(06-18-2022 04:36 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 03:44 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 01:25 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 12:34 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 10:16 AM)XLance Wrote:  Untrue.
These schools might want B1G money (or the projected SEC money) but I seriously doubt that many if any of the schools in the ACC or PAC actually want to be in the B1G or the SEC.

That is some serious head in the sand thinking right there. I don't doubt that used to be true, but not anymore. The reality is if any school can join another conference and make 30 million, maybe 50 million dollars more each year they would. It's silly to think otherwise. And please don't bring up endowments, they do not have a thing to do with such decisions.

Of course you have absolutely no proof to support your position nor are you likely to find any. To claim to KNOW what the BOT of every school outside of the B1G and SEC wants is ridiculous.

Lance, since when has any of the "knowledge" you've graced this board with ever come to fruition?

Weren't Texas and Baylor supposed to join the ACC?

I'll wait.

No, I imagined that Oklahoma and Baylor would be perfect additions for the SEC.
Texas would have been a great addition for the ACC but unfortunately they chose another path.

Not exactly. In fairness, here and there we all make differing predictions, but very few of us claim to have connections to decision makers. Even fewer claim to know how certain things will play out.

You stated that Texas was bound for the ACC, that such had already been decided and agreed upon by people at the highest levels...and that accepting Baylor was the price the ACC was willing to pay.

Were you wrong or misinformed?

To me, the clearest solution to the VA/NC controversy is for the Big 10 to take UVA, UNC, and Duke while the SEC takes NC St and VT.

You then establish an MOU or even a law in the respective state legislatures requiring athletic contests among VT-UVA and NC St-UNC annually.

All 5 get a seat in college football’s new order and their rivalries get preserved.

Round out those additions with whomever you like—ND, Miami, & GT if you’re the Big 10; Florida St and Clemson if you’re the SEC.

Both super leagues end up at 20 members and the 5 remaining ACC schools get absorbed by the Big 12 (along with USF to put their league at 18).

(06-18-2022 10:20 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 04:36 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 03:44 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 01:25 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-18-2022 12:34 PM)Lurker Above Wrote:  That is some serious head in the sand thinking right there. I don't doubt that used to be true, but not anymore. The reality is if any school can join another conference and make 30 million, maybe 50 million dollars more each year they would. It's silly to think otherwise. And please don't bring up endowments, they do not have a thing to do with such decisions.

Of course you have absolutely no proof to support your position nor are you likely to find any. To claim to KNOW what the BOT of every school outside of the B1G and SEC wants is ridiculous.

Lance, since when has any of the "knowledge" you've graced this board with ever come to fruition?

Weren't Texas and Baylor supposed to join the ACC?

I'll wait.

No, I imagined that Oklahoma and Baylor would be perfect additions for the SEC.
Texas would have been a great addition for the ACC but unfortunately they chose another path.

Not exactly. In fairness, here and there we all make differing predictions, but very few of us claim to have connections to decision makers. Even fewer claim to know how certain things will play out.

You stated that Texas was bound for the ACC, that such had already been decided and agreed upon by people at the highest levels...and that accepting Baylor was the price the ACC was willing to pay.

Were you wrong or misinformed?

If you read upthread you will find that Texas was at on time a "done deal" to join the PAC, and at the last minute were influenced by what they considered a better deal and they took it.
I can only suppose that the ACC was outbid. That would fit Texas' behavior based on past history.

(06-19-2022 08:01 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  To me, the clearest solution to the VA/NC controversy is for the Big 10 to take UVA, UNC, and Duke while the SEC takes NC St and VT.

You then establish an MOU or even a law in the respective state legislatures requiring athletic contests among VT-UVA and NC St-UNC annually.

All 5 get a seat in college football’s new order and their rivalries get preserved.

Round out those additions with whomever you like—ND, Miami, & GT if you’re the Big 10; Florida St and Clemson if you’re the SEC.

Both super leagues end up at 20 members and the 5 remaining ACC schools get absorbed by the Big 12 (along with USF to put their league at 18).

Absolutely. As soon as ESPN and FOX pony up an additional $300-400 million a year and the 10 departing ACC schools pay their $1 billion in exit fees we can start negotiating how much the 5 remaining ACC schools should get for agreeing to release the 10 from their GoR. How hard can that be? Git 'er done.

For purposes of synthesizing into current thinking, extrapolating football fan base size to TV viewership and streaming ($), here's what the NYTimes claims about fan base size based on their ongoing analysis of college football (caveat: metrics unknown):

Top 16 Schools [Theoretically] Account for 50% of College Fans

01. Ohio State - 11.26M
02. Notre Dame - 8.21M
03. Texas - 7.23M
04. Penn State - 6.36M
05. Michigan - 6.26M
06. Florida - 5.89M
07. Oregon - 5.54M
08. Alabama - 5.34M
09. Wisconsin - 4.57M
10. Southern Cal - 4.46M
11. LSU - 4.02M
12. Georgia - 3.99M
13. Texas A&M - 3.87M
14. Syracuse - 3.45M
15. Auburn - 3.27M
16. Tennessee - 3.27M

Top 50 [Others listed for context]

17. Oklahoma - 3.22
19. Miami - 2.99
20. Florida State - 2.79
21. North Carolina - 2.74
22. South Carolina - 2.69
23. Missouri - 2.64
25. Washington - 2.46
27. UCLA - 2.35
28. Clemson - 2.33
29. Virginia Tech - 2.27
30. Arkansas - 2.16
31. Kentucky - 2.06
32. Arizona State - 1.95
34. West Virginia - 1.84
35. Mississippi - 1.67
36. Texas Tech - 1.65
37. Oklahoma State - 1.42
39. Mississippi State - 1.34
40. Georgia Tech - 1.28
41. Minnesota - 1.26
42. UConn - 1.22
43. Rutgers - 1.18
44. Cal - 1.14
45. Utah - 1.09
46. Pitt - 1.07
47. Arizona - 1.04
48. BYU - 1.03
50. Colorado - 0.95

Others of Interest:

51. North Carolina State - 0.94
54. Kansas - 0.90
55. Stanford - 0.89
57. Louisville - 0.86
58. Virginia - 0.86
63. Vanderbilt - 0.82
65. TCU - 0.80
66. Duke - 0.79

******

I agree with others in that increased money for the whole trumps money for the new. I mean, I feel pretty sure that Incarnate Word would like SEC money, and my guess is IW would be willing to join the SEC to get that money, cannon fodder be damned. So, many schools will want to join the SEC in the future, due to, well, more money, lol. Indeed, the SEC has more suitors than Odysseus' wife, Penelope, lol.

