(04-15-2021 03:30 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  This will have a huge impact. It will certainly change somewhat how expansion is approached, and there will be considerable streamlining.

http://seattlemedium.com/u-s-supreme-cou...-athletes/

Quite significant.

(04-16-2021 11:19 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-15-2021 03:30 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  This will have a huge impact. It will certainly change somewhat how expansion is approached, and there will be considerable streamlining.

http://seattlemedium.com/u-s-supreme-cou...-athletes/

Quite significant.

If this happens you have a breakaway, consolidation, and a new world for college football. The question then becomes how soon does college basketball follow?

(04-16-2021 11:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2021 11:19 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-15-2021 03:30 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  This will have a huge impact. It will certainly change somewhat how expansion is approached, and there will be considerable streamlining.

http://seattlemedium.com/u-s-supreme-cou...-athletes/

Quite significant.

If this happens you have a breakaway, consolidation, and a new world for college football. The question then becomes how soon does college basketball follow?

If that ruling comes down then the NCAA won't have any authority to impose a different set of rules for basketball.

The athletes will have a great deal of leverage.

I imagine schools with valuable programs will coalesce one way or the other. It would be the best way to maintain the profit margin.

However, this would likely have Title IX implications. It's one thing for Federal law to require equal sponsorship, but it can't require equal payment for what will amount to employee groups. Still wouldn't shock me to see some sports dropped as a means of maintaining financial balance.

Coming on the heels of the Alston decision and the probable expansion of the college football playoffs now comes this little ditty from PAC-land:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...eport/amp/

Quote:According to Jon Wilner of the Mercury News, Kliavkoff and the league's athletic directors have "engaged in preliminary discussions" regarding changes to the structure of the football season in the wake of the expected College Football Playoff expansion. Among those changes are eliminating divisions and dropping from nine conference games per season to eight.

First thing that comes to my mind is they have to make up the games, someway, somehow. OOC games against the likes of BYU, Hawaii and San Diego State would help but these are few and far between in the region. Maybe they can push for more games against Notre Dame.

The issue that they might be starting to realize is that the negatives of being isolated on the West may be more than the positives. Even if they don't go to eight games the fact that they're talking about it shows there's concern behind the scenes.

The PAC may have to do one of two things:

- Explore another scheduling agreement with a major conference in the eastern two-thirds of the country, similar to the one they broke with the Big Ten

- Ending their isolation by getting into the Central Time Zone

Another pressure point for further realignment?

(06-21-2021 10:02 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Coming on the heels of the Alston decision and the probable expansion of the college football playoffs now comes this little ditty from PAC-land:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...eport/amp/

Quote:According to Jon Wilner of the Mercury News, Kliavkoff and the league's athletic directors have "engaged in preliminary discussions" regarding changes to the structure of the football season in the wake of the expected College Football Playoff expansion. Among those changes are eliminating divisions and dropping from nine conference games per season to eight.

First thing that comes to my mind is they have to make up the games, someway, somehow. OOC games against the likes of BYU, Hawaii and San Diego State would help but these are few and far between in the region. Maybe they can push for more games against Notre Dame.

The issue that they might be starting to realize is that the negatives of being isolated on the West may be more than the positives. Even if they don't go to eight games the fact that they're talking about it shows there's concern behind the scenes.

The PAC may have to do one of two things:

- Explore another scheduling agreement with a major conference in the eastern two-thirds of the country, similar to the one they broke with the Big Ten

- Ending their isolation by getting into the Central Time Zone

Another pressure point for further realignment?

1. They need to expand. I just don't see PAC presidents dismissing their pride to do so. They will not expand with anyone but peers. That rules out other West Coast options, BYU, and most of the Big12.

2. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri, Nebraska, T.C.U., and Texas Tech to 20 would do nicely.

3. The Big 10 and SEC need to divide the ACC and B12 remainder.
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College (hockey is a plus) to the B1G.

Clemson, FSU, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Miami to the SEC.

4. Make the AAC the 4th P conference.
Army, Air Force, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, W.V.U., Baylor, BYU, Wake Forest & Colorado State

5. Now you have 4 conferences of 20 each in an upper tier. You have incorporated the best of the G5 and closed the door while preserving a balance for win / loss records. and established geographical balance.

B1G:

Boston College, Penn State, Pittsburg, Rutgers, Syracuse
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:

Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Clemson, Louisville, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M


PAC:

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Colorado, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal


AAC:

Army, Cincinnati, Navy, Temple, West Virginia
Colorado State, Kansas State, Memphis, Oklahoma State, Tulsa
Air Force, Baylor, B.Y.U., Houston, Southern Methodist
Central Florida, East Carolina, South Florida, Tulane, Wake Forest

(06-21-2021 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 10:02 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Coming on the heels of the Alston decision and the probable expansion of the college football playoffs now comes this little ditty from PAC-land:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...eport/amp/

Quote:According to Jon Wilner of the Mercury News, Kliavkoff and the league's athletic directors have "engaged in preliminary discussions" regarding changes to the structure of the football season in the wake of the expected College Football Playoff expansion. Among those changes are eliminating divisions and dropping from nine conference games per season to eight.

