(12-29-2015 03:44 PM)Win5002 Wrote: (12-29-2015 12:27 AM)JRsec Wrote: (12-28-2015 11:36 PM)murrdcu Wrote: http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/ar...er-premium
There's also this article. Mentions the costs and losses ESPN/Disney have absorbed getting the LHN up and running. I remember reading somewhere that with the decline of revenues from the cable/satelite subscriptions, that one way to reduce the payouts a company has to make is to remove some of the contracts it has to pay. Let's say ESPN doesn't bid on the new B1G TV deal. Ok, that's one. Now, if they wanted to or needed to get rid of another contract, ESPN would need to dissolve either the B12 or ACC contract by dissolving their conference. Now ESPN makes a ton of cash off of the ACC contract, if the LHN secures the horns to ESPN, only OU football and KU's basketball are of substantial value and national interest in that conference.
Both OU's & Kansas's T3 contract with FOX will be up in about 3-4 years. The buyout is no big deal.
I disagree that ESPN makes a ton of money off of the ACC. They have stretched that profit thin trying to keep an overvalued football product in the ACC together in hopes of landing N.D..
I think there is a germ of truth to what Fluguar is saying, but only a germ. The rest is Fluguar's hype to get hits. Oklahoma has already done its shopping. They know the offers from all interested parties.
What this issue is designed to do is to spark the excuse for dissolution. If OU leaves along with Kansas then Texas will be forced to do so. Then I think we see some action. Let's say that ESPN decides to let Texas just go. UConn & West Virginia are added to the ACC to take them to a full 16 plus N.D.
The SEC takes Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State if the Big 10 won't take Iowa State and Kansas. If they do we just get the Oklahoma schools.
Texas, Texas Tech, T.C.U. and Kansas State head to the PAC.
We're done.
Personally I think the move will be much more involved and that it will include the loss of ACC schools as well.
Why? Because with Oklahoma moving to the SEC, possibly Kansas to the Big 10, and Texas to the PAC the gulf in income will only increase.
Another issue to consider is this. If Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia all move along with Florida State and Notre Dame the dissolution of both conferences would be easy. How? The formation of a new conference would either take all, or enough, of those left behind in both the Big 12 and ACC to dissolve both easily. The new conference would remain a P4 conference, just less well paid than the Big 10 and SEC.
Money will make the name brand schools leave. They are simply worth almost twice as much elsewhere as they are where they reside now.
I don't see why you think a ACC/Big 12 league with ND mentioned above would need to lag in revenues very much behind the B1G & SEC. That could be a very good league, the question is how many schools make the cut. If they stop at 16 who gets left out or are they picked up by the other power leagues.
I actually think this is the best scenario for college football is to have 4 solid leagues. The PAC league may end up being the weakest due to geography. Texas from what I have read has said that ship has sailed, there is not the media coverage of the PAC other leagues get and they don't want a bunch of 9pm or 10 pm start times for sporting events. Some left over schools may need to head to the PAC but I seriously doubt Texas does.
Let's assume a few things if we are going to speculate about this.
1. The Big 10 is not going to abandon AAU membership as a requirement.
2. The SEC isn't going to settle for non brands whether they are pursuing content, or markets.
3. The SEC and Big 10 might very well cooperate to acquire what they desire in as much as FOX and ESPN will let them.
That said if you want to build 4 balanced conferences the best way to do that is to build the 4th around some core football brands. Oklahoma and Texas fit that bill. Could Notre Dame add cachet to that duo? You bet! Would they? I don't think so and here's why. The Irish wanted Southern exposure for recruiting and enhanced presence along the population centers of the Northeast. The Irish want to play their Olympic sports against others that emphasize them. The Irish like women's basketball, men's basketball, lacrosse, and competing against other privates and against small state schools that act like privates. Are they really going to Midwest to play two football first schools and pay through the nose for travel in minor sports? I don't think so.
If the Big 10 wants to move into more Southerly recruiting grounds the price of Virginia and North Carolina will be Duke. In all likelihood 18 will be about as large as either they or the SEC can become and remain on the plus side of profitability. So who is the Big 10's 4th? Georgia Tech still fits the bill and might easily fall into that slot. Syracuse could be that one piece needed to sew up the Northeast. But Notre Dame would be the most profitable brand to land, more profitable than Georgia Tech and the niche Atlanta market they would bring, more profitable and just as effective in sewing up the Northeast as Syracuse. And for all of those thinking about adding Kansas the Jayhawks are behind all of these schools in what they could add to Big 10 coffers.
For the sake of time let's assume major crow is eaten in South Bend and the Irish finally yield to the Big 10 because all other situations that would remain are less favorable and that is just a fact unless they want to remain independent but without a way into the college football playoffs and likely in a lower tier for the sport, which they don't and could not fathom doing. Football and N.D. are too intertwined in identity to ever be separated and relegated to any level but the top. I'm afraid that a Big 10 landing Duke, Virginia and North Carolina would be far too enticing and profitable to say no to again. They'll demand a concession and that likely would be to remain in the Eastern division of the Big 10 as opposed to a new Central or the Western division.
As far as 18 schools in three divisions goes it is a preferable model in many ways to 4 division of 5. The 5 divisional games provides a truer division champ. The wildcard spot left open to go with the 3 divisional winners for the Conference Championship Series would be the best possible balance for years in which one division is significantly stronger than the other two.
Finally with those 4 representing two large Southern States but still academically compatible with the Big 10 and contiguous to their footprint and with 3 huge brands (2 in hoops and one in football) coming in what else could they really want? And more importantly who else could add a dollar to the value of those 18? In short outside of Texas and Oklahoma, nobody!
Now if the SEC understands that a new conference will be built around Texas and Oklahoma which schools from the present ACC make the most sense for them? Under these circumstances adding the North Carolina and Virginia markets would be a plus. North Carolina State and Virginia Tech do that, but don't add home run content. Florida State adds that and cements the SEC in the state of Florida. Clemson brings another content brand, though not as strong as that of a Florida State or Notre Dame.
With those 4 the SEC fills the Southeast with its presence, consolidates its footprint and solidifies its brand.
Now we get to the leftovers:
Boston College, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Baylor, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
How the PAC comports itself is it's own business.
Those are 4 relatively strong conferences each with some brands and geographical integrity.
Nothing is going to stop the Big 10 and SEC from taking those that add the most value to their conferences. Something like this is about as well as things could turn out.
Wake is out.
