The reason the RRR will survive regardless of conference affiliation is simple. There's too much money involved in the game for either team not to play. The business interests in Dallas ensure that the game will be played.

(01-11-2021 03:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 03:12 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Right, however the reality of that would make the SEC less likely to move to 18. Do you really want to give up seats that easily now, when it may cost you solid opportunities for market expansion later?

Pro expansion with Texa-homa is that the SEC would dominate the old SWC market with those 4 schools plus Arkansas, A&M, & L.S.U. which is strong in Houston, like A&M. If it is about eyeballs then Texa-homa is worth more than an extra 2 slots for ACC schools.

The con side is that by giving up those two slots you might miss out of a deal that would land the top North Carolina schools. I'm not worried about F.S.U. and Clemson because if the ACC were getting raided those two are safer, wealthier, and their fan bases more secure in the SEC and neither has tag along baggage.

Good points.

If you’re thinking from a strictly SEC standpoint though isn’t there some fear that if you don’t accommodate TTU and OK St in 2024 that you could send say Oklahoma to the Big Ten. I think Oklahoma is itching to make a move and if it’s clear that neither the Big Ten or SEC will take Oklahoma St I think they go to the Big Ten simply to make the academic folks happy.

I think going to 18 in 2024 puts the SEC in a good place to either strategically pick their top 2 ACC schools in 2037 or take 6 if there’s enough programs there that could help compete the SEC and ESPN’s stranglehold of the South.

By 2037 I seriously question what kind of state some of those ACC programs are going to be in. College football’s following may be so weak in NC and VA that it doesn’t even make sense to go after them.

I think it’s smarter to lock in value programs now rather than hold open spots for team’s whose future value may be demonstrably lower by the time they actually become available on the market.

I tend to agree with the last remark about it being better to make that move than to wait. However, look at it from a UT perspective. If you hang back and let Oklahoma move to the Big 10 you accomplish many objectives some of which you never may speak openly. Recruiting in Texas is currently split between 9 nearby P5 schools all of which are in state, a state away, and play Texas schools annually: Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U., and Texas Tech. I forget who did the study but there was one done that said P5 schools ideally have an advantage when in their own home state population vs the number of P5 schools is 5,000,000 people to 1 P5 school. The state of Texas has 28 million people. They can support 5 P programs within the state which is exactly what they have. Add the population of Oklahoma and divide by 7 and there isn't enough. Add Arkansas moreso than L.S.U. and there certainly isn't enough without it affecting the number of solid recruits within the area.

If Texas lets Oklahoma head to the Big 10 and keeps the RRR with them, and joins the SEC with just Texas Tech they have given themselves every advantage in the future within their home state. They take away A&M's branding advantage, bring Tech doesn't cost them standing within their state, they effectively demote Baylor and T.C.U. to a conference beneath their new standing and cull Oklahoma State from the mix. They can share Houston with L.S.U. and share DFW with Arkansas and with only 3P schools in state all three Texas schools enhance the number of quality home recruits from which to draw. This isn't a strategy that one can discuss openly, but Texas has a vested interest in culling the number of P programs in state and reducing the exposure to top brands from out of state. Oklahoma in the Big 10 still has the annual game in DFW but getting Texas recruits to play at Oklahoma would get much harder for the Sooners to do only having the 1 game in Texas, whereas Texas will have joined a conference that gives them two old rivals back, limits the games in Texas to games between the 3 public P universities, and gives the Horns exposure into recruit rich Louisiana at a rate perhaps better than L.S.U.'s exposure into Texas and brings back the Hogs which their alumni fondly remember playing.

If Texas and Tech form the same 8 team division of the SEC West that Texas and Oklahoma might have formed it gives Texas all of the advantages without Oklahoma, but while keeping the historic game.

So I'm strongly suggesting that Oklahoma to the Big 10 without Texas may indeed be the outcome Texas wants, but will never speak of publicly.

Plus it gives NE a much needed shot with the return of ou in it's division. ou could still then continue scheduling teams in the DFW area (SMU/TCU) or Houston (UH/Rice) as part of it's OOC schedule as well.

With the success of the LSU game in Austin 2 years ago and the soon to be successful game in Fayetnam this fall, I bet the admin/boosters/alumni have conversations with the Hartzell (UT president) about joining the SEC.

It is the most equitable win/win for OU and UT, the SEC and Big 10, and FOX and ESPN. The SEC gets the state of Texas in exchange for a division that suits Texas. ESPN keeps Texas in tow with control of the highest ad rates in a state of 28 million, The Big 10 gets to reunite a rivalry of consequence and gains a football blueblood, FOX benefits from that. Perhaps they benefit from blueblood Kansas joining with them. ESPN can utilize the AAC for Baylor and T.C.U. so they don't lose any ground in Texas, and it make sense to the fans.

