Well, the SEC is out of distractions with the elimination of Alabama from the CFP. Basketball season has not started conference play, and this dead time is as good as any to look at the potential realignment prospects from the ACC.

I believe we are looking at 3 potentialities given the current ACC situation.

(1) The ACC decides there is too much risk in going to the mat legally with FSU and they settle.

(2) The ACC refuses to settle and FSU buys their way out and becomes a free agent.

(3) FSU gets out, Clemson follows, and the loss of 24.7% of the ACC's total value results in the defection of more schools.

With option #1 a negotiated settlement might include a continued relationship with ESPN. ESPN could facilitate their move to the SEC, handling damages paid to an annual amount withheld from the FSU distribution from the SEC and paid to the ACC spread out over 10 years, possibly more.

Such a result would enable the ACC to backfill with USF or do nothing since they took in 3 which ESPN could eventually agree to pay pro rata. This approach would allow ESPN to seek 100% of the rights to Kansas as a travel partner. ESPN earns more from FSU in the SEC and the SEC earns more in basketball with the Jayhawks. Things settle in quietly and the Big 10 stays at bay.

With option #2 FSU could join the Big 10 or the SEC. It is unlikely that another ACC school would pay that much to leave. If FSU heads to the Big 10 perhaps they pick up Stanford or Kansas and move to 22 schools. If FSU heads to the SEC perhaps the travel partner to 18 is Kansas. Either way things stop for a bit.

With option #3 a Jailbreak occurs. If Clemson and FSU want to travel together it will be to the SEC. The SEC will also want a presence in North Carolina and Virginia. To get it they will take either Duke or N.C. State with a Virginia school. If UNC wants to move with Duke then look for UVa to be the other school. If UNC moves with N.C. State then the other school could be either Virginia school, with Tech being actually the valuable sports brand. If the SEC lands FSU they will see not need in another Florida school. They will be covered with top brands in Virginia (where it is virtually a tie between UVa and Va Tech) and in North Carolina. Could the SEC pick up Miami? Sure. It's a large state and the games between the three are huge TV draws. If a 6th is needed to round things out Miami is the best bet.

Those moves also keep the Big 10 at Bay. They could look at Georgia Tech but the money isn't there. If they picked up Virginia they might think about Atlanta. If they picked up Virginia and Duke I think Georgia Tech would get that shot especially if they could land Miami as well.

The SEC won't be stopping at 21, but the Big 10 would likely stop 24. Where does the SEC look to get to acquire more markets? Kansas, Colorado, and an Arizona school would be the direction ESPN would encourage. Why? To spread the SEC's time zone reach. That's one national brand in hoops, two if the Arizona schools is Arizona and not State, and a population reach of 16.5 million people. Adding Florida state delivers roughly 77% of the Florida college sports market in a state of 22 million. Adding North Carolina and Virginia adds 20 million. Clemson is a solid brand with a great support base and travel commitment but only brings 2.5 million more viewers (the other half of South Carolina).

The strongest additions the SEC could make if things hit jailbreak status in the ACC would be to lock down Virginia, UNC, and Duke and to add FSU and Clemson. The first three virtually lock the Big 10 out, and the last two are the best football brands remaining in the Southeast outside of the SEC. You get academic props from the first three and blueblood hoops programs. If N.C. State or Virginia Tech are required to land that trio I say do it. Taking two marginal schools to keep a monopoly in the Deep South is worth it. If the Big 10 takes Georgia Tech and Miami to go with Notre Dame should they land them then fine. We haven't lost control of anything, or lost ad revenue. Besides for that move to even be feasible Notre Dame would have to want to affiliate completely with the Big 10. Why not just offer them the same kind of partial deal they already have with the ACC? They can sign a partial with the Big 10 as well and all parties are appeased if not content. If the SEC lands 7 ACC schools to keep the Big 10 out of the Deep South and N.C. State and Virginia Tech preserve rivalries for the incoming schools then we will need 1 more, Kansas. Kansas doesn't complete the SEC but it completes the SEC's new Western Division when paired with Texas, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Arkansas.

The SEC remains regional, and our regional boundaries extend to 3 new states with no long trips to Colorado or Arizona. Let the Big 10 acquire a foothold and then to compete marketwise we have to extend our borders into areas our fans will not like to go!

Of these options my preferred one is #1. Let ESPN/ACC/FSU settle. Take the Noles with ESPN providing ancillary and compelling financial considerations to do so, pick up Kansas and wait. That's less distress, more time to work things out if more moves are to come, it sets our Western boundary firmly, secures our market dominance in the state of Florida, and allows the ACC to remain our best buffer against the Big 12 until closer to the expiration of their current contract, which should come at a time when most of the paradigm changing demographic issues are known quantities instead of just feared ones.

I'll go ahead and argue now for 24 and for much the same reason I have historically.

1. It's a significant amount of content under one roof. I know the networks have undue influence, but I think single leagues going larger helps mitigate that simply due to the market share. I don't even think it's a matter of getting the biggest brands you can get. Add members that are relevant in their market and it makes a difference.

2. It tends to generate less travel overall even if you expand outside your region. Basically, it distributes distance over a larger number so most schools don't make long trips as often.

3. More unique match-ups are created and that can keep TV inventory fresh. You need the big brand vs brand games, yes. You also need the consistent rivalry games, sure. But people like watching games they don't get to see all the time as well. That's one reason bowl games and early season non-conference match-ups tend to get good ratings.

(01-04-2024 12:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'll go ahead and argue now for 24 and for much the same reason I have historically.

1. It's a significant amount of content under one roof. I know the networks have undue influence, but I think single leagues going larger helps mitigate that simply due to the market share. I don't even think it's a matter of getting the biggest brands you can get. Add members that are relevant in their market and it makes a difference.

2. It tends to generate less travel overall even if you expand outside your region. Basically, it distributes distance over a larger number so most schools don't make long trips as often.

3. More unique match-ups are created and that can keep TV inventory fresh. You need the big brand vs brand games, yes. You also need the consistent rivalry games, sure. But people like watching games they don't get to see all the time as well. That's one reason bowl games and early season non-conference match-ups tend to get good ratings.

I, too, think the SEC should go to 24. If Florida St can wrangle free, then I'd like to see the SEC take: Clemson, Florida St, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Virginia, and Virginia Tech. That leaves 2 spots. For the final 2, my options would be: Duke, Georgia Tech, Kansas, Louisville, and Miami. All 5 have important rivalries with schools that would be in the SEC. There are a number of decisions you could make:
- Bring in all ACC rivals: Georgia Tech and Louisville
- Be the best basketball conference: Duke and Kansas
- Keep the B1G out of the South: Georgia Tech and Miami
- Increase the academic profile: Duke and either Georgia Tech or Miami

My choice would actually be Kansas and Miami. It keeps the B1G out of Florida, adds 1 historically great basketball school and 1 with a good up-and-coming basketball program, both AAU, and both bring rivalries with multiple schools in the SEC.

SEC
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida St, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, LSU, Miami, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Missouri, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Perhaps this post which I linked from the ACC Forum will assist this discussion:

https://csnbbs.com/thread-984096-post-19...id19397945

Look for Post #24

Based upon that data the most obvious move to 20 is this one:

Clemson and Florida State to secure the Deep South. North Carolina and Virginia to add the flagship AAU schools of two new markets delivering 20 million more viewers.

If the SEC and ESPN need to coerce this outcome, then adding Duke and N.C. State with Virginia Tech works fine. For #24 you choose between Kansas, Georgia Tech and Miami. Kansas has the highest valuation and it's not close.

(01-04-2024 01:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Perhaps this post which I linked from the ACC Forum will assist this discussion:

https://csnbbs.com/thread-984096-post-19...id19397945

Look for Post #24

Based upon that data the most obvious move to 20 is this one:

Clemson and Florida State to secure the Deep South. North Carolina and Virginia to add the flagship AAU schools of two new markets delivering 20 million more viewers.

If the SEC and ESPN need to coerce this outcome, then adding Duke and N.C. State with Virginia Tech works fine. For #24 you choose between Kansas, Georgia Tech and Miami. Kansas has the highest valuation and it's not close.

Those make sense. I struggle with Duke over Miami but I understand it. If/when basketball separates from the NCAA like football, the SEC would have the top 4 blue bloods under one roof. UCLA has the titles but did it all, nearly exclusively, under 1 coach which should not be considered a blue blood.

(01-04-2024 12:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'll go ahead and argue now for 24 and for much the same reason I have historically.

1. It's a significant amount of content under one roof. I know the networks have undue influence, but I think single leagues going larger helps mitigate that simply due to the market share. I don't even think it's a matter of getting the biggest brands you can get. Add members that are relevant in their market and it makes a difference.

2. It tends to generate less travel overall even if you expand outside your region. Basically, it distributes distance over a larger number so most schools don't make long trips as often.

3. More unique match-ups are created and that can keep TV inventory fresh. You need the big brand vs brand games, yes. You also need the consistent rivalry games, sure. But people like watching games they don't get to see all the time as well. That's one reason bowl games and early season non-conference match-ups tend to get good ratings.

ATU, I've started looking at this whole procedure as one which will be designed to protect the dominant hold for ESPN in terms of viewership for each state where they are dominant already. That is the core of the advertising revenue for the SEC and ACC.

When you do this you'll find that 24 is certainly possible if not likely. Virginia is a state where UVa and Va Tech split the market. You can't take one and dominate the state's viewership. Conclusion: SEC would take both for ESPN.

South Carolina is a state where the hotter team holds a 51-52% lead in viewership. To keep all of South Carolina ESPN needs to move Clemson to the SEC.

In Florida the Gators deliver 42% of the college sports viewership. Florida State delivers 35% of it. Together those two maximize ESPN's advertising revenues in Florida. Remember right now ESPN holds all 3 key schools with Miami being the third. ESPN would feel it a bit if they lost FSU to FOX and settled for Miami as a second. They would still carry the majority of the Florida viewers but wouldn't have the super majority of them.

North Carolina is different. UNC carries a majority but adding N.C. State cinches it. The difference is Duke. They are strong in New England and frankly very valuable to ESPN in the Winter as a blueblood basketball program (1 of the top 4).

There are 7 schools: Virginia, Virginia Tech, Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State/Miami as the 7th.

From there you can add Kansas which would also be highly valuable to ESPN, or clean sweep the ACC with Miami.

If ESPN has FSU, then Kansas makes more sense. If FSU leaves and ESPN can hold onto Miami, then Kansas makes 8.

There's your 24. There's your solid reason for it. And there is ESPN's likeliest options.

I'm seeing a lot more for 24 these days, and I think those arguments hold merit. Though I recognize the odd number problems, I for a while pushed for 21.

But I've recently seen the number 22 mentioned more frequently and I think it makes sense. 22 means a 3-6 rotation that completes home and home every 6 years. (22 means team A has to rotate through 21 teams, 3 permanent leaves 18 or 6 to rotate every three years then home and home means 6).

It seems odd but if divisionless is the standard, 22 may be the way to go as it minimizes "bloat."

Do that means 6 spots instead of 8.

FSU/UNC are the first two. So four spots left. Check in with ND and make the. Say no. Then One Virginia school is in. Three spots left. I'll go with Kansas.

Two spots left. Clemson/Miami? Miami/NC State? Something out of the blue like an OK State?

I'll say Miami - AaU and get the Florida monopoly. If the Big 10 grabs them then take USF - Tampa seems more SEC to me anyway.

Clemson is the natural fit and has the brand.

I revisited an older article from the Knoxville News Sentinel where the writer stated that the SEC shouldn't fool around with its choices if the ACC indeed loses members. His suggestion was that the SEC take Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina and Miami.

What struck me was how simplistically lock down such a combination would be for ESPN.

