Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
Author Message
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,470
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1298
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #181
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(01-18-2019 05:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At 48 you are looking at:

SEC + Texlahoma 4 + 6 ACC schools

Big Ten + 8 PAC 12 AAU schools + ND + 1 lucky winner

JR--To me it just feels a bit stale and contrived and getting huge just to be huge. You'd be dropping a whopping 17 schools from the ranks of the elite and while some of them certainly deserve to be downgraded a lot of schools would be devestated.

I'd really just prefer letting the ACC (ND), Big Ten (Oklahoma), and SEC (Texas) divide the 3 big gems out there along with one companion school each and have a true P4.

At 56 who would you have going where?

On a separate note, what do you think the true market value of the SEC Tier 1 rights are and who could realistically afford them? Could they get more for their dollar if they created two bundles of T1 rights and split them between bidders?

Oh let's see:

48: (56)

B1G:
Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse (Boston College)

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State (Pittsburgh)

Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin (Utah)

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington (Arizona State)

SEC:
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina (Miami)

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee Vanderbilt (West Virginia)

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M (Kansas)

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech (Louisville)

As to T1 rights values? With no additions we are probably looking at 7 million per school conservatively. Some have suggested 10 million but I prefer conservative numbers.

If we added 4 and split the T1 rights between bidders who knows what kind of bump would be available? It's not been done before.
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2019 07:30 PM by JRsec.)
01-18-2019 07:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,691
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 55
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #182
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
JR--your 56 are pretty close to where I would put them too.

Ariz St gets a pass even though they aren't AAU--I'm not sure Utah does though. I could also see AAU Iowa St and Kansas as part of the Big Ten group at the expense of the Utes and another non-AAU like BC or Syracuse.

I think the SEC group is spot on except if Kansas is snatched by the Big Ten at the expense of someone like Utah. You might find yourselves with Oklahoma St or Texas Tech instead.

I also think both blocks maintain the conference names. Those names have existed for a long time and have very strong brand power.

I think both blocks beef up the conference networks into multi-channel affairs and both pursue exclusive streaming deals with a FAANG company where some games are only available through that streaming service.

So who do you think will bid on the SEC tier 1 package, particularly if relations with CBS have soured? What kind of inventory do you see the network pursuing if they lose that deal? Grabbing the AAC on the cheap? overpaying to get the Big 12 to maintain appearances and connections to a major conference?
01-18-2019 10:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,470
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1298
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #183
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(01-18-2019 10:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR--your 56 are pretty close to where I would put them too.

Ariz St gets a pass even though they aren't AAU--I'm not sure Utah does though. I could also see AAU Iowa St and Kansas as part of the Big Ten group at the expense of the Utes and another non-AAU like BC or Syracuse.

I think the SEC group is spot on except if Kansas is snatched by the Big Ten at the expense of someone like Utah. You might find yourselves with Oklahoma St or Texas Tech instead.

I also think both blocks maintain the conference names. Those names have existed for a long time and have very strong brand power.

I think both blocks beef up the conference networks into multi-channel affairs and both pursue exclusive streaming deals with a FAANG company where some games are only available through that streaming service.

So who do you think will bid on the SEC tier 1 package, particularly if relations with CBS have soured? What kind of inventory do you see the network pursuing if they lose that deal? Grabbing the AAC on the cheap? overpaying to get the Big 12 to maintain appearances and connections to a major conference?

I know I'm old, but I don't see the FAANG companies landing the bid. College presidents love universal exposure of their school's name. They don't want inbred circulation only. Their alums will watch the games if they are on the worst network, but the point is people who aren't alums will watch what is either a free channel, or something they've already paid for. They will seldom to never pay to stream a game from a school that isn't their's unless maybe it has national significance.

Presidents will want their games on where the most people who are not alums can see their school's name, band, and football team. They would be happy that their carrier could stream as well, but will not want that as their sole option.

CBS has a window in which to save relations with the SEC. If we have a few years to go on the existing contract when they come to us with a major offer to stay, and make it effective immediately we probably would stay. The exclusive 2:30 time slot has not only made CBS a pile of money and garnered great ratings, but it has greatly enhanced the SEC brand. They can save the relationship.

