(04-05-2018 11:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 10:56 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 03:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 02:22 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  ...the ideal for the ACC would be: Texas, TCU, WVU and any 4th Big XII team except Texas Tech (too far). If Texas/OU ends up being another ACC/SEC rivalry, all the better.

(04-04-2018 08:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ...Texas Tech is a bridge too far for the ACC but Texas, T.C.U., Baylor, Houston, and Kansas State would give them quite a bit. Then you could put N.D. to the question, "In or out?" They'd go in because they have nowhere else to go to get a special deal and the ACC offers them more of what they need.

Then ESPN can use the SEC to take the two Oklahoma's, Kansas, Iowa State, Texas Tech and W.V.U..

Both conferences move to 20 and nobody worries about the worth of a product because the ACC with UT and ND moves to 50 million per school, the SEC moves to 55, and the total cost to ESPN, including buying out the FOX half, (even if they sublet the rights back to FOX), and the remaining T3 would not top $800 million. That's 4% of the total profits of ESPN.

To sew up 40 solid programs in the largest market footprint, combined with the 1st & 3rd best viewing regions would be huge.

And quite frankly they could do it without increasing the budget if they let MNF go.

JR, I love this scenario of yours and I hope it comes to pass, but... can't we trade Kansas State for WVU? The 'Eers have HUGE multiplier value in the ACC (vs. Pitt, VT, Syracuse, and to a lesser extent UVA, BC, Louisville, etc.). There must be some way to make that happen!?!

I'd be willing to trade Baylor for WVU if the problem is 2 teams from Kansas (which IS a problem, no doubt).

Hey, I'm not exactly hot for WVU, but the issue for the SEC is divisional balance.

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia

We won't take 3 from a state under these circumstances and Texas will insist on a division of friendly faces if they head to the ACC. So it just breaks that way.

Anyway I hope ESPN sees the same merit in it that we do.

I don't mind this arrangement (though I think getting KY-TN in the same division with Vandy might be a better overall setup). I do think that WVU is worth more in the ACC than in the SEC. And honestly I don't know what value KSU would bring after Snyder anyway. (No offense meant to KSU fans, I really am saying "I don't know"). So what if the ACC took WVU instead of KSU and the SEC took USF? KSU could land in the AAC or the MWC and be okay-ish, or even wind up with the NY6 bowl most years due to their advantages. If they convince a conference to unbalanced pay/etc. (ala the WCC to keep Gonzaga), they could make decent money (not the $50 mil range but maybe 15-20 mil with NCAA credits/etc, maybe.)

I know the SEC wouldn't normally take a G5 school, but USF has pretty good research and would give the school a second Florida team without taking from the ACC. They also have some (short) history, reaching #2 in the nation in the old Big East. They also have 50,000+ students, etc.

Just a thought. If the the networks want to maximize value, then WVU to the ACC does make some sense.

I agree that USF will eventually have a big upside and that the SEC should keep an eye on them. But, as many of these threads are want to do the premise of what is being discussed was lost a few pages back. The concept being discussed has to do with ESPN absorbing all of the Big 12 between the ACC and SEC so that it could be moved prior to the expiration of the GOR so the placement of Kansas State, Baylor, and Iowa State is assumed here for the purposes of the speculation.

As to Hokie Marks suggestions of having Oklahoma State head to the ACC with Texas, that is probably the most detrimental thing that Oklahoma could experience schedule wise. They need to have either Texas or Oklahoma State with them in order to keep playing both regularly as they do not want them both as OOC games. So if the ACC wants Texas and the SEC wants Oklahoma in this scenario then Okie State needs to stay with the Sooners. That's why I placed KState in the ACC in my scenario. Snyder and Texas have always had good relations and Texas needed another regional school in its division and if Texas Tech is too far for the ACC schools then KState has to be it.

Although Tech in the ACC sounds crazy, does it really matter when one is seemingly ok with a TCU addition(who is only a few hour drive away from Tech)? I feel that beggars can't be choosers and if the ACC were blessed enough to acquire Texas, they should welcome Tech with open arms. If Texas requests another lone star state institution into the ACC with them, Tech would probably be their choice; not TCU, Houston, or Rice. Surprisingly Baylor has a legit shot as well because of their political poll in Texas (they have the oldest law school in the state).

(04-05-2018 01:50 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 11:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 10:56 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 03:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 02:22 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  ...the ideal for the ACC would be: Texas, TCU, WVU and any 4th Big XII team except Texas Tech (too far). If Texas/OU ends up being another ACC/SEC rivalry, all the better.


JR, I love this scenario of yours and I hope it comes to pass, but... can't we trade Kansas State for WVU? The 'Eers have HUGE multiplier value in the ACC (vs. Pitt, VT, Syracuse, and to a lesser extent UVA, BC, Louisville, etc.). There must be some way to make that happen!?!

I'd be willing to trade Baylor for WVU if the problem is 2 teams from Kansas (which IS a problem, no doubt).

Hey, I'm not exactly hot for WVU, but the issue for the SEC is divisional balance.

Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia

We won't take 3 from a state under these circumstances and Texas will insist on a division of friendly faces if they head to the ACC. So it just breaks that way.

Anyway I hope ESPN sees the same merit in it that we do.

I don't mind this arrangement (though I think getting KY-TN in the same division with Vandy might be a better overall setup). I do think that WVU is worth more in the ACC than in the SEC. And honestly I don't know what value KSU would bring after Snyder anyway. (No offense meant to KSU fans, I really am saying "I don't know"). So what if the ACC took WVU instead of KSU and the SEC took USF? KSU could land in the AAC or the MWC and be okay-ish, or even wind up with the NY6 bowl most years due to their advantages. If they convince a conference to unbalanced pay/etc. (ala the WCC to keep Gonzaga), they could make decent money (not the $50 mil range but maybe 15-20 mil with NCAA credits/etc, maybe.)

