Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
Author Message
Nerdlinger Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,003
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #61
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-03-2018 08:03 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let's say the SEC were to land Texas and Oklahoma and the asking price is Tech and Oklahoma St. That's 18.

At that point do you push the NCAA to let you do conference semi finals and arrange in 3 divisions of 6, with a wild card getting a berth.

Do you push for hosting a title game without having divisions and move to a model where each school has some protects rivalries.

Do you toss another two schools in the mix and go to 20, utilizing a loophole that as long as you have 4 divisions of 5 and a plan in place where at the season where the Division A winner players the Division B winner and C plays D.

The way I see it, if the SEC is able to score a massive coup and get the Texlahoma 4 no matter how you slice it you either need a rule change or a rule stretch to make it wieldly.

What would be interesting to me is if a power conference were to reach 16 and lobby the NCAA to permit conferences with at least 16 teams to hold semifinals. If they were successful, you might see a push by other conferences to reach 16, which I'd love to see. However, the NCAA would probably be able to foresee the chaos that would ensue. They'd either (1) deny permission for semis, (2) permit them for 16-team conferences but cap conference sizes at 16 (if that's even something they can regulate), or (3) further deregulate CCGs and divisions, allowing smaller conferences to have semis as well. Option 3 seems likeliest, since it would have the support of the conferences that do not want to expand further.
(This post was last modified: 02-03-2018 09:55 AM by Nerdlinger.)
02-03-2018 09:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
oliveandblue Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,220
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Tulane
Location:
Post: #62
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
I would like to see more 10 team leagues where all of the members are similar in goals.

I think the PAC-12, Big East, Ivy, and a couple others really get the idea of what a conference should be.
02-03-2018 11:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SMUmustangs Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,073
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 68
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #63
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-03-2018 12:59 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-02-2018 11:45 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  
(02-02-2018 08:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-02-2018 07:02 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Someone logically explain the purpose of having conferences, not a separate association, consisting of 18, 20, 22, or 24 members? Such numbers significantly exceed the quantity needed to meet scheduling requirements of every sport. There are expectations, in most conference sports, everybody plays everyone else within a REASONABLE cycle. There are only 12 regular season games for fb unless someone wants to take a trip to Hawaii. In bb, home to home within a season is common and preferred. Then, there are the OOCs to be accommodated. No need for a conference to be overly incestuous as subsets. Engaging other conferences need to be encouraged on peer levels for the regular season.

Having a P5/NCAA policy of a maximize of sixteen (16) members would be a good thing. There has long been a minimum number for certain validations. It would lead to overall better stability, and knowing there is a limit to aggressive aquisitions. Perhaps not all want to go to 16 based on needs, and that should be generally OK. It would also make final choices in aquisitions more thoughtful and strategic.

They will be thoughtful and strategic anyway. The SEC won't add a school unless they increase the bottom line and we have parameters beyond that initial qualifier. They must be contiguous and fit our cultural identity (have some claim on being Southern). Beyond that we look at overall sports fit (meaning they have to offer the requisite number of required sports with facilities that meet conference standards). If they don't currently meet those requirements they have to have a plan in place to have met them prior to their joining the conference. We also look at academics. While a strong product might have average academics we look for schools who meet our athletic profile who also have high academic standings.

So the presidents (those who decide these issues) look at the profit and then decide on applicants after checking the other criteria.

A prospective member like Oklahoma is at the academic mean of the SEC, but their financial numbers are extremely strong and their sports emphasis and fit is dead on for the SEC. With Missouri they had the market impact we were looking for with the birth of the SECN and their academics were strong. Their overall sports fit was strong. But their sports history was pretty average and they had to upgrade facilities.
Texas A&M was extremely strong in all areas and as close to a no brainer addition as we could hope to find.

When we add again it will likely be two schools with a sports brand pedigree with average to strong academics, either inside of our footprint or in a contiguous state bringing a new market. For a school like Oklahoma State to get a serious look they would have to be the traveling companion of Oklahoma. Oklahoma brings an economic impact of 1 billion with them. That's the 3rd best in the nation, slightly higher than that of Alabama who is 4th, and behind Ohio State and Texas who are 1st and 2nd.