First thing that comes to my mind is they have to make up the games, someway, somehow. OOC games against the likes of BYU, Hawaii and San Diego State would help but these are few and far between in the region. Maybe they can push for more games against Notre Dame.

The issue that they might be starting to realize is that the negatives of being isolated on the West may be more than the positives. Even if they don't go to eight games the fact that they're talking about it shows there's concern behind the scenes.

The PAC may have to do one of two things:

- Explore another scheduling agreement with a major conference in the eastern two-thirds of the country, similar to the one they broke with the Big Ten

- Ending their isolation by getting into the Central Time Zone

Another pressure point for further realignment?

1. They need to expand. I just don't see PAC presidents dismissing their pride to do so. They will not expand with anyone but peers. That rules out other West Coast options, BYU, and most of the Big12.

2. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and Texas Tech to 20 would do nicely.

3. The Big 10 and SEC need to divide the ACC and B12 remainder.
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College (hockey is a plus) to the B1G.

Clemson, FSU, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Miami to the SEC.

4. Make the AAC the 4th P conference.
Army, Air Force, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, W.V.U., Baylor, TCU, BYU, Wake Forest

5. Now you have 4 conferences of 20 each in an upper tier. You have incorporated the best of the G5 and closed the door while preserving a balance for win / loss records. and established geographical balance.

I'll flip it. Right now the Big 12 is making more money than the PAC.
So, most of the PAC joins the Big 12: Washington, Oregon, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Cal, Stanford

West Virginia and ND to the ACC

Washington St and Oregon State to the MWC

Colorado and UVA to the Big 10

NC State and FSU to the SEC

Cincy/USF/UCF/Memphis/Houston to the ACC

Two conferences at 18, two at 16.

(06-21-2021 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 10:02 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Coming on the heels of the Alston decision and the probable expansion of the college football playoffs now comes this little ditty from PAC-land:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...eport/amp/

Quote:According to Jon Wilner of the Mercury News, Kliavkoff and the league's athletic directors have "engaged in preliminary discussions" regarding changes to the structure of the football season in the wake of the expected College Football Playoff expansion. Among those changes are eliminating divisions and dropping from nine conference games per season to eight.

First thing that comes to my mind is they have to make up the games, someway, somehow. OOC games against the likes of BYU, Hawaii and San Diego State would help but these are few and far between in the region. Maybe they can push for more games against Notre Dame.

The issue that they might be starting to realize is that the negatives of being isolated on the West may be more than the positives. Even if they don't go to eight games the fact that they're talking about it shows there's concern behind the scenes.

The PAC may have to do one of two things:

- Explore another scheduling agreement with a major conference in the eastern two-thirds of the country, similar to the one they broke with the Big Ten

- Ending their isolation by getting into the Central Time Zone

Another pressure point for further realignment?

1. They need to expand. I just don't see PAC presidents dismissing their pride to do so. They will not expand with anyone but peers. That rules out other West Coast options, BYU, and most of the Big12.

2. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri, Nebraska, T.C.U., and Texas Tech to 20 would do nicely.

3. The Big 10 and SEC need to divide the ACC and B12 remainder.
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College (hockey is a plus) to the B1G.

Clemson, FSU, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Miami to the SEC.

4. Make the AAC the 4th P conference.
Army, Air Force, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, W.V.U., Baylor, BYU, Wake Forest & Colorado State

5. Now you have 4 conferences of 20 each in an upper tier. You have incorporated the best of the G5 and closed the door while preserving a balance for win / loss records. and established geographical balance.

B1G:

Boston College, Penn State, Pittsburg, Rutgers, Syracuse
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:

Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Clemson, Louisville, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M


PAC:

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Colorado, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal


AAC:

Army, Cincinnati, Navy, Temple, West Virginia
Colorado State, Kansas State, Memphis, Oklahoma State, Tulsa
Air Force, Baylor, B.Y.U., Houston, Southern Methodist
Central Florida, East Carolina, South Florida, Tulane, Wake Forest

A poster in the general board mentioned the other day that the programs of Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Missouri are, essentially, one and the same, due to historical connections but that the two Oklahomas were always more connected to the state of Texas.

(06-25-2021 06:14 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-21-2021 10:02 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Coming on the heels of the Alston decision and the probable expansion of the college football playoffs now comes this little ditty from PAC-land:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...eport/amp/

Quote:According to Jon Wilner of the Mercury News, Kliavkoff and the league's athletic directors have "engaged in preliminary discussions" regarding changes to the structure of the football season in the wake of the expected College Football Playoff expansion. Among those changes are eliminating divisions and dropping from nine conference games per season to eight.

First thing that comes to my mind is they have to make up the games, someway, somehow. OOC games against the likes of BYU, Hawaii and San Diego State would help but these are few and far between in the region. Maybe they can push for more games against Notre Dame.

The issue that they might be starting to realize is that the negatives of being isolated on the West may be more than the positives. Even if they don't go to eight games the fact that they're talking about it shows there's concern behind the scenes.

