I know this is an SEC board but there is so much realignment conversation I will post it here. As I see it the PAC is in 4th place in a realignment sweepstakes to bring in Texas & OU. There is no other meaningful realignment out there for them.

Why not look at 6-8 teams now? I think there is a chance Baylor could be left out with all their problems and maybe the league could dissolve with only them not having a home.

A pickup of Texas, TT, TCU, OU, OSU, KU, KSU & ISU gives a lot of CST content. What would be better picking up 6-8 teams and going to 18 or 20 versus eventually going to 16 with UNLV or Nevada, New Mexico, Hawaii & Houston?

Or even consider this, later if it is more of a merger at the time of GOR's why is it so important to keep Oregon St. & Washington St? Also, if I am FOX and they plan on having the BIG & PAC properties I would make this happen to make sure they maintain a large portion of Texas going forward. If that is the plan going forward, FOX may be able to convince the B1G to take Kansas and ISU. I think its smarter to balance the PAC with Texas & OU than to have OU go to the B1G and it would be a larger risk to OU to go to the B1G with just Kansas. Especially with larger access to California.

The PAC would have to probably accommodate the LHN until it dies or maybe ESPN would be ready to let it die or sell it to the PAC Network.

WVU finds a home in the ACC or SEC.

There is a difference between 2010 and now...the PAC's teir three rights have not yielded their members much money. So assuming and new TV contracts for theirs 1 and 2 could even match current B12 per team payouts, B12 schools would probably make less money off of Teir 3 deal in current form. Texas alone would go from $15M/yr profit to a million or two with less exposure.

(05-24-2017 01:44 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  I know this is an SEC board but there is so much realignment conversation I will post it here. As I see it the PAC is in 4th place in a realignment sweepstakes to bring in Texas & OU. There is no other meaningful realignment out there for them.

Why not look at 6-8 teams now? I think there is a chance Baylor could be left out with all their problems and maybe the league could dissolve with only them not having a home.

A pickup of Texas, TT, TCU, OU, OSU, KU, KSU & ISU gives a lot of CST content. What would be better picking up 6-8 teams and going to 18 or 20 versus eventually going to 16 with UNLV or Nevada, New Mexico, Hawaii & Houston?

Or even consider this, later if it is more of a merger at the time of GOR's why is it so important to keep Oregon St. & Washington St? Also, if I am FOX and they plan on having the BIG & PAC properties I would make this happen to make sure they maintain a large portion of Texas going forward. If that is the plan going forward, FOX may be able to convince the B1G to take Kansas and ISU. I think its smarter to balance the PAC with Texas & OU than to have OU go to the B1G and it would be a larger risk to OU to go to the B1G with just Kansas. Especially with larger access to California.

The PAC would have to probably accommodate the LHN until it dies or maybe ESPN would be ready to let it die or sell it to the PAC Network.

WVU finds a home in the ACC or SEC.

This has become the unofficial realignment theories and possibilities board. Unfortunately, the actual board has become cluttered with crap, and it takes too much shoveling to find interesting and stimulating realignment dialogue in that toilet. Fortunately, the moderator (JRsec) does an excellent job keeping the place well maintained because crap is promptly removed and not tolerated….

(05-24-2017 02:11 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  There is a difference between 2010 and now...the PAC's teir three rights have not yielded their members much money. So assuming and new TV contracts for theirs 1 and 2 could even match current B12 per team payouts, B12 schools would probably make less money off of Teir 3 deal in current form. Texas alone would go from $15M/yr profit to a million or two with less exposure.

With the current league having the states of Texas and California as anchors and controlling all of the Power schools west of the Missouri river maybe it would be more successful at distribution.

(05-24-2017 02:31 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 02:11 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  There is a difference between 2010 and now...the PAC's teir three rights have not yielded their members much money. So assuming and new TV contracts for theirs 1 and 2 could even match current B12 per team payouts, B12 schools would probably make less money off of Teir 3 deal in current form. Texas alone would go from $15M/yr profit to a million or two with less exposure.

With the current league having the states of Texas and California as anchors and controlling all of the Power schools west of the Missouri river maybe it would be more successful at distribution.