To put it another way our average economic impact for an SEC school is 1/2 billion plus per school. The SEC's overall economic impact is over 7 billion and 2 billion ahead of the Big 10. The Oklahoma pair would be 124 million each (by average) in excess of the SEC's current average. In terms of gross total revenue the two together generated 243 million between them (150 million for OU / 93 million for OSU).

It's the silly season and folks building lists and having global domination alignments is the norm.

In the SEC the additions of Arkansas, Missouri, and South Carolina were top 30ish and top 40ish programs. With A&M we added a top 10. If the SEC added Texas and Oklahoma (which would be tough to do) we would hold 7 of the top 10 programs. That would be a grand slam in realignment terms. It is also why we or another conference might consider letting Oklahoma or Texas bring another state school along. Either of those two cover the other addition and still leave us a profit, but more importantly would leave us in a revenue position that really could not be challenged by another conference adding anyone else.
Given the GoRs, and what high quality teams may be available in 5 or 6 years or so, I concur, the OU-oSu combo may be the best possibility for expanding in the contiguous way. Perhaps they will be the "ace jewels' the U. of Fla. President spoke of as a criteria a few years back. Barry Tramel, OU's soundingboard, spoke so pro-BIG in the past, as if OU is the Harvard of the lower plains, and belonged there; being another diss at the SEC. Perhaps that has all changed. Still, as much as an arrogant pain in the tailbone Texas may be, i prefer them, but not with TTU. That would be too much "Texas".

Personally, I would have favored a prime NC school from the ACC. But N.C. and VA will stay protected ACC turf. Their GoR is for a long time, and seriously doubt there will be any horse-trading. Those schools are very bonded.

The Ace Jewels are Texas and Oklahoma. The trick would be to land the pair. I'm just afraid that means taking another Texas and Oklahoma school.

As to North Carolina and Virginia the only hope to make a play there is if the economic disparity between the ACC and the B1G/SEC widens in the next 15 years and if we move to a content driven model it certainly could widen. But the Big 10 and SEC would have to work in tandem to crack that nut. And if the ACC and SEC both remain ESPN properties then it is very doubtful that any cooperation could involved the SEC. ESPN would have to want to move those schools before it could happen.

So my question to you is if it was Texas that we landed who would you want as their travel companion if not another Texas school? I don't love the idea of taking Tech but it is their last "state" school and the only one the politicians could get involved with wanting to place in a P5 for revenue reasons.

Let's say the choices were another AAU school (Iowa State and Kansas), or another state flagship (Iowa State, Kansas, West Virginia) who would you pick?

Here's the issue. Iowa State's gross total revenue is in the high 70 million range. Texas Tech is in the high 70 million range. Kansas is in the 96 million range. West Virginia's is in the 105 million range. But, Kansas only average 25,000 attendance at football last year and their economic impact estimations by the WSJ are in the 370 million range (which is okay). Texas Tech's impact numbers are in the 170 million range and their attendance is around 50k. The problem for the Eers is that their economic impact estimations are in the 74 million range which is extremely low. But they do average around the mid 60k range in attendance.

My point is there are no clear cut companions outside of OU. Kansas may be the best but they are hardly a cultural fit. They would provide Mizzou their rivalry back. Iowa State is a great school, but hardly a cultural fit and would be the farthest outlying destination in the SEC. West Virginia would only be able to squeeze in with Texas. The Horns numbers cover the WVU deficits but really gut the profit in taking Texas.

Behind Kansas the Cowboys have the best numbers.

I think in the end should Texas be interested the price would be Tech. Just like the price for OU will be the Pokes.

Kansas may be the only non cultural fit that would be considered. It gives UK another basketball blue blood. It gives Missouri back their rivalry. And they are AAU.

But as you can see it's not going to be clear cut or easy.

