Florida Rep. Jimmy Patronis wants PCSA clarity about sports betting.

https://www.covers.com/industry/florida-...ct-22-2026

Big Ten has adopted caps consistent with the PCSA.

(10-23-2026 11:12 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 10:31 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 06:23 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 10:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 08:36 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  Well, imagine if the local plumbing companies did that... For pro sports, of course, they are only allowed to do this because of the Sports Broadcasting Act and MLS's single ownership structure. Maybe the actual answer is that conference rights are an anti-trust violation that schools have gotten away with for the past 40 years.

Conferences have never been a significant part of the marketplace. CFA was pretty significant and nobody challenged it. But nobody was forced into it. It was voluntary. And then it broke apart with first Notre Dame and then everyone else leaving. Maybe the SEC and Big Ten are getting significant, but on the other hand, nobody is impairing the other conferences from getting TV contracts.

Conferences have been an extremely significant part of the media landscape since the 80’s. I don’t understand how anyone can deny that.

What started as administrative offices that handled rules, refs, and scheduling have turned into brands. Brands that are now being sponsored by other brands!

The B1G and SEC have caused significant disadvantages around CFB via their hostile takeover. They’ve decreased value of other conferences to the point university presidents are classifying conferences in monetary tiers which hold specific voting power. Meanwhile there are silly restrictions around any other form of media bundling outside the conference structure. That looks like a market takeover to me.*

I feel like there is a pretty strong case being built here.




*Insert predictable “ACC dId It ToO So Ur pOiNt InVaLiD!”

Doesn’t mean I EVER supported it personally. I didn’t.

Nonsense. Everyone is making more money than ever. It’s just that the P2 are growing faster.

It's not nonsense. The B1G and SEC have the final say in the CFP, yet that is what every FBS school is vying for. The only reason they wield more power is due to their media bundling.

The only reason the P2 wield more power is that all but a couple of the top Brands in all of CFB are in one or the other. That's also why ND gets a bigger seat at the table than other Independents like UConn. Saying the P2 wield a lot of power is really just saying that Alabama and OSU wield a lot of power, which is obvious to one and all.

(10-23-2026 08:53 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:12 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 06:45 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 06:39 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 05:28 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  Sure. What is to stop either from deciding they are better off with ND and those four as regulars on their football schedule over some of the teams they play now?

NCAA ban on single sport FBS football conferences plus federal anti-trust issues with independent schools pooling media rights. I had a Thought Patrol on northern schools doing this last offseason and that was the ultimate answer. I suppose schools could try to not pool media rights but if they don't the networks will rip them apart. These "lesser blue bloods" like FSU and Clemson will never be able to get ND style deals because they don't have the ND fanbase's size or wealth. At best they get something equivalent to a little more than a maximum ACC share but with a miserable streaming deal that would see them off of America's televisions and out of America's thoughts.

You’ve hit on a Thought Patrol I’ve had for years: why are there ridiculous rules on pooling rights? Why can a conference of upwards into the 20’s pool rights, but a league of independents can’t? It’s absurd. Release the rights! Create a super bundle while maintaining conference membership. Use OOC games to schedule the big dawgs in the super bundle.

There’s not necessarily a rule on independents pooling media rights. It’s more about the marketplace and what’s the most lucrative option for the greatest number of schools, which is why independents eventually evaporated down to Notre Dame (by choice) and UConn (sort of forced into it if it wanted Big East basketball. The old College Football Association did pool the rights of independents (among others) before. Notre Dame makes more than the ACC schools, but even as a school with arguably the most nationalized fan base, it still makes less than the average Big Ten school. You can set up the greatest schedule ever, but if you’re independent, you’re still only selling the rights to *your* home games.

That’s why I’ve never bought true Notre Dame-style independence as a viable threat: if ND can’t make more than an aggregated Big Ten and SEC package, then realistically no one can. This makes sense with basic economics: the fewer sellers selling a product on a marketplace gives those sellers more pricing power. The Big Ten as an aggregate has more pricing power than if the 18 members went out and individually sold their media rights, to the point where the additional value of that aggregation is so overwhelming that Purdue makes more media money than Notre Dame down the road. That’s why antitrust law exists in the first place: it’s a basic truism that concentrating sellers into one entity drives up prices.

The Super League is what has always been the real threat. Even Ohio State and Alabama can’t really expect much different than Notre Dame-level rights fees (as the generally better schedules that Ohio State and Alabama have are tied to them being in the Big Ten and SEC). 20 of the top brands getting together and forming a league, on the other hand, *is* a massive revenue generator compared to being a member of the Big Ten or SEC.

Now, if the top 20 brands all decide to go independent and then all happen to play each other, then that’s a de facto Super League. Whether all 20 of those schools are prevented from pooling their media rights together in a way that wouldn’t be the case if they formed a conference is a grey area, although from a pure media rights standpoint, it’s a distinction without a difference.

The main issues with being a confederation of independents as opposed to an actual conference may be less about media rights and more about governance. Independence is great because there are no rules for me, but that also means that there are no rules for thee. Look at the litigation that the SEC and LSU are still going through - even Texas and Alabama don’t want to be playing against an LSU team that has certain types of players. We kind of give short shrift the governance piece a lot, but much like mergers and acquisitions, there are economics of scale and direct enforcement mechanism when there is a coordinated and concentrated group that are signed onto same by-laws that is simply impossible when that same group is subject to just a strict business arrangement for media rights.

I think the governance piece is underrated by a lot of fans. It’s something that is necessary and all schools want (or at least say that they want) but everyone hates doing it. That’s a large reason why the NCAA itself still exists. The Big Ten and SEC could theoretically just separate from the NCAA and create their own governance structure (and that has been suggested many times on this forum), but that require recreating all of the governance and administrative functions that the NCAA had before… and that both SUCKS in practice and, quite importantly, costs a lot of money to implement. Even the wealthiest conferences don’t want to be spending their money on hiring more governance and administrative officials - that’s exactly what they want to outsource.