I think it would definitely be more successful at distribution. I think the question is would it be more profitable for OU and UT to go to the PAC or go to one of the others. The others already have more successful T3 setups without having to take the current Big 12 teams. What UT and OU would bring to the others would be additional profit on top of that.

I think the PAC's ultimate problem is they don't have as many passionate fan bases in that region. It's a different culture, I think, that hurts them. That and they have a great deal of pro sport competition in most of the relevant markets.

The PAC will be ok, but I don't think it will ever quite compete with the B1G and SEC.

(05-24-2017 02:45 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 02:31 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(05-24-2017 02:11 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  There is a difference between 2010 and now...the PAC's teir three rights have not yielded their members much money. So assuming and new TV contracts for theirs 1 and 2 could even match current B12 per team payouts, B12 schools would probably make less money off of Teir 3 deal in current form. Texas alone would go from $15M/yr profit to a million or two with less exposure.

With the current league having the states of Texas and California as anchors and controlling all of the Power schools west of the Missouri river maybe it would be more successful at distribution.

I think it would definitely be more successful at distribution. I think the question is would it be more profitable for OU and UT to go to the PAC or go to one of the others. The others already have more successful T3 setups without having to take the current Big 12 teams. What UT and OU would bring to the others would be additional profit on top of that.

I think the PAC's ultimate problem is they don't have as many passionate fan bases in that region. It's a different culture, I think, that hurts them. That and they have a great deal of pro sport competition in most of the relevant markets.

The PAC will be ok, but I don't think it will ever quite compete with the B1G and SEC.

If it was all about maximized revenue, you would be accurate. I'm not sure it is. If this was about maximizing revenue the SEC would already have had Texas, A&M, OU & OSU as a 4 team group or a 6 team contingent also giving Missouri & KS. That has not happened, so I think it is more than just creating the most revenues possible.

Your correct the PAC will never have the rabid fanbase for college sports some leagues have, but California does give a lot of recruits and eyeballs. If this becomes a FOX vs ESPN battle largely based along college football FOX needs the state of Texas! Not just audience wise but as a recruiting pipeline as well to keep their blueblood schools and their quality secondary programs well stocked with recruits.

I read a lot of long term strategy discussion about ESPN essentially merging the SEC & ACC and FOX the B1G & PAC 12 for two football conferences. If so it helps FOX to somehow create a presence in Texas for the B1G for recruiting also as well as some presence in California. While it wasn't the B1G's primary objective I think they down play how important recruiting was to the B1G in picking up Rutgers and Maryland for recruiting and showcasing their teams in these areas.

If this really ever played out it would seem to be a strong calling card to try and bring in ND it would ND games against the B1G schools, PAC 12 schools and Texas/OU. Yes, it eliminates the Southeast but I think giving access to the rest of the country would be enough for the Domers. If the two league's revenues were equalized maybe even Missouri or A&M if they don't do well decides to give up the SEC experiment.

Don't take me wrong, I'm sure the SEC/ACC side would be competing for this as well but if Texas and OU had wanted to or been able to leave with enough teams, I think it would have happened already. So it would seem there is some resistance.

The converse is ESPN pays for at least 8 teams and if academics were holding up Texas, ESPN ships them and some Texas schools to the ACC and the SEC gets OU and other old Big 12 schools.

2015 Map of Catholics

This 2015 map shows that Catholicism has shifted South and West in the last 30 years. Much of this is explained by growing Hispanic populations that trend towards Catholicism, so I'm not sure how that affect Notre Dame and college football; however, the 2015 map indicates that California and Texas are heavy on Catholicism while the SEC states (other than Texas and Louisiana) are pretty sparse.

So, perhaps Notre Dame would be okay with the B1G-PAC coalition that also include Texas and Oklahoma.

(05-24-2017 04:55 PM)YNot Wrote:  2015 Map of Catholics

This 2015 map shows that Catholicism has shifted South and West in the last 30 years. Much of this is explained by growing Hispanic populations that trend towards Catholicism, so I'm not sure how that affect Notre Dame and college football; however, the 2015 map indicates that California and Texas are heavy on Catholicism while the SEC states (other than Texas and Louisiana) are pretty sparse.

So, perhaps Notre Dame would be okay with the B1G-PAC coalition that also include Texas and Oklahoma.

I don't think N.D. is worried about Catholic population trends as much as they are worried about recruiting.