Question is: Which schools would "move the needle" upward, other than ND? I've bolded some of our favorite speculative schools. To me, according to the NYTimes, the "movers" are ND, USC, Oregon, and - really? - Syracuse?

While some of our discussion is focusing on basketball $, in the context of an NCAA breakaway, the football viewership of several basketball candidates are downright dismal. Do those football fan base numbers translate to basketball fan base, too? Specifically, I'm picking on Duke and Kansas, but UVA is also among the bottom givers.

As suggested above, what surprises me most is Syracuse. Syracuse in the top 16 fan bases? Can that be correct, lol? My goodness.

Unless you go west and north (Syracuse?) - and JR assures me that ain't happening, lol - these numbers, if reasonably accurate, seem to suggest Frank the Tank may be correct about future SEC expansion. As in, no future SEC expansion, the SEC is done (excepting ND).

Think about this, though, as a longshot: The big dog is self-evidently ND, right? What if the SEC moved to 20 by bringing in ND on condition that ND's western pal, SoCal, and Syracuse (ND's cherished NY presence) were included? Then turn around and give SoCal a pal, Oregon? Now the SEC is at a perfect 20, but with a massive infusion of SEC viewers all over the country. [Yeah, yeah, okay, let the scorn commence, lol.]

The foregoing "ND scenario" better fits the B1G than the SEC, I understand, unless ... Unless ND simply doesn't want the B1G. ND to the SEC also violates Occam's Razor since ND loves independence, so, in the end, "ND to the SEC" is simply academic, an exercise in futility; indeed, a fantasy, lol. Lots of difference makers in ND, USC, and Oregon, though. [I choke up adding Syracuse in that previous sentence.]

Excising ND from joining a conference, what the NYTimes information says to me is SoCal and Oregon are out there, possibly ripe for the taking, huge fanbases, nail down whole parts of the far west ... . Long road trip but a fun road trip. Personally, I'd be willing for Texas to play in a grouping with USC and Oregon (basically one away football game yearly, but I'm also personally good with all sports). Many others on this board will disagree, perhaps vehemently, and, further, SoCal and Oregon would not like the "all sports" travel, so there's that, too. But oh, the apparent $. And not just for the SEC: USC and Oregon would bank coin, too.

I can only find the NYTimes charts on surly, so, not meaning to link out of the site, here are the charts for those interested (scroll down on page 46):

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/2...y/page/46/

(06-19-2022 12:17 PM)XOVERX Wrote:  For purposes of synthesizing into current thinking, extrapolating football fan base size to TV viewership and streaming ($), here's what the NYTimes claims about fan base size based on their ongoing analysis of college football (caveat: metrics unknown):

Top 16 Schools [Theoretically] Account for 50% of College Fans

01. Ohio State - 11.26M
02. Notre Dame - 8.21M
03. Texas - 7.23M
04. Penn State - 6.36M
05. Michigan - 6.26M
06. Florida - 5.89M
07. Oregon - 5.54M
08. Alabama - 5.34M
09. Wisconsin - 4.57M
10. Southern Cal - 4.46M
11. LSU - 4.02M
12. Georgia - 3.99M
13. Texas A&M - 3.87M
14. Syracuse - 3.45M
15. Auburn - 3.27M
16. Tennessee - 3.27M

Top 50 [Others listed for context]

17. Oklahoma - 3.22
19. Miami - 2.99
20. Florida State - 2.79
21. North Carolina - 2.74
22. South Carolina - 2.69
23. Missouri - 2.64
25. Washington - 2.46
27. UCLA - 2.35
28. Clemson - 2.33
29. Virginia Tech - 2.27
30. Arkansas - 2.16
31. Kentucky - 2.06
32. Arizona State - 1.95
34. West Virginia - 1.84
35. Mississippi - 1.67
36. Texas Tech - 1.65
37. Oklahoma State - 1.42
39. Mississippi State - 1.34
40. Georgia Tech - 1.28
41. Minnesota - 1.26
42. UConn - 1.22
43. Rutgers - 1.18
44. Cal - 1.14
45. Utah - 1.09
46. Pitt - 1.07
47. Arizona - 1.04
48. BYU - 1.03
50. Colorado - 0.95

Others of Interest:

51. North Carolina State - 0.94
54. Kansas - 0.90
55. Stanford - 0.89
57. Louisville - 0.86
58. Virginia - 0.86
63. Vanderbilt - 0.82
65. TCU - 0.80
66. Duke - 0.79

******

I agree with others in that increased money for the whole trumps money for the new. I mean, I feel pretty sure that Incarnate Word would like SEC money, and my guess is IW would be willing to join the SEC to get that money, cannon fodder be damned. So, many schools will want to join the SEC in the future, due to, well, more money, lol. Indeed, the SEC has more suitors than Odysseus' wife, Penelope, lol.

Question is: Which schools would "move the needle" upward, other than ND? I've bolded some of our favorite speculative schools. To me, according to the NYTimes, the "movers" are ND, USC, Oregon, and - really? - Syracuse?

While some of our discussion is focusing on basketball $, in the context of an NCAA breakaway, the football viewership of several basketball candidates are downright dismal. Do those football fan base numbers translate to basketball fan base, too? Specifically, I'm picking on Duke and Kansas, but UVA is also among the bottom givers.