Circling back, it’s another reason why the CFA - which did aggregate the media rights of many then-independents - ultimately went away. It was a pure media contract. That was all that bound those schools together. In essence, the schools were “dating” each other, but none of them were “married” to each other in the way that they would be in a conference or even under the NCAA. Now, we can say that a conference today is really just a reflection of its media contract, but there are still a lot more obligations when you sign onto the by-laws of an entity that go far beyond a media deal where you are really married to that organization legally. 16 independents can’t do a thing about LSU whereas the SEC with 16 members can actually do quite a bit to LSU.

Maximizing income in capitalism actually *does* require rule of law. Anarchy can temporarily make a few people more money, but ultimately it depresses the economy overall because stability of income requires, well, stability or at least working from certain rules. Asking independents to get together and agree on certain things but try to avoid being a conference is sort of attempting to have “coordinated anarchy” and that is an oxymoron at it’s core where it is very difficult to last beyond a temporary period (see the CFA era for college football). That’s more psychological than it is legal or even financial. Heck, to circle it back, the whole reason why Notre Dame is still independent is *psychological* (how it sees its identity) than it is financial.

Can we list TV/conference payouts for each to compare, instead of blanket statements about revenue?

I will start. ND gets:

$50 million a year from NBC
$18 million a year from the ACC.

So, around $68 million a year in TV/conference revenue, not total revenue.

ND made $289 million in total revenue last year, ranking #3 in the country.

ND was #1 in total football revenues.

What does the average Big Ten school make in TV revenue?

Total average revenue?

The SEC?

ACC?

Big 12?

Anyone have all of the numbers?

Conference distributions are never exactly apples-to-apples comparisons. At a high level, conferences touted their average per member distributions to legacy/full-time members in FY2024-25 as:

B1G - $80M (excludes Oregon & Washington which get partial shares)
SEC - $72M (excludes Texas & Oklahoma which received media distribution directly from ESPN)
ACC - $47M (excludes Cal, Stanford, SMU & Notre Dame which receive partial shares)
B12 - $40M (excludes BYU, Cincy, Houston & UCF which were still receiving partial shares via their old media contract)

(10-28-2026 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:53 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:12 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 06:45 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 06:39 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  NCAA ban on single sport FBS football conferences plus federal anti-trust issues with independent schools pooling media rights. I had a Thought Patrol on northern schools doing this last offseason and that was the ultimate answer. I suppose schools could try to not pool media rights but if they don't the networks will rip them apart. These "lesser blue bloods" like FSU and Clemson will never be able to get ND style deals because they don't have the ND fanbase's size or wealth. At best they get something equivalent to a little more than a maximum ACC share but with a miserable streaming deal that would see them off of America's televisions and out of America's thoughts.

You’ve hit on a Thought Patrol I’ve had for years: why are there ridiculous rules on pooling rights? Why can a conference of upwards into the 20’s pool rights, but a league of independents can’t? It’s absurd. Release the rights! Create a super bundle while maintaining conference membership. Use OOC games to schedule the big dawgs in the super bundle.

There’s not necessarily a rule on independents pooling media rights. It’s more about the marketplace and what’s the most lucrative option for the greatest number of schools, which is why independents eventually evaporated down to Notre Dame (by choice) and UConn (sort of forced into it if it wanted Big East basketball. The old College Football Association did pool the rights of independents (among others) before. Notre Dame makes more than the ACC schools, but even as a school with arguably the most nationalized fan base, it still makes less than the average Big Ten school. You can set up the greatest schedule ever, but if you’re independent, you’re still only selling the rights to *your* home games.

That’s why I’ve never bought true Notre Dame-style independence as a viable threat: if ND can’t make more than an aggregated Big Ten and SEC package, then realistically no one can. This makes sense with basic economics: the fewer sellers selling a product on a marketplace gives those sellers more pricing power. The Big Ten as an aggregate has more pricing power than if the 18 members went out and individually sold their media rights, to the point where the additional value of that aggregation is so overwhelming that Purdue makes more media money than Notre Dame down the road. That’s why antitrust law exists in the first place: it’s a basic truism that concentrating sellers into one entity drives up prices.

The Super League is what has always been the real threat. Even Ohio State and Alabama can’t really expect much different than Notre Dame-level rights fees (as the generally better schedules that Ohio State and Alabama have are tied to them being in the Big Ten and SEC). 20 of the top brands getting together and forming a league, on the other hand, *is* a massive revenue generator compared to being a member of the Big Ten or SEC.

Now, if the top 20 brands all decide to go independent and then all happen to play each other, then that’s a de facto Super League. Whether all 20 of those schools are prevented from pooling their media rights together in a way that wouldn’t be the case if they formed a conference is a grey area, although from a pure media rights standpoint, it’s a distinction without a difference.

The main issues with being a confederation of independents as opposed to an actual conference may be less about media rights and more about governance. Independence is great because there are no rules for me, but that also means that there are no rules for thee. Look at the litigation that the SEC and LSU are still going through - even Texas and Alabama don’t want to be playing against an LSU team that has certain types of players. We kind of give short shrift the governance piece a lot, but much like mergers and acquisitions, there are economics of scale and direct enforcement mechanism when there is a coordinated and concentrated group that are signed onto same by-laws that is simply impossible when that same group is subject to just a strict business arrangement for media rights.

I think the governance piece is underrated by a lot of fans. It’s something that is necessary and all schools want (or at least say that they want) but everyone hates doing it. That’s a large reason why the NCAA itself still exists. The Big Ten and SEC could theoretically just separate from the NCAA and create their own governance structure (and that has been suggested many times on this forum), but that require recreating all of the governance and administrative functions that the NCAA had before… and that both SUCKS in practice and, quite importantly, costs a lot of money to implement. Even the wealthiest conferences don’t want to be spending their money on hiring more governance and administrative officials - that’s exactly what they want to outsource.

Circling back, it’s another reason why the CFA - which did aggregate the media rights of many then-independents - ultimately went away. It was a pure media contract. That was all that bound those schools together. In essence, the schools were “dating” each other, but none of them were “married” to each other in the way that they would be in a conference or even under the NCAA. Now, we can say that a conference today is really just a reflection of its media contract, but there are still a lot more obligations when you sign onto the by-laws of an entity that go far beyond a media deal where you are really married to that organization legally. 16 independents can’t do a thing about LSU whereas the SEC with 16 members can actually do quite a bit to LSU.

