(06-25-2019 08:40 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:36 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:30 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  There is no reason to rush into anything.

Anybody that the Big 12 would consider adding will be there in 4 years
Anybody that the AAC would consider adding will be there in 4 years

Candidates could strengthen their cases, or weaken them.

Agree on these points. Expansion will likely hit the "pause" button until 2025. If anything, the AAC has an open slot that will rise in value over time for those not named the P5. Let's see what cream rises consistently to the top. However, you wonder if there will be other programs that will make a strictly financial move to survive/focus primarily on either hoops or football like UConn did.

Open spots don't sit empty for long. The audition process has already happened while no one realized it was happening which is actually the best way to do it. That 12th spot will be filled as UConn leaves.

Define how long...there's no early indication that the AAC schools are going to add a program just to fill a spot when UConn exits.

Next couple of months, probably before the basketball season ends. Thats just my best guess.

(06-25-2019 08:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:40 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Define how long...there's no early indication that the AAC schools are going to add a program just to fill a spot when UConn exits.

Next couple of months, probably before the basketball season ends. Thats just my best guess.

Honestly, I'll be very surprised if that happens.

(06-25-2019 07:00 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Interesting take...

He is wrong, the next round of realignment is just beginning and UConn's announcement was the first move.

(06-25-2019 08:48 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:40 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Define how long...there's no early indication that the AAC schools are going to add a program just to fill a spot when UConn exits.

Next couple of months, probably before the basketball season ends. Thats just my best guess.

Honestly, I'll be very surprised if that happens.

Realignment rarely gets drawn out these things have always moved fast especially when its a conference replacing a member.

(06-25-2019 08:36 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:30 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  There is no reason to rush into anything.

Anybody that the Big 12 would consider adding will be there in 4 years
Anybody that the AAC would consider adding will be there in 4 years

Candidates could strengthen their cases, or weaken them.

Agree on these points. Expansion will likely hit the "pause" button until 2025. If anything, the AAC has an open slot that will rise in value over time for those not named the P5. Let's see what cream rises consistently to the top. However, you wonder if there will be other programs that will make a strictly financial move to survive/focus primarily on either hoops or football like UConn did.

Open spots don't sit empty for long. The audition process has already happened while no one realized it was happening which is actually the best way to do it. That 12th spot will be filled as UConn leaves.

As a B1G fan you should know that there are exceptions to that rule. The Big Ten sat at 11 for what, 18 years? All they needed was one more school and it took until summer 2010 to invite Nebraska.

(06-25-2019 08:51 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:48 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:40 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Define how long...there's no early indication that the AAC schools are going to add a program just to fill a spot when UConn exits.

Next couple of months, probably before the basketball season ends. Thats just my best guess.

Honestly, I'll be very surprised if that happens.

Realignment rarely gets drawn out these things have always moved fast especially when its a conference replacing a member.

You're making the assumption that a) the AAC wants to expand; and b) there is mutual interest between the AAC and a program it wants to invite. Like you, I don't have a crystal ball but I'm not getting the same read as you are.

(06-25-2019 08:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. Realignment has been the norm in college football throughout its history. Inactivity is the anomaly.

2. Schools opting out of the spending war will trigger adjustments.

3. More money (especially significantly more money) will trigger adjustments.

4. As factors that determine payouts change realignment will be triggered. Right now content is the only sure bet for larger payouts and for long term security for conferences, more so than the market model which is still viable for conference networks. As content additions are sought and streaming increases (which augments the need for content games) realignment will be triggered.

5. As extraneous factors such as the numbers of content games, and conference games, are slowly bargained away for incremental increases in revenue, leverage will become a greater need for conferences and the more schools you represent the greater leverage you will have. This may force a confederation of conferences, or simply trigger more realignment.

So no. Realignment is not over and never will be because all it is is a reaction to changing conditions in the marketplace.

Most or all of those issues are longer term issues.

To me the biggest long term issue is still the possible (inevitable?) collapse of the share-and-share-alike model for media revenue within a conference.

Suppose, at some point in time, Texas tells the rest of the Big 12, "We want to stay in the Big 12 and we want it to stay together, but from now on, we want to own our own media rights and we want to sell them on our own. Broadcast and streaming rights for every Texas Longhorns home game in every sport, every Longhorns highlight show, coaches' show, talking-head show, replays of "classic" games from the past, all of it. We hope our conference mates will all agree to this arrangement, but if not, we are prepared to make it happen outside of the Big 12." Or maybe they just settle for a model like in Spanish fútbol, where the two brands that have the most value by far get the lion's share of the league's TV money.

