If most of you haven't noticed yet I am willing to play with or speculate about any kind of conference realignment theory. It's fun and it tells you a lot about the persons with which you post and it can generate some interesting stories on the side as well as some preposterous predictions. But for the purposes of clarity and the elimination of passions imagine that there was no conference involvement with the realignment process and that everything is about Network property and then take a look at realignment.

ESPN has rights to:

All of the ACC:
Boston College, Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest and all sports except Football and Hockey for Notre Dame.

All of the SEC (except for 1 choice for the 3:00 Saturday CBS time slot):
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Presently T1 rights with the Big 10 where the BTN is 51% FOX owned so they share rights with FOX to these schools:
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin

ESPN shares T1 and T2 options with the Big 12 and has T3 rights to Texas and Kansas while FOX has T3 rights with Oklahoma and some of the others, but not all.

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, West Virginia

The PAC owns their own network and property and leases rights to ESPN and FOX. The properties leased are:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern California, Stanford, Utah, Washington, Washington State

Clearly ESPN is in the much stronger position on product. FOX to their credit has made major inroads into the Big 10 and is at least on equal footing with ESPN in the PAC and Big 12.

If harmony is to prevail some kind of access to the Southeast has to be gained by FOX. Subletting rights to ACC and some SEC games might bring about that kind of cooperation. However should ESPN fail to renew their T1 rights in the Big 10, or have to split those rights with FOX at the T1 level, or lose standing in the Big 12, or lose lease rights in the PAC as a result of a FOX move then there will be repercussions. Chief among those repercussions would be no access to leased ACC & SEC games and the likely securing of certain Big 12 properties that could lead to another round of realignment. A strengthening of FOX's hold over the Big 10 could result in the pursuit of ESPN properties within the ACC which could spur another round of realignment as well.

When folks say there are a lot of moving parts that applies here as well.

Scenarios:

1. The PACN sells 50% of its rights to ESPN. Why? To gain access to expansion targets. Now if ESPN encourages Texas to move to the PAC they maximize revenues off of that brand placement on the West coast and open time zone slots that optimize their new found interest in Oregon, Stanford, U.S.C., U.C.L.A. and Washington. This would be the the best use of a top brand for ESPN. Likely FOX would gain concessions here as well for the inclusion of Oklahoma. Or FOX may choose to encourage Oklahoma to move to the Big 10 if it thought that it's Big 12 properties were in jeopardy. Without Texas there aren't but two targets from the Big 12 that would be suitable to the Big 10; Kansas and Oklahoma and the Sooners may not be a slam dunk.

The problem here is that Oklahoma and Kansas T3 rights are owned by competitors so the likelihood of FOX cooperating with the Oklahoma move to a PAC that ESPN was gaining control over would be less likely to happen. So now lets just say Texas is going to move to the PAC with Texas Tech, Kansas State and Iowa State (AAU). That still gives the PAC 3 new states nearly 34 million more viewers, and 4 central time zones slots with which to add product from the PAC to the viewing lineup.

Let's say that ESPN re-signs with the Big 10 for T1 rights but for fewer games than they have received in the past and FOX gains share here. ESPN will not be inclined to offer any of its property to the Big 10 for what is essentially a reduction in access. In this case Kansas is the more acceptable school for Big 10 expansion but they are more under ESPN influence than FOX influence. The SEC would love to have Oklahoma but they are more under FOX influence than ESPN influence. Both FOX and ESPN are into Kansas and Oklahoma's T3 for roughly the same amount. They swap if the Big 10 prefers Kansas to Oklahoma. They don't swap if the Big 10 prefers Oklahoma to Kansas. Either way one goes to the Big 10 and the other to the SEC.

Both the Big 10 and SEC will need a partner. The SEC has more options here. If they land Kansas then they can opt for Oklahoma State and gain both states and two of the top 30 most profitable schools. The SEC could opt for Kansas and another Texas School.

The ACC would be looking at West Virginia as a possibility with perhaps adding Cincinnati or Connecticut (which might also be an option for the Big 10 if another more suitable partner for Kansas cannot be obtained).

If something like this essentially came to pass then 8 Big 12 schools will have been taken and the GOR and conference could be dissolved and the assets moved to places where the networks involved gained increased profit or profit potential from the moves.

2. But, let's say a Texas move to the ESPN controlled ACC would or could entice Notre Dame to go all in. Now the ACC has 16 full members and the Texas placement there helps ESPN land another of the nation's darlings and steal a prize from NBC. Now there is no PAC deal. There is a less cooperative environment and ESPN has much more to gain by condensing its best properties into the ACC and SEC. They might well spend to buy out Oklahoma's T3 and to place both Oklahoma and Kansas in the SEC, or if the Big 10 didn't want to be isolated out of the ESPN loop and they sign over all of their T1 rights to ESPN then perhaps they get some growth help from redundant ESPN holdings. Kansas and Virginia Tech could round out the Big 10's growth. ESPN loses no particular market in this exchange and enhances both the basketball T1 value and the football T1 value of the Big 10. The SECN in which ESPN is heavily invested is rewarded as well. The SEC welcomes Okahoma State and also welcomes N.C. State. But where's Oklahoma? If the Big 10 gets involved Oklahoma might well go to the ACC to really cement their football cache. Again no market is lost to ESPN or the ACC. Texas and Oklahoma is preserved as a conference rivalry. To fill the spots of Virginia Tech and N.C. State the ACC adds Texas's in state pals of T.C.U. for Dallas and Baylor. But lets do the math. Kansas to the Big 10 for 1, Oklahoma State to the SEC for 2, Texas, Oklahoma, T.C.U., and Baylor to the ACC for 6. We're 2 short here. If ESPN wanted to pay the SEC they would be in position to take two of Kansas State (another 3 million plus state) and West Virginia (now more appealing with N.C. State in hand), Iowa State (another 3 plus million state and AAU with basketball help) or Texas Tech as a second State school from Texas.

A variant on this move could be Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Virginia Tech and N.C. State to the SEC; and Texas, Oklahoma, Baylor and T.C.U. to the ACC with the SEC moving to 18 with Oklahoma State and Kansas State.

But either of these scenarios nets the 8 necessary schools to dissolve the conference and eliminate the GOR.

3. The Big 10 doesn't do enough to keep ESPN's blessing for additional inventory. So much like in the last scenario the SEC and ACC account for 8 of the Big 12 schools. The SEC picks up Virginia Tech and N.C. State along with Kansas and Oklahoma State to move to 18. The ACC picks up Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Texas, Baylor, and Texas Tech to move to 18.

4. The PAC sells enough interest in their product and network to FOX and ESPN to gain access to properties possessed by both in the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Notre Dame all move to the PAC for a twenty team conference. The Big 12 is dissolved.

The Big 10 gives ESPN the rights they want in a long term stable deal. ESPN parks the ACC basketball talent in the Big 10. The Big 10 gains Boston College (market and hockey), Syracuse, Virginia, Duke, North Carolina, and Georgia Tech to move to 20.

ESPN parks football talent in the SEC. The SEC gains Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson, Florida State, Miami and either Baylor or Louisville to get to 20. The ACC now loses 12 schools and is dissolved.

5. The PAC plays ball, the Big 10 also and FOX and ESPN agree to share a rebuilt Big 12 which finally gives FOX access to some strong Southeastern properties.

The PAC adds: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas State, and Iowa State to get to 16.
The Big 10 adds: Kansas and Virginia to get to 16.
The SEC adds: North Carolina and Duke to get to 16.

The ACC/Big 12 emerges:
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virgnia
East: Cincinnati, Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
West: Baylor, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

Only here there are four "everything but football members" and they are each attached to a different division for four of their six obligated conference games. In the West B.Y.U. is attached. In the South it is Wake Forest. In the North it is Connecticut. In the East it is Notre Dame.

The independents each add something of value. N.D. adds national cache. Connecticut adds great hoops. B.Y.U. a strong market and good football. And Wake Forest great academics.

These 68 can then form the new upper division.

If you were FOX and ESPN how would you move to 4 conferences?

My head is spinning!!!

YES! I needed some new JR views to chew on. I'm slammed at work, so I'll be reading and responding this weekend.

(03-14-2014 01:30 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  My head is spinning!!!

There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money. Schools under contract are assets and where those assets are placed, and why, determines what percentage of profit can be derived from any set of contingencies. Once I realized about a year ago that it was actually the networks driving realignment and not the conferences (which really just give the networks some guidelines that would be acceptable) then the whole picture cleared up quite a bit for me. Of course I could be wrong, but I really really don't think so. The conferences move for money and the networks pay the money therefore the networks essentially control realignment since no move will be made that a network refuses to pay for.

It is a lot, but it is not even all the contingencies that I considered, just some of the more likely ones. Take some dramamine and revisit it. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

(03-14-2014 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money.

If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

(03-14-2014 03:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money.

If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

Then the SEC would add Ohio st. and Michigan. While the ACC would add State Penn and Texas.

(03-15-2014 08:21 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Then the SEC would add Ohio st. and Michigan. While the ACC would add State Penn and Texas.

Well HH that sure cuts to the chase for an extremely profitable end to Realignment for the SEC and the ACC.