I know the SEC wouldn't normally take a G5 school, but USF has pretty good research and would give the school a second Florida team without taking from the ACC. They also have some (short) history, reaching #2 in the nation in the old Big East. They also have 50,000+ students, etc.

Just a thought. If the the networks want to maximize value, then WVU to the ACC does make some sense.

I agree that USF will eventually have a big upside and that the SEC should keep an eye on them. But, as many of these threads are want to do the premise of what is being discussed was lost a few pages back. The concept being discussed has to do with ESPN absorbing all of the Big 12 between the ACC and SEC so that it could be moved prior to the expiration of the GOR so the placement of Kansas State, Baylor, and Iowa State is assumed here for the purposes of the speculation.

As to Hokie Marks suggestions of having Oklahoma State head to the ACC with Texas, that is probably the most detrimental thing that Oklahoma could experience schedule wise. They need to have either Texas or Oklahoma State with them in order to keep playing both regularly as they do not want them both as OOC games. So if the ACC wants Texas and the SEC wants Oklahoma in this scenario then Okie State needs to stay with the Sooners. That's why I placed KState in the ACC in my scenario. Snyder and Texas have always had good relations and Texas needed another regional school in its division and if Texas Tech is too far for the ACC schools then KState has to be it.

Although Tech in the ACC sounds crazy, does it really matter when one is seemingly ok with a TCU addition(who is only a few hour drive away from Tech)? I feel that beggars can't be choosers and if the ACC were blessed enough to acquire Texas, they should welcome Tech with open arms. If Texas requests another lone star state institution into the ACC with them, Tech would probably be their choice; not TCU, Houston, or Rice. Surprisingly Baylor has a legit shot as well because of their political poll in Texas (they have the oldest law school in the state).

Baylor is the oldest institution of higher learning in Texas. If they had kept their nose clean and their coeds unsoiled they would easily have been the third choice, even over Tech because of their historical significance. And their Baptist roots would not have been a deterrent in the SEC or ACC. It is sadly their Penn State status as a pariah that has them currently persona non grata.

I agree that there should be no concerns about Tech if Texas is headed to the ACC. But the nuance here is that the absorption of the Big 12 would be necessary to dissolve the conference early in order to avoid competition for the rights from Amazon or whomever, and to lock that product down and secure the position of the SEC and elevate the position of the ACC relative to the Big 10 or any other product a competitor of ESPN might seek.

So that's the only reason we are even talking about T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State, Iowa State, West Virginia or Texas Tech and why Houston is included. There are 10 teams to assimilate. So there are 5 slots in the ACC if one is reserved for N.D., and 6 in the SEC if we are both to move to 20. The SEC can more naturally fit 6 of those around the periphery of the existing boundaries and all would be contiguous. Texas however would need 4 traveling companions to build a home division around itself.

I don't think Texas will seek independence. I do think they want at least a division of their own for the sake of the minor sports.

So the obvious here is that with Oklahoma needing to be with OSU so it can keep Texas as an OOC game, and with Kansas fitting well with Missouri and Iowa State while an outlier fitting well with Kansas, Missouri and the two Oklahoma's and with Texas needing 4 more schools around itself in order to have a division of their own it is regrettably going to mean that WVU has to be in the SEC. You just can't give Texas a division of its own if WVU is one of the schools headed to the ACC.

As to KState or Tech I was merely surmising whether or not the SEC would insist upon a second Texas school as opposed to a second Kansas school, especially since the SEC would have to take OSU to accommodate the RRR. I think we would want a second Texas school and Tech is the hardest fit for the ACC.

It's certainly not a perfect set up, but it's probably the best alignment for all concerned and of course neither the ACC or SEC would do it unless we get very well paid to do so.

It is just my belief that given the competition that may be lining up to try to take a slice of ESPN's lineup and given the relatively low cost of the investment the ACC could easily be taken to 50 million and the SEC to 55 to get this done.

Another reason this is probably a really good move for ESPN...

They get a lot of extra content for their conference networks and RSNs. The 3rd tier content for Big 12 schools is currently unavailable outside of what Texas provides and it would be more beneficial to roll that content over to another network and find some other use for the LHN anyway. That and ESPN only has access to half the 1st and 2nd tier content. This way, they could own it all.

One of the issues that ESPN will run into as they create more linear channels and integrate the RSNs is the need to fill air time. Regardless of what's on the conference networks, they've still got to fill spots on all their other channels and it would be ideal if they had some leftover to sell exclusively over on ESPN Plus.

I also wonder if the SEC would end up having to restart a wrestling league? So many of the old Big 8 schools sponsored that sport.

That would be an interesting development.

(04-05-2018 03:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Baylor is the oldest institution of higher learning in Texas. If they had kept their nose clean and their coeds unsoiled they would easily have been the third choice, even over Tech because of their historical significance. And their Baptist roots would not have been a deterrent in the SEC or ACC. It is sadly their Penn State status as a pariah that has them currently persona non grata.

I agree that there should be no concerns about Tech if Texas is headed to the ACC. But the nuance here is that the absorption of the Big 12 would be necessary to dissolve the conference early in order to avoid competition for the rights from Amazon or whomever, and to lock that product down and secure the position of the SEC and elevate the position of the ACC relative to the Big 10 or any other product a competitor of ESPN might seek.