The PAC may have to do one of two things:

- Explore another scheduling agreement with a major conference in the eastern two-thirds of the country, similar to the one they broke with the Big Ten

- Ending their isolation by getting into the Central Time Zone

Another pressure point for further realignment?

1. They need to expand. I just don't see PAC presidents dismissing their pride to do so. They will not expand with anyone but peers. That rules out other West Coast options, BYU, and most of the Big12.

2. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri, Nebraska, T.C.U., and Texas Tech to 20 would do nicely.

3. The Big 10 and SEC need to divide the ACC and B12 remainder.
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College (hockey is a plus) to the B1G.

Clemson, FSU, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Miami to the SEC.

4. Make the AAC the 4th P conference.
Army, Air Force, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, W.V.U., Baylor, BYU, Wake Forest & Colorado State

5. Now you have 4 conferences of 20 each in an upper tier. You have incorporated the best of the G5 and closed the door while preserving a balance for win / loss records. and established geographical balance.

B1G:

Boston College, Penn State, Pittsburg, Rutgers, Syracuse
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:

Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Clemson, Louisville, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M


PAC:

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Colorado, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal


AAC:

Army, Cincinnati, Navy, Temple, West Virginia
Colorado State, Kansas State, Memphis, Oklahoma State, Tulsa
Air Force, Baylor, B.Y.U., Houston, Southern Methodist
Central Florida, East Carolina, South Florida, Tulane, Wake Forest

A poster in the general board mentioned the other day that the programs of Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Missouri are, essentially, one and the same, due to historical connections but that the two Oklahomas were always more connected to the state of Texas.

I saw that and tend to agree. Colorado, Missouri, and Nebraska all seem a bit lost where their fans are concerned. It's sad. Kansas, KState, and Iowa State, those 6 do need to be together wherever they ultimately wind up and that would have to be the PAC or B12 in some kind of merger.

A new layer of economic pressure?

Reports came out a few weeks ago that the Big 12 will not be able to renegotiate early. Apparently the networks aren't interested in that at the moment.

We can all speculate as to why and there is more than one sound theory, but consider that it lines up with what we've been saying about the Big 12 for a decade...they're overpaid.

1. There's no reason for the networks to work on a new contract because they're in a position of strength.

2. The Big 12 wanted it which means they need it.

3. If they can't get it soon then that means the clock is ticking on any relative prosperity they have. The Big Ten will get a bump in a couple of years. The SEC is getting their bump soon. The PAC 12 may even get a reasonable bump.

4. If all that is true then the idea of PAC 12 schools being less valuable than the Big 12 is an illusion. The networks likely overpaid the Big 12 ten years ago in order to maintain some control over the situation. They have little motivation to keep up the charade especially with ten more years worth of ratings data.

5. Oklahoma will not stick around just to take a pay cut.

Conclusion...the pressure on Texas will only increase. If everything I said above is correct then they have no viable path ahead in the Big 12. They'll be taking a pay cut 7 ways to Sunday.

I'm not a numbers guy, but this could also mean, assuming the fallout, that roughly 1/3 of their overall media revenue could be coming from the LHN. That's not a good situation especially considering the waning value of cable networks. It would also mean their reliance on the favor of ESPN would increase come time for a new contract because the value of their 1st and 2nd tier rights would be minimal given their conference affiliation.

They either move or lose revenue.

(06-26-2021 12:17 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  A new layer of economic pressure?

Reports came out a few weeks ago that the Big 12 will not be able to renegotiate early. Apparently the networks aren't interested in that at the moment.

We can all speculate as to why and there is more than one sound theory, but consider that it lines up with what we've been saying about the Big 12 for a decade...they're overpaid.

1. There's no reason for the networks to work on a new contract because they're in a position of strength.

2. The Big 12 wanted it which means they need it.

3. If they can't get it soon then that means the clock is ticking on any relative prosperity they have. The Big Ten will get a bump in a couple of years. The SEC is getting their bump soon. The PAC 12 may even get a reasonable bump.

4. If all that is true then the idea of PAC 12 schools being less valuable than the Big 12 is an illusion. The networks likely overpaid the Big 12 ten years ago in order to maintain some control over the situation. They have little motivation to keep up the charade especially with ten more years worth of ratings data.

5. Oklahoma will not stick around just to take a pay cut.

Conclusion...the pressure on Texas will only increase. If everything I said above is correct then they have no viable path ahead in the Big 12. They'll be taking a pay cut 7 ways to Sunday.

I'm not a numbers guy, but this could also mean, assuming the fallout, that roughly 1/3 of their overall media revenue could be coming from the LHN. That's not a good situation especially considering the waning value of cable networks. It would also mean their reliance on the favor of ESPN would increase come time for a new contract because the value of their 1st and 2nd tier rights would be minimal given their conference affiliation.

They either move or lose revenue.

Texas made 24 million less in Gross Total Revenue in 2019-20 than they did in 2018-19. The Big 12 lost 55 million year over year and Texas was 45% of that. OU lost 2 million. And mind you these losses aren't the massive ones coming for 2020-21.

