(07-24-2017 12:01 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  UConn is exactly the same type of add as Maryland and Rutgers, other than the AAU part which is irrelevant if you're throwing around low research schools in low population states like Nebraska and Oklahoma.

Assuming that's true, that's another reason UConn to the B1G is unlikely. It doesn't add very much beyond what they got when they added those two. No reason to pay for the same thing twice.

It's the type of add that gives the buyer specifically what they're looking to buy:

- new state of cable subscribers for BTN
- high end bball (Maryland, not Rutgers)
- football conf wins for Mich, Ohio St, and Penn St

(07-24-2017 11:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Poppycock!

Such language!

(07-24-2017 11:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The networks aren't going to pay the Big 10 to take UConn or ISU because they (the networks) would lose money on the payouts. The networks provide valuations on schools being considered. If there isn't enough value there is no addition. If there is and the school falls within the loose parameters of the conference then they are added.

As to the Networks being eroded by cord cutting that news is old and overplayed, really overplayed. Amazon is not in the production game. ESPN and FOX are. Right now the streaming companies aren't in the rights holding game either. ESPN and FOX are. (Rights equals Raw Materials). The layoffs are part of transition from manufacturing a product (production) and distributing a product (FS1 & FS2 / ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, etc.), and fee collection (Retail), to soliciting the raw materials, and producing, to wholesaling (leasing the content to other providers) while keeping some retail outlets (FS1 & FS2 / ESPN & ESPN2, etc.).

ESPN and FOX will adjust by controlling the fees they charge the Amazons of the world for a finished product that Amazon can sell at a profitable rate.

Amazon may one day get into production from another angle, a more direct one. But right now they won't. The sports market may have peaked. It's one thing to take a product you have little to nothing in and sell it for a profit. It's quite another to spend the overhead required to get that product raw, produce it, and retail it.

ESPN and FOX will pass into history, but it won't be necessary for another 20 or 30 years, although we may have already peaked in the sports market. It will remain profitable enough for them for that long. I doubt it will be technology, or competition that puts ESPN out of business. Instead it will be the coming of age of a generation that never played the games and would rather play Angry Birds for Senior Citizens or Candy Crush than watch a baseball, football or basketball game.

My generation's memories were built on big plays, long runs, grand slams, and buzzer beaters. This one's memories are being built on perks for having the high score online, or reaching the gozillinth level of (pick your game title) on an ass numbing, mind blanking sunny afternoon when their yards needed mowing, their pets needed a walk, and their children needed some family time. I know this because I have 30 something year old nephews with families who are combat veterans but would rather escape into the video world than enjoy any other form of down time. They don't watch many sports, don't spend much real time with their families and probably won't miss ESPN when it's gone. And because of that they would never pay Amazon to stream anything. This is why Amazon (and companies like it) are probably never going to get into the expensive end of the sports game, but will sell the product to the retail customer as long as it is profitable.

And I don't just base this analysis on my nephews. I have witnessed it everywhere. It is a cultural trend that they are chin deep into, but it's a very crowded cultural trend. If we were under nuclear attack they wouldn't notice until their hair fell off onto the control panel. So I think ESPN is fairly safe for a while yet. And when it dies it will be for lack of demand for sports.

Fair points, though I still don't think ESPN has as much power as you portray it to have. A stable conference like the Big Ten is likely stuck "for life" with whatever add they make, so I would think they have a much greater investment in the expansion candidates than any TV contract.

(07-24-2017 04:34 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 11:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Poppycock!

Such language!

(07-24-2017 11:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  The networks aren't going to pay the Big 10 to take UConn or ISU because they (the networks) would lose money on the payouts. The networks provide valuations on schools being considered. If there isn't enough value there is no addition. If there is and the school falls within the loose parameters of the conference then they are added.

As to the Networks being eroded by cord cutting that news is old and overplayed, really overplayed. Amazon is not in the production game. ESPN and FOX are. Right now the streaming companies aren't in the rights holding game either. ESPN and FOX are. (Rights equals Raw Materials). The layoffs are part of transition from manufacturing a product (production) and distributing a product (FS1 & FS2 / ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, etc.), and fee collection (Retail), to soliciting the raw materials, and producing, to wholesaling (leasing the content to other providers) while keeping some retail outlets (FS1 & FS2 / ESPN & ESPN2, etc.).

ESPN and FOX will adjust by controlling the fees they charge the Amazons of the world for a finished product that Amazon can sell at a profitable rate.