(06-25-2019 08:54 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:36 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:30 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  There is no reason to rush into anything.

Anybody that the Big 12 would consider adding will be there in 4 years
Anybody that the AAC would consider adding will be there in 4 years

Candidates could strengthen their cases, or weaken them.

Agree on these points. Expansion will likely hit the "pause" button until 2025. If anything, the AAC has an open slot that will rise in value over time for those not named the P5. Let's see what cream rises consistently to the top. However, you wonder if there will be other programs that will make a strictly financial move to survive/focus primarily on either hoops or football like UConn did.

Open spots don't sit empty for long. The audition process has already happened while no one realized it was happening which is actually the best way to do it. That 12th spot will be filled as UConn leaves.

As a B1G fan you should know that there are exceptions to that rule. The Big Ten sat at 11 for what, 18 years? All they needed was one more school and it took until summer 2010 to invite Nebraska.

Different time, also it wasn't a post-raid situation. Since Miami left the Big East which kicked off this current era of college athletics.

(06-25-2019 08:59 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. Realignment has been the norm in college football throughout its history. Inactivity is the anomaly.

2. Schools opting out of the spending war will trigger adjustments.

3. More money (especially significantly more money) will trigger adjustments.

4. As factors that determine payouts change realignment will be triggered. Right now content is the only sure bet for larger payouts and for long term security for conferences, more so than the market model which is still viable for conference networks. As content additions are sought and streaming increases (which augments the need for content games) realignment will be triggered.

5. As extraneous factors such as the numbers of content games, and conference games, are slowly bargained away for incremental increases in revenue, leverage will become a greater need for conferences and the more schools you represent the greater leverage you will have. This may force a confederation of conferences, or simply trigger more realignment.

So no. Realignment is not over and never will be because all it is is a reaction to changing conditions in the marketplace.

Most or all of those issues are longer term issues.

To me the biggest long term issue is still the possible (inevitable?) collapse of the share-and-share-alike model for media revenue within a conference.

Suppose, at some point in time, Texas tells the rest of the Big 12, "We want to stay in the Big 12 and we want it to stay together, but from now on, we want to own our own media rights and we want to sell them on our own. Broadcast and streaming rights for every Texas Longhorns home game in every sport, every Longhorns highlight show, coaches' show, talking-head show, replays of "classic" games from the past, all of it. We hope our conference mates will all agree to this arrangement, but if not, we are prepared to make it happen outside of the Big 12." Or maybe they just settle for a model like in Spanish fútbol, where the two brands that have the most value by far get the lion's share of the league's TV money.

Won't happen. Texas can't stay married to a lot of schools without a large followings and earn what they think they are worth. Content will drive the market for some time to come now. And while that doesn't mean Texas has to play nothing but big brands, it does mean they have to play a significant proportion of games against much larger draws.

The issues I listed will always be with us and will be why Realignment in some form will continue.

(06-25-2019 08:59 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:51 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:48 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:40 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Define how long...there's no early indication that the AAC schools are going to add a program just to fill a spot when UConn exits.

Next couple of months, probably before the basketball season ends. Thats just my best guess.

Honestly, I'll be very surprised if that happens.

Realignment rarely gets drawn out these things have always moved fast especially when its a conference replacing a member.

You're making the assumption that a) the AAC wants to expand; and b) there is mutual interest between the AAC and a program it wants to invite. Like you, I don't have a crystal ball but I'm not getting the same read as you are.

Thats because you are leaving out one BIG factor and thats ESPN and what they want. Instead of reworking the contract for 11 and losing content it's just easier for them to give the AAC a list of approval candidates to choose from to replace UConn. Bing bam boom and thats that. ESPN owns 100% of the AAC and will let the conference know what they should (will) do.

(06-25-2019 09:04 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:59 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  You're making the assumption that a) the AAC wants to expand; and b) there is mutual interest between the AAC and a program it wants to invite. Like you, I don't have a crystal ball but I'm not getting the same read as you are.

Thats because you are leaving out one BIG factor and thats ESPN and what they want. Instead of reworking the contract for 11 and losing content it's just easier for them to give the AAC a list of approval candidates to choose from to replace UConn. Bing bam boom and thats that. ESPN owns 100% of the AAC and will let the conference know what they should (will) do.