If the first move of the SEC was to 20 and with those 4 schools that shuts FOX and the Big 10 out of Florida in any meaningful way. Locks down South Carolina the state and takes the #1 prize off of the board in a new state giving the SEC the three top football values and the best all around sports school and market in the ACC.

If ESPN desired to cover other bases since those 4 would add value, the SEC with its markets secure would be more open to accepting whoever ESPN recommended at pro rata. N.C. State locks down North Carolina, Virginia & Virginia Tech locks down Virginia and then you have Kansas or Duke, or Georgia Tech depending upon what ESPN wanted to do. If only Virginia Tech was taken, then Georgia Tech could close the door permanently on Big 10 influence South of Virginia and still make room for Kansas.

It's an interesting angle to consider as it basically means the SEC owns the SE and SW which is what we desire, and it forces the Big 10 to look West again with the possible but remote exception of Notre Dame and possibly Virginia which creates a stalemate for the SEC and Big 10 in that state and for FOX and ESPN with ESPN holding a slight advantage in viewership.

Clemson and FSU will vote on whether to settle tomorrow. If it is affirmative given the exit fee for 2029-30 will be under 100 million in total, or should they decide to leave now or before 2029 less than 200 million, then I'd say some movement will be happening much sooner than 2036, and very likely sooner than 2031. The lessened amounts indicate a much weaker position for the ACC, especially since a North Carolina Court refused venue leaving the decision to a Florida court.

We could be looking at just FSU and Clemson. But should UNC also come they will probably be bringing N.C. State.

From there it will depend on whether the Big 10 wants to get involved meaning whether some of the other schools have SEC options or not. I think the SEC should go ahead and take both Virginia schools, and if Duke wants in too, which they may not, or may have been told if N.C. State comes they will not receive an offer then we could look to Kansas for another AAU school and a new state and market and consider taking Georgia Tech to keep the Big 10 out of the Atlanta DMA.

It will be fascinating but with the new playoff mode coming online in 2026 and totally under Big 10 and SEC control, I would be surprised to see movement as early as 2027. And it could happen on the cheap if the Big 10 were to take Notre Dame, Stanford, Miami and Georgia Tech, and the SEC take the aforementioned 7 plus Kansas. 11 of the 18 ACC schools would be taken. California, S.M.U., Louisville, Wake Forest, Pittsburgh, Boston College, and Syracuse could easily merge with the 15 remaining Big 12 members and invites to Washington State and Oregon State could round them out as well.

Guess what's back on the daily chat menu? Realignment/Consolidation and this time it's the ACC in the spotlight.

I would not be upset to see us land both Chapel Hill & Raleigh

(03-04-2025 02:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Clemson and FSU will vote on whether to settle tomorrow. If it is affirmative given the exit fee for 2029-30 will be under 100 million in total, or should they decide to leave now or before 2029 less than 200 million, then I'd say some movement will be happening much sooner than 2036, and very likely sooner than 2031. The lessened amounts indicate a much weaker position for the ACC, especially since a North Carolina Court refused venue leaving the decision to a Florida court.

We could be looking at just FSU and Clemson. But should UNC also come they will probably be bringing N.C. State.

From there it will depend on whether the Big 10 wants to get involved meaning whether some of the other schools have SEC options or not. I think the SEC should go ahead and take both Virginia schools, and if Duke wants in too, which they may not, or may have been told if N.C. State comes they will not receive an offer then we could look to Kansas for another AAU school and a new state and market and consider taking Georgia Tech to keep the Big 10 out of the Atlanta DMA.

It will be fascinating but with the new playoff mode coming online in 2026 and totally under Big 10 and SEC control, I would be surprised to see movement as early as 2027. And it could happen on the cheap if the Big 10 were to take Notre Dame, Stanford, Miami and Georgia Tech, and the SEC take the aforementioned 7 plus Kansas. 11 of the 18 ACC schools would be taken. California, S.M.U., Louisville, Wake Forest, Pittsburgh, Boston College, and Syracuse could easily merge with the 15 remaining Big 12 members and invites to Washington State and Oregon State could round them out as well.

Guess what's back on the daily chat menu? Realignment/Consolidation and this time it's the ACC in the spotlight.

I do think the SEC has the upper hand on the ACC core for expansion over the B1G because of regionality. Let's say the SEC did get those 8 plus and the B1G got those 4 plus California and Connecticut for 24. Why UConn? State flagship and the financial future of college basketball. The rest of the P4 (6 ACC, 15 XII) merge and add Memphis, South Florida, and Tulane for 24.

SEC
East: Clemson, Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Virginia, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Florida St, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St
Southeast: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Southwest: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

B1G
Atlantic: Connecticut, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, Notre Dame, Rutgers
Central: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Midwest: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
Pacific: California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington

XXIV
Central: Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, Texas Tech
Eastern: Boston College, Pittsburgh, South Florida, Syracuse, Wake Forest, West Virginia
Metro: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Louisville, Memphis, Tulane
Western: Arizona, Arizona St, BYU, Colorado, SMU, Utah

What if FSU decides to go to the B1G?

Obviously they won’t pay $163M to join for a “half bowl of soup” as the Texas State AD or President recently said in reference to the PAC offering them a reduced share to join and help pay for Gonzaga getting a full share without a football program. Rumors suggest fsu would get around 75% share and assistance for the exit fee/separation costs. Now this is the only advantage the B1G would have over the SEC in negotiations with ACC schools. Granted, the SEC won’t-or hasn’t historically, helped any new member financially transition into the conference, but the SEC does make that school a full member from day one; full voting rights and full earnings share.

Besides, FSU might not even have the votes as Georgia, who is supposedly the driving force to add North Carolina, is strictly opposed to adding the ‘noles and leading that group of detractors. Anyway, let’s assume the votes are there for FSU and Clemson. So when UNC and UVA become available, assuming those two are “tied at the hip, Sankey presents those two new additions to ESpN who says the sec needs more value to get a deal done by suggesting expanding at once with two more: FSU and CU. FSU shops its deal to the B1G whose TV partners, mostly Fox, will scramble to find money to pay for FSU plus one. Warchant and other FSU media sites are saying FSU is being offereD around a 75% share until next TV contract where the ‘noles, huskies and ducks are expected to get full shares. I’m guessing the B1G would dig into their big fat check book and help cover some exit costs to try and secure the ‘noles and Miami as teams 19 and 20.

So assuming Big Ten grabs FSU and Miami, who would the SEC round off expansion with if UNC, UVA and Clemson are secured? I would prefer the dark horse candidate Duke. Kansas is an excellent option too, not sure how tough it would be to exit the Big 12. Wonder what this board thinks today and are there any SEC realignment insiders out there to follow?

(04-06-2025 03:25 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  What if FSU decides to go to the B1G?

Obviously they won’t pay $163M to join for a “half bowl of soup” as the Texas State AD or President recently said in reference to the PAC offering them a reduced share to join and help pay for Gonzaga getting a full share without a football program. Rumors suggest fsu would get around 75% share and assistance for the exit fee/separation costs. Now this is the only advantage the B1G would have over the SEC in negotiations with ACC schools. Granted, the SEC won’t-or hasn’t historically, helped any new member financially transition into the conference, but the SEC does make that school a full member from day one; full voting rights and full earnings share.

Besides, FSU might not even have the votes as Georgia, who is supposedly the driving force to add North Carolina, is strictly opposed to adding the ‘noles and leading that group of detractors. Anyway, let’s assume the votes are there for FSU and Clemson. So when UNC and UVA become available, assuming those two are “tied at the hip, Sankey presents those two new additions to ESpN who says the sec needs more value to get a deal done by suggesting expanding at once with two more: FSU and CU. FSU shops its deal to the B1G whose TV partners, mostly Fox, will scramble to find money to pay for FSU plus one. Warchant and other FSU media sites are saying FSU is being offereD around a 75% share until next TV contract where the ‘noles, huskies and ducks are expected to get full shares. I’m guessing the B1G would dig into their big fat check book and help cover some exit costs to try and secure the ‘noles and Miami as teams 19 and 20.

So assuming Big Ten grabs FSU and Miami, who would the SEC round off expansion with if UNC, UVA and Clemson are secured? I would prefer the dark horse candidate Duke. Kansas is an excellent option too, not sure how tough it would be to exit the Big 12. Wonder what this board thinks today and are there any SEC realignment insiders out there to follow?

Have no fear. The Big 10 has no advantages in picking up Florida State because there is resistance among some of their presidents to the whole idea. FSU is not AAU and not close to becoming AAU in spite of all of the hot air on the topic. The AAU is a closed system unless they vote to expand beyond current membership. If they did (which they won't because they voted to expand 2 years ago and this seldom has happened) FSU would find its attributes listed behind about 7 other schools. The Big 10 may talk FSU, but their target in Florida is Miami.

Second. The SEC loaned Missouri money to help them transition to the SEC. So it has done so in the past.

Third. The "Gentlemen's Agreement" was a 180 from what Clay Travis trumpeted. Slive asked the presidents of Florida and South Carolina not to nominate Clemson and FSU until the renegotiation clause of the SEC was fulfilled with the additions of Texas A&M and Missouri and afterward, he said no prohibitions would be in place to deny entry to a SEC member's request to add an in-state rival. Florida nominated FSU in 1991 and again in 2011 prompting Slive's request when the South Carolina president, Pastides, also wanted to nominate Clemson. To my knowledge Georgia isn't the least bit concerned about FSU. These are mostly things concocted out of thin air and then circled in discussion by internet gurus wanting You-Tube traffic.

The Big 10's wish list would include, and likely in order, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and possibly Virginia.

Your hypothetical won't come to pass. But if the SEC prioritized North Carolina, Virginia (more likely Virginia Tech if dollars matter and they usually do) and Clemson either of your dark horses would be a great way for the conference to wrap up at 20.

SEC insiders and Big 10 insiders do not exist. Neither conference discusses anything that Presidents consider behind closed doors and no ADs are briefed on realignment decisions until a school has been accepted. Big Mountain claims their source is an AD. So what? They don't know until it is done. All discussion from "insiders" is pure B.S. I did know somethings, but half a dozen or so years after the fact which transpired in the SEC dealings of 1991 and a little bit in 2011. I never knew anything in advance, but did hear the logic and reasoning behind the additions which were made when most of that information would have been no longer forbidden to know (except for votes), and even then I only learned anything from family which were involved, and I already knew some of the people involved so just knowing them and how they thought or approached particular subjects was informative in retrospect.

The SEC's first priority list included: Arkansas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma (then silent partner of Texas), Texas, and Texas A&M. And that list was generated between 1990 and 91 and before any serious talks began (other than with Texas where talks may have been ongoing as early as 1987).

Broyles and the SWC members saw that they had no shot at larger media payouts under the footprint model which paid the best rates for top schools in a state and not so much for duplicates. A&M was in the discussion because Texas was a whopping state and if UT was going to consider a move it needed to include Arkansas, A&M and Oklahoma. When did Texas finally join? After A&M and Arkansas had already joined the SEC and Oklahoma was willing to do the same.

In 1991 Clemson was seen as a bridge to North Carolina. UNC wasn't a primary target in 1991 only because nobody in the SEC thought they could get them. UNC was seen as a long-range acquisition. The SEC recognized in 1991 that a second Florida school was eventually going to be needed in order to carry that state and more importantly to protect the Deep South as SEC territory. I don't think any of that has changed. Tallahassee was logical as it was within easy driving distance of many SEC schools at that time. Miami was considered a world away and the SEC didn't particularly want privates. Miami today would be a different matter, but FSU is still the better fit.

We now have 4 of those six targets as full members. South Carolina took Clemson's place, and I guess you could say Missouri took FSU's place.

