Will there be a P5 realignment by 2026?

I think that OU will be in-play.

The BIG will make overtures. A solid Midwestern division would be anchored by OU. Some nostalgia by rekindling the UNL rivalry. KU would be used as a bridge...geographically, academically and culturally. At the end the day, the BIG will be very attractive: reliable money, an attractive path to football exposure and championships, and the academics feel like their athletics are aligned with academia.

UT-Austin will desperately work to keep OU close. Either trying to save the B12 or working with other power conferences. ESPN will also partner with UT-Austin by offering financial and exposure sweeteners.

The SEC will be a backup option in case state politics becomes an issue.

After the frustrations from the last round of realignment, OU has nicely positioned itself to be at the center of all discussions.

I wouldn't bet on it. More schools would be hurt than would be helped by further realignment. I suspect college presidents' aversion to change and uncertainty will ultimately prevail.

(06-29-2020 09:34 AM)ken d Wrote:  I wouldn't bet on it. More schools would be hurt than would be helped by further realignment. I suspect college presidents' aversion to change and uncertainty will ultimately prevail.

1. Schools do what is best for themselves. They really don't think collectively, at least beyond their state borders.

2. College presidents aren't as engaged or as in control of college athletics as they were 20 years ago.

3. Traditional revenue streams are under constant downward pressure so all new streams are looked upon somewhat favorably.

4. The country is in upheaval and despite what conventional wisdom says about people tending not to embrace further upheaval in troubled times the opposite is actually truer.

For those reasons if there is movement it could come from several areas.

The PAC and ACC schools could be witnessing the doubling of their media revenues by the Big 10 and SEC by 2024. The PAC and Big 12 have GOR's that expire in 2025 and both will be up for contract renewals. The ACC will still be looking at another 13 years of being locked into an inferior contract in 2024.

We still have major rulings on likeness and image, pay for play, and other contingencies that alter the existing landscape of college athletics.

To simply ignore all of these factors and think they are not going to cause change is extremely naive. To be able to say exactly what change will transpire is simply foolhardy.

We are entering a major period of chaos and change and to think colleges and college athletics won't be majorly impacted seems extremely unreasonable to me.

If just some of the legal changes transpire it will impact present conference arrangements as some schools will opt out of participation under the new criteria and some will embrace it.

Demographic and technological changes are going to impact college sports as by 2035 Boomer's will be a statistical anomaly and as the driving factor behind the golden age of college sports that will be both anticipated and felt. Those seeking to gravitate where traditional sports revenue streams may be maintained will certainly bring about some realignment. Popularity of the sport, crowd support, access to recruits, and revenue will necessitate change.

State funded schools and well endowed privates will survive, but smaller privates, particularly with religious affiliations are already suffering and that will not abate.

So to answer the survey considering that change can happen in a preparatory way by 2024 instead of out of fear or necessity then I believe absolutely we will have changes.

But whether those changes occur out of the Big 12, ACC, or PAC are issues yet to be determined. Whether the SEC and Big 10 remain intact depends upon some of these court rulings and what the weaker schools seek to do.

So to answer your question Jed I expect change. What change that will be is yet to be determined. And I believe that change will come by 2024 because it is always preferable to move ahead of crisis rather than to risk leverage in the midst of it.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  I think that OU will be in-play.

The BIG will make overtures. A solid Midwestern division would be anchored by OU. Some nostalgia by rekindling the UNL rivalry. KU would be used as a bridge...geographically, academically and culturally. At the end the day, the BIG will be very attractive: reliable money, an attractive path to football exposure and championships, and the academics feel like their athletics are aligned with academia.

I don't know if the B1G will sacrifice its academic standards for OU. OU is not a peer to the large state flagships of the Midwest. But, money talks, and if Fox and ESPN make the right whispers in their ears, the B1G could move in that direction.

OU's administrators and some of its donors would crawl on their hands and knees to the B1G. Fans? Not so much.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin will desperately work to keep OU close. Either trying to save the B12 or working with other power conferences. ESPN will also partner with UT-Austin by offering financial and exposure sweeteners.