So that's the only reason we are even talking about T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State, Iowa State, West Virginia or Texas Tech and why Houston is included. There are 10 teams to assimilate. So there are 5 slots in the ACC if one is reserved for N.D., and 6 in the SEC if we are both to move to 20. The SEC can more naturally fit 6 of those around the periphery of the existing boundaries and all would be contiguous. Texas however would need 4 traveling companions to build a home division around itself.

I don't think Texas will seek independence. I do think they want at least a division of their own for the sake of the minor sports.

So the obvious here is that with Oklahoma needing to be with OSU so it can keep Texas as an OOC game, and with Kansas fitting well with Missouri and Iowa State while an outlier fitting well with Kansas, Missouri and the two Oklahoma's and with Texas needing 4 more schools around itself in order to have a division of their own it is regrettably going to mean that WVU has to be in the SEC. You just can't give Texas a division of its own if WVU is one of the schools headed to the ACC.

As to KState or Tech I was merely surmising whether or not the SEC would insist upon a second Texas school as opposed to a second Kansas school, especially since the SEC would have to take OSU to accommodate the RRR. I think we would want a second Texas school and Tech is the hardest fit for the ACC.

It's certainly not a perfect set up, but it's probably the best alignment for all concerned and of course neither the ACC or SEC would do it unless we get very well paid to do so.

It is just my belief that given the competition that may be lining up to try to take a slice of ESPN's lineup and given the relatively low cost of the investment the ACC could easily be taken to 50 million and the SEC to 55 to get this done.

I am a believer in Social Darwinism; not everyone in the Big XII has to survive. If it were personally up to me; I hope the Big XII never dissolves. Realistically however; if Texas and\or Oklahoma decide to leave after the GoR concludes, there maybe a few intuitions filling out MW or AAC applications. The only angle I don't see discussed much around Conference realignment is the ego of Texas needing to be inflated. It wouldn't shock me to see OU go to a major conference, while Texas keeps the Big XII afloat for all Olympic sports while going independent for football. I can see that happening...

(04-05-2018 03:28 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 03:21 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Baylor is the oldest institution of higher learning in Texas. If they had kept their nose clean and their coeds unsoiled they would easily have been the third choice, even over Tech because of their historical significance. And their Baptist roots would not have been a deterrent in the SEC or ACC. It is sadly their Penn State status as a pariah that has them currently persona non grata.

I agree that there should be no concerns about Tech if Texas is headed to the ACC. But the nuance here is that the absorption of the Big 12 would be necessary to dissolve the conference early in order to avoid competition for the rights from Amazon or whomever, and to lock that product down and secure the position of the SEC and elevate the position of the ACC relative to the Big 10 or any other product a competitor of ESPN might seek.

So that's the only reason we are even talking about T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State, Iowa State, West Virginia or Texas Tech and why Houston is included. There are 10 teams to assimilate. So there are 5 slots in the ACC if one is reserved for N.D., and 6 in the SEC if we are both to move to 20. The SEC can more naturally fit 6 of those around the periphery of the existing boundaries and all would be contiguous. Texas however would need 4 traveling companions to build a home division around itself.

I don't think Texas will seek independence. I do think they want at least a division of their own for the sake of the minor sports.

So the obvious here is that with Oklahoma needing to be with OSU so it can keep Texas as an OOC game, and with Kansas fitting well with Missouri and Iowa State while an outlier fitting well with Kansas, Missouri and the two Oklahoma's and with Texas needing 4 more schools around itself in order to have a division of their own it is regrettably going to mean that WVU has to be in the SEC. You just can't give Texas a division of its own if WVU is one of the schools headed to the ACC.

As to KState or Tech I was merely surmising whether or not the SEC would insist upon a second Texas school as opposed to a second Kansas school, especially since the SEC would have to take OSU to accommodate the RRR. I think we would want a second Texas school and Tech is the hardest fit for the ACC.

It's certainly not a perfect set up, but it's probably the best alignment for all concerned and of course neither the ACC or SEC would do it unless we get very well paid to do so.

It is just my belief that given the competition that may be lining up to try to take a slice of ESPN's lineup and given the relatively low cost of the investment the ACC could easily be taken to 50 million and the SEC to 55 to get this done.

I am a believer in Social Darwinism; not everyone in the Big XII has to survive. If it were personally up to me; I hope the Big XII never dissolves. Realistically however; if Texas and\or Oklahoma decide to leave after the GoR concludes, there maybe a few intuitions filling out MW or AAC applications. The only angle I don't see discussed much around Conference realignment is the ego of Texas needing to be inflated. It wouldn't shock me to see OU go to a major conference, while Texas keeps the Big XII afloat for all Olympic sports while going independent for football. I can see that happening...

Well the Texas rebuilding a conference around them angle has been covered here. 10th Mountain certainly believes this will be the case.

I'm a huge believer in social Darwinism as well. I taught it to my children and grandchildren with the mantra, "Stay away from stupid people. Stupid people will get you killed."

And I agree if we go to 2025 and the end of the GOR there will only be a few survivors in P5 conferences. But Grassy, that too is a motivation to make a move while you still have leverage as an entity. That's why with Amazon and other bidders waiting on 2025 to make their pitch it might behoove ESPN to utilize the advantages they currently have and move early, and keep it in house.

So this isn't the only theory, it's just one of many we have or are exploring.

If we wait to 2025 Texas and Oklahoma have enough coattails to get OSU and TTU in somewhere if they want to. I'm not sure anyone else finds a home and that includes Kansas and West Virginia.

So I'd say right now 5 years out from serious discussions and just a year prior to the launch of the ACCN that it is in ESPN's interests and those of the minor Big 12 members to work an early deal.