If we expand to 20, I'd expect North Carolina and either a mandated N.C. State, or one of their two buddies (Duke or Virginia). Clemson would be a logical choice in an expansion to 24 due to commitment, attendance, and overall fit within the South. But Clemson would not be an urgent addition because the Big 10 will not consider them.

I don't think UNC is ready to move but they have been in ardent conversations about it with both the SEC and Big 10. They talked to the SEC first three days after the OU/UT news broke.

I see things shaking out another way. FOX and ESPN want to expand the CFP to 14 games, possibly even 16. They want a scheduling agreement between the SEC and Big 10 to drive ratings numbers through the season thereby increasing their profits and frankly pressuring a few schools to consider joining one or the other conferences. What they don't want right now is a rancor over another round of expansion. What they do want is as much parity between the SEC and Big 10 as they can work out. Scheduling agreements are easier when there are equal numbers of schools involved. FSU wants out ASAP. ESPN knows this and doesn't want to lose their leverage over the state of Florida. If FSU joins the SEC and ESPN helps to facilitate that move, then ESPN is assured of top ad rates in Florida no matter what Miami subsequently chooses to do. And, outside of the ACC there is only one school from the old Big 12 not yet accounted for, but which ESPN was willing to offer a sweetheart T3 deal in order to keep more access to them, Kansas.

For these reasons I can see the SEC moving to 18 within a couple of years, matching the Big 10's membership and inventory (remember in all things the number of schools represents a voting presence on matters so equal numbers are needed to have an equal voice in decisions), and doing so with Kansas and FSU. The Big 10 didn't want Kansas because they carried much of their market without having to add them. And the Big 10 doesn't really want FSU, what they want is for the SEC and ESPN to worry about FSU and take them figuring the SEC and ESPN won't triple down in Florida with the states of North Carolina and Virginia at stake, and that is very sound strategy on their part. So, the Big 10 feigns interest in FSU in hopes that ESPN and the SEC will take them for their own reasons leaving Miami open for the Big 10. That also solves any debate among Big 10 presidents as to who to add from Florida. And Miami might well be unnecessary for ESPN to protect if FSU and UF are safely in the SEC.

If this happens then by 2029 or 30 the SEC and Big 10 will be in a position to move to 22 or 24 and the entire focus will be upon the ACC. Notre Dame, Miami, Stanford, and California will still be appealing to the Big 10. North Carolina, a Virginia school, and Clemson appealing to the SEC. If Duke or Georgia Tech want in the SEC has choice as to who is #4. If the move is to 24 the SEC has room to encourage UNC and Virginia with N.C. State or Virginia Tech. The Big 10 could then look to Colorado and Arizona State. But either way you want to take it if the SEC and Big 10 are both at 18 within a year or two then decisions about the CFP and any scheduling agreement will be much easier to handle. And both the SEC and Big 10 will have their key targets still available. It also leaves ESPN the option to pick up Big East basketball and add it to the ACC where Clemson and Miami's presence is needed for strength of schedule to keep Notre Dame as an affiliate. And if that happened, we may well settle in at 18 each for the SEC and Big 10, keeping the Big 12 and ACC separate and with each adding basketball only schools to help with their revenue and in the ACC's case their network.

Kick that around and tell me what you think.

Now back to insiders. Dudes with nothing to lose are sometimes fed disinformation by the conferences so the conference can judge fan response to ideas before the presidents have to make a decision. That's the only insider information that there is, and it is either used to misdirect the public's attention or to gauge its response.

(04-06-2025 12:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 03:25 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  What if FSU decides to go to the B1G?

Obviously they won’t pay $163M to join for a “half bowl of soup” as the Texas State AD or President recently said in reference to the PAC offering them a reduced share to join and help pay for Gonzaga getting a full share without a football program. Rumors suggest fsu would get around 75% share and assistance for the exit fee/separation costs. Now this is the only advantage the B1G would have over the SEC in negotiations with ACC schools. Granted, the SEC won’t-or hasn’t historically, helped any new member financially transition into the conference, but the SEC does make that school a full member from day one; full voting rights and full earnings share.

Besides, FSU might not even have the votes as Georgia, who is supposedly the driving force to add North Carolina, is strictly opposed to adding the ‘noles and leading that group of detractors. Anyway, let’s assume the votes are there for FSU and Clemson. So when UNC and UVA become available, assuming those two are “tied at the hip, Sankey presents those two new additions to ESpN who says the sec needs more value to get a deal done by suggesting expanding at once with two more: FSU and CU. FSU shops its deal to the B1G whose TV partners, mostly Fox, will scramble to find money to pay for FSU plus one. Warchant and other FSU media sites are saying FSU is being offereD around a 75% share until next TV contract where the ‘noles, huskies and ducks are expected to get full shares. I’m guessing the B1G would dig into their big fat check book and help cover some exit costs to try and secure the ‘noles and Miami as teams 19 and 20.

So assuming Big Ten grabs FSU and Miami, who would the SEC round off expansion with if UNC, UVA and Clemson are secured? I would prefer the dark horse candidate Duke. Kansas is an excellent option too, not sure how tough it would be to exit the Big 12. Wonder what this board thinks today and are there any SEC realignment insiders out there to follow?

Have no fear. The Big 10 has no advantages in picking up Florida State because there is resistance among some of their presidents to the whole idea. FSU is not AAU and not close to becoming AAU in spite of all of the hot air on the topic. The AAU is a closed system unless they vote to expand beyond current membership. If they did (which they won't because they voted to expand 2 years ago and this seldom has happened) FSU would find its attributes listed behind about 7 other schools. The Big 10 may talk FSU, but their target in Florida is Miami.

Second. The SEC loaned Missouri money to help them transition to the SEC. So it has done so in the past.

Third. The "Gentlemen's Agreement" was a 180 from what Clay Travis trumpeted. Slive asked the presidents of Florida and South Carolina not to nominate Clemson and FSU until the renegotiation clause of the SEC was fulfilled with the additions of Texas A&M and Missouri and afterward, he said no prohibitions would be in place to deny entry to a SEC member's request to add an in-state rival. Florida nominated FSU in 1991 and again in 2011 prompting Slive's request when the South Carolina president, Pastides, also wanted to nominate Clemson. To my knowledge Georgia isn't the least bit concerned about FSU. These are mostly things concocted out of thin air and then circled in discussion by internet gurus wanting You-Tube traffic.

The Big 10's wish list would include, and likely in order, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and possibly Virginia.

Your hypothetical won't come to pass. But if the SEC prioritized North Carolina, Virginia (more likely Virginia Tech if dollars matter and they usually do) and Clemson either of your dark horses would be a great way for the conference to wrap up at 20.

SEC insiders and Big 10 insiders do not exist. Neither conference discusses anything that Presidents consider behind closed doors and no ADs are briefed on realignment decisions until a school has been accepted. Big Mountain claims their source is an AD. So what? They don't know until it is done. All discussion from "insiders" is pure B.S. I did know somethings, but half a dozen or so years after the fact which transpired in the SEC dealings of 1991 and a little bit in 2011. I never knew anything in advance, but did hear the logic and reasoning behind the additions which were made when most of that information would have been no longer forbidden to know (except for votes), and even then I only learned anything from family which were involved, and I already knew some of the people involved so just knowing them and how they thought or approached particular subjects was informative in retrospect.

The SEC's first priority list included: Arkansas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma (then silent partner of Texas), Texas, and Texas A&M. And that list was generated between 1990 and 91 and before any serious talks began (other than with Texas where talks may have been ongoing as early as 1987).

Broyles and the SWC members saw that they had no shot at larger media payouts under the footprint model which paid the best rates for top schools in a state and not so much for duplicates. A&M was in the discussion because Texas was a whopping state and if UT was going to consider a move it needed to include Arkansas, A&M and Oklahoma. When did Texas finally join? After A&M and Arkansas had already joined the SEC and Oklahoma was willing to do the same.

In 1991 Clemson was seen as a bridge to North Carolina. UNC wasn't a primary target in 1991 only because nobody in the SEC thought they could get them. UNC was seen as a long-range acquisition. The SEC recognized in 1991 that a second Florida school was eventually going to be needed in order to carry that state and more importantly to protect the Deep South as SEC territory. I don't think any of that has changed. Tallahassee was logical as it was within easy driving distance of many SEC schools at that time. Miami was considered a world away and the SEC didn't particularly want privates. Miami today would be a different matter, but FSU is still the better fit.

We now have 4 of those six targets as full members. South Carolina took Clemson's place, and I guess you could say Missouri took FSU's place.

If we expand to 20, I'd expect North Carolina and either a mandated N.C. State, or one of their two buddies (Duke or Virginia). Clemson would be a logical choice in an expansion to 24 due to commitment, attendance, and overall fit within the South. But Clemson would not be an urgent addition because the Big 10 will not consider them.

I don't think UNC is ready to move but they have been in ardent conversations about it with both the SEC and Big 10. They talked to the SEC first three days after the OU/UT news broke.

I see things shaking out another way. FOX and ESPN want to expand the CFP to 14 games, possibly even 16. They want a scheduling agreement between the SEC and Big 10 to drive ratings numbers through the season thereby increasing their profits and frankly pressuring a few schools to consider joining one or the other conferences. What they don't want right now is a rancor over another round of expansion. What they do want is as much parity between the SEC and Big 10 as they can work out. Scheduling agreements are easier when there are equal numbers of schools involved. FSU wants out ASAP. ESPN knows this and doesn't want to lose their leverage over the state of Florida. If FSU joins the SEC and ESPN helps to facilitate that move, then ESPN is assured of top ad rates in Florida no matter what Miami subsequently chooses to do. And, outside of the ACC there is only one school from the old Big 12 not yet accounted for, but which ESPN was willing to offer a sweetheart T3 deal in order to keep more access to them, Kansas.

For these reasons I can see the SEC moving to 18 within a couple of years, matching the Big 10's membership and inventory (remember in all things the number of schools represents a voting presence on matters so equal numbers are needed to have an equal voice in decisions), and doing so with Kansas and FSU. The Big 10 didn't want Kansas because they carried much of their market without having to add them. And the Big 10 doesn't really want FSU, what they want is for the SEC and ESPN to worry about FSU and take them figuring the SEC and ESPN won't triple down in Florida with the states of North Carolina and Virginia at stake, and that is very sound strategy on their part. So, the Big 10 feigns interest in FSU in hopes that ESPN and the SEC will take them for their own reasons leaving Miami open for the Big 10. That also solves any debate among Big 10 presidents as to who to add from Florida. And Miami might well be unnecessary for ESPN to protect if FSU and UF are safely in the SEC.

If this happens then by 2029 or 30 the SEC and Big 10 will be in a position to move to 22 or 24 and the entire focus will be upon the ACC. Notre Dame, Miami, Stanford, and California will still be appealing to the Big 10. North Carolina, a Virginia school, and Clemson appealing to the SEC. If Duke or Georgia Tech want in the SEC has choice as to who is #4. If the move is to 24 the SEC has room to encourage UNC and Virginia with N.C. State or Virginia Tech. The Big 10 could then look to Colorado and Arizona State. But either way you want to take it if the SEC and Big 10 are both at 18 within a year or two then decisions about the CFP and any scheduling agreement will be much easier to handle. And both the SEC and Big 10 will have their key targets still available. It also leaves ESPN the option to pick up Big East basketball and add it to the ACC where Clemson and Miami's presence is needed for strength of schedule to keep Notre Dame as an affiliate. And if that happened, we may well settle in at 18 each for the SEC and Big 10, keeping the Big 12 and ACC separate and with each adding basketball only schools to help with their revenue and in the ACC's case their network.

Kick that around and tell me what you think.