The preferred move at OU is most likely the path of least resistance: no move at all. OU is comfortable in a conference with regional rivals, especially one that it helped form. OU has a reasonable path to the CFP from the B12 (being successful in the CFP is an entirely different story). But, if there is a $20M per year difference between payments in the B1G/SEC and the B12, OU has to pursue other options. A network can overpay for OU's Tier 3 rights (just as UT is overpaid) to keep OU in the B12 and to keep the conference together. The downside of that is that it increases the difference in revenue between UT, OU and the other 8 teams. But, that could be the price to keep the other 8 in a P5 conference. Also, a lot of fans and season ticket holders are unhappy with B12 home schedules. Which leads us to...

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  The SEC will be a backup option in case state politics becomes an issue.

The SEC is the people's choice. Sure, it's a tougher conference which would result in an average of one more loss per year. But, the buzz around home games with SEC opponents would increase donations and excitement among the fan base. Plus, with the right deal, the SEC can invite OSU to come along. The inclusion of OSU is not a deal-breaker, but it helps. It is also something the B1G is not willing to do.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  After the frustrations from the last round of realignment, OU has nicely positioned itself to be at the center of all discussions.

Yes, OU is the key to any future realignment in the P5. After the departure of the previous president/senator/governor, any change in leadership is an improvement.

(06-29-2020 02:23 PM)johnintx Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  I think that OU will be in-play.

The BIG will make overtures. A solid Midwestern division would be anchored by OU. Some nostalgia by rekindling the UNL rivalry. KU would be used as a bridge...geographically, academically and culturally. At the end the day, the BIG will be very attractive: reliable money, an attractive path to football exposure and championships, and the academics feel like their athletics are aligned with academia.

I don't know if the B1G will sacrifice its academic standards for OU. OU is not a peer to the large state flagships of the Midwest. But, money talks, and if Fox and ESPN make the right whispers in their ears, the B1G could move in that direction.

OU's administrators and some of the donors would crawl on their hands and knees to the B1G. Fans? Not so much.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin will desperately work to keep OU close. Either trying to save the B12 or working with other power conferences. ESPN will also partner with UT-Austin by offering financial and exposure sweeteners.

The preferred move at OU is most likely the path of least resistance: no move at all. OU is comfortable in a conference with regional rivals, especially one that it helped form. OU has a reasonable path to the CFP from the B12 (being successful in the CFP is an entirely different story). But, if there is a $20M per year difference between payments in the B1G/SEC and the B12, OU has to pursue other options. A network can overpay for OU's Tier 3 rights (just as UT is overpaid) to keep OU in the B12 and to keep the conference together. The downside of that is that it increases the difference in revenue between UT, OU and the other 8 teams. But, that could be the price to keep the other 8 in a P5 conference. Also, a lot of fans and season ticket holders are unhappy with B12 home schedules. Which leads us to...

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  The SEC will be a backup option in case state politics becomes an issue.

The SEC is the people's choice. Sure, it's a tougher conference which would result in an average of one more loss per year. But, the buzz around home games with SEC opponents would increase donations and excitement among the fan base. Plus, with the right deal, the SEC can invite OSU to come along. The inclusion of OSU is not a deal-breaker, but it helps. It is also something the B1G is not willing to do.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  After the frustrations from the last round of realignment, OU has nicely positioned itself to be at the center of all discussions.

Yes, OU is the key to any future realignment in the P5. After the departure of the previous president/senator/governor, any change in leadership is an improvement.

Quick search on academic rankings of three midwestern universities (Note: 2020 USNWR [lower # is better], 2019 Shanghai rankings [higher # is better] and 2016 CWUR [higher # is better]):

A= 130, 21.1 and 47.4
B= 132, 17.1 and 46.6
C= 139, 21.1 and 45.9

The 3 universities (not in order) are Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. By academic standards, these universities are almost identical. The BIG does not need to “sacrifice its academic standards for OU”...the standard already exists and OU is at the current existing level.