(03-15-2014 01:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 08:21 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Then the SEC would add Ohio st. and Michigan. While the ACC would add State Penn and Texas.

Well HH that sure cuts to the chase for an extremely profitable end to Realignment for the SEC and the ACC.

Man you just know if ESPN had its way. This would happen. Can you imagine how much they could charge advertisers for air time during the Florida vs. Ohio st. game.

(03-15-2014 09:37 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 01:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-15-2014 08:21 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Then the SEC would add Ohio st. and Michigan. While the ACC would add State Penn and Texas.

Well HH that sure cuts to the chase for an extremely profitable end to Realignment for the SEC and the ACC.

Man you just know if ESPN had its way. This would happen. Can you imagine how much they could charge advertisers for air time during the Florida vs. Ohio st. game.

Enough to buy Urban Meyer a lifetime supply of Maalox, that's for sure.

(03-14-2014 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money.

If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

(03-16-2014 10:55 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money.

If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

And the fact that the B1G has regrets over Missouri just gives me goose bumps all over...

(03-14-2014 12:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If most of you haven't noticed yet I am willing to play with or speculate about any kind of conference realignment theory. It's fun and it tells you a lot about the persons with which you post and it can generate some interesting stories on the side as well as some preposterous predictions. But for the purposes of clarity and the elimination of passions imagine that there was no conference involvement with the realignment process and that everything is about Network property and then take a look at realignment.

ESPN has rights to:

All of the ACC:
Boston College, Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest and all sports except Football and Hockey for Notre Dame.

All of the SEC (except for 1 choice for the 3:00 Saturday CBS time slot):
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Presently T1 rights with the Big 10 where the BTN is 51% FOX owned so they share rights with FOX to these schools:
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin

ESPN shares T1 and T2 options with the Big 12 and has T3 rights to Texas and Kansas while FOX has T3 rights with Oklahoma and some of the others, but not all.

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, West Virginia

The PAC owns their own network and property and leases rights to ESPN and FOX. The properties leased are:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern California, Stanford, Utah, Washington, Washington State

Clearly ESPN is in the much stronger position on product. FOX to their credit has made major inroads into the Big 10 and is at least on equal footing with ESPN in the PAC and Big 12.

If harmony is to prevail some kind of access to the Southeast has to be gained by FOX. Subletting rights to ACC and some SEC games might bring about that kind of cooperation. However should ESPN fail to renew their T1 rights in the Big 10, or have to split those rights with FOX at the T1 level, or lose standing in the Big 12, or lose lease rights in the PAC as a result of a FOX move then there will be repercussions. Chief among those repercussions would be no access to leased ACC & SEC games and the likely securing of certain Big 12 properties that could lead to another round of realignment. A strengthening of FOX's hold over the Big 10 could result in the pursuit of ESPN properties within the ACC which could spur another round of realignment as well.

When folks say there are a lot of moving parts that applies here as well.

Scenarios:

1. The PACN sells 50% of its rights to ESPN. Why? To gain access to expansion targets. Now if ESPN encourages Texas to move to the PAC they maximize revenues off of that brand placement on the West coast and open time zone slots that optimize their new found interest in Oregon, Stanford, U.S.C., U.C.L.A. and Washington. This would be the the best use of a top brand for ESPN. Likely FOX would gain concessions here as well for the inclusion of Oklahoma. Or FOX may choose to encourage Oklahoma to move to the Big 10 if it thought that it's Big 12 properties were in jeopardy. Without Texas there aren't but two targets from the Big 12 that would be suitable to the Big 10; Kansas and Oklahoma and the Sooners may not be a slam dunk.

The problem here is that Oklahoma and Kansas T3 rights are owned by competitors so the likelihood of FOX cooperating with the Oklahoma move to a PAC that ESPN was gaining control over would be less likely to happen. So now lets just say Texas is going to move to the PAC with Texas Tech, Kansas State and Iowa State (AAU). That still gives the PAC 3 new states nearly 34 million more viewers, and 4 central time zones slots with which to add product from the PAC to the viewing lineup.

Let's say that ESPN re-signs with the Big 10 for T1 rights but for fewer games than they have received in the past and FOX gains share here. ESPN will not be inclined to offer any of its property to the Big 10 for what is essentially a reduction in access. In this case Kansas is the more acceptable school for Big 10 expansion but they are more under ESPN influence than FOX influence. The SEC would love to have Oklahoma but they are more under FOX influence than ESPN influence. Both FOX and ESPN are into Kansas and Oklahoma's T3 for roughly the same amount. They swap if the Big 10 prefers Kansas to Oklahoma. They don't swap if the Big 10 prefers Oklahoma to Kansas. Either way one goes to the Big 10 and the other to the SEC.

Both the Big 10 and SEC will need a partner. The SEC has more options here. If they land Kansas then they can opt for Oklahoma State and gain both states and two of the top 30 most profitable schools. The SEC could opt for Kansas and another Texas School.

The ACC would be looking at West Virginia as a possibility with perhaps adding Cincinnati or Connecticut (which might also be an option for the Big 10 if another more suitable partner for Kansas cannot be obtained).

If something like this essentially came to pass then 8 Big 12 schools will have been taken and the GOR and conference could be dissolved and the assets moved to places where the networks involved gained increased profit or profit potential from the moves.

2. But, let's say a Texas move to the ESPN controlled ACC would or could entice Notre Dame to go all in. Now the ACC has 16 full members and the Texas placement there helps ESPN land another of the nation's darlings and steal a prize from NBC. Now there is no PAC deal. There is a less cooperative environment and ESPN has much more to gain by condensing its best properties into the ACC and SEC. They might well spend to buy out Oklahoma's T3 and to place both Oklahoma and Kansas in the SEC, or if the Big 10 didn't want to be isolated out of the ESPN loop and they sign over all of their T1 rights to ESPN then perhaps they get some growth help from redundant ESPN holdings. Kansas and Virginia Tech could round out the Big 10's growth. ESPN loses no particular market in this exchange and enhances both the basketball T1 value and the football T1 value of the Big 10. The SECN in which ESPN is heavily invested is rewarded as well. The SEC welcomes Okahoma State and also welcomes N.C. State. But where's Oklahoma? If the Big 10 gets involved Oklahoma might well go to the ACC to really cement their football cache. Again no market is lost to ESPN or the ACC. Texas and Oklahoma is preserved as a conference rivalry. To fill the spots of Virginia Tech and N.C. State the ACC adds Texas's in state pals of T.C.U. for Dallas and Baylor. But lets do the math. Kansas to the Big 10 for 1, Oklahoma State to the SEC for 2, Texas, Oklahoma, T.C.U., and Baylor to the ACC for 6. We're 2 short here. If ESPN wanted to pay the SEC they would be in position to take two of Kansas State (another 3 million plus state) and West Virginia (now more appealing with N.C. State in hand), Iowa State (another 3 plus million state and AAU with basketball help) or Texas Tech as a second State school from Texas.

A variant on this move could be Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Virginia Tech and N.C. State to the SEC; and Texas, Oklahoma, Baylor and T.C.U. to the ACC with the SEC moving to 18 with Oklahoma State and Kansas State.

But either of these scenarios nets the 8 necessary schools to dissolve the conference and eliminate the GOR.

3. The Big 10 doesn't do enough to keep ESPN's blessing for additional inventory. So much like in the last scenario the SEC and ACC account for 8 of the Big 12 schools. The SEC picks up Virginia Tech and N.C. State along with Kansas and Oklahoma State to move to 18. The ACC picks up Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Texas, Baylor, and Texas Tech to move to 18.

4. The PAC sells enough interest in their product and network to FOX and ESPN to gain access to properties possessed by both in the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Notre Dame all move to the PAC for a twenty team conference. The Big 12 is dissolved.

The Big 10 gives ESPN the rights they want in a long term stable deal. ESPN parks the ACC basketball talent in the Big 10. The Big 10 gains Boston College (market and hockey), Syracuse, Virginia, Duke, North Carolina, and Georgia Tech to move to 20.

ESPN parks football talent in the SEC. The SEC gains Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson, Florida State, Miami and either Baylor or Louisville to get to 20. The ACC now loses 12 schools and is dissolved.

5. The PAC plays ball, the Big 10 also and FOX and ESPN agree to share a rebuilt Big 12 which finally gives FOX access to some strong Southeastern properties.

The PAC adds: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas State, and Iowa State to get to 16.
The Big 10 adds: Kansas and Virginia to get to 16.
The SEC adds: North Carolina and Duke to get to 16.

The ACC/Big 12 emerges:
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virgnia
East: Cincinnati, Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
West: Baylor, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

Only here there are four "everything but football members" and they are each attached to a different division for four of their six obligated conference games. In the West B.Y.U. is attached. In the South it is Wake Forest. In the North it is Connecticut. In the East it is Notre Dame.

The independents each add something of value. N.D. adds national cache. Connecticut adds great hoops. B.Y.U. a strong market and good football. And Wake Forest great academics.

These 68 can then form the new upper division.

If you were FOX and ESPN how would you move to 4 conferences?