Big 10 West:
Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Oklahoma, Wisconsin

Big 10 East:
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

SEC East:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee Vanderbilt

JR, it is confession time for me: the main reason I am not big on Texas going to the SEC is that it will move Alabama as well as Auburn to the SEC East and make the SEC East extremely difficult to win for Georgia. I actually like the way things are now, but would not be opposed to getting rid of divisions, or having just Auburn in the East, because we already play each other year anyway. It's adding Alabama that I am not keen on.

In order to move forward things will have to change.
History has shown us that when sports at the professional level moved into extended playoffs, not only did popularity explode, but so did profitability.
However, history has also shown us that in order to facilitate that growth it was necessary to shift some properties from one league to another. What was thought to be unthinkable, proved to be solid strategic moves to get the right teams in the correct positions to keep fans involved and competition leveled out. It also turned out to be positive for the franchises that were assigned to move to other leagues.

Somebody, somewhere is pushing pins all over a map trying to determine what moves could be made to benefit the game, to make it bigger and better (and more profitable for everyone involved, not just individual conferences but for all leagues).

When the AFL and the NFL merged the Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns moved from the NFC to the AFC. Each franchise has enjoyed enormous success after the switch.
More recently the Houston Astros were assigned to move to the American League from the National to even out the number of teams in both leagues. Another success story, not only for the franchise, but for playoff baseball.

Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football. What we may see as unnatural will be made for the good of the game (and money). No conference will be immune, and as we have seen in pro football it may be some of the strongest may be moved to boost some of the weaker to balance play.

(01-11-2021 04:49 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If Oklahoma and Kansas moved to the Big Ten then it does make sense for Texas and Texas Tech to move to the SEC together.

I also think it makes sense for ESPN to grab a school like TCU and put them in the ACC if Notre Dame is willing to join in football. The ACC would probably snub West Virginia and they wouldn't be valuable to anyone else.

However...let us consider what Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 could cause as far as a ripple effect.

Texas and Texas Tech would have a safe home in the SEC. Oklahoma and Kansas would fit pretty well with the Big Ten. But this sort of maneuver would still put a lot of pressure on Notre Dame and the ACC as a whole to some degree.

ESPN controls the destiny of the ACC, but they also want Big Ten rights. The package from the Big Ten is coming open about the same time the Big 12 GOR ends. That's strategic, of course, but we should also consider FOX's diminished position. They will still want content, but they've given up on pursuing certain properties. They've reduced their own platform and they've sold off the very studios that would have made a streaming service viable.

The ACC is in an inferior economic position without question and if both the SEC and Big Ten get another raise with significant powers coming on board then the leaders of the ACC will have to consider giving up the ghost. They have no means of making up the gap as things stand now and the addition of Notre Dame in football is only going to do so much. That's compounded by the length of the ACC contract.

So let's consider that one of the reasons that ESPN made the ACC sign such a long term deal is to have leverage over them. At this stage, ESPN could make those schools do just about anything because there's no help coming otherwise.

The ACC powers will desperately want an outlet. ESPN will be happy to give them one provided they do exactly what ESPN wants.

If you moved Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Virginia Tech to the SEC then you have a very solid 20.

If you moved Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, and Duke to the Big Ten then you have another very solid 20.

That's not enough to break the ACC GOR, but it's no longer necessary because the ACC will be preserved by continuing on as a tweener league. They can keep making the same money they're making now(which isn't top dollar) and I don't think anyone would care.

East: Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Cincinnati
South: Miami, UCF, USF, NC State, Wake Forest
Central: Louisville, Memphis, Houston, Baylor, SMU
West: BYU, TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State

In the future we're going to need a map to find out who plays where.

(01-12-2021 07:19 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  In the future we're going to need a map to find out who plays where.

How's that different than today?
Florida's in the SEC, Florida State's in the ACC, Central Florida's in the AAC.
Texas is in the Big 12, Texas A&M's in the SEC
Penn State is in the Big Ten, Pittsburgh's in the ACC, Temple's in the AAC.

(01-12-2021 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football.

Yeah they're all at this board :)

(01-12-2021 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  In order to move forward things will have to change.
History has shown us that when sports at the professional level moved into extended playoffs, not only did popularity explode, but so did profitability.
However, history has also shown us that in order to facilitate that growth it was necessary to shift some properties from one league to another. What was thought to be unthinkable, proved to be solid strategic moves to get the right teams in the correct positions to keep fans involved and competition leveled out. It also turned out to be positive for the franchises that were assigned to move to other leagues.

Somebody, somewhere is pushing pins all over a map trying to determine what moves could be made to benefit the game, to make it bigger and better (and more profitable for everyone involved, not just individual conferences but for all leagues).

When the AFL and the NFL merged the Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns moved from the NFC to the AFC. Each franchise has enjoyed enormous success after the switch.
More recently the Houston Astros were assigned to move to the American League from the National to even out the number of teams in both leagues. Another success story, not only for the franchise, but for playoff baseball.

Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football. What we may see as unnatural will be made for the good of the game (and money). No conference will be immune, and as we have seen in pro football it may be some of the strongest may be moved to boost some of the weaker to balance play.

The problem with college sports is that you don’t have one person or body looking to build for overall success. You have 5 conference commissioners looking out for what’s best for their conferences and at each school there is an administration that only cares about their school. You also have the networks, whose only concern is their own profits.

(01-12-2021 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  In order to move forward things will have to change.
History has shown us that when sports at the professional level moved into extended playoffs, not only did popularity explode, but so did profitability.
However, history has also shown us that in order to facilitate that growth it was necessary to shift some properties from one league to another. What was thought to be unthinkable, proved to be solid strategic moves to get the right teams in the correct positions to keep fans involved and competition leveled out. It also turned out to be positive for the franchises that were assigned to move to other leagues.

Somebody, somewhere is pushing pins all over a map trying to determine what moves could be made to benefit the game, to make it bigger and better (and more profitable for everyone involved, not just individual conferences but for all leagues).

When the AFL and the NFL merged the Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns moved from the NFC to the AFC. Each franchise has enjoyed enormous success after the switch.
More recently the Houston Astros were assigned to move to the American League from the National to even out the number of teams in both leagues. Another success story, not only for the franchise, but for playoff baseball.

Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football. What we may see as unnatural will be made for the good of the game (and money). No conference will be immune, and as we have seen in pro football it may be some of the strongest may be moved to boost some of the weaker to balance play.

Moving the Astros made no sense. They should have moved Milwaukee back to the American League. It was simply done because the Astros were undergoing an ownership change so they could make that a requirement to approve the transfer.

And with the NFL, while the Steelers were one of the oldest NFL franchises, the Browns originated in the AAFC and joined the NFL as part of that merger in 1950. Baltimore Colts were also an AAFC team joining the NFL as part of that merger, but their history is a little more complicated as that franchise was later folded and a series of other franchises were created and folded eventually turning into a 2nd NFL Colts in 1953.

(01-12-2021 11:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-12-2021 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  In order to move forward things will have to change.
History has shown us that when sports at the professional level moved into extended playoffs, not only did popularity explode, but so did profitability.
However, history has also shown us that in order to facilitate that growth it was necessary to shift some properties from one league to another. What was thought to be unthinkable, proved to be solid strategic moves to get the right teams in the correct positions to keep fans involved and competition leveled out. It also turned out to be positive for the franchises that were assigned to move to other leagues.

Somebody, somewhere is pushing pins all over a map trying to determine what moves could be made to benefit the game, to make it bigger and better (and more profitable for everyone involved, not just individual conferences but for all leagues).

When the AFL and the NFL merged the Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns moved from the NFC to the AFC. Each franchise has enjoyed enormous success after the switch.
More recently the Houston Astros were assigned to move to the American League from the National to even out the number of teams in both leagues. Another success story, not only for the franchise, but for playoff baseball.

Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football. What we may see as unnatural will be made for the good of the game (and money). No conference will be immune, and as we have seen in pro football it may be some of the strongest may be moved to boost some of the weaker to balance play.

Moving the Astros made no sense. They should have moved Milwaukee back to the American League. It was simply done because the Astros were undergoing an ownership change so they could make that a requirement to approve the transfer.

Yeah, moving the Astros was a poor example. That fan base hated it.

And college realignment moves haven’t “made the game bigger”. They’ve made the game worse and broken up irreplaceable rivalries.

(01-12-2021 11:31 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(01-12-2021 11:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-12-2021 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  In order to move forward things will have to change.
History has shown us that when sports at the professional level moved into extended playoffs, not only did popularity explode, but so did profitability.
However, history has also shown us that in order to facilitate that growth it was necessary to shift some properties from one league to another. What was thought to be unthinkable, proved to be solid strategic moves to get the right teams in the correct positions to keep fans involved and competition leveled out. It also turned out to be positive for the franchises that were assigned to move to other leagues.

Somebody, somewhere is pushing pins all over a map trying to determine what moves could be made to benefit the game, to make it bigger and better (and more profitable for everyone involved, not just individual conferences but for all leagues).

When the AFL and the NFL merged the Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns moved from the NFC to the AFC. Each franchise has enjoyed enormous success after the switch.
More recently the Houston Astros were assigned to move to the American League from the National to even out the number of teams in both leagues. Another success story, not only for the franchise, but for playoff baseball.

Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football. What we may see as unnatural will be made for the good of the game (and money). No conference will be immune, and as we have seen in pro football it may be some of the strongest may be moved to boost some of the weaker to balance play.

Moving the Astros made no sense. They should have moved Milwaukee back to the American League. It was simply done because the Astros were undergoing an ownership change so they could make that a requirement to approve the transfer.