Maximizing income in capitalism actually *does* require rule of law. Anarchy can temporarily make a few people more money, but ultimately it depresses the economy overall because stability of income requires, well, stability or at least working from certain rules. Asking independents to get together and agree on certain things but try to avoid being a conference is sort of attempting to have “coordinated anarchy” and that is an oxymoron at it’s core where it is very difficult to last beyond a temporary period (see the CFA era for college football). That’s more psychological than it is legal or even financial. Heck, to circle it back, the whole reason why Notre Dame is still independent is *psychological* (how it sees its identity) than it is financial.

Can we list TV/conference payouts for each to compare, instead of blanket statements about revenue?

I will start. ND gets:

$50 million a year from NBC
$18 million a year from the ACC.

So, around $68 million a year in TV/conference revenue, not total revenue.

ND made $289 million in total revenue last year, ranking #3 in the country.

ND was #1 in total football revenues.

What does the average Big Ten school make in TV revenue?

Total average revenue?

The SEC?

ACC?

Big 12?

Anyone have all of the numbers?

Conference distributions are never exactly apples-to-apples comparisons. At a high level, conferences touted their average per member distributions to legacy/full-time members in FY2024-25 as:

B1G - $80M (excludes Oregon & Washington which get partial shares)
SEC - $72M (excludes Texas & Oklahoma which received media distribution directly from ESPN)
ACC - $47M (excludes Cal, Stanford, SMU & Notre Dame which receive partial shares)
B12 - $40M (excludes BYU, Cincy, Houston & UCF which were still receiving partial shares via their old media contract)

Thanks for posting this.

Looking at these numbers and taking the CFP expansion into consideration, I think that it's certainly possible neither P2 expands and as a result, the M2 stay intact.

If that happens, all of the realignment will happen at the G level... and there could be a lot of it.

(10-28-2026 04:11 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:53 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:12 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 06:45 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  You’ve hit on a Thought Patrol I’ve had for years: why are there ridiculous rules on pooling rights? Why can a conference of upwards into the 20’s pool rights, but a league of independents can’t? It’s absurd. Release the rights! Create a super bundle while maintaining conference membership. Use OOC games to schedule the big dawgs in the super bundle.

There’s not necessarily a rule on independents pooling media rights. It’s more about the marketplace and what’s the most lucrative option for the greatest number of schools, which is why independents eventually evaporated down to Notre Dame (by choice) and UConn (sort of forced into it if it wanted Big East basketball. The old College Football Association did pool the rights of independents (among others) before. Notre Dame makes more than the ACC schools, but even as a school with arguably the most nationalized fan base, it still makes less than the average Big Ten school. You can set up the greatest schedule ever, but if you’re independent, you’re still only selling the rights to *your* home games.

That’s why I’ve never bought true Notre Dame-style independence as a viable threat: if ND can’t make more than an aggregated Big Ten and SEC package, then realistically no one can. This makes sense with basic economics: the fewer sellers selling a product on a marketplace gives those sellers more pricing power. The Big Ten as an aggregate has more pricing power than if the 18 members went out and individually sold their media rights, to the point where the additional value of that aggregation is so overwhelming that Purdue makes more media money than Notre Dame down the road. That’s why antitrust law exists in the first place: it’s a basic truism that concentrating sellers into one entity drives up prices.

The Super League is what has always been the real threat. Even Ohio State and Alabama can’t really expect much different than Notre Dame-level rights fees (as the generally better schedules that Ohio State and Alabama have are tied to them being in the Big Ten and SEC). 20 of the top brands getting together and forming a league, on the other hand, *is* a massive revenue generator compared to being a member of the Big Ten or SEC.

Now, if the top 20 brands all decide to go independent and then all happen to play each other, then that’s a de facto Super League. Whether all 20 of those schools are prevented from pooling their media rights together in a way that wouldn’t be the case if they formed a conference is a grey area, although from a pure media rights standpoint, it’s a distinction without a difference.

The main issues with being a confederation of independents as opposed to an actual conference may be less about media rights and more about governance. Independence is great because there are no rules for me, but that also means that there are no rules for thee. Look at the litigation that the SEC and LSU are still going through - even Texas and Alabama don’t want to be playing against an LSU team that has certain types of players. We kind of give short shrift the governance piece a lot, but much like mergers and acquisitions, there are economics of scale and direct enforcement mechanism when there is a coordinated and concentrated group that are signed onto same by-laws that is simply impossible when that same group is subject to just a strict business arrangement for media rights.

I think the governance piece is underrated by a lot of fans. It’s something that is necessary and all schools want (or at least say that they want) but everyone hates doing it. That’s a large reason why the NCAA itself still exists. The Big Ten and SEC could theoretically just separate from the NCAA and create their own governance structure (and that has been suggested many times on this forum), but that require recreating all of the governance and administrative functions that the NCAA had before… and that both SUCKS in practice and, quite importantly, costs a lot of money to implement. Even the wealthiest conferences don’t want to be spending their money on hiring more governance and administrative officials - that’s exactly what they want to outsource.

Circling back, it’s another reason why the CFA - which did aggregate the media rights of many then-independents - ultimately went away. It was a pure media contract. That was all that bound those schools together. In essence, the schools were “dating” each other, but none of them were “married” to each other in the way that they would be in a conference or even under the NCAA. Now, we can say that a conference today is really just a reflection of its media contract, but there are still a lot more obligations when you sign onto the by-laws of an entity that go far beyond a media deal where you are really married to that organization legally. 16 independents can’t do a thing about LSU whereas the SEC with 16 members can actually do quite a bit to LSU.

Maximizing income in capitalism actually *does* require rule of law. Anarchy can temporarily make a few people more money, but ultimately it depresses the economy overall because stability of income requires, well, stability or at least working from certain rules. Asking independents to get together and agree on certain things but try to avoid being a conference is sort of attempting to have “coordinated anarchy” and that is an oxymoron at it’s core where it is very difficult to last beyond a temporary period (see the CFA era for college football). That’s more psychological than it is legal or even financial. Heck, to circle it back, the whole reason why Notre Dame is still independent is *psychological* (how it sees its identity) than it is financial.

Can we list TV/conference payouts for each to compare, instead of blanket statements about revenue?

I will start. ND gets:

$50 million a year from NBC
$18 million a year from the ACC.