Now back to insiders. Dudes with nothing to lose are sometimes fed disinformation by the conferences so the conference can judge fan response to ideas before the presidents have to make a decision. That's the only insider information that there is, and it is either used to misdirect the public's attention or to gauge its response.

I like your idea of the SEC adding FSU and another right now, as both the B1G and SEC would be at equal number of members to start a scheduling agreement. That would allow other ACC schools to get their ducks in a row for future realignment. Not sure if Kansas would be ready to pull the trigger this soon. Clemson also sued for exit clarity and should be ready to move this summer with FSU. The ACC should be able to use that $300M+ in exit fees to remove or significantly alter the unequal revenue policies FSU and Clemson forced on them as part of the settlement. This will improve the near term finances of the ACC members while everyone prepares for the next round of ACC losses.

So 2030-ish, new tv contracts welcome into the B1G ND, Stanford, Miami and GT 2 while the SEC adds uNC, UVA, Duke and Kansas.

(04-06-2025 07:35 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 12:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 03:25 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  What if FSU decides to go to the B1G?

Obviously they won’t pay $163M to join for a “half bowl of soup” as the Texas State AD or President recently said in reference to the PAC offering them a reduced share to join and help pay for Gonzaga getting a full share without a football program. Rumors suggest fsu would get around 75% share and assistance for the exit fee/separation costs. Now this is the only advantage the B1G would have over the SEC in negotiations with ACC schools. Granted, the SEC won’t-or hasn’t historically, helped any new member financially transition into the conference, but the SEC does make that school a full member from day one; full voting rights and full earnings share.

Besides, FSU might not even have the votes as Georgia, who is supposedly the driving force to add North Carolina, is strictly opposed to adding the ‘noles and leading that group of detractors. Anyway, let’s assume the votes are there for FSU and Clemson. So when UNC and UVA become available, assuming those two are “tied at the hip, Sankey presents those two new additions to ESpN who says the sec needs more value to get a deal done by suggesting expanding at once with two more: FSU and CU. FSU shops its deal to the B1G whose TV partners, mostly Fox, will scramble to find money to pay for FSU plus one. Warchant and other FSU media sites are saying FSU is being offereD around a 75% share until next TV contract where the ‘noles, huskies and ducks are expected to get full shares. I’m guessing the B1G would dig into their big fat check book and help cover some exit costs to try and secure the ‘noles and Miami as teams 19 and 20.

So assuming Big Ten grabs FSU and Miami, who would the SEC round off expansion with if UNC, UVA and Clemson are secured? I would prefer the dark horse candidate Duke. Kansas is an excellent option too, not sure how tough it would be to exit the Big 12. Wonder what this board thinks today and are there any SEC realignment insiders out there to follow?

Have no fear. The Big 10 has no advantages in picking up Florida State because there is resistance among some of their presidents to the whole idea. FSU is not AAU and not close to becoming AAU in spite of all of the hot air on the topic. The AAU is a closed system unless they vote to expand beyond current membership. If they did (which they won't because they voted to expand 2 years ago and this seldom has happened) FSU would find its attributes listed behind about 7 other schools. The Big 10 may talk FSU, but their target in Florida is Miami.

Second. The SEC loaned Missouri money to help them transition to the SEC. So it has done so in the past.

Third. The "Gentlemen's Agreement" was a 180 from what Clay Travis trumpeted. Slive asked the presidents of Florida and South Carolina not to nominate Clemson and FSU until the renegotiation clause of the SEC was fulfilled with the additions of Texas A&M and Missouri and afterward, he said no prohibitions would be in place to deny entry to a SEC member's request to add an in-state rival. Florida nominated FSU in 1991 and again in 2011 prompting Slive's request when the South Carolina president, Pastides, also wanted to nominate Clemson. To my knowledge Georgia isn't the least bit concerned about FSU. These are mostly things concocted out of thin air and then circled in discussion by internet gurus wanting You-Tube traffic.

The Big 10's wish list would include, and likely in order, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and possibly Virginia.

Your hypothetical won't come to pass. But if the SEC prioritized North Carolina, Virginia (more likely Virginia Tech if dollars matter and they usually do) and Clemson either of your dark horses would be a great way for the conference to wrap up at 20.

SEC insiders and Big 10 insiders do not exist. Neither conference discusses anything that Presidents consider behind closed doors and no ADs are briefed on realignment decisions until a school has been accepted. Big Mountain claims their source is an AD. So what? They don't know until it is done. All discussion from "insiders" is pure B.S. I did know somethings, but half a dozen or so years after the fact which transpired in the SEC dealings of 1991 and a little bit in 2011. I never knew anything in advance, but did hear the logic and reasoning behind the additions which were made when most of that information would have been no longer forbidden to know (except for votes), and even then I only learned anything from family which were involved, and I already knew some of the people involved so just knowing them and how they thought or approached particular subjects was informative in retrospect.

The SEC's first priority list included: Arkansas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma (then silent partner of Texas), Texas, and Texas A&M. And that list was generated between 1990 and 91 and before any serious talks began (other than with Texas where talks may have been ongoing as early as 1987).

Broyles and the SWC members saw that they had no shot at larger media payouts under the footprint model which paid the best rates for top schools in a state and not so much for duplicates. A&M was in the discussion because Texas was a whopping state and if UT was going to consider a move it needed to include Arkansas, A&M and Oklahoma. When did Texas finally join? After A&M and Arkansas had already joined the SEC and Oklahoma was willing to do the same.

In 1991 Clemson was seen as a bridge to North Carolina. UNC wasn't a primary target in 1991 only because nobody in the SEC thought they could get them. UNC was seen as a long-range acquisition. The SEC recognized in 1991 that a second Florida school was eventually going to be needed in order to carry that state and more importantly to protect the Deep South as SEC territory. I don't think any of that has changed. Tallahassee was logical as it was within easy driving distance of many SEC schools at that time. Miami was considered a world away and the SEC didn't particularly want privates. Miami today would be a different matter, but FSU is still the better fit.

We now have 4 of those six targets as full members. South Carolina took Clemson's place, and I guess you could say Missouri took FSU's place.

If we expand to 20, I'd expect North Carolina and either a mandated N.C. State, or one of their two buddies (Duke or Virginia). Clemson would be a logical choice in an expansion to 24 due to commitment, attendance, and overall fit within the South. But Clemson would not be an urgent addition because the Big 10 will not consider them.

I don't think UNC is ready to move but they have been in ardent conversations about it with both the SEC and Big 10. They talked to the SEC first three days after the OU/UT news broke.

I see things shaking out another way. FOX and ESPN want to expand the CFP to 14 games, possibly even 16. They want a scheduling agreement between the SEC and Big 10 to drive ratings numbers through the season thereby increasing their profits and frankly pressuring a few schools to consider joining one or the other conferences. What they don't want right now is a rancor over another round of expansion. What they do want is as much parity between the SEC and Big 10 as they can work out. Scheduling agreements are easier when there are equal numbers of schools involved. FSU wants out ASAP. ESPN knows this and doesn't want to lose their leverage over the state of Florida. If FSU joins the SEC and ESPN helps to facilitate that move, then ESPN is assured of top ad rates in Florida no matter what Miami subsequently chooses to do. And, outside of the ACC there is only one school from the old Big 12 not yet accounted for, but which ESPN was willing to offer a sweetheart T3 deal in order to keep more access to them, Kansas.

For these reasons I can see the SEC moving to 18 within a couple of years, matching the Big 10's membership and inventory (remember in all things the number of schools represents a voting presence on matters so equal numbers are needed to have an equal voice in decisions), and doing so with Kansas and FSU. The Big 10 didn't want Kansas because they carried much of their market without having to add them. And the Big 10 doesn't really want FSU, what they want is for the SEC and ESPN to worry about FSU and take them figuring the SEC and ESPN won't triple down in Florida with the states of North Carolina and Virginia at stake, and that is very sound strategy on their part. So, the Big 10 feigns interest in FSU in hopes that ESPN and the SEC will take them for their own reasons leaving Miami open for the Big 10. That also solves any debate among Big 10 presidents as to who to add from Florida. And Miami might well be unnecessary for ESPN to protect if FSU and UF are safely in the SEC.

If this happens then by 2029 or 30 the SEC and Big 10 will be in a position to move to 22 or 24 and the entire focus will be upon the ACC. Notre Dame, Miami, Stanford, and California will still be appealing to the Big 10. North Carolina, a Virginia school, and Clemson appealing to the SEC. If Duke or Georgia Tech want in the SEC has choice as to who is #4. If the move is to 24 the SEC has room to encourage UNC and Virginia with N.C. State or Virginia Tech. The Big 10 could then look to Colorado and Arizona State. But either way you want to take it if the SEC and Big 10 are both at 18 within a year or two then decisions about the CFP and any scheduling agreement will be much easier to handle. And both the SEC and Big 10 will have their key targets still available. It also leaves ESPN the option to pick up Big East basketball and add it to the ACC where Clemson and Miami's presence is needed for strength of schedule to keep Notre Dame as an affiliate. And if that happened, we may well settle in at 18 each for the SEC and Big 10, keeping the Big 12 and ACC separate and with each adding basketball only schools to help with their revenue and in the ACC's case their network.

Kick that around and tell me what you think.

Now back to insiders. Dudes with nothing to lose are sometimes fed disinformation by the conferences so the conference can judge fan response to ideas before the presidents have to make a decision. That's the only insider information that there is, and it is either used to misdirect the public's attention or to gauge its response.

I like your idea of the SEC adding FSU and another right now, as both the B1G and SEC would be at equal number of members to start a scheduling agreement. That would allow other ACC schools to get their ducks in a row for future realignment. Not sure if Kansas would be ready to pull the trigger this soon. Clemson also sued for exit clarity and should be ready to move this summer with FSU. The ACC should be able to use that $300M+ in exit fees to remove or significantly alter the unequal revenue policies FSU and Clemson forced on them as part of the settlement. This will improve the near term finances of the ACC members while everyone prepares for the next round of ACC losses.

So 2030-ish, new tv contracts welcome into the B1G ND, Stanford, Miami and GT 2 while the SEC adds uNC, UVA, Duke and Kansas.

Kansas or Clemson, either way it works for me. I'm just suspicious that ESPN won't let too many football brands leave at once from the ACC. But either way it works.

(04-06-2025 08:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 07:35 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 12:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 03:25 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  What if FSU decides to go to the B1G?

Obviously they won’t pay $163M to join for a “half bowl of soup” as the Texas State AD or President recently said in reference to the PAC offering them a reduced share to join and help pay for Gonzaga getting a full share without a football program. Rumors suggest fsu would get around 75% share and assistance for the exit fee/separation costs. Now this is the only advantage the B1G would have over the SEC in negotiations with ACC schools. Granted, the SEC won’t-or hasn’t historically, helped any new member financially transition into the conference, but the SEC does make that school a full member from day one; full voting rights and full earnings share.

Besides, FSU might not even have the votes as Georgia, who is supposedly the driving force to add North Carolina, is strictly opposed to adding the ‘noles and leading that group of detractors. Anyway, let’s assume the votes are there for FSU and Clemson. So when UNC and UVA become available, assuming those two are “tied at the hip, Sankey presents those two new additions to ESpN who says the sec needs more value to get a deal done by suggesting expanding at once with two more: FSU and CU. FSU shops its deal to the B1G whose TV partners, mostly Fox, will scramble to find money to pay for FSU plus one. Warchant and other FSU media sites are saying FSU is being offereD around a 75% share until next TV contract where the ‘noles, huskies and ducks are expected to get full shares. I’m guessing the B1G would dig into their big fat check book and help cover some exit costs to try and secure the ‘noles and Miami as teams 19 and 20.

