Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The Great Chase for Texas
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,384
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #1
The Great Chase for Texas
We've been discussing a little more about Texas specifically lately and what ESPN's plan might be to lock them down for the long term. I thought I would start a thread for it because I think there are so many facets to this.

A while back, I posted an idea for what to do with the Longhorn Network once Texas had settled on a new conference. I still believe that some utilization of the LHN on the part of ESPN will be necessary in order to secure the future of a UT and ESPN partnership.

Exactly what the utilization would be is certainly up for debate although I think it's highly probable that the LHN will not simply be fazed out because that's not really ESPN's style...

1) While I believe it's true that the LHN was originally designed as a way to keep Texas in the fold, it's also true that an awful lot of money has been spent to create its infrastructure.

2) It will be very hard to integrate the LHN into any existing conference network because it has its own set of studios and UT is going to want some sort of guarantee to make just as much money off their T3 rights as they are making right now. It can be done, but I don't think it will be as easy as simply designating the LHN as an outlet for a regional package. Why? The following...

3) The LHN will be basically worthless in a world of streaming unless the content changes dramatically.

So anyway, the SEC certainly wants Texas and is probably willing to take both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in order to put pressure on UT.

By contrast, the ACC may be willing to give UT a partial deal to both complement Notre Dame's membership and add value and content to their own network.

The PAC needs Texas badly, but are they willing to take the little brothers to make it happen? That's probably the only way they could make the move because the money wouldn't be there for UT in the PAC like you might get with other leagues.

The B1G would probably love Texas too, but there's no way ESPN is going to cooperate with that as the B1G is primarily a FOX product now. An ESPN owned T3 network is not going to be blended with a FOX owned T3 network especially when the entire point of the LHN was to maintain control over UT. Texas would bring a nice windfall for the B1G, but the brand value for UT would take a hit if they're playing a bunch of B1G schools every season.

What will UT choose? Does anyone really know?

The reason I bring up the LHN so much is because I believe that UT's decision will probably come down to whatever is the best package any league can offer. I think playing rivals and local schools will be a part of it. I believe travel will be a part of it. I believe academic partnerships will be an aspect as well, but ultimately money talks. Money soothes egos if nothing else.

Texas basically makes more money than anyone else right now. That's not likely to change anytime soon unless the Big 12 can't negotiate a decent contract in a few years. At that point, UT won't be hurting, but they may fall permanently behind Texas A&M unless a move is made. That sort of dynamic also indicates why UT might make a move sooner than later.

Now some would say that UT is so rich that money doesn't matter that much...they'll always have plenty of it the thought goes. Let me ask you a question, have you ever known a wealthy man to turn down an opportunity to improve his own stature? Especially an oil rich Texan with an ego the size of Alaska?

I think UT will end up partnering with the league that can best utilize the LHN and give the entire conference not only another boost in revenue, but put the entire association on another level from what UT is used to.

That's my thought. What about you?
08-16-2017 11:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,791
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 832
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #2
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-16-2017 11:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  We've been discussing a little more about Texas specifically lately and what ESPN's plan might be to lock them down for the long term. I thought I would start a thread for it because I think there are so many facets to this.

A while back, I posted an idea for what to do with the Longhorn Network once Texas had settled on a new conference. I still believe that some utilization of the LHN on the part of ESPN will be necessary in order to secure the future of a UT and ESPN partnership.

Exactly what the utilization would be is certainly up for debate although I think it's highly probable that the LHN will not simply be fazed out because that's not really ESPN's style...

1) While I believe it's true that the LHN was originally designed as a way to keep Texas in the fold, it's also true that an awful lot of money has been spent to create its infrastructure.

2) It will be very hard to integrate the LHN into any existing conference network because it has its own set of studios and UT is going to want some sort of guarantee to make just as much money off their T3 rights as they are making right now. It can be done, but I don't think it will be as easy as simply designating the LHN as an outlet for a regional package. Why? The following...

3) The LHN will be basically worthless in a world of streaming unless the content changes dramatically.

So anyway, the SEC certainly wants Texas and is probably willing to take both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in order to put pressure on UT.

By contrast, the ACC may be willing to give UT a partial deal to both complement Notre Dame's membership and add value and content to their own network.

The PAC needs Texas badly, but are they willing to take the little brothers to make it happen? That's probably the only way they could make the move because the money wouldn't be there for UT in the PAC like you might get with other leagues.

The B1G would probably love Texas too, but there's no way ESPN is going to cooperate with that as the B1G is primarily a FOX product now. An ESPN owned T3 network is not going to be blended with a FOX owned T3 network especially when the entire point of the LHN was to maintain control over UT. Texas would bring a nice windfall for the B1G, but the brand value for UT would take a hit if they're playing a bunch of B1G schools every season.

What will UT choose? Does anyone really know?

The reason I bring up the LHN so much is because I believe that UT's decision will probably come down to whatever is the best package any league can offer. I think playing rivals and local schools will be a part of it. I believe travel will be a part of it. I believe academic partnerships will be an aspect as well, but ultimately money talks. Money soothes egos if nothing else.

Texas basically makes more money than anyone else right now. That's not likely to change anytime soon unless the Big 12 can't negotiate a decent contract in a few years. At that point, UT won't be hurting, but they may fall permanently behind Texas A&M unless a move is made. That sort of dynamic also indicates why UT might make a move sooner than later.

Now some would say that UT is so rich that money doesn't matter that much...they'll always have plenty of it the thought goes. Let me ask you a question, have you ever known a wealthy man to turn down an opportunity to improve his own stature? Especially an oil rich Texan with an ego the size of Alaska?