I mean this respectfully, but do you have an inside track on the ESPN/AAC negotiations? I think you're overplaying your "ESPN as the ultimate power card." I can see them wanting to look at the financial terms of the deal but not cornering Aresco in a back room and giving him a list of teams to add one or else. There's been a lot of discussion about this in recent days...

Quote:Why is it unlikely a team joins the conference to push membership back to 12?

The old school line of thinking from previous realignment moves called for conferences to expand the footprint into larger markets for increased viewership via increased households. That's where the money was through network-television deals.

With that in mind, Georgia State (Atlanta), UNC Charlotte and UAB (Birmingham) would make sense due to potentially large audiences attractive for TV.

But the old school methods appear to be fleeting. Large markets, from a viewership perspective, are increasingly shrinking in significance, as streaming is the way of the future and large, engaged fan bases, regardless of location, are key.

The AAC-ESPN $1 billon, 12-year deal agreed to earlier this year begins in 2020 (that's an average of more than $83 million per year), according to an ESPN report.

While football and men’s and women’s basketball will still be broadcast on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU, most basketball games, a large number of football games and other sports including baseball and soccer will air on ESPN+, the network’s streaming service.

Streaming subscriptions in place of television sets will be the key metric in the coming years. And from that angle, Georgia State doesn’t deliver the Atlanta market. Tulane, already a conference member, doesn’t deliver the New Orleans market.

Instead, these schools bring with them a base of fans as potential subscribers. And there doesn’t appear to be a match out there to provide enough value to warrant inclusion.

Taking into account the loss of profit caused by UConn's absence, the overall value of the rights deal would be affected by the loss of how much the Huskies would have made but each remaining member should not see their cut reduced or enhanced.

This is the likely outcome, as ESPN reported Tuesday the network can renegotiate the deal if a team leaves the conference.

Stay At 11 Feasible Option

I think ODU had more fans in the stands than the 3 schools mentioned. Even when Delaware, James Madison, Montana and Montana State had down years? they get around 20,000 fans. That is more than Georgia State and Charlotte gets, and UAB gwt that way as well. UAB gain last year, but how long will they be? They could go 0-12 this year.

(06-25-2019 09:37 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 09:04 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:59 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  You're making the assumption that a) the AAC wants to expand; and b) there is mutual interest between the AAC and a program it wants to invite. Like you, I don't have a crystal ball but I'm not getting the same read as you are.

Thats because you are leaving out one BIG factor and thats ESPN and what they want. Instead of reworking the contract for 11 and losing content it's just easier for them to give the ACC a list of approval candidates to choose from to replace UConn. Bing bam boom and thats that. ESPN owns 100% of the AAC and will let the conference know what they should (will) do.

I mean this respectfully, but do you have an inside track on the ESPN/AAC negotiations? I think you're overplaying your "ESPN as the ultimate power card." I can see them wanting to look at the financial terms of the deal but not cornering Aresco in a back room and giving him a list of teams to add one or else. There's been a lot of discussion about this in recent days...

Quote:Why is it unlikely a team joins the conference to push membership back to 12?

The old school line of thinking from previous realignment moves called for conferences to expand the footprint into larger markets for increased viewership via increased households. That's where the money was through network-television deals.

With that in mind, Georgia State (Atlanta), UNC Charlotte and UAB (Birmingham) would make sense due to potentially large audiences attractive for TV.

But the old school methods appear to be fleeting. Large markets, from a viewership perspective, are increasingly shrinking in significance, as streaming is the way of the future and large, engaged fan bases, regardless of location, are key.

The AAC-ESPN $1 billon, 12-year deal agreed to earlier this year begins in 2020 (that's an average of more than $83 million per year), according to an ESPN report.

While football and men’s and women’s basketball will still be broadcast on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU, most basketball games, a large number of football games and other sports including baseball and soccer will air on ESPN+, the network’s streaming service.

Streaming subscriptions in place of television sets will be the key metric in the coming years. And from that angle, Georgia State doesn’t deliver the Atlanta market. Tulane, already a conference member, doesn’t deliver the New Orleans market.

Instead, these schools bring with them a base of fans as potential subscribers. And there doesn’t appear to be a match out there to provide enough value to warrant inclusion.

Taking into account the loss of profit caused by UConn's absence, the overall value of the rights deal would be affected by the loss of how much the Huskies would have made but each remaining member should not see their cut reduced or enhanced.

