The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

ken d - Your points on the PAC taking Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma st, and Texas Tech is valid and true. It benefits the additions more than the conference. I agree the more the likely situation is the XII expanding in that situation with some combination like it suggested.

I don’t know that Missouri leaves the SEC but stranger things have happened. I think Missouri would fall into misery similar to Nebraska. The SEC does wonders for schools. That new SEC lineup would be highly valuable to the conference adding Texas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma St.

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

(11-15-2018 05:04 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

Texas to the ACC is not my pipe dream.
The expansion of the future really has nothing to do with the conferences, but has everything with marketing data that ESPN has been collecting .....forever.
If ESPN has Texas under contract for a long time to come and also have the ACC under contract for a long time to come, which they do, how could ESPN best monetize both? Would collecting advertising revenue for Texas out of Oklahoma (4 million folks) outstrip what could be collected in North Carolina and Virginia (24 million people)?
None of us really know who is pulling the strings, but you can wager that "the networks" are not putting up huge dollars without expecting maximum return. Time will tell which direction things will go.

(11-16-2018 08:24 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 05:04 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

Texas to the ACC is not my pipe dream.
The expansion of the future really has nothing to do with the conferences, but has everything with marketing data that ESPN has been collecting .....forever.
If ESPN has Texas under contract for a long time to come and also have the ACC under contract for a long time to come, which they do, how could ESPN best monetize both? Would collecting advertising revenue for Texas out of Oklahoma (4 million folks) outstrip what could be collected in North Carolina and Virginia (24 million people)?
None of us really know who is pulling the strings, but you can wager that "the networks" are not putting up huge dollars without expecting maximum return. Time will tell which direction things will go.

ESPN would earn more off of Texas in the SEC where the national draw among those with football interest would be maximized with the two Texas schools plus Florida and Georgia and where the Oklahoma brand would maximize as well. And the SEC is quite profitable for ESPN already. In the business world you are correct that they will maximize their profits, but in business you always increase your value by placing your best brands in a collection of your better brands and other best brands. And by placing them where you draw the most interest and where your existing brands draw even more interest from their fans, and that's not the ACC.

(11-16-2018 09:17 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-16-2018 08:24 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 05:04 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

Texas to the ACC is not my pipe dream.
The expansion of the future really has nothing to do with the conferences, but has everything with marketing data that ESPN has been collecting .....forever.
If ESPN has Texas under contract for a long time to come and also have the ACC under contract for a long time to come, which they do, how could ESPN best monetize both? Would collecting advertising revenue for Texas out of Oklahoma (4 million folks) outstrip what could be collected in North Carolina and Virginia (24 million people)?
None of us really know who is pulling the strings, but you can wager that "the networks" are not putting up huge dollars without expecting maximum return. Time will tell which direction things will go.

ESPN would earn more off of Texas in the SEC where the national draw among those with football interest would be maximized with the two Texas schools plus Florida and Georgia and where the Oklahoma brand would maximize as well. And the SEC is quite profitable for ESPN already. In the business world you are correct that they will maximize their profits, but in business you always increase your value by placing your best brands in a collection of your better brands and other best brands. And by placing them where you draw the most interest and where your existing brands draw even more interest from their fans, and that's not the ACC.

Good point, JR. However, since I don't have access to all of ESPN's marketing data it would be difficult to make a definitive statement as to Texas' placement, but I do believe it would be with an existing ESPN "property".
As had been said before; time will tell.

(11-16-2018 08:24 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 05:04 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

Texas to the ACC is not my pipe dream.
The expansion of the future really has nothing to do with the conferences, but has everything with marketing data that ESPN has been collecting .....forever.
If ESPN has Texas under contract for a long time to come and also have the ACC under contract for a long time to come, which they do, how could ESPN best monetize both? Would collecting advertising revenue for Texas out of Oklahoma (4 million folks) outstrip what could be collected in North Carolina and Virginia (24 million people)?
None of us really know who is pulling the strings, but you can wager that "the networks" are not putting up huge dollars without expecting maximum return. Time will tell which direction things will go.