But if they drag it out until the contract expires before offering something better they won't have our support.

I told you already that a bump of 7 million per school is the conservative estimate for the renewal of our T1. The SEC this year should come in around 45-46 million for total TV revenue. Last year we were flat due to the bowl rotation. Our contract with ESPN is backloaded so we get a bump of around 2 million a year right now. If CBS renews by 2020 we should be in the 48-49 million range. So a bump in T1 of 7 million puts us at 56-57 million at the end of the 2020-1 season if CBS renews early. If not we will keep getting our escalators until 2023-4. There are some who believe we could get as much as 10 million. We'll see.

As to who CBS might pursue if they lost the SEC? It won't be the ACC as they are sewed up until 2037. The Big 10 is up for renewal as is the Big 12 and PAC. There isn't much of a national market for the PAC. Folks in the east are headed to bed when their last game starts so I rule them out. IMO, the only product they could pursue would be the Big 10. But FOX has the 2nd best product available and they aren't going to let it go, at least unless they have a shot at picking up the Southeast which they have coveted. NBC might be a player too but they have N.D. and exclusivity wouldn't be likely. Disney could go after the SEC's T1 for ABC. I think that CBS would be pretty hard up if they lose us.
(This post was last modified: 01-18-2019 11:33 PM by JRsec.)
01-18-2019 11:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Online
All American
*

Posts: 2,818
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 116
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #184
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(01-18-2019 11:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-18-2019 10:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR--your 56 are pretty close to where I would put them too.

Ariz St gets a pass even though they aren't AAU--I'm not sure Utah does though. I could also see AAU Iowa St and Kansas as part of the Big Ten group at the expense of the Utes and another non-AAU like BC or Syracuse.

I think the SEC group is spot on except if Kansas is snatched by the Big Ten at the expense of someone like Utah. You might find yourselves with Oklahoma St or Texas Tech instead.

I also think both blocks maintain the conference names. Those names have existed for a long time and have very strong brand power.

I think both blocks beef up the conference networks into multi-channel affairs and both pursue exclusive streaming deals with a FAANG company where some games are only available through that streaming service.

So who do you think will bid on the SEC tier 1 package, particularly if relations with CBS have soured? What kind of inventory do you see the network pursuing if they lose that deal? Grabbing the AAC on the cheap? overpaying to get the Big 12 to maintain appearances and connections to a major conference?

I know I'm old, but I don't see the FAANG companies landing the bid. College presidents love universal exposure of their school's name. They don't want inbred circulation only. Their alums will watch the games if they are on the worst network, but the point is people who aren't alums will watch what is either a free channel, or something they've already paid for. They will seldom to never pay to stream a game from a school that isn't their's unless maybe it has national significance.

Presidents will want their games on where the most people who are not alums can see their school's name, band, and football team. They would be happy that their carrier could stream as well, but will not want that as their sole option.

CBS has a window in which to save relations with the SEC. If we have a few years to go on the existing contract when they come to us with a major offer to stay, and make it effective immediately we probably would stay. The exclusive 2:30 time slot has not only made CBS a pile of money and garnered great ratings, but it has greatly enhanced the SEC brand. They can save the relationship.

But if they drag it out until the contract expires before offering something better they won't have our support.

I told you already that a bump of 7 million per school is the conservative estimate for the renewal of our T1. The SEC this year should come in around 45-46 million for total TV revenue. Last year we were flat due to the bowl rotation. Our contract with ESPN is backloaded so we get a bump of around 2 million a year right now. If CBS renews by 2020 we should be in the 48-49 million range. So a bump in T1 of 7 million puts us at 56-57 million at the end of the 2020-1 season if CBS renews early. If not we will keep getting our escalators until 2023-4. There are some who believe we could get as much as 10 million. We'll see.

As to who CBS might pursue if they lost the SEC? It won't be the ACC as they are sewed up until 2037. The Big 10 is up for renewal as is the Big 12 and PAC. There isn't much of a national market for the PAC. Folks in the east are headed to bed when their last game starts so I rule them out. IMO, the only product they could pursue would be the Big 10. But FOX has the 2nd best product available and they aren't going to let it go, at least unless they have a shot at picking up the Southeast which they have coveted. NBC might be a player too but they have N.D. and exclusivity wouldn't be likely. Disney could go after the SEC's T1 for ABC. I think that CBS would be pretty hard up if they lose us.