As to Barry Trammel he's been a Boren mouthpiece and Boren leaned Big 10. But Boren was the first to suggest that if the SEC took OSU that we could land OU. He had served at OSU prior to becoming a Senator and has a building named after him there. Plus his wife is an OSU alum. But Trammel was only doing his bidding. The more we were convinced of the Big 10 possibility the more likely we were to offer OSU too next time around. It's a political ploy that needed to sell the idea to make us bite.

JR, great stuff as usual. However, I have to disagree that Berry Tramel is a mouthpiece for Boren.

Tramel is a very nice guy and easy to communicate with. I have often conversed with him on the phone or via email. He has even included some of my conversations with him in his articles. You email him and he will respond, call him and he will talk to you.

Having said that, I must add he is very independent and opinionated. If he believes in something he is like a bulldog. He is not the type person to be a mouthpiece for anyone. He is friendly and down to earth, but he is not easily influenced.

I do think Boren and the OU Administtration desires the Big10.....but they also would like to stay with OSU. We both know that the Big10 is not offering OSU. So what OU does may depend on Texas. IMO if Texas agrees to go to the Big10, OU will leave OSU behind. If Texas
declines the Big10, then OU and OSU may very well go to the SEC. As I have often said, I do not believe Texas will go to the SEC

Of course the PAC could do something drastic and possibly change everything, but that does not seem likely.

I always enjoy reading your well thought out analysis of realgnment.
(This post was last modified: 02-03-2018 12:28 PM by SMUmustangs.)
02-03-2018 12:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,765
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 832
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #64
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-03-2018 12:20 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  
(02-03-2018 12:59 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-02-2018 11:45 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  
(02-02-2018 08:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-02-2018 07:02 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Someone logically explain the purpose of having conferences, not a separate association, consisting of 18, 20, 22, or 24 members? Such numbers significantly exceed the quantity needed to meet scheduling requirements of every sport. There are expectations, in most conference sports, everybody plays everyone else within a REASONABLE cycle. There are only 12 regular season games for fb unless someone wants to take a trip to Hawaii. In bb, home to home within a season is common and preferred. Then, there are the OOCs to be accommodated. No need for a conference to be overly incestuous as subsets. Engaging other conferences need to be encouraged on peer levels for the regular season.

Having a P5/NCAA policy of a maximize of sixteen (16) members would be a good thing. There has long been a minimum number for certain validations. It would lead to overall better stability, and knowing there is a limit to aggressive aquisitions. Perhaps not all want to go to 16 based on needs, and that should be generally OK. It would also make final choices in aquisitions more thoughtful and strategic.

They will be thoughtful and strategic anyway. The SEC won't add a school unless they increase the bottom line and we have parameters beyond that initial qualifier. They must be contiguous and fit our cultural identity (have some claim on being Southern). Beyond that we look at overall sports fit (meaning they have to offer the requisite number of required sports with facilities that meet conference standards). If they don't currently meet those requirements they have to have a plan in place to have met them prior to their joining the conference. We also look at academics. While a strong product might have average academics we look for schools who meet our athletic profile who also have high academic standings.

So the presidents (those who decide these issues) look at the profit and then decide on applicants after checking the other criteria.

A prospective member like Oklahoma is at the academic mean of the SEC, but their financial numbers are extremely strong and their sports emphasis and fit is dead on for the SEC. With Missouri they had the market impact we were looking for with the birth of the SECN and their academics were strong. Their overall sports fit was strong. But their sports history was pretty average and they had to upgrade facilities.
Texas A&M was extremely strong in all areas and as close to a no brainer addition as we could hope to find.

When we add again it will likely be two schools with a sports brand pedigree with average to strong academics, either inside of our footprint or in a contiguous state bringing a new market. For a school like Oklahoma State to get a serious look they would have to be the traveling companion of Oklahoma. Oklahoma brings an economic impact of 1 billion with them. That's the 3rd best in the nation, slightly higher than that of Alabama who is 4th, and behind Ohio State and Texas who are 1st and 2nd.