I think UT will end up partnering with the league that can best utilize the LHN and give the entire conference not only another boost in revenue, but put the entire association on another level from what UT is used to.

That's my thought. What about you?

A couple of thoughts for you. First if Texas moves to another conference as long a their total conference distribution is 50 million then the LHN is covered. They currently get 34.8 for T1 & T2 and another 14 plus for the LHN. So make it a round 50 million and the total is covered. Second, it depends on where they go as to what is done with the LHN. If they wind up in the SEC I think Charlotte will become the studio for the two eastern most divisions and the LHN will become the studio for the two western most divisions and that one of the two current SEC overflow channels will be used to televise the Eastern 8 and the current SECN primary channel will be used to televise the Western 8 and the second overflow channel which is not used at this time will become the overflow channel for the other two.

If Texas goes the ACC then perhaps the LHN becomes the Spanish language version of the ACC, only concentrating on Texas and Miami sporting events.

I don't think Texas will go to the Big 10 for the reasons you've stated.

But if 6 schools from the Big 12 including Texas were to head to the PAC and the PAC were to sell out to ESPN then I could see the LHN becoming the network which covered the Eastern Division which consisted of 6 of the present Big 12 schools.
(This post was last modified: 08-17-2017 12:37 AM by JRsec.)
08-17-2017 12:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,384
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #3
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 12:30 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-16-2017 11:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  We've been discussing a little more about Texas specifically lately and what ESPN's plan might be to lock them down for the long term. I thought I would start a thread for it because I think there are so many facets to this.

A while back, I posted an idea for what to do with the Longhorn Network once Texas had settled on a new conference. I still believe that some utilization of the LHN on the part of ESPN will be necessary in order to secure the future of a UT and ESPN partnership.

Exactly what the utilization would be is certainly up for debate although I think it's highly probable that the LHN will not simply be fazed out because that's not really ESPN's style...

1) While I believe it's true that the LHN was originally designed as a way to keep Texas in the fold, it's also true that an awful lot of money has been spent to create its infrastructure.

2) It will be very hard to integrate the LHN into any existing conference network because it has its own set of studios and UT is going to want some sort of guarantee to make just as much money off their T3 rights as they are making right now. It can be done, but I don't think it will be as easy as simply designating the LHN as an outlet for a regional package. Why? The following...

3) The LHN will be basically worthless in a world of streaming unless the content changes dramatically.

So anyway, the SEC certainly wants Texas and is probably willing to take both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in order to put pressure on UT.

By contrast, the ACC may be willing to give UT a partial deal to both complement Notre Dame's membership and add value and content to their own network.

The PAC needs Texas badly, but are they willing to take the little brothers to make it happen? That's probably the only way they could make the move because the money wouldn't be there for UT in the PAC like you might get with other leagues.

The B1G would probably love Texas too, but there's no way ESPN is going to cooperate with that as the B1G is primarily a FOX product now. An ESPN owned T3 network is not going to be blended with a FOX owned T3 network especially when the entire point of the LHN was to maintain control over UT. Texas would bring a nice windfall for the B1G, but the brand value for UT would take a hit if they're playing a bunch of B1G schools every season.

What will UT choose? Does anyone really know?

The reason I bring up the LHN so much is because I believe that UT's decision will probably come down to whatever is the best package any league can offer. I think playing rivals and local schools will be a part of it. I believe travel will be a part of it. I believe academic partnerships will be an aspect as well, but ultimately money talks. Money soothes egos if nothing else.

Texas basically makes more money than anyone else right now. That's not likely to change anytime soon unless the Big 12 can't negotiate a decent contract in a few years. At that point, UT won't be hurting, but they may fall permanently behind Texas A&M unless a move is made. That sort of dynamic also indicates why UT might make a move sooner than later.

Now some would say that UT is so rich that money doesn't matter that much...they'll always have plenty of it the thought goes. Let me ask you a question, have you ever known a wealthy man to turn down an opportunity to improve his own stature? Especially an oil rich Texan with an ego the size of Alaska?

I think UT will end up partnering with the league that can best utilize the LHN and give the entire conference not only another boost in revenue, but put the entire association on another level from what UT is used to.

That's my thought. What about you?

A couple of thoughts for you. First if Texas moves to another conference as long a their total conference distribution is 50 million then the LHN is covered. They currently get 34.8 for T1 & T2 and another 14 plus for the LHN. So make it a round 50 million and the total is covered. Second, it depends on where they go as to what is done with the LHN. If they wind up in the SEC I think Charlotte will become the studio for the two eastern most divisions and the LHN will become the studio for the two western most divisions and that one of the two current SEC overflow channels will be used to televise the Eastern 8 and the current SECN primary channel will be used to televise the Western 8 and the second overflow channel which is not used at this time will become the overflow channel for the other two.

If Texas goes the ACC then perhaps the LHN becomes the Spanish language version of the ACC, only concentrating on Texas and Miami sporting events.

I don't think Texas will go to the Big 10 for the reasons you've stated.

But if 6 schools from the Big 12 including Texas were to head to the PAC and the PAC were to sell out to ESPN then I could see the LHN becoming the network which covered the Eastern Division which consisted of 6 of the present Big 12 schools.

I think the $50M figure might do it although I think if some use can be found for the LHN that not only covers that T3 figure but somehow gives an additional boost to the entire league then that may be the winning bid...even if it's not necessarily a cash infusion that results.

From UT's perspective, I could see them thinking "hey, we're generating $15M with this network so let's find a way to adapt this asset to not only cover that revenue, but add something else to the pot." I think ESPN might look at it that way too being that they've already invested so much money in it. UT is also a partial owner so there's that angle to consider.