Well we have covered this rodeo before. I do not know what will happen, but I do feel that I have some knowledge about the University of Texas. I have worked closely with former football players and conducted business with others. I have known many die hard UT fans. Living in Texas you get a good feel for what UT is all about. They have tremendous pride, more than any place I know about. They make more money than anybody. As DeLoss Dodds once said, they do not keep up with the Jones......they are the Jones.

Therefore, I feel certain that UT will never settle for anything. They don't have to. Every conference would like to have UT.

Posters keep saying UT might accept a partial Notre Dame type deal with the ACC. IMO THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. UT will not settle for being on an Island and will not abandon their other sports teams.

(11-16-2018 12:11 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(11-16-2018 08:24 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 05:04 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

Texas to the ACC is not my pipe dream.
The expansion of the future really has nothing to do with the conferences, but has everything with marketing data that ESPN has been collecting .....forever.
If ESPN has Texas under contract for a long time to come and also have the ACC under contract for a long time to come, which they do, how could ESPN best monetize both? Would collecting advertising revenue for Texas out of Oklahoma (4 million folks) outstrip what could be collected in North Carolina and Virginia (24 million people)?
None of us really know who is pulling the strings, but you can wager that "the networks" are not putting up huge dollars without expecting maximum return. Time will tell which direction things will go.

Well we have covered this rodeo before. I do not know what will happen, but I do feel that I have some knowledge about the University of Texas. I have worked closely with former football players and conducted business with others. I have known many die hard UT fans. Living in Texas you get a good feel for what UT is all about. They have tremendous pride, more than any place I know about. They make more money than anybody. As DeLoss Dodds once said, they do not keep up with the Jones......they are the Jones.

Therefore, I feel certain that UT will never settle for anything. They don't have to. Every conference would like to have UT.

Posters keep saying UT might accept a partial Notre Dame type deal with the ACC. IMO THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. UT will not settle for being on an Island and will not abandon their other sports teams.

Here is the list of all of the Jones:

The original Public Ivies as Moll listed them in 1985:[2]

College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, Virginia)
Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
University of California (nine campuses as of 1985)[7]
University of Michigan (Ann Arbor)
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
University of Texas at Austin
University of Vermont (Burlington)
University of Virginia (Charlottesville)

I thought Ohio State and Purdue were both Public Ivies. Hmm.

(11-16-2018 09:17 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-16-2018 08:24 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 05:04 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 11:23 AM)ken d Wrote:  The B1G's options for expansion are pretty limited, and Texas would be the longest of long shots to find a home there. An ideal scenario for the Horns would occur if the B1G panics and thinks it needs to make a preemptive move.

Though it's probably not a value adder for the B1G, suppose they took Missouri and Kansas as a pair. That would allow the SEC to invite both Texas and Oklahoma State to accompany the Sooners.

That meets all of UT's needs. They are in a division with OU, OK State, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss and Mississippi State. The clear east-west divide lets the SEC keep its 8 game league schedule, giving the Horns (and everyone else) four OOC games with which to pack their big stadiums. Texas gets to keep its other sports in a great conference.

Now all they need to do is bribe / persuade the B1G to start the ball rolling.

Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

Texas to the ACC is not my pipe dream.
The expansion of the future really has nothing to do with the conferences, but has everything with marketing data that ESPN has been collecting .....forever.
If ESPN has Texas under contract for a long time to come and also have the ACC under contract for a long time to come, which they do, how could ESPN best monetize both? Would collecting advertising revenue for Texas out of Oklahoma (4 million folks) outstrip what could be collected in North Carolina and Virginia (24 million people)?
None of us really know who is pulling the strings, but you can wager that "the networks" are not putting up huge dollars without expecting maximum return. Time will tell which direction things will go.

ESPN would earn more off of Texas in the SEC where the national draw among those with football interest would be maximized with the two Texas schools plus Florida and Georgia and where the Oklahoma brand would maximize as well. And the SEC is quite profitable for ESPN already. In the business world you are correct that they will maximize their profits, but in business you always increase your value by placing your best brands in a collection of your better brands and other best brands. And by placing them where you draw the most interest and where your existing brands draw even more interest from their fans, and that's not the ACC.

Keep in mind that I am someone who believes Texas does not want to be independent in football, but if they did...