As suggested above, what surprises me most is Syracuse. Syracuse in the top 16 fan bases? Can that be correct, lol? My goodness.

Unless you go west and north (Syracuse?) - and JR assures me that ain't happening, lol - these numbers, if reasonably accurate, seem to suggest Frank the Tank may be correct about future SEC expansion. As in, no future SEC expansion, the SEC is done (excepting ND).

Think about this, though, as a longshot: The big dog is self-evidently ND, right? What if the SEC moved to 20 by bringing in ND on condition that ND's western pal, SoCal, and Syracuse (ND's cherished NY presence) were included? Then turn around and give SoCal a pal, Oregon? Now the SEC is at a perfect 20, but with a massive infusion of SEC viewers all over the country. [Yeah, yeah, okay, let the scorn commence, lol.]

The foregoing "ND scenario" better fits the B1G than the SEC, I understand, unless ... Unless ND simply doesn't want the B1G. ND to the SEC also violates Occam's Razor since ND loves independence, so, in the end, "ND to the SEC" is simply academic, an exercise in futility; indeed, a fantasy, lol. Lots of difference makers in ND, USC, and Oregon, though. [I choke up adding Syracuse in that previous sentence.]

Excising ND from joining a conference, what the NYTimes information says to me is SoCal and Oregon are out there, possibly ripe for the taking, huge fanbases, nail down whole parts of the far west ... . Long road trip but a fun road trip. Personally, I'd be willing for Texas to play in a grouping with USC and Oregon (basically one away football game yearly, but I'm also personally good with all sports). Many others on this board will disagree, perhaps vehemently, and, further, SoCal and Oregon would not like the "all sports" travel, so there's that, too. But oh, the apparent $. And not just for the SEC: USC and Oregon would bank coin, too.

I can only find the NYTimes charts on surly, so, not meaning to link out of the site, here are the charts for those interested (scroll down on page 46):

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/2...y/page/46/

In fairness I need to point out a few things:

Slive and Sankey both kept the boundary as SE'ish.

Odysseus's big dog had a lot to do with determining who would win Penelope.

I'd like to see the same metric on viewership for hoops.

And perhaps the SEC needs to, based on your data, add Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, and make ND an offer the can't refuse and call it quits at 20, huh?

I’m honestly at this point a fan of a sort of AL/NL split for CFB, where the SEC and Big 10 each form the core of one of those leagues.

Everyone involved then withdraws their football program from the NCAA and operates under its own governing structure. If the NCAA doesn’t like it and wants to hassle them over it, then they withdraw from the NCAA entirely.

(06-19-2022 12:17 PM)XOVERX Wrote:  For purposes of synthesizing into current thinking, extrapolating football fan base size to TV viewership and streaming ($), here's what the NYTimes claims about fan base size based on their ongoing analysis of college football (caveat: metrics unknown):

Top 16 Schools [Theoretically] Account for 50% of College Fans

01. Ohio State - 11.26M
02. Notre Dame - 8.21M
03. Texas - 7.23M
04. Penn State - 6.36M
05. Michigan - 6.26M
06. Florida - 5.89M
07. Oregon - 5.54M
08. Alabama - 5.34M
09. Wisconsin - 4.57M
10. Southern Cal - 4.46M
11. LSU - 4.02M
12. Georgia - 3.99M
13. Texas A&M - 3.87M
14. Syracuse - 3.45M
15. Auburn - 3.27M
16. Tennessee - 3.27M

Top 50 [Others listed for context]

17. Oklahoma - 3.22
19. Miami - 2.99
20. Florida State - 2.79
21. North Carolina - 2.74
22. South Carolina - 2.69
23. Missouri - 2.64
25. Washington - 2.46
27. UCLA - 2.35
28. Clemson - 2.33
29. Virginia Tech - 2.27
30. Arkansas - 2.16
31. Kentucky - 2.06
32. Arizona State - 1.95
34. West Virginia - 1.84
35. Mississippi - 1.67
36. Texas Tech - 1.65
37. Oklahoma State - 1.42
39. Mississippi State - 1.34
40. Georgia Tech - 1.28
41. Minnesota - 1.26
42. UConn - 1.22
43. Rutgers - 1.18
44. Cal - 1.14
45. Utah - 1.09
46. Pitt - 1.07
47. Arizona - 1.04
48. BYU - 1.03
50. Colorado - 0.95

Others of Interest:

51. North Carolina State - 0.94
54. Kansas - 0.90
55. Stanford - 0.89
57. Louisville - 0.86
58. Virginia - 0.86
63. Vanderbilt - 0.82
65. TCU - 0.80
66. Duke - 0.79

******

I agree with others in that increased money for the whole trumps money for the new. I mean, I feel pretty sure that Incarnate Word would like SEC money, and my guess is IW would be willing to join the SEC to get that money, cannon fodder be damned. So, many schools will want to join the SEC in the future, due to, well, more money, lol. Indeed, the SEC has more suitors than Odysseus' wife, Penelope, lol.

Question is: Which schools would "move the needle" upward, other than ND? I've bolded some of our favorite speculative schools. To me, according to the NYTimes, the "movers" are ND, USC, Oregon, and - really? - Syracuse?

While some of our discussion is focusing on basketball $, in the context of an NCAA breakaway, the football viewership of several basketball candidates are downright dismal. Do those football fan base numbers translate to basketball fan base, too? Specifically, I'm picking on Duke and Kansas, but UVA is also among the bottom givers.

As suggested above, what surprises me most is Syracuse. Syracuse in the top 16 fan bases? Can that be correct, lol? My goodness.

Unless you go west and north (Syracuse?) - and JR assures me that ain't happening, lol - these numbers, if reasonably accurate, seem to suggest Frank the Tank may be correct about future SEC expansion. As in, no future SEC expansion, the SEC is done (excepting ND).