I know you suggested using the TX studios to cover a Western grouping, but I'm not sure that an SEC Network with two regional channels would work. It hasn't seemed to have done much for the PAC and I think ultimately there could be ancillary costs that hurt the bottom line. That and the lack of consistent branding from one region to another. I think the SEC needs to dedicate itself to one national channel and focus on building content for streaming.

My suggestion a while back was to convert it into a Spanish language version of the SEC Network for both American and Latin American markets. Now that the SECN is in Mexico and other countries, I'm not sure how needed that is. I don't know what the format is for that sort of distribution though. Perhaps it's just the standard feed dubbed in Spanish, I have no idea actually. But I think it would be wise to market to the Spanish-speaking population in the US. It's only going to grow.

I've thought that perhaps ESPN would like to stick Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas in the SEC in order to preserve their content. Couldn't hurt and those are probably the 4 best additions if we're looking at a world where content becomes even more valuable.
08-17-2017 01:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,791
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 832
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #4
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 01:48 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 12:30 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-16-2017 11:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  We've been discussing a little more about Texas specifically lately and what ESPN's plan might be to lock them down for the long term. I thought I would start a thread for it because I think there are so many facets to this.

A while back, I posted an idea for what to do with the Longhorn Network once Texas had settled on a new conference. I still believe that some utilization of the LHN on the part of ESPN will be necessary in order to secure the future of a UT and ESPN partnership.

Exactly what the utilization would be is certainly up for debate although I think it's highly probable that the LHN will not simply be fazed out because that's not really ESPN's style...

1) While I believe it's true that the LHN was originally designed as a way to keep Texas in the fold, it's also true that an awful lot of money has been spent to create its infrastructure.

2) It will be very hard to integrate the LHN into any existing conference network because it has its own set of studios and UT is going to want some sort of guarantee to make just as much money off their T3 rights as they are making right now. It can be done, but I don't think it will be as easy as simply designating the LHN as an outlet for a regional package. Why? The following...

3) The LHN will be basically worthless in a world of streaming unless the content changes dramatically.

So anyway, the SEC certainly wants Texas and is probably willing to take both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in order to put pressure on UT.

By contrast, the ACC may be willing to give UT a partial deal to both complement Notre Dame's membership and add value and content to their own network.

The PAC needs Texas badly, but are they willing to take the little brothers to make it happen? That's probably the only way they could make the move because the money wouldn't be there for UT in the PAC like you might get with other leagues.

The B1G would probably love Texas too, but there's no way ESPN is going to cooperate with that as the B1G is primarily a FOX product now. An ESPN owned T3 network is not going to be blended with a FOX owned T3 network especially when the entire point of the LHN was to maintain control over UT. Texas would bring a nice windfall for the B1G, but the brand value for UT would take a hit if they're playing a bunch of B1G schools every season.

What will UT choose? Does anyone really know?

The reason I bring up the LHN so much is because I believe that UT's decision will probably come down to whatever is the best package any league can offer. I think playing rivals and local schools will be a part of it. I believe travel will be a part of it. I believe academic partnerships will be an aspect as well, but ultimately money talks. Money soothes egos if nothing else.

Texas basically makes more money than anyone else right now. That's not likely to change anytime soon unless the Big 12 can't negotiate a decent contract in a few years. At that point, UT won't be hurting, but they may fall permanently behind Texas A&M unless a move is made. That sort of dynamic also indicates why UT might make a move sooner than later.

Now some would say that UT is so rich that money doesn't matter that much...they'll always have plenty of it the thought goes. Let me ask you a question, have you ever known a wealthy man to turn down an opportunity to improve his own stature? Especially an oil rich Texan with an ego the size of Alaska?

I think UT will end up partnering with the league that can best utilize the LHN and give the entire conference not only another boost in revenue, but put the entire association on another level from what UT is used to.

That's my thought. What about you?

A couple of thoughts for you. First if Texas moves to another conference as long a their total conference distribution is 50 million then the LHN is covered. They currently get 34.8 for T1 & T2 and another 14 plus for the LHN. So make it a round 50 million and the total is covered. Second, it depends on where they go as to what is done with the LHN. If they wind up in the SEC I think Charlotte will become the studio for the two eastern most divisions and the LHN will become the studio for the two western most divisions and that one of the two current SEC overflow channels will be used to televise the Eastern 8 and the current SECN primary channel will be used to televise the Western 8 and the second overflow channel which is not used at this time will become the overflow channel for the other two.

If Texas goes the ACC then perhaps the LHN becomes the Spanish language version of the ACC, only concentrating on Texas and Miami sporting events.

I don't think Texas will go to the Big 10 for the reasons you've stated.

But if 6 schools from the Big 12 including Texas were to head to the PAC and the PAC were to sell out to ESPN then I could see the LHN becoming the network which covered the Eastern Division which consisted of 6 of the present Big 12 schools.

I think the $50M figure might do it although I think if some use can be found for the LHN that not only covers that T3 figure but somehow gives an additional boost to the entire league then that may be the winning bid...even if it's not necessarily a cash infusion that results.

From UT's perspective, I could see them thinking "hey, we're generating $15M with this network so let's find a way to adapt this asset to not only cover that revenue, but add something else to the pot." I think ESPN might look at it that way too being that they've already invested so much money in it. UT is also a partial owner so there's that angle to consider.

I know you suggested using the TX studios to cover a Western grouping, but I'm not sure that an SEC Network with two regional channels would work. It hasn't seemed to have done much for the PAC and I think ultimately there could be ancillary costs that hurt the bottom line. That and the lack of consistent branding from one region to another. I think the SEC needs to dedicate itself to one national channel and focus on building content for streaming.