So we'll see.

(04-05-2018 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 03:28 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  I am a believer in Social Darwinism; not everyone in the Big XII has to survive. If it were personally up to me; I hope the Big XII never dissolves. Realistically however; if Texas and\or Oklahoma decide to leave after the GoR concludes, there maybe a few intuitions filling out MW or AAC applications. The only angle I don't see discussed much around Conference realignment is the ego of Texas needing to be inflated. It wouldn't shock me to see OU go to a major conference, while Texas keeps the Big XII afloat for all Olympic sports while going independent for football. I can see that happening...

Well the Texas rebuilding a conference around them angle has been covered here. 10th Mountain certainly believes this will be the case.

I'm a huge believer in social Darwinism as well. I taught it to my children and grandchildren with the mantra, "Stay away from stupid people. Stupid people will get you killed."

And I agree if we go to 2025 and the end of the GOR there will only be a few survivors in P5 conferences. But Grassy, that too is a motivation to make a move while you still have leverage as an entity. That's why with Amazon and other bidders waiting on 2025 to make their pitch it might behoove ESPN to utilize the advantages they currently have and move early, and keep it in house.

So this isn't the only theory, it's just one of many we have or are exploring.

If we wait to 2025 Texas and Oklahoma have enough coattails to get OSU and TTU in somewhere if they want to. I'm not sure anyone else finds a home and that includes Kansas and West Virginia.

So I'd say right now 5 years out from serious discussions and just a year prior to the launch of the ACCN that it is in ESPN's interests and those of the minor Big 12 members to work an early deal.

So we'll see.

Smart teachings directed towards your children and grandchildren haha! Otherwise I don't disagree with you, I feel that Okie State and Tech are safer than one would like to believe. I find it interesting that you included both Kansas and West Virginia in the "not safe" category, because I kinda agree with you.

Surprisingly I think Kansas's best bet may actually be the SEC (I don't believe the B1G will offer them unless it is a package deal with Oklahoma, and I am not sold that OU will go B1G without Okie State). Otherwise I am not 100% certain that the B1G will offer the J-hawks by themselves, Delaney seems to be focused on the eastern seaboard. Also I can see the ACC being against a WVU addition, but I can see ESPN vetoing it and forcing the Mountaineers in.

If ESPN truly holds all the cards then I feel both Kansas and WVU are locks for a major a conference, but if conferences can bite the hands that feed them, I can see scenarios where either one becomes left out. The smaller institutions lobbying the larger ones to work together for survival is key, the only issue is that the smaller schools may have lost when the Big XII decided not to expand.

(04-05-2018 06:14 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 03:28 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  I am a believer in Social Darwinism; not everyone in the Big XII has to survive. If it were personally up to me; I hope the Big XII never dissolves. Realistically however; if Texas and\or Oklahoma decide to leave after the GoR concludes, there maybe a few intuitions filling out MW or AAC applications. The only angle I don't see discussed much around Conference realignment is the ego of Texas needing to be inflated. It wouldn't shock me to see OU go to a major conference, while Texas keeps the Big XII afloat for all Olympic sports while going independent for football. I can see that happening...

Well the Texas rebuilding a conference around them angle has been covered here. 10th Mountain certainly believes this will be the case.

I'm a huge believer in social Darwinism as well. I taught it to my children and grandchildren with the mantra, "Stay away from stupid people. Stupid people will get you killed."

And I agree if we go to 2025 and the end of the GOR there will only be a few survivors in P5 conferences. But Grassy, that too is a motivation to make a move while you still have leverage as an entity. That's why with Amazon and other bidders waiting on 2025 to make their pitch it might behoove ESPN to utilize the advantages they currently have and move early, and keep it in house.

So this isn't the only theory, it's just one of many we have or are exploring.

If we wait to 2025 Texas and Oklahoma have enough coattails to get OSU and TTU in somewhere if they want to. I'm not sure anyone else finds a home and that includes Kansas and West Virginia.

So I'd say right now 5 years out from serious discussions and just a year prior to the launch of the ACCN that it is in ESPN's interests and those of the minor Big 12 members to work an early deal.

So we'll see.

Smart teachings directed towards your children and grandchildren haha! Otherwise I don't disagree with you, I feel that Okie State and Tech are safer than one would like to believe. I find it interesting that you included both Kansas and West Virginia in the "not safe" category, because I kinda agree with you.

Surprisingly I think Kansas's best bet may actually be the SEC (I don't believe the B1G will offer them unless it is a package deal with Oklahoma, and I am not sold that OU will go B1G without Okie State). Otherwise I am not 100% certain that the B1G will offer the J-hawks by themselves, Delaney seems to be focused on the eastern seaboard. Also I can see the ACC being against a WVU addition, but I can see ESPN vetoing it and forcing the Mountaineers in.

If ESPN truly holds all the cards then I feel both Kansas and WVU are locks for a major a conference, but if conferences can bite the hands that feed them, I can see scenarios where either one becomes left out. The smaller institutions lobbying the larger ones to work together for survival is key, the only issue is that the smaller schools may have lost when the Big XII decided not to expand.

I can see why you might think that the Big 12 not expanding was a sign of ill tidings for the smaller schools, but things have changed. ESPN is going to have to fill oodles of dead air time on the RSN's. Heck they just bought Ivy League rights this week. They are going to move away from studio production and talking heads and make strides to fill all of the niches with streaming options.

ESPN has wanted to work some product placement on the Big 12 for some time now. Refusing to pay the little 8 more to stay in the Big 12 was both the work of ESPN and FOX. But to group them where their value goes up by having more than just two brands to play is a horse of a different color as they try to fill as many streaming options as possible. After all filling this void is their best defense against Amazon.