Forgive me, but sometimes you get a concept in your head and you forget to communicate the logic that brought about the thought and because of that someone can't follow your idea. I've done that here. Let me put a history around it and then I think the connection can be made between why I believe networks are controlling realignment, how they are controlling it, and what may yet happen because of it.

When the Big 10 added Penn State it got everyone to start thinking. That not only meant that the other conferences started thinking about more expansion but the networks did too, particularly ESPN. At that point the eventual movement of the Big 10 to the East became apparent to the forward thinking individuals. Otherwise why add such an outlier? That single move suddenly gave new value to schools like Syracuse, Pitt, Miami, Boston College, and Virginia Tech. Some of them like Miami had value as a sports commodity for football, as did Virginia Tech. Some had value for markets with competitive sports programs, like Pitt and Boston College, and some were clear cut basketball draws with decent football, like Syracuse.

Now maybe the ACC saw the value in them right away, or perhaps saw that they would be vulnerable on the Northern end of their conference if they didn't have a buffer, or maybe both. But the one entity that everyone had to contact prior to making further moves had to be the network that paid them. That put ESPN in the perfect position to optimize their own value by shaping the conference landscapes.

Let's say the brain trust at ESPN had a skull session to determine how best to utilize their position since the conferences that might be in a position to expand might wish to do so. Simply paying them to take the teams they wanted most may or may not be in the best interest of the network. Because if conferences had expanded in the old way of growth they might wind up adding duplicates from the same states thereby minimizing instead of optimizing the advertising revenue that could be generated for that addition's slot. So inside of 1 year when the SEC wanted to go after Clemson and Florida State in addition to Texas and Texas A&M and Arkansas ESPN saw a chance to encourage the expansion of the SEC into South Carolina and Arkansas (but not with another of their product in Clemson), was fortunate that Texas politics held up any movement there (even though Texas it was later learned was already looking West instead of East) and (I am insinuating here) that ESPN may have had a hidden hand in encouraging Florida State to the ACC thereby keeping F.S.U. from further strengthening the SEC's overall position which would give them more leverage while cutting off ESPN's other product, the ACC, from significant Florida recruiting grounds.

By placing the Noles in the ACC ESPN begins to enhance the value of its basketball assets with football eyeballs, encourages the SEC to expand into markets without taking teams (Clemson) that devalue another of ESPN's holdings, and ESPN wins in total value on all fronts. I think that out of this two year period of time the whole strategy of the realignment we now are witnessing was born. 1. The conferences ask ESPN what they would be willing to pay for an addition. 2. ESPN then analyzes the addition to see if paying for it helps them or hurts another of their enterprises. 3. ESPN controls the placement.

Then the next big issue crops up again from the Big 10. Delany buys satellite time and announces plans for a self own and self distributed network. The BTN stands as a colossal threat to the future of sports broadcasting and to ESPN itself. Delany is motivated because he knows that ESPN is underpaying for the value of the product and he is looking to maximize the Big 10's earnings any way he can. It is a brilliant plan. Meanwhile in the interim between the Penn State addition and the threat of the Big 10 network ESPN has had the foresight to add Boston College and Virginia Tech along with Miami to the ACC to enhance it's football and strengthen it's markets and cement F.S.U. But with the addition of the BTN ESPN is awakened to what Delany will need if he intends to build markets for his new network. Now the Mouse becomes reactive and Syracuse (the top N.Y. product) and Pitt (another valuable product but also a larger buffer against a hostile Big 10's movement into a still underpaid product the ACC) is added to shore up the Northeast and withhold markets from the Big Ten. Distribution problems eventually force Delany to sell enough interest in the Big 10 network to gain corporate backing and now he poses his third threat to ESPN by bringing FOX on board.

With product cut off temporarily in the Northeast and with Delany having taken Nebraska and Colorado having bolted to the PAC (also not owned by ESPN) suddenly there is a two front war. How does ESPN shelter its property or at least withhold value from the Big 10 in the West? Well the obvious answer came when Delany made his big mistake by tipping his hand on how he valued property in the West at the time of the Nebraska addition. Missouri was seen a property that neither the PAC nor SEC had interest in. Delany still wanted the Eastern markets much more than those of the Midwest because he already carried many of those states without having to possess their schools within the Big 10 and because he saw little outside interest in the region and always thought that they would be there for the taking once he had expanded East.

Then a second power extraneous to the Mouse opens up with a major salvo. Larry Scott is seeking as many as six of the Big 12 schools. Thanks to Baylor wanting inclusion in the proposed move and A&M not wanting to head West, the beans get spilled and before the coup can be accomplished in steps the Mouse with 15 million a year for Texas to hold that product in place. Now they turn to an old friend, Mike Slive, and offer him a piece of what Kramer had wanted two decades before, A&M. But if the SEC could also repatriate Missouri into the South the cornerstone for Big 10 expansion down to Texas could be thwarted. Sewing up Kansas's tier 3 rights also helped to block expansion Southward by the now arrested Big 10. To hold Texas and Oklahoma in place the GOR is suggested and adopted and the last two remaining pieces of valuable football property in the Big East must be accounted for to hold for insurance against future movement. West Virginia agrees to shake loose and move to the Big 12 to help preserve it. It is a lifeline for the Mountaineers and one of the two needed teams that preserves the TV contract value for the Big 12. T.C.U. is added because they are available, leaving just Louisville as the remaining product of value unaccounted for.

Delany knows now if he doesn't move soon Rutgers will eventually be consumed by the rival that ESPN is building in the ACC (rival because the academics rival that of the Big 10 and can be used to continue to remove strong Northeastern schools from the market.) Delany wants to send a Sicilian message to ESPN and he knows that a woefully underpaid and financially strapped Maryland which has a former Big 10 president at the helm is the most available and thanks to serendipity one of the more desirable ACC products. He strikes. The ACC feeling threatened is encouraged to offer Notre Dame its terms to come on board partially and stabilize the conference's image. The last remaining football power from the Big East is added in Louisville because they settle a dispute between Chapel Hill and Tallahassee over the direction of the athletic focus of the conference. Since Louisville is equally a football and basketball addition their academics are overlooked and they are brought in to shore up the perception of vulnerability outside of the conference, and to compromise between factions inside the conference. And now the GOR is utilized again to stop the possibility of further movement.

Conclusions and observations:

Connecticut has not been taken because the ACC needed to compromise between football and basketball and the Huskies aren't fully up to speed in football and because they are too far North to help the SEC, and not an AAU school like the Big 10 prefers. If they are taken now I believe it will be by the Big 10 but only if necessary for market acquisition. If the ACC takes them it will be to back fill.

ESPN is on hold while trying to figure out the next moves of the Big 10 and PAC, but is still far more worried about the Big 10. Texas gives them leverage to acquire part of the PAC's network and they know it. But Texas could also potentially gain them Notre Dame in the ACC, or if the PAC doesn't give them a piece of its network Texas in the ACC adds further value to an ESPN property and sets up a strategy for maximizing the content in both the SEC and ACC. IMO this is why the ACC doesn't yet have its network. ESPN is waiting to see if the LHN can be utilized thereby saving it the start up costs. When Texas's fate is decided then the ACC will either utilize the LHN or ESPN will create a network for them.

ESPN has forced Delany out of his position of wanting to own and distribute his own product, but they failed to acquire a piece of that network and their competitor did instead. ESPN has checked Delany's growth Eastward and cut off his growth down into the Plains. Delany has bloodied ESPN's nose with the theft of Maryland and depending upon the lawsuit could yet strike another blow.

I doubt that either side wants to get too down and dirty because it will be too costly and I think ESPN could be exposed to some collusion charges should everything come out.

Slive was telling the truth when he said SEC expansion was a matter of just waiting for the right parties to call. Especially when ESPN hands out the phone number and pays for the charges.

The SEC will be fine but could become a haven for the top properties from the ACC should legal issues create a window for the Big 10 to strike again, or could acquire more Big 12 properties depending on how ESPN chooses to shelter its interests in the Big 12 more fully in a conference they own without FOX's interference.

I do not believe the SEC is pursuing anyone. I believe that Texas will wind up either in the PAC or in the ACC with friends. Less probable would be the further raiding of the ACC by the Big 10, but if it happened the future SEC expansion would be from the East and excess product would be salvaged by placing it in the Big 12.

And that is why I listed the scenarios above.

(03-16-2014 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 12:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If most of you haven't noticed yet I am willing to play with or speculate about any kind of conference realignment theory. It's fun and it tells you a lot about the persons with which you post and it can generate some interesting stories on the side as well as some preposterous predictions. But for the purposes of clarity and the elimination of passions imagine that there was no conference involvement with the realignment process and that everything is about Network property and then take a look at realignment.

ESPN has rights to:

All of the ACC:
Boston College, Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest and all sports except Football and Hockey for Notre Dame.

All of the SEC (except for 1 choice for the 3:00 Saturday CBS time slot):
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Presently T1 rights with the Big 10 where the BTN is 51% FOX owned so they share rights with FOX to these schools:
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin

ESPN shares T1 and T2 options with the Big 12 and has T3 rights to Texas and Kansas while FOX has T3 rights with Oklahoma and some of the others, but not all.