To put it another way our average economic impact for an SEC school is 1/2 billion plus per school. The SEC's overall economic impact is over 7 billion and 2 billion ahead of the Big 10. The Oklahoma pair would be 124 million each (by average) in excess of the SEC's current average. In terms of gross total revenue the two together generated 243 million between them (150 million for OU / 93 million for OSU).

It's the silly season and folks building lists and having global domination alignments is the norm.

In the SEC the additions of Arkansas, Missouri, and South Carolina were top 30ish and top 40ish programs. With A&M we added a top 10. If the SEC added Texas and Oklahoma (which would be tough to do) we would hold 7 of the top 10 programs. That would be a grand slam in realignment terms. It is also why we or another conference might consider letting Oklahoma or Texas bring another state school along. Either of those two cover the other addition and still leave us a profit, but more importantly would leave us in a revenue position that really could not be challenged by another conference adding anyone else.
Given the GoRs, and what high quality teams may be available in 5 or 6 years or so, I concur, the OU-oSu combo may be the best possibility for expanding in the contiguous way. Perhaps they will be the "ace jewels' the U. of Fla. President spoke of as a criteria a few years back. Barry Tramel, OU's soundingboard, spoke so pro-BIG in the past, as if OU is the Harvard of the lower plains, and belonged there; being another diss at the SEC. Perhaps that has all changed. Still, as much as an arrogant pain in the tailbone Texas may be, i prefer them, but not with TTU. That would be too much "Texas".

Personally, I would have favored a prime NC school from the ACC. But N.C. and VA will stay protected ACC turf. Their GoR is for a long time, and seriously doubt there will be any horse-trading. Those schools are very bonded.

The Ace Jewels are Texas and Oklahoma. The trick would be to land the pair. I'm just afraid that means taking another Texas and Oklahoma school.

As to North Carolina and Virginia the only hope to make a play there is if the economic disparity between the ACC and the B1G/SEC widens in the next 15 years and if we move to a content driven model it certainly could widen. But the Big 10 and SEC would have to work in tandem to crack that nut. And if the ACC and SEC both remain ESPN properties then it is very doubtful that any cooperation could involved the SEC. ESPN would have to want to move those schools before it could happen.

So my question to you is if it was Texas that we landed who would you want as their travel companion if not another Texas school? I don't love the idea of taking Tech but it is their last "state" school and the only one the politicians could get involved with wanting to place in a P5 for revenue reasons.

Let's say the choices were another AAU school (Iowa State and Kansas), or another state flagship (Iowa State, Kansas, West Virginia) who would you pick?

Here's the issue. Iowa State's gross total revenue is in the high 70 million range. Texas Tech is in the high 70 million range. Kansas is in the 96 million range. West Virginia's is in the 105 million range. But, Kansas only average 25,000 attendance at football last year and their economic impact estimations by the WSJ are in the 370 million range (which is okay). Texas Tech's impact numbers are in the 170 million range and their attendance is around 50k. The problem for the Eers is that their economic impact estimations are in the 74 million range which is extremely low. But they do average around the mid 60k range in attendance.

My point is there are no clear cut companions outside of OU. Kansas may be the best but they are hardly a cultural fit. They would provide Mizzou their rivalry back. Iowa State is a great school, but hardly a cultural fit and would be the farthest outlying destination in the SEC. West Virginia would only be able to squeeze in with Texas. The Horns numbers cover the WVU deficits but really gut the profit in taking Texas.

Behind Kansas the Cowboys have the best numbers.

I think in the end should Texas be interested the price would be Tech. Just like the price for OU will be the Pokes.

Kansas may be the only non cultural fit that would be considered. It gives UK another basketball blue blood. It gives Missouri back their rivalry. And they are AAU.

But as you can see it's not going to be clear cut or easy.

As to Barry Trammel he's been a Boren mouthpiece and Boren leaned Big 10. But Boren was the first to suggest that if the SEC took OSU that we could land OU. He had served at OSU prior to becoming a Senator and has a building named after him there. Plus his wife is an OSU alum. But Trammel was only doing his bidding. The more we were convinced of the Big 10 possibility the more likely we were to offer OSU too next time around. It's a political ploy that needed to sell the idea to make us bite.