So assuming Big Ten grabs FSU and Miami, who would the SEC round off expansion with if UNC, UVA and Clemson are secured? I would prefer the dark horse candidate Duke. Kansas is an excellent option too, not sure how tough it would be to exit the Big 12. Wonder what this board thinks today and are there any SEC realignment insiders out there to follow?

Have no fear. The Big 10 has no advantages in picking up Florida State because there is resistance among some of their presidents to the whole idea. FSU is not AAU and not close to becoming AAU in spite of all of the hot air on the topic. The AAU is a closed system unless they vote to expand beyond current membership. If they did (which they won't because they voted to expand 2 years ago and this seldom has happened) FSU would find its attributes listed behind about 7 other schools. The Big 10 may talk FSU, but their target in Florida is Miami.

Second. The SEC loaned Missouri money to help them transition to the SEC. So it has done so in the past.

Third. The "Gentlemen's Agreement" was a 180 from what Clay Travis trumpeted. Slive asked the presidents of Florida and South Carolina not to nominate Clemson and FSU until the renegotiation clause of the SEC was fulfilled with the additions of Texas A&M and Missouri and afterward, he said no prohibitions would be in place to deny entry to a SEC member's request to add an in-state rival. Florida nominated FSU in 1991 and again in 2011 prompting Slive's request when the South Carolina president, Pastides, also wanted to nominate Clemson. To my knowledge Georgia isn't the least bit concerned about FSU. These are mostly things concocted out of thin air and then circled in discussion by internet gurus wanting You-Tube traffic.

The Big 10's wish list would include, and likely in order, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and possibly Virginia.

Your hypothetical won't come to pass. But if the SEC prioritized North Carolina, Virginia (more likely Virginia Tech if dollars matter and they usually do) and Clemson either of your dark horses would be a great way for the conference to wrap up at 20.

SEC insiders and Big 10 insiders do not exist. Neither conference discusses anything that Presidents consider behind closed doors and no ADs are briefed on realignment decisions until a school has been accepted. Big Mountain claims their source is an AD. So what? They don't know until it is done. All discussion from "insiders" is pure B.S. I did know somethings, but half a dozen or so years after the fact which transpired in the SEC dealings of 1991 and a little bit in 2011. I never knew anything in advance, but did hear the logic and reasoning behind the additions which were made when most of that information would have been no longer forbidden to know (except for votes), and even then I only learned anything from family which were involved, and I already knew some of the people involved so just knowing them and how they thought or approached particular subjects was informative in retrospect.

The SEC's first priority list included: Arkansas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma (then silent partner of Texas), Texas, and Texas A&M. And that list was generated between 1990 and 91 and before any serious talks began (other than with Texas where talks may have been ongoing as early as 1987).

Broyles and the SWC members saw that they had no shot at larger media payouts under the footprint model which paid the best rates for top schools in a state and not so much for duplicates. A&M was in the discussion because Texas was a whopping state and if UT was going to consider a move it needed to include Arkansas, A&M and Oklahoma. When did Texas finally join? After A&M and Arkansas had already joined the SEC and Oklahoma was willing to do the same.

In 1991 Clemson was seen as a bridge to North Carolina. UNC wasn't a primary target in 1991 only because nobody in the SEC thought they could get them. UNC was seen as a long-range acquisition. The SEC recognized in 1991 that a second Florida school was eventually going to be needed in order to carry that state and more importantly to protect the Deep South as SEC territory. I don't think any of that has changed. Tallahassee was logical as it was within easy driving distance of many SEC schools at that time. Miami was considered a world away and the SEC didn't particularly want privates. Miami today would be a different matter, but FSU is still the better fit.

We now have 4 of those six targets as full members. South Carolina took Clemson's place, and I guess you could say Missouri took FSU's place.

If we expand to 20, I'd expect North Carolina and either a mandated N.C. State, or one of their two buddies (Duke or Virginia). Clemson would be a logical choice in an expansion to 24 due to commitment, attendance, and overall fit within the South. But Clemson would not be an urgent addition because the Big 10 will not consider them.

I don't think UNC is ready to move but they have been in ardent conversations about it with both the SEC and Big 10. They talked to the SEC first three days after the OU/UT news broke.

I see things shaking out another way. FOX and ESPN want to expand the CFP to 14 games, possibly even 16. They want a scheduling agreement between the SEC and Big 10 to drive ratings numbers through the season thereby increasing their profits and frankly pressuring a few schools to consider joining one or the other conferences. What they don't want right now is a rancor over another round of expansion. What they do want is as much parity between the SEC and Big 10 as they can work out. Scheduling agreements are easier when there are equal numbers of schools involved. FSU wants out ASAP. ESPN knows this and doesn't want to lose their leverage over the state of Florida. If FSU joins the SEC and ESPN helps to facilitate that move, then ESPN is assured of top ad rates in Florida no matter what Miami subsequently chooses to do. And, outside of the ACC there is only one school from the old Big 12 not yet accounted for, but which ESPN was willing to offer a sweetheart T3 deal in order to keep more access to them, Kansas.

For these reasons I can see the SEC moving to 18 within a couple of years, matching the Big 10's membership and inventory (remember in all things the number of schools represents a voting presence on matters so equal numbers are needed to have an equal voice in decisions), and doing so with Kansas and FSU. The Big 10 didn't want Kansas because they carried much of their market without having to add them. And the Big 10 doesn't really want FSU, what they want is for the SEC and ESPN to worry about FSU and take them figuring the SEC and ESPN won't triple down in Florida with the states of North Carolina and Virginia at stake, and that is very sound strategy on their part. So, the Big 10 feigns interest in FSU in hopes that ESPN and the SEC will take them for their own reasons leaving Miami open for the Big 10. That also solves any debate among Big 10 presidents as to who to add from Florida. And Miami might well be unnecessary for ESPN to protect if FSU and UF are safely in the SEC.

If this happens then by 2029 or 30 the SEC and Big 10 will be in a position to move to 22 or 24 and the entire focus will be upon the ACC. Notre Dame, Miami, Stanford, and California will still be appealing to the Big 10. North Carolina, a Virginia school, and Clemson appealing to the SEC. If Duke or Georgia Tech want in the SEC has choice as to who is #4. If the move is to 24 the SEC has room to encourage UNC and Virginia with N.C. State or Virginia Tech. The Big 10 could then look to Colorado and Arizona State. But either way you want to take it if the SEC and Big 10 are both at 18 within a year or two then decisions about the CFP and any scheduling agreement will be much easier to handle. And both the SEC and Big 10 will have their key targets still available. It also leaves ESPN the option to pick up Big East basketball and add it to the ACC where Clemson and Miami's presence is needed for strength of schedule to keep Notre Dame as an affiliate. And if that happened, we may well settle in at 18 each for the SEC and Big 10, keeping the Big 12 and ACC separate and with each adding basketball only schools to help with their revenue and in the ACC's case their network.

Kick that around and tell me what you think.

Now back to insiders. Dudes with nothing to lose are sometimes fed disinformation by the conferences so the conference can judge fan response to ideas before the presidents have to make a decision. That's the only insider information that there is, and it is either used to misdirect the public's attention or to gauge its response.

I like your idea of the SEC adding FSU and another right now, as both the B1G and SEC would be at equal number of members to start a scheduling agreement. That would allow other ACC schools to get their ducks in a row for future realignment. Not sure if Kansas would be ready to pull the trigger this soon. Clemson also sued for exit clarity and should be ready to move this summer with FSU. The ACC should be able to use that $300M+ in exit fees to remove or significantly alter the unequal revenue policies FSU and Clemson forced on them as part of the settlement. This will improve the near term finances of the ACC members while everyone prepares for the next round of ACC losses.

So 2030-ish, new tv contracts welcome into the B1G ND, Stanford, Miami and GT 2 while the SEC adds uNC, UVA, Duke and Kansas.

Kansas or Clemson, either way it works for me. I'm just suspicious that ESPN won't let too many football brands leave at once from the ACC. But either way it works.

While our discussion above stands as what I see as being the most likely next move, for the sake of freshness and to address possibilities others are tossing against the wall, and because it is a possibility due to the expansion of the CFP that both the SEC and Big Ten could prosper from additional AQ slots by further consolidation, let's look at plans for the SEC to move to 20. I'd like to tender four separate groupings for discussion to this end as I have heard a variety of ideas for this discussed and all of them have some merit.

Plan one split the baby between football brands and basketball brands and play it safe: Clemson and Florida State for football / North Carolina and Virginia for basketball and markets. And I would substitute Duke for Virginia as a variant.

Why? Clemson and Florida State would likely add the most value and do so by multiplying the number of higher viewer games versus an SEC schedule. North Carolina and Virginia add 20 million to the market reach of the SEC and North Carolina and Duke add the most basketball branding which multiplies the SEC's ratings for Winter sports.

Plan two maximize football revenue period: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech

Why? Not only are you adding the top 3 football revenue producers for the ACC but North Carolina which is positioning to grow their value in that sport and already carry the highest number of viewers in a state of 11 million which would add to the SEC's markets.

Plan three maximize market expansion period: North Carolina, Virginia/Virginia Tech, Kansas, Florida State to attain and keep top add rates in Florida.

Why? Obviously it adds the 3 most logical contiguous markets and secures dominance in the 2nd largest market the SEC occupies.

Plan four dominate your expanded footprint: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, N.C. State or Duke.

Why? Florida State gives the SEC 77% of the Florida college sports viewers when added to the U of Florida. Clemson gives the SEC nearly 100% of the South Carolina sports viewers when added to the U of South Carolina. Adding both North Carolina and a second school from the state (either N.C. State or Duke) gives the SEC the majority of college sports viewers in North Carolina a market of 11 million.

Why did I not mention Notre Dame? They'll stay independent though a scheduling agreement might be productive should we pursue one.

(05-22-2025 09:57 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 08:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 07:35 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 12:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 03:25 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  What if FSU decides to go to the B1G?

Obviously they won’t pay $163M to join for a “half bowl of soup” as the Texas State AD or President recently said in reference to the PAC offering them a reduced share to join and help pay for Gonzaga getting a full share without a football program. Rumors suggest fsu would get around 75% share and assistance for the exit fee/separation costs. Now this is the only advantage the B1G would have over the SEC in negotiations with ACC schools. Granted, the SEC won’t-or hasn’t historically, helped any new member financially transition into the conference, but the SEC does make that school a full member from day one; full voting rights and full earnings share.

Besides, FSU might not even have the votes as Georgia, who is supposedly the driving force to add North Carolina, is strictly opposed to adding the ‘noles and leading that group of detractors. Anyway, let’s assume the votes are there for FSU and Clemson. So when UNC and UVA become available, assuming those two are “tied at the hip, Sankey presents those two new additions to ESpN who says the sec needs more value to get a deal done by suggesting expanding at once with two more: FSU and CU. FSU shops its deal to the B1G whose TV partners, mostly Fox, will scramble to find money to pay for FSU plus one. Warchant and other FSU media sites are saying FSU is being offereD around a 75% share until next TV contract where the ‘noles, huskies and ducks are expected to get full shares. I’m guessing the B1G would dig into their big fat check book and help cover some exit costs to try and secure the ‘noles and Miami as teams 19 and 20.

So assuming Big Ten grabs FSU and Miami, who would the SEC round off expansion with if UNC, UVA and Clemson are secured? I would prefer the dark horse candidate Duke. Kansas is an excellent option too, not sure how tough it would be to exit the Big 12. Wonder what this board thinks today and are there any SEC realignment insiders out there to follow?