ESPN and FOX said no because nobody knows what NIL and Stipends will cause in the way of realignment and because even GOR's have a legal loophole. If the nature of the contract changes substantively for either party due to forces beyond their control the contract is null and void. Legal changes to the nature of the relationship between schools and students turned professional employees is such a change. Had GOR's existed in the early 70's the Marshall plane crash would have been another such circumstance. So why would ESPN and FOX want to re-up now only to have contracts voided when schools not willing to make the jump to pay for play pull out, legally voiding the GOR's, or when a new semi-pro upper tier pulls out of the NCAA forming a new association again substantively changing the nature of the old contract.

So it was in nobody's interest to waste time and money on working an early contract.

If you make a close examination of the 2019-20 Revenue totals as compared to the 2018-19 numbers and consider how much more devastating the 2020-21 numbers are gong to be, then you can understand the push for a 12 team playoff at triple the revenue and why ESPN is anxious to get this done before it comes up for bid.

What is curious to me is the format which accounts for the 6 teams with the best conference records in seeding. It essentially promotes the AAC without calling it that. Why? I'm guessing if their is contraction with stipend caps being lifted or raised and should there be a breakaway that moving to 8 slots (2 each for a P4) would be easy to agree upon and that the tacit inclusion of the AAC would mean that their members would have an opportunity to choose to move up as well.

This is important because it gives schools from either the SEC, ACC, B12, B1G, or PAC which might be impacted by defections a way to fill slots or reconstitute themselves or form a compilation conference if needed.

I believe this is why we have a format with few details. It leaves all contingencies open in a time of extreme uncertainty, but sets ESPN up with a way to renew and extend the CFP contract before it comes up for bid.

Now all of that said should we see contraction it also makes it easier for OU and UT to move since the AAC would be upgraded by B12 schools not moving with UT and OU.

You could see between 3 to 5 ACC schools, 1 SEC school, 1 to 6 B1G schools, and maybe 0 to 4 PAC schools opt out. So I don't expect details until stipends are ruled on next Summer.

Losses are spurring the push on expanding playoffs. But keep this in mind on the revenue numbers for 2019-20. No media money was really impacted. Losses were in tourney money, gate for some Spring sports, and donations. Boomers are dying out now and Boomers and Xers don't like the growing politics in sports and don't like their traditions and icons being trashed. NCAA football and basketball have now lost massive support and will feel it for years to come and what could have been the last 10 years of its golden age has been aborted because politics inserted itself into another of precious few escapes from a dying culture and a world in harsher competition for basic necessities (food, fuel, and yes, water). Boomer resources will now be spent on end of life care and used to help their children survive an ever increasing hostility in the world they will inherit.

I have a hard time believing that any of the remaining 8 of the XII would find a landing spot elsewhere.

However....


This being somewhat new territory for the other power conferences not named the SEC, there will be a lot of nervous programs in those conferences, even if they won't admit so publicly. The Big Ten might be too happy counting the research dollars to act with any urgency, even though some of the programs understand the consequences of NIL, stipends, etc...

In the PAC, there are programs there who are even more vulnerable and the ACC somewhat vulnerable even with their long-term Grant of Rights.

Cal, Stanford may be comfortable even without a power conference but others like Oregon, Washington, Arizona, USC and Utah would want to know if the PAC would be in the game in the short to immediate term. Here's where I think there would be a push by them to make sure they can be in the conversation, and they'd try to solve it by taking the best of the leftovers out there.

I could see them try to pull in Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas and Iowa State. Both KU and ISU are AAU members. They may not be valuable enough for the Big Ten but might be economical for the PAC. The PAC will probably turn down K-State, TCU, Baylor and WVU.

Should that happen then we'll know that realignment among the power conferences for this cycle is over.

The remaining 8 in the B12 are the ones needing to figure out a plan of action.

Bowlsby needs to be on the phone talking with each of the other P5 Commissioners and get as deep of a perspective as he can, if any of them intend to pursue any of the remaining eight schools. He also needs to ask each B12 school if they are in serious collaboration with any other conference regarding expansion. He may not receive fully candid responses, but he needs to know the situation with each member school as best can be assessed at this point.

Does Bowlsby have a tentative line-up of B12 replacements?
This conference needs proactive leadership that hasn't shown well for a long time. The deceptive PR messaging that the B12 is a tight, 10-member conference whereby they all adore each other and it is working greatly, has been exposed and punctured for not being realistic.
Perhaps the B12 eight are being diligent in terms of finding the best collective option for themselves.
Frankly, it is moreless each school for itself. It may end up being Aresco that does the fix.

(08-17-2015 07:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Allow the coming economic disparity between the SEC / Big 10 and the Big 12 and ACC continue for just 5 or 6 years and the whole prospect for realignment will dramatically change and for the better for the SEC and Big 10 and the unintended consequences of not brokering out moves, and for sticking with current GOR's will have dramatic consequences for the best of the G5 schools, some of the private schools in P5 conferences now, and for some of the last FBS schools that got into the P5 and some that were already in it. Why?