So I wouldn't rule the hypothesis out.

That said if we follow what has been the normal progression I could easily see OU and OSU to the SEC. But if that is the likely path it has to scare the hell out of ESPN. They have to nail down some interesting change to spruce up the ACC schedule and Texas and friends could do that well. But if things piecemeal out then controlling product placement will be extremely difficult and what's more if the ACC's revenue is not boosted to more competitive levels and soon then when 2035 rolls around the Big 10 will come calling, and likely doing it wholesale. I could see a play for UNC and UVa, but when that is declined, and it will be, I'm not so sure that Pitt, B.C., and Syracuse will. And with those N.D. would again be in play. Why N.D.? They keep the Big 10 from having exclusive advertising in many of their larger cities. ESPN wanted N.D. as an insurance policy for markets in Philadelphia, New York, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Detroit and a few more areas that undermine the Big 10's ability to leverage ad rates. Plus right now the stabilizing factor for the ACC has been N.D.. Take that away, and Tobacco Road has to rethink everything including their own security. Why? Because then the football first Southern schools would be in play.

So since ESPN doesn't own 100% of the rights of any other conference, if they want to keep and build upon the ACC, they will need to make a splash to bring up their per school revenue if for no other reason than to ward off Big 10 advances.

So we'll see how this plays out. If ESPN does nothing then both the Big 10 and SEC might wait until 2035 to see what shakes loose.

Eventually I see too much value at stake for the SEC and Big 10 to stop at 16. If the SEC gets Oklahoma and any other from the Big 12 their expansion Westward is done.

Then everything will depend upon what the Big 10 can accomplish in the East. If they are successful we could easily be headed toward 18 or even 20 member conferences.

(04-05-2018 02:55 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I also wonder if the SEC would end up having to restart a wrestling league? So many of the old Big 8 schools sponsored that sport.

That would be an interesting development.

Not necessarily. There are several sports the SEC does not sponsor but its schools do play in other conferences for those sports. Wrestling would just be another addition to that mix.

(04-05-2018 06:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 06:14 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 03:28 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  I am a believer in Social Darwinism; not everyone in the Big XII has to survive. If it were personally up to me; I hope the Big XII never dissolves. Realistically however; if Texas and\or Oklahoma decide to leave after the GoR concludes, there maybe a few intuitions filling out MW or AAC applications. The only angle I don't see discussed much around Conference realignment is the ego of Texas needing to be inflated. It wouldn't shock me to see OU go to a major conference, while Texas keeps the Big XII afloat for all Olympic sports while going independent for football. I can see that happening...

Well the Texas rebuilding a conference around them angle has been covered here. 10th Mountain certainly believes this will be the case.

I'm a huge believer in social Darwinism as well. I taught it to my children and grandchildren with the mantra, "Stay away from stupid people. Stupid people will get you killed."

And I agree if we go to 2025 and the end of the GOR there will only be a few survivors in P5 conferences. But Grassy, that too is a motivation to make a move while you still have leverage as an entity. That's why with Amazon and other bidders waiting on 2025 to make their pitch it might behoove ESPN to utilize the advantages they currently have and move early, and keep it in house.

So this isn't the only theory, it's just one of many we have or are exploring.

If we wait to 2025 Texas and Oklahoma have enough coattails to get OSU and TTU in somewhere if they want to. I'm not sure anyone else finds a home and that includes Kansas and West Virginia.

So I'd say right now 5 years out from serious discussions and just a year prior to the launch of the ACCN that it is in ESPN's interests and those of the minor Big 12 members to work an early deal.

So we'll see.

Smart teachings directed towards your children and grandchildren haha! Otherwise I don't disagree with you, I feel that Okie State and Tech are safer than one would like to believe. I find it interesting that you included both Kansas and West Virginia in the "not safe" category, because I kinda agree with you.

Surprisingly I think Kansas's best bet may actually be the SEC (I don't believe the B1G will offer them unless it is a package deal with Oklahoma, and I am not sold that OU will go B1G without Okie State). Otherwise I am not 100% certain that the B1G will offer the J-hawks by themselves, Delaney seems to be focused on the eastern seaboard. Also I can see the ACC being against a WVU addition, but I can see ESPN vetoing it and forcing the Mountaineers in.

If ESPN truly holds all the cards then I feel both Kansas and WVU are locks for a major a conference, but if conferences can bite the hands that feed them, I can see scenarios where either one becomes left out. The smaller institutions lobbying the larger ones to work together for survival is key, the only issue is that the smaller schools may have lost when the Big XII decided not to expand.

I can see why you might think that the Big 12 not expanding was a sign of ill tidings for the smaller schools, but things have changed. ESPN is going to have to fill oodles of dead air time on the RSN's. Heck they just bought Ivy League rights this week. They are going to move away from studio production and talking heads and make strides to fill all of the niches with streaming options.

ESPN has wanted to work some product placement on the Big 12 for some time now. Refusing to pay the little 8 more to stay in the Big 12 was both the work of ESPN and FOX. But to group them where their value goes up by having more than just two brands to play is a horse of a different color as they try to fill as many streaming options as possible. After all filling this void is their best defense against Amazon.

So I wouldn't rule the hypothesis out.