So, around $68 million a year in TV/conference revenue, not total revenue.

ND made $289 million in total revenue last year, ranking #3 in the country.

ND was #1 in total football revenues.

What does the average Big Ten school make in TV revenue?

Total average revenue?

The SEC?

ACC?

Big 12?

Anyone have all of the numbers?

Conference distributions are never exactly apples-to-apples comparisons. At a high level, conferences touted their average per member distributions to legacy/full-time members in FY2024-25 as:

B1G - $80M (excludes Oregon & Washington which get partial shares)
SEC - $72M (excludes Texas & Oklahoma which received media distribution directly from ESPN)
ACC - $47M (excludes Cal, Stanford, SMU & Notre Dame which receive partial shares)
B12 - $40M (excludes BYU, Cincy, Houston & UCF which were still receiving partial shares via their old media contract)

Thanks for posting this.

Looking at these numbers and taking the CFP expansion into consideration, I think that it's certainly possible neither P2 expands and as a result, the M2 stay intact.

If that happens, all of the realignment will happen at the G level... and there could be a lot of it.

Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.

Interesting to note the Big 12, even though it was last in the P4 and only half of the B1G, was 3x that of the top earners in the American and more like 4-5x on average the highest of the g conferences. There's obviously a sizeable gap between #1 and #4 on the list, but that gap between 4 and 5 is ENORMOUS. It's likely to stay about the same, perhaps even grow over time, whereas the gap amongst the P4 is likely to remain relatively constant.

Looking at most recent info, Big 12 is looking like $710m for this year, with the American at $127m last year and $137m 2 year average.

$710m/$137m = 5.18x factor, and the Big 12 revenues are skyrocketing while American revenues were down significantly year over year. Even assuming that the American stabilizes, which seems likely, that's still worse than a 5x factor right now. And, again, that's vs the lowest revenue conference in the P4.

Its possible P2 stays as is...but I think the ACC 6+ to 1 sport league, keeping rest of sports in ACC could gain momentum....Anywhere from 8-12 of us could break away in football, still schedule ACC schools and ND each year, but use that as the path to get a new tv deal(s) much sooner than 2036. Of course we have to pay ACC our 75 million, and figure out playoff access like ND...but that wasn't placed in the FSU/Clemson lawsuit for nothing. It could be a win for this group, win for ACC, win for some G6 as refillers to ACC, and win for Big 12 for not getting poached by ACC.

(10-28-2026 05:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 04:11 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:53 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:12 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There’s not necessarily a rule on independents pooling media rights. It’s more about the marketplace and what’s the most lucrative option for the greatest number of schools, which is why independents eventually evaporated down to Notre Dame (by choice) and UConn (sort of forced into it if it wanted Big East basketball. The old College Football Association did pool the rights of independents (among others) before. Notre Dame makes more than the ACC schools, but even as a school with arguably the most nationalized fan base, it still makes less than the average Big Ten school. You can set up the greatest schedule ever, but if you’re independent, you’re still only selling the rights to *your* home games.

That’s why I’ve never bought true Notre Dame-style independence as a viable threat: if ND can’t make more than an aggregated Big Ten and SEC package, then realistically no one can. This makes sense with basic economics: the fewer sellers selling a product on a marketplace gives those sellers more pricing power. The Big Ten as an aggregate has more pricing power than if the 18 members went out and individually sold their media rights, to the point where the additional value of that aggregation is so overwhelming that Purdue makes more media money than Notre Dame down the road. That’s why antitrust law exists in the first place: it’s a basic truism that concentrating sellers into one entity drives up prices.

The Super League is what has always been the real threat. Even Ohio State and Alabama can’t really expect much different than Notre Dame-level rights fees (as the generally better schedules that Ohio State and Alabama have are tied to them being in the Big Ten and SEC). 20 of the top brands getting together and forming a league, on the other hand, *is* a massive revenue generator compared to being a member of the Big Ten or SEC.

Now, if the top 20 brands all decide to go independent and then all happen to play each other, then that’s a de facto Super League. Whether all 20 of those schools are prevented from pooling their media rights together in a way that wouldn’t be the case if they formed a conference is a grey area, although from a pure media rights standpoint, it’s a distinction without a difference.

The main issues with being a confederation of independents as opposed to an actual conference may be less about media rights and more about governance. Independence is great because there are no rules for me, but that also means that there are no rules for thee. Look at the litigation that the SEC and LSU are still going through - even Texas and Alabama don’t want to be playing against an LSU team that has certain types of players. We kind of give short shrift the governance piece a lot, but much like mergers and acquisitions, there are economics of scale and direct enforcement mechanism when there is a coordinated and concentrated group that are signed onto same by-laws that is simply impossible when that same group is subject to just a strict business arrangement for media rights.

I think the governance piece is underrated by a lot of fans. It’s something that is necessary and all schools want (or at least say that they want) but everyone hates doing it. That’s a large reason why the NCAA itself still exists. The Big Ten and SEC could theoretically just separate from the NCAA and create their own governance structure (and that has been suggested many times on this forum), but that require recreating all of the governance and administrative functions that the NCAA had before… and that both SUCKS in practice and, quite importantly, costs a lot of money to implement. Even the wealthiest conferences don’t want to be spending their money on hiring more governance and administrative officials - that’s exactly what they want to outsource.

Circling back, it’s another reason why the CFA - which did aggregate the media rights of many then-independents - ultimately went away. It was a pure media contract. That was all that bound those schools together. In essence, the schools were “dating” each other, but none of them were “married” to each other in the way that they would be in a conference or even under the NCAA. Now, we can say that a conference today is really just a reflection of its media contract, but there are still a lot more obligations when you sign onto the by-laws of an entity that go far beyond a media deal where you are really married to that organization legally. 16 independents can’t do a thing about LSU whereas the SEC with 16 members can actually do quite a bit to LSU.

Maximizing income in capitalism actually *does* require rule of law. Anarchy can temporarily make a few people more money, but ultimately it depresses the economy overall because stability of income requires, well, stability or at least working from certain rules. Asking independents to get together and agree on certain things but try to avoid being a conference is sort of attempting to have “coordinated anarchy” and that is an oxymoron at it’s core where it is very difficult to last beyond a temporary period (see the CFA era for college football). That’s more psychological than it is legal or even financial. Heck, to circle it back, the whole reason why Notre Dame is still independent is *psychological* (how it sees its identity) than it is financial.