JR, great stuff as usual. However, I have to disagree that Berry Tramel is a mouthpiece for Boren.

Tramel is a very nice guy and easy to communicate with. I have often conversed with him on the phone or via email. He has even included some of my conversations with him in his articles. You email him and he will respond, call him and he will talk to you.

Having said that, I must add he is very independent and opinionated. If he believes in something he is like a bulldog. He is not the type person to be a mouthpiece for anyone. He is friendly and down to earth, but he is not easily influenced.

I do think Boren and the OU Administtration desires the Big10.....but they also would like to stay with OSU. We both know that the Big10 is not offering OSU. So what OU does may depend on Texas. IMO if Texas agrees to go to the Big10, OU will leave OSU behind. If Texas
declines the Big10, then OU and OSU may very well go to the SEC. As I have often said, I do not believe Texas will go to the SEC

Of course the PAC could do something drastic and possibly change everything, but that does not seem likely.

I always enjoy reading your well thought out analysis of realgnment.

Well, I'll obviously defer to first hand knowledge of Tramel. I guess I picked up an Okie fan bias where Tramel was concerned. They seem to think he was lockstep with Boren, but if you know him perhaps that misconception was because Barry's opinion is just similar to the leanings of Boren and not because of him.

I think Texas isn't likely at all. And the only temptation the SEC can offer are annual games with Arkansas, Texas A&M, and should we land them, Oklahoma. Toss in L.S.U. and their season ticket book looks very appealing with road games that spur donations for that small allotment. That's our appeal if we are to have one.

IMO, despite any academic shortfalls of OSU, the SEC's best play to land their major objectives is to bite the bullet and invite both Oklahoma schools. Just the addition of Oklahoma puts us over the top financially and might make Texas give it a think. And the Pokes are competitive in all sports and would make a solid middle tier addition to a West that would likely see Auburn and Alabama shift east. The lure of not having Auburn and Alabama in the West would certainly set the stage for Oklahoma, L.S.U. and perhaps A&M to establish themselves. Oklahoma would have anyway, but not having to face an equally dominant program until the conference CCG would be good for both OU and AL and it would make both divisions relevant with those kinds of brands being the bell cows of each.

I think for the PAC to have a shot they are going to have to have some major financial backing from a network. Otherwise if movement happens it will be either the Big 10 or SEC that is involved.
02-03-2018 02:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,215
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #65
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
I have to think if the Oklahoma schools go to the SEC Texas is going to have to think long and hard about joining them too. All the schools they'd like to be playing--Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas would all be there.

While in state, Tech, TCU, and Baylor are not giant rivalries for the burnt orange. The Big Ten can't provide them with traditional rivals or accomodate the secondary rivals they still have in the Big 12.

The SEC is going to win the realignment game when the Big 12 GOR expires. The Big Ten is going to have to hope they can get ND and the choice Pac 12 schools to keep pace.
02-03-2018 05:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,706
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 343
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #66
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-03-2018 05:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I have to think if the Oklahoma schools go to the SEC Texas is going to have to think long and hard about joining them too. All the schools they'd like to be playing--Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas would all be there.

While in state, Tech, TCU, and Baylor are not giant rivalries for the burnt orange. The Big Ten can't provide them with traditional rivals or accomodate the secondary rivals they still have in the Big 12.

The SEC is going to win the realignment game when the Big 12 GOR expires. The Big Ten is going to have to hope they can get ND and the choice Pac 12 schools to keep pace.

Absolutely right on the B1G. And the B1G probably won't want OU for other reasons. So unless Texas goes to the SEC, they would have to hope they can attract PAC teams to join them in the B12 or wind up being Snow White to the 7 dwarves once OU and OK State head east. Is Texas' ego big enough that they'd turn down the SEC's offer? It could be. It's big enough that they would regret it, but never admit that they do.
02-03-2018 08:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 805
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #67
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-03-2018 05:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I have to think if the Oklahoma schools go to the SEC Texas is going to have to think long and hard about joining them too. All the schools they'd like to be playing--Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas would all be there.