5 or 6 years will make the breaking of most of the GOR's economically viable. Which means that networks won't have to pay for duplicate schools that need to attach themselves to larger more brand recognizable schools, and they won't have to pay for small alumni based privates either, and they won't have to worry about G5 Schools being added to the P ranks. In fact the whole P4 structure will quit talking about 64 schools and will be talking instead about 54.

The failure to broker out moves from the Big 12 now means that the ACC is actually going to be much more vulnerable in 5 or 6 years, as well. It means that Baylor, T.C.U., West Virginia, Louisville, Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College, Wake Forest and Miami are all also vulnerable to varying degrees of getting left behind in a move to 54 schools, instead of 64.

Think in terms of Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Kansas State to the PAC; Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Florida State and Clemson to the SEC; North Carolina, Virginia, Georgia Tech, and Notre Dame to the Big 10.

No B.Y.U., no Cincinnati, no Duke, no Wake Forest, etc. etc. etc.

How? Won't there be lawsuits? Will it be the end of college football as we know it?

As to the last 2 questions, no and no. The separation will be over expenditures. With Big 10 and SEC schools paying out full cost scholarships (and the Big 10 will) and with privates having a tough time doing so (except Stanford, Notre Dame, and the other larger privates), and with the growing gap in money earned to spend on such, there will be a natural drop off of those wanting the upper tier. Time therefore becomes the ally of separation, less overhead, and better content. A P3 could well emerge with 18 schools each. It will be more profitable for those who stay the course, will provide some room for those who want to be there, and the necessary monetary facts for those who don't wish to be a part of it to exit with some political cover.

So the time has passed for this year's movement to happen. We wait. And each year we do wait the better it will be for the networks, those who want the upper tier, and the more difficult it will grow for others to remain.

I respectfully disagree with your second conclusion. With athletes able to earn money, we're only a short step to a "mini-NFL" with paid players on pseudo-college teams. The current major programs will become the NFL "farm system" and it will be the end of college football "as we know it". Will it succeed? Only time will tell.

(07-28-2021 07:42 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I have a hard time believing that any of the remaining 8 of the XII would find a landing spot elsewhere.

However....


This being somewhat new territory for the other power conferences not named the SEC, there will be a lot of nervous programs in those conferences, even if they won't admit so publicly. The Big Ten might be too happy counting the research dollars to act with any urgency, even though some of the programs understand the consequences of NIL, stipends, etc...

In the PAC, there are programs there who are even more vulnerable and the ACC somewhat vulnerable even with their long-term Grant of Rights.

Cal, Stanford may be comfortable even without a power conference but others like Oregon, Washington, Arizona, USC and Utah would want to know if the PAC would be in the game in the short to immediate term. Here's where I think there would be a push by them to make sure they can be in the conversation, and they'd try to solve it by taking the best of the leftovers out there.

I could see them try to pull in Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas and Iowa State. Both KU and ISU are AAU members. They may not be valuable enough for the Big Ten but might be economical for the PAC. The PAC will probably turn down K-State, TCU, Baylor and WVU.

Should that happen then we'll know that realignment among the power conferences for this cycle is over.

I believe the ACC is now at a crossroads and is deliberating over a plate full of reality. The are staring at a 40 million dollar deficit in media revenue alone compared to the SEC's new contract, and know that when the Big Ten renews, likely next year, that a similar deficit will exist there. They just finished a woeful football season and only retiring Coach K is having a solid basketball season. In other words they are getting a blast of what media revenue deficits can do.

Now they've issued a survey asking alumni and season ticket holders how they feel about the ACC and how they feel about other conferences. Football bell cow Clemson has lost its AD, DC, & OC and Dabo has been scoping out NFL options.

I'd say the clock is ticking on the ACC and since they are under ESPN's thumb I could see 7 of them joining the SEC with perhaps Kansas, and the rest helping to create a P3 with B12 and PAC 12 remnants. I could also see the 9 AAU schools of the PAC joining Notre Dame in the Big 10.

California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Utah

Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin

Indiana, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers


SEC:

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M


New Big 12:

Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon State, San Diego State*, Texas Tech, Washington State

Baylor, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian

Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Florida*, Tulane*, Wake Forest

*Army, Navy, and Air Force could replace these 3.

I'm feeling a bit more confident that we may work our way to something like this.

Conference Semis and Finals and the 3 conference champs and one at large advance to the CFP.

(12-27-2021 08:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-28-2021 07:42 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I have a hard time believing that any of the remaining 8 of the XII would find a landing spot elsewhere.

However....


This being somewhat new territory for the other power conferences not named the SEC, there will be a lot of nervous programs in those conferences, even if they won't admit so publicly. The Big Ten might be too happy counting the research dollars to act with any urgency, even though some of the programs understand the consequences of NIL, stipends, etc...

In the PAC, there are programs there who are even more vulnerable and the ACC somewhat vulnerable even with their long-term Grant of Rights.

Cal, Stanford may be comfortable even without a power conference but others like Oregon, Washington, Arizona, USC and Utah would want to know if the PAC would be in the game in the short to immediate term. Here's where I think there would be a push by them to make sure they can be in the conversation, and they'd try to solve it by taking the best of the leftovers out there.