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, West Virginia

The PAC owns their own network and property and leases rights to ESPN and FOX. The properties leased are:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern California, Stanford, Utah, Washington, Washington State

Clearly ESPN is in the much stronger position on product. FOX to their credit has made major inroads into the Big 10 and is at least on equal footing with ESPN in the PAC and Big 12.

If harmony is to prevail some kind of access to the Southeast has to be gained by FOX. Subletting rights to ACC and some SEC games might bring about that kind of cooperation. However should ESPN fail to renew their T1 rights in the Big 10, or have to split those rights with FOX at the T1 level, or lose standing in the Big 12, or lose lease rights in the PAC as a result of a FOX move then there will be repercussions. Chief among those repercussions would be no access to leased ACC & SEC games and the likely securing of certain Big 12 properties that could lead to another round of realignment. A strengthening of FOX's hold over the Big 10 could result in the pursuit of ESPN properties within the ACC which could spur another round of realignment as well.

When folks say there are a lot of moving parts that applies here as well.

Scenarios:

1. The PACN sells 50% of its rights to ESPN. Why? To gain access to expansion targets. Now if ESPN encourages Texas to move to the PAC they maximize revenues off of that brand placement on the West coast and open time zone slots that optimize their new found interest in Oregon, Stanford, U.S.C., U.C.L.A. and Washington. This would be the the best use of a top brand for ESPN. Likely FOX would gain concessions here as well for the inclusion of Oklahoma. Or FOX may choose to encourage Oklahoma to move to the Big 10 if it thought that it's Big 12 properties were in jeopardy. Without Texas there aren't but two targets from the Big 12 that would be suitable to the Big 10; Kansas and Oklahoma and the Sooners may not be a slam dunk.

The problem here is that Oklahoma and Kansas T3 rights are owned by competitors so the likelihood of FOX cooperating with the Oklahoma move to a PAC that ESPN was gaining control over would be less likely to happen. So now lets just say Texas is going to move to the PAC with Texas Tech, Kansas State and Iowa State (AAU). That still gives the PAC 3 new states nearly 34 million more viewers, and 4 central time zones slots with which to add product from the PAC to the viewing lineup.

Let's say that ESPN re-signs with the Big 10 for T1 rights but for fewer games than they have received in the past and FOX gains share here. ESPN will not be inclined to offer any of its property to the Big 10 for what is essentially a reduction in access. In this case Kansas is the more acceptable school for Big 10 expansion but they are more under ESPN influence than FOX influence. The SEC would love to have Oklahoma but they are more under FOX influence than ESPN influence. Both FOX and ESPN are into Kansas and Oklahoma's T3 for roughly the same amount. They swap if the Big 10 prefers Kansas to Oklahoma. They don't swap if the Big 10 prefers Oklahoma to Kansas. Either way one goes to the Big 10 and the other to the SEC.

Both the Big 10 and SEC will need a partner. The SEC has more options here. If they land Kansas then they can opt for Oklahoma State and gain both states and two of the top 30 most profitable schools. The SEC could opt for Kansas and another Texas School.

The ACC would be looking at West Virginia as a possibility with perhaps adding Cincinnati or Connecticut (which might also be an option for the Big 10 if another more suitable partner for Kansas cannot be obtained).

If something like this essentially came to pass then 8 Big 12 schools will have been taken and the GOR and conference could be dissolved and the assets moved to places where the networks involved gained increased profit or profit potential from the moves.

2. But, let's say a Texas move to the ESPN controlled ACC would or could entice Notre Dame to go all in. Now the ACC has 16 full members and the Texas placement there helps ESPN land another of the nation's darlings and steal a prize from NBC. Now there is no PAC deal. There is a less cooperative environment and ESPN has much more to gain by condensing its best properties into the ACC and SEC. They might well spend to buy out Oklahoma's T3 and to place both Oklahoma and Kansas in the SEC, or if the Big 10 didn't want to be isolated out of the ESPN loop and they sign over all of their T1 rights to ESPN then perhaps they get some growth help from redundant ESPN holdings. Kansas and Virginia Tech could round out the Big 10's growth. ESPN loses no particular market in this exchange and enhances both the basketball T1 value and the football T1 value of the Big 10. The SECN in which ESPN is heavily invested is rewarded as well. The SEC welcomes Okahoma State and also welcomes N.C. State. But where's Oklahoma? If the Big 10 gets involved Oklahoma might well go to the ACC to really cement their football cache. Again no market is lost to ESPN or the ACC. Texas and Oklahoma is preserved as a conference rivalry. To fill the spots of Virginia Tech and N.C. State the ACC adds Texas's in state pals of T.C.U. for Dallas and Baylor. But lets do the math. Kansas to the Big 10 for 1, Oklahoma State to the SEC for 2, Texas, Oklahoma, T.C.U., and Baylor to the ACC for 6. We're 2 short here. If ESPN wanted to pay the SEC they would be in position to take two of Kansas State (another 3 million plus state) and West Virginia (now more appealing with N.C. State in hand), Iowa State (another 3 plus million state and AAU with basketball help) or Texas Tech as a second State school from Texas.

A variant on this move could be Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Virginia Tech and N.C. State to the SEC; and Texas, Oklahoma, Baylor and T.C.U. to the ACC with the SEC moving to 18 with Oklahoma State and Kansas State.

But either of these scenarios nets the 8 necessary schools to dissolve the conference and eliminate the GOR.

3. The Big 10 doesn't do enough to keep ESPN's blessing for additional inventory. So much like in the last scenario the SEC and ACC account for 8 of the Big 12 schools. The SEC picks up Virginia Tech and N.C. State along with Kansas and Oklahoma State to move to 18. The ACC picks up Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Texas, Baylor, and Texas Tech to move to 18.

4. The PAC sells enough interest in their product and network to FOX and ESPN to gain access to properties possessed by both in the Big 12. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Notre Dame all move to the PAC for a twenty team conference. The Big 12 is dissolved.

The Big 10 gives ESPN the rights they want in a long term stable deal. ESPN parks the ACC basketball talent in the Big 10. The Big 10 gains Boston College (market and hockey), Syracuse, Virginia, Duke, North Carolina, and Georgia Tech to move to 20.

ESPN parks football talent in the SEC. The SEC gains Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson, Florida State, Miami and either Baylor or Louisville to get to 20. The ACC now loses 12 schools and is dissolved.

5. The PAC plays ball, the Big 10 also and FOX and ESPN agree to share a rebuilt Big 12 which finally gives FOX access to some strong Southeastern properties.

The PAC adds: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas State, and Iowa State to get to 16.
The Big 10 adds: Kansas and Virginia to get to 16.
The SEC adds: North Carolina and Duke to get to 16.

The ACC/Big 12 emerges:
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virgnia
East: Cincinnati, Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
West: Baylor, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

Only here there are four "everything but football members" and they are each attached to a different division for four of their six obligated conference games. In the West B.Y.U. is attached. In the South it is Wake Forest. In the North it is Connecticut. In the East it is Notre Dame.

The independents each add something of value. N.D. adds national cache. Connecticut adds great hoops. B.Y.U. a strong market and good football. And Wake Forest great academics.

These 68 can then form the new upper division.

If you were FOX and ESPN how would you move to 4 conferences?

Forgive me, but sometimes you get a concept in your head and you forget to communicate the logic that brought about the thought and because of that someone can't follow your idea. I've done that here. Let me put a history around it and then I think the connection can be made between why I believe networks are controlling realignment, how they are controlling it, and what may yet happen because of it.

When the Big 10 added Penn State it got everyone to start thinking. That not only meant that the other conferences started thinking about more expansion but the networks did too, particularly ESPN. At that point the eventual movement of the Big 10 to the East became apparent to the forward thinking individuals. Otherwise why add such an outlier? That single move suddenly gave new value to schools like Syracuse, Pitt, Miami, Boston College, and Virginia Tech. Some of them like Miami had value as a sports commodity for football, as did Virginia Tech. Some had value for markets with competitive sports programs, like Pitt and Boston College, and some were clear cut basketball draws with decent football, like Syracuse.

Now maybe the ACC saw the value in them right away, or perhaps saw that they would be vulnerable on the Northern end of their conference if they didn't have a buffer, or maybe both. But the one entity that everyone had to contact prior to making further moves had to be the network that paid them. That put ESPN in the perfect position to optimize their own value by shaping the conference landscapes.

Let's say the brain trust at ESPN had a skull session to determine how best to utilize their position since the conferences that might be in a position to expand might wish to do so. Simply paying them to take the teams they wanted most may or may not be in the best interest of the network. Because if conferences had expanded in the old way of growth they might wind up adding duplicates from the same states thereby minimizing instead of optimizing the advertising revenue that could be generated for that addition's slot. So inside of 1 year when the SEC wanted to go after Clemson and Florida State in addition to Texas and Texas A&M and Arkansas ESPN saw a chance to encourage the expansion of the SEC into South Carolina and Arkansas (but not with another of their product in Clemson), was fortunate that Texas politics held up any movement there (even though Texas it was later learned was already looking West instead of East) and (I am insinuating here) that ESPN may have had a hidden hand in encouraging Florida State to the ACC thereby keeping F.S.U. from further strengthening the SEC's overall position which would give them more leverage while cutting off ESPN's other product, the ACC, from significant Florida recruiting grounds.