Amazon may one day get into production from another angle, a more direct one. But right now they won't. The sports market may have peaked. It's one thing to take a product you have little to nothing in and sell it for a profit. It's quite another to spend the overhead required to get that product raw, produce it, and retail it.

ESPN and FOX will pass into history, but it won't be necessary for another 20 or 30 years, although we may have already peaked in the sports market. It will remain profitable enough for them for that long. I doubt it will be technology, or competition that puts ESPN out of business. Instead it will be the coming of age of a generation that never played the games and would rather play Angry Birds for Senior Citizens or Candy Crush than watch a baseball, football or basketball game.

My generation's memories were built on big plays, long runs, grand slams, and buzzer beaters. This one's memories are being built on perks for having the high score online, or reaching the gozillinth level of (pick your game title) on an ass numbing, mind blanking sunny afternoon when their yards needed mowing, their pets needed a walk, and their children needed some family time. I know this because I have 30 something year old nephews with families who are combat veterans but would rather escape into the video world than enjoy any other form of down time. They don't watch many sports, don't spend much real time with their families and probably won't miss ESPN when it's gone. And because of that they would never pay Amazon to stream anything. This is why Amazon (and companies like it) are probably never going to get into the expensive end of the sports game, but will sell the product to the retail customer as long as it is profitable.

And I don't just base this analysis on my nephews. I have witnessed it everywhere. It is a cultural trend that they are chin deep into, but it's a very crowded cultural trend. If we were under nuclear attack they wouldn't notice until their hair fell off onto the control panel. So I think ESPN is fairly safe for a while yet. And when it dies it will be for lack of demand for sports.

Fair points, though I still don't think ESPN has as much power as you portray it to have. A stable conference like the Big Ten is likely stuck "for life" with whatever add they make, so I would think they have a much greater investment in the expansion candidates than any TV contract.

Within their loose parameters they will. But those parameters likely mean Kansas and another. If the other is Texas the parameters still mean something. If it is Oklahoma we will have stretched those parameters even farther than the #14 academic school in the Big 10 today, Nebraska.

Nebraska was a football addition for money. Oklahoma would be the same. And prior to expansion the Big 10 would not have seen a need to add Kansas.
The networks will control the choices within the parameters, and might even stretch those parameters a little bit more.

But my point is a very simple one. If the networks don't give a favorable valuation nothing happens. The networks control the choices by valuations.

Nobody in Big 10 land whispered the name of Rutgers in a realignment meeting. A network exec told them what the Scarlet Knights would be worth to them. The same thing happened in the SEC with Missouri. And it happened in the ACC with Pitt and Syracuse, and later especially with Louisville. I equally doubt that anyone in the PAC considered any expansion until money was dangled.

The Big 10 parameters were contiguous if possible, and AAU preferred.

The SEC parameters were contiguous a must, and Southern in culture preferred.

The ACC parameters were built around academics (but they took Florida State as a work project in '91 and Louisville in 2011-2).

Big 12 parameters were whatever we need to stay together. Contiguity preferred but WVU was available.

The PAC parameters are apparently increasingly political so who knows.

So the networks give valuations on a list of schools that could meet those parameters and the conference picks from the list. So you tell me who is in control? Hint: It's almost always the one who writes the checks.

After reading your responses, I think the remaining Big 12 wouldn't be able to put in a competitive bid for Texas's non-football sports. So it would come down to B1G, SEC, full membership, Pac 16 full with 3 partners or ACC partial membership.

As a follow up question, how valuable would the Big 12 media rights deal be per school without Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas and adding 3 G5 schools (say BYU, Cincinnati and, UConn)? Would it be in the AAC range of $2 million per school per year and having to play Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights for football or would it be more like $10 million per school per year? I'm talking in today's dollars, not trying to anticipates the market for 2025.

(07-26-2017 12:10 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  After reading your responses, I think the remaining Big 12 wouldn't be able to put in a competitive bid for Texas's non-football sports. So it would come down to B1G, SEC, full membership, Pac 16 full with 3 partners or ACC partial membership.

As a follow up question, how valuable would the Big 12 media rights deal be per school without Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas and adding 3 G5 schools (say BYU, Cincinnati and, UConn)? Would it be in the AAC range of $2 million per school per year and having to play Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights for football or would it be more like $10 million per school per year? I'm talking in today's dollars, not trying to anticipates the market for 2025.

