A while back, I posted a synopsis from Awful Announcing that quoted the article I'm about to link, but I stumbled across the original article again and it got me thinking.

Sports Business Journal reports on issues that could spark another realignment in the next decade

Quote:History says that expansion and TV talks go hand in hand. A conference wants more money? It adds schools.

From 2022 through 2024, three of the five major college conferences will renegotiate their media deals in a marketplace that’s very different than a decade ago, raising questions about who their partners might be and how much they’ll be willing to spend. Not everyone, however, is convinced that conference realignment is a foregone conclusion during the next round of TV talks, according to a dozen commissioners, athletic directors and media executives.

Chatter about four 16-team super conferences has subsided. The likelihood of the 10-school Big 12 expanding is far-fetched. The smallest of the power five leagues gave expansion a thorough examination two years ago and opted to pass, deciding that Central Florida, Cincinnati and Houston didn’t add enough value.

The makeup of the power five conferences has not changed since the Big Ten and ACC last expanded in 2014, making this one of the most stable periods in decades. Most people in the business believe this period of stability will continue.

Quote:While college experts were skeptical about widespread conference shake-ups, they unanimously said they’ll be watching three factors that could be triggers for change: Texas, Oklahoma and the success of the ACC Network.

Quote:Another potential trigger for change is the ACC Network, which is scheduled to launch in August in an environment rife with cord cutters and dwindling subscriber bases. ESPN fully owns the channel and was able to secure the right to launch it on Altice’s New York-area systems and nationally on at least one digital multichannel video provider.

If the channel is successful in signing more carriage deals, the conference’s makeup will remain the same. If not, some of the ACC’s stronger programs — Florida State, Clemson — could become targets for the SEC and Big Ten. Sources say success in terms of revenue falls somewhere between the thriving Big Ten Network and struggling Pac-12 Networks.

So my wheels are turning now which means you should all be frightened...

The SEC already has access to TX and the Midwest to a certain degree, but what do they really want? Does Texas really want to be in the SEC? What about Oklahoma?

How could ESPN win at all this...maintaining what it wants without ticking anyone off?

What about the old trade for NC and VA schools that was supposed to give the SEC a boost while creating parity for the ACC? Is it still possible? Is it the best trade that could be made?

The ACC desperately needs revenue which means they need schools like Texas and Notre Dame. The SEC doesn't need either of them. What the SEC wants is more content and rivalries that make their fans excited.

Ok folks, what about this?

The SEC acquires Florida State and Clemson.

Too much bleeding for the ACC to survive? Not a problem. They just need content and some good markets to compensate.

The ACC acquires Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.

At this point, Notre Dame is required to make their commitment full. They agree.

The ACC now stands at 18, but the key point is that the power structure hasn't been altered that much. The NC and VA schools are intact as a bloc. Two of the key football schools have left which means the faction that consisted of Southern football schools has been divided up...some of them will probably favor UNC/Duke while others will have UT/OU. There is balance there and a lot of new revenue because UT/OU open up a new world of possibilities.

If the ACC wanted, they could even add schools like Tulane and Cincinnati to both expand their markets and give a little more weight to the private/basketball school wing of the conference. I doubt Texas and Oklahoma would care as long as they had their own division and the Notre Dame fan base would help with subs in OH. Tulane would be a nice way to round out a Western division, access New Orleans, they're AAU, and have built a new football stadium.

Basically, the ACC needs to move their core a little to the West because their markets are fine, but their viewership is not. They need to get out of the Eastern Time Zone as they have more than maximized the potential of those Northeastern markets.

BUT THAT'S NOT ALL!

Oh no, if you act now then we'll throw in some extra moves!

I can't shake the idea that ESPN wants Kansas in the SEC. They're building their football program with an SEC apparatus. So is TCU for that matter...

It makes sense to me that the SEC would look at Kansas only after they've explored Oklahoma and Texas. The latter 2 are the prizes, but Kansas would bring a lot of value to the table if Oklahoma and Texas were off the market. Perhaps that is the agreement? Perhaps that is why Kansas is preparing the way they are?

And now perhaps TCU makes a lot of sense. We don't have to deal with the A&M/UT feud except as an SEC/ACC end of season rivalry. We still get access to DFW and still get a solid football program with a lot of potential.

At that point, 18 is a good number although perhaps they would want to round it out with 20 if the ACC does the same.

And the B1G and PAC just watch and get left behind? Idk, I think if this is the direction then the other conferences would smell this coming and react. But if not, then it could be very beneficial for both the ACC and SEC!

SEC
West: TCU, Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas
South: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Kentucky, South Carolina, Clemson, Georgia, Florida, Florida St

ACC
North: Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston Collegr, Georgia Tech, Miami
East: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest
South: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Louisville, West Virginia

(01-12-2019 02:02 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  A while back, I posted a synopsis from Awful Announcing that quoted the article I'm about to link, but I stumbled across the original article again and it got me thinking.