The PAC 12 on CBS could work. It wouldn't be ideal for CBS, but the product could come at a bargain price as the PAC sorely needs exposure.

Right now, the PAC plays a lot of games later in the day, but apparently their fans don't like this dynamic. I don't blame them and perhaps they take an opportunity to put some of their better games on earlier in the day. Most of the folks on the West Coast probably want to enjoy their night life or at least spend their evening doing something other than watching football.

Let's say CBS agrees to an exclusive window around Noon Pacific Time. That's a good window for fans on the West Coast and they can get a jumpstart on fans turning away from the first round of games back East. If the game is big enough then some fans back East might stick around and watch.

Let's also say that as a part of the deal that CBS Sports Network, which sorely needs decent content, gets an exclusive prime time window. For the PAC, it's not a bad deal as CBSSN has decent penetration and there's so much competition for that time slot that it's basically going to be only PAC fans watching anyway.

But if I'm the PAC then I'm asking CBS to buy the PAC Network and get that albatross off my neck. Perhaps that will help distribution for the PAC Network, assuming it's trimmed down, and then we can do a few more tricks with time slots...

I would sell only one late night game to ESPN. The solitary game in that window will get better ratings and look better on paper. However, I will put one other late night game on PAC Network. So if you want to watch late night football, and some people do, then there's your reason to get the PAC Network.

If I'm CBS, however, then I also want the PAC to expand into the Central Time Zone to help out my content options...

All in all, if it comes at the right price then I could see this being beneficial for both.
Yesterday 08:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ArQ Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 815
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Pitt/Louisville
Location: Most beautiful place
Post: #185
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(01-18-2019 05:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At 48 you are looking at:

SEC + Texlahoma 4 + 6 ACC schools

Big Ten + 8 PAC 12 AAU schools + ND + 1 lucky winner

JR--To me it just feels a bit stale and contrived and getting huge just to be huge. You'd be dropping a whopping 17 schools from the ranks of the elite and while some of them certainly deserve to be downgraded a lot of schools would be devestated.

I'd really just prefer letting the ACC (ND), Big Ten (Oklahoma), and SEC (Texas) divide the 3 big gems out there along with one companion school each and have a true P4.

At 56 who would you have going where?

On a seperate note, what do you think the true market value of the SEC Tier 1 rights are and who could realistically afford them? Could they get more for their dollar if they created two bundles of T1 rights and split them between bidders?

Nobody already in P5 will be downgraded to G5. Right now there are 65 P5 schools, counting Notre Dame. I think it is either P3 (22x3) or P4 (18x4) configuration. Most likely P4 configuration so teams won't travel as far. Big 12 will be absolved. Ideally four Texas schools are sent to PAC12 to balance P4. PAC18 also adds Nevada, Boise State and BYU. PAC18 loses Colorado.

B1G adds Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, West Virginia and Colorado. B1G sends Maryland back to ACC.

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, UCF and USF.

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, UConn and Maryland.
Yesterday 10:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,691
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 55
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #186
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
I wasn't saying that the FAANG companies have a shot at their Tier 1 rights but they could parcel off a Tier 2 game each week for an exclusive package.

I like the idea of CBS pursuing a relationship with the PAC 12 if they lose the SEC. It's not ideal but there are not a lot of properties available.

Perhaps CBS airs a 3:30 eastern PAC 12 game and a 8:00 eastern PAC 12 game. ESPN gets sold 1 late night game. There's still content for the PAC 12 Networks and the opportunity to sell a Friday night game to someone.
Yesterday 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,691
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 55
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #187
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Yesterday 10:23 AM)ArQ Wrote:  
(01-18-2019 05:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At 48 you are looking at:

SEC + Texlahoma 4 + 6 ACC schools

Big Ten + 8 PAC 12 AAU schools + ND + 1 lucky winner

JR--To me it just feels a bit stale and contrived and getting huge just to be huge. You'd be dropping a whopping 17 schools from the ranks of the elite and while some of them certainly deserve to be downgraded a lot of schools would be devestated.