The only thing you have to go on there is a little bit of data. Texas and Oklahoma's earning power represented roughly 1/3rd of the total earning power in the Big 12. Let's assume that WVU gets into the ACC for a moment. Last year they earned about 109 million in total revenue. And let's assume that Kansas and one of Oklahoma State, T.C.U., or Texas Tech also make it into another conference. Kansas earned in the neighborhood of 97 million, T.C.U. around 93 million, and Oklahoma State around 91 million. Now you with just one of those in addition to Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and West Virginia you've knocked out a little over 60% of the revenue. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas are the largest draws. About half of a 3.9 million state might watch the Cowboys. The other Texas schools don't deliver the whole state, but could deliver a major city and surrounding areas. So you figure that T.C.U. and Tech might deliver DFW, so maybe 1/3rd of Texas or 8 to 9 million.

Now I don't know how to really figure it from there but 40% of their current payout for T1 & T2 would be 14 million and their T3 would go down. Factor in that they don't carry the whole state of Texas and may not be in Oklahoma at all and it could drop even more. Right now Texas and Oklahoma represent 79.9% of all potential viewers in the Big 12. So one might argue that without Texas and Oklahoma their contract was only worth 7 million per school.

But I think that the leftovers might get rolled into the AAC. S.M.U., Houston, Tulsa, UCF, USF, and Memphis are already there. Add Baylor, and the other remnants and maybe that conference gets bumped up. Anyway they would be the best remaining conference.

So we'll see.

(07-26-2017 01:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 12:10 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  After reading your responses, I think the remaining Big 12 wouldn't be able to put in a competitive bid for Texas's non-football sports. So it would come down to B1G, SEC, full membership, Pac 16 full with 3 partners or ACC partial membership.

As a follow up question, how valuable would the Big 12 media rights deal be per school without Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas and adding 3 G5 schools (say BYU, Cincinnati and, UConn)? Would it be in the AAC range of $2 million per school per year and having to play Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights for football or would it be more like $10 million per school per year? I'm talking in today's dollars, not trying to anticipates the market for 2025.

The only thing you have to go on there is a little bit of data. Texas and Oklahoma's earning power represented roughly 1/3rd of the total earning power in the Big 12. Let's assume that WVU gets into the ACC for a moment. Last year they earned about 109 million in total revenue. And let's assume that Kansas and one of Oklahoma State, T.C.U., or Texas Tech also make it into another conference. Kansas earned in the neighborhood of 97 million, T.C.U. around 93 million, and Oklahoma State around 91 million. Now you with just one of those in addition to Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and West Virginia you've knocked out a little over 60% of the revenue. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas are the largest draws. About half of a 3.9 million state might watch the Cowboys. The other Texas schools don't deliver the whole state, but could deliver a major city and surrounding areas. So you figure that T.C.U. and Tech might deliver DFW, so maybe 1/3rd of Texas or 8 to 9 million.

Now I don't know how to really figure it from there but 40% of their current payout for T1 & T2 would be 14 million and their T3 would go down. Factor in that they don't carry the whole state of Texas and may not be in Oklahoma at all and it could drop even more. Right now Texas and Oklahoma represent 79.9% of all potential viewers in the Big 12. So one might argue that without Texas and Oklahoma their contract was only worth 7 million per school.

But I think that the leftovers might get rolled into the AAC. S.M.U., Houston, Tulsa, UCF, USF, and Memphis are already there. Add Baylor, and the other remnants and maybe that conference gets bumped up. Anyway they would be the best remaining conference.

So we'll see.

It could be less. I believe a 3.0 rating game is worth many time more than a 1.0 rating game. As such if all the 3.0 or more ratings games where removed from the TV deal then the remaining games could be worth a small fraction of what they are with Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas.

Also, without those key ratings driving schools the remaining conference is not likely to get as many good time slots.

Someone could do an analysis of the ratings those 10 teams get playing against each other and figure out how close those ratings are to the AAC and get a reasonable estimate of what the remaining conference + new members could earn.

Regarding your other point about the remaining school joining the AAC. If there were only 3-4 schools remaining, then sure that could happen. However, I don't think that more than 4 of the Big 12 schools will find a P4 home, so then the remaining schools will probably just expand back to 10 with G5 schools.

(07-26-2017 01:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 12:10 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  After reading your responses, I think the remaining Big 12 wouldn't be able to put in a competitive bid for Texas's non-football sports. So it would come down to B1G, SEC, full membership, Pac 16 full with 3 partners or ACC partial membership.

