(08-08-2017 12:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 10:30 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 07:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  The more I look at this:
Dennis Dodd @dennisdoddcbs
·
3m
More and more administrators telling me really hard to go beyond 14. We may have reached peak expansion, super conferences.

Dennis Dodd
Dennis Dodd @dennisdoddcbs
·
5m
"If you go much beyond where we are, it's more like an association," Delany on further expansion. Hearing this more and more.


the more i'm beginning to think that the B1G, SEC and ACC are done.
The PAC only needs to add the two things they need most. Windows for the rest of the country to see PAC football and basketball. That could be accomplished with Kansas and Oklahoma to get the PAC to 14 members.
Texas would become the "new Notre Dame" with a partial football deal with somebody (PAC/SEC/B1G....most likely the PAC which would include Oklahoma as a permanent) and their other sports in the western division of the American. Which would include two schools in Kansas (Wichita State, Kansas State) , two in Oklahoma (Oklahoma State, Tulsa) , 5 in Texas (Houston, SMU, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU). The other side of the American would include Iowa State, Tulane, UConn, Temple. East Carolina, UCF, USF, Memphis and Cincinnati).

This way we end up with 4 X 14 and two Prima Donnas and one really good league of 18 (which is the best of the rest).
Playoffs could be expanded to 6, one spot for the American and 1 at large to go with the 4 champions of the P4.

This like a lot of scenarios is pure speculation in an effort to find something workable to bring things to a close. But I find this one very realistic in that it evens the playing field between the P4, parks Texas in a place that they will be happy, and gives the PAC the two things they need with eastern audiences (access to the west and blue-bloods in both sports to lend credibility to eastern viewers).

X, the whole picture is complicated by the word "peak". I think it is operative, but not with what is a workable number of schools. 16 is truly easier to work with for scheduling, geographical groups, and providing a reason for conference semis (which would be about money) than is 14. I think the word "peak" is operative because of revenue. So what Delany and Dodds may really be hinting at is that we are peaking on revenue which means 14 is as big as you get.....for some conferences. Delany didn't say the Big 10 had peaked, but in truth at 51.1 million in 2018 projected I don't think even Kansas adds to their bottom line.

So Delany is soft soaping his audience for the eventuality that the Big 10 can't land Texas and therefore Oklahoma as a single entity doesn't do it for them academically and doesn't match them well for minor sports. Therefore they are done until they can get into Virginia or North Carolina. But that should that eventuality ever come 16 may be as big as they get.

Now after this season the SEC will be sitting at 43 million an by 2018 we should be around 45-46 million. At that range of income we could profit a bit more with Oklahoma and Texas and their sports actually fit ours better than they do the Big 10. But the same may be said of the PAC and the ACC.

I think you need to revisit the 15 concept as it has a particular interest if we have peaked in income. It would lead to 3 divisions of 5 per conference and that would open up conference semis with the best at large. All of that could boost revenue.

If we head there then Oklahoma to the SEC, West Virginia to the ACC, and Texas and Kansas to the PAC perhaps with Texas Tech makes some sense. Oklahoma would put the SEC at or near 50 million. Texas and Kansas would boost the PAC and WVU gives the ACC a boost. I think the Big 10 would sit at 14 for now.

From the start of all of this most have said the final number could be between 60 to 72 for inclusion in the upper tier. So all we are saying here is that it is looking more like 60 than 64 and 72 is probably priced out of the game.

Money becomes the ultimate problem.
If the SEC adds Oklahoma and Oklahoma State it gets pricey.
Each schools in the SEC will expect an increase, because that's what has happened in the past. For the pair lets say $4 Million each, so that's what $56 million add on the payout for both schools at $45 million each. JR, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State aren't worth $150 million and ESPN would be crazy to guarantee that kind of money for that pair for 20 years.
Texas may be worth even less to the SEC than Oklahoma, because your already getting cable fees in Texas without having to pay Texas $50 million a year.
Peak may be peak dollars so why would you take on more overhead for zero profit. It's just not smart business.

OK/OK State may be worth $150 million.

ESPN pays $80 million for the Sugar/ $55 million for the Orange. OK was in the Orange Bowl in 2015, and in the Sugar Bowl this year (versus Auburn), and in 2016 OK State was in it (versus Ole Miss). The 2016 Sugar Bowl had 8 million viewers (not a playoff game that year).

But adding OK/OK State means adding a great deal of good inventory:
OK-OK State
OK-Alabama
OK-LSU
OK-Auburn
OK-TN
OK-Georgia
OK-Florida
would all be above average games.

OK State would draw a little less, but still valuable matchups. I would certainly be interested in an OK State-TN matchup when it happened.

If OK State-Ole Miss is worth 80 million, then OK-Alabama should easily be worth $100 million, especially with smart scheduling, towards the end of the season as a de facto division championship some years. (And yes I know this is not how it actually works, but for comparisons sake...)

Imagine in the final two weeks of the season you have OK-Alabama first then Alabama-Auburn and OK-OK State. Some years that would be a top five matchup followed by two top ten/top fifteen matchups. Of course, some years would be duds, but imagine the marketing possibilities there. And in some years, do Auburn fans actually root for Bama to beat OK so that Auburn can win the division? Crazy cross-team rooting interests there.

Throw in the other matchups that ESPN gains with the additions, and the teams are easily worth $150 m, with surplus value for ESPN. Even with just the games I listed, that's 7 high profile matchups each season. If they are only worth $20 m each, that's 140 mil for just OK.

Make it OK and Texas and you have Texas-Alabama, Texas-OK, Texas-Texas A&M, Texas-LSU, and more.

I think I'd pay $150 million for that.