That said if we follow what has been the normal progression I could easily see OU and OSU to the SEC. But if that is the likely path it has to scare the hell out of ESPN. They have to nail down some interesting change to spruce up the ACC schedule and Texas and friends could do that well. But if things piecemeal out then controlling product placement will be extremely difficult and what's more if the ACC's revenue is not boosted to more competitive levels and soon then when 2035 rolls around the Big 10 will come calling, and likely doing it wholesale. I could see a play for UNC and UVa, but when that is declined, and it will be, I'm not so sure that Pitt, B.C., and Syracuse will. And with those N.D. would again be in play. Why N.D.? They keep the Big 10 from having exclusive advertising in many of their larger cities. ESPN wanted N.D. as an insurance policy for markets in Philadelphia, New York, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Detroit and a few more areas that undermine the Big 10's ability to leverage ad rates. Plus right now the stabilizing factor for the ACC has been N.D.. Take that away, and Tobacco Road has to rethink everything including their own security. Why? Because then the football first Southern schools would be in play.

So since ESPN doesn't own 100% of the rights of any other conference, if they want to keep and build upon the ACC, they will need to make a splash to bring up their per school revenue if for no other reason than to ward off Big 10 advances.

So we'll see how this plays out. If ESPN does nothing then both the Big 10 and SEC might wait until 2035 to see what shakes loose.

Eventually I see too much value at stake for the SEC and Big 10 to stop at 16. If the SEC gets Oklahoma and any other from the Big 12 their expansion Westward is done.

Then everything will depend upon what the Big 10 can accomplish in the East. If they are successful we could easily be headed toward 18 or even 20 member conferences.

I gotta think if the SEC lands OU and OSU, then the Big 12 schools are going to be evaluating all options. The Big Ten will try and capitalize and I could see Delany calling some Big 12 schools and PAC12 schools as they are the lowest paid P5 conference who happens to fill some awful kickoff time slots for ESPN.

As the plans for ESPN+ slowly come together, it appears that streaming service is being geared towards niche sports fan groups. Besides all Ivy League games being played there, MLS fans will save money over current MLS DirectKick prices as ESPN+ will carry all those non nationally televised games on the service.

Now if ESPN groups in all of its NCAA men’s basketball games from conference rights it holds that don’t get national coverage on to ESPN+, we could see enough value there where maybe adding a Kansas and West Virginia in addition to the Oklahoma schools to the sec makes financial sense.

Texas, if they land in the ACC, would require a Notre Dame deal at minimum or else they could just duct tape the remnants of the B12 with a G5 school or two and play an independent like football schedule to remain in the P5 money arms race.

Also, the sec would almost need the Big Ten to also expand just so those two conferences would vote to allow major changes to scheduling rules to accommodate these much much bigger leagues.

(04-05-2018 09:37 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 02:55 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I also wonder if the SEC would end up having to restart a wrestling league? So many of the old Big 8 schools sponsored that sport.

That would be an interesting development.

Not necessarily. There are several sports the SEC does not sponsor but its schools do play in other conferences for those sports. Wrestling would just be another addition to that mix.

I know, but in those cases it's usually only one or two schools sponsoring an outlier sport.

With wrestling, and assuming the sort of additions we're talking about did take place, we'd have Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Missouri, and West Virginia all sponsoring the sport. At that point, it would really be unreasonable not to sponsor it.

If we kickstarted that league again then I could maybe see a couple more schools add the sport since there would be an infrastructure in place. That and it would make for some nice filler content during the Winter months when the only other thing we've got going on is basketball and gymnastics.

(04-05-2018 09:58 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I gotta think if the SEC lands OU and OSU, then the Big 12 schools are going to be evaluating all options. The Big Ten will try and capitalize and I could see Delany calling some Big 12 schools and PAC12 schools as they are the lowest paid P5 conference who happens to fill some awful kickoff time slots for ESPN.

As the plans for ESPN+ slowly come together, it appears that streaming service is being geared towards niche sports fan groups. Besides all Ivy League games being played there, MLS fans will save money over current MLS DirectKick prices as ESPN+ will carry all those non nationally televised games on the service.

Now if ESPN groups in all of its NCAA men’s basketball games from conference rights it holds that don’t get national coverage on to ESPN+, we could see enough value there where maybe adding a Kansas and West Virginia in addition to the Oklahoma schools to the sec makes financial sense.

Texas, if they land in the ACC, would require a Notre Dame deal at minimum or else they could just duct tape the remnants of the B12 with a G5 school or two and play an independent like football schedule to remain in the P5 money arms race.

Also, the sec would almost need the Big Ten to also expand just so those two conferences would vote to allow major changes to scheduling rules to accommodate these much much bigger leagues.

I do think that some of the Big 12 little brothers would settle for a rebuilt Big 12 with Texas as a partial if that was the best deal they could get. Here's the problem though...I don't think Texas would go for it.

If OU and OSU left then the timeline demands this sort of thing happen well into the next decade. That means a brand new TV contract for whatever is left of the Big 12 will be in the throws of negotiation.

When the networks look at the product, they'll see 5 games involving Texas and then whatever else the league can offer will pale in comparison. Oklahoma alone represents almost half the value of the league. If OSU leaves too then that's another program that tends to perform well even if their economic impact isn't as robust.

Also taking into account that the Big 12 was slightly overpaid to keep it together, I don't see any motivation for the networks to give this league halfway decent money. Texas would still get strong revenue overall and they might even continue the LHN deal, but their 1st and 2nd tier contracts wouldn't be anything special.

UT would get offered a nice deal from ESPN or some other network in the same way that ND has their own deal for home games, but ND has much more national appeal than Texas does. That and ESPN isn't going to renew the LHN under the current terms. If they end up paying a lump sum for 6 or 7 Texas home games then they'll have to restructure the 3rd Tier deal because there won't be enough content to even maintain its current mediocrity.

All in all, Texas would be leaving a lot of money on the table and the only thing they'll really get in return is a little more scheduling freedom.