As a follow up question, how valuable would the Big 12 media rights deal be per school without Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas and adding 3 G5 schools (say BYU, Cincinnati and, UConn)? Would it be in the AAC range of $2 million per school per year and having to play Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights for football or would it be more like $10 million per school per year? I'm talking in today's dollars, not trying to anticipates the market for 2025.

The only thing you have to go on there is a little bit of data. Texas and Oklahoma's earning power represented roughly 1/3rd of the total earning power in the Big 12. Let's assume that WVU gets into the ACC for a moment. Last year they earned about 109 million in total revenue. And let's assume that Kansas and one of Oklahoma State, T.C.U., or Texas Tech also make it into another conference. Kansas earned in the neighborhood of 97 million, T.C.U. around 93 million, and Oklahoma State around 91 million. Now you with just one of those in addition to Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and West Virginia you've knocked out a little over 60% of the revenue. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas are the largest draws. About half of a 3.9 million state might watch the Cowboys. The other Texas schools don't deliver the whole state, but could deliver a major city and surrounding areas. So you figure that T.C.U. and Tech might deliver DFW, so maybe 1/3rd of Texas or 8 to 9 million.

Now I don't know how to really figure it from there but 40% of their current payout for T1 & T2 would be 14 million and their T3 would go down. Factor in that they don't carry the whole state of Texas and may not be in Oklahoma at all and it could drop even more. Right now Texas and Oklahoma represent 79.9% of all potential viewers in the Big 12. So one might argue that without Texas and Oklahoma their contract was only worth 7 million per school.

But I think that the leftovers might get rolled into the AAC. S.M.U., Houston, Tulsa, UCF, USF, and Memphis are already there. Add Baylor, and the other remnants and maybe that conference gets bumped up. Anyway they would be the best remaining conference.

So we'll see.

I was thinking somewhere between 6 and 10 million per year (w/o OU and KU and with Texas as a partial in football). Your assumptions are slightly different, and given that I think your $7M number is very reasonable.

Here's a what if scenario for you all:

Let's say the SEC gets UVA & UNC to go to 16

Let's say the Big 12 reaches out to the ACC and says we want to take 8 of your most valuable schools And collectively we will be worth more due to our large footprint. You'll form an East Divison with WVU while the rest of our league will be the West and we can play one cross division game a year but other than that we will just meet in the title game. Miami, Fla St, GT, Clemson, NC St, VT, Louisville, and Pitt jump on it.

With the ACC trashed the Big Ten gets Notre Dame and BC (big market and a historic rival for ND)

Duke, WF, and Syracuse join the AAC.

What's the tv value for each of those leagues?

(07-26-2017 09:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's a what if scenario for you all:

Let's say the SEC gets UVA & UNC to go to 16

Let's say the Big 12 reaches out to the ACC and says we want to take 8 of your most valuable schools And collectively we will be worth more due to our large footprint. You'll form an East Divison with WVU while the rest of our league will be the West and we can play one cross division game a year but other than that we will just meet in the title game. Miami, Fla St, GT, Clemson, NC St, VT, Louisville, and Pitt jump on it.

With the ACC trashed the Big Ten gets Notre Dame and BC (big market and a historic rival for ND)

Duke, WF, and Syracuse join the AAC.

What's the tv value for each of those leagues?

The big winner there is the B1G. ND is a national brand that people all over the country will buy the BTN just to see 1 random ND game and BC while not a big factor in their home market, is still in a large market. So I'd say the per school payouts go up by 5 Million per school.

The SEC does pretty well filling out the rest of the southern footprint with the 2 state flagships that they want. While this will help the SEC's basketball, non-football sports and academic standing it doesn't do much for football. North Carolina and Virginia are more populous than most SEC states but not so much more that they'll really push the average per team payout a great deal when divided by 16 schools. So I'd say the average per school payouts go up by 2 Million per school.

In your scenario, the AAC gets a blue blood in Duke, blue blood equivalent in Syracuse and a decent basketball school in Wake. I don't think these would be the 3 left behind however. Duke would get chosen by the Big 12 over NCST and Syracuse would get chosen over one of Louisville or Pitt. Probably over Louisville since Pitt was the first school the Big 12 was after when they looked into expanding and took WVU. But in your scenario combining those elite basketball schools with the ones in the AAC and you'd double there media payout at least to $4 million per school per year. You'd probably need a 4th new school to balance out scheduling.