Yeah, moving the Astros was a poor example. That fan base hated it.

And college realignment moves haven’t “made the game bigger”. They’ve made the game worse and broken up irreplaceable rivalries.

It happens when wisdom is confused with profit. Marcus Aurelius "What is it's nature?" College sports was less about entertainment and profit more about being a touchstone to loyalty and a way to remember who you were and what you believed to be true about yourself and life. College football was the organizational touchstone that bridged the generations of graduates and connected them one to another. So it bound us to our college peers and to our school as a whole and by implication all alumni.

College football therefore in its nature is more about relationships than money or entertainment. It is essentially for lack of a better term, and as Malenowski and Durkheim would say, our form of Totemism.

So the Corporate rights holders have imposed their organizing principle on a game in which the fans and schools had found and loved another, connection over money.

The two don't mix and that is why Disney and Fox are killing the game, and Disney more than FOX because universities while political, were apolitical in social life. Something that once made all of our lives far more tolerant. The agenda therefore for ticket holders was relationships to school and to each other and both required an open mind and a warm heart. TV brushed that aside to recreate a "Game Day Experience" as artificial and alien to the alumni as a the proverbial cockroach in the punchbowl.

(01-11-2021 06:34 PM)schmolik Wrote:  I would prefer Texas and Oklahoma be in the same conference together and the Red River Rivalry remain a conference game. You can say they'd never cancel the game even if they weren't in the same conference but if I said in 2010 that Texas and Texas A&M would no longer play would you have believed me? What's stopping Texas from blackballing Oklahoma the way they blackballed A&M, especially if Oklahoma leaves the Big 12 before UT? Who needs Oklahoma/Texas more? The only way to guarantee they play is for them to play in the same conference.

I know it would be better financially for the Big 10 if OU/UT were in the B1G but geographically they fit better in the SEC and if they were there then Texas and Texas A&M would play again.

(01-11-2021 06:39 PM)RocketCitySooner Wrote:  The reason the RRR will survive regardless of conference affiliation is simple. There's too much money involved in the game for either team not to play. The business interests in Dallas ensure that the game will be played.

RocketCitySooner is correct the RRR game makes too much money for both teams and the City of Dallas to end it.

Schmolik, Living far away I would not expect you know this. When Jerry Jones wanted to move the RRR game to his stadium in Arlington the City of Dallas stepped up and spent millions of dollars upgrading and expanding the Old Cotton Bowl stadium. They renovated it and added upper decks to each end to increase the capacity to 92,000. In reality the RRR is the only game of any consequence played in the stadium each year. The City of Dallas made a commitment to keep the RRR in Dallas at all cost. IIRC they pay big bucks to each team to play the game in Dallas.

It is a huge money maker for each school. To purchase a ticket to the game supporters must donate big bucks just to be eligible to buy a ticket plus be a season ticket holder.

Many fans go to Dallas each year for the game and festivities even though they do not have a ticket to the game. It is a huge money maker for the hotels, bars and restaurants and even the retail shops. The stadium is located inside the Fairgrounds. It is the State Fair of Texas and quite an event.

As for the game itself, to me it was even bigger when they were in different conferences. It had more of a regional feel to it, one team from the Big8 and one from the SWC.

(01-12-2021 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(01-12-2021 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  In order to move forward things will have to change.
History has shown us that when sports at the professional level moved into extended playoffs, not only did popularity explode, but so did profitability.
However, history has also shown us that in order to facilitate that growth it was necessary to shift some properties from one league to another. What was thought to be unthinkable, proved to be solid strategic moves to get the right teams in the correct positions to keep fans involved and competition leveled out. It also turned out to be positive for the franchises that were assigned to move to other leagues.

Somebody, somewhere is pushing pins all over a map trying to determine what moves could be made to benefit the game, to make it bigger and better (and more profitable for everyone involved, not just individual conferences but for all leagues).

When the AFL and the NFL merged the Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns moved from the NFC to the AFC. Each franchise has enjoyed enormous success after the switch.
More recently the Houston Astros were assigned to move to the American League from the National to even out the number of teams in both leagues. Another success story, not only for the franchise, but for playoff baseball.

Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football. What we may see as unnatural will be made for the good of the game (and money). No conference will be immune, and as we have seen in pro football it may be some of the strongest may be moved to boost some of the weaker to balance play.

The problem with college sports is that you don’t have one person or body looking to build for overall success. You have 5 conference commissioners looking out for what’s best for their conferences and at each school there is an administration that only cares about their school. You also have the networks, whose only concern is their own profits.

Mack Brown suggested recently that the P5 should have a Football Czar.

