up." lol)

The common denominator of B1G (setting aside the perpetual pursuit of Notre Dame --who long ago friend-zoned them--) and SEC interest is North Carolina on top. I have long thought the B1G will lose this one, but who knows, Chapel Hill seems far from ready. Florida State does have interest from the B1G, so perhaps that is a settle for both.[b]

In the end, we are probably only going to see a small number of schools move. The very high valuation requirements of the SEC simply limit the number who could move to maybe two, and only if ESPN agrees.[b] If an ACC school tries to go to the B1G, do not expect ESPN to make it easy for them to join their competitor's league. In short the majority of the 7 will still be in the ACC seven years from now.

This is a very important point. FSU and the BIG may want each other but ESPN won’t let FSU go easily.

Also it does look like ESPN is happy with the SEC sitting at 16. This won’t bode well for GoR deniers.

(12-09-2023 11:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-09-2023 11:05 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Or this scenario:
SEC (2): Clemson, Miami
Big 10 (4): FSU, UNC, Virginia, ND
Big 12 (4) : Georgia Tech, Louisville, NC State, Virginia Tech
Still In ACC (8): BC, California, Duke, Pit, SMU, Stanford, Syracuse, Wake Forest

1. Nobody will leave until 2032-4 unless ESPN gives the go ahead.

2. If ESPN desires to preserve the ACC and the ACC desires to stay together as an academic basketball first conference then we might see something like this:

a. Florida State and Clemson to the SEC
South Florida, Tulane and Connecticut to the ACC

b. Florida State and Kansas to the SEC
South Florida and Tulane to the ACC

3. If it is a larger move and the ACC is not staying together, but it's happening earlier and ESPN is controlling the disbandment, then you might get this:

a. Whoever ESPN wants to keep 100% of the rights to head to the SEC:
Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

b. Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse,
Virginia Tech, possibly Wake Forest to the Big 12

c. Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Stanford to the Big 10

JR I agree with you in that ESPN would control the ACC’s (and SEC’s) future moves until 2032 if there’s any.

One thing that I didn’t agree with you (and all others) is this. If further consolidation continues, I am quite sure ESPN would drop the B12 before they drop the ACC.

Yes, the B12 media right are owned by both Fox and ESPN but I don’t think it’s a good thing. The B12 lost Texas and OU and the P12 lost everyone but two and both conferences were shared by Fox and ESPN

ESPN made a committment for the ACC and the SEC by establishing the conference TV networks and owning the 100% media rights. I think these are two conferences that ESPN wants to keep (the SEC for premier Southern football and great basketball and the ACC for premier basketball and other sports and OK football for nationwide broadcast)

If I were ESPN, I would move certain B12 schools (such as ASU, utah, TCU, Kansas, etc) to the ACC and drop the B12 in 2030 as Fox dropped the Pac 12. After that movement, ESPN would then be able to consider how to prevent certain key ACC schools from leaving for the B10 in 2036.

This is not a popular take because people want to see the ACC implode now but try to think from ESPN perspective.

(12-12-2023 01:14 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(12-11-2023 04:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Likelihood is pretty low. ESPN is telling the SEC they are happy, and that more than 16 is "a consortium, not a conference" (Peter Thamel) which is "hard to keep together" (translation, we at ESPN would not oppose breaking the SEC up if it gets too big; side note, the B1G may already be too big). Finally ESPN says, "the SEC is happy at 16" (translation, ESPN is happy with the SEC at 16).

Beyond that there is the value question. We've all seen the numbers thrown around here, but a consistent group of schools show up as having value: Notre Dame with higher value than the B1G or SEC average, Miami, North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson with value roughly the average of the BIG or SEC (SEC is a little higher per school). The list doesn't go deeper because the other schools lower the average, and this the potential revenue per school of the existing conference members.

Valuation can also include market reach. A negative for Florida State and Clemson is that they are already well within SEC footprint, meaning there is a certain cannibalization of viewers rather than a near full addition of fans. This factor could explain Thamel's (ESPN value) ranking of North Carolina and Virginia (despite not having true SEC valuation level) ahead of Florida State and Clemson (in whatever order you prefer). North Carolina and Virginia are the last two southern states the SEC has yet to plant their flag, and thus virgin territory. ESPN apparently values DMV in much the same way the B1G and FOX value the NYC to DC corridor such that Rutgers and Maryland has outsized value. (It should always be noted that Rutgers has paid off handsomely for the BTN in carriage fees and eyeballs for B1G games, never mind the product that is Rutgers athletics; this result is probably why see Virginia's outsized value ESPN talking points imply.) Note, Finebaum also lists UNC as the top target (another ESPN voice).