Can we list TV/conference payouts for each to compare, instead of blanket statements about revenue?

I will start. ND gets:

$50 million a year from NBC
$18 million a year from the ACC.

So, around $68 million a year in TV/conference revenue, not total revenue.

ND made $289 million in total revenue last year, ranking #3 in the country.

ND was #1 in total football revenues.

What does the average Big Ten school make in TV revenue?

Total average revenue?

The SEC?

ACC?

Big 12?

Anyone have all of the numbers?

Conference distributions are never exactly apples-to-apples comparisons. At a high level, conferences touted their average per member distributions to legacy/full-time members in FY2024-25 as:

B1G - $80M (excludes Oregon & Washington which get partial shares)
SEC - $72M (excludes Texas & Oklahoma which received media distribution directly from ESPN)
ACC - $47M (excludes Cal, Stanford, SMU & Notre Dame which receive partial shares)
B12 - $40M (excludes BYU, Cincy, Houston & UCF which were still receiving partial shares via their old media contract)

Thanks for posting this.

Looking at these numbers and taking the CFP expansion into consideration, I think that it's certainly possible neither P2 expands and as a result, the M2 stay intact.

If that happens, all of the realignment will happen at the G level... and there could be a lot of it.

Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.

Interesting to note the Big 12, even though it was last in the P4 and only half of the B1G, was 3x that of the top earners in the American and more like 4-5x on average the highest of the g conferences. There's obviously a sizeable gap between #1 and #4 on the list, but that gap between 4 and 5 is ENORMOUS. It's likely to stay about the same, perhaps even grow over time, whereas the gap amongst the P4 is likely to remain relatively constant.

Looking at most recent info, Big 12 is looking like $710m for this year, with the American at $127m last year and $137m 2 year average.

$710m/$137m = 5.18x factor, and the Big 12 revenues are skyrocketing while American revenues were down significantly year over year. Even assuming that the American stabilizes, which seems likely, that's still worse than a 5x factor right now. And, again, that's vs the lowest revenue conference in the P4.

Fear is a powerful motivator. And for state flagship AAU programs to think that their conference home will be seen as second tier is motivation enough, especially in the coming enrollment decline where visibility of your school to prospective students is essential. It's about a helluva lot more than football, or even blueblood hoops. So there is fear of falling further behind financially in athletics, the fear of losing appeal to prospective students, the fear of being thought of as second tier to what any peer universities will be enjoying, and the fear of angering alumni all indicate moves.

Now back to the numbers if you prorate out what the Big Ten would have made if every school had gotten an equal share the difference in media revenue shrinks to about 3 to 4 million. Not having to travel as much as the Big Ten pretty well levels that out.

(10-28-2026 02:21 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 11:12 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 10:31 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 06:23 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-22-2026 10:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  Conferences have never been a significant part of the marketplace. CFA was pretty significant and nobody challenged it. But nobody was forced into it. It was voluntary. And then it broke apart with first Notre Dame and then everyone else leaving. Maybe the SEC and Big Ten are getting significant, but on the other hand, nobody is impairing the other conferences from getting TV contracts.

Conferences have been an extremely significant part of the media landscape since the 80’s. I don’t understand how anyone can deny that.

What started as administrative offices that handled rules, refs, and scheduling have turned into brands. Brands that are now being sponsored by other brands!

The B1G and SEC have caused significant disadvantages around CFB via their hostile takeover. They’ve decreased value of other conferences to the point university presidents are classifying conferences in monetary tiers which hold specific voting power. Meanwhile there are silly restrictions around any other form of media bundling outside the conference structure. That looks like a market takeover to me.*

I feel like there is a pretty strong case being built here.




*Insert predictable “ACC dId It ToO So Ur pOiNt InVaLiD!”

Doesn’t mean I EVER supported it personally. I didn’t.

Nonsense. Everyone is making more money than ever. It’s just that the P2 are growing faster.

It's not nonsense. The B1G and SEC have the final say in the CFP, yet that is what every FBS school is vying for. The only reason they wield more power is due to their media bundling.

The only reason the P2 wield more power is that all but a couple of the top Brands in all of CFB are in one or the other. That's also why ND gets a bigger seat at the table than other Independents like UConn. Saying the P2 wield a lot of power is really just saying that Alabama and OSU wield a lot of power, which is obvious to one and all.

I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me or agreeing with me in a way that sounds like you aren’t

(10-28-2026 06:04 PM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 02:21 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 11:12 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 10:31 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 06:23 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  Conferences have been an extremely significant part of the media landscape since the 80’s. I don’t understand how anyone can deny that.

What started as administrative offices that handled rules, refs, and scheduling have turned into brands. Brands that are now being sponsored by other brands!

The B1G and SEC have caused significant disadvantages around CFB via their hostile takeover. They’ve decreased value of other conferences to the point university presidents are classifying conferences in monetary tiers which hold specific voting power. Meanwhile there are silly restrictions around any other form of media bundling outside the conference structure. That looks like a market takeover to me.*

I feel like there is a pretty strong case being built here.




*Insert predictable “ACC dId It ToO So Ur pOiNt InVaLiD!”

Doesn’t mean I EVER supported it personally. I didn’t.

Nonsense. Everyone is making more money than ever. It’s just that the P2 are growing faster.

It's not nonsense. The B1G and SEC have the final say in the CFP, yet that is what every FBS school is vying for. The only reason they wield more power is due to their media bundling.

The only reason the P2 wield more power is that all but a couple of the top Brands in all of CFB are in one or the other. That's also why ND gets a bigger seat at the table than other Independents like UConn. Saying the P2 wield a lot of power is really just saying that Alabama and OSU wield a lot of power, which is obvious to one and all.

I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me or agreeing with me in a way that sounds like you aren’t

You are not a King without your court and subjects. Alabama and Ohio State (or pick your favorite would-be kings) need their associations and if they didn't have them their crown would not only tarnish in an off year but may get melted for scrap. That's why there are usually two or three would-be kings in each P2 conference. If one slips you have options. It was never just Alabama and Ohio State and I would argue Alabama was supplanted by Texas and Georgia and possibly a couple of others.