I agree with your above reply in terms of content driven prominence. However right now that SEC content is being shared by both CBS and ESPN with CBS getting the far far better content match-ups whereas ESPN gets more of it to try and balance the scales so to speak. Is that changed by the time the next realignment wave happens? And if yes, is it changed in ESPN's favor or to their detriment?

Also, while the cable subscribers model is being damaged by streaming and cord-cutting the model doesn't appear to be entirely going away any time soon. So, does having Texas with an ND type deal in the ACC possible make more for ABC/ESPN if the following happens:

1) SEC remains with CBS/ESPN or moves to FOX/ABC-ESPN let's say with it's primary Tier 1 content - seeing how much the B1G has seen a huge spike in their tv content by splitting Tier 1 between FOX and ABC/ESPN - in either case I don't believe any one thinks SEC goes with ABC/ESPN exclusively precisely because of its inventory of desireable tv content;

2) Texas signs with ABC/ESPN for its football only tv contract (out of ESPN loyalty to Texas with the LHN), similar to ND with NBC where by those 7 Texas home games always air at mid-afternoon or evening on ABC/ESPN;

3) Texas does an ND type deal with the ACC;

As a result of the first two items, wouldn't there be more Texas specific content being aired on ABC at 3:30PM and at 8:00PM with less competition for those time slots than they face by actually being in the SEC (e.g. - which is more likely: a Texas@NC State match-up with a 3:30 time slot on ABC or a Texas@Arkansas match-up on CBS or FOX at 3:30?);

As a result of number three, wouldn't the increase of subscribers under the cable model due to ACCN getting full price in the state of Texas be more than Texas being added to the SEC?;

Lastly, does having Texas (by themselves, not including Oklahoma who may wind up in the B1G after all) significantly increase the number of streaming subscribers for the SEC outside of the SEC regional area or are the vast majority of Longhorns fans across the country already going to be paying the streaming price prior to Texas even joining the SEC simply because they are the football juggernaut that the SEC is?

I don't have the answers to those questions, but I don't think it is as cut and dried as you seem to believe.

Cheers,
Neil

(11-16-2018 06:19 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  

(11-16-2018 09:17 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-16-2018 08:24 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 05:04 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2018 02:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  Ken d, go ahead and pencil Texas in as a Notre Dame style partial for the ACC.
It will give them the latitude to play Oklahoma every year plus one other premier game. Texas already has series scheduled to play Alabama, Georgia, Michigan and Ohio State. Every third year they could get the 5th (odd game) of the ACC/Notre Dame series.
They could back fill their other ooc games with a combination of Baylor, Texas Tech, SMU, Rice and TCU and still have room for first game cupcakes like UTEP, Tulane or North Texas.
That is a lot of games in front of their home folks, plus exposure up and down the entire east coast.

Texas in the ACC is every bit a pipe dream as Texas in the B1G. It just isn't going to happen. There is no history between Texas and the ACC. There is no fan interest or will to move to the ACC. Texas alumni are all fairly solidly in camps of Big 12, SEC, or PAC. There is a vocal group that clamors about the B1G but that is almost as much of a pipe dream as the ACC netting Texas. This isn't meant as a slant against either conference mind you, just that there is very little will in moving the programs that far when there are other options to be had.

On the opposite end I constantly have Baylor fans talking about the ACC as a landing spot for Baylor lose their minds when I have tell them we are desirable as a rash at the moment and that absent picking up Notre Dame the ACC could just grab UCONN/Cincy/WVU, and call it a day.

Texas to the ACC is not my pipe dream.
The expansion of the future really has nothing to do with the conferences, but has everything with marketing data that ESPN has been collecting .....forever.
If ESPN has Texas under contract for a long time to come and also have the ACC under contract for a long time to come, which they do, how could ESPN best monetize both? Would collecting advertising revenue for Texas out of Oklahoma (4 million folks) outstrip what could be collected in North Carolina and Virginia (24 million people)?
None of us really know who is pulling the strings, but you can wager that "the networks" are not putting up huge dollars without expecting maximum return. Time will tell which direction things will go.