By placing the Noles in the ACC ESPN begins to enhance the value of its basketball assets with football eyeballs, encourages the SEC to expand into markets without taking teams (Clemson) that devalue another of ESPN's holdings, and ESPN wins in total value on all fronts. I think that out of this two year period of time the whole strategy of the realignment we now are witnessing was born. 1. The network asks ESPN what they would be willing to pay for an addition. 2. ESPN then analyzes the addition to see if paying for it helps them or hurts another of their enterprises. 3. ESPN controls the placement.

Then the next big issue crops up again from the Big 10. Delany buys satellite time and announces plans for a self own and self distributed network. The BTN stands as a colossal threat to the future of sports broadcasting and to ESPN itself. Delany is motivated because he know that ESPN is underpaying for the value of the product and he is looking to maximize the Big 10's earnings any way he can. It is a brilliant plan. Meanwhile in the interim between the Penn State addition and the threat of the Big 10 network ESPN has had the foresight to add Boston College and Virginia Tech along with Miami to the ACC to enhance it's football and strengthen it's markets and cement F.S.U. But with the addition of the BTN ESPN is awakened to what Delany will need if he intends to build markets for his new network. Now the Mouse becomes reactive and Syracuse (the top N.Y. product) and Pitt (another valuable product but also a larger buffer against a hostile Big 10's movement into a still underpaid product the ACC) is added to shore up the Northeast and withhold markets from the Big Ten. Distribution problems eventually force Delany to sell enough interest in the Big 10 network to gain corporate backing and now he poses his third threat to ESPN by bringing FOX on board.

With product cut off temporarily in the Northeast and with Delany having taken Nebraska and Colorado having bolted to the PAC (also not owned by ESPN) suddenly there is a two front war. How does ESPN shelter its property or at least withhold value from the Big 10 in the West? Well the obvious answer came when Delany made his big mistake by tipping his hand on how he valued property in the West at the time of the Nebraska addition. Missouri was seen a property that neither the PAC nor SEC had interest in. Delany still wanted the Eastern markets much more than those of the Midwest because he already carried many of those states without having to possess their schools within the Big 10 and because he saw little outside interest in the region and always thought that they would be there for the taking once he had expanded East.

Then a second power extraneous to the Mouse opens up with a major salvo. Larry Scott is seeking as many as six of the Big 12 schools. Thanks to Baylor wanting inclusion in the proposed move and A&M not wanting to head West, the beans get spilled and before the coup can be accomplished in steps the Mouse with 15 million a year for Texas to hold that product in place. Now they turn to an old friend, Mike Slive, and offer him a piece of what Kramer had wanted two decades before, A&M. But if the SEC could also repatriate Missouri into the South the cornerstone for Big 10 expansion down to Texas could be thwarted. Sewing up Kansas's tier 3 rights also helped to block expansion Southward by the now arrested Big 10. To hold Texas and Oklahoma in place the GOR is suggested and adopted and the last two remaining pieces of valuable football property in the Big East must be accounted for to hold for insurance against future movement. West Virginia agrees to shake loose and move to the Big 12 to help preserve it. It is a lifeline for the Mountaineers and one of the two needed teams that preserves the TV contract value for the Big 12. T.C.U. is added because they are available, leaving just Louisville as the remaining product of value unaccounted for.

Delany knows now if he doesn't move soon Rutgers will eventually be consumed by the rival that ESPN is building in the ACC (rival because the academics rival that of the Big 10 and can be used to continue to remove strong Northeastern schools from the market.) Delany wants to send a Sicilian message to ESPN and he knows that a woefully underpaid and financially strapped Maryland which has a former Big 10 president at the helm is the most available and thanks to serendipity one of the more desirable ACC products. He strikes. The ACC feeling threatened is encouraged to offer Notre Dame its terms to come on board partially and stabilize the conference's image. The last remaining football power from the Big East is added in Louisville because they settle a dispute between Chapel Hill and Tallahassee over the direction of the athletic focus of the conference. Since Louisville is equally a football and basketball addition their academics are overlooked and they are brought in to shore up the perception of vulnerability outside of the conference, and to compromise between factions inside the conference. And now the GOR is utilized again to stop the possibility of further movement.

Conclusions and observations:

Connecticut has not been taken because the ACC needed to compromise between football and basketball and the Huskies aren't fully up to speed in football and because they are too far North to help the SEC, and not an AAU school like the Big 10 prefers. If they are taken now I believe it will be by the Big 10 but only if necessary for market acquisition. If the ACC takes them it will be to back fill.

ESPN is on hold while trying to figure out the next moves of the Big 10 and PAC, but is still far more worried about the Big 10. Texas gives them leverage to acquire part of the PAC's network and they know it. But Texas could also potentially gain them Notre Dame in the ACC, or if the PAC doesn't give them a piece of its network Texas in the ACC adds further value to an ESPN property and sets up a strategy for maximizing the content in both the SEC and ACC. IMO this is why the ACC doesn't yet have its network. ESPN is waiting to see if the LHN can be utilized thereby saving it the start up costs. When Texas's fate is decided then the ACC will either utilize the LHN or ESPN will create a network for them.

ESPN has forced Delany out of his position of wanting to own and distribute his own product, but they failed to acquire a piece of that network and their competitor did instead. ESPN has checked Delany's growth Eastward and cut off his growth down into the Plains. Delany has bloodied ESPN's nose with the theft of Maryland and depending upon the lawsuit could yet strike another blow.

I doubt that either side wants to get too down and dirty because it will be too costly and I think ESPN could be exposed to some collusion charges should everything come out.

Slive was telling the truth when he said SEC expansion was a matter of just waiting for the right parties to call. Especially when ESPN hands out the phone number and pays for the charges.

The SEC will be fine but could become a haven for the top properties from the ACC should legal issues create a window for the Big 10 to strike again, or could acquire more Big 12 properties depending on how ESPN chooses to shelter its interests in the Big 12 more fully in a conference they own without FOX's interference.

I do not believe the SEC is pursuing anyone. I believe that Texas will wind up either in the PAC or in the ACC with friends. Less probable would be the further raiding of the ACC by the Big 10, but if it happened the future SEC expansion would be from the East and excess product would be salvaged by placing it in the Big 12.

And that is why I listed the scenarios above.

(03-16-2014 10:55 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money.

If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

So BBB where does Texas go?
1. PAC if ESPN can acquire 50% ownership of the PACN When? Sooner than the grant of rights expire since ESPN is in position to place eight between the PAC/SEC/ACC and/or possibly Big 10.

2. ACC if ESPN can get a commitment date out of Notre Dame. When? Soon if they can get to PAC and Big 10 to both take a pair. In 12 years if they can't.

3. Big 12 if ESPN can get a long term commitment out of the Big 10 for T1 and can morph the LHN into a New Big 12 Conference Network. When? At the end of 12 years.

4. SEC only if at the end of 12 years Texas and OU make the most money there, and that is possible.

5. Independent in the ACC but only if N.D. refuses to join and they can bring their friends from the Big 12.

(03-17-2014 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 10:55 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money.

If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

So BBB where does Texas go?
1. PAC if ESPN can acquire 50% ownership of the PACN When? Sooner than the grant of rights expire since ESPN is in position to place eight between the PAC/SEC/ACC and/or possibly Big 10.

2. ACC if ESPN can get a commitment date out of Notre Dame. When? Soon if they can get to PAC and Big 10 to both take a pair. In 12 years if they can't.

3. Big 12 if ESPN can get a long term commitment out of the Big 10 for T1 and can morph the LHN into a New Big 12 Conference Network. When? At the end of 12 years.

4. SEC only if at the end of 12 years Texas and OU make the most money there, and that is possible.

5. Independent in the ACC but only if N.D. refuses to join and they can bring their friends from the Big 12.

There is one more option:

6. Independent in a rebuilt B12 after KU, OU, and maybe a few others leave. They would still probably rule that conference, while at the same time having the national schedule they want for FB.

It will be interesting to see what direction Texas goes. Dodds favored a eastern path if they left the B12 and he was infatuated with Notre Dame. So it is almost certain that they would have gone to the ACC if the B12 failed and he had his way. He helped convince Powers to back out of the PAC 16 deal in 2010. Now that he is out, Patterson, the new AD, has been a PAC guy (ASU) and worked for Portland in the NBA, and their president Powers is a PAC guy. I think they will be more open to the PAC than they were when Dodds was the AD.

Texas will try to keep the B12 intact for now and if it fails, I still think they look east first, but if they get a better deal from the PAC than one of the eastern conferences they might take it the next go around. They probably go where they feel they will have the most power as they mint money regardless. So probably options 5 or 6, if option 3 (keeping the B12 intact) fails.

(03-16-2014 10:55 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  There is only one organizing principle in that thread post. Money.

If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

Former OSU president Gee basically admitted they should have taken KU and MU for #13 and #14 when they took NU. They thought they would both be there later. They did not count on MU moving to the SEC. If they took MU and KU along with NU in 2010 the B12 would have died. A&M would have gone to the SEC in 2010 and the rest probably go to the PAC. One of WVU/ISU/KSU is in the SEC as #14 probably. Eliminates one more power conference.