(10-28-2026 05:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 04:11 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:53 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:12 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There’s not necessarily a rule on independents pooling media rights. It’s more about the marketplace and what’s the most lucrative option for the greatest number of schools, which is why independents eventually evaporated down to Notre Dame (by choice) and UConn (sort of forced into it if it wanted Big East basketball. The old College Football Association did pool the rights of independents (among others) before. Notre Dame makes more than the ACC schools, but even as a school with arguably the most nationalized fan base, it still makes less than the average Big Ten school. You can set up the greatest schedule ever, but if you’re independent, you’re still only selling the rights to *your* home games.

That’s why I’ve never bought true Notre Dame-style independence as a viable threat: if ND can’t make more than an aggregated Big Ten and SEC package, then realistically no one can. This makes sense with basic economics: the fewer sellers selling a product on a marketplace gives those sellers more pricing power. The Big Ten as an aggregate has more pricing power than if the 18 members went out and individually sold their media rights, to the point where the additional value of that aggregation is so overwhelming that Purdue makes more media money than Notre Dame down the road. That’s why antitrust law exists in the first place: it’s a basic truism that concentrating sellers into one entity drives up prices.

The Super League is what has always been the real threat. Even Ohio State and Alabama can’t really expect much different than Notre Dame-level rights fees (as the generally better schedules that Ohio State and Alabama have are tied to them being in the Big Ten and SEC). 20 of the top brands getting together and forming a league, on the other hand, *is* a massive revenue generator compared to being a member of the Big Ten or SEC.

Now, if the top 20 brands all decide to go independent and then all happen to play each other, then that’s a de facto Super League. Whether all 20 of those schools are prevented from pooling their media rights together in a way that wouldn’t be the case if they formed a conference is a grey area, although from a pure media rights standpoint, it’s a distinction without a difference.

The main issues with being a confederation of independents as opposed to an actual conference may be less about media rights and more about governance. Independence is great because there are no rules for me, but that also means that there are no rules for thee. Look at the litigation that the SEC and LSU are still going through - even Texas and Alabama don’t want to be playing against an LSU team that has certain types of players. We kind of give short shrift the governance piece a lot, but much like mergers and acquisitions, there are economics of scale and direct enforcement mechanism when there is a coordinated and concentrated group that are signed onto same by-laws that is simply impossible when that same group is subject to just a strict business arrangement for media rights.

I think the governance piece is underrated by a lot of fans. It’s something that is necessary and all schools want (or at least say that they want) but everyone hates doing it. That’s a large reason why the NCAA itself still exists. The Big Ten and SEC could theoretically just separate from the NCAA and create their own governance structure (and that has been suggested many times on this forum), but that require recreating all of the governance and administrative functions that the NCAA had before… and that both SUCKS in practice and, quite importantly, costs a lot of money to implement. Even the wealthiest conferences don’t want to be spending their money on hiring more governance and administrative officials - that’s exactly what they want to outsource.

Circling back, it’s another reason why the CFA - which did aggregate the media rights of many then-independents - ultimately went away. It was a pure media contract. That was all that bound those schools together. In essence, the schools were “dating” each other, but none of them were “married” to each other in the way that they would be in a conference or even under the NCAA. Now, we can say that a conference today is really just a reflection of its media contract, but there are still a lot more obligations when you sign onto the by-laws of an entity that go far beyond a media deal where you are really married to that organization legally. 16 independents can’t do a thing about LSU whereas the SEC with 16 members can actually do quite a bit to LSU.

Maximizing income in capitalism actually *does* require rule of law. Anarchy can temporarily make a few people more money, but ultimately it depresses the economy overall because stability of income requires, well, stability or at least working from certain rules. Asking independents to get together and agree on certain things but try to avoid being a conference is sort of attempting to have “coordinated anarchy” and that is an oxymoron at it’s core where it is very difficult to last beyond a temporary period (see the CFA era for college football). That’s more psychological than it is legal or even financial. Heck, to circle it back, the whole reason why Notre Dame is still independent is *psychological* (how it sees its identity) than it is financial.

Can we list TV/conference payouts for each to compare, instead of blanket statements about revenue?

I will start. ND gets:

$50 million a year from NBC
$18 million a year from the ACC.

So, around $68 million a year in TV/conference revenue, not total revenue.

ND made $289 million in total revenue last year, ranking #3 in the country.

ND was #1 in total football revenues.

What does the average Big Ten school make in TV revenue?

Total average revenue?

The SEC?

ACC?

Big 12?

Anyone have all of the numbers?

Conference distributions are never exactly apples-to-apples comparisons. At a high level, conferences touted their average per member distributions to legacy/full-time members in FY2024-25 as:

B1G - $80M (excludes Oregon & Washington which get partial shares)
SEC - $72M (excludes Texas & Oklahoma which received media distribution directly from ESPN)
ACC - $47M (excludes Cal, Stanford, SMU & Notre Dame which receive partial shares)
B12 - $40M (excludes BYU, Cincy, Houston & UCF which were still receiving partial shares via their old media contract)

Thanks for posting this.

Looking at these numbers and taking the CFP expansion into consideration, I think that it's certainly possible neither P2 expands and as a result, the M2 stay intact.

If that happens, all of the realignment will happen at the G level... and there could be a lot of it.

Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.

Interesting to note the Big 12, even though it was last in the P4 and only half of the B1G, was 3x that of the top earners in the American and more like 4-5x on average the highest of the g conferences. There's obviously a sizeable gap between #1 and #4 on the list, but that gap between 4 and 5 is ENORMOUS. It's likely to stay about the same, perhaps even grow over time, whereas the gap amongst the P4 is likely to remain relatively constant.

Looking at most recent info, Big 12 is looking like $710m for this year, with the American at $127m last year and $137m 2 year average.

$710m/$137m = 5.18x factor, and the Big 12 revenues are skyrocketing while American revenues were down significantly year over year. Even assuming that the American stabilizes, which seems likely, that's still worse than a 5x factor right now. And, again, that's vs the lowest revenue conference in the P4.

I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

(10-28-2026 08:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 05:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 04:11 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-23-2026 08:53 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Can we list TV/conference payouts for each to compare, instead of blanket statements about revenue?