Second set of searches on football AP rankings and ‘valuation’ of three midwestern universities (AP rankings for first 80 years; AP rankings for last 20 years; and 2018 WSJ valuation):

Iowa = 335 points, 108 points and $459M
Oklahoma = 1086, 337 and $886M
Nebraska = 913, 96 and $472M

It’s not going to take an academic genius to determine the financial and reputation value that OU will bring to the BIG. OU is a football and financial juggernaut...it doesn’t take admittance to the AAU, to comprehend athletics and business.

(06-29-2020 03:27 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 02:23 PM)johnintx Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  I think that OU will be in-play.

The BIG will make overtures. A solid Midwestern division would be anchored by OU. Some nostalgia by rekindling the UNL rivalry. KU would be used as a bridge...geographically, academically and culturally. At the end the day, the BIG will be very attractive: reliable money, an attractive path to football exposure and championships, and the academics feel like their athletics are aligned with academia.

I don't know if the B1G will sacrifice its academic standards for OU. OU is not a peer to the large state flagships of the Midwest. But, money talks, and if Fox and ESPN make the right whispers in their ears, the B1G could move in that direction.

OU's administrators and some of the donors would crawl on their hands and knees to the B1G. Fans? Not so much.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin will desperately work to keep OU close. Either trying to save the B12 or working with other power conferences. ESPN will also partner with UT-Austin by offering financial and exposure sweeteners.

The preferred move at OU is most likely the path of least resistance: no move at all. OU is comfortable in a conference with regional rivals, especially one that it helped form. OU has a reasonable path to the CFP from the B12 (being successful in the CFP is an entirely different story). But, if there is a $20M per year difference between payments in the B1G/SEC and the B12, OU has to pursue other options. A network can overpay for OU's Tier 3 rights (just as UT is overpaid) to keep OU in the B12 and to keep the conference together. The downside of that is that it increases the difference in revenue between UT, OU and the other 8 teams. But, that could be the price to keep the other 8 in a P5 conference. Also, a lot of fans and season ticket holders are unhappy with B12 home schedules. Which leads us to...

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  The SEC will be a backup option in case state politics becomes an issue.

The SEC is the people's choice. Sure, it's a tougher conference which would result in an average of one more loss per year. But, the buzz around home games with SEC opponents would increase donations and excitement among the fan base. Plus, with the right deal, the SEC can invite OSU to come along. The inclusion of OSU is not a deal-breaker, but it helps. It is also something the B1G is not willing to do.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  After the frustrations from the last round of realignment, OU has nicely positioned itself to be at the center of all discussions.

Yes, OU is the key to any future realignment in the P5. After the departure of the previous president/senator/governor, any change in leadership is an improvement.

Quick search on academic rankings of three midwestern universities (Note: 2020 USNWR [lower # is better], 2019 Shanghai rankings [higher # is better] and 2016 CWUR [higher # is better]):

A= 130, 21.1 and 47.4
B= 132, 17.1 and 46.6
C= 139, 21.1 and 45.9

The 3 universities (not in order) are Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. By academic standards, these universities are almost identical. The BIG does not need to “sacrifice its academic standards for OU”...the standard already exists and OU is at the current existing level.


Second set of searches on football AP rankings and ‘valuation’ of three midwestern universities (AP rankings for first 80 years; AP rankings for last 20 years; and 2018 WSJ valuation):

Iowa = 335 points, 108 points and $459M
Oklahoma = 1086, 337 and $886M
Nebraska = 913, 96 and $472M

It’s not going to take an academic genius to determine the financial and reputation value that OU will bring to the BIG. OU is a football and financial juggernaut...it doesn’t take admittance to the AAU, to comprehend athletics and business.

The same situation exists for Notre Dame.

The biggest question in my mind is Kansas. Do they really bring enough to the table to be worth the addition (do they add to the existing bottom line of the Big 10?). I think maybe not.

Would the home run for the Big 10 not be Oklahoma and Notre Dame?
If so would not the home run for the SEC then be Texas and Florida State?