While in state, Tech, TCU, and Baylor are not giant rivalries for the burnt orange. The Big Ten can't provide them with traditional rivals or accomodate the secondary rivals they still have in the Big 12.

The SEC is going to win the realignment game when the Big 12 GOR expires. The Big Ten is going to have to hope they can get ND and the choice Pac 12 schools to keep pace.

If the SEC ends up netting Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Florida St, Clemson, North Carolina St, and Virginia Tech for 22 then the B1G could still do well with Kansas, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Boston College. Those additions may entice Notre Dame for a 24-school conference. The SEC may look at 2 of West Virginia, Iowa St, Louisville, Kansas St, or TCU for 24. Perhaps Louisville and West Virginia. The PAC, still isolated, might consider TCU, Houston, Iowa St, Kansas St, and any number of Mountain West schools which I would doubt. I could see the 8 PAC AAU schools heading to the B1G for 32 and the SEC sitting at 24.

B1G
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Colorado
North: Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue
East: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Syracuse
South: Penn St, Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami

SEC
West: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Missouri
South: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Florida St
North: Kentucky, Louisville, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: North Carolina St, South Carolina, Clemson, Georgia, Florida, Auburn

AAC
Pacific: Arizona St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Washington St, Boise St
Mountain: Utah, BYU, Colorado St, Air Force, Kansas St
Southwest: TCU, Baylor, Houston, Tulsa, Tulane
North: Iowa St, Memphis, Cincinnati, Temple, Connecticut
Southeast: Navy, Wake Forest, East Carolina, Central Florida, South Florida
02-03-2018 08:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,476
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 79
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #68
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-03-2018 05:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I have to think if the Oklahoma schools go to the SEC Texas is going to have to think long and hard about joining them too. All the schools they'd like to be playing--Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas would all be there.

While in state, Tech, TCU, and Baylor are not giant rivalries for the burnt orange. The Big Ten can't provide them with traditional rivals or accomodate the secondary rivals they still have in the Big 12.

The SEC is going to win the realignment game when the Big 12 GOR expires. The Big Ten is going to have to hope they can get ND and the choice Pac 12 schools to keep pace.

Would be very hard for Texas to not seriously consider the SEC if OU, A&M and Arkansas are just sitting there. Their fans would have to be convinced their future schedules would be worth the prices charged. More than likely the fans would force Texas to join, well if Texas doesn’t get brocked by A&M.

The other issue is scheduling. Would have to alter the divisions requirements or most of these schools will never play one another in football.
02-03-2018 08:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,765
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 832
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #69
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-03-2018 08:52 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(02-03-2018 05:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I have to think if the Oklahoma schools go to the SEC Texas is going to have to think long and hard about joining them too. All the schools they'd like to be playing--Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas would all be there.

While in state, Tech, TCU, and Baylor are not giant rivalries for the burnt orange. The Big Ten can't provide them with traditional rivals or accomodate the secondary rivals they still have in the Big 12.

The SEC is going to win the realignment game when the Big 12 GOR expires. The Big Ten is going to have to hope they can get ND and the choice Pac 12 schools to keep pace.

Would be very hard for Texas to not seriously consider the SEC if OU, A&M and Arkansas are just sitting there. Their fans would have to be convinced their future schedules would be worth the prices charged. More than likely the fans would force Texas to join, well if Texas doesn’t get brocked by A&M.

The other issue is scheduling. Would have to alter the divisions requirements or most of these schools will never play one another in football.

I don't know how many times I have to say this. A&M can't block Texas! It takes a 3/4's vote to get in, and 4 votes to block membership. That means that it would take 3 more presidents beside A&M's to vote against Texas. And we are talking presidents of Universities who will be honing in on UT's academic standing. And A.D.'s who will advise them as to just how much more national attention and money UT would bring. So I'm telling you, there aren't 4 presidents in the SEC who would say no. The only negative vote Texas might receive is that of A&M but no single school can keep another out. And Georgia who is pushing academics, Florida who is AAU, and South Carolina will all be voting for the Horns' admission if it ever comes down to it.