Think about this, though, as a longshot: The big dog is self-evidently ND, right? What if the SEC moved to 20 by bringing in ND on condition that ND's western pal, SoCal, and Syracuse (ND's cherished NY presence) were included? Then turn around and give SoCal a pal, Oregon? Now the SEC is at a perfect 20, but with a massive infusion of SEC viewers all over the country. [Yeah, yeah, okay, let the scorn commence, lol.]

The foregoing "ND scenario" better fits the B1G than the SEC, I understand, unless ... Unless ND simply doesn't want the B1G. ND to the SEC also violates Occam's Razor since ND loves independence, so, in the end, "ND to the SEC" is simply academic, an exercise in futility; indeed, a fantasy, lol. Lots of difference makers in ND, USC, and Oregon, though. [I choke up adding Syracuse in that previous sentence.]

Excising ND from joining a conference, what the NYTimes information says to me is SoCal and Oregon are out there, possibly ripe for the taking, huge fanbases, nail down whole parts of the far west ... . Long road trip but a fun road trip. Personally, I'd be willing for Texas to play in a grouping with USC and Oregon (basically one away football game yearly, but I'm also personally good with all sports). Many others on this board will disagree, perhaps vehemently, and, further, SoCal and Oregon would not like the "all sports" travel, so there's that, too. But oh, the apparent $. And not just for the SEC: USC and Oregon would bank coin, too.

I can only find the NYTimes charts on surly, so, not meaning to link out of the site, here are the charts for those interested (scroll down on page 46):

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/2...y/page/46/

Things are going to get interesting. I read a couple of pages of the Surlyhorns thread, and what seemed to be the underlying theme......Texas fans aren't interested in just joining the SEC, they think they deserve to take it over. Fun times ahead.

(06-19-2022 01:39 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m honestly at this point a fan of a sort of AL/NL split for CFB, where the SEC and Big 10 each form the core of one of those leagues.

Everyone involved then withdraws their football program from the NCAA and operates under its own governing structure. If the NCAA doesn’t like it and wants to hassle them over it, then they withdraw from the NCAA entirely.

Contracts were signed to broadcast NCAA football. What happens when it is re-branded and the NCAA is not a part of it? Would we not have to open contracts and re-sign them, or should expansion be a part of the process? There's a lot of nitty gritty which would/could be advantageous. If the B1G and SEC initiated the move we could encourage interested schools to withdraw singularly and the 2 could grow as they saw fit and the rest could form their own conference/s.
Movement to larger groupings for collective bargaining seems logical. Because of core principles the SEC and B1G have for membership (the SEC wants the member to be Southeastern or Southwestern/ish and the B1G wants academic metrics met) I see 3 leagues of 20-24 under one mutually agreed upon governance structure. If it is expanded to cover more G5s I could see 4 of 20.

Slive and Sankey both kept the boundary as SE'ish.

I have noticed an affinity for "Old South" geography among my old-line SEC friends. I defer to you with respect to Slive and Sankey.

That being said, what conference would turn down ND? Would the SEC?

If so, an SEC denial would seem unwise if growing the pie is the goal versus maintaining post-bellum geographical integrity (or deciding that making more money is a bad idea).

Of course, my scenario also assumes ND + USC, Ducks, & Cuse, and that certainly requires more analysis than ND + a few ACC schools.

Furthermore, an ACC collapse is unlikely to be spearheaded by ND or Syracuse. The only way, I'm thinking, for the ACC to collapse is for others to show the way out. Possibly FSU and/or Clemson, maybe UNC and/or UVA. At the correct and proper time, if one or more key ACC schools decide they deserve to make more money by matriculating elsewhere, such a move might persuade ND to join a conference, perhaps not.

Therefore, assume arguendo three assumptions: (1) UNC-UVA (or whomever) decide to move to the B1G; and (2) the B1G will accept those ACC schools, and (3) ND decides to join a conference. These are significant assumptions, I understand, but I think none of the assumptions are outlandish.

Given our assumptions, Occam's Razor suggests ND to the B1G. Probably ND goes to the B1G.

Maybe not, though. Based on the NFL draft, football recruiting in the SEC is superior to football recruiting in the B1G. B1G NIL regulation may or may not please ND viz-a-viz the SEC NIL, who knows? Finally, ND has their unique unhappy history with the B1G.

Let's assume ND does its due diligence (unlike a certain Elon Musk), speaking with both the B1G and the SEC. ND contacts the SEC, "Whatcha got for us?" Sankey: "Well, we're wondering if you've heard from USC, Oregon, or Syracuse about a move to 20 in the SEC?" ND: "Oh yeah? Hmmm. We'll get back to you".

We know USC and Oregon have problems with their payout in the PAC. If the ACC is collapsing, maybe Syracuse becomes fearful? Maybe Syracuse would like to align with ND? If ND were to put out feelers north and west, who knows who might call the SEC? I suspect all of USC, Oregon, and Syracuse would call Sankey to kick the can around.

ND gets a lot out of that deal, too: First, massive money. Second, SEC football recruiting ground, to include California, NJ, NY. Third, one of their key traditional basketball recruiting grounds (NY). Fourth, continued national presence by conference footprint. Fifth, excellent matchups, with only 9 conference games; meaning, they can still play Michigan and Navy. Sixth, USC goes on as a conference game.

Deferring to the NYTimes football fan base information, and if that information is accurate, it seems an addition of ND, USC, Oregon, and Syracuse to the SEC is accretive. Judging from the NYTimes analysis, accretion seems doubtful with SEC additions such as UNC, UVA, FSU, Kansas, Duke, VPI, Miami, NCSU, GT, or any combination thereof.

Also, scheduling for a league of 20 is tantamount to scheduling for a league of 16. And if that league of 20 makes the original 16 more money? How about if that league of 20 makes the original 16 schools a helluva lot more money?

Best I can tell, a 20-school SEC with ND (#2), USC (#10), Oregon (#7), and Syracuse (#14) will make the original 16 schools a helluva lot more money.

Unless the basketball information changes the analysis - and it could - any SEC move beyond 16, without ND, seems problematical, which winds us all the way back to Frank the Tank's point: Absent ND, SEC future expansion appears to be done.