The Big 10 closes the back door on advertising in every Notre Dame loving city in the Northern Midwest and Northeast. And they add two football value driving bluebloods.

For the SEC the additions of Texas and Florida State gives the SEC a slammed door lock on premium ad rates in the Lone Stat and Sunshine states which closes the back door for them as well.

I'm not sure that outside of possibly Clemson's current brand power or the need of a basketball power to compliment Kentucky via Kansas that any others move the needle for either quite that much.

No doubt Oklahoma is a prize for either, but in terms of market advantage Texas offers more.

Would the SEC jump all over Texas and Oklahoma? Absolutely. But from a consolidation of branding and power Texas and Florida State would add more in terms of leverage.

Note: I'm not saying either of these moves are likely, but I am saying in terms of what the two major conferences would love to have those two sets of additions would round both the Big 10 and SEC out in most satisfying and complete terms.

(06-29-2020 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 03:27 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 02:23 PM)johnintx Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  I think that OU will be in-play.

The BIG will make overtures. A solid Midwestern division would be anchored by OU. Some nostalgia by rekindling the UNL rivalry. KU would be used as a bridge...geographically, academically and culturally. At the end the day, the BIG will be very attractive: reliable money, an attractive path to football exposure and championships, and the academics feel like their athletics are aligned with academia.

I don't know if the B1G will sacrifice its academic standards for OU. OU is not a peer to the large state flagships of the Midwest. But, money talks, and if Fox and ESPN make the right whispers in their ears, the B1G could move in that direction.

OU's administrators and some of the donors would crawl on their hands and knees to the B1G. Fans? Not so much.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin will desperately work to keep OU close. Either trying to save the B12 or working with other power conferences. ESPN will also partner with UT-Austin by offering financial and exposure sweeteners.

The preferred move at OU is most likely the path of least resistance: no move at all. OU is comfortable in a conference with regional rivals, especially one that it helped form. OU has a reasonable path to the CFP from the B12 (being successful in the CFP is an entirely different story). But, if there is a $20M per year difference between payments in the B1G/SEC and the B12, OU has to pursue other options. A network can overpay for OU's Tier 3 rights (just as UT is overpaid) to keep OU in the B12 and to keep the conference together. The downside of that is that it increases the difference in revenue between UT, OU and the other 8 teams. But, that could be the price to keep the other 8 in a P5 conference. Also, a lot of fans and season ticket holders are unhappy with B12 home schedules. Which leads us to...

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  The SEC will be a backup option in case state politics becomes an issue.

The SEC is the people's choice. Sure, it's a tougher conference which would result in an average of one more loss per year. But, the buzz around home games with SEC opponents would increase donations and excitement among the fan base. Plus, with the right deal, the SEC can invite OSU to come along. The inclusion of OSU is not a deal-breaker, but it helps. It is also something the B1G is not willing to do.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  After the frustrations from the last round of realignment, OU has nicely positioned itself to be at the center of all discussions.

Yes, OU is the key to any future realignment in the P5. After the departure of the previous president/senator/governor, any change in leadership is an improvement.

Quick search on academic rankings of three midwestern universities (Note: 2020 USNWR [lower # is better], 2019 Shanghai rankings [higher # is better] and 2016 CWUR [higher # is better]):

A= 130, 21.1 and 47.4
B= 132, 17.1 and 46.6
C= 139, 21.1 and 45.9

The 3 universities (not in order) are Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. By academic standards, these universities are almost identical. The BIG does not need to “sacrifice its academic standards for OU”...the standard already exists and OU is at the current existing level.


Second set of searches on football AP rankings and ‘valuation’ of three midwestern universities (AP rankings for first 80 years; AP rankings for last 20 years; and 2018 WSJ valuation):

Iowa = 335 points, 108 points and $459M
Oklahoma = 1086, 337 and $886M
Nebraska = 913, 96 and $472M

It’s not going to take an academic genius to determine the financial and reputation value that OU will bring to the BIG. OU is a football and financial juggernaut...it doesn’t take admittance to the AAU, to comprehend athletics and business.

The same situation exists for Notre Dame.