Have no fear. The Big 10 has no advantages in picking up Florida State because there is resistance among some of their presidents to the whole idea. FSU is not AAU and not close to becoming AAU in spite of all of the hot air on the topic. The AAU is a closed system unless they vote to expand beyond current membership. If they did (which they won't because they voted to expand 2 years ago and this seldom has happened) FSU would find its attributes listed behind about 7 other schools. The Big 10 may talk FSU, but their target in Florida is Miami.

Second. The SEC loaned Missouri money to help them transition to the SEC. So it has done so in the past.

Third. The "Gentlemen's Agreement" was a 180 from what Clay Travis trumpeted. Slive asked the presidents of Florida and South Carolina not to nominate Clemson and FSU until the renegotiation clause of the SEC was fulfilled with the additions of Texas A&M and Missouri and afterward, he said no prohibitions would be in place to deny entry to a SEC member's request to add an in-state rival. Florida nominated FSU in 1991 and again in 2011 prompting Slive's request when the South Carolina president, Pastides, also wanted to nominate Clemson. To my knowledge Georgia isn't the least bit concerned about FSU. These are mostly things concocted out of thin air and then circled in discussion by internet gurus wanting You-Tube traffic.

The Big 10's wish list would include, and likely in order, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and possibly Virginia.

Your hypothetical won't come to pass. But if the SEC prioritized North Carolina, Virginia (more likely Virginia Tech if dollars matter and they usually do) and Clemson either of your dark horses would be a great way for the conference to wrap up at 20.

SEC insiders and Big 10 insiders do not exist. Neither conference discusses anything that Presidents consider behind closed doors and no ADs are briefed on realignment decisions until a school has been accepted. Big Mountain claims their source is an AD. So what? They don't know until it is done. All discussion from "insiders" is pure B.S. I did know somethings, but half a dozen or so years after the fact which transpired in the SEC dealings of 1991 and a little bit in 2011. I never knew anything in advance, but did hear the logic and reasoning behind the additions which were made when most of that information would have been no longer forbidden to know (except for votes), and even then I only learned anything from family which were involved, and I already knew some of the people involved so just knowing them and how they thought or approached particular subjects was informative in retrospect.

The SEC's first priority list included: Arkansas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma (then silent partner of Texas), Texas, and Texas A&M. And that list was generated between 1990 and 91 and before any serious talks began (other than with Texas where talks may have been ongoing as early as 1987).

Broyles and the SWC members saw that they had no shot at larger media payouts under the footprint model which paid the best rates for top schools in a state and not so much for duplicates. A&M was in the discussion because Texas was a whopping state and if UT was going to consider a move it needed to include Arkansas, A&M and Oklahoma. When did Texas finally join? After A&M and Arkansas had already joined the SEC and Oklahoma was willing to do the same.

In 1991 Clemson was seen as a bridge to North Carolina. UNC wasn't a primary target in 1991 only because nobody in the SEC thought they could get them. UNC was seen as a long-range acquisition. The SEC recognized in 1991 that a second Florida school was eventually going to be needed in order to carry that state and more importantly to protect the Deep South as SEC territory. I don't think any of that has changed. Tallahassee was logical as it was within easy driving distance of many SEC schools at that time. Miami was considered a world away and the SEC didn't particularly want privates. Miami today would be a different matter, but FSU is still the better fit.

We now have 4 of those six targets as full members. South Carolina took Clemson's place, and I guess you could say Missouri took FSU's place.

If we expand to 20, I'd expect North Carolina and either a mandated N.C. State, or one of their two buddies (Duke or Virginia). Clemson would be a logical choice in an expansion to 24 due to commitment, attendance, and overall fit within the South. But Clemson would not be an urgent addition because the Big 10 will not consider them.

I don't think UNC is ready to move but they have been in ardent conversations about it with both the SEC and Big 10. They talked to the SEC first three days after the OU/UT news broke.

I see things shaking out another way. FOX and ESPN want to expand the CFP to 14 games, possibly even 16. They want a scheduling agreement between the SEC and Big 10 to drive ratings numbers through the season thereby increasing their profits and frankly pressuring a few schools to consider joining one or the other conferences. What they don't want right now is a rancor over another round of expansion. What they do want is as much parity between the SEC and Big 10 as they can work out. Scheduling agreements are easier when there are equal numbers of schools involved. FSU wants out ASAP. ESPN knows this and doesn't want to lose their leverage over the state of Florida. If FSU joins the SEC and ESPN helps to facilitate that move, then ESPN is assured of top ad rates in Florida no matter what Miami subsequently chooses to do. And, outside of the ACC there is only one school from the old Big 12 not yet accounted for, but which ESPN was willing to offer a sweetheart T3 deal in order to keep more access to them, Kansas.

For these reasons I can see the SEC moving to 18 within a couple of years, matching the Big 10's membership and inventory (remember in all things the number of schools represents a voting presence on matters so equal numbers are needed to have an equal voice in decisions), and doing so with Kansas and FSU. The Big 10 didn't want Kansas because they carried much of their market without having to add them. And the Big 10 doesn't really want FSU, what they want is for the SEC and ESPN to worry about FSU and take them figuring the SEC and ESPN won't triple down in Florida with the states of North Carolina and Virginia at stake, and that is very sound strategy on their part. So, the Big 10 feigns interest in FSU in hopes that ESPN and the SEC will take them for their own reasons leaving Miami open for the Big 10. That also solves any debate among Big 10 presidents as to who to add from Florida. And Miami might well be unnecessary for ESPN to protect if FSU and UF are safely in the SEC.

If this happens then by 2029 or 30 the SEC and Big 10 will be in a position to move to 22 or 24 and the entire focus will be upon the ACC. Notre Dame, Miami, Stanford, and California will still be appealing to the Big 10. North Carolina, a Virginia school, and Clemson appealing to the SEC. If Duke or Georgia Tech want in the SEC has choice as to who is #4. If the move is to 24 the SEC has room to encourage UNC and Virginia with N.C. State or Virginia Tech. The Big 10 could then look to Colorado and Arizona State. But either way you want to take it if the SEC and Big 10 are both at 18 within a year or two then decisions about the CFP and any scheduling agreement will be much easier to handle. And both the SEC and Big 10 will have their key targets still available. It also leaves ESPN the option to pick up Big East basketball and add it to the ACC where Clemson and Miami's presence is needed for strength of schedule to keep Notre Dame as an affiliate. And if that happened, we may well settle in at 18 each for the SEC and Big 10, keeping the Big 12 and ACC separate and with each adding basketball only schools to help with their revenue and in the ACC's case their network.

Kick that around and tell me what you think.

Now back to insiders. Dudes with nothing to lose are sometimes fed disinformation by the conferences so the conference can judge fan response to ideas before the presidents have to make a decision. That's the only insider information that there is, and it is either used to misdirect the public's attention or to gauge its response.

I like your idea of the SEC adding FSU and another right now, as both the B1G and SEC would be at equal number of members to start a scheduling agreement. That would allow other ACC schools to get their ducks in a row for future realignment. Not sure if Kansas would be ready to pull the trigger this soon. Clemson also sued for exit clarity and should be ready to move this summer with FSU. The ACC should be able to use that $300M+ in exit fees to remove or significantly alter the unequal revenue policies FSU and Clemson forced on them as part of the settlement. This will improve the near term finances of the ACC members while everyone prepares for the next round of ACC losses.

So 2030-ish, new tv contracts welcome into the B1G ND, Stanford, Miami and GT 2 while the SEC adds uNC, UVA, Duke and Kansas.

Kansas or Clemson, either way it works for me. I'm just suspicious that ESPN won't let too many football brands leave at once from the ACC. But either way it works.

While our discussion above stands as what I see as being the most likely next move, for the sake of freshness and to address possibilities others are tossing against the wall, and because it is a possibility due to the expansion of the CFP that both the SEC and Big Ten could prosper from additional AQ slots by further consolidation, let's look at plans for the SEC to move to 20. I'd like to tender four separate groupings for discussion to this end as I have heard a variety of ideas for this discussed and all of them have some merit.

Plan one split the baby between football brands and basketball brands and play it safe: Clemson and Florida State for football / North Carolina and Virginia for basketball and markets. And I would substitute Duke for Virginia as a variant.

Why? Clemson and Florida State would likely add the most value and do so by multiplying the number of higher viewer games versus an SEC schedule. North Carolina and Virginia add 20 million to the market reach of the SEC and North Carolina and Duke add the most basketball branding which multiplies the SEC's ratings for Winter sports.

Plan two maximize football revenue period: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech

Why? Not only are you adding the top 3 football revenue producers for the ACC but North Carolina which is positioning to grow their value in that sport and already carry the highest number of viewers in a state of 11 million which would add to the SEC's markets.

Plan three maximize market expansion period: North Carolina, Virginia/Virginia Tech, Kansas, Florida State to attain and keep top add rates in Florida.

Why? Obviously it adds the 3 most logical contiguous markets and secures dominance in the 2nd largest market the SEC occupies.

Plan four dominate your expanded footprint: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, N.C. State or Duke.

Why? Florida State gives the SEC 77% of the Florida college sports viewers when added to the U of Florida. Clemson gives the SEC nearly 100% of the South Carolina sports viewers when added to the U of South Carolina. Adding both North Carolina and a second school from the state (either N.C. State or Duke) gives the SEC the majority of college sports viewers in North Carolina a market of 11 million.

Why did I not mention Notre Dame? They'll stay independent though a scheduling agreement might be productive should we pursue one.

JR, I don’t see an SEC-ND scheduling agreement unless it look imminent that ND is joining the B1G. That would mean the SEC failed at bringing in ND after adding UNC plus friend(s) and to keep the Irish from being a solely B1G product, ESPN made the offer lucrative enough.

Now the interesting part will be the bidding war for UNC. We know both conferences want UNC and UVA. Rumors for years has been the sec would add those two and fsu and cu (football brands help pay for the other two) at a full share per the prorata contract.

What would the B1G ten’s counter offer be? UNC, uva, Miami and Duke on partial shares until next contract renewal? I doubt ESPN would want to offer a fifth full share just for Duke football, but since “Duke’s got money,” see if they’ll take the best offer ESPN gives them and call it a day,…or until ND comes calling.

Could FSU be an option with a Miami to the Big Ten if the SEC does get UNC? According to Matt Hayes: no. Although it was fun watching him rip apart the “social media clowns” that continuously said FSU had a done deal or landing spot with the B1G. FOX would want the Seminoles, not so much the presidents of the B1G

(05-22-2025 07:07 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-22-2025 09:57 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 08:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 07:35 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 12:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Have no fear. The Big 10 has no advantages in picking up Florida State because there is resistance among some of their presidents to the whole idea. FSU is not AAU and not close to becoming AAU in spite of all of the hot air on the topic. The AAU is a closed system unless they vote to expand beyond current membership. If they did (which they won't because they voted to expand 2 years ago and this seldom has happened) FSU would find its attributes listed behind about 7 other schools. The Big 10 may talk FSU, but their target in Florida is Miami.

Second. The SEC loaned Missouri money to help them transition to the SEC. So it has done so in the past.

Third. The "Gentlemen's Agreement" was a 180 from what Clay Travis trumpeted. Slive asked the presidents of Florida and South Carolina not to nominate Clemson and FSU until the renegotiation clause of the SEC was fulfilled with the additions of Texas A&M and Missouri and afterward, he said no prohibitions would be in place to deny entry to a SEC member's request to add an in-state rival. Florida nominated FSU in 1991 and again in 2011 prompting Slive's request when the South Carolina president, Pastides, also wanted to nominate Clemson. To my knowledge Georgia isn't the least bit concerned about FSU. These are mostly things concocted out of thin air and then circled in discussion by internet gurus wanting You-Tube traffic.

The Big 10's wish list would include, and likely in order, Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, and possibly Virginia.