Finally, I disagree with Frank the Tank in that I do not believe SEC-B1G expansion is done. Until three or four of ND, USC, Oregon, and Syracuse are off the board, either the SEC and/or the B1G will expand again. It might take awhile, but it will happen. My guess is no later than 2035.

Odysseus's big dog had a lot to do with determining who would win Penelope.

A man who knows his Odyssey.

I'd like to see the same metric on viewership for hoops. 07-coffee3

Agreed.

The SEC isnt landing Notre Dame. The B1G has a shot. If that happens, it slingshots them above the SEC and the SEC will have to counter

(06-19-2022 02:53 PM)XOVERX Wrote:  Slive and Sankey both kept the boundary as SE'ish.

I have noticed an affinity for "Old South" geography among my old-line SEC friends. I defer to you with respect to Slive and Sankey.

That being said, what conference would turn down ND? Would the SEC?

If so, an SEC denial would seem unwise if growing the pie is the goal versus maintaining post-bellum geographical integrity (or deciding that making more money is a bad idea).

Of course, my scenario also assumes ND + USC, Ducks, & Cuse, and that certainly requires more analysis than ND + a few ACC schools.

Furthermore, an ACC collapse is unlikely to be spearheaded by ND or Syracuse. The only way, I'm thinking, for the ACC to collapse is for others to show the way out. Possibly FSU and/or Clemson, maybe UNC and/or UVA. At the correct and proper time, if one or more key ACC schools decide they deserve to make more money by matriculating elsewhere, such a move might persuade ND to join a conference, perhaps not.

Therefore, assume arguendo three assumptions: (1) UNC-UVA (or whomever) decide to move to the B1G; and (2) the B1G will accept those ACC schools, and (3) ND decides to join a conference. These are significant assumptions, I understand, but I think none of the assumptions are outlandish.

Given our assumptions, Occam's Razor suggests ND to the B1G. Probably ND goes to the B1G.

Maybe not, though. Based on the NFL draft, football recruiting in the SEC is superior to football recruiting in the B1G. B1G NIL regulation may or may not please ND viz-a-viz the SEC NIL, who knows? Finally, ND has their unique unhappy history with the B1G.

Let's assume ND does its due diligence (unlike a certain Elon Musk), speaking with both the B1G and the SEC. ND contacts the SEC, "Whatcha got for us?" Sankey: "Well, we're wondering if you've heard from USC, Oregon, or Syracuse about a move to 20 in the SEC?" ND: "Oh yeah? Hmmm. We'll get back to you".

We know USC and Oregon have problems with their payout in the PAC. If the ACC is collapsing, maybe Syracuse becomes fearful? Maybe Syracuse would like to align with ND? If ND were to put out feelers north and west, who knows who might call the SEC? I suspect all of USC, Oregon, and Syracuse would call Sankey to kick the can around.

ND gets a lot out of that deal, too: First, massive money. Second, SEC football recruiting ground, to include California, NJ, NY. Third, one of their key traditional basketball recruiting grounds (NY). Fourth, continued national presence by conference footprint. Fifth, excellent matchups, with only 9 conference games; meaning, they can still play Michigan and Navy. Sixth, USC goes on as a conference game.

Deferring to the NYTimes football fan base information, and if that information is accurate, it seems an addition of ND, USC, Oregon, and Syracuse to the SEC is accretive. Judging from the NYTimes analysis, accretion seems doubtful with SEC additions such as UNC, UVA, FSU, Kansas, Duke, VPI, Miami, NCSU, GT, or any combination thereof.

Also, scheduling for a league of 20 is tantamount to scheduling for a league of 16. And if that league of 20 makes the original 16 more money? How about if that league of 20 makes the original 16 schools a helluva lot more money?

Best I can tell, a 20-school SEC with ND (#2), USC (#10), Oregon (#7), and Syracuse (#14) will make the original 16 schools a helluva lot more money.

Unless the basketball information changes the analysis - and it could - any SEC move beyond 16, without ND, seems problematical, which winds us all the way back to Frank the Tank's point: Absent ND, SEC future expansion appears to be done.

Finally, I disagree with Frank the Tank in that I do not believe SEC-B1G expansion is done. Until three or four of ND, USC, Oregon, and Syracuse are off the board, either the SEC and/or the B1G will expand again. It might take awhile, but it will happen. My guess is no later than 2035.

Odysseus's big dog had a lot to do with determining who would win Penelope.

A man who knows his Odyssey.

I'd like to see the same metric on viewership for hoops. 07-coffee3

Agreed.

Notre Dame to the SEC? Duh! We're the Bible Belt and the favorite color of both is cash green! One must always be prepared to use a rationalization to overcome an inconvenient guideline!

In 1987 when Texas was first in discussion with the SEC, along with a silent partner in the Big 8 (Oklahoma) and Arkansas, and A&M, the SEC was also looking at potential defensive moves to safeguard the SEC's geographical branding. A plan for 20 was considered and basically agreed upon if the B1G decided to move on the ACC.

The nice thing about the Big Ten is that their membership preferences illuminate their targets. Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame (for many reasons not held to AAU) and lacking the Irish Georgia Tech or Kansas would be considered.

The SEC doesn't lose much at all in a move to take Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia. Hoops will be freed and hoops value will be x 2.25 (conservatively) higher. Add Kansas and the SEC has boxed the B1G out of the SE/SW, picked up massive hoops content value multiplied times 4 over what we have already, and adds nearly 24 million to the footprint. It is the ultimate move defensively to 20. It also gives ESPN a much easier segregation of product by brand value.

The B1G would not be likely to move on a #2 or #3 non AAU program and Georgia Tech is a low revenue producer w/o control of the Atlanta market.