The biggest question in my mind is Kansas. Do they really bring enough to the table to be worth the addition (do they add to the existing bottom line of the Big 10?). I think maybe not.

Would the home run for the Big 10 not be Oklahoma and Notre Dame?
If so would not the home run for the SEC then be Texas and Florida State?

The Big 10 closes the back door on advertising in every Notre Dame loving city in the Northern Midwest and Northeast. And they add two football value driving bluebloods.

For the SEC the additions of Texas and Florida State gives the SEC a slammed door lock on premium ad rates in the Lone Stat and Sunshine states which closes the back door for them as well.

I'm not sure that outside of possibly Clemson's current brand power or the need of a basketball power to compliment Kentucky via Kansas that any others move the needle for either quite that much.

No doubt Oklahoma is a prize for either, but in terms of market advantage Texas offers more.

Would the SEC jump all over Texas and Oklahoma? Absolutely. But from a consolidation of branding and power Texas and Florida State would add more in terms of leverage.

Note: I'm not saying either of these moves are likely, but I am saying in terms of what the two major conferences would love to have those two sets of additions would round both the Big 10 and SEC out in most satisfying and complete terms.

Notre Dame and Florida State are committed to the ACC until 2036 :)

Unless OU is leaving, UT-Austin should have no need nor interest to consider changing a successful B12 relationship.

I absolutely don't want any realignment again. With that said...

How many of these conference members are squirming in their seats as they sit at the table and talk numbers. It's no longer one or two, not so happy, members of certain conferences. Go read the thread about Michigan's projections (losses) they are about to experience. Now ask yourself how bad is it for my school. You get enough uneasy schools and you can throw those current TV contracts right in the trash. The focus now is how soon can my school rebound from this pandemic? There are some options if enough schools are on the same page. If they were looking for an out, this f***ed up year may have provided them one.

(06-29-2020 03:55 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 03:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 03:27 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 02:23 PM)johnintx Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  I think that OU will be in-play.

The BIG will make overtures. A solid Midwestern division would be anchored by OU. Some nostalgia by rekindling the UNL rivalry. KU would be used as a bridge...geographically, academically and culturally. At the end the day, the BIG will be very attractive: reliable money, an attractive path to football exposure and championships, and the academics feel like their athletics are aligned with academia.

I don't know if the B1G will sacrifice its academic standards for OU. OU is not a peer to the large state flagships of the Midwest. But, money talks, and if Fox and ESPN make the right whispers in their ears, the B1G could move in that direction.

OU's administrators and some of the donors would crawl on their hands and knees to the B1G. Fans? Not so much.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  UT-Austin will desperately work to keep OU close. Either trying to save the B12 or working with other power conferences. ESPN will also partner with UT-Austin by offering financial and exposure sweeteners.

The preferred move at OU is most likely the path of least resistance: no move at all. OU is comfortable in a conference with regional rivals, especially one that it helped form. OU has a reasonable path to the CFP from the B12 (being successful in the CFP is an entirely different story). But, if there is a $20M per year difference between payments in the B1G/SEC and the B12, OU has to pursue other options. A network can overpay for OU's Tier 3 rights (just as UT is overpaid) to keep OU in the B12 and to keep the conference together. The downside of that is that it increases the difference in revenue between UT, OU and the other 8 teams. But, that could be the price to keep the other 8 in a P5 conference. Also, a lot of fans and season ticket holders are unhappy with B12 home schedules. Which leads us to...

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  The SEC will be a backup option in case state politics becomes an issue.

The SEC is the people's choice. Sure, it's a tougher conference which would result in an average of one more loss per year. But, the buzz around home games with SEC opponents would increase donations and excitement among the fan base. Plus, with the right deal, the SEC can invite OSU to come along. The inclusion of OSU is not a deal-breaker, but it helps. It is also something the B1G is not willing to do.

(06-29-2020 08:47 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  After the frustrations from the last round of realignment, OU has nicely positioned itself to be at the center of all discussions.