The Big 12 now at 18 schools I see going down in value per school. Yes they would have a big populous footprint with the 8 added ACC schools but they'd only be playing 1 game a year in that populous footprint. 8/9th of there games would still be in the same old footprint. And because of that lack of exposure between what is essentially 2 separate leagues and a championship game, I don't think the Big 12 would get it's own network. That lack of a network combined with the fact that the networks wouldn't have to overpay the original big 12 to stay together would lose the 18 schools an average of 10 million a year. I say average because the ACC schools will be leaving behind the ACCN for no network in the Big 12. The Original Big 12 schools won't be losing as much.

(07-26-2017 09:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's a what if scenario for you all:

Let's say the SEC gets UVA & UNC to go to 16

Let's say the Big 12 reaches out to the ACC and says we want to take 8 of your most valuable schools And collectively we will be worth more due to our large footprint. You'll form an East Divison with WVU while the rest of our league will be the West and we can play one cross division game a year but other than that we will just meet in the title game. Miami, Fla St, GT, Clemson, NC St, VT, Louisville, and Pitt jump on it.

With the ACC trashed the Big Ten gets Notre Dame and BC (big market and a historic rival for ND)

Duke, WF, and Syracuse join the AAC.

What's the tv value for each of those leagues?

Also, If 12 schools left the ACC, the remaining 3 would be collecting $900 million dollars in exit fees and could afford to bring in 7 AAC schools and make a heck of a basketball conference. As opposed to joining the AAC.

Duke
Syracuse
Wake Forest
Cincinnati
UConn
Temple
Memphis
UCF
USF
Houston

Double round robin play creates a lot of attractive basketball matchups between the top 7 schools listed.

(07-26-2017 09:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's a what if scenario for you all:

Let's say the SEC gets UVA & UNC to go to 16

Let's say the Big 12 reaches out to the ACC and says we want to take 8 of your most valuable schools And collectively we will be worth more due to our large footprint. You'll form an East Divison with WVU while the rest of our league will be the West and we can play one cross division game a year but other than that we will just meet in the title game. Miami, Fla St, GT, Clemson, NC St, VT, Louisville, and Pitt jump on it.

With the ACC trashed the Big Ten gets Notre Dame and BC (big market and a historic rival for ND)

Duke, WF, and Syracuse join the AAC.

What's the tv value for each of those leagues?

I think that you have this backwards. With a GOR until 2036 and a network, it will likely be the ACC reaching out and taking Big 12 schools, not the other way around.

UVA and UNC are the ACC. Like, the lifeblood ... of the old ACC, anyway.

Only way I think they'd leave the ACC is if the ACC was collapsing. That is not anywhere near the case now, thanks in large part to the success of schools like Clemson, Louisville, etc.

Texas wouldn't jeopardize the path to the Sugar Bowl or Playoff by being Indy.
ND cares more about being Indy than any major bowl or playoffs.

The Big 12 only had 2 games last year with more than 2 million viewers that did *not* include either Oklahoma or Texas.

TCU v. WVU = 3.18M viewers (ABC)
TCU v. Arkansas = 2.47M viewers (ESPN)

There were only 9 other non-Texas/Oklahoma B12 games with more than 1M viewers.

That's just a notch above the AAC, which had 7 AAC games with more than 1M viewers (13, if you include Army-Navy and marque opponents Oklahoma, Ohio St., Michigan, FSU, and Notre Dame).

There were 13 Texas or Oklahoma games (including UT v. OU) that landed 2M+ viewers, including some really big ratings, such as Oklahoma v. Ohio St. (5.8m viewers) and Texas v. Notre Dame (10.9M viewers!).

The Big 12 media deal would take a huge hit if Oklahoma and Texas were to leave.

If the B12 still has 2 or 3 football games hosting Texas - as part of the independent/Olympic sports only affiliation - then a portion of the contract value is salvaged, but still pretty small potatoes when you share it with the entire conference.

The B12 might have a chance to keep the Sugar Bowl IF Texas is eligible to take the B12's place under certain criteria....

How does that compare to the PAC, YNot?

Big 12 might not be able to get Big Ten/SEC/even ACC ratings ... but if they could at least get PAC ratings, they'd still be P5.

(07-27-2017 02:38 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(07-26-2017 09:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's a what if scenario for you all:

Let's say the SEC gets UVA & UNC to go to 16

Let's say the Big 12 reaches out to the ACC and says we want to take 8 of your most valuable schools And collectively we will be worth more due to our large footprint. You'll form an East Divison with WVU while the rest of our league will be the West and we can play one cross division game a year but other than that we will just meet in the title game. Miami, Fla St, GT, Clemson, NC St, VT, Louisville, and Pitt jump on it.