(01-11-2021 06:34 PM)schmolik Wrote:  I would prefer Texas and Oklahoma be in the same conference together and the Red River Rivalry remain a conference game. You can say they'd never cancel the game even if they weren't in the same conference but if I said in 2010 that Texas and Texas A&M would no longer play would you have believed me? What's stopping Texas from blackballing Oklahoma the way they blackballed A&M, especially if Oklahoma leaves the Big 12 before UT? Who needs Oklahoma/Texas more? The only way to guarantee they play is for them to play in the same conference.

I know it would be better financially for the Big 10 if OU/UT were in the B1G but geographically they fit better in the SEC and if they were there then Texas and Texas A&M would play again.

Texas may have blackballed A&M in the early days, but they've regretted it. You can tell they are the more eager to renew that series because their home schedule has suffered without it. A&M, for their part, no longer needs that game so they've decided to stick it to UT, it appears.

One day they will play again, maybe in the SEC at that, but I doubt Texas makes the same mistake twice.

If Oklahoma moved to the SEC then ironically, Texas would still need that game more. OU would have a nice complement of home games every year. Texas is the bigger money maker, but you can't make a habit of pissing off everyone you do business with. Eventually, it catches up with you.

(01-12-2021 11:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-12-2021 06:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  In order to move forward things will have to change.
History has shown us that when sports at the professional level moved into extended playoffs, not only did popularity explode, but so did profitability.
However, history has also shown us that in order to facilitate that growth it was necessary to shift some properties from one league to another. What was thought to be unthinkable, proved to be solid strategic moves to get the right teams in the correct positions to keep fans involved and competition leveled out. It also turned out to be positive for the franchises that were assigned to move to other leagues.

Somebody, somewhere is pushing pins all over a map trying to determine what moves could be made to benefit the game, to make it bigger and better (and more profitable for everyone involved, not just individual conferences but for all leagues).

When the AFL and the NFL merged the Pittsburgh Steelers, Baltimore Colts and Cleveland Browns moved from the NFC to the AFC. Each franchise has enjoyed enormous success after the switch.
More recently the Houston Astros were assigned to move to the American League from the National to even out the number of teams in both leagues. Another success story, not only for the franchise, but for playoff baseball.

Somewhere somebody is planning those league changes for College football. What we may see as unnatural will be made for the good of the game (and money). No conference will be immune, and as we have seen in pro football it may be some of the strongest may be moved to boost some of the weaker to balance play.

Moving the Astros made no sense. They should have moved Milwaukee back to the American League. It was simply done because the Astros were undergoing an ownership change so they could make that a requirement to approve the transfer.

There was no room for them in the AL central. The AL needed another team in the West, to go with Seattle, Oakland, the Angles, and the Rangers.
It was a logical move that solidified that division and gave the American League exclusivity in Texas.

(01-12-2021 04:18 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 06:34 PM)schmolik Wrote:  I would prefer Texas and Oklahoma be in the same conference together and the Red River Rivalry remain a conference game. You can say they'd never cancel the game even if they weren't in the same conference but if I said in 2010 that Texas and Texas A&M would no longer play would you have believed me? What's stopping Texas from blackballing Oklahoma the way they blackballed A&M, especially if Oklahoma leaves the Big 12 before UT? Who needs Oklahoma/Texas more? The only way to guarantee they play is for them to play in the same conference.

I know it would be better financially for the Big 10 if OU/UT were in the B1G but geographically they fit better in the SEC and if they were there then Texas and Texas A&M would play again.

Texas may have blackballed A&M in the early days, but they've regretted it. You can tell they are the more eager to renew that series because their home schedule has suffered without it. A&M, for their part, no longer needs that game so they've decided to stick it to UT, it appears.

One day they will play again, maybe in the SEC at that, but I doubt Texas makes the same mistake twice.

If Oklahoma moved to the SEC then ironically, Texas would still need that game more. OU would have a nice complement of home games every year. Texas is the bigger money maker, but you can't make a habit of pissing off everyone you do business with. Eventually, it catches up with you.

The Texas/A&M game will be added to the long list of ACC/SEC season ending match-ups.

(01-11-2021 04:49 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If Oklahoma and Kansas moved to the Big Ten then it does make sense for Texas and Texas Tech to move to the SEC together.

I also think it makes sense for ESPN to grab a school like TCU and put them in the ACC if Notre Dame is willing to join in football. The ACC would probably snub West Virginia and they wouldn't be valuable to anyone else.

However...let us consider what Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 could cause as far as a ripple effect.

Texas and Texas Tech would have a safe home in the SEC. Oklahoma and Kansas would fit pretty well with the Big Ten. But this sort of maneuver would still put a lot of pressure on Notre Dame and the ACC as a whole to some degree.

ESPN controls the destiny of the ACC, but they also want Big Ten rights. The package from the Big Ten is coming open about the same time the Big 12 GOR ends. That's strategic, of course, but we should also consider FOX's diminished position. They will still want content, but they've given up on pursuing certain properties. They've reduced their own platform and they've sold off the very studios that would have made a streaming service viable.