This permits ESPN to build better value in football with the pieces remaining in the New Big 12 and the old ACC. It's a win win for pro rata on 4 hoops schools. Anything ESPN might lose in added value for those 4 is likely covered in the synergy they would have in basketball with Tennessee, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Kentucky, and other improving SEC programs, and they would eclipse the cost with added football value in a conference anchored with Clemson, FSU, Miami, Va Tech, N.C. State, Oklahoma St, Iowa St., Kansas State, TCU and Texas Tech, Louisville, WVU, Houston and Cincinnati.

If ND were interested they could replace Kansas. It still works.

(06-19-2022 02:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-19-2022 01:39 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m honestly at this point a fan of a sort of AL/NL split for CFB, where the SEC and Big 10 each form the core of one of those leagues.

Everyone involved then withdraws their football program from the NCAA and operates under its own governing structure. If the NCAA doesn’t like it and wants to hassle them over it, then they withdraw from the NCAA entirely.

Contracts were signed to broadcast NCAA football. What happens when it is re-branded and the NCAA is not a part of it? Would we not have to open contracts and re-sign them, or should expansion be a part of the process? There's a lot of nitty gritty which would/could be advantageous. If the B1G and SEC initiated the move we could encourage interested schools to withdraw singularly and the 2 could grow as they saw fit and the rest could form their own conference/s.
Movement to larger groupings for collective bargaining seems logical. Because of core principles the SEC and B1G have for membership (the SEC wants the member to be Southeastern or Southwestern/ish and the B1G wants academic metrics met) I see 3 leagues of 20-24 under one mutually agreed upon governance structure. If it is expanded to cover more G5s I could see 4 of 20.

Pulling away from the NCAA should be relatively uncomplicated. If Cleveland St can be in the NCAA without a football team then I don’t see why Ohio St can’t too.

As far as the relationship with the broadcasters go, I don’t think it has to be complicated unless one of the parties decides to make it complicated. Both parties entered their agreements with the understanding that the on field product would be at the highest level for collegiate sports, whether that banner is NCAA FBS (Unofficially the P5) or the CFP (or whatever name the new organization gets) it’s still the same thing.

(06-19-2022 03:17 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  The SEC isn't landing Notre Dame. The B1G has a shot. If that happens, it slingshots them above the SEC and the SEC will have to counter

If ND eschews independence, I agree with you that the B1G would have to be the overwhelming favorite for Domer landing.

I compare the situation to that of Texas. For years, common wisdom, especially among Texas folks, was that Texas would never join the SEC for [reasons]. Then, last July, we know what happened. The SEC made way too much sense to Texas.

Among a large group, the common wisdom is that ND will never give up independence, and, if they do, they damn sure will never join the B1G. Really?

I think you're right. The B1G makes way too much sense for ND if they surrender independence. Irish hockey is B1G right now.

Right now, even if ND joined the B1G, I wonder if the B1G would go past 16? According to the NYTimes, the B1G should take ND and Syracuse (or whomever) and maybe call it a league? A league of 16 allows for excellent rivalry preservation, league familiarity, and flexible nonconference scheduling.

I question whether the SEC would "have to counter" if ND goes to the B1G. Respond how, exactly? The SEC already comprises 8 of the top 16 football properties in the land. Where's the upside to SEC expansion if the candidates are not accretive?

If you're right, if the SEC does respond to "ND to the B1G" with a move past 16, I imagine it will be with four from the group of usual suspects that we routinely discuss. I say "four" because 20 is tantamount to 16, while 18 is marginally more cumbersome (although 18 is workable).

Now, though, with this NYTimes analysis, it does not appear that the usual suspects are SEC accretive. Unless basketball somehow forms a wild card that increases SEC per school revenue - JR's argument - I'm thinking the SEC sits tight at 16 and counts its money - Frank the Tank's argument.

Still, being an SEC guy, I willfully choose to ignore Occam's Razor and go with the ACC will crumble, ND will then give up independence, and ND will never join the B1G, lol.

(06-19-2022 03:17 PM)THUNDERStruck73 Wrote:  The SEC isnt landing Notre Dame. The B1G has a shot. If that happens, it slingshots them above the SEC and the SEC will have to counter

I just love "isn't" and "never" statements! Many zero info guys used one of those terms when stating on this board what Texas and Oklahoma would and would not do.

And you best check your WSJ valuations. if the Big 10 lands the Irish it just gets them within 3 billion of the SEC's value. It helps the B1G with media revenue as a national brand but also shores up B1G controls on ad rates in many of their cities where the Irish have been a back door for advertisers. However for that very reason I could see ESPN buying ND's media rights and setting them up to remain an independent perhaps even spreading some home and homes between the SEC and ACC, especially if ESPN could convince U.S.C. to do the same and the Mouse could own that annual game.

Such a move allows ESPN to back door the Big Ten and the PAC 12 and negates their need to invest in PAC 12 rights since ESPN will have access to BYU and Texas Tech for the 9PM time slot.

So while I find it unlikely the SEC would land ND, and was having some fun with my remarks, ESPN finding an offer and amount which appeals to them plays in favor of the ESPN family of rights and not the Big 10. The Irish would have Syracuse, Pitt, Miami, FSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Tennessee, and really anyone else in the mix. It's why a play on USC could easily be in the works.

(06-19-2022 03:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Notre Dame to the SEC? Duh! We're the Bible Belt and the favorite color of both is cash green! One must always be prepared to use a rationalization to overcome an inconvenient guideline!

In 1987 when Texas was first in discussion with the SEC, along with a silent partner in the Big 8 (Oklahoma) and Arkansas, and A&M, the SEC was also looking at potential defensive moves to safeguard the SEC's geographical branding. A plan for 20 was considered and basically agreed upon if the B1G decided to move on the ACC.

The nice thing about the Big Ten is that their membership preferences illuminate their targets. Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame (for many reasons not held to AAU) and lacking the Irish Georgia Tech or Kansas would be considered.

The SEC doesn't lose much at all in a move to take Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia. Hoops will be freed and hoops value will be x 2.25 (conservatively) higher. Add Kansas and the SEC has boxed the B1G out of the SE/SW, picked up massive hoops content value multiplied times 4 over what we have already, and adds nearly 24 million to the footprint. It is the ultimate move defensively to 20. It also gives ESPN a much easier segregation of product by brand value.