My suggestion a while back was to convert it into a Spanish language version of the SEC Network for both American and Latin American markets. Now that the SECN is in Mexico and other countries, I'm not sure how needed that is. I don't know what the format is for that sort of distribution though. Perhaps it's just the standard feed dubbed in Spanish, I have no idea actually. But I think it would be wise to market to the Spanish-speaking population in the US. It's only going to grow.

I've thought that perhaps ESPN would like to stick Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas in the SEC in order to preserve their content. Couldn't hurt and those are probably the 4 best additions if we're looking at a world where content becomes even more valuable.

As to the use of the LHN we have to acknowledge that it could be a moot issue. It depends a great deal upon what direction sports broadcasting moves as a result of technology.

I'd love to see us take the four you mentioned. Whatever happens I think the network's willingness to pay will be the deciding factor. I do think, have stated, and continue to believe that the most viable approach to landing Texas is to simply give them a Big 12 division. So moving to 18 and splitting into 3 divisions like this might just do the trick:

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

That's a whole division of their friends and old rivals and they don't have to go head to head with A&M but they will play them annually. The rest of the SEC essentially remains the same.

That makes it comfortable for Texas and comfortable for the rest of us. The Aggies don't have to be in their division and can compete for the conference championship series separately.

It won't involve the ACC and whatever they want to do won't be any of our affair. With Texas (the state) locked up we don't have to worry so much about Florida. Leaving them in a division of their favorite schools to play keeps them happy. We all keep 1 permanent rival and play 10 conference games. The five in our division, one permanent rival, and rotate 2 each from the other divisions.

But the question is how to land Texas? I think that is about as good of a set up as we can give them. Substitute Texas Tech for Kansas but only if we must.
08-17-2017 02:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Soobahk40050 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 583
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Tennessee
Location:
Post: #5
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.
08-17-2017 07:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,563
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #6
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 02:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 01:48 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 12:30 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-16-2017 11:12 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  We've been discussing a little more about Texas specifically lately and what ESPN's plan might be to lock them down for the long term. I thought I would start a thread for it because I think there are so many facets to this.

A while back, I posted an idea for what to do with the Longhorn Network once Texas had settled on a new conference. I still believe that some utilization of the LHN on the part of ESPN will be necessary in order to secure the future of a UT and ESPN partnership.

Exactly what the utilization would be is certainly up for debate although I think it's highly probable that the LHN will not simply be fazed out because that's not really ESPN's style...

1) While I believe it's true that the LHN was originally designed as a way to keep Texas in the fold, it's also true that an awful lot of money has been spent to create its infrastructure.

2) It will be very hard to integrate the LHN into any existing conference network because it has its own set of studios and UT is going to want some sort of guarantee to make just as much money off their T3 rights as they are making right now. It can be done, but I don't think it will be as easy as simply designating the LHN as an outlet for a regional package. Why? The following...

3) The LHN will be basically worthless in a world of streaming unless the content changes dramatically.

So anyway, the SEC certainly wants Texas and is probably willing to take both Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in order to put pressure on UT.

By contrast, the ACC may be willing to give UT a partial deal to both complement Notre Dame's membership and add value and content to their own network.

The PAC needs Texas badly, but are they willing to take the little brothers to make it happen? That's probably the only way they could make the move because the money wouldn't be there for UT in the PAC like you might get with other leagues.

The B1G would probably love Texas too, but there's no way ESPN is going to cooperate with that as the B1G is primarily a FOX product now. An ESPN owned T3 network is not going to be blended with a FOX owned T3 network especially when the entire point of the LHN was to maintain control over UT. Texas would bring a nice windfall for the B1G, but the brand value for UT would take a hit if they're playing a bunch of B1G schools every season.

What will UT choose? Does anyone really know?

The reason I bring up the LHN so much is because I believe that UT's decision will probably come down to whatever is the best package any league can offer. I think playing rivals and local schools will be a part of it. I believe travel will be a part of it. I believe academic partnerships will be an aspect as well, but ultimately money talks. Money soothes egos if nothing else.

Texas basically makes more money than anyone else right now. That's not likely to change anytime soon unless the Big 12 can't negotiate a decent contract in a few years. At that point, UT won't be hurting, but they may fall permanently behind Texas A&M unless a move is made. That sort of dynamic also indicates why UT might make a move sooner than later.

Now some would say that UT is so rich that money doesn't matter that much...they'll always have plenty of it the thought goes. Let me ask you a question, have you ever known a wealthy man to turn down an opportunity to improve his own stature? Especially an oil rich Texan with an ego the size of Alaska?

I think UT will end up partnering with the league that can best utilize the LHN and give the entire conference not only another boost in revenue, but put the entire association on another level from what UT is used to.

That's my thought. What about you?

A couple of thoughts for you. First if Texas moves to another conference as long a their total conference distribution is 50 million then the LHN is covered. They currently get 34.8 for T1 & T2 and another 14 plus for the LHN. So make it a round 50 million and the total is covered. Second, it depends on where they go as to what is done with the LHN. If they wind up in the SEC I think Charlotte will become the studio for the two eastern most divisions and the LHN will become the studio for the two western most divisions and that one of the two current SEC overflow channels will be used to televise the Eastern 8 and the current SECN primary channel will be used to televise the Western 8 and the second overflow channel which is not used at this time will become the overflow channel for the other two.

If Texas goes the ACC then perhaps the LHN becomes the Spanish language version of the ACC, only concentrating on Texas and Miami sporting events.

