http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...day-012016
Mandel believes the Big 12 will have to become mathematically correct again. But also that it will disintegrate in about 10 years with its top programs joining a supersized Pac.
He also comments on BYU's chances.
And he thinks the decline in non-playoff bowls means an 8 team playoff is inevitable.
That would coincide with the theory being espoused that ESPN's future strategy is to more or less let Fox have college sports west of I-35 (think a supersized PAC that includes several B12 south teams) while they dominate the eastern US through the B1G in the North and the SEC in the South
I don't think there will be a complete separation of the bowls and playoff....
And if they expand the playoff, I see them going to a 6 team format, with the top 2 getting byes, using the same playoff/bowl schematic they have now, except vacating the New Years Eve date and time.
The format is a complete success IMO....the NYE date is the fail. College football isn't big enough to compete with the biggest party night of the year
(01-20-2016 03:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]That would coincide with the theory being espoused that ESPN's future strategy is to more or less let Fox have college sports west of I-35 (think a supersized PAC that includes several B12 south teams) while they dominate the eastern US through the B1G in the North and the SEC in the South
Except ESPN isn't getting the whole B1G contract and that Fox will have a big chunk of that deal.
(01-20-2016 03:57 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 03:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]That would coincide with the theory being espoused that ESPN's future strategy is to more or less let Fox have college sports west of I-35 (think a supersized PAC that includes several B12 south teams) while they dominate the eastern US through the B1G in the North and the SEC in the South
Except ESPN isn't getting the whole B1G contract and that Fox will have a big chunk of that deal.
I don't think Fox will have more than half the deal. It'll probably best case for Fox be similar to the Pac 12 where it's about half. Big Ten aren't going to be morons and leave ESPN entirely...
(01-20-2016 03:57 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think there will be a complete separation of the bowls and playoff....
And if they expand the playoff, I see them going to a 6 team format, with the top 2 getting byes, using the same playoff/bowl schematic they have now, except vacating the New Years Eve date and time.
The format is a complete success IMO....the NYE date is the fail. College football isn't big enough to compete with the biggest party night of the year
ESPN won't let them go only to 6. Too much money involved. Also puts the top 2 teams at a disadvantage having to go 4 weeks between games while team they're playing stays sharp. Remember in the SF how disjointed the early part of the games were(both years actually).
(01-20-2016 04:02 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 03:57 PM)EvilVodka Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think there will be a complete separation of the bowls and playoff....
And if they expand the playoff, I see them going to a 6 team format, with the top 2 getting byes, using the same playoff/bowl schematic they have now, except vacating the New Years Eve date and time.
The format is a complete success IMO....the NYE date is the fail. College football isn't big enough to compete with the biggest party night of the year
ESPN won't let them go only to 6. Too much money involved. Also puts the top 2 teams at a disadvantage having to go 4 weeks between games while team they're playing stays sharp. Remember in the SF how disjointed the early part of the games were(both years actually).
ESPN didn't want the NYE games either....they don't call ALL of the shots. It took a freaking long time to get to 4....I don't think it will be easy peesy getting to 8. Six teams will be a compromise between what everyone wants, and what the Playoff Creators want
I said the same thing Mandel said, why the next round of realignment will happen. The new larger contracts from the sec and the big 10 will force the "high end" schools to look elsewhere.
http://csnbbs.com/thread-766478-page-2.html
Funny how the Big 12 gets an NCAA rule passed that was explicitly crafted by it to AVOID having to expand, and yet since then, all these writers have come out of the woodwork to say that expansion is inevitable?
I mean, I get quoting Boren. OU's position on expansion is obviously important, but this goes beyond this.
I sometimes think sportswriters HOPE expansion happens, it gives them something to write about.
That makes me want to stay at 10, more. I think the Big 12 will be "psychologically disadvantaged" no matter what we do. More importantly, nothing the league does is going to stop the "next step" in realignment. So might as well play at 10 with a round robin and maximize revenue and enjoy the short term.
(01-20-2016 04:09 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ]That makes me want to stay at 10, more. I think the Big 12 will be "psychologically disadvantaged" no matter what we do. More importantly, nothing the league does is going to stop the "next step" in realignment. So might as well play at 10 with a round robin and maximize revenue and enjoy the short term.
If the Goal is to be as powerful as the B1G and SEC, then yes, the Big 12 will always be at a disadvantage. No conference network or anything else will change that.
Funny thing is, the PAC is in the same situation but doesn't seem to be bothered by it. Wonder why the Big 12 is?
(01-20-2016 04:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]Funny how the Big 12 gets an NCAA rule passed that was explicitly crafted by it to AVOID having to expand, and yet since then, all these writers have come out of the woodwork to say that expansion is inevitable?
I mean, I get quoting Boren. OU's position on expansion is obviously important, but this goes beyond this.
I sometimes think sportswriters HOPE expansion happens, it gives them something to write about.
Mandel does refer to that in his article.
(01-20-2016 04:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 04:09 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote: [ -> ]That makes me want to stay at 10, more. I think the Big 12 will be "psychologically disadvantaged" no matter what we do. More importantly, nothing the league does is going to stop the "next step" in realignment. So might as well play at 10 with a round robin and maximize revenue and enjoy the short term.