This is the likely outcome, as ESPN reported Tuesday the network can renegotiate the deal if a team leaves the conference.

Stay At 11 Feasible Option

Feasible? yes. Easy? No. Complicated divisional round robin or Waiver from NCAA which always willing to upset the P5. Note - Sarcasm.

AAC will stand pat until the next vote on CCG rules. AAC will likely support divisionless football. Will B10 and SEC support it? That is the million dollar question. Then the AAC will need to decide if expanding or figure out a complex 5/6 round robin. NCAA is not going to waiver if there is a way for AAC to meet the rule. Waiver may be if a team can't join by 2020 or 2021. Not really sure how AAC fans would found this unfair.

(06-25-2019 09:04 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:59 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:51 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:48 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Next couple of months, probably before the basketball season ends. Thats just my best guess.

Honestly, I'll be very surprised if that happens.

Realignment rarely gets drawn out these things have always moved fast especially when its a conference replacing a member.

You're making the assumption that a) the AAC wants to expand; and b) there is mutual interest between the AAC and a program it wants to invite. Like you, I don't have a crystal ball but I'm not getting the same read as you are.

Thats because you are leaving out one BIG factor and thats ESPN and what they want. Instead of reworking the contract for 11 and losing content it's just easier for them to give the AAC a list of approval candidates to choose from to replace UConn. Bing bam boom and thats that. ESPN owns 100% of the AAC and will let the conference know what they should (will) do.

And who do you think aside from the very obvious candidates (that I would bet say no) would ESPN be willing to pay 7 million a year for the AAC to add? Remember they own 100% of the MAC and Sun Belt as well for pennies.

(06-25-2019 08:40 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:36 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Open spots don't sit empty for long. The audition process has already happened while no one realized it was happening which is actually the best way to do it. That 12th spot will be filled as UConn leaves.

Define how long...there's no early indication that the AAC schools are going to support adding a program just to fill a spot when UConn exits.

The 14th MAC spot stayed open until the MAC could exercise the "all in / all out" option, then it did, then it disappeared along with the formerly occupied 13th spot.

The AAC can apply for a three year waiver to allow one cycle of pairs of AAC West schools sitting out one game of their round robin, and promise to have it sorted out at the end. And then just wait and see: maybe the CCG will get deregulated in that time, maybe a better candidate will become available, maybe changing economics will lead to the next wave of realignment starting before the anticipated starting gun. Apply for a second waiver is nothing has changed, if that is turned down, it's the Eastern division's turn to make the numbers work with rotating pairs of schools playing 7 conference game schedules.

That takes the AAC past 2026, by which time something will certainly break.

(06-25-2019 09:37 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 09:04 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:59 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  You're making the assumption that a) the AAC wants to expand; and b) there is mutual interest between the AAC and a program it wants to invite. Like you, I don't have a crystal ball but I'm not getting the same read as you are.

Thats because you are leaving out one BIG factor and thats ESPN and what they want. Instead of reworking the contract for 11 and losing content it's just easier for them to give the AAC a list of approval candidates to choose from to replace UConn. Bing bam boom and thats that. ESPN owns 100% of the AAC and will let the conference know what they should (will) do.

I mean this respectfully, but do you have an inside track on the ESPN/AAC negotiations? I think you're overplaying your "ESPN as the ultimate power card." I can see them wanting to look at the financial terms of the deal but not cornering Aresco in a back room and giving him a list of teams to add one or else. There's been a lot of discussion about this in recent days...

Quote:Why is it unlikely a team joins the conference to push membership back to 12?

The old school line of thinking from previous realignment moves called for conferences to expand the footprint into larger markets for increased viewership via increased households. That's where the money was through network-television deals.

With that in mind, Georgia State (Atlanta), UNC Charlotte and UAB (Birmingham) would make sense due to potentially large audiences attractive for TV.

But the old school methods appear to be fleeting. Large markets, from a viewership perspective, are increasingly shrinking in significance, as streaming is the way of the future and large, engaged fan bases, regardless of location, are key.

The AAC-ESPN $1 billon, 12-year deal agreed to earlier this year begins in 2020 (that's an average of more than $83 million per year), according to an ESPN report.

While football and men’s and women’s basketball will still be broadcast on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU, most basketball games, a large number of football games and other sports including baseball and soccer will air on ESPN+, the network’s streaming service.