I don't think Texas will go to the Big 10 for the reasons you've stated.

But if 6 schools from the Big 12 including Texas were to head to the PAC and the PAC were to sell out to ESPN then I could see the LHN becoming the network which covered the Eastern Division which consisted of 6 of the present Big 12 schools.

I think the $50M figure might do it although I think if some use can be found for the LHN that not only covers that T3 figure but somehow gives an additional boost to the entire league then that may be the winning bid...even if it's not necessarily a cash infusion that results.

From UT's perspective, I could see them thinking "hey, we're generating $15M with this network so let's find a way to adapt this asset to not only cover that revenue, but add something else to the pot." I think ESPN might look at it that way too being that they've already invested so much money in it. UT is also a partial owner so there's that angle to consider.

I know you suggested using the TX studios to cover a Western grouping, but I'm not sure that an SEC Network with two regional channels would work. It hasn't seemed to have done much for the PAC and I think ultimately there could be ancillary costs that hurt the bottom line. That and the lack of consistent branding from one region to another. I think the SEC needs to dedicate itself to one national channel and focus on building content for streaming.

My suggestion a while back was to convert it into a Spanish language version of the SEC Network for both American and Latin American markets. Now that the SECN is in Mexico and other countries, I'm not sure how needed that is. I don't know what the format is for that sort of distribution though. Perhaps it's just the standard feed dubbed in Spanish, I have no idea actually. But I think it would be wise to market to the Spanish-speaking population in the US. It's only going to grow.

I've thought that perhaps ESPN would like to stick Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas in the SEC in order to preserve their content. Couldn't hurt and those are probably the 4 best additions if we're looking at a world where content becomes even more valuable.

As to the use of the LHN we have to acknowledge that it could be a moot issue. It depends a great deal upon what direction sports broadcasting moves as a result of technology.

I'd love to see us take the four you mentioned. Whatever happens I think the network's willingness to pay will be the deciding factor. I do think, have stated, and continue to believe that the most viable approach to landing Texas is to simply give them a Big 12 division. So moving to 18 and splitting into 3 divisions like this might just do the trick:

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

That's a whole division of their friends and old rivals and they don't have to go head to head with A&M but they will play them annually. The rest of the SEC essentially remains the same.

That makes it comfortable for Texas and comfortable for the rest of us. The Aggies don't have to be in their division and can compete for the conference championship series separately.

It won't involve the ACC and whatever they want to do won't be any of our affair. With Texas (the state) locked up we don't have to worry so much about Florida. Leaving them in a division of their favorite schools to play keeps them happy. We all keep 1 permanent rival and play 10 conference games. The five in our division, one permanent rival, and rotate 2 each from the other divisions.

But the question is how to land Texas? I think that is about as good of a set up as we can give them. Substitute Texas Tech for Kansas but only if we must.

That 18 team set up looks really good, but it's not practical. The B1G is going to demand concessions for the rights to their programming which ESPN needs.
I still contend in that scenario, that Missouri becomes the peace offering to the B1G for those TV rights.

Missouri and Kansas to the B1G.

Then you might see this set-up for the SEC:

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Arkansas, Texas
A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt
Miss. State, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky
Fla., Georgia, South Carolina, Auburn
08-17-2017 07:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Underdog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,740
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 121
I Root For: The American
Location: Cloud Nine
Post: #7
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 07:07 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.

The PAC has the best chance because it could take UT and three little brothers if it gives ESPN a % of the PACN. UT would love being responsible for creating an all Texas division within the PAC 16 along with delivering a PAC Lone Star Network. The PAC could also take UT, TT, OU, and OSU. However, the new PAC 16 would still lag behind the SEC and B1G… but surpass the ACC in $$$....
(This post was last modified: 08-17-2017 08:00 AM by Underdog.)
08-17-2017 07:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 808
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #8
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
Like many others posters here, I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma St find their way into the SEC.

The PAC has an opportunity to make Texas salivate: bring in 4 schools from the State of Texas and allow Texas to maintain some form the of the LHN.

Here's 4 pods...

Northwest: Washington, Washington St, Oregon, Oregon St
Southwest: Arizona, Arizona St, Utah, Colorado
Golden State: California, Stanford, USC, UCLA
Lone Star State: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston
08-17-2017 08:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,024
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 76
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #9
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 07:07 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.

I'd love to see Texas as an independent. They could easily fill a schedule with big time P5 teams in the early part of the schedule, Texas teams in the middle, and Army/BYU/ND in November.

I think more independents is a good thing honestly.
08-17-2017 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Underdog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,740
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 121
I Root For: The American
Location: Cloud Nine
Post: #10
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 08:37 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  Like many others posters here, I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma St find their way into the SEC.

The PAC has an opportunity to make Texas salivate: bring in 4 schools from the State of Texas and allow Texas to maintain some form the of the LHN.

Here's 4 pods...

Northwest: Washington, Washington St, Oregon, Oregon St
Southwest: Arizona, Arizona St, Utah, Colorado
Golden State: California, Stanford, USC, UCLA
Lone Star State: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston

I honestly think this ^ will likely happen....
08-17-2017 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 808
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #11
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 09:19 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 07:07 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.

I'd love to see Texas as an independent. They could easily fill a schedule with big time P5 teams in the early part of the schedule, Texas teams in the middle, and Army/BYU/ND in November.

I think more independents is a good thing honestly.

I agree - I would love to see more independents.
08-17-2017 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,384
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 93
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #12
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 02:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  As to the use of the LHN we have to acknowledge that it could be a moot issue. It depends a great deal upon what direction sports broadcasting moves as a result of technology.