The ACC is in an inferior economic position without question and if both the SEC and Big Ten get another raise with significant powers coming on board then the leaders of the ACC will have to consider giving up the ghost. They have no means of making up the gap as things stand now and the addition of Notre Dame in football is only going to do so much. That's compounded by the length of the ACC contract.

So let's consider that one of the reasons that ESPN made the ACC sign such a long term deal is to have leverage over them. At this stage, ESPN could make those schools do just about anything because there's no help coming otherwise.

The ACC powers will desperately want an outlet. ESPN will be happy to give them one provided they do exactly what ESPN wants.

If you moved Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Virginia Tech to the SEC then you have a very solid 20.

If you moved Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, and Duke to the Big Ten then you have another very solid 20.

FWIW, I played with a divisional split of the two groups. I had a very hard time coming up with any reasonable scenario that splits the Alabamian programs, as that split complicated many other areas. Therefore, I had to keep the two together, then pair LSU with them. Georgia and Georgia Tech together is a no-brainer, especially when you also can pair GT with Vanderbilt and Tennessee. Putting all the former B8 and SWC programs together is also another obvious idea. None of the original SEC members would end up in a division with former SWC and B8 programs, which is about as fair as I could come up with.

On the Big Ten, I had connect the plains programs with one of the recruiting areas, so I paired Northwestern with Nebraska and Oklahoma. The Illini is paired with the upper lakes programs. Each division is to have at least two historical programs but that proved to be nearly impossible: separating the Michigans and Wisconsin/Minnesota make no sense, so I had to put the two pairs together, thus necessarily split Michigan and Ohio State. Therefore, not only did I split Michigan/Ohio State but also the Illinois programs and ND kept away from the Michigans and Indiana public schools.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan State, Michigan, Illinois
Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Notre Dame, Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia

Texas Tech, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M
Mississippi, Mississippi State, Louisiana State, Alabama, Auburn
Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, Georgia Tech, Tennessee
Florida State, Clemson, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia Tech

(01-13-2021 01:17 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 04:49 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If Oklahoma and Kansas moved to the Big Ten then it does make sense for Texas and Texas Tech to move to the SEC together.

I also think it makes sense for ESPN to grab a school like TCU and put them in the ACC if Notre Dame is willing to join in football. The ACC would probably snub West Virginia and they wouldn't be valuable to anyone else.

However...let us consider what Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 could cause as far as a ripple effect.

Texas and Texas Tech would have a safe home in the SEC. Oklahoma and Kansas would fit pretty well with the Big Ten. But this sort of maneuver would still put a lot of pressure on Notre Dame and the ACC as a whole to some degree.

ESPN controls the destiny of the ACC, but they also want Big Ten rights. The package from the Big Ten is coming open about the same time the Big 12 GOR ends. That's strategic, of course, but we should also consider FOX's diminished position. They will still want content, but they've given up on pursuing certain properties. They've reduced their own platform and they've sold off the very studios that would have made a streaming service viable.

The ACC is in an inferior economic position without question and if both the SEC and Big Ten get another raise with significant powers coming on board then the leaders of the ACC will have to consider giving up the ghost. They have no means of making up the gap as things stand now and the addition of Notre Dame in football is only going to do so much. That's compounded by the length of the ACC contract.

So let's consider that one of the reasons that ESPN made the ACC sign such a long term deal is to have leverage over them. At this stage, ESPN could make those schools do just about anything because there's no help coming otherwise.

The ACC powers will desperately want an outlet. ESPN will be happy to give them one provided they do exactly what ESPN wants.

If you moved Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Virginia Tech to the SEC then you have a very solid 20.

If you moved Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, and Duke to the Big Ten then you have another very solid 20.

FWIW, I played with a divisional split of the two groups. I had a very hard time coming up with any reasonable scenario that splits the Alabamian programs, as that split complicated many other areas. Therefore, I had to keep the two together, then pair LSU with them. Georgia and Georgia Tech together is a no-brainer, especially when you also can pair GT with Vanderbilt and Tennessee. Putting all the former B8 and SWC programs together is also another obvious idea. None of the original SEC members would end up in a division with former SWC and B8 programs, which is about as fair as I could come up with.

On the Big Ten, I had connect the plains programs with one of the recruiting areas, so I paired Northwestern with Nebraska and Oklahoma. The Illini is paired with the upper lakes programs. Each division is to have at least two historical programs but that proved to be nearly impossible: separating the Michigans and Wisconsin/Minnesota make no sense, so I had to put the two pairs together, thus necessarily split Michigan and Ohio State. Therefore, not only did I split Michigan/Ohio State but also the Illinois programs and ND kept away from the Michigans and Indiana public schools.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan State, Michigan, Illinois
Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Notre Dame, Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia

Texas Tech, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M
Mississippi, Mississippi State, Louisiana State, Alabama, Auburn
Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, Georgia Tech, Tennessee
Florida State, Clemson, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia Tech

In the past when a group got too big to manage, it divided, stronger entities were formed and the lesser programs were left with the original structure and then faded away. Such was the case with the old Southern Conference and would be with any number of teams over 16.....heck that number might actually be 14, which is why school Presidents are reluctant to expand.