Your hypothetical won't come to pass. But if the SEC prioritized North Carolina, Virginia (more likely Virginia Tech if dollars matter and they usually do) and Clemson either of your dark horses would be a great way for the conference to wrap up at 20.

SEC insiders and Big 10 insiders do not exist. Neither conference discusses anything that Presidents consider behind closed doors and no ADs are briefed on realignment decisions until a school has been accepted. Big Mountain claims their source is an AD. So what? They don't know until it is done. All discussion from "insiders" is pure B.S. I did know somethings, but half a dozen or so years after the fact which transpired in the SEC dealings of 1991 and a little bit in 2011. I never knew anything in advance, but did hear the logic and reasoning behind the additions which were made when most of that information would have been no longer forbidden to know (except for votes), and even then I only learned anything from family which were involved, and I already knew some of the people involved so just knowing them and how they thought or approached particular subjects was informative in retrospect.

The SEC's first priority list included: Arkansas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma (then silent partner of Texas), Texas, and Texas A&M. And that list was generated between 1990 and 91 and before any serious talks began (other than with Texas where talks may have been ongoing as early as 1987).

Broyles and the SWC members saw that they had no shot at larger media payouts under the footprint model which paid the best rates for top schools in a state and not so much for duplicates. A&M was in the discussion because Texas was a whopping state and if UT was going to consider a move it needed to include Arkansas, A&M and Oklahoma. When did Texas finally join? After A&M and Arkansas had already joined the SEC and Oklahoma was willing to do the same.

In 1991 Clemson was seen as a bridge to North Carolina. UNC wasn't a primary target in 1991 only because nobody in the SEC thought they could get them. UNC was seen as a long-range acquisition. The SEC recognized in 1991 that a second Florida school was eventually going to be needed in order to carry that state and more importantly to protect the Deep South as SEC territory. I don't think any of that has changed. Tallahassee was logical as it was within easy driving distance of many SEC schools at that time. Miami was considered a world away and the SEC didn't particularly want privates. Miami today would be a different matter, but FSU is still the better fit.

We now have 4 of those six targets as full members. South Carolina took Clemson's place, and I guess you could say Missouri took FSU's place.

If we expand to 20, I'd expect North Carolina and either a mandated N.C. State, or one of their two buddies (Duke or Virginia). Clemson would be a logical choice in an expansion to 24 due to commitment, attendance, and overall fit within the South. But Clemson would not be an urgent addition because the Big 10 will not consider them.

I don't think UNC is ready to move but they have been in ardent conversations about it with both the SEC and Big 10. They talked to the SEC first three days after the OU/UT news broke.

I see things shaking out another way. FOX and ESPN want to expand the CFP to 14 games, possibly even 16. They want a scheduling agreement between the SEC and Big 10 to drive ratings numbers through the season thereby increasing their profits and frankly pressuring a few schools to consider joining one or the other conferences. What they don't want right now is a rancor over another round of expansion. What they do want is as much parity between the SEC and Big 10 as they can work out. Scheduling agreements are easier when there are equal numbers of schools involved. FSU wants out ASAP. ESPN knows this and doesn't want to lose their leverage over the state of Florida. If FSU joins the SEC and ESPN helps to facilitate that move, then ESPN is assured of top ad rates in Florida no matter what Miami subsequently chooses to do. And, outside of the ACC there is only one school from the old Big 12 not yet accounted for, but which ESPN was willing to offer a sweetheart T3 deal in order to keep more access to them, Kansas.

For these reasons I can see the SEC moving to 18 within a couple of years, matching the Big 10's membership and inventory (remember in all things the number of schools represents a voting presence on matters so equal numbers are needed to have an equal voice in decisions), and doing so with Kansas and FSU. The Big 10 didn't want Kansas because they carried much of their market without having to add them. And the Big 10 doesn't really want FSU, what they want is for the SEC and ESPN to worry about FSU and take them figuring the SEC and ESPN won't triple down in Florida with the states of North Carolina and Virginia at stake, and that is very sound strategy on their part. So, the Big 10 feigns interest in FSU in hopes that ESPN and the SEC will take them for their own reasons leaving Miami open for the Big 10. That also solves any debate among Big 10 presidents as to who to add from Florida. And Miami might well be unnecessary for ESPN to protect if FSU and UF are safely in the SEC.

If this happens then by 2029 or 30 the SEC and Big 10 will be in a position to move to 22 or 24 and the entire focus will be upon the ACC. Notre Dame, Miami, Stanford, and California will still be appealing to the Big 10. North Carolina, a Virginia school, and Clemson appealing to the SEC. If Duke or Georgia Tech want in the SEC has choice as to who is #4. If the move is to 24 the SEC has room to encourage UNC and Virginia with N.C. State or Virginia Tech. The Big 10 could then look to Colorado and Arizona State. But either way you want to take it if the SEC and Big 10 are both at 18 within a year or two then decisions about the CFP and any scheduling agreement will be much easier to handle. And both the SEC and Big 10 will have their key targets still available. It also leaves ESPN the option to pick up Big East basketball and add it to the ACC where Clemson and Miami's presence is needed for strength of schedule to keep Notre Dame as an affiliate. And if that happened, we may well settle in at 18 each for the SEC and Big 10, keeping the Big 12 and ACC separate and with each adding basketball only schools to help with their revenue and in the ACC's case their network.

Kick that around and tell me what you think.

Now back to insiders. Dudes with nothing to lose are sometimes fed disinformation by the conferences so the conference can judge fan response to ideas before the presidents have to make a decision. That's the only insider information that there is, and it is either used to misdirect the public's attention or to gauge its response.

I like your idea of the SEC adding FSU and another right now, as both the B1G and SEC would be at equal number of members to start a scheduling agreement. That would allow other ACC schools to get their ducks in a row for future realignment. Not sure if Kansas would be ready to pull the trigger this soon. Clemson also sued for exit clarity and should be ready to move this summer with FSU. The ACC should be able to use that $300M+ in exit fees to remove or significantly alter the unequal revenue policies FSU and Clemson forced on them as part of the settlement. This will improve the near term finances of the ACC members while everyone prepares for the next round of ACC losses.

So 2030-ish, new tv contracts welcome into the B1G ND, Stanford, Miami and GT 2 while the SEC adds uNC, UVA, Duke and Kansas.

Kansas or Clemson, either way it works for me. I'm just suspicious that ESPN won't let too many football brands leave at once from the ACC. But either way it works.

While our discussion above stands as what I see as being the most likely next move, for the sake of freshness and to address possibilities others are tossing against the wall, and because it is a possibility due to the expansion of the CFP that both the SEC and Big Ten could prosper from additional AQ slots by further consolidation, let's look at plans for the SEC to move to 20. I'd like to tender four separate groupings for discussion to this end as I have heard a variety of ideas for this discussed and all of them have some merit.

Plan one split the baby between football brands and basketball brands and play it safe: Clemson and Florida State for football / North Carolina and Virginia for basketball and markets. And I would substitute Duke for Virginia as a variant.

Why? Clemson and Florida State would likely add the most value and do so by multiplying the number of higher viewer games versus an SEC schedule. North Carolina and Virginia add 20 million to the market reach of the SEC and North Carolina and Duke add the most basketball branding which multiplies the SEC's ratings for Winter sports.

Plan two maximize football revenue period: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech

Why? Not only are you adding the top 3 football revenue producers for the ACC but North Carolina which is positioning to grow their value in that sport and already carry the highest number of viewers in a state of 11 million which would add to the SEC's markets.

Plan three maximize market expansion period: North Carolina, Virginia/Virginia Tech, Kansas, Florida State to attain and keep top add rates in Florida.

Why? Obviously it adds the 3 most logical contiguous markets and secures dominance in the 2nd largest market the SEC occupies.

Plan four dominate your expanded footprint: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, N.C. State or Duke.

Why? Florida State gives the SEC 77% of the Florida college sports viewers when added to the U of Florida. Clemson gives the SEC nearly 100% of the South Carolina sports viewers when added to the U of South Carolina. Adding both North Carolina and a second school from the state (either N.C. State or Duke) gives the SEC the majority of college sports viewers in North Carolina a market of 11 million.

Why did I not mention Notre Dame? They'll stay independent though a scheduling agreement might be productive should we pursue one.

JR, I don’t see an SEC-ND scheduling agreement unless it look imminent that ND is joining the B1G. That would mean the SEC failed at bringing in ND after adding UNC plus friend(s) and to keep the Irish from being a solely B1G product, ESPN made the offer lucrative enough.

Now the interesting part will be the bidding war for UNC. We know both conferences want UNC and UVA. Rumors for years has been the sec would add those two and fsu and cu (football brands help pay for the other two) at a full share per the prorata contract.

What would the B1G ten’s counter offer be? UNC, uva, Miami and Duke on partial shares until next contract renewal? I doubt ESPN would want to offer a fifth full share just for Duke football, but since “Duke’s got money,” see if they’ll take the best offer ESPN gives them and call it a day,…or until ND comes calling.

Could FSU be an option with a Miami to the Big Ten if the SEC does get UNC? According to Matt Hayes: no. Although it was fun watching him rip apart the “social media clowns” that continuously said FSU had a done deal or landing spot with the B1G. FOX would want the Seminoles, not so much the presidents of the B1G

I've never believed the FSU and Clemson to the Big 10 nonsense even when Frank was pushing it.

I also believe the decision this time around will be made by ESPN which will seek to use the SEC to protect the product and markets they want to hang onto. The settlement was made because ESPN and FSU got something each wanted. Now we wait to find out what it was that each thought they were getting. My guess was that FSU could leave and ESPN would help them, but that ESPN wanted to hold onto their rights. If so I expect to see them in the SEC.

Now if ESPN doesn't care about FSU and freed them they did so know the Big 10 wasn't taking them and that they would wind up in the Big 12 where they cost ESPN half as much. Then you might see North Carolina, Virginia, Miami and either Duke or Kansas in the SEC which if Clemson and FSU don't have a Big 10 home would mean that the Big 10's bluff to take them will have been called and ESPN will hold onto Florida with Miami, and hold onto North Carolina possibly with Duke which is what North Carolina wanted if they were to head to the SEC in 2011, and part of Virginia.

What does that do for the SEC/ESPN? It protects markets and eases the degree of football difficulty a bit while adding major Winter brands.

If ESPN did want to keep FSU I think you have your answer on Clemson as well. Add those two to the SEC for football and viewership goes way up and the list of schools having won recent championships is stellar.

The question is what did ESPN want and did that include FSU? We'll see.

(05-22-2025 07:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-22-2025 07:07 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-22-2025 09:57 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 08:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 07:35 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I like your idea of the SEC adding FSU and another right now, as both the B1G and SEC would be at equal number of members to start a scheduling agreement. That would allow other ACC schools to get their ducks in a row for future realignment. Not sure if Kansas would be ready to pull the trigger this soon. Clemson also sued for exit clarity and should be ready to move this summer with FSU. The ACC should be able to use that $300M+ in exit fees to remove or significantly alter the unequal revenue policies FSU and Clemson forced on them as part of the settlement. This will improve the near term finances of the ACC members while everyone prepares for the next round of ACC losses.

So 2030-ish, new tv contracts welcome into the B1G ND, Stanford, Miami and GT 2 while the SEC adds uNC, UVA, Duke and Kansas.

Kansas or Clemson, either way it works for me. I'm just suspicious that ESPN won't let too many football brands leave at once from the ACC. But either way it works.

While our discussion above stands as what I see as being the most likely next move, for the sake of freshness and to address possibilities others are tossing against the wall, and because it is a possibility due to the expansion of the CFP that both the SEC and Big Ten could prosper from additional AQ slots by further consolidation, let's look at plans for the SEC to move to 20. I'd like to tender four separate groupings for discussion to this end as I have heard a variety of ideas for this discussed and all of them have some merit.

