No!

No

(08-06-2022 09:36 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  No, but furthermore why would they want to? Similar or better money than the B1G (depending on who signed their deal last), better local rivals with Texas A&M, LSU, & Arkansas being in-conference rivals for both. Additional great matchups vs Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, and even Tennessee (when they get good). The only benefit I see would be academic, but academics are not sufficient to reverse a move like the one they just made.

Academics don't matter. Being in the Big Ten doesn't make your university better academically. OU and UT made the clearly best choice when they opted for the SEC, knowing that the Big Ten would also take them. It still is.

UTx isn't going to leave the mighty SEC for the B1G, unless the B1G makes an unexpected, major power move when it's immediately available: a ND/FSU/UNC/UVA/UW/UO/etc. kind of play. The odds of that lining up for the B1G are slim right now. ND alone won't be enough to flip the Horns unless it involves a heckuva sweetheart deal and that isn't going to happen in this era.

No, but Missouri might.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

(08-07-2022 05:52 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:36 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  No, but furthermore why would they want to? Similar or better money than the B1G (depending on who signed their deal last), better local rivals with Texas A&M, LSU, & Arkansas being in-conference rivals for both. Additional great matchups vs Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, and even Tennessee (when they get good). The only benefit I see would be academic, but academics are not sufficient to reverse a move like the one they just made.

Academics don't matter. Being in the Big Ten doesn't make your university better academically. OU and UT made the clearly best choice when they opted for the SEC, knowing that the Big Ten would also take them. It still is.

I agree with you that OU and UT have already made their choice and will not make the switch. They determined the SEC to be the right choice for them and it is understandable.

I disagree that academics don’t matter. In fact, they matter greatly to some. While the BIG likely would have overlooked OU’s rankings because of their brand power, they certainly would not do so for just anyone. Also understand power of the Big Ten Academic Alliance, which accounts for $12 billion in combined research grants every year. This is a big deal to member universities and has significant economic input in their communities. Academics aren’t driving the bus on realignment, but they are holding the map for some…

(08-07-2022 08:17 AM)NotoriousOne Wrote:  

(08-07-2022 05:52 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:36 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  No, but furthermore why would they want to? Similar or better money than the B1G (depending on who signed their deal last), better local rivals with Texas A&M, LSU, & Arkansas being in-conference rivals for both. Additional great matchups vs Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, and even Tennessee (when they get good). The only benefit I see would be academic, but academics are not sufficient to reverse a move like the one they just made.

Academics don't matter. Being in the Big Ten doesn't make your university better academically. OU and UT made the clearly best choice when they opted for the SEC, knowing that the Big Ten would also take them. It still is.

I agree with you that OU and UT have already made their choice and will not make the switch. They determined the SEC to be the right choice for them and it is understandable.

I disagree that academics don’t matter. In fact, they matter greatly to some. While the BIG likely would have overlooked OU’s rankings because of their brand power, they certainly would not do so for just anyone. Also understand power of the Big Ten Academic Alliance, which accounts for $12 billion in combined research grants every year. This is a big deal to member universities and has significant economic input in their communities. Academics aren’t driving the bus on realignment, but they are holding the map for some…

When I said that academics don't matter I was referring to the fact that being a part of the Big Ten consortium doesn't bring to a university any research grant it would not have gotten on its own. That $12 billion isn't shared - it's nothing more than adding up the totals each individual university earned on its own. The communities that member schools reside in don't get any bonus for being in a particular athletic conference.

That being said, some university presidents may prefer to rub shoulders with counterparts in a different conference than the one they find themselves in.

What if OUT chose the B1G to begin with?

I think they would have kept East West divisions due to balance:

West: UN, OUT, Iowa, Wisc, Illinois, NWU, Minn
East: Purdue Indiana Rutgers Maryland, UM, OSU, MSU, PSU

Would the SEC have made any additional moves? Probably not.

PAC12 never loses LA.

And then.... perhaps UNC and NC State to the SEC in 2036? Things would have definitely stabilized though. I don't think the SEC would have added any additional Big 12 teams.