I will start. ND gets:

$50 million a year from NBC
$18 million a year from the ACC.

So, around $68 million a year in TV/conference revenue, not total revenue.

ND made $289 million in total revenue last year, ranking #3 in the country.

ND was #1 in total football revenues.

What does the average Big Ten school make in TV revenue?

Total average revenue?

The SEC?

ACC?

Big 12?

Anyone have all of the numbers?

Conference distributions are never exactly apples-to-apples comparisons. At a high level, conferences touted their average per member distributions to legacy/full-time members in FY2024-25 as:

B1G - $80M (excludes Oregon & Washington which get partial shares)
SEC - $72M (excludes Texas & Oklahoma which received media distribution directly from ESPN)
ACC - $47M (excludes Cal, Stanford, SMU & Notre Dame which receive partial shares)
B12 - $40M (excludes BYU, Cincy, Houston & UCF which were still receiving partial shares via their old media contract)

Thanks for posting this.

Looking at these numbers and taking the CFP expansion into consideration, I think that it's certainly possible neither P2 expands and as a result, the M2 stay intact.

If that happens, all of the realignment will happen at the G level... and there could be a lot of it.

Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.

Interesting to note the Big 12, even though it was last in the P4 and only half of the B1G, was 3x that of the top earners in the American and more like 4-5x on average the highest of the g conferences. There's obviously a sizeable gap between #1 and #4 on the list, but that gap between 4 and 5 is ENORMOUS. It's likely to stay about the same, perhaps even grow over time, whereas the gap amongst the P4 is likely to remain relatively constant.

Looking at most recent info, Big 12 is looking like $710m for this year, with the American at $127m last year and $137m 2 year average.

$710m/$137m = 5.18x factor, and the Big 12 revenues are skyrocketing while American revenues were down significantly year over year. Even assuming that the American stabilizes, which seems likely, that's still worse than a 5x factor right now. And, again, that's vs the lowest revenue conference in the P4.

I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

Those Goobers don't know any more than you do. If six of the best programs leave the ACC for the Big Ten and SEC the gap grows it does not remain constant! The reason why is equally obvious. You can't get sufficient value from the Big 12 in replacing them. What you could get is more football value. But even there if you do lose football schools it is going to be a downer if you lose Clemson, Florida State and Miami. Of those you could survive and do alright losing just Miami.

If Clemson and FSU leave it doesn't speak well for ESPN's continued interest in the survivability of the ACC as a P4. If the hoops schools leave even with Miami you could grow easily with old PAC schools or the best of the Big 12 and do well enough. This isn't a this or that proposition. It's an if this then that one.

If Duke, Virginia and North Carolina leave even if it is with Miami it means that ESPN has plans for the ACC as a football product. If Clemson, FSU and Miami leave it means they don't.

(10-28-2026 08:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 05:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.
....

I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

If chances are “zero,” the SEC and B1G seem not to have told Miami.

Odd, that—when it wouldn’t be difficult for the league offices to shoot off that email, and save everyone a lot of hassle.

We’ll see how things go.

(10-29-2026 08:58 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 08:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 05:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.
....

I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

If chances are “zero,” the SEC and B1G seem not to have told Miami.

Odd, that—when it wouldn’t be difficult for the league offices to shoot off that email, and save everyone a lot of hassle.

We’ll see how things go.

Thamel is good, but I believe he is wrong. Miami has hope with the Big 10. The SEC? No, very, very unlikely.

(10-29-2026 09:19 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 08:58 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 08:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 05:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.
....

I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

If chances are “zero,” the SEC and B1G seem not to have told Miami.

Odd, that—when it wouldn’t be difficult for the league offices to shoot off that email, and save everyone a lot of hassle.

We’ll see how things go.

Thamel is good, but I believe he is wrong. Miami has hope with the Big 10. The SEC? No, very, very unlikely.

I've not read Thamel's reasoning but find it hard to believe that Miami would not be desired by the SEC or the B10, given their viewership and market.

(10-29-2026 10:05 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 09:19 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 08:58 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 08:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 05:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Feels like there's too much smoke coming out of certain ACC schools to have ZERO P2 moves on the horizon, but I do think that they'll be limited to 2-4, regardless of whether the PCSA passes or not.
....

I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

If chances are “zero,” the SEC and B1G seem not to have told Miami.

Odd, that—when it wouldn’t be difficult for the league offices to shoot off that email, and save everyone a lot of hassle.

We’ll see how things go.

Thamel is good, but I believe he is wrong. Miami has hope with the Big 10. The SEC? No, very, very unlikely.

I've not read Thamel's reasoning but find it hard to believe that Miami would not be desired by the SEC or the B10, given their viewership and market.

Essentially it boils down to economics.

The next B1G deal will first and foremost calculate Oregon and Washington as fully vested members. As I've said, this is "expansion 1." Anything beyond that will have to bring enough monetary value to increase 18 other schools' paychecks.

The SEC, on the other hand, could expand with a pro-rata right now if they wanted. At least everyone assumes they have at least two left in the chamber. However, what is the impetus to expand unless 1) there is a real threat by the B1G to meaningfully encroach on their product 2) a recalculation of the entire deal is on the table and 3) the negotiation window is open (not until the 30's) and expansion models are put on the table.

(10-29-2026 10:18 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 10:05 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 09:19 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 08:58 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 08:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

If chances are “zero,” the SEC and B1G seem not to have told Miami.

Odd, that—when it wouldn’t be difficult for the league offices to shoot off that email, and save everyone a lot of hassle.

We’ll see how things go.

Thamel is good, but I believe he is wrong. Miami has hope with the Big 10. The SEC? No, very, very unlikely.

I've not read Thamel's reasoning but find it hard to believe that Miami would not be desired by the SEC or the B10, given their viewership and market.

Essentially it boils down to economics.

The next B1G deal will first and foremost calculate Oregon and Washington as fully vested members. As I've said, this is "expansion 1." Anything beyond that will have to bring enough monetary value to increase 18 other schools' paychecks.