Worked out for the SEC IMO, as I think it gave the SEC more options in the west now with A&M and MU than they had previously.

(03-18-2014 12:18 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 10:55 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:51 PM)Wedge Wrote:  If money is the organizing principle, think of how much you could make by starting a new league that puts together the six most valuable Big Ten schools and the six most valuable ACC schools. Or an all-southern league that cherry-picks UT and OU and adds them to the most valuable SEC and ACC properties while not including the less-valuable "athletic franchises".

We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

So BBB where does Texas go?
1. PAC if ESPN can acquire 50% ownership of the PACN When? Sooner than the grant of rights expire since ESPN is in position to place eight between the PAC/SEC/ACC and/or possibly Big 10.

2. ACC if ESPN can get a commitment date out of Notre Dame. When? Soon if they can get to PAC and Big 10 to both take a pair. In 12 years if they can't.

3. Big 12 if ESPN can get a long term commitment out of the Big 10 for T1 and can morph the LHN into a New Big 12 Conference Network. When? At the end of 12 years.

4. SEC only if at the end of 12 years Texas and OU make the most money there, and that is possible.

5. Independent in the ACC but only if N.D. refuses to join and they can bring their friends from the Big 12.

There is one more option:

6. Independent in a rebuilt B12 after KU, OU, and maybe a few others leave. They would still probably rule that conference, while at the same time having the national schedule they want for FB.

It will be interesting to see what direction Texas goes. Dodds favored a eastern path if they left the B12 and he was infatuated with Notre Dame. So it is almost certain that they would have gone to the ACC if the B12 failed and he had his way. He helped convince Powers to back out of the PAC 16 deal in 2010. Now that he is out, Patterson, the new AD, has been a PAC guy (ASU) and worked for Portland in the NBA, and their president Powers is a PAC guy. I think they will be more open to the PAC than they were when Dodds was the AD.

Texas will try to keep the B12 intact for now and if it fails, I still think they look east first, but if they get a better deal from the PAC than one of the eastern conferences they might take it the next go around. They probably go where they feel they will have the most power as they mint money regardless. So probably options 5 or 6, if option 3 (keeping the B12 intact) fails.

Implicit in option 3 is that at the end of the GOR the Big 10 does indeed expand out of the ACC, key ACC properties that ESPN wants to keep direct relations with enter the SEC, and the remainder reform a Big 12 with greater depth, better academics and a network created out of the LHN that would be owned by ESPN. All of which would be made possible by ESPN feeling secure enough about a 15 or 20 year T1 rights deal with the Big 10.

Remember that even ESPN knew that the Big 10 and SEC were a gestalt for the industry and that the PAC was too remote to be effectively broken up. So what was their strategy to control realignment? Buy the ACC outright and see to it that they stay undervalued, and sew up the best properties of the Big 12. Why? Everyone else's growth will have to come from those properties and therefore the PAC, Big 10 and SEC will all have to make some concessions to ESPN while the power brokering is done. And by having extra rights to Texas and Kansas with the Big 10 eschewing Iowa State for market reasons and Oklahoma lacking AAU and ARWU status sufficient enough to be a slam dunk then even if the ACC stabilized fully they still control the assets that give them leverage. And I might add do so with great flexibility depending upon the variables like Notre Dame and Texas and their desires.

Because of that I don't see Texas becoming available to the PAC unless a percentage of the PACN is forthcoming. I don't see Texas to the Big 10 because as the top property ESPN isn't going to want FOX to have greater access to a product that ESPN currently controls. I don't see Texas to the ACC unless it is a lure for fuller control to Notre Dame. And the only way I see Texas to the SEC is if the PAC refuses accommodations to ESPN and the ACC can't land N.D. outright and the placement of Texas in the SEC makes ESPN the most money.

I think eventually Notre Dame realizes the gig is up as an independent and I believe them when they say that of all of the conferences the ACC is their best fit. So a commitment to join in full after their present NBC contract is out seems like a reasonable goal for ESPN to shoot for with Texas as the lure.

Worst case scenario for ESPN:
If N.D. refuses, the PAC holds onto 100% of their network, and the Big 10 doesn't do something to rekindle warmer relations with ESPN then Texas likely winds up in the SEC.

Best case scenario for ESPN:
The PAC sells them a 50% share of the PACN. The Big 10 warms back up to them with a long term deal. The SECN is a huge hit and the need to carry the Big 12 and the ACC is gone.

In this scenario product gets trimmed to essentials. We are looking at 3 twenty team conferences. The top academic/basketball schools of the ACC go to the Big 10 optimizing ESPN's hoops product to its fullest extent. The top football product of the ACC moves to the SEC maximizing ESPN's pigskin product. And the best 8 of the Big 12 move to the PAC giving top schools new markets and much better content and marrying great California product to the rabid fans of the Big 12. Five schools are trimmed, Content maximized, Markets optimized, and a perpetual stake in all 3 remaining power conferences virtually assured. Here I'd look for Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Notre Dame to be the 8 headed West. Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Syracuse, and Virginia to go to the Big 10. And Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, and Virginia Tech to head to the SEC. You might sub Pitt for Miami?

Best case for the Big 12 is for the Big 10 to warm up to ESPN again, the SECN to become a huge hit and for the PAC to remain cold and isolated to the Mouse. Then the Big 10 can move to 16 with somebody like Syracuse and Virignia, the SEC can move to 16 with North Carolina and either Duke or Virginia Tech, and N.C. State, Louisville, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, and Miami make the Big 12 another powerhouse conference with roots in the Southeast and Southwest for recruiting. Texas and Oklahoma remain kings but with a helluva a supporting cast. ESPN has long term T1 rights in the Big 10, all rights but the 1 game a week for CBS in the SEC, and half of T1 & T2 rights and all of the T3 rights of the Big 12. And they trim overhead by leasing games to FOX. That would be your option 6. And BTW if something like this actually happened look for N.D., Pitt, B.C. and Connecticut to head to the PAC for their 16.

Of Course the Best case for the ACC exists too and is probably more likely. N.D. agrees to join, Texas comes on board with Baylor and Texas Tech. The ACC yields N.C. State to the SEC and the SEC adds Oklahoma. The ACC becomes the SEC's partner for the Sugar Bowl and cross conference play. Kansas moves to the Big 10 and is joined by Virginia Tech. The ACC, SEC, and Big 10 all stand at 16. If the PAC takes T.C.U., Iowa State, Kansas State and Oklahoma State fine it gets done prior to the end of the GOR. If they don't then the Big 10, SEC and ACC move to 18 each. The SEC adds Kansas State and T.C.U., the Big 10 adds Connecticut and Iowa State, and the ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia but only if everyone needs to move now. If not we wait for 12 years and then the SEC adds Oklahoma and N.C. State, the Big 10 gets Kansas and Virginia Tech, and the ACC gets Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech and Notre Dame. And if you don't like that disposition of the schools involved there are other configurations that work as well. But you get the general idea.

And all of it always stays in the hands of the network. Texas won't just wake up and decide where they want to go without the network benefiting.

(03-18-2014 01:24 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:18 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 10:55 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(03-14-2014 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  We might get there Wedge, but I think like filtering fine wine, there are a few more transitions to go through first. And I do think so far the whole process has been one of filtration. The Big East was used as a filter for the top up and coming programs and some strong basketball product. Then the ACC was used to filter the Big East. Three conferences have been used to filter the Big 12. And I don't think the filtration is at all complete.

So far the Big 10 has been strengthened in markets with loads of Alumni and then there is the Nebraska content add. I look for more markets with their next two at minimum and 1 market and 1 content add at best.

The SEC got two market adds it's just fortunate that one was also a regional content add as well.

The PAC got two market adds that serve as bridges as well.

The ACC gained huge product in basketball and added some nice markets, but the Maryland loss bisected their market footprint. It will be interesting to see if they are now remade into the 4th national brand conference or whether they are filtered.

I consider the Big 12 the most likely to be filtered next and by the PAC if they sell part of their network rights. But Texas and Oklahoma along with Kansas could be rebuilt into the 4th national brand conference should something happen in the ACC. We'll see.

First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

So BBB where does Texas go?
1. PAC if ESPN can acquire 50% ownership of the PACN When? Sooner than the grant of rights expire since ESPN is in position to place eight between the PAC/SEC/ACC and/or possibly Big 10.

2. ACC if ESPN can get a commitment date out of Notre Dame. When? Soon if they can get to PAC and Big 10 to both take a pair. In 12 years if they can't.

3. Big 12 if ESPN can get a long term commitment out of the Big 10 for T1 and can morph the LHN into a New Big 12 Conference Network. When? At the end of 12 years.

4. SEC only if at the end of 12 years Texas and OU make the most money there, and that is possible.

5. Independent in the ACC but only if N.D. refuses to join and they can bring their friends from the Big 12.

There is one more option:

6. Independent in a rebuilt B12 after KU, OU, and maybe a few others leave. They would still probably rule that conference, while at the same time having the national schedule they want for FB.