Curiously missing from the discussion are high value private schools Notre Dame and Miami, perhaps also Duke in that list. Notre Dame seems to be conceded to NBC and ultimately the B1G, and simply outside the SEC mindset (obviously not outside the B1G mindset as they built in a payout for the Irish if they had joined). Notre Dame reupping with NBC sends the message that they don't plan to go anywhere for awhile, a don't call us, we'll call you message to interested conferences. Miami's omission is more curious, as they are both southern and pretty much virgin territory you'd think. Apparently that view of Miami is not shared, or the school just doesn't align with how the SEC views itself.

B1G voices seem to see the same list, but without Clemson (not fitting B1G image of itself I suspect) and variably mentioning Miami, with Duke or Georgia Tech getting the odd mention (rather unlikely), and Virginia less interest than the SEC reveals (this might be an incorrect read).

The above is important, because the networks pay for expansion. The SEC and B1G do nothing without the full support and underwriting of their network providers. Yormack and the Big 12 have also stayed within the parameters of what FOX and ESPN agreed to fund (turning away Oregon State and San Diego State for example). FOX only funding a sub 50% for UW and Oregon, is an example of these limits. It's a mistake to think this doesn't matter, or to downplay it. ESPN is publicly suggesting the parameters and limits for the SEC.
 
All this review of chatter and my quick look at metrics, suggests only some of the "7" actually have any real hypergamous possibilities. Many fan bases of schools that don't have such a chance still hope they'll somehow get lucky; we saw this with Oklahoma State fans, we say this with Cal regents and backers, and still with some Washington State and Oregon State supporters; and we are seeing it among NC State and VT supporters as well. (I like this modern dating analogy, with schools searching for new conferences being like women, and conferences like men, with schools all wanting to "marry up." lol)

The common denominator of B1G (setting aside the perpetual pursuit of Notre Dame --who long ago friend-zoned them--) and SEC interest is North Carolina on top. I have long thought the B1G will lose this one, but who knows, Chapel Hill seems far from ready.
Florida State does have interest from the B1G, so perhaps that is a settle for both.

In the end, we are probably only going to see a small number of schools move. The very high valuation requirements of the SEC simply limit the number who could move to maybe two, and only if ESPN agrees. If an ACC school tries to go to the B1G, do not expect ESPN to make it easy for them to join their competitor's league. In short the majority of the 7 will still be in the ACC seven years from now.

This is a very important point. FSU and the BIG may want each other but ESPN won’t let FSU go easily.

Also it does look like ESPN is happy with the SEC sitting at 16. This won’t bode well for GoR deniers.

That's a bit premature, the SEC doesn't even officially have 16 members yet. Football season isn't over and the prospective additions are still entangled in the sinking ACC who would watch vigilantly for any opportunity to sue. Time will tell, but don't be so sure the SEC and ESPN aren't up to something just because the conference hasn't made a bungled public mess of it as the ACC always does.

(12-12-2023 01:14 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(12-11-2023 04:52 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Likelihood is pretty low. ESPN is telling the SEC they are happy, and that more than 16 is "a consortium, not a conference" (Peter Thamel) which is "hard to keep together" (translation, we at ESPN would not oppose breaking the SEC up if it gets too big; side note, the B1G may already be too big). Finally ESPN says, "the SEC is happy at 16" (translation, ESPN is happy with the SEC at 16).

Beyond that there is the value question. We've all seen the numbers thrown around here, but a consistent group of schools show up as having value: Notre Dame with higher value than the B1G or SEC average, Miami, North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson with value roughly the average of the BIG or SEC (SEC is a little higher per school). The list doesn't go deeper because the other schools lower the average, and this the potential revenue per school of the existing conference members.

Valuation can also include market reach. A negative for Florida State and Clemson is that they are already well within SEC footprint, meaning there is a certain cannibalization of viewers rather than a near full addition of fans. This factor could explain Thamel's (ESPN value) ranking of North Carolina and Virginia (despite not having true SEC valuation level) ahead of Florida State and Clemson (in whatever order you prefer). North Carolina and Virginia are the last two southern states the SEC has yet to plant their flag, and thus virgin territory. ESPN apparently values DMV in much the same way the B1G and FOX value the NYC to DC corridor such that Rutgers and Maryland has outsized value. (It should always be noted that Rutgers has paid off handsomely for the BTN in carriage fees and eyeballs for B1G games, never mind the product that is Rutgers athletics; this result is probably why see Virginia's outsized value ESPN talking points imply.) Note, Finebaum also lists UNC as the top target (another ESPN voice).