Streaming subscriptions in place of television sets will be the key metric in the coming years. And from that angle, Georgia State doesn’t deliver the Atlanta market. Tulane, already a conference member, doesn’t deliver the New Orleans market.

Instead, these schools bring with them a base of fans as potential subscribers. And there doesn’t appear to be a match out there to provide enough value to warrant inclusion.

Taking into account the loss of profit caused by UConn's absence, the overall value of the rights deal would be affected by the loss of how much the Huskies would have made but each remaining member should not see their cut reduced or enhanced.

This is the likely outcome, as ESPN reported Tuesday the network can renegotiate the deal if a team leaves the conference.

Stay At 11 Feasible Option

I think Paulie and Vinnie are gunna take Aresco behind the BadaBing for a little ESPN “fair negotiation”.

Realignment isn't dead. The AAC will replace UConn. Probably not in the next few months, because I doubt BYU, Boise, Army, or Air Force would accept an offer. But they will add a 12th member at some point. I think they will spend this season and possibly next, evaluating programs and watching to see who is building facilities, who is winning, who is pulling in fans, and who is finding ways to make headlines. Because, that is how a program adds value.

(06-25-2019 10:46 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Realignment isn't dead. The AAC will replace UConn. Probably not in the next few months, because I doubt BYU, Boise, Army, or Air Force would accept an offer. But they will add a 12th member at some point. I think they will spend this season and possibly next, evaluating programs and watching to see who is building facilities, who is winning, who is pulling in fans, and who is finding ways to make headlines. Because, that is how a program adds value.

A three year waiver on a rotating pair of Western schools skipping the game with each other covers that, including a year for the school to make the transition if need be under their own conference bylaws.

I do think the P5 are thinking old school ways of adding schools like grabbing all the top academics instead of going after schools that are winning. I do think that some G5 schools are actually P5 and some P5 act more like G5 or FCS (cough, Kansas, cough.)

(06-25-2019 09:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:59 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 08:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  1. Realignment has been the norm in college football throughout its history. Inactivity is the anomaly.

2. Schools opting out of the spending war will trigger adjustments.

3. More money (especially significantly more money) will trigger adjustments.

4. As factors that determine payouts change realignment will be triggered. Right now content is the only sure bet for larger payouts and for long term security for conferences, more so than the market model which is still viable for conference networks. As content additions are sought and streaming increases (which augments the need for content games) realignment will be triggered.

5. As extraneous factors such as the numbers of content games, and conference games, are slowly bargained away for incremental increases in revenue, leverage will become a greater need for conferences and the more schools you represent the greater leverage you will have. This may force a confederation of conferences, or simply trigger more realignment.

So no. Realignment is not over and never will be because all it is is a reaction to changing conditions in the marketplace.

Most or all of those issues are longer term issues.

To me the biggest long term issue is still the possible (inevitable?) collapse of the share-and-share-alike model for media revenue within a conference.

Suppose, at some point in time, Texas tells the rest of the Big 12, "We want to stay in the Big 12 and we want it to stay together, but from now on, we want to own our own media rights and we want to sell them on our own. Broadcast and streaming rights for every Texas Longhorns home game in every sport, every Longhorns highlight show, coaches' show, talking-head show, replays of "classic" games from the past, all of it. We hope our conference mates will all agree to this arrangement, but if not, we are prepared to make it happen outside of the Big 12." Or maybe they just settle for a model like in Spanish fútbol, where the two brands that have the most value by far get the lion's share of the league's TV money.

Won't happen. Texas can't stay married to a lot of schools without a large followings and earn what they think they are worth. Content will drive the market for some time to come now. And while that doesn't mean Texas has to play nothing but big brands, it does mean they have to play a significant proportion of games against much larger draws.

The issues I listed will always be with us and will be why Realignment in some form will continue.

Texas is not going to change their successful marketing model. Their formula has always been to play a Texas centric schedule, and that isn't going to change. What will change s how will the 'Horns get the flexibility in scheduling to continue with that formula.
Texas does not need to join the B1G in that they have enough marketing power to schedule Ohio State and Michigan (both of which they have on their future schedule) without having to put up with the rest of that league.
While the SEC has upgraded their academic performance, the perception is just not there to satisfy any Board of Regents or University President of a school with a large ego.
That only leaves west or east, and we all know that Texas isn't going west and with the ACC willing to allow and encourage the LHN and scheduling flexibility........the Longhorn's decision is a no brainer.