I'd really just prefer letting the ACC (ND), Big Ten (Oklahoma), and SEC (Texas) divide the 3 big gems out there along with one companion school each and have a true P4.

At 56 who would you have going where?

On a seperate note, what do you think the true market value of the SEC Tier 1 rights are and who could realistically afford them? Could they get more for their dollar if they created two bundles of T1 rights and split them between bidders?

Nobody already in P5 will be downgraded to G5. Right now there are 65 P5 schools, counting Notre Dame. I think it is either P3 (22x3) or P4 (18x4) configuration. Most likely P4 configuration so teams won't travel as far. Big 12 will be absolved. Ideally four Texas schools are sent to PAC12 to balance P4. PAC18 also adds Nevada, Boise State and BYU. PAC18 loses Colorado.

B1G adds Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, West Virginia and Colorado. B1G sends Maryland back to ACC.

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, UCF and USF.

ACC adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati, UConn and Maryland.

Were you following the conversation at all? We were discussing the idea of the Big Ten and SEC using their might to consolidate college sports content into 2 large leagues of 24-30 teams each.
Yesterday 12:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 485
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 25
I Root For: Old ACC
Location:
Post: #188
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
UConn - really?
Yesterday 12:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OrangeDude Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 534
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #189
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Yesterday 12:17 PM)Statefan Wrote:  UConn - really?

I was more shocked by WVU to the Big Ten. 03-wink

Cheers,
Neil
Yesterday 05:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ArQ Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 815
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Pitt/Louisville
Location: Most beautiful place
Post: #190
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Yesterday 05:13 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  
(Yesterday 12:17 PM)Statefan Wrote:  UConn - really?

I was more shocked by WVU to the Big Ten. 03-wink

Cheers,
Neil

The goal is the best fit in geography to minimize the traveling cost.
Yesterday 07:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,929
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 606
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Charlotte, NC
Post: #191
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(01-18-2019 07:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-18-2019 05:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At 48 you are looking at:

SEC + Texlahoma 4 + 6 ACC schools

Big Ten + 8 PAC 12 AAU schools + ND + 1 lucky winner

JR--To me it just feels a bit stale and contrived and getting huge just to be huge. You'd be dropping a whopping 17 schools from the ranks of the elite and while some of them certainly deserve to be downgraded a lot of schools would be devestated.

I'd really just prefer letting the ACC (ND), Big Ten (Oklahoma), and SEC (Texas) divide the 3 big gems out there along with one companion school each and have a true P4.

At 56 who would you have going where?

On a separate note, what do you think the true market value of the SEC Tier 1 rights are and who could realistically afford them? Could they get more for their dollar if they created two bundles of T1 rights and split them between bidders?

Oh let's see:

48: (56)

B1G:
Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse (Boston College)

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State (Pittsburgh)

Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin (Utah)

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington (Arizona State)

SEC:
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina (Miami)

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee Vanderbilt (West Virginia)

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M (Kansas)

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech (Louisville)

As to T1 rights values? With no additions we are probably looking at 7 million per school conservatively. Some have suggested 10 million but I prefer conservative numbers.

If we added 4 and split the T1 rights between bidders who knows what kind of bump would be available? It's not been done before.

This could work well - especially the 56, since that keeps nearly all of the best programs in the club.
Yesterday 07:51 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,470
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1298
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #192
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Yesterday 07:51 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(01-18-2019 07:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-18-2019 05:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  At 48 you are looking at:

SEC + Texlahoma 4 + 6 ACC schools

Big Ten + 8 PAC 12 AAU schools + ND + 1 lucky winner

JR--To me it just feels a bit stale and contrived and getting huge just to be huge. You'd be dropping a whopping 17 schools from the ranks of the elite and while some of them certainly deserve to be downgraded a lot of schools would be devestated.

I'd really just prefer letting the ACC (ND), Big Ten (Oklahoma), and SEC (Texas) divide the 3 big gems out there along with one companion school each and have a true P4.

At 56 who would you have going where?

On a separate note, what do you think the true market value of the SEC Tier 1 rights are and who could realistically afford them? Could they get more for their dollar if they created two bundles of T1 rights and split them between bidders?