Curiously missing from the discussion are high value private schools Notre Dame and Miami, perhaps also Duke in that list. Notre Dame seems to be conceded to NBC and ultimately the B1G, and simply outside the SEC mindset (obviously not outside the B1G mindset as they built in a payout for the Irish if they had joined). Notre Dame reupping with NBC sends the message that they don't plan to go anywhere for awhile, a don't call us, we'll call you message to interested conferences. Miami's omission is more curious, as they are both southern and pretty much virgin territory you'd think. Apparently that view of Miami is not shared, or the school just doesn't align with how the SEC views itself.

B1G voices seem to see the same list, but without Clemson (not fitting B1G image of itself I suspect) and variably mentioning Miami, with Duke or Georgia Tech getting the odd mention (rather unlikely), and Virginia less interest than the SEC reveals (this might be an incorrect read).

The above is important, because the networks pay for expansion. The SEC and B1G do nothing without the full support and underwriting of their network providers. Yormack and the Big 12 have also stayed within the parameters of what FOX and ESPN agreed to fund (turning away Oregon State and San Diego State for example). FOX only funding a sub 50% for UW and Oregon, is an example of these limits. It's a mistake to think this doesn't matter, or to downplay it. ESPN is publicly suggesting the parameters and limits for the SEC.
 
All this review of chatter and my quick look at metrics, suggests only some of the "7" actually have any real hypergamous possibilities. Many fan bases of schools that don't have such a chance still hope they'll somehow get lucky; we saw this with Oklahoma State fans, we say this with Cal regents and backers, and still with some Washington State and Oregon State supporters; and we are seeing it among NC State and VT supporters as well. (I like this modern dating analogy, with schools searching for new conferences being like women, and conferences like men, with schools all wanting to "marry up." lol)

The common denominator of B1G (setting aside the perpetual pursuit of Notre Dame --who long ago friend-zoned them--) and SEC interest is North Carolina on top. I have long thought the B1G will lose this one, but who knows, Chapel Hill seems far from ready. Florida State does have interest from the B1G, so perhaps that is a settle for both.[b]

In the end, we are probably only going to see a small number of schools move. The very high valuation requirements of the SEC simply limit the number who could move to maybe two, and only if ESPN agrees.[b] If an ACC school tries to go to the B1G, do not expect ESPN to make it easy for them to join their competitor's league. In short the majority of the 7 will still be in the ACC seven years from now.

This is a very important point. FSU and the BIG may want each other but ESPN won’t let FSU go easily.

Also it does look like ESPN is happy with the SEC sitting at 16. This won’t bode well for GoR deniers.

The SEC has said often, and prior to past realignment moves, "We are happy at 12, We are happy at 14, now We are happy at 16 and have no desire to grow further", and always there was a caveat, just like Sankey's latest declaration where he added, "but if we see that it is about to happen We will be nimble."

ESPN and FOX are clearly behind this and building toward a new model designed to give them maximum leverage in the coming post seasons.

The change has been the norm, it has been consistent, and it has been driven largely by the networks. Until they have what they want I see no reason to expect anything but more.

The worth of the athletic programs of the schools is no longer the greatest motivation behind the League formation. How much school A or B adds to the bottom line, while important, has been set up to be less determinative because both major networks added pro rata clauses to the contracts. That means they wanted to be able to add a school for their reasons whether it paid fair value or not. Otherwise, the contracts would have remained subject to each school's value. Media giant legal teams don't change terms without a motivation or directive.

This board after every round of realignment returns to the same conventional wisdom that was wrong just prior to that realignment. Profitability to the Conference is not the same as profitability to the networks, hence pro rata.

JRsec,

I do not see the SEC settling for the fat girl to reach some number. And I do not see the Disney corporation, which is losing $Billions, eagerly agreeing to ever increasing spending by ESPN for the same product by moving them from category B (ACC) to category A (SEC) compensation. ESPN is funding their movie disasters. There needs to be a very strong case to show that Virginia Tech in the SEC actually makes $80M more for ESPN than they do now in the ACC.

The SEC has never done pro rata at a reduced rates. Would FSU, Clemson or others, who have to pay a massive exit fee from the ACC, accept a Washington/Oregon type say $35M SEC payout that goes up only $1-2M per year? It could take 20 years to be financially in the black for such a move.