It will be interesting to see what direction Texas goes. Dodds favored a eastern path if they left the B12 and he was infatuated with Notre Dame. So it is almost certain that they would have gone to the ACC if the B12 failed and he had his way. He helped convince Powers to back out of the PAC 16 deal in 2010. Now that he is out, Patterson, the new AD, has been a PAC guy (ASU) and worked for Portland in the NBA, and their president Powers is a PAC guy. I think they will be more open to the PAC than they were when Dodds was the AD.

Texas will try to keep the B12 intact for now and if it fails, I still think they look east first, but if they get a better deal from the PAC than one of the eastern conferences they might take it the next go around. They probably go where they feel they will have the most power as they mint money regardless. So probably options 5 or 6, if option 3 (keeping the B12 intact) fails.

Implicit in option 3 is that at the end of the GOR the Big 10 does indeed expand out of the ACC, key ACC properties that ESPN wants to keep direct relations with enter the SEC, and the remainder reform a Big 12 with greater depth, better academics and a network created out of the LHN that would be owned by ESPN. All of which would be made possible by ESPN feeling secure enough about a 15 or 20 year T1 rights deal with the Big 10.

Remember that even ESPN knew that the Big 10 and SEC were a gestalt for the industry and that the PAC was too remote to be effectively broken up. So what was their strategy to control realignment? Buy the ACC outright and see to it that they stay undervalued, and sew up the best properties of the Big 12. Why? Everyone else's growth will have to come from those properties and therefore the PAC, Big 10 and SEC will all have to make some concessions to ESPN while the power brokering is done. And by having extra rights to Texas and Kansas with the Big 10 eschewing Iowa State for market reasons and Oklahoma lacking AAU and ARWU status sufficient enough to be a slam dunk then even if the ACC stabilized fully they still control the assets that give them leverage. And I might add do so with great flexibility depending upon the variables like Notre Dame and Texas and their desires.

Because of that I don't see Texas becoming available to the PAC unless a percentage of the PACN is forthcoming. I don't see Texas to the Big 10 because as the top property ESPN isn't going to want FOX to have greater access to a product that ESPN currently controls. I don't see Texas to the ACC unless it is a lure for fuller control to Notre Dame. And the only way I see Texas to the SEC is if the PAC refuses accommodations to ESPN and the ACC can't land N.D. outright and the placement of Texas in the SEC makes ESPN the most money.

I think eventually Notre Dame realizes the gig is up as an independent and I believe them when they say that of all of the conferences the ACC is their best fit. So a commitment to join in full after their present NBC contract is out seems like a reasonable goal for ESPN to shoot for with Texas as the lure.

Worst case scenario for ESPN:
If N.D. refuses, the PAC holds onto 100% of their network, and the Big 10 doesn't do something to rekindle warmer relations with ESPN then Texas likely winds up in the SEC.

Best case scenario for ESPN:
The PAC sells them a 50% share of the PACN. The Big 10 warms back up to them with a long term deal. The SECN is a huge hit and the need to carry the Big 12 and the ACC is gone.

In this scenario product gets trimmed to essentials. We are looking at 3 twenty team conferences. The top academic/basketball schools of the ACC go to the Big 10 optimizing ESPN's hoops product to its fullest extent. The top football product of the ACC moves to the SEC maximizing ESPN's pigskin product. And the best 8 of the Big 12 move to the PAC giving top schools new markets and much better content and marrying great California product to the rabid fans of the Big 12. Five schools are trimmed, Content maximized, Markets optimized, and a perpetual stake in all 3 remaining power conferences virtually assured. Here I'd look for Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Notre Dame to be the 8 headed West. Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Syracuse, and Virginia to go to the Big 10. And Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, and Virginia Tech to head to the SEC. You might sub Pitt for Miami?

Best case for the Big 12 is for the Big 10 to warm up to ESPN again, the SECN to become a huge hit and for the PAC to remain cold and isolated to the Mouse. Then the Big 10 can move to 16 with somebody like Syracuse and Virignia, the SEC can move to 16 with North Carolina and either Duke or Virginia Tech, and N.C. State, Louisville, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, and Miami make the Big 12 another powerhouse conference with roots in the Southeast and Southwest for recruiting. Texas and Oklahoma remain kings but with a helluva a supporting cast. ESPN has long term T1 rights in the Big 10, all rights but the 1 game a week for CBS in the SEC, and half of T1 & T2 rights and all of the T3 rights of the Big 12. And they trim overhead by leasing games to FOX. That would be your option 6. And BTW if something like this actually happened look for N.D., Pitt, B.C. and Connecticut to head to the PAC for their 16.

Of Course the Best case for the ACC exists too and is probably more likely. N.D. agrees to join, Texas comes on board with Baylor and Texas Tech. The ACC yields N.C. State to the SEC and the SEC adds Oklahoma. The ACC becomes the SEC's partner for the Sugar Bowl and cross conference play. Kansas moves to the Big 10 and is joined by Virginia Tech. The ACC, SEC, and Big 10 all stand at 16. If the PAC takes T.C.U., Iowa State, Kansas State and Oklahoma State fine it gets done prior to the end of the GOR. If they don't then the Big 10, SEC and ACC move to 18 each. The SEC adds Kansas State and T.C.U., the Big 10 adds Connecticut and Iowa State, and the ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia but only if everyone needs to move now. If not we wait for 12 years and then the SEC adds Oklahoma and N.C. State, the Big 10 gets Kansas and Virginia Tech, and the ACC gets Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech and Notre Dame. And if you don't like that disposition of the schools involved there are other configurations that work as well. But you get the general idea.

And all of it always stays in the hands of the network. Texas won't just wake up and decide where they want to go without the network benefiting.

Definitely in the end it will be in the hands of the networks. Someone has to pay for Texas (and friends) in any move. Right now ESPN holds the most chips.

A lot depends on FOX. They made a name for themselves by overpaying (at the time) for the NFL (specifically the NFC) when they were getting started in the 1990s. If there is one network who might be able to eventually dethrone ESPN it is FOX. I think we will learn how serious they are about going head to head with ESPN when the B1G T1 winner is determined. If FOX gets it (especially if they overbid) then things will get interesting.

IMO ESPN's position right now is as strong as it is likely to get. I think they will have more challengers trying to get a piece of college sports in a decade. If I was ESPN and I wanted further realignment I would try to orchestrate it soon. Giving Texas the LHN and continuously bumping the ACC's payout helped stabilize things for awhile and let ESPN sort through some things (SECN, no ACCN, B1G T1 soon); however, sooner (ACC) or later (B12) there will be movement to the the B1G/SEC/PAC because those two conferences will likely have fallen too far behind financially. Right now they have near total control of all the pieces likely to move. If it happens a decade from now FOX might have gotten FOX Sports up to speed and have had the B1G T1. More competitors like Google and others might even be involved in the process. The landscape in ten years will probably not be as conducive to ESPN getting what they want. Of course, I could be totally wrong.

(03-18-2014 02:50 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 01:24 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-18-2014 12:18 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-17-2014 09:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-16-2014 10:55 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  First, great thoughts as always, JR. You lay out a lot of good information that is actually being used in this realignment process. Your view of the Big 12 as the next conference to be filtered is accurate, and I think it was only disrupted by 2 things: 1) ESPN seeing it occurring and putting a stop to it by a move that a river gambler may not have even tried, the LHN. 2) Reading between the lines from Gee and others, the Big 10's blindness to conditions by concentrating solely on eastward expansion.

With the ACC rallying the troops, not adding Missouri and Kansas as Big 10 schools #15 and #16 has to be a regret. Texas, as is always the case and proven by JR's 1st and 2nd scenarios being completely contingent on them moving, might as well be the Notre Dame during the BCS years. If you all remember, it felt like the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame basically called the shots.

So BBB where does Texas go?
1. PAC if ESPN can acquire 50% ownership of the PACN When? Sooner than the grant of rights expire since ESPN is in position to place eight between the PAC/SEC/ACC and/or possibly Big 10.

2. ACC if ESPN can get a commitment date out of Notre Dame. When? Soon if they can get to PAC and Big 10 to both take a pair. In 12 years if they can't.

3. Big 12 if ESPN can get a long term commitment out of the Big 10 for T1 and can morph the LHN into a New Big 12 Conference Network. When? At the end of 12 years.

4. SEC only if at the end of 12 years Texas and OU make the most money there, and that is possible.

5. Independent in the ACC but only if N.D. refuses to join and they can bring their friends from the Big 12.

There is one more option:

6. Independent in a rebuilt B12 after KU, OU, and maybe a few others leave. They would still probably rule that conference, while at the same time having the national schedule they want for FB.

It will be interesting to see what direction Texas goes. Dodds favored a eastern path if they left the B12 and he was infatuated with Notre Dame. So it is almost certain that they would have gone to the ACC if the B12 failed and he had his way. He helped convince Powers to back out of the PAC 16 deal in 2010. Now that he is out, Patterson, the new AD, has been a PAC guy (ASU) and worked for Portland in the NBA, and their president Powers is a PAC guy. I think they will be more open to the PAC than they were when Dodds was the AD.