I could see them try to pull in Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas and Iowa State. Both KU and ISU are AAU members. They may not be valuable enough for the Big Ten but might be economical for the PAC. The PAC will probably turn down K-State, TCU, Baylor and WVU.

Should that happen then we'll know that realignment among the power conferences for this cycle is over.

I believe the ACC is now at a crossroads and is deliberating over a plate full of reality. The are staring at a 40 million dollar deficit in media revenue alone compared to the SEC's new contract, and know that when the Big Ten renews, likely next year, that a similar deficit will exist there. They just finished a woeful football season and only retiring Coach K is having a solid basketball season. In other words they are getting a blast of what media revenue deficits can do.

Now they've issued a survey asking alumni and season ticket holders how they feel about the ACC and how they feel about other conferences. Football bell cow Clemson has lost its AD, DC, & OC and Dabo has been scoping out NFL options.

I'd say the clock is ticking on the ACC and since they are under ESPN's thumb I could see 7 of them joining the SEC with perhaps Kansas, and the rest helping to create a P3 with B12 and PAC 12 remnants. I could also see the 9 AAU schools of the PAC joining Notre Dame in the Big 10.

California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Utah

Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin

Indiana, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers


SEC:

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M


New Big 12:

Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon State, San Diego State*, Texas Tech, Washington State

Baylor, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian

Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Florida*, Tulane*, Wake Forest

*Army, Navy, and Air Force could replace these 3.

I'm feeling a bit more confident that we may work our way to something like this.

Conference Semis and Finals and the 3 conference champs and one at large advance to the CFP.

Been thinking about this for a few days. Started to post a couple of times and just deleted everything.

My premise here is that the ACC would survive in some context. Just as the Big 12 did after the powers destabilized it by leaving. I think ESPN is best served by having a league like the ACC...just not with the entirety of its current membership.

The key cog in all of it is Notre Dame. ESPN and the ACC want them to be full members, but ND hasn't found the sufficient motivation yet. I think one day they will, but it seems debatable as to what exactly will trigger that change and when. I will say though that Notre Dame will have little incentive to remain independent if the SEC or other conferences decide to de-emphasize their role in the NCAA. Whether that's separating the basketball postseason(which would essentially bankrupt the NCAA) or simply setting up a more formal separation, this sort of shift will force ND to look at things a different way because all of a sudden an independent schedule doesn't mean much. If the Big Ten and the SEC depart then who is ND going to spend their time playing? And to what end? A postseason absent the richest and most prominent names in the game? Seems pointless.

That's more of an aside. More specifically, I think ESPN wants to create a suitable home for ND so that they can truly control their rights. The economics of other major moves wouldn't be as significant as finally nailing down ND.

ND wants a national schedule for national exposure. They want to compete for championships and they want to play like-minded schools for the most part. For them, independence is a means to an end. Yes, it is part of their identity, but only because of the advantages it offers. Independence unto itself won't grant them everything they want in a vacuum.

So Notre Dame is in the driver's seat so to speak. Under the current dynamics, they have no motivation to make anything other than an ideal move. That could change in the not too distant future, but for now, they do what they want because they can.

So the primary reason I think the ACC will survive is because there are so many sub-par brands in that league. If those schools didn't occupy large population centers then their TV value would be more akin to the American...only a few ACC schools transcend their home market in any meaningful way.

So I see the ACC as a mirror to the Big 12 in some respect because it's a collection of schools that are capable of competing at a high level, but have less gravitas to really win titles and fans consistently on a broad basis. Those are the things that build a successful athletic program...winning and eyeballs. That's where the money comes from.

The other dynamic here is that I think there will be some competition for the ACC schools that have value. That's where the Big Ten really wants to go...it's the demographic infusion they need.

So to me, the new linchpin is Florida State or Miami. These are once proud programs with some economic struggles and less success than they really want. For example, Miami just went out and got Mario Cristobal from Oregon...a far more successful program over the last 15 years. Miami also stole Clemson's AD and perhaps that demonstrates that Clemson's potential is quite limited. For Florida State's part, they have a jaded fan base that realizes they almost left back in 2011 and are a bit mystified that their administration signed a GOR with the ACC.

These programs are linchpins in part because of their motivation and in part because their departure would doom the whole ACC.

(01-03-2022 07:48 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(12-27-2021 08:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-28-2021 07:42 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I have a hard time believing that any of the remaining 8 of the XII would find a landing spot elsewhere.

However....


This being somewhat new territory for the other power conferences not named the SEC, there will be a lot of nervous programs in those conferences, even if they won't admit so publicly. The Big Ten might be too happy counting the research dollars to act with any urgency, even though some of the programs understand the consequences of NIL, stipends, etc...

In the PAC, there are programs there who are even more vulnerable and the ACC somewhat vulnerable even with their long-term Grant of Rights.

Cal, Stanford may be comfortable even without a power conference but others like Oregon, Washington, Arizona, USC and Utah would want to know if the PAC would be in the game in the short to immediate term. Here's where I think there would be a push by them to make sure they can be in the conversation, and they'd try to solve it by taking the best of the leftovers out there.

