(06-18-2018 05:26 PM)JRsec Wrote: I'm going to ask each of you to take a multiple personality pill and become the commissioners of the SEC, Big 10, PAC, and ACC.
Using the attendance, Gross Total Revenue, TV Revenue, WSJ Football and Basketball Valuation numbers pinned at the top of this page come up with a prospects list in order for each conference.
Do not pick who you want in that conference. Pick who you think, based on the numbers and what you know of that particular conference's membership criteria, who it is you would propose to the presidents that comprise that conference.
List the school's name and why you think they would qualify for membership into that conference.
Then do the same for all of the Non Big 12 P conferences.
When you have completed those 4 lists of candidates (and yes there should be duplicates on the various lists) then look at the prospect of the schools in the Big 12 and answer the question "Would leaving be profitable and would it be so for "all" of our sports?"
I think you will find the experience enlightening and we will vote on the best responses for + Reputation and all who participate will at least get a +1.
SEC:
Hello, my name is Greg Sankey and I've come to recommend your strategy for conquering the world.
There are only 2 schools that are above our revenue average...Texas and Oklahoma. With that said, I don't think we should use that average as a hard and fast threshold. It wasn't used as the standard last time when we took Missouri so I think we should approach this thing delicately.
We have to consider that most of the value that any addition brings would be in TV revenue. The TV revenue average is a much smaller figure than our average overall revenue. It's also a little harder to calculate because the average is based on the strength of the whole rather than simply a sum of the parts.
So I think we should prioritize 3 things...TV ratings, new markets and/or unique viewers that their inclusion adds to our pot, and consistency of performance.
1. TV ratings will ultimately determine what we get paid because these companies have to make money too and they need people watching their network.
2. New markets and/or unique viewers within currently accessed markets are important. This is a sneaky way to grow TV ratings by getting more people to be interested in your product.
3. Consistency of performance shouldn't be underestimated though. People want to watch quality products and so we need to pick programs that have show both a commitment and an ability to perform well over long periods of time.
I feel comfortable recommending:
Texas
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
West Virginia
I think the addition of Oklahoma State will be necessary given the political situation in the state of OK. Texas is too valuable not to pursue so I've selected a suitable 4th addition in WVU. I feel each of these additions once scheduled against the current members of the SEC will add more value to the average TV revenue.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Ten:
Hello, my name is Jim Delany and I don't have a lot to work with here.
My criteria isn't all that different from the SEC's, but we need schools that give us access to markets with affluent alumni even if the alumni don't necessarily live near the school. In the recent past, I have banked a lot on rich and populous cable markets. That seems to be falling out of style though so my biggest problem is that most of what I would find palatable isn't terribly close by. There are some decent additions to be had, but the snobs in my league will absolutely slaughter me if I don't recommend schools with large research budgets and endowments. I have no shot at getting into the ACC right now so I'm left to dig through the Big 12 and see what I can find.
Oklahoma and Texas would fill pretty much every point of our criteria even though OU's academics aren't really on par with the rest of our league. I wouldn't mind taking Iowa State, but we already possess the top brand in that state and unfortunately the Cyclones don't offer us much return for our investment. Kansas is palatable, but has quality control issues.
Pretty sure I can get Oklahoma, but not so sure about Texas.
But I tell you what, I'm darn tempted to roll the dice on Colorado. They have tons of alumni in CA and Denver is a pretty strong and growing market in itself. If I can wrestle CU away with the promise of huge money then I have a very solid #2 if Texas says no. If Texas says yes then I still like Colorado, but the problem would be finding a decent 4th school. So that's my plan...stick with 16 by starting with Oklahoma. Texas is my first choice then take Colorado if UT declines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAC 12:
Hello, my name is Larry Scott and I don't want to play this game anymore.
I would love to recommend Texas and Oklahoma, but I don't think I can get them at this point without taking a whole bunch of schools that my Presidents aren't interested in. The fact that they can make so much more money elsewhere is not helping me sleep at night.
I was having a sourdough sandwich downtown the other day and I started thinking about Hawaii. I'm not talking about the school...I'm talking about just picking up shop and moving to Hawaii. I mean, forget this crap. I can't do that though.
In some of my more reflective moments, I think Kansas and Iowa State would be good additions, but most of my members don't want to travel that far.
I could always call UNLV. I know they would still answer and playing some games in that sweet new stadium would be nice. They'd take me up on my offer, but that also kind of makes me not want them. You want most what you can't have in life.
Hindsight is 20/20 my friend. If I had just pushed the issue on Baylor then maybe I'd be sitting pretty right now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACC:
Hello, my name is John Swofford and I've made some mistakes in life, but I'm just focusing on being a better person right now.
My criteria for expansion is a bit limited because most of the good options are not close by. If this new network thing works out then maybe I'll be able to convince someone new to come around.
Some people say I should go after West Virginia, but I'm just not feeling it. Sure, I'd like to have a 16th school, but I don't really need one until Notre Dame makes a real commitment. Until that day comes, I think I run a better chance of diluting our payments rather than adding to the bottom line. Even then, I'm not sure WVU is the one. We pretty much have schools all over that area anyway and a lot of our schools don't care for the Mountaineers. I'm not sure it would last.
And after the whole Louisville thing, I don't want to take any more chances on an unproven commodity.