The SEC, on the other hand, could expand with a pro-rata right now if they wanted. At least everyone assumes they have at least two left in the chamber. However, what is the impetus to expand unless 1) there is a real threat by the B1G to meaningfully encroach on their product 2) a recalculation of the entire deal is on the table and 3) the negotiation window is open (not until the 30's) and expansion models are put on the table.

Your first paragraph doesn't make economic sense. The B$G added them knowing they paid for themselves. But the B$G wanted to milk them like they did Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland. USC and UCLA were too valuable, so they couldn't offer them peanuts. So yes, they need a raise of 1/17th to keep the same payout since they each get a half share, but they have already factored the value of those schools in and it was more than 1/18th.

(10-29-2026 10:18 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 10:05 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 09:19 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 08:58 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-28-2026 08:52 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I have been saying that man.

I was listening to Colleg Gameday pod cast and Pete Thamel said Miami has zero chance with the SEC and a pretty long shot chance with the B10.

If chances are “zero,” the SEC and B1G seem not to have told Miami.

Odd, that—when it wouldn’t be difficult for the league offices to shoot off that email, and save everyone a lot of hassle.

We’ll see how things go.

Thamel is good, but I believe he is wrong. Miami has hope with the Big 10. The SEC? No, very, very unlikely.

I've not read Thamel's reasoning but find it hard to believe that Miami would not be desired by the SEC or the B10, given their viewership and market.

Essentially it boils down to economics.

The next B1G deal will first and foremost calculate Oregon and Washington as fully vested members. As I've said, this is "expansion 1." Anything beyond that will have to bring enough monetary value to increase 18 other schools' paychecks.

The SEC, on the other hand, could expand with a pro-rata right now if they wanted. At least everyone assumes they have at least two left in the chamber. However, what is the impetus to expand unless 1) there is a real threat by the B1G to meaningfully encroach on their product 2) a recalculation of the entire deal is on the table and 3) the negotiation window is open (not until the 30's) and expansion models are put on the table.

Actually, Thamel's reasoning is "b/c school Presidents told me so", then he tried to explain their reasoning to himself the way that we are now.

Spot on with the reasons or lack thereof to expand. If the B1G isn't making a move, there's no reason for the SEC to do anything until 2034 or thereabouts, UNLESS we get a huge windfall to move earlier than that. ND probably provides that windfall, but nobody else would.

As for Thamel and McMurphy, I'll just reiterate my old points that the B1G Presidents (per Frank) all just assumed that they'd want Cal and Stanford until they looked at the Economics of it, then suddenly they had zero interest. UVA won't be that bad, but it will be pretty bad, certainly far below "replacement value", and even further below 11+1=13 as Frank said so long ago. Much more than for UNC, the current ACC is the perfect Conference for UVA.

(10-29-2026 12:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 10:18 AM)Dr Dawgma III Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 10:05 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 09:19 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(10-29-2026 08:58 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  If chances are “zero,” the SEC and B1G seem not to have told Miami.

Odd, that—when it wouldn’t be difficult for the league offices to shoot off that email, and save everyone a lot of hassle.

We’ll see how things go.

Thamel is good, but I believe he is wrong. Miami has hope with the Big 10. The SEC? No, very, very unlikely.

I've not read Thamel's reasoning but find it hard to believe that Miami would not be desired by the SEC or the B10, given their viewership and market.

Essentially it boils down to economics.

The next B1G deal will first and foremost calculate Oregon and Washington as fully vested members. As I've said, this is "expansion 1." Anything beyond that will have to bring enough monetary value to increase 18 other schools' paychecks.

The SEC, on the other hand, could expand with a pro-rata right now if they wanted. At least everyone assumes they have at least two left in the chamber. However, what is the impetus to expand unless 1) there is a real threat by the B1G to meaningfully encroach on their product 2) a recalculation of the entire deal is on the table and 3) the negotiation window is open (not until the 30's) and expansion models are put on the table.

Your first paragraph doesn't make economic sense. The B$G added them knowing they paid for themselves. But the B$G wanted to milk them like they did Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland. USC and UCLA were too valuable, so they couldn't offer them peanuts. So yes, they need a raise of 1/17th to keep the same payout since they each get a half share, but they have already factored the value of those schools in and it was more than 1/18th.

It gets really fun when you factor in how much more than $100m+ a school needs to bring to actually be worth the hassle of adding just one more.

Let's use the B1G here as the example. A school needs $100m in value just to break even, plus bring commensurate addition value for bowls and other sports. Let's call it $110m total.

For each additional $1m in value to the rest of the Conference, they need to bring another $20m (for 19 schools + 1 for B1G office). But $1m isn't really enough to get Iowa and Washington to vote in a distant school like Miami, they'll pay at least that much in extra costs yearly. So, let's say that "breakeven + $10m + $2m per share holder" is the real "slightly more than additive" that Oregon and Washington brought to the B1G back in 2023. We've already seen that Cal and Stanford's Academics only took them so far, it's difficult to see why UVA's would be any different to the snobby B1G Presidents.

$100m
$10m for bowl payouts, mbb, other sports
$40m for $2m per school + B1G office

We're looking at around $150m in value brought to the Conference to get the 70-75% votes you need from the P2. Perhaps a bit less for the SEC if a school like UNC or UVA is right in our wheelhouse, perhaps a bit more if a school is really far away and has a rough and tumble history like FSU and Miami, but something in that range.

Not many will sniff $100m, much less $150m in value, thus leading to my prediction of very little action in the coming years.

(10-28-2026 05:40 PM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  Its possible P2 stays as is...but I think the ACC 6+ to 1 sport league, keeping rest of sports in ACC could gain momentum....Anywhere from 8-12 of us could break away in football, still schedule ACC schools and ND each year, but use that as the path to get a new tv deal(s) much sooner than 2036. Of course we have to pay ACC our 75 million, and figure out playoff access like ND...but that wasn't placed in the FSU/Clemson lawsuit for nothing. It could be a win for this group, win for ACC, win for some G6 as refillers to ACC, and win for Big 12 for not getting poached by ACC.

UCF, Cincinnati and West Virginia might be good with UConn to form a much better M3 conference that can get more money as they seemed to be a much bigger brand media wise for all sports. There are rules against a single football only conference in the FBS. Notre Dame might want it as well. Getting the UConn basketball brands with you would help. Then you don't have Boston College blocking them from being added.