Yes, OU is the key to any future realignment in the P5. After the departure of the previous president/senator/governor, any change in leadership is an improvement.

Quick search on academic rankings of three midwestern universities (Note: 2020 USNWR [lower # is better], 2019 Shanghai rankings [higher # is better] and 2016 CWUR [higher # is better]):

A= 130, 21.1 and 47.4
B= 132, 17.1 and 46.6
C= 139, 21.1 and 45.9

The 3 universities (not in order) are Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. By academic standards, these universities are almost identical. The BIG does not need to “sacrifice its academic standards for OU”...the standard already exists and OU is at the current existing level.


Second set of searches on football AP rankings and ‘valuation’ of three midwestern universities (AP rankings for first 80 years; AP rankings for last 20 years; and 2018 WSJ valuation):

Iowa = 335 points, 108 points and $459M
Oklahoma = 1086, 337 and $886M
Nebraska = 913, 96 and $472M

It’s not going to take an academic genius to determine the financial and reputation value that OU will bring to the BIG. OU is a football and financial juggernaut...it doesn’t take admittance to the AAU, to comprehend athletics and business.

The same situation exists for Notre Dame.

The biggest question in my mind is Kansas. Do they really bring enough to the table to be worth the addition (do they add to the existing bottom line of the Big 10?). I think maybe not.

Would the home run for the Big 10 not be Oklahoma and Notre Dame?
If so would not the home run for the SEC then be Texas and Florida State?

The Big 10 closes the back door on advertising in every Notre Dame loving city in the Northern Midwest and Northeast. And they add two football value driving bluebloods.

For the SEC the additions of Texas and Florida State gives the SEC a slammed door lock on premium ad rates in the Lone Stat and Sunshine states which closes the back door for them as well.

I'm not sure that outside of possibly Clemson's current brand power or the need of a basketball power to compliment Kentucky via Kansas that any others move the needle for either quite that much.

No doubt Oklahoma is a prize for either, but in terms of market advantage Texas offers more.

Would the SEC jump all over Texas and Oklahoma? Absolutely. But from a consolidation of branding and power Texas and Florida State would add more in terms of leverage.

Note: I'm not saying either of these moves are likely, but I am saying in terms of what the two major conferences would love to have those two sets of additions would round both the Big 10 and SEC out in most satisfying and complete terms.

Notre Dame and Florida State are committed to the ACC until 2036 :)

Unless OU is leaving, UT-Austin should have no need nor interest to consider changing a successful B12 relationship.

I'm sorry but Notre Dame and Florida State are committed to the ACC until it is far more profitable to be somewhere else. Court decisions on exit fees are well established and the ability of a GOR to hold a school, particularly a state school, has yet to be determined and for the monetary difference of one full year of conference revenue (established) vs the ridiculous penalty for the GOR (heretofore unruled upon by the courts for a state school or a non profit sports entity) will be an interesting challenge waiting to happen. As for N.D. we are talking about 2 games one year and 3 the next so something that can be worked around easily as OOC games).

As for your second comment it is moot since the discussion is predicated upon OU's departure to the Big 10.

(06-29-2020 04:13 PM)cubucks Wrote:  I absolutely don't want any realignment again. With that said...

How many of these conference members are squirming in their seats as they sit at the table and talk numbers. It's no longer one or two, not so happy, members of certain conferences. Go read the thread about Michigan's projections (losses) they are about to experience. Now ask yourself how bad is it for my school. You get enough uneasy schools and you can throw those current TV contracts right in the trash. The focus now is how soon can my school rebound from this pandemic? There are some options if enough schools are on the same page. If they were looking for an out, this f***ed up year may have provided them one.

If you're Michigan or another Big Ten school looking to make more money quickly, the problem is that shedding lower-value Big Ten members would make far more money for the remaining Big Ten members than adding anyone other than UT or ND.

If you're a P5 program that is close to the bottom of your own conference in the value provided to the conference, you'd want extra reassurance from your lawyers that kicking you out of the conference has too many legal entanglements for the big boys to do it at this time.