If the Goal is to be as powerful as the B1G and SEC, then yes, the Big 12 will always be at a disadvantage. No conference network or anything else will change that.
Funny thing is, the PAC is in the same situation but doesn't seem to be bothered by it. Wonder why the Big 12 is?
Boren's ego?
14 is 40% more than 10. Its only 16% more than 12.
Most of the Big 12 and pretty much all of the ACC schools want and would benefit from conference networks.
So, create a new Big 12/ACC network (the BIG SPORTS network). Markets from Boston to Raleigh to Miami to Dallas to Kansas City. Tons of inventory to make it more attractive and a broader reach than the B1G, SEC, and PAC networks.
No realignment needed.
(01-20-2016 04:00 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 03:57 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 03:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]That would coincide with the theory being espoused that ESPN's future strategy is to more or less let Fox have college sports west of I-35 (think a supersized PAC that includes several B12 south teams) while they dominate the eastern US through the B1G in the North and the SEC in the South
Except ESPN isn't getting the whole B1G contract and that Fox will have a big chunk of that deal.
I don't think Fox will have more than half the deal. It'll probably best case for Fox be similar to the Pac 12 where it's about half. Big Ten aren't going to be morons and leave ESPN entirely...
Who said they were leaving ESPN entirely? Also they would be stupid to go all in with ESPN.
Texas finally sees the big disparity in TV money between conferences and decides after a talk with it's TV partners at Fox that they can get around the same type of money as the B1G and SEC by heading west. They take their friends OU and little brothers OSU and TCU/Tech/Baylor/KU and form the Pac-16. With it comes the Pac-16 network.
I say this happens right around the time the GoR is about to expire.
(01-20-2016 04:55 PM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ]Most of the Big 12 and pretty much all of the ACC schools want and would benefit from conference networks.
So, create a new Big 12/ACC network (the BIG SPORTS network). Markets from Boston to Raleigh to Miami to Dallas to Kansas City. Tons of inventory to make it more attractive and a broader reach than the B1G, SEC, and PAC networks.
No realignment needed.
But, if you want some realignment, take it a step or two further....spin off a new NCAA conference so that you end up with three 8-team FBS conferences and two major independents that are part of the BIG SPORTS Network.
Each of the three conferences plays a 7-game round-robin schedule and holds a conference championship game. The BIG SPORTS Network members also play a bunch of cross-conference OOC games (including annual rivalry games like UNC-NC State and UVA-Virginia Tech, and including games against the two independents (who agree to play 6 BIG SPORTS Network opponents per season):
ACC
North Carolina
Duke
Virginia
Georgia Tech
Pitt
Syracuse
Boston College
*UConn
(NEW) EAST COAST CONFERENCE
Florida St.
Clemson
Louisville
Miami
Virginia Tech
NC State
Wake Forest
WVU
BIG 12
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St.
Texas Tech
TCU
Baylor
Kansas
Kansas St.
Iowa St.
INDEPENDENTS:
Notre Dame, Texas
The conferences also play each other often in Olympic sports, with Texas being an Olympic sports member of the Big 12 and Notre Dame an Olympic sports member of the ACC.
In men's basketball, each conference plays a full H-H round robin and between 6 and 8 cross-conference games as part of the BIG SPORTS Network.
(01-20-2016 03:44 PM)10thMountain Wrote: [ -> ]That would coincide with the theory being espoused that ESPN's future strategy is to more or less let Fox have college sports west of I-35 (think a supersized PAC that includes several B12 south teams) while they dominate the eastern US through the B1G in the North and the SEC in the South
How's that going to work when FOX wins half of B1G T1 and BTN is FOX??
(01-20-2016 03:02 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]Mandel believes the Big 12 will have to become mathematically correct again. But also that it will disintegrate in about 10 years with its top programs joining a supersized Pac.
Those two ideas might be at cross purposes. Adding more schools to the Big 12 might make it more complicated for UT and others to leave the conference in the near future.
Also, even though a Pac including UT is a stronger competitor in the conference money race than either the Pac-12 or Big 12 will ever be, it might never happen because egos and politics are also part of the process. Events don't automatically flow straight in the direction of the most money. The movement is often a zig-zag or meander in that direction.
(01-20-2016 05:12 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (01-20-2016 03:02 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]Mandel believes the Big 12 will have to become mathematically correct again. But also that it will disintegrate in about 10 years with its top programs joining a supersized Pac.
Those two ideas might be at cross purposes. Adding more schools to the Big 12 might make it more complicated for UT and others to leave the conference in the near future.
Also, even though a Pac including UT is a stronger competitor in the conference money race than either the Pac-12 or Big 12 will ever be, it might never happen because egos and politics are also part of the process. Events don't automatically flow straight in the direction of the most money. The movement is often a zig-zag or meander in that direction.
Plus I will continue to contend, until it is demonstrated otherwise, that Texas will demand an unequal share of the revenue if it joins the PAC, B1G or SEC and thus has to "subvert" the LHN for the sake of the P12N, BTN or SECN.
That's just not right.