I could see them try to pull in Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas and Iowa State. Both KU and ISU are AAU members. They may not be valuable enough for the Big Ten but might be economical for the PAC. The PAC will probably turn down K-State, TCU, Baylor and WVU.

Should that happen then we'll know that realignment among the power conferences for this cycle is over.

I believe the ACC is now at a crossroads and is deliberating over a plate full of reality. The are staring at a 40 million dollar deficit in media revenue alone compared to the SEC's new contract, and know that when the Big Ten renews, likely next year, that a similar deficit will exist there. They just finished a woeful football season and only retiring Coach K is having a solid basketball season. In other words they are getting a blast of what media revenue deficits can do.

Now they've issued a survey asking alumni and season ticket holders how they feel about the ACC and how they feel about other conferences. Football bell cow Clemson has lost its AD, DC, & OC and Dabo has been scoping out NFL options.

I'd say the clock is ticking on the ACC and since they are under ESPN's thumb I could see 7 of them joining the SEC with perhaps Kansas, and the rest helping to create a P3 with B12 and PAC 12 remnants. I could also see the 9 AAU schools of the PAC joining Notre Dame in the Big 10.

California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Utah

Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin

Indiana, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers


SEC:

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M


New Big 12:

Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon State, San Diego State*, Texas Tech, Washington State

Baylor, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian

Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Florida*, Tulane*, Wake Forest

*Army, Navy, and Air Force could replace these 3.

I'm feeling a bit more confident that we may work our way to something like this.

Conference Semis and Finals and the 3 conference champs and one at large advance to the CFP.

Been thinking about this for a few days. Started to post a couple of times and just deleted everything.

My premise here is that the ACC would survive in some context. Just as the Big 12 did after the powers destabilized it by leaving. I think ESPN is best served by having a league like the ACC...just not with the entirety of its current membership.

The key cog in all of it is Notre Dame. ESPN and the ACC want them to be full members, but ND hasn't found the sufficient motivation yet. I think one day they will, but it seems debatable as to what exactly will trigger that change and when. I will say though that Notre Dame will have little incentive to remain independent if the SEC or other conferences decide to de-emphasize their role in the NCAA. Whether that's separating the basketball postseason(which would essentially bankrupt the NCAA) or simply setting up a more formal separation, this sort of shift will force ND to look at things a different way because all of a sudden an independent schedule doesn't mean much. If the Big Ten and the SEC depart then who is ND going to spend their time playing? And to what end? A postseason absent the richest and most prominent names in the game? Seems pointless.

That's more of an aside. More specifically, I think ESPN wants to create a suitable home for ND so that they can truly control their rights. The economics of other major moves wouldn't be as significant as finally nailing down ND.

ND wants a national schedule for national exposure. They want to compete for championships and they want to play like-minded schools for the most part. For them, independence is a means to an end. Yes, it is part of their identity, but only because of the advantages it offers. Independence unto itself won't grant them everything they want in a vacuum.

So Notre Dame is in the driver's seat so to speak. Under the current dynamics, they have no motivation to make anything other than an ideal move. That could change in the not too distant future, but for now, they do what they want because they can.

So the primary reason I think the ACC will survive is because there are so many sub-par brands in that league. If those schools didn't occupy large population centers then their TV value would be more akin to the American...only a few ACC schools transcend their home market in any meaningful way.

So I see the ACC as a mirror to the Big 12 in some respect because it's a collection of schools that are capable of competing at a high level, but have less gravitas to really win titles and fans consistently on a broad basis. Those are the things that build a successful athletic program...winning and eyeballs. That's where the money comes from.

The other dynamic here is that I think there will be some competition for the ACC schools that have value. That's where the Big Ten really wants to go...it's the demographic infusion they need.

So to me, the new linchpin is Florida State or Miami. These are once proud programs with some economic struggles and less success than they really want. For example, Miami just went out and got Mario Cristobal from Oregon...a far more successful program over the last 15 years. Miami also stole Clemson's AD and perhaps that demonstrates that Clemson's potential is quite limited. For Florida State's part, they have a jaded fan base that realizes they almost left back in 2011 and are a bit mystified that their administration signed a GOR with the ACC.

These programs are linchpins in part because of their motivation and in part because their departure would doom the whole ACC.

Okay, you told me ND isn't moving anytime soon. Clemson is not as desirable as Clemson thinks. You indicated FSU wants change and stated Miami is upgrading.

Here's what you didn't tell me. Why schools who can earn 76 million by moving won't. And if they do where they will realign, and how can the ACC possibly avoid mass exodus once some of the big brands cash in with B1G or SEC invites? And if someone does head B1G why ESPN would let it happen if they could own them in the SEC?

So who leaves and where do they go and why?