The B1G would not be likely to move on a #2 or #3 non AAU program and Georgia Tech is a low revenue producer w/o control of the Atlanta market.

This permits ESPN to build better value in football with the pieces remaining in the New Big 12 and the old ACC. It's a win win for pro rata on 4 hoops schools. Anything ESPN might lose in added value for those 4 is likely covered in the synergy they would have in basketball with Tennessee, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Kentucky, and other improving SEC programs, and they would eclipse the cost with added football value in a conference anchored with Clemson, FSU, Miami, Va Tech, N.C. State, Oklahoma St, Iowa St., Kansas State, TCU and Texas Tech, Louisville, WVU, Houston and Cincinnati.

If ND were interested they could replace Kansas. It still works.

I would love to see a basketball financial analysis. The basketball information is out there somewhere in the public domain; unfortunately, I haven't found it. You seem sure of basketball values. Do you have the relevant analysis handy?

A basketball league featuring Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Duke is crunk ... If it pays off (because the football revenues from Kansas, North Carolina, and Duke, as a group, are bright, bright, iridescent red).

(06-19-2022 08:04 PM)XOVERX Wrote:  

(06-19-2022 03:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Notre Dame to the SEC? Duh! We're the Bible Belt and the favorite color of both is cash green! One must always be prepared to use a rationalization to overcome an inconvenient guideline!

In 1987 when Texas was first in discussion with the SEC, along with a silent partner in the Big 8 (Oklahoma) and Arkansas, and A&M, the SEC was also looking at potential defensive moves to safeguard the SEC's geographical branding. A plan for 20 was considered and basically agreed upon if the B1G decided to move on the ACC.

The nice thing about the Big Ten is that their membership preferences illuminate their targets. Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame (for many reasons not held to AAU) and lacking the Irish Georgia Tech or Kansas would be considered.

The SEC doesn't lose much at all in a move to take Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia. Hoops will be freed and hoops value will be x 2.25 (conservatively) higher. Add Kansas and the SEC has boxed the B1G out of the SE/SW, picked up massive hoops content value multiplied times 4 over what we have already, and adds nearly 24 million to the footprint. It is the ultimate move defensively to 20. It also gives ESPN a much easier segregation of product by brand value.

The B1G would not be likely to move on a #2 or #3 non AAU program and Georgia Tech is a low revenue producer w/o control of the Atlanta market.

This permits ESPN to build better value in football with the pieces remaining in the New Big 12 and the old ACC. It's a win win for pro rata on 4 hoops schools. Anything ESPN might lose in added value for those 4 is likely covered in the synergy they would have in basketball with Tennessee, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Kentucky, and other improving SEC programs, and they would eclipse the cost with added football value in a conference anchored with Clemson, FSU, Miami, Va Tech, N.C. State, Oklahoma St, Iowa St., Kansas State, TCU and Texas Tech, Louisville, WVU, Houston and Cincinnati.

If ND were interested they could replace Kansas. It still works.

I would love to see a basketball financial analysis. The basketball information is out there somewhere in the public domain; unfortunately, I haven't found it. You seem sure of basketball values. Do you have the relevant analysis handy?

A basketball league featuring Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Duke is crunk ... If it pays off (because the football revenues from Kansas, North Carolina, and Duke, as a group, are bright, bright, iridescent red).

The P5 subforum at the top of the page has the WSJ valuations on the programs reach into the economy of their regions of influence. The 2.25 multiplier I use is simply the additional revenue withheld for the NCAA including the 6 years in arrears method of payment the use. The tourney earns 1.1 billion as of last year. Participants received ~270 million in shares. The rest is a welfare system. The actual payouts to participants would rise if the organizing group paid out everything to participating schools and each member school simply paid out an equal share for operational overhead. You might actually see hoops revenue approach 3/4ths of football revenue instead of 1/8th to 1/4 as it is at most schools.

As to bright red revenue numbers for football, not really. Kentucky and UNC would pay their way. In fact Kentucky is top 20 in total revenue most years. ESPN would only need to pay pro rata on Duke and a little on Kansas. Of all top hoops brands Kansas would get the largest bump w/o the NCAA.

And for the record, since when has the NYT been a reliable source of sports info? Any info? The Times which i used to read regularly is a shadow of its former quality. I think they hired Yahoo sports writers who trained at Bleacher Report!

(06-19-2022 01:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  Things are going to get interesting. I read a couple of pages of the Surlyhorns thread, and what seemed to be the underlying theme......Texas fans aren't interested in just joining the SEC, they think they deserve to take it over. Fun times ahead.

Oh my goodness, XLance, you don't know the half of it. The SEC has no clue yet when it comes to Texas. They do not yet perceive our God-given entitlement and unparalleled arrogance.

In short, we at Texas are arrogant SOBs. I'm talking a level of arrogance that culminates in utter obnoxiousness. Alabama arrogance is cute and mint julep polite compared with the arrogance of mighty Texas.

Thing is, we at Texas are even more arrogant when we're down. So, just as the eyes of Texas are upon you, Texas arrogance is likewise and always upon you.

For example, we're plotting and planning right now as to the timing to move the SEC conference HQ to Houston. I mean, that's a happening thing, full stop. Then we'll move the SEC Championship game, yearly, to Dallas. Georgia Dome? How sweet. Uhhh, no. Horns Down? We love it when folks do the Horns Down - it strokes our unlimited ego - but hey, if we can also turn Horns Down into a 15 yard penalty, what fun! The SEC cannot escape Texas' Machiavellian machinations, you are so right! We are the devil incarnate.

We at Texas laugh in delight when the emotions of other fanbases turn hot. Texas basks in the hatred and the penumbra of disappointment that others feel because they are "not Texas." Because, well, Texas is the best. At everything. All the time. Even when we lose an athletics event. Just the facts. Texas' arrogance shines like the light from ten thousand suns, ripping apart the hearts of haters like the black hole at the center of the Milky Way rips apart entire solar systems.