With the ACC trashed the Big Ten gets Notre Dame and BC (big market and a historic rival for ND)

Duke, WF, and Syracuse join the AAC.

What's the tv value for each of those leagues?

Also, If 12 schools left the ACC, the remaining 3 would be collecting $900 million dollars in exit fees and could afford to bring in 7 AAC schools and make a heck of a basketball conference. As opposed to joining the AAC.

Duke
Syracuse
Wake Forest
Cincinnati
UConn
Temple
Memphis
UCF
USF
Houston

Double round robin play creates a lot of attractive basketball matchups between the top 7 schools listed.

If 12 schools were to leave the ACC and did so all at the same time they could just call for a vote and disband the league--leaving the last 3 with no exit fees, and they'd all be free to go where they please fee free.

(08-03-2017 02:22 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  How does that compare to the PAC, YNot?

Big 12 might not be able to get Big Ten/SEC/even ACC ratings ... but if they could at least get PAC ratings, they'd still be P5.

PAC had 34 games over 1M viewers, including 17 games over 2M viewers.

USC and Washington provided the top PAC ratings in 2016.

USC had 9 over 1M, including 5 over 2M. Washington had 8 over 1M, including 6 over 2M.

However, there were 17 games with over 1M viewers that did not include USC or Washington, including 6 of those that had over 2M viewers.

Only Oregon State did not have a game over 1M viewers. Everyone else had multiple games with at least 1M viewers. Stanford, Colorado and UCLA each had 3 games with more than 2M viewers.

So, the PAC showed that it is not as top-heavy as the B12. The other difference from the B12 is that it's not always USC and Washington at the top of the ratings. Oregon, Stanford, and UCLA can all hold the torch and even Colorado and Washington St. (who before 2016 were cellar-dwellers) can help the PAC land strong ratings.

If the Big 12 lost Texas and Oklahoma, it would be completely devastated. If the PAC lost USC and Washington, while it would hurt, the PAC would still look like a P5 conference.

(07-18-2017 12:49 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  instead of losing them all together?

Clearly any conference would take Texas as a full member. The ACC might offer a ND type deal to Texas. Rather than be an outlier in a conference far to the East as a partial member wouldn't Texas prefer to be in a central region conference with many former conference mates as a partial member if it wanted to go the independent route?



I'm thinking that the B1G takes OU an KU when the B12 GoR expires. Then Texas shops themselves around for the best deal and the remaining 7 B12 schools agree to offer Texas's other sports a home if they give 5 football games a year to the conference. Without Texas folding up into a P4, the other P5 schools won't go champions only on the CFP, which means ND will not join the ACC. Without that, the ACC will not expand. Maybe the SEC takes OSU and WVU but I doubt it. So you're looking at a B12 conference like :

Baylor
TCU
Texas Tech
Oklahoma State
Kansas State
Iowa State
WVU
Cincinnati
BYU
UCF

Texas with an agreement to play 5 football games against the conference.

I bring this up because I hear a lot of talk about Texas getting a ND type deal from the ACC. And one guy mentioned could Texas get one from the P12 but I never hear anyone mentioning the the remaining B12 could do the same.

I think that it's probably hard for competitors (ESPN/FOX) to control an entity (Big 12) together for a multitude of reasons.
I believe the Big 12 will be allowed to die to eliminate any legal entanglement between the Big 12, FOX and ESPN, before a new conference is born or the remnants are merged into the AAC. Texas may be offered a Notre Dame type deal at that time.

(07-26-2017 09:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's a what if scenario for you all:

Let's say the SEC gets UVA & UNC to go to 16

Let's say the Big 12 reaches out to the ACC and says we want to take 8 of your most valuable schools And collectively we will be worth more due to our large footprint. You'll form an East Divison with WVU while the rest of our league will be the West and we can play one cross division game a year but other than that we will just meet in the title game. Miami, Fla St, GT, Clemson, NC St, VT, Louisville, and Pitt jump on it.

With the ACC trashed the Big Ten gets Notre Dame and BC (big market and a historic rival for ND)

Duke, WF, and Syracuse join the AAC.

What's the tv value for each of those leagues?

Don't even mention that possibility ever again, even as a joke. It will NEVER happen.