Clemson did ultimately win 10 games this year. Losing your coordinators, who are new head coaches of Oklahoma and Virginia, is not shabby. AD changes happen for an abundance of reasons. I wouldn't dismiss that Clemson quietly sought a change. Ohio State didn't win the BIG fb Championship this year, or made the playoffs. That doesn't imply the program is decline.
Some of you thought it was absurd a year or two ago to suggest that Miami could be an SEC consideration. I heard responses that TCU would be a better addition. But now, I wouldn't take it to the extreme the other way.
The general comments about Notre Dame, are on the money. Notre Dame gets enabled, and that is not deniable. If pushed for full-time fb in a conference, it won't be in the ACC unless a huge, unique, and controversial, subsidy comes with it. The BIG wants ND badly, but ND doesn't want the BIG.
Will the ACC fractionalize? Maybe. I don't believe it will cease existing. Pitt, Syracuse, BC, could be picked off tomorrow by the BIG if the GoR allowed. The BIG does not want them.
Those North Carolina and Virginia schools won't be easily broken. There is a price for everything. We'll see what may be ponied-up. Maryland succumbed several years back, but feeling alienated and being deep in the red were at work.
Clemson, also a charter member, is tied to the ACC core stronger than one may perceive. Hearing their fans, they don't want to be in the same conference as South Carolina.
Georgia Tech, Louisville, FSU, and Miami would jump fast at an SEC offer. Maybe FSU and/or Miami have a chance. Despite recent struggles, FSU would still be the more preferred one, IMO.
The BIG wanted GT, as part of a string of NC-VA schools also being added.
The point, I don't believe there will be a mass exodus from the ACC during a decade's time. Could the SEC and BIG end-up with a couple of them each? Of course, and perhaps likely. With NIL and the pay-the-players movement having footing, the applecart will turn over and some apples will roll beyond reach.

There will be backlash in some form from academia. It is all new territory and not terribly comforting.

(01-03-2022 10:07 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Clemson did ultimately win 10 games this year. Losing your coordinators, who are new head coaches of Oklahoma and Virginia, is not shabby. AD changes happen for an abundance of reasons. I wouldn't dismiss that Clemson quietly sought a change. Ohio State didn't win the BIG fb Championship this year, or made the playoffs. That doesn't imply the program is decline.
Some of you thought it was absurd a year or two ago to suggest that Miami could be an SEC consideration. I heard responses that TCU would be a better addition. But now, I wouldn't take it to the extreme the other way.
The general comments about Notre Dame, are on the money. Notre Dame gets enabled, and that is not deniable. If pushed for full-time fb in a conference, it won't be in the ACC unless a huge, unique, and controversial, subsidy comes with it. The BIG wants ND badly, but ND doesn't want the BIG.
Will the ACC fractionalize? Maybe. I don't believe it will cease existing. Pitt, Syracuse, BC, could be picked off tomorrow by the BIG if the GoR allowed. The BIG does not want them.
Those North Carolina and Virginia schools won't be easily broken. There is a price for everything. We'll see what may be ponied-up. Maryland succumbed several years back, but feeling alienated and being deep in the red were at work.
Clemson, also a charter member, is tied to the ACC core stronger than one may perceive. Hearing their fans, they don't want to be in the same conference as South Carolina.
Georgia Tech, Louisville, FSU, and Miami would jump fast at an SEC offer. Maybe FSU and/or Miami have a chance. Despite recent struggles, FSU would still be the more preferred one, IMO.
The BIG wanted GT, as part of a string of NC-VA schools also being added.
The point, I don't believe there will be a mass exodus from the ACC during a decade's time. Could the SEC and BIG end-up with a couple of them each? Of course, and perhaps likely. With NIL and the pay-the-players movement having footing, the applecart will turn over and some apples will roll beyond reach.

There will be backlash in some form from academia. It is all new territory and not terribly comforting.

Once the courts rule on the status of athletes (Student / or Employee) things will happen rapidly. Based on the SCOTUS's tongue lashing of the NCAA over NIL most believe it will be employee. If it is things will happen so fast in the ACC you will get whiplash. The SEC and B1G will make quick, large, and decisive moves with regards to the ACC and PAC 12 with Kansas & Notre Dame possibly being involved as well.

Practically overnight we will move to super leagues and schools will opt out.

If the rule that athletes are students we will stay roughly as configured, but the SEC may proceed with a pay for play tier. Hoops values would be a catalyst for such change.

The Big 12 (new version) and part of the ACC may join with the SEC in such a move and because pay for play would be other no GOR would apply because you are not moving within a like system, but establishing a new one.

I think we will see massive movement likely by 2023. We'll see.

If Vanderbilt opts out of the SEC in the near future, who would likely replace them?

Miami would be a strong private school that could replace the only current non public member.

If a fleet of schools opt out the new NIL requirements, I could just see an entirely new structure and set of teams forming new football conferences or even entirely new conferences outright.

(01-04-2022 12:42 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  If Vanderbilt opts out of the SEC in the near future, who would likely replace them?

Miami would be a strong private school that could replace the only current non public member.

If a fleet of schools opt out the new NIL requirements, I could just see an entirely new structure and set of teams forming new football conferences or even entirely new conferences outright.

Miami would make a nice replacement. If there was a merger of the best Southern brands of the ACC with the SEC you would have several options in such a move. Duke could also be that school, or possibly even Notre Dame. Out of those three oddly Miami would likely be the better fit. The best available private fit right now would be Baylor, but to replace a Vandy the presidents would favor Notre Dame and Duke.