Our SEC friends will soon learn, bless their collective, if inferior, hearts. Thank you for warning our SEC friends because they should be afraid. And they are. We're Texas.

(06-19-2022 01:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-19-2022 12:17 PM)XOVERX Wrote:  For purposes of synthesizing into current thinking, extrapolating football fan base size to TV viewership and streaming ($), here's what the NYTimes claims about fan base size based on their ongoing analysis of college football (caveat: metrics unknown):

Top 16 Schools [Theoretically] Account for 50% of College Fans

01. Ohio State - 11.26M
02. Notre Dame - 8.21M
03. Texas - 7.23M
04. Penn State - 6.36M
05. Michigan - 6.26M
06. Florida - 5.89M
07. Oregon - 5.54M
08. Alabama - 5.34M
09. Wisconsin - 4.57M
10. Southern Cal - 4.46M
11. LSU - 4.02M
12. Georgia - 3.99M
13. Texas A&M - 3.87M
14. Syracuse - 3.45M
15. Auburn - 3.27M
16. Tennessee - 3.27M

Top 50 [Others listed for context]

17. Oklahoma - 3.22
19. Miami - 2.99
20. Florida State - 2.79
21. North Carolina - 2.74
22. South Carolina - 2.69
23. Missouri - 2.64
25. Washington - 2.46
27. UCLA - 2.35
28. Clemson - 2.33
29. Virginia Tech - 2.27
30. Arkansas - 2.16
31. Kentucky - 2.06
32. Arizona State - 1.95
34. West Virginia - 1.84
35. Mississippi - 1.67
36. Texas Tech - 1.65
37. Oklahoma State - 1.42
39. Mississippi State - 1.34
40. Georgia Tech - 1.28
41. Minnesota - 1.26
42. UConn - 1.22
43. Rutgers - 1.18
44. Cal - 1.14
45. Utah - 1.09
46. Pitt - 1.07
47. Arizona - 1.04
48. BYU - 1.03
50. Colorado - 0.95

Others of Interest:

51. North Carolina State - 0.94
54. Kansas - 0.90
55. Stanford - 0.89
57. Louisville - 0.86
58. Virginia - 0.86
63. Vanderbilt - 0.82
65. TCU - 0.80
66. Duke - 0.79

******

I agree with others in that increased money for the whole trumps money for the new. I mean, I feel pretty sure that Incarnate Word would like SEC money, and my guess is IW would be willing to join the SEC to get that money, cannon fodder be damned. So, many schools will want to join the SEC in the future, due to, well, more money, lol. Indeed, the SEC has more suitors than Odysseus' wife, Penelope, lol.

Question is: Which schools would "move the needle" upward, other than ND? I've bolded some of our favorite speculative schools. To me, according to the NYTimes, the "movers" are ND, USC, Oregon, and - really? - Syracuse?

While some of our discussion is focusing on basketball $, in the context of an NCAA breakaway, the football viewership of several basketball candidates are downright dismal. Do those football fan base numbers translate to basketball fan base, too? Specifically, I'm picking on Duke and Kansas, but UVA is also among the bottom givers.

As suggested above, what surprises me most is Syracuse. Syracuse in the top 16 fan bases? Can that be correct, lol? My goodness.

Unless you go west and north (Syracuse?) - and JR assures me that ain't happening, lol - these numbers, if reasonably accurate, seem to suggest Frank the Tank may be correct about future SEC expansion. As in, no future SEC expansion, the SEC is done (excepting ND).

Think about this, though, as a longshot: The big dog is self-evidently ND, right? What if the SEC moved to 20 by bringing in ND on condition that ND's western pal, SoCal, and Syracuse (ND's cherished NY presence) were included? Then turn around and give SoCal a pal, Oregon? Now the SEC is at a perfect 20, but with a massive infusion of SEC viewers all over the country. [Yeah, yeah, okay, let the scorn commence, lol.]

The foregoing "ND scenario" better fits the B1G than the SEC, I understand, unless ... Unless ND simply doesn't want the B1G. ND to the SEC also violates Occam's Razor since ND loves independence, so, in the end, "ND to the SEC" is simply academic, an exercise in futility; indeed, a fantasy, lol. Lots of difference makers in ND, USC, and Oregon, though. [I choke up adding Syracuse in that previous sentence.]

Excising ND from joining a conference, what the NYTimes information says to me is SoCal and Oregon are out there, possibly ripe for the taking, huge fanbases, nail down whole parts of the far west ... . Long road trip but a fun road trip. Personally, I'd be willing for Texas to play in a grouping with USC and Oregon (basically one away football game yearly, but I'm also personally good with all sports). Many others on this board will disagree, perhaps vehemently, and, further, SoCal and Oregon would not like the "all sports" travel, so there's that, too. But oh, the apparent $. And not just for the SEC: USC and Oregon would bank coin, too.

I can only find the NYTimes charts on surly, so, not meaning to link out of the site, here are the charts for those interested (scroll down on page 46):

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/topic/2...y/page/46/

Things are going to get interesting. I read a couple of pages of the Surlyhorns thread, and what seemed to be the underlying theme......Texas fans aren't interested in just joining the SEC, they think they deserve to take it over. Fun times ahead.

And we know how this story ends. The SEC is playing with fire.

The most likely thing to occur is ESPN will pay the ACC to get ND football instead of pumping more money into the sec to get 4-8 ACC members. Thus, ESPN will control a 16 team SEC and most likely a 16 team ACC with either WVU or Cincinnati as a new member. The big 10 might be content at 14 or they can target Kansas and either Colorado or Missouri to get to 16. I also think the pac 12 will make a move into Texas notwithstanding the academic snobbery of the California schools. As for Texas having any control over the sec leadership, the horns haven’t got the votes and other than Oklahoma no other allies to pass anything.