Perhaps the key would be to start with a playoff number (say 8 teams) and work on forming conferences of 8 or so teams rather than 16, 18, 20 or 24.
Each champion would enter the tournament. Seven game round robin conference schedules would leave plenty of room for OOC rivalries without overloading the schedule.

If 8 were not feasible in some markets, the number of schools per conference could actually go as high as 10/11 as long as the conference was willing to give up scheduling flexibility. (The PAC could actually stay in tact as an 11 team conference if necessary, but in doing so making it more difficult for any individual school to become champion and participating in the playoff).

Smaller compact conferences would be easier for fans and schools because they would be more regional and better for the media giants that paid the bills as the conferences would have less power and therefore easier to control.

(01-13-2021 05:51 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-13-2021 01:17 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 04:49 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If Oklahoma and Kansas moved to the Big Ten then it does make sense for Texas and Texas Tech to move to the SEC together.

I also think it makes sense for ESPN to grab a school like TCU and put them in the ACC if Notre Dame is willing to join in football. The ACC would probably snub West Virginia and they wouldn't be valuable to anyone else.

However...let us consider what Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 could cause as far as a ripple effect.

Texas and Texas Tech would have a safe home in the SEC. Oklahoma and Kansas would fit pretty well with the Big Ten. But this sort of maneuver would still put a lot of pressure on Notre Dame and the ACC as a whole to some degree.

ESPN controls the destiny of the ACC, but they also want Big Ten rights. The package from the Big Ten is coming open about the same time the Big 12 GOR ends. That's strategic, of course, but we should also consider FOX's diminished position. They will still want content, but they've given up on pursuing certain properties. They've reduced their own platform and they've sold off the very studios that would have made a streaming service viable.

The ACC is in an inferior economic position without question and if both the SEC and Big Ten get another raise with significant powers coming on board then the leaders of the ACC will have to consider giving up the ghost. They have no means of making up the gap as things stand now and the addition of Notre Dame in football is only going to do so much. That's compounded by the length of the ACC contract.

So let's consider that one of the reasons that ESPN made the ACC sign such a long term deal is to have leverage over them. At this stage, ESPN could make those schools do just about anything because there's no help coming otherwise.

The ACC powers will desperately want an outlet. ESPN will be happy to give them one provided they do exactly what ESPN wants.

If you moved Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Virginia Tech to the SEC then you have a very solid 20.

If you moved Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, and Duke to the Big Ten then you have another very solid 20.

FWIW, I played with a divisional split of the two groups. I had a very hard time coming up with any reasonable scenario that splits the Alabamian programs, as that split complicated many other areas. Therefore, I had to keep the two together, then pair LSU with them. Georgia and Georgia Tech together is a no-brainer, especially when you also can pair GT with Vanderbilt and Tennessee. Putting all the former B8 and SWC programs together is also another obvious idea. None of the original SEC members would end up in a division with former SWC and B8 programs, which is about as fair as I could come up with.

On the Big Ten, I had connect the plains programs with one of the recruiting areas, so I paired Northwestern with Nebraska and Oklahoma. The Illini is paired with the upper lakes programs. Each division is to have at least two historical programs but that proved to be nearly impossible: separating the Michigans and Wisconsin/Minnesota make no sense, so I had to put the two pairs together, thus necessarily split Michigan and Ohio State. Therefore, not only did I split Michigan/Ohio State but also the Illinois programs and ND kept away from the Michigans and Indiana public schools.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan State, Michigan, Illinois
Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Notre Dame, Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia

Texas Tech, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M
Mississippi, Mississippi State, Louisiana State, Alabama, Auburn
Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, Georgia Tech, Tennessee
Florida State, Clemson, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia Tech

In the past when a group got too big to manage, it divided, stronger entities were formed and the lesser programs were left with the original structure and then faded away. Such was the case with the old Southern Conference and would be with any number of teams over 16.....heck that number might actually be 14, which is why school Presidents are reluctant to expand.

Perhaps the key would be to start with a playoff number (say 8 teams) and work on forming conferences of 8 or so teams rather than 16, 18, 20 or 24.
Each champion would enter the tournament. Seven game round robin conference schedules would leave plenty of room for OOC rivalries without overloading the schedule.

If 8 were not feasible in some markets, the number of schools per conference could actually go as high as 10/11 as long as the conference was willing to give up scheduling flexibility. (The PAC could actually stay in tact as an 11 team conference if necessary, but in doing so making it more difficult for any individual school to become champion and participating in the playoff).