Big 12 still adds the same four.

(08-07-2022 07:59 AM)b2b Wrote:  No, but Missouri might.

Not sure how Mizzou would fit in to B1G plans these days, but IMO that would be best for them and the SEC.

(08-06-2022 09:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I believe it is possible. I have long thought the B1G's new deal would put it substantially ahead of even the SEC going forward, which could prompt such a switch.

I have long held that the SEC's 2008 deal has and will continue to tamp down its earnings compared to the B1G, and I think this might come to a head when the new B1G deal is announced. Over the past 15 years, the B1G has IMO been smarter about TV deals, by keeping its eggs in separate baskets and most importantly, by signing shorter deals to capture rising rights fees.

Others disagree. We soon shall see, I've been wrong before.

I agree with you relative to the B1G’s mastery of media rights and its potential growth. The B1G has a much rosier future in terms of payouts and diversification. Delaney and Warren are transformative stewards of media rights.

Nevertheless, I completely disagree with the suggestion that UT and OU would consider a switch of conferences. Teams still need to fill up their large stadiums, and schools need to cater to their boosters.

(08-07-2022 09:00 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I believe it is possible. I have long thought the B1G's new deal would put it substantially ahead of even the SEC going forward, which could prompt such a switch.

I have long held that the SEC's 2008 deal has and will continue to tamp down its earnings compared to the B1G, and I think this might come to a head when the new B1G deal is announced. Over the past 15 years, the B1G has IMO been smarter about TV deals, by keeping its eggs in separate baskets and most importantly, by signing shorter deals to capture rising rights fees.

Others disagree. We soon shall see, I've been wrong before.

I agree with you relative to the B1G’s mastery of media rights and its potential growth. The B1G has a much rosier future in terms of payouts and diversification. Delaney and Warren are transformative stewards of media rights.

Nevertheless, I completely disagree with the suggestion that UT and OU would consider a switch of conferences. Teams still need to fill up their large stadiums, and schools need to cater to their boosters.

Well, that last part didn't stop USC and UCLA. I can't imagine that any (well, not literally any, but most) USC and UCLA supporters are happy from a fan interest standpoint about being in a conference centered 2,000 miles away, and are looking forward to conference games vs Iowa, Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, and Minnesota. Heck, even games vs the big brands will field weird as conference games.

I don't think TX and OU to the B1G is likely either, but IMO it is in the realm of possibility. We'll see.

No

(08-04-2022 12:07 PM)LeeNobody Wrote:  Many have speculated that the future of CFB is a p2 but what if it is actually a P1. UT and OU will not join the SEC till after USC and UCLA will join the B1G. I know it is crazy, but they are technically not committed to the SEC till there is a contract in hand. It would be the coup of the century, but paired with ND you would have an incredible superleague, that could not be matched for brands.

What would the offer have to be? Would others from the SEC start trying to leave?

No, they had a shot and rejected it, or they were rejected by the B10. Same with PAC12. They are going to the conference they want to be in. Just follow the money.

(08-07-2022 09:00 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(08-06-2022 09:55 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I believe it is possible. I have long thought the B1G's new deal would put it substantially ahead of even the SEC going forward, which could prompt such a switch.

I have long held that the SEC's 2008 deal has and will continue to tamp down its earnings compared to the B1G, and I think this might come to a head when the new B1G deal is announced. Over the past 15 years, the B1G has IMO been smarter about TV deals, by keeping its eggs in separate baskets and most importantly, by signing shorter deals to capture rising rights fees.

Others disagree. We soon shall see, I've been wrong before.

I agree with you relative to the B1G’s mastery of media rights and its potential growth. The B1G has a much rosier future in terms of payouts and diversification. Delaney and Warren are transformative stewards of media rights.

Nevertheless, I completely disagree with the suggestion that UT and OU would consider a switch of conferences. Teams still need to fill up their large stadiums, and schools need to cater to their boosters.

What exactly has Warren done? Fox is driving this, and that is because of the work Delaney did.