ESPN would earn more off of Texas in the SEC where the national draw among those with football interest would be maximized with the two Texas schools plus Florida and Georgia and where the Oklahoma brand would maximize as well. And the SEC is quite profitable for ESPN already. In the business world you are correct that they will maximize their profits, but in business you always increase your value by placing your best brands in a collection of your better brands and other best brands. And by placing them where you draw the most interest and where your existing brands draw even more interest from their fans, and that's not the ACC.

Keep in mind that I am someone who believes Texas does not want to be independent in football, but if they did...

I agree with your above reply in terms of content driven prominence. However right now that SEC content is being shared by both CBS and ESPN with CBS getting the far far better content match-ups whereas ESPN gets more of it to try and balance the scales so to speak. Is that changed by the time the next realignment wave happens? And if yes, is it changed in ESPN's favor or to their detriment?

Also, while the cable subscribers model is being damaged by streaming and cord-cutting the model doesn't appear to be entirely going away any time soon. So, does having Texas with an ND type deal in the ACC possible make more for ABC/ESPN if the following happens:

1) SEC remains with CBS/ESPN or moves to FOX/ABC-ESPN let's say with it's primary Tier 1 content - seeing how much the B1G has seen a huge spike in their tv content by splitting Tier 1 between FOX and ABC/ESPN - in either case I don't believe any one thinks SEC goes with ABC/ESPN exclusively precisely because of its inventory of desireable tv content;

2) Texas signs with ABC/ESPN for its football only tv contract (out of ESPN loyalty to Texas with the LHN), similar to ND with NBC where by those 7 Texas home games always air at mid-afternoon or evening on ABC/ESPN;

3) Texas does an ND type deal with the ACC;

As a result of the first two items, wouldn't there be more Texas specific content being aired on ABC at 3:30PM and at 8:00PM with less competition for those time slots than they face by actually being in the SEC (e.g. - which is more likely: a Texas@NC State match-up with a 3:30 time slot on ABC or a Texas@Arkansas match-up on CBS or FOX at 3:30?);

As a result of number three, wouldn't the increase of subscribers under the cable model due to ACCN getting full price in the state of Texas be more than Texas being added to the SEC?;

Lastly, does having Texas (by themselves, not including Oklahoma who may wind up in the B1G after all) significantly increase the number of streaming subscribers for the SEC outside of the SEC regional area or are the vast majority of Longhorns fans across the country already going to be paying the streaming price prior to Texas even joining the SEC simply because they are the football juggernaut that the SEC is?

I don't have the answers to those questions, but I don't think it is as cut and dried as you seem to believe.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil, CBS gets 14 contests and currently the CCG. ESPN has plenty of high dollar inventory left, and should the SEC sell their T1 rights to the FOX or ABC, with Texas in the SEC the number of highly viewed schools they would play provides significant increase in the T2 inventory which also profits ESPN. It also reunites Texas with A&M, Arkansas, and even Missouri which are games Horns fans once loved and would be in high demand in spite of record. There is no history with the ACC even for 5 games outside of Notre Dame which has been infrequent.

Texas prizes their minor sports and loves their baseball. But games played more locally are crucial to their business model. Why play outside of the state of Texas if you can guarantee massive turnouts in other Texas venues. That's even more important for their minor sports because the families of the athletes can make those trips even on somewhat limited budgets.

I've lived in San Antonio. I don't claim to know everything about the Horns, but I have some experience with Texans. I think SMUmustang is correct in his assessment. And in stating that, I believe the SEC or PAC would always be at best 2nd choice behind keeping essentially a Texas-centric conference. It is geography that is the best opportunity for the SEC. Having old rivals helps as well. But will we land them? Who knows. But I don't think there's a snowballs chance of them heading to the ACC as a partial. Had the ACC at 12 full member decide to move to 16 by creating a group of 4 including Texas then I would say this notion had legs. But to take them just for football, and by themselves. I just don't see it, and I don't believe for a second that they would have fan endorsement of the move.

I don't think who gets the SEC's T1 rights in 2023 will help or hurt where UT is concerned. And if ESPN could really determine their future for them they wouldn't be paying them 15 million a year on average for an unprofitable network to keep them, but on Texas's terms.