This internet myth that there is a voting block against in state schools is pure B.S. that Travis got started. It doesn't exist. Florida sponsored F.S.U. in '91 and both South Carolina and Florida were willing to support F.S.U. and Clemson in 2010-1. The only gentlemen's agreement that was made was one where Slive asked that schools not sponsor their in state rivals until the required two new markets were added that permitted the SEC to renegotiate their contract with ESPN. Slive said at the time that any future adds would not have that prohibition and that the only qualifier would be profit.

South Carolina and Florida were both supportive because both of their athletic departments build their donation structure around their games with Clemson and F.S.U. and they fear further realignment without adding those schools because larger conferences mean fewer OOC games and they don't want difficulties scheduling those games. So it's more flexible for them to include their rival than to exclude them.
(This post was last modified: 02-03-2018 09:30 PM by JRsec.)
02-03-2018 09:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 21,824
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 634
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #70
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
(02-02-2018 05:04 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(02-02-2018 04:25 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  If the carriage model weakens further (I expect it will) or collapses (less likely) then it will could be that see schools demanding that they retain a number of games to sell on their own.

That's the logical next step, a creep into individual rights rather than a leap.

It's a big creep, if each school retained the rights to all non-conference football games. USC and ND could sell their game by itself, maybe fetching $10 million/year at today's prices, and USC gets $5 million they don't have to share with conference mates. If Texas ever plays Texas A&M again, that would probably be worth about the same, again, a nice $5 million/year for each school that isn't shared with conference mates. Many marquee non-con games could fetch almost that much for TV rights.

And essentially the conference TV contracts would be devalued by the value of each non-con game that isn't in the conference TV package; effectively, each other Big 12 team would be giving up $500,000 each year so that the Horns can get the whole $5 million in TV money from one of their big non-con games.

I don't think that creep can happen unless the carriage fee system significantly weakens or collapses and we move to what for lack of a better term I'll call metered usage.

Revenue to the conference is determined by actual viewership, that is in a subscriber driven system the league's cut of subscription revenue is determined by minutes of viewership or in an ad based system based on minutes of viewing or worse interaction with interactive advertisements.

In such a system, a school can definitively determine value but even then the disparity has to be significant, otherwise schools will opt for aggregation to protect against fluctuations but something like that has to happen for there to be any push to divest conferences of the sales role.
02-04-2018 08:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
templefootballfan Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,758
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 62
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE
Post: #71
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
you want to hold conf playoffs & CFP with kids that are not getting paid.
on top of that, stop student fee's & taxpayer money.
good luck with that
02-04-2018 10:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 973
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #72
RE: What will spark the dawn of the mega-conferences?
I think we may have the answer to the question in this thread: whatever Oklahoma decides.


(02-02-2018 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Big 10 (at 24):

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

Midwest: Colorado, Kansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Mideast: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue

East: Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia


SEC (at 24)

West: Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

Southwest: Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Miss. State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Southeast: Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami

East: Clemson, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia Tech


Now you have 48 schools in the Mega 2 and the Big 10 / SEC Rivalry tag sells better than any whether it is a special one and done at a neutral site, a bowl game, or a home and home.

These two could pool their media contracts and the leverage would be astronomical.

Your Tweener 3 can become a healthier Tweener 2:

ACC:

North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

South: Central Florida, Duke, East Carolina, Louisville, South Florida, Wake Forest

Big 12:

West: Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon State, San Diego St., Utah, Washington State

East: Baylor, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Iowa State, Kansas State, T.C.U.


* Notre Dame can attach wherever they wish.

The G5 should then realign into two strong conferences as well of 12 to 16 schools an that should form the FBS.

That's a pretty good potential final outcome. 04-cheers
02-04-2018 10:31 AM
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.