I'd love to see us take the four you mentioned. Whatever happens I think the network's willingness to pay will be the deciding factor. I do think, have stated, and continue to believe that the most viable approach to landing Texas is to simply give them a Big 12 division. So moving to 18 and splitting into 3 divisions like this might just do the trick:

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

That's a whole division of their friends and old rivals and they don't have to go head to head with A&M but they will play them annually. The rest of the SEC essentially remains the same.

That makes it comfortable for Texas and comfortable for the rest of us. The Aggies don't have to be in their division and can compete for the conference championship series separately.

It won't involve the ACC and whatever they want to do won't be any of our affair. With Texas (the state) locked up we don't have to worry so much about Florida. Leaving them in a division of their favorite schools to play keeps them happy. We all keep 1 permanent rival and play 10 conference games. The five in our division, one permanent rival, and rotate 2 each from the other divisions.

But the question is how to land Texas? I think that is about as good of a set up as we can give them. Substitute Texas Tech for Kansas but only if we must.

The LHN may very well end up being a moot point. Part of ESPN's downsizing was actually moving their ESPNU production back to Bristol although I suspect to some degree that move had to do with making room for a coming ACC Network.

I suppose the question will be whether or not ESPN can get a decent ROI on what they've put into the LHN. If they can't then perhaps it's best to scuttle the whole thing as long as Texas has been secured.

I think to some degree, ESPN's ability and willingness to pay for Texas in the SEC or ACC could come down to whether or not they've got a solid plan to utilize the LHN. If they can find some way to monetize it within a new conference structure then that might go a long way to helping them find the funding to fuel the realignment.

When it comes to streaming, it all essentially melds into the same entity anyway although there's got to be some way to divide the revenue when it comes to a platform like the SECN in which ESPN is sharing the money. Can they find a way to do the same thing with the LHN? That is the question.
08-17-2017 11:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Soobahk40050 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 583
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Tennessee
Location:
Post: #13
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 09:19 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 07:07 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.

I'd love to see Texas as an independent. They could easily fill a schedule with big time P5 teams in the early part of the schedule, Texas teams in the middle, and Army/BYU/ND in November.

I think more independents is a good thing honestly.

I know the Big 12 as a whole is overpaid, but I wonder if they could go in-mass to independence. No one would have trouble scheduling, as they could basically keep a conference schedule intact but function as independents. Would help teams like Texas, OK get more money, and would probably mean teams like Kansas State/Baylor get more than they would in the AAC/MWC.
08-17-2017 11:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Underdog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,740
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 121
I Root For: The American
Location: Cloud Nine
Post: #14
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-17-2017 11:23 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 09:19 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 07:07 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.

I'd love to see Texas as an independent. They could easily fill a schedule with big time P5 teams in the early part of the schedule, Texas teams in the middle, and Army/BYU/ND in November.

I think more independents is a good thing honestly.

I know the Big 12 as a whole is overpaid, but I wonder if they could go in-mass to independence. No one would have trouble scheduling, as they could basically keep a conference schedule intact but function as independents. Would help teams like Texas, OK get more money, and would probably mean teams like Kansas State/Baylor get more than they would in the AAC/MWC.

TV contact... gone, CFP spot... gone, NCAA auto-bid... gone, etc....
(This post was last modified: 08-21-2017 10:59 PM by Underdog.)
08-21-2017 10:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Underdog Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,740
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 121
I Root For: The American
Location: Cloud Nine
Post: #15
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
Is there still a “Great Chase for Texas?” The program has hit rock bottom with that inept defensive performance against Maryland….
09-03-2017 08:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Soobahk40050 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 583
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Tennessee
Location:
Post: #16
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(08-21-2017 10:53 PM)Underdog Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 11:23 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 09:19 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 07:07 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.

I'd love to see Texas as an independent. They could easily fill a schedule with big time P5 teams in the early part of the schedule, Texas teams in the middle, and Army/BYU/ND in November.

I think more independents is a good thing honestly.

I know the Big 12 as a whole is overpaid, but I wonder if they could go in-mass to independence. No one would have trouble scheduling, as they could basically keep a conference schedule intact but function as independents. Would help teams like Texas, OK get more money, and would probably mean teams like Kansas State/Baylor get more than they would in the AAC/MWC.

TV contact... gone, CFP spot... gone, NCAA auto-bid... gone, etc....

Ok, so how about the Big 12 simply stops sponsoring football. They keep the basketball league to keep the NCAA auto-bid.

As to TV contract, see ND and BYU. As to CFP spot, the only Big 12 team to make it so far has been OK, and with a decent schedule and 12-0 record, or a good schedule and an 11-1 they would at least be in the running.

I admit it is far fetched, though.
09-03-2017 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,791
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 832
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #17
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(09-03-2017 08:58 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-21-2017 10:53 PM)Underdog Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 11:23 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 09:19 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(08-17-2017 07:07 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  One option not mentioned so far: Texas as a true independent.

If their T1 and 2 games are worth $35-40 mil, then this is a legitimate option.

Would mean a very direct bidding war between ESPN/Fox for those rights. Would also still in some ways come down to if Texas wanted more ACC/SEC (ESPN) schools on it's schedule or Big 10 (Fox). Independence could be a way to play Big 10 schools, keep some local rivalries and appease a fan base that wouldn't care about games against Minnesota every year.

Then SEC if they really wanted to expand would be free to take OK/St, OK/Kansas, OK/TCU, or OK/WVU.

The ACC could grab say Cincy and ND all in. Or ND/WVU, or even Houston (a good fit with their basketball pedigree too).