Texas will try to keep the B12 intact for now and if it fails, I still think they look east first, but if they get a better deal from the PAC than one of the eastern conferences they might take it the next go around. They probably go where they feel they will have the most power as they mint money regardless. So probably options 5 or 6, if option 3 (keeping the B12 intact) fails.

Implicit in option 3 is that at the end of the GOR the Big 10 does indeed expand out of the ACC, key ACC properties that ESPN wants to keep direct relations with enter the SEC, and the remainder reform a Big 12 with greater depth, better academics and a network created out of the LHN that would be owned by ESPN. All of which would be made possible by ESPN feeling secure enough about a 15 or 20 year T1 rights deal with the Big 10.

Remember that even ESPN knew that the Big 10 and SEC were a gestalt for the industry and that the PAC was too remote to be effectively broken up. So what was their strategy to control realignment? Buy the ACC outright and see to it that they stay undervalued, and sew up the best properties of the Big 12. Why? Everyone else's growth will have to come from those properties and therefore the PAC, Big 10 and SEC will all have to make some concessions to ESPN while the power brokering is done. And by having extra rights to Texas and Kansas with the Big 10 eschewing Iowa State for market reasons and Oklahoma lacking AAU and ARWU status sufficient enough to be a slam dunk then even if the ACC stabilized fully they still control the assets that give them leverage. And I might add do so with great flexibility depending upon the variables like Notre Dame and Texas and their desires.

Because of that I don't see Texas becoming available to the PAC unless a percentage of the PACN is forthcoming. I don't see Texas to the Big 10 because as the top property ESPN isn't going to want FOX to have greater access to a product that ESPN currently controls. I don't see Texas to the ACC unless it is a lure for fuller control to Notre Dame. And the only way I see Texas to the SEC is if the PAC refuses accommodations to ESPN and the ACC can't land N.D. outright and the placement of Texas in the SEC makes ESPN the most money.

I think eventually Notre Dame realizes the gig is up as an independent and I believe them when they say that of all of the conferences the ACC is their best fit. So a commitment to join in full after their present NBC contract is out seems like a reasonable goal for ESPN to shoot for with Texas as the lure.

Worst case scenario for ESPN:
If N.D. refuses, the PAC holds onto 100% of their network, and the Big 10 doesn't do something to rekindle warmer relations with ESPN then Texas likely winds up in the SEC.

Best case scenario for ESPN:
The PAC sells them a 50% share of the PACN. The Big 10 warms back up to them with a long term deal. The SECN is a huge hit and the need to carry the Big 12 and the ACC is gone.

In this scenario product gets trimmed to essentials. We are looking at 3 twenty team conferences. The top academic/basketball schools of the ACC go to the Big 10 optimizing ESPN's hoops product to its fullest extent. The top football product of the ACC moves to the SEC maximizing ESPN's pigskin product. And the best 8 of the Big 12 move to the PAC giving top schools new markets and much better content and marrying great California product to the rabid fans of the Big 12. Five schools are trimmed, Content maximized, Markets optimized, and a perpetual stake in all 3 remaining power conferences virtually assured. Here I'd look for Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Notre Dame to be the 8 headed West. Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Syracuse, and Virginia to go to the Big 10. And Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, Miami, N.C. State, and Virginia Tech to head to the SEC. You might sub Pitt for Miami?

Best case for the Big 12 is for the Big 10 to warm up to ESPN again, the SECN to become a huge hit and for the PAC to remain cold and isolated to the Mouse. Then the Big 10 can move to 16 with somebody like Syracuse and Virignia, the SEC can move to 16 with North Carolina and either Duke or Virginia Tech, and N.C. State, Louisville, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, and Miami make the Big 12 another powerhouse conference with roots in the Southeast and Southwest for recruiting. Texas and Oklahoma remain kings but with a helluva a supporting cast. ESPN has long term T1 rights in the Big 10, all rights but the 1 game a week for CBS in the SEC, and half of T1 & T2 rights and all of the T3 rights of the Big 12. And they trim overhead by leasing games to FOX. That would be your option 6. And BTW if something like this actually happened look for N.D., Pitt, B.C. and Connecticut to head to the PAC for their 16.

Of Course the Best case for the ACC exists too and is probably more likely. N.D. agrees to join, Texas comes on board with Baylor and Texas Tech. The ACC yields N.C. State to the SEC and the SEC adds Oklahoma. The ACC becomes the SEC's partner for the Sugar Bowl and cross conference play. Kansas moves to the Big 10 and is joined by Virginia Tech. The ACC, SEC, and Big 10 all stand at 16. If the PAC takes T.C.U., Iowa State, Kansas State and Oklahoma State fine it gets done prior to the end of the GOR. If they don't then the Big 10, SEC and ACC move to 18 each. The SEC adds Kansas State and T.C.U., the Big 10 adds Connecticut and Iowa State, and the ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia but only if everyone needs to move now. If not we wait for 12 years and then the SEC adds Oklahoma and N.C. State, the Big 10 gets Kansas and Virginia Tech, and the ACC gets Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech and Notre Dame. And if you don't like that disposition of the schools involved there are other configurations that work as well. But you get the general idea.

And all of it always stays in the hands of the network. Texas won't just wake up and decide where they want to go without the network benefiting.

Definitely in the end it will be in the hands of the networks. Someone has to pay for Texas (and friends) in any move. Right now ESPN holds the most chips.

A lot depends on FOX. They made a name for themselves by overpaying (at the time) for the NFL (specifically the NFC) when they were getting started in the 1990s. If there is one network who might be able to eventually dethrone ESPN it is FOX. I think we will learn how serious they are about going head to head with ESPN when the B1G T1 winner is determined. If FOX gets it (especially if they overbid) then things will get interesting.

IMO ESPN's position right now is as strong as it is likely to get. I think they will have more challengers trying to get a piece of college sports in a decade. If I was ESPN and I wanted further realignment I would try to orchestrate it soon. Giving Texas the LHN and continuously bumping the ACC's payout helped stabilize things for awhile and let ESPN sort through some things (SECN, no ACCN, B1G T1 soon); however, sooner (ACC) or later (B12) there will be movement to the the B1G/SEC/PAC because those two conferences will likely have fallen too far behind financially. Right now they have near total control of all the pieces likely to move. If it happens a decade from now FOX might have gotten FOX Sports up to speed and have had the B1G T1. More competitors like Google and others might even be involved in the process. The landscape in ten years will probably not be as conducive to ESPN getting what they want. Of course, I could be totally wrong.

I don't think you are wrong at all. Fans won't want to hear it or believe it, but what you suggest could well be a prime motivator. The presidents are already anticipating those kinds of changes 10 years out in their models and plans and if they are not good AD's are. In first reflection of your point I would say that whatever structural changes ESPN may want to make to the landscape of college football, that FOX and future parties interested in broadcasting the games would likely also approve and desire them.

Designing a structure that is readily understandable to the average fan is important because it lends anticipation and trust to that which they invest their time. The simpler the format to determine a champion generally the more fans you have. All successful sports start local, spread to a regional appeal, and then engage the nation. Therefore grouping schools will be important. To maximize regional appeal borders need to be blurred between regions. Those areas with teams in two different conferences will bring crossover fans from other regions in larger numbers to their regular conference games. If the lines are too crisp crossover interest won't be as great. It would be advantageous for the PAC, and SEC to share what could be their border states of Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas; for the PAC to share Iowa with the Big 10 or possibly Kansas; for the SEC and Big 10 to share North Carolina and Virginia, and possibly Pennsylvania and Georgia for instance. Fans from both regions would tune in to see what Pitt was doing against the SEC powers or what Virginia was doing against Big 10 powers, or for PAC fans to tune into what A&M was doing against the SEC (which accounts for a great deal of the Aggies present wave of popularity anyway with regards to the Big 12). Just look at what the annual 5 games shared between the ACC and SEC have done to bolster eyeballs on the sets.

So I would say that if ESPN achieves the structure (whether a P3 or P4) that blurs borders and increases the content games of each remaining conference, and optimizes markets that FOX and future networks would likely want to either do the same, or preserve it if ESPN has already accomplished it.

Fans claim today that they hate realignment. And there are aspects, like the loss of traditional rivalries, that have been hurt by the transitional stage which in my opinion has done its damage by not being quick enough. Once changes are in place I fully expect to see many of those traditional games restored. The sooner the better for the sake of the schools. But when it is done the clarity that the structure should provide, the relative competitiveness of the income levels which will bring stability, and the structure that avoids capricious decision makers whether they are polls, coaches votes, computers programmed with inherent biases, or the damned committees which will prove to be even worse (see the NCAA Tournament selection committee for my example of corruption) the happier the fans will be. Football will then be truly decided on the field. Win your championship and you are in. Have the best record of the remaining teams and you are the wild card (if we have or need one). The regions will be represented and the champion will have earned it on the field.

IMO the changes taking place were needed. The flaw has been in dragging this out for two decades now when the model needed was clear in the 1970's, and was only beginning to be implemented in early 1990, and we have managed to drag it out at a torturous pace ever since. The sooner it concludes now the better everyone will be.

Good insights Jhawkmvp!