I think there's also a chance that a school like TCU or West Virginia could get snapped up anyway by the ACC and that would further devalue anything the Big 12 put forth. Would a school like TCU stick around the Big 12 with a tiny contract if the ACC offers them an out? I highly doubt it.

(04-05-2018 09:37 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 02:55 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I also wonder if the SEC would end up having to restart a wrestling league? So many of the old Big 8 schools sponsored that sport.

That would be an interesting development.

Not necessarily. There are several sports the SEC does not sponsor but its schools do play in other conferences for those sports. Wrestling would just be another addition to that mix.

We had wrestling until Title IX. That's when Auburn lost its team. It was a sad day on the Plains.

(04-05-2018 10:36 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-05-2018 09:58 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I gotta think if the SEC lands OU and OSU, then the Big 12 schools are going to be evaluating all options. The Big Ten will try and capitalize and I could see Delany calling some Big 12 schools and PAC12 schools as they are the lowest paid P5 conference who happens to fill some awful kickoff time slots for ESPN.

As the plans for ESPN+ slowly come together, it appears that streaming service is being geared towards niche sports fan groups. Besides all Ivy League games being played there, MLS fans will save money over current MLS DirectKick prices as ESPN+ will carry all those non nationally televised games on the service.

Now if ESPN groups in all of its NCAA men’s basketball games from conference rights it holds that don’t get national coverage on to ESPN+, we could see enough value there where maybe adding a Kansas and West Virginia in addition to the Oklahoma schools to the sec makes financial sense.

Texas, if they land in the ACC, would require a Notre Dame deal at minimum or else they could just duct tape the remnants of the B12 with a G5 school or two and play an independent like football schedule to remain in the P5 money arms race.

Also, the sec would almost need the Big Ten to also expand just so those two conferences would vote to allow major changes to scheduling rules to accommodate these much much bigger leagues.

I do think that some of the Big 12 little brothers would settle for a rebuilt Big 12 with Texas as a partial if that was the best deal they could get. Here's the problem though...I don't think Texas would go for it.

If OU and OSU left then the timeline demands this sort of thing happen well into the next decade. That means a brand new TV contract for whatever is left of the Big 12 will be in the throws of negotiation.

When the networks look at the product, they'll see 5 games involving Texas and then whatever else the league can offer will pale in comparison. Oklahoma alone represents almost half the value of the league. If OSU leaves too then that's another program that tends to perform well even if their economic impact isn't as robust.

Also taking into account that the Big 12 was slightly overpaid to keep it together, I don't see any motivation for the networks to give this league halfway decent money. Texas would still get strong revenue overall and they might even continue the LHN deal, but their 1st and 2nd tier contracts wouldn't be anything special.

UT would get offered a nice deal from ESPN or some other network in the same way that ND has their own deal for home games, but ND has much more national appeal than Texas does. That and ESPN isn't going to renew the LHN under the current terms. If they end up paying a lump sum for 6 or 7 Texas home games then they'll have to restructure the 3rd Tier deal because there won't be enough content to even maintain its current mediocrity.

All in all, Texas would be leaving a lot of money on the table and the only thing they'll really get in return is a little more scheduling freedom.

I think there's also a chance that a school like TCU or West Virginia could get snapped up anyway by the ACC and that would further devalue anything the Big 12 put forth. Would a school like TCU stick around the Big 12 with a tiny contract if the ACC offers them an out? I highly doubt it.

I'm pretty sure this is why Texas shopped a merger with the SEC, and is pushing it with the PAC. The only issue is just like before only Texas makes out like a bandit. Oklahoma won't go for it. But it is why ESPN could offer to divide the Big 12 between the SEC and ACC and probably sell it.

If Texas pushes for a merger with the PAC and seeks to hold onto the LHN then seeing Texas, Texas Tech, & T.C.U. head to the PAC is a possibility. If that happened and ESPN wanted more content from the SEC then we could pick up OU and OSU, but might also be a good place for ESPN to park Kansas.

But not matter what happens I like our chances with OU because they won't go to the Big 10 without Texas, they will be pressed politically to cover State, and we fit their sports and recruiting needs better than the PAC or Big 10. And face it, the state is pretty Red. There's more to fit than academics and sports.

One problem JR: the instate voting block that could prevent Texas from getting in the SEC should A&M continue to object their admission.

Voting block: Texas A&M, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

(04-06-2018 06:44 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  One problem JR: the instate voting block that could prevent Texas from getting in the SEC should A&M continue to object their admission.

Voting block: Texas A&M, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Call me crazy but I don't believe that voting block exists and it is a pure message board myth. UF would probably love FSU to be in their divisional schedule because it allows them to free up an OoC game with an easily winnable game. The same would be true with other rivals who play annually out of conference games.

(04-06-2018 09:33 AM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 06:44 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  One problem JR: the instate voting block that could prevent Texas from getting in the SEC should A&M continue to object their admission.

Voting block: Texas A&M, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Call me crazy but I don't believe that voting block exists and it is a pure message board myth. UF would probably love FSU to be in their divisional schedule because it allows them to free up an OoC game with an easily winnable game. The same would be true with other rivals who play annually out of conference games.

Good lord, if the Gators' OoC schedule was any easier they'd be Mississippi State.

...hey, wait a minute!?! Didn't they hire...

(04-06-2018 06:44 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  One problem JR: the instate voting block that could prevent Texas from getting in the SEC should A&M continue to object their admission.

Voting block: Texas A&M, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

There is no voting block. There never has been one.

Fact: In '91 Florida sponsored the motion to offer F.S.U. SEC membership.