(06-29-2020 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 03:55 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

Notre Dame and Florida State are committed to the ACC until 2036 :)

Unless OU is leaving, UT-Austin should have no need nor interest to consider changing a successful B12 relationship.

I'm sorry but Notre Dame and Florida State are committed to the ACC until it is far more profitable to be somewhere else. Court decisions on exit fees are well established and the ability of a GOR to hold a school, particularly a state school, has yet to be determined and for the monetary difference of one full year of conference revenue (established) vs the ridiculous penalty for the GOR (heretofore unruled upon by the courts for a state school or a non profit sports entity) will be an interesting challenge waiting to happen. As for N.D. we are talking about 2 games one year and 3 the next so something that can be worked around easily as OOC games).

As for your second comment it is moot since the discussion is predicated upon OU's departure to the Big 10.
[/quote]

I’m not a lawyer and can’t pretend to understand the full ramifications of GORs. But I don’t believe that ESPN would welcome a move of ND to the BIG...or FSU to the SEC. It’s not just the ACC, but also ESPN that would put up a fight. In addition, the BIG also uses a GOR to stabilize its BTN asset. If you are willing to litigate, there are many options...but the litigants may also create lots of unintended damage.

(06-29-2020 06:38 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 04:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-29-2020 03:55 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

Notre Dame and Florida State are committed to the ACC until 2036 :)

Unless OU is leaving, UT-Austin should have no need nor interest to consider changing a successful B12 relationship.

I'm sorry but Notre Dame and Florida State are committed to the ACC until it is far more profitable to be somewhere else. Court decisions on exit fees are well established and the ability of a GOR to hold a school, particularly a state school, has yet to be determined and for the monetary difference of one full year of conference revenue (established) vs the ridiculous penalty for the GOR (heretofore unruled upon by the courts for a state school or a non profit sports entity) will be an interesting challenge waiting to happen. As for N.D. we are talking about 2 games one year and 3 the next so something that can be worked around easily as OOC games).

As for your second comment it is moot since the discussion is predicated upon OU's departure to the Big 10.

I’m not a lawyer and can’t pretend to understand the full ramifications of GORs. But I don’t believe that ESPN would welcome a move of ND to the BIG...or FSU to the SEC. It’s not just the ACC, but also ESPN that would put up a fight. In addition, the BIG also uses a GOR to stabilize its BTN asset. If you are willing to litigate, there are many options...but the litigants may also create lots of unintended damage.
[/quote]

Most GOR's were used in the music and entertainment industry. Nobody has really tested whether a university president or AD or example is a legal proxy for the state legislature.

Look, it's not likely, but we are talking the ultimate moves here. There is no reason why the SEC could not add Texas (ESPN would be happy) and the Big 10 could add Oklahoma (FOX) would be happy and the two could simply wait on N.D. and F.S.U. since the monetary increase both would have from their big additions would only widen the gap even more.

And I might add getting doubled up in media revenue with a contract well passed peak payouts for the industry, and with pending legal action that may change the amateur nature of athletics leaves a lot of room for voting to void to dissolve the conference which ends the contract and allows those who want to make more elsewhere to leave and those who refuse to pay players to step down. There are, as I have already indicated, a plethora of issues that can still force change.

So I wouldn't rule anything out, and it's a big wait and see.

PS. I enjoy most of your posts but you need to work on quoting posts by not cropping the blocked prompts.

JRsec

Regarding the cropping...I’m experimenting on how to simplify posts via an iPad. Possibly, I’m just creating a mess. I’ll cease and desist the odd practice...unless I move to a laptop & can do appropriate edits

(06-29-2020 08:05 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  JRsec

Regarding the cropping...I’m experimenting on how to simplify posts via an iPad. Possibly, I’m just creating a mess. I’ll cease and desist the odd practice...unless I move to a laptop & can do appropriate edits

JRsec gives great advice. I too enjoy your posts and look forward to hearing from you again soon.

