(05-31-2019 09:44 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-31-2019 08:50 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-31-2019 07:28 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-30-2019 11:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2019 06:10 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  As Frank mentioned earlier, like the Big Ten, the SEC has reason to oppose it because it could help the ACC to woo ND. Not that ND would go to the SEC, but you don't help the competition.

A moot point. Once the SEC's T1 is renewed and the Big 10 has inked a new deal being divisionless makes expanding even more likely.

B1G: 54 million
SEC: 43.7 million
Big 12: 36.5 million
ACC: 29.5 million
PAC: 29.5 million

All of that for 2018.

If UT or OU join either the Big 10 or SEC or both the revenue gap widens significantly.

The SEC will receive a boost close to 58 million at lowest estimates when the T1 is renewed or bought by someone besides CBS.

The Big 10 will likely get at least a 5% bump when they renew their general FOX contract.

At those rates they will be doubling the ACC and PAC even with the ACCN which will likely make between 5 to 8 million a year tops after 4-5 years.

It won't matter if N.D. goes all in with the ACC because the revenue gap for the ACC and PAC vs the SEC and Big 10 will range from 150 million a decade to 250 million a decade or from 15 million a year to 25 million a year or more.

Going divisionless will initially assist the Big 10 and SEC in assimilating even more growth if that is their desire and the revenue difference will have even the top brands of the PAC and ACC contemplating what they might earn elsewhere.

it is what I frequently have said that time x economic disparity x economic pressure from declining state and federal funds will = a two league format instead of a P4. And all of this will happen should Texas and or Oklahoma leave the Big 12. And remember what the departure of UT and OU do the Big 12. They lose over 40% of their total value when those 2 depart.

Other catalysts for 2 leagues will be these:

1. With further consolidation the Big 10 and SEC will gain leverage with dominance over their regions. If an advertiser wants in they have to pay top rates for the privilege.

2. Consolidation gives those conferences better leverage when selling rights.

3. Consolidation eliminates duplicated conference expenses, duplicated commercial property, and saves each school on their share of conference expenses.

4. It makes scheduling much simpler and will likely contain all regular season revenues within the conference since the size would mean that all 12 games would likely be played within house. Only post season revenues would be shared.

5. It's a format the networks understand well and can work with easily.

6. It is the most natural way to expand T3 revenue with a conference network and again it saves the network duplication of overhead.

So I don't think the SEC or Big 10 will be worried about Notre Dame going all in with the ACC. I think they will be preoccupied with anticipating their business model changes to maximize the advantages.

This manifesto leads me to believe the biggest brands of those two conferences will have some economic majors that will realize if the they trim the fat they can make even more money.

My manifesto revolves around the idea of the largest brands going independent with their TV rights and even using in-house teams to broadcast events. Every major school is pouring money into their own AV departments. Why outsource to networks in the streaming age?

Over time, conference affiliation will be less important regarding TV, and stand alone brands will rule.

That's possible, but the need for ease of scheduling, the consolidation of overhead for officiating and the need for a more powerful lobby voice indicates that conferences will be with us for awhile. Leverage for contracts will continue to be important and most schools' administrations don't want to get bogged down in those details.

That said, I agree with you about the AV departments and can easily foresee the SEC considering handling its own network when the ESPN contract is up. It will have had an established viewing record by 2034 and we can produce our own programming.

But T1 and T2 rights will still be parsed out and the networks will pay much more when the volume of content is guaranteed and the quality of scheduling on an annual basis is proven.

So I still see the need for larger groups negotiating together, but when it comes to the T3 inventory cutting the middle guy out makes a lot of sense.

I'm not suggesting conferences will go away, I'm suggesting the heavyweights will demand the lion's share eventually. I think the model will change and the payments will be based on what the individual school brings to the table rather than the conference as a whole.

That will probably be past my lifetime, but it may well come to pass. And when it does it will have taken us full circle back to birth of conferences first as scheduling alliances and then as business partners and around the circle we will go again. Only by that time there may not be any physical sports, just sodapop fat kids with nimble fingers and a joystick playing virtual football or hoops for good ole State U while they score by the likes they get on some futuristic social media scoring mechanism. And if that is the case I'll be relieved to be gone.