Fact: In 2010-1 in conference meetings Florida was concerned about the growth of the conference and their ability to, should all conference continue to grow, keep F.S.U. on the schedule. They wanted to sponsor them again.

Fact: In 2010-1 South Carolina felt the same way about Clemson. And even Spurrier said that he would welcome Clemson.

Fact: Mike Slive asked for a gentlemen's agreement because of these sentiments so he asked that no in state rival's candidacy be put forward until the two new market renegotiation clause was fulfilled. So the official reason Slive even had to make this request was for the exact opposite reason that you are stating. These schools are businesses and what they are most concerned about is the bottom line. South Carolina and Florida center all of their athletic donations around the away ticket priority for games with their in state rivals so their whole athletic marketing strategy is based upon obtaining away tickets to Clemson and Florida State.

Furthermore: State schools rely upon their state legislatures for apportionment. There's no way in hell that a state employee will, out of spite or rivalry, insist that the other state school be cut off from what could be a better revenue stream. Any jerk who was on a state payroll and suggested this would suffer from political blow back of the representatives who rely upon the good will of both alumni bases to sustain their positions. I would hope that University Presidents are educated enough and politically savvy enough to realize this. Because of that those who think that Oklahoma State is not important to Oklahoma are out of touch with reality. That doesn't mean that the two are tied, but it does mean that if Oklahoma can help its own financial situation and help that of Oklahoma State's they will be expected to do what is best for both so long as it doesn't hurt Oklahoma.

Fact: The only SEC member to have officially spoken or written about wanting to exclude other state schools from entering was Loftin at A&M and that was in his book which predominantly was sold to Aggies who feel strongly in the negative about Texas. When he spoke of other schools feeling similarly it was after Mike Slive asked them not to sponsor their in state rivals, not before. They were merely being team players until the contract was renegotiated.

Fact: Because of the revenue impact they have there isn't anyone in the SEC who would vote against the entry of Texas. And if there was a vote against them it would probably come from the Aggies but it would not be enough to keep Texas out. That doesn't mean that Texas wants to come. I think most of our people would be surprised by a Texas application.

At some point this pure fantasy B.S. needs to die. Florida State and Clemson suffered as candidates under the market footprint model simply because as product from states we already represented they didn't add as much value as candidates from new states. But nobody in the conference could directly attribute their decisions to this because it would prove the case of network manipulation. So they made up B.S. talking points about it in public to gloss over what everyone knew. The networks were for the most part controlling realignment. But stating that lays the groundwork for tortuous interference cases against those that write our checks. It's all just as screwed up with winks and glances the other way as recruiting is.

The next time we add schools content will be a much stronger factor, not the only factor but a leading one. In that world the only thing that will matter is branding and the size of the audience that school can command. In that world in state rivals will once again have an appeal. But even then I don't expect Florida State and Clemson to be joining because ESPN holds 100% of their rights and they won't want to pay more for them by placing those schools in the SEC, nor will they want to devalue their holdings in the ACC. But, Texas and Oklahoma are the two massive brand values left to be sewn up more securely. There's the story line for the next realignment and why the SEC and Big 10 will be involved. The SEC will be one of ESPN's proxies and the Big 10 could be, it's not certain yet, working for the opposition of ESPN. There's your next ball game.

(04-06-2018 10:24 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 09:33 AM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 06:44 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  One problem JR: the instate voting block that could prevent Texas from getting in the SEC should A&M continue to object their admission.

Voting block: Texas A&M, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Call me crazy but I don't believe that voting block exists and it is a pure message board myth. UF would probably love FSU to be in their divisional schedule because it allows them to free up an OoC game with an easily winnable game. The same would be true with other rivals who play annually out of conference games.

Good lord, if the Gators' OoC schedule was any easier they'd be Mississippi State.

...hey, wait a minute!?! Didn't they hire...

HAHAHAHA! Congrats sir, you have won the internet today

(04-06-2018 12:58 PM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 10:24 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 09:33 AM)The Grassy Nole Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 06:44 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  One problem JR: the instate voting block that could prevent Texas from getting in the SEC should A&M continue to object their admission.

Voting block: Texas A&M, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Call me crazy but I don't believe that voting block exists and it is a pure message board myth. UF would probably love FSU to be in their divisional schedule because it allows them to free up an OoC game with an easily winnable game. The same would be true with other rivals who play annually out of conference games.

Good lord, if the Gators' OoC schedule was any easier they'd be Mississippi State.

...hey, wait a minute!?! Didn't they hire...

HAHAHAHA! Congrats sir, you have won the internet today

IMO, Florida would be happier playing the Noles and Canes. But they can't do that in a 14 member SEC under the current playoff selection format and realistically expect to be in the mix. They have that annual crossover with L.S.U. and prior to the lulls at Tennessee and Florida there schedule was anything but easy. Florida more than any other SEC member has always been concerned that their traditional rivals were like having an extra SEC game on the schedule. In the 80's Bowden literally would travel anywhere to play anyone because he wanted to build the branding of Florida State. The Gators in the 80's were trying to become relevant, but within the confines of a strong conference. So their track to building donor support was to seek easier OOC games to offset the difficulty of playing a much stronger F.S.U.. They wanted consistent bowl appearances while Florida State was seeking respect.

Unfortunately for Florida, that recipe was never altered once they had attained the much larger donor support. Keeping a certain number of home games on the schedule was part of the problem, but having Florida State perpetually as one of their OOC games was the excuse they used to keep the other 3 OOC games peachy.

So criticism of their scheduling has merit, but then how many schools annually schedule a Florida State caliber school as their annual OOC P game?