The PAC would still have tough decisions to make about who is worthwhile to them, but would have options.

I'd love to see Texas as an independent. They could easily fill a schedule with big time P5 teams in the early part of the schedule, Texas teams in the middle, and Army/BYU/ND in November.

I think more independents is a good thing honestly.

I know the Big 12 as a whole is overpaid, but I wonder if they could go in-mass to independence. No one would have trouble scheduling, as they could basically keep a conference schedule intact but function as independents. Would help teams like Texas, OK get more money, and would probably mean teams like Kansas State/Baylor get more than they would in the AAC/MWC.

TV contact... gone, CFP spot... gone, NCAA auto-bid... gone, etc....

Ok, so how about the Big 12 simply stops sponsoring football. They keep the basketball league to keep the NCAA auto-bid.

As to TV contract, see ND and BYU. As to CFP spot, the only Big 12 team to make it so far has been OK, and with a decent schedule and 12-0 record, or a good schedule and an 11-1 they would at least be in the running.

I admit it is far fetched, though.

Here's the hypothetical for you. Let's assume by the end of next week that Virginia Tech manages a win over West Virginia tonight and that Ohio State beats Oklahoma by 10 or more points in Columbus. Neither of those outcomes is out of the realm of possibility. All of the sudden Texas, Oklahoma, and West Virginia have suffered significant losses. Baylor's loss to Liberty is a death blow. That leaves O.S.U. as the lone possibility for a CFP invite because I seriously doubt that Texas Tech, Kansas, Kansas State, or Iowa State are going to get a look and because T.C.U. has been passed over before. But let's say that Oklahoma or Arkansas manages to beat T.C.U. and that O.S.U. suffers only 1 loss. Neither of those are out of the realm of possibility either. With what the nation perceives as the 3 or the top 4 programs in the Big 12 losing does O.S.U. with 1 loss have the S.O.S. to make the CFP? No.

What Maryland did Saturday was to drive yet another nail in the coffin of the Big 12.

Right now your major contenders for the CFP are Stanford / Washington / Colorado from the PAC, Ohio State / Penn State / Wisconsin / Michigan from the B1G, and Alabama / L.S.U. and Georgia from the SEC, and Clemson from the ACC.

The ACC nearly suffered the same fate as the Big 12 on the opening weekend. Let's say that W.V.U. and Tennessee win tonight and tomorrow. All of the sudden the ACC has lost Florida State, N.C. State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, and Virginia Tech. That will leave Miami and Clemson. Should Auburn find a way to take down Clemson their season is virtually over with for the CFP. It will be especially true if Georgia wins in South Bend. All of the sudden their S.O.S. is gone.

Somebody will likely get two teams in for the first time and in that case all of the sudden there will be a push for a conversion to a champs only model and that will do two things: 1. Kill the Big 12 and 2. Force Notre Dame to abandon independence.

All of the possible losses I have speculated about are possible, if not likely in some cases, and only improbably with regard to Clemson playing Auburn at home.

What the opening weekend has done is to virtually level the Big 12's chances from the outset and to make vulnerable the ACC in a definitive way.
09-03-2017 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,563
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #18
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(09-03-2017 12:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Here's the hypothetical for you. Let's assume by the end of next week that Virginia Tech manages a win over West Virginia tonight and that Ohio State beats Oklahoma by 10 or more points in Columbus. Neither of those outcomes is out of the realm of possibility. All of the sudden Texas, Oklahoma, and West Virginia have suffered significant losses. Baylor's loss to Liberty is a death blow. That leaves O.S.U. as the lone possibility for a CFP invite because I seriously doubt that Texas Tech, Kansas, Kansas State, or Iowa State are going to get a look and because T.C.U. has been passed over before. But let's say that Oklahoma or Arkansas manages to beat T.C.U. and that O.S.U. suffers only 1 loss. Neither of those are out of the realm of possibility either. With what the nation perceives as the 3 or the top 4 programs in the Big 12 losing does O.S.U. with 1 loss have the S.O.S. to make the CFP? No.

What Maryland did Saturday was to drive yet another nail in the coffin of the Big 12.

Right now your major contenders for the CFP are Stanford / Washington / Colorado from the PAC, Ohio State / Penn State / Wisconsin / Michigan from the B1G, and Alabama / L.S.U. and Georgia from the SEC, and Clemson from the ACC.

The ACC nearly suffered the same fate as the Big 12 on the opening weekend. Let's say that W.V.U. and Tennessee win tonight and tomorrow. All of the sudden the ACC has lost Florida State, N.C. State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, and Virginia Tech. That will leave Miami and Clemson. Should Auburn find a way to take down Clemson their season is virtually over with for the CFP. It will be especially true if Georgia wins in South Bend. All of the sudden their S.O.S. is gone.

Somebody will likely get two teams in for the first time and in that case all of the sudden there will be a push for a conversion to a champs only model and that will do two things: 1. Kill the Big 12 and 2. Force Notre Dame to abandon independence.

All of the possible losses I have speculated about are possible, if not likely in some cases, and only improbably with regard to Clemson playing Auburn at home.

What the opening weekend has done is to virtually level the Big 12's chances from the outset and to make vulnerable the ACC in a definitive way.


The conclusion to this is hypothetical is this:
The networks must have a champions only model to insure interest in all leagues through out the season and protect their investment in college football.