Oh let's see:

48: (56)

B1G:
Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse (Boston College)

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State (Pittsburgh)

Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin (Utah)

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington (Arizona State)

SEC:
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina (Miami)

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee Vanderbilt (West Virginia)

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M (Kansas)

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech (Louisville)

As to T1 rights values? With no additions we are probably looking at 7 million per school conservatively. Some have suggested 10 million but I prefer conservative numbers.

If we added 4 and split the T1 rights between bidders who knows what kind of bump would be available? It's not been done before.

This could work well - especially the 56, since that keeps nearly all of the best programs in the club.

Glad you like it. What does it do for us? It levels TV revenue and leaves only donors and ticket sales as the variance. It provides a clear access to the National Championship which is decided on the field. It gets rid of 3 sets of conference office real estate and 3 commissioners' salaries, and three sets of conference staff and overhead. That leaves a lot more of the pie for the schools. I'd even favor rebranding. The Big 10 becomes the Union Pacific and the SEC becomes the Great South, or Great Southern conference. All play is regional in the divisions. All division champions advance the conference semis. The winners of the conferences meet for the National Championship. No committees, no polls (although they could have them they just wouldn't be anything more than what they are, opinions), no lobbying, just win to advance. The officiating could be a joint effort of the 2 conferences and all officials would be trained identically. Leverage for TV rights would be massive.
Yesterday 09:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big Frog II Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,013
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 38
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #193
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
Why don't we just have one big conference of 65. See, isn't that easy?
Yesterday 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ArQ Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 815
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Pitt/Louisville
Location: Most beautiful place
Post: #194
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Yesterday 09:36 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Why don't we just have one big conference of 65. See, isn't that easy?

Or continue the current P5 configuration. Just expand CFP to 8 teams format. 5 P5 champions + best G5 champion + 2 wild cards.
Yesterday 10:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,470
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1298
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #195
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Yesterday 10:33 PM)ArQ Wrote:  
(Yesterday 09:36 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Why don't we just have one big conference of 65. See, isn't that easy?

Or continue the current P5 configuration. Just expand CFP to 8 teams format. 5 P5 champions + best G5 champion + 2 wild cards.

I guess you didn't see the survey conducted of Commissioners and key presidents that indicated that there were only 2 who were interested in actually expanding the playoffs and one of those was Aresco? Expanding to 8 slots is the modern equivalent of trying to catch Big Foot, get a picture of Nessie, or capture a Unicorn. Everyone is free to pontificate on that concept and discussion is good, to a point. But those in charge, the CFP committee, the commissioners and the presidents aren't interested.
Yesterday 11:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,074
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 218
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #196
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Yesterday 10:33 PM)ArQ Wrote:  
(Yesterday 09:36 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Why don't we just have one big conference of 65. See, isn't that easy?

Or continue the current P5 configuration. Just expand CFP to 8 teams format. 5 P5 champions + best G5 champion + 2 wild cards.

Or Texas and ESPN could just end it.
Move Texas and Texas Tech to the SEC and let everyone else scramble for crumbs.
Oklahoma and Kansas to the B1G? Most likely.
West Virginia and Notre Dame (all in) to the ACC.
All of the other Big 12 schools can reform as a high G conference.
The PAC's status of being irrelevant will continue.
Today 08:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
P5PACSEC Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 350
Joined: Jul 2018
Reputation: 11
I Root For: P5
Location:
Post: #197
RE: Big Ten targeting Texas and Oklahoma?
(Today 08:32 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(Yesterday 10:33 PM)ArQ Wrote:  
(Yesterday 09:36 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  Why don't we just have one big conference of 65. See, isn't that easy?

Or continue the current P5 configuration. Just expand CFP to 8 teams format. 5 P5 champions + best G5 champion + 2 wild cards.

Or Texas and ESPN could just end it.
Move Texas and Texas Tech to the SEC and let everyone else scramble for crumbs.
Oklahoma and Kansas to the B1G? Most likely.
West Virginia and Notre Dame (all in) to the ACC.
All of the other Big 12 schools can reform as a high G conference.
The PAC's status of being irrelevant will continue.

I'm good with Tech and UT to the SEC but I would like to the Oklahoma schools come as well.
Today 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: ArQ, 4 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.