Smaller compact conferences would be easier for fans and schools because they would be more regional and better for the media giants that paid the bills as the conferences would have less power and therefore easier to control.

Why did you feel a need to "split" Alabama and Auburn? I see enough state pairs split up already, why split another when you don't have to?

I think a mega SEC with 3, then later 4 or even 5 divisions of 6 is the future.

(01-13-2021 06:34 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-13-2021 05:51 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-13-2021 01:17 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 04:49 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If Oklahoma and Kansas moved to the Big Ten then it does make sense for Texas and Texas Tech to move to the SEC together.

I also think it makes sense for ESPN to grab a school like TCU and put them in the ACC if Notre Dame is willing to join in football. The ACC would probably snub West Virginia and they wouldn't be valuable to anyone else.

However...let us consider what Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 could cause as far as a ripple effect.

Texas and Texas Tech would have a safe home in the SEC. Oklahoma and Kansas would fit pretty well with the Big Ten. But this sort of maneuver would still put a lot of pressure on Notre Dame and the ACC as a whole to some degree.

ESPN controls the destiny of the ACC, but they also want Big Ten rights. The package from the Big Ten is coming open about the same time the Big 12 GOR ends. That's strategic, of course, but we should also consider FOX's diminished position. They will still want content, but they've given up on pursuing certain properties. They've reduced their own platform and they've sold off the very studios that would have made a streaming service viable.

The ACC is in an inferior economic position without question and if both the SEC and Big Ten get another raise with significant powers coming on board then the leaders of the ACC will have to consider giving up the ghost. They have no means of making up the gap as things stand now and the addition of Notre Dame in football is only going to do so much. That's compounded by the length of the ACC contract.

So let's consider that one of the reasons that ESPN made the ACC sign such a long term deal is to have leverage over them. At this stage, ESPN could make those schools do just about anything because there's no help coming otherwise.

The ACC powers will desperately want an outlet. ESPN will be happy to give them one provided they do exactly what ESPN wants.

If you moved Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Virginia Tech to the SEC then you have a very solid 20.

If you moved Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, and Duke to the Big Ten then you have another very solid 20.

FWIW, I played with a divisional split of the two groups. I had a very hard time coming up with any reasonable scenario that splits the Alabamian programs, as that split complicated many other areas. Therefore, I had to keep the two together, then pair LSU with them. Georgia and Georgia Tech together is a no-brainer, especially when you also can pair GT with Vanderbilt and Tennessee. Putting all the former B8 and SWC programs together is also another obvious idea. None of the original SEC members would end up in a division with former SWC and B8 programs, which is about as fair as I could come up with.

On the Big Ten, I had connect the plains programs with one of the recruiting areas, so I paired Northwestern with Nebraska and Oklahoma. The Illini is paired with the upper lakes programs. Each division is to have at least two historical programs but that proved to be nearly impossible: separating the Michigans and Wisconsin/Minnesota make no sense, so I had to put the two pairs together, thus necessarily split Michigan and Ohio State. Therefore, not only did I split Michigan/Ohio State but also the Illinois programs and ND kept away from the Michigans and Indiana public schools.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan State, Michigan, Illinois
Indiana, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Notre Dame, Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia

Texas Tech, Arkansas, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M
Mississippi, Mississippi State, Louisiana State, Alabama, Auburn
Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, Georgia Tech, Tennessee
Florida State, Clemson, South Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia Tech

In the past when a group got too big to manage, it divided, stronger entities were formed and the lesser programs were left with the original structure and then faded away. Such was the case with the old Southern Conference and would be with any number of teams over 16.....heck that number might actually be 14, which is why school Presidents are reluctant to expand.

Perhaps the key would be to start with a playoff number (say 8 teams) and work on forming conferences of 8 or so teams rather than 16, 18, 20 or 24.
Each champion would enter the tournament. Seven game round robin conference schedules would leave plenty of room for OOC rivalries without overloading the schedule.

If 8 were not feasible in some markets, the number of schools per conference could actually go as high as 10/11 as long as the conference was willing to give up scheduling flexibility. (The PAC could actually stay in tact as an 11 team conference if necessary, but in doing so making it more difficult for any individual school to become champion and participating in the playoff).

Smaller compact conferences would be easier for fans and schools because they would be more regional and better for the media giants that paid the bills as the conferences would have less power and therefore easier to control.

Why did you feel a need to "split" Alabama and Auburn? I see enough state pairs split up already, why split another when you don't have to?

There are some in the SEC East who think that shifting Alabama to that division would make it too strong. However, the more complicating factors are the Tennessee-Alabama and Auburn-Georgia rivalries (and the minor issue of Vanderbilt-Ole Miss). You would have to go with two protected games for inter-divisional games. Florida-Florida State would be fine as long as Georgia and Florida are in the same division. However, splitting Tennessee from Florida and Georgia would be no-go.

Keeping Alabama-Auburn together avoids those problems.