Plan one split the baby between football brands and basketball brands and play it safe: Clemson and Florida State for football / North Carolina and Virginia for basketball and markets. And I would substitute Duke for Virginia as a variant.

Why? Clemson and Florida State would likely add the most value and do so by multiplying the number of higher viewer games versus an SEC schedule. North Carolina and Virginia add 20 million to the market reach of the SEC and North Carolina and Duke add the most basketball branding which multiplies the SEC's ratings for Winter sports.

Plan two maximize football revenue period: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech

Why? Not only are you adding the top 3 football revenue producers for the ACC but North Carolina which is positioning to grow their value in that sport and already carry the highest number of viewers in a state of 11 million which would add to the SEC's markets.

Plan three maximize market expansion period: North Carolina, Virginia/Virginia Tech, Kansas, Florida State to attain and keep top add rates in Florida.

Why? Obviously it adds the 3 most logical contiguous markets and secures dominance in the 2nd largest market the SEC occupies.

Plan four dominate your expanded footprint: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, N.C. State or Duke.

Why? Florida State gives the SEC 77% of the Florida college sports viewers when added to the U of Florida. Clemson gives the SEC nearly 100% of the South Carolina sports viewers when added to the U of South Carolina. Adding both North Carolina and a second school from the state (either N.C. State or Duke) gives the SEC the majority of college sports viewers in North Carolina a market of 11 million.

Why did I not mention Notre Dame? They'll stay independent though a scheduling agreement might be productive should we pursue one.

JR, I don’t see an SEC-ND scheduling agreement unless it look imminent that ND is joining the B1G. That would mean the SEC failed at bringing in ND after adding UNC plus friend(s) and to keep the Irish from being a solely B1G product, ESPN made the offer lucrative enough.

Now the interesting part will be the bidding war for UNC. We know both conferences want UNC and UVA. Rumors for years has been the sec would add those two and fsu and cu (football brands help pay for the other two) at a full share per the prorata contract.

What would the B1G ten’s counter offer be? UNC, uva, Miami and Duke on partial shares until next contract renewal? I doubt ESPN would want to offer a fifth full share just for Duke football, but since “Duke’s got money,” see if they’ll take the best offer ESPN gives them and call it a day,…or until ND comes calling.

Could FSU be an option with a Miami to the Big Ten if the SEC does get UNC? According to Matt Hayes: no. Although it was fun watching him rip apart the “social media clowns” that continuously said FSU had a done deal or landing spot with the B1G. FOX would want the Seminoles, not so much the presidents of the B1G

I've never believed the FSU and Clemson to the Big 10 nonsense even when Frank was pushing it.

I also believe the decision this time around will be made by ESPN which will seek to use the SEC to protect the product and markets they want to hang onto. The settlement was made because ESPN and FSU got something each wanted. Now we wait to find out what it was that each thought they were getting. My guess was that FSU could leave and ESPN would help them, but that ESPN wanted to hold onto their rights. If so I expect to see them in the SEC.

Now if ESPN doesn't care about FSU and freed them they did so know the Big 10 wasn't taking them and that they would wind up in the Big 12 where they cost ESPN half as much. Then you might see North Carolina, Virginia, Miami and either Duke or Kansas in the SEC which if Clemson and FSU don't have a Big 10 home would mean that the Big 10's bluff to take them will have been called and ESPN will hold onto Florida with Miami, and hold onto North Carolina possibly with Duke which is what North Carolina wanted if they were to head to the SEC in 2011, and part of Virginia.

What does that do for the SEC/ESPN? It protects markets and eases the degree of football difficulty a bit while adding major Winter brands.

If ESPN did want to keep FSU I think you have your answer on Clemson as well. Add those two to the SEC for football and viewership goes way up and the list of schools having won recent championships is stellar.

The question is what did ESPN want and did that include FSU? We'll see.

It's been a while, but I remember various ideas on the SEC and Big 12 essentially splitting the ACC. That's the scenario that leads to Florida State and Clemson going to the Big 12, and I think it would have to be that because otherwise they can just stick around in the ACC even if they lost face doing it.

For the Big 12 to be worth the move, I think they would have to be killing the ACC. And maybe the Big Ten would help if they were landing Notre Dame in the process.

Something like Florida State, Clemson, NC State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, and Pittsburgh to the Big 12.

In that scenario, this presumes something like UNC, Duke, Virginia, and Miami going to the SEC.

With 10 core schools gone, Notre Dame might finally give up the ghost and go to the Big Ten with Stanford or Georgia Tech.

But I tend to think Florida State and Clemson are heading to the SEC. Perhaps UNC is going to wait a while longer, but they could still come with Duke or Virginia. I think the idea of UNC and UVA moving as a pair is viable because there were certain reporters floating the idea long before the Twitterati and the YouTubers picked it up.

I could also see a scheduling agreement with Notre Dame, but I don't think of this in terms of a partial membership. A mutually beneficial agreement could be had that allows 4 games maybe? It gives ND more options and I trust SEC leadership not to give away the hog on an arrangement like that.

(05-22-2025 08:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-22-2025 07:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-22-2025 07:07 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-22-2025 09:57 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-06-2025 08:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Kansas or Clemson, either way it works for me. I'm just suspicious that ESPN won't let too many football brands leave at once from the ACC. But either way it works.

While our discussion above stands as what I see as being the most likely next move, for the sake of freshness and to address possibilities others are tossing against the wall, and because it is a possibility due to the expansion of the CFP that both the SEC and Big Ten could prosper from additional AQ slots by further consolidation, let's look at plans for the SEC to move to 20. I'd like to tender four separate groupings for discussion to this end as I have heard a variety of ideas for this discussed and all of them have some merit.

Plan one split the baby between football brands and basketball brands and play it safe: Clemson and Florida State for football / North Carolina and Virginia for basketball and markets. And I would substitute Duke for Virginia as a variant.

Why? Clemson and Florida State would likely add the most value and do so by multiplying the number of higher viewer games versus an SEC schedule. North Carolina and Virginia add 20 million to the market reach of the SEC and North Carolina and Duke add the most basketball branding which multiplies the SEC's ratings for Winter sports.

Plan two maximize football revenue period: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech

Why? Not only are you adding the top 3 football revenue producers for the ACC but North Carolina which is positioning to grow their value in that sport and already carry the highest number of viewers in a state of 11 million which would add to the SEC's markets.

Plan three maximize market expansion period: North Carolina, Virginia/Virginia Tech, Kansas, Florida State to attain and keep top add rates in Florida.

Why? Obviously it adds the 3 most logical contiguous markets and secures dominance in the 2nd largest market the SEC occupies.

Plan four dominate your expanded footprint: Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, N.C. State or Duke.

Why? Florida State gives the SEC 77% of the Florida college sports viewers when added to the U of Florida. Clemson gives the SEC nearly 100% of the South Carolina sports viewers when added to the U of South Carolina. Adding both North Carolina and a second school from the state (either N.C. State or Duke) gives the SEC the majority of college sports viewers in North Carolina a market of 11 million.

Why did I not mention Notre Dame? They'll stay independent though a scheduling agreement might be productive should we pursue one.

JR, I don’t see an SEC-ND scheduling agreement unless it look imminent that ND is joining the B1G. That would mean the SEC failed at bringing in ND after adding UNC plus friend(s) and to keep the Irish from being a solely B1G product, ESPN made the offer lucrative enough.

Now the interesting part will be the bidding war for UNC. We know both conferences want UNC and UVA. Rumors for years has been the sec would add those two and fsu and cu (football brands help pay for the other two) at a full share per the prorata contract.

What would the B1G ten’s counter offer be? UNC, uva, Miami and Duke on partial shares until next contract renewal? I doubt ESPN would want to offer a fifth full share just for Duke football, but since “Duke’s got money,” see if they’ll take the best offer ESPN gives them and call it a day,…or until ND comes calling.

Could FSU be an option with a Miami to the Big Ten if the SEC does get UNC? According to Matt Hayes: no. Although it was fun watching him rip apart the “social media clowns” that continuously said FSU had a done deal or landing spot with the B1G. FOX would want the Seminoles, not so much the presidents of the B1G

I've never believed the FSU and Clemson to the Big 10 nonsense even when Frank was pushing it.

I also believe the decision this time around will be made by ESPN which will seek to use the SEC to protect the product and markets they want to hang onto. The settlement was made because ESPN and FSU got something each wanted. Now we wait to find out what it was that each thought they were getting. My guess was that FSU could leave and ESPN would help them, but that ESPN wanted to hold onto their rights. If so I expect to see them in the SEC.

Now if ESPN doesn't care about FSU and freed them they did so know the Big 10 wasn't taking them and that they would wind up in the Big 12 where they cost ESPN half as much. Then you might see North Carolina, Virginia, Miami and either Duke or Kansas in the SEC which if Clemson and FSU don't have a Big 10 home would mean that the Big 10's bluff to take them will have been called and ESPN will hold onto Florida with Miami, and hold onto North Carolina possibly with Duke which is what North Carolina wanted if they were to head to the SEC in 2011, and part of Virginia.

What does that do for the SEC/ESPN? It protects markets and eases the degree of football difficulty a bit while adding major Winter brands.

If ESPN did want to keep FSU I think you have your answer on Clemson as well. Add those two to the SEC for football and viewership goes way up and the list of schools having won recent championships is stellar.

The question is what did ESPN want and did that include FSU? We'll see.

It's been a while, but I remember various ideas on the SEC and Big 12 essentially splitting the ACC. That's the scenario that leads to Florida State and Clemson going to the Big 12, and I think it would have to be that because otherwise they can just stick around in the ACC even if they lost face doing it.

For the Big 12 to be worth the move, I think they would have to be killing the ACC. And maybe the Big Ten would help if they were landing Notre Dame in the process.

Something like Florida State, Clemson, NC State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, and Pittsburgh to the Big 12.

In that scenario, this presumes something like UNC, Duke, Virginia, and Miami going to the SEC.

With 10 core schools gone, Notre Dame might finally give up the ghost and go to the Big Ten with Stanford or Georgia Tech.

But I tend to think Florida State and Clemson are heading to the SEC. Perhaps UNC is going to wait a while longer, but they could still come with Duke or Virginia. I think the idea of UNC and UVA moving as a pair is viable because there were certain reporters floating the idea long before the Twitterati and the YouTubers picked it up.

I could also see a scheduling agreement with Notre Dame, but I don't think of this in terms of a partial membership. A mutually beneficial agreement could be had that allows 4 games maybe? It gives ND more options and I trust SEC leadership not to give away the hog on an arrangement like that.

I believe that control of the Florida market is too important to ESPN to let it get fouled up by issues the Noles had with the ACC. I think FSU moves to the SEC and that was part of the behind the scenes agreement which led to the settlement. ESPN got the assurances of keeping the property and control of the Florida market and ESPN gets to have payments to the ACC withheld over a period a years by ESPN to cover their exit.

The question in my mind is whether Clemson is essential to the continued presence of Notre Dame? And if so was the scheduling agreement a release of Clemson to travel with FSU to the SEC, or was it a ploy to keep Clemson tied to the ACC. Frankly it could easily be either. If Clemson stays I look for Kansas to be partnered with FSU. If Clemson leaves they'll be FSU's partner to the SEC.

If N.D. stays and Tobacco Road doubles down on the ACC then that may end it all right there and the SEC and Big 10 will stick at 18.

Outside of N.D. there isn't anyone worth the effort if UNC stays put. And if UNC feels they must move I still suspect that what they requested in 2011 will be operative. They wanted Duke as their travel companion then and I believe the SEC presidents would go for it now.