As a by product in the future you will see more conference games and less "battle of the titans" match-ups early in the season. Rules changes will be coming to allow for sub-divisions (pods) for 16 team leagues and more freedom for each of the four remaining conferences to select their own method of selecting a champion.
Maintaining interest in the regular season will become paramount.
09-03-2017 01:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,791
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 832
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #19
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
(09-03-2017 01:55 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(09-03-2017 12:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Here's the hypothetical for you. Let's assume by the end of next week that Virginia Tech manages a win over West Virginia tonight and that Ohio State beats Oklahoma by 10 or more points in Columbus. Neither of those outcomes is out of the realm of possibility. All of the sudden Texas, Oklahoma, and West Virginia have suffered significant losses. Baylor's loss to Liberty is a death blow. That leaves O.S.U. as the lone possibility for a CFP invite because I seriously doubt that Texas Tech, Kansas, Kansas State, or Iowa State are going to get a look and because T.C.U. has been passed over before. But let's say that Oklahoma or Arkansas manages to beat T.C.U. and that O.S.U. suffers only 1 loss. Neither of those are out of the realm of possibility either. With what the nation perceives as the 3 or the top 4 programs in the Big 12 losing does O.S.U. with 1 loss have the S.O.S. to make the CFP? No.

What Maryland did Saturday was to drive yet another nail in the coffin of the Big 12.

Right now your major contenders for the CFP are Stanford / Washington / Colorado from the PAC, Ohio State / Penn State / Wisconsin / Michigan from the B1G, and Alabama / L.S.U. and Georgia from the SEC, and Clemson from the ACC.

The ACC nearly suffered the same fate as the Big 12 on the opening weekend. Let's say that W.V.U. and Tennessee win tonight and tomorrow. All of the sudden the ACC has lost Florida State, N.C. State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, and Virginia Tech. That will leave Miami and Clemson. Should Auburn find a way to take down Clemson their season is virtually over with for the CFP. It will be especially true if Georgia wins in South Bend. All of the sudden their S.O.S. is gone.

Somebody will likely get two teams in for the first time and in that case all of the sudden there will be a push for a conversion to a champs only model and that will do two things: 1. Kill the Big 12 and 2. Force Notre Dame to abandon independence.

All of the possible losses I have speculated about are possible, if not likely in some cases, and only improbably with regard to Clemson playing Auburn at home.

What the opening weekend has done is to virtually level the Big 12's chances from the outset and to make vulnerable the ACC in a definitive way.


The conclusion to this is hypothetical is this:
The networks must have a champions only model to insure interest in all leagues through out the season and protect their investment in college football.

As a by product in the future you will see more conference games and less "battle of the titans" match-ups early in the season. Rules changes will be coming to allow for sub-divisions (pods) for 16 team leagues and more freedom for each of the four remaining conferences to select their own method of selecting a champion.
Maintaining interest in the regular season will become paramount.

You're preaching to the choir. I've been an advocate of the Champs only model since I've been on the board. I've also been a consistent proponent of 4 divisions (not rotating pods) and conference semis. I've even noted that should we move to larger than 16 conferences that the ultimate aim should be upon winning your conference because it keeps the more schools involved in the hunt for the semis and therefore keeps more interest upon the member schools.

ESPN will be the one who fights this however because those battle of the Titans drives ratings, ad dollars, and gives their blithering morons something to talk about all week long before the real season starts to provide the story lines.

But this year these titanic match ups may have hit their own self created iceberg and two conferences may be down at the bow by end of next week. What to talk about then? B1G / SEC? If so the public is tired of that story line and ratings will sag.
09-03-2017 02:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,563
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #20
RE: The Great Chase for Texas
The question changes from the chase for Texas to how does the Texas Market get divided? Which has been the question all along.
Three conferences have to be satisfied. I say three, because I think because of politics, the PAC schools have removed themselves from the expansion equation.

Delany did everybody in college football a favor by leaving the ESPN tent and starting the BTN. He allowed the market to seek the proper dollar level for P level football. Remember Delany said he would have never left ESPN if they had agreed to pay the Big Ten more.
How do we placate the B1G and Delany. ESPN gives them back what they took from them (Missouri), so they can pair the Tigers with Kansas.


So what about the ACC and the SEC where ESPN has vested interests?
With the SEC down to 13 teams it is necessary to add three to get to 16. Oklahoma is a no brainer, but to get them, yep!, it means Oklahoma State. But for #16? Tough call. West Virginia? Remember we are dividing the Texas market. So how do we add to the SEC's share of Texas (A&M with LSU handles the Houston area, Oklahoma would take case of DFW)and add the one other thing we are missing (a rival for Oklahoma State) you invite the second Texas school that you need, Texas Tech.
For the ACC?
For starters you allow Notre Dame to enter the league at their own pace (which may be several years down the road) but in addition to Texas add TCU.
DFW presence is not only good for the ACC but would also bode well for the Irish in that is gives a good "stage" for ACC product is Texas.

That's it, we're done. No need to celebrate, throw confetti or dance a jig. Everybody goes away with what they wanted or needed. Perfect? Perfect was never going to happen and keep everybody happy
ESPN gets what they need out of the B1G, the SEC and the ACC. Six regions (one stretched) that are pretty distinctive and pretty well balanced.

B1G west:
Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, Minn, Wisc, NW, Ill
B1G east:
Purdue, Indiana, Mich, Mich St, Ohio St,. Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State

SEC east:
Kentucky, Tenn, Ala, Auburn, Ga, so. carolina, Florida, Miss. State
SEC west:
Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Arkansas, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, A&M, LSU

ACC west:
TCU, Texas, Miami, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, BC
ACC east:
Florida St., Clemson, Ga. Tech, Carolina, State, Duke, Wake Forest, UVa
currently partial and future member: Notre Dame.
(This post was last modified: 09-04-2017 06:30 AM by XLance.)
09-03-2017 04:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.