Do any of these moves help the SEC add CFP spots? Where is the payoff for the SEC members? Every move we have seen so far resulted in better payouts for existing conference members. Every "no" was a because it would not increase payouts. That much of the trend will continue.

(12-12-2023 02:51 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  JRsec,

I do not see the SEC settling for the fat girl to reach some number. And I do not see the Disney corporation, which is losing $Billions, eagerly agreeing to ever increasing spending by ESPN for the same product by moving them from category B (ACC) to category A (SEC) compensation. ESPN is funding their movie disasters. There needs to be a very strong case to show that Virginia Tech in the SEC actually makes $80M more for ESPN than they do now in the ACC.

The SEC has never done pro rata at a reduced rates. Would FSU, Clemson or others, who have to pay a massive exit fee from the ACC, accept a Washington/Oregon type say $35M SEC payout that goes up only $1-2M per year? It could take 20 years to be financially in the black for such a move.

Do any of these moves help the SEC add CFP spots? Where is the payoff for the SEC members? Every move we have seen so far resulted in better payouts for existing conference members. Every "no" was a because it would not increase payouts. That much of the trend will continue.

Stu, I've gone over it way too many times, but if any number larger than 2 moves to the SEC, I don't think it will be the intention of ESPN to keep the ACC around. Whatever the number, assuming perhaps 2 head to the Big 10, could be 1 or 2 more, is a total reduction of overhead. Any school moving to the Big 12 where the cost is shared with FOX is a reduction of 10 million in overhead per school. Any schools left, assuming the SEC in that case takes 4, will be sustained by exit fees. You can move 4 schools to the SEC, 2 to the big 10, and up to 8 to the Big 12 and FOX gains inventory access in a portion of the country where they have desired it, and ESPN saves overhead without losing access to any schools except those headed to the Big 10. And, we still haven't touched the closing of the LHN and ACCN, the reduction in the talking heads that worked there, and the sale of the commercial property they occupy. It's very feasible.

As to the SEC, they are committed to share and share alike. This is why in order to keep full access to brands they want ESPN agrees to pro rata for any school moving to the SEC.

As to CFP spots, the moves, especially if they include some of the hoops brands, helps the SEC present records which are more appealing for a CFP selection without having to play lower tier schools, which if we do have a breakaway, will not be on anyone's schedule. Add FSU and Clemson and you enhance your SOS. Add North Carolina, Kansas, Virginia or Duke and you balance out the W/L records in a brutal football conference. If I were the SEC commissioner I would sell the presidents on the basketball first schools which play football as I anticipated as Sankey is indicating, a breakaway. In a breakaway hoops values more than double as their earning potential does. The Big 10 is the one which needs stronger football brands, but has an abundance of hoops talent. I would think the networks would want that as well.

The issue over Clemson and Florida State is the exact opposite that is presented in repeated internet myth. South Carolina and Florida actually want to preserve those games as conference games out of fear of losing them to realignment's future scheduling issues. If we grow to 2 Super conferences the number of OOC games and their timing comes under tremendous pressure for seeking a specific time (last game of the season) and specific foe (as a rotation may be mandated for OOC play). That's why in 2011 Pastides and Machen both wanted Clemson and FSU included. What head coaches and ADs prattle on about is selling the rivalry as fans see it. What presidents look at are the ticket priority donations which drive giving for those games. Lose those games and you lose annual contributions in the millions cumulatively.

I don't talk about Clemson and FSU to the SEC because that is what I would want, but because that is what is discussed at the level where it counts. If the SEC is going to move to 20 give me new markets North Carolina, Virginia, and Kansas. If UNC and UVa won't move without Duke there's #4. The academic value alone is worth that set of moves. SEC fans would hate it, until they saw that those 4 in a lot of years would provide their football teams with a bit of a breather in the schedule. Add those and the SEC has in its basketball lineup (with Kentucky) the top 4 all time winningest programs in the sport. All have very credible diamond sports as well. I like balance.

What I think the pressure will be is to add FSU and Clemson, as much to fulfill a promise indicated by Mike Slive, and to satisfy 2 conference members, and then to look to new markets.

We'll see.

From the network perspective FOX will have a Super Conference, ESPN will have a Super Conference, and they will share a compilation conference between them. ESPN will shave a 100 million plus in overhead, FOX will add access to inventory which they could not access on the East Coast and in the South prior to this, and ESPN will only lose what heads to the Big 10. They all win. If FOX and ESPN retain the rights to the schools and win a combined bid on the CFP they stand to make a clean 750 million each annually from the CFP and more if they have a hoops Tourney.