I think we have already seen the beginning of "new" realignment when ESPN took over the SEC lock, stock and barrel.
ESPN now controls the media rights for 28 schools outright, from Boston down to Florida and west into Texas and represents most of the college football loving public.
Adding four more would give ESPN 1/2 of all of the P schools plus 5/8 of Notre Dame's football until 2037.
Does it matter that those schools are ACC or SEC? Probably not to ESPN. Who is to say that the mouse might put not put all of them together in a big box and shake them out in into 2, 3, or even four distinct regional "divisions" for television broadcast purposes.

The next phase of "new" realignment is deciding which four are to join ESPN and which 6 are going to fortify the other team.

(06-29-2020 08:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  I think we have already seen the beginning of "new" realignment when ESPN took over the SEC lock, stock and barrel.
ESPN now controls the media rights for 28 schools outright, from Boston down to Florida and west into Texas and represents most of the college football loving public.
Adding four more would give ESPN 1/2 of all of the P schools plus 5/8 of Notre Dame's football until 2037.
Does it matter that those schools are ACC or SEC? Probably not to ESPN. Who is to say that the mouse might put not put all of them together in a big box and shake them out in into 2, 3, or even four distinct regional "divisions" for television broadcast purposes.

The next phase of "new" realignment is deciding which four are to join ESPN and which 6 are going to fortify the other team.

I see your points.

No, ESPN doesn't give a damn. Individual schools do, though. You're only as good as the company you keep when tied to a conference. What's the value of North Carolina in conference "A" compared to conference "B"? That's where the issues are becoming more and more relevant as the world crumbles.

It sucks, I agree with that it completely sucks. It's just a matter of time until the strong survive and the rest regress.

ESPN/FOX/CBS etc... pay conferences, not individual schools, except for Notre Dame and Texas, obviously. Where is your schools most value going to come from, XLance? Is it the ACC or somewhere else? I hope the ACC stays whole and the way they currently are. Is your school looking at it the same way I am?

(06-29-2020 08:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  I think we have already seen the beginning of "new" realignment when ESPN took over the SEC lock, stock and barrel.
ESPN now controls the media rights for 28 schools outright, from Boston down to Florida and west into Texas and represents most of the college football loving public.
Adding four more would give ESPN 1/2 of all of the P schools plus 5/8 of Notre Dame's football until 2037.
Does it matter that those schools are ACC or SEC? Probably not to ESPN. Who is to say that the mouse might put not put all of them together in a big box and shake them out in into 2, 3, or even four distinct regional "divisions" for television broadcast purposes.

The next phase of "new" realignment is deciding which four are to join ESPN and which 6 are going to fortify the other team.

They need those schools to be Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and West Virginia.

Missouri needs to join Nebraska and Kansas in the Big 10. But that won't happen.

Most likely all former Big 8 schools wind up in the Big 10 or PAC and all 4 Texas schools wind up in the SEC/ACC minus Missouri and plus West Virginia.

So from the Big 12 Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State wind up in the PAC/Big 10 configuration and Baylor, Texas, T.C.U. Texas Tech and WVU wind up in the SEC/ACC configuration. And Missouri joins them.

I don't believe we wind up with 2 large leagues but if we did that would be the most likely way to break them up.


SEABOARD-GULF COAST

Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami, Mississippi State

Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Wake Forest

Boston College, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

* Notre Dame


UNION-PACIFIC

Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Utah

California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

* Brigham Young


If you were gong to break them up into two leagues I think it would look something like that.

I have a difficult time seeing Baylor and Kansas State getting a ride. Baylor in particular brings some toxic issues. I also don't see the incentive for the B10 to add Iowa State, but it might not matter if the actually conference is as drawn.

Perhaps the real question is how many chumps do you need to make the system work?

(06-29-2020 03:27 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  A= 130, 21.1 and 47.4
B= 132, 17.1 and 46.6
C= 139, 21.1 and 45.9

Curious where you are getting those ARWU rankings, since on their main ranking board, they don't report an overall score below the top 100, they report the tiers that the universities are in:

Kansas: 201-300th (US 67-94th)
Nebraska: 201-300th (US 67-94th)
Oklahoma: 401-500th (US 117-137th)