Sports Business Journal reports on issues that could spark another realignment in the next decade

Quote:History says that expansion and TV talks go hand in hand. A conference wants more money? It adds schools.

From 2022 through 2024, three of the five major college conferences will renegotiate their media deals in a marketplace that’s very different than a decade ago, raising questions about who their partners might be and how much they’ll be willing to spend. Not everyone, however, is convinced that conference realignment is a foregone conclusion during the next round of TV talks, according to a dozen commissioners, athletic directors and media executives.

Chatter about four 16-team super conferences has subsided. The likelihood of the 10-school Big 12 expanding is far-fetched. The smallest of the power five leagues gave expansion a thorough examination two years ago and opted to pass, deciding that Central Florida, Cincinnati and Houston didn’t add enough value.

The makeup of the power five conferences has not changed since the Big Ten and ACC last expanded in 2014, making this one of the most stable periods in decades. Most people in the business believe this period of stability will continue.

Quote:While college experts were skeptical about widespread conference shake-ups, they unanimously said they’ll be watching three factors that could be triggers for change: Texas, Oklahoma and the success of the ACC Network.

Quote:Another potential trigger for change is the ACC Network, which is scheduled to launch in August in an environment rife with cord cutters and dwindling subscriber bases. ESPN fully owns the channel and was able to secure the right to launch it on Altice’s New York-area systems and nationally on at least one digital multichannel video provider.

If the channel is successful in signing more carriage deals, the conference’s makeup will remain the same. If not, some of the ACC’s stronger programs — Florida State, Clemson — could become targets for the SEC and Big Ten. Sources say success in terms of revenue falls somewhere between the thriving Big Ten Network and struggling Pac-12 Networks.

So my wheels are turning now which means you should all be frightened...

The SEC already has access to TX and the Midwest to a certain degree, but what do they really want? Does Texas really want to be in the SEC? What about Oklahoma?

How could ESPN win at all this...maintaining what it wants without ticking anyone off?

What about the old trade for NC and VA schools that was supposed to give the SEC a boost while creating parity for the ACC? Is it still possible? Is it the best trade that could be made?

The ACC desperately needs revenue which means they need schools like Texas and Notre Dame. The SEC doesn't need either of them. What the SEC wants is more content and rivalries that make their fans excited.

Ok folks, what about this?

The SEC acquires Florida State and Clemson.

Too much bleeding for the ACC to survive? Not a problem. They just need content and some good markets to compensate.

The ACC acquires Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.

At this point, Notre Dame is required to make their commitment full. They agree.

The ACC now stands at 18, but the key point is that the power structure hasn't been altered that much. The NC and VA schools are intact as a bloc. Two of the key football schools have left which means the faction that consisted of Southern football schools has been divided up...some of them will probably favor UNC/Duke while others will have UT/OU. There is balance there and a lot of new revenue because UT/OU open up a new world of possibilities.

If the ACC wanted, they could even add schools like Tulane and Cincinnati to both expand their markets and give a little more weight to the private/basketball school wing of the conference. I doubt Texas and Oklahoma would care as long as they had their own division and the Notre Dame fan base would help with subs in OH. Tulane would be a nice way to round out a Western division, access New Orleans, they're AAU, and have built a new football stadium.

Basically, the ACC needs to move their core a little to the West because their markets are fine, but their viewership is not. They need to get out of the Eastern Time Zone as they have more than maximized the potential of those Northeastern markets.

BUT THAT'S NOT ALL!

Oh no, if you act now then we'll throw in some extra moves!

I can't shake the idea that ESPN wants Kansas in the SEC. They're building their football program with an SEC apparatus. So is TCU for that matter...

It makes sense to me that the SEC would look at Kansas only after they've explored Oklahoma and Texas. The latter 2 are the prizes, but Kansas would bring a lot of value to the table if Oklahoma and Texas were off the market. Perhaps that is the agreement? Perhaps that is why Kansas is preparing the way they are?

And now perhaps TCU makes a lot of sense. We don't have to deal with the A&M/UT feud except as an SEC/ACC end of season rivalry. We still get access to DFW and still get a solid football program with a lot of potential.

At that point, 18 is a good number although perhaps they would want to round it out with 20 if the ACC does the same.

I like this concept and all of the additions to the SEC well enough, but the only thing I am compelled to say is that the two teams the ACC can least afford to lose, even if they are gaining Texas and Oklahoma, are Clemson and Florida State. Losing those 2 diminishes the addition of Texas and Oklahoma significantly.

I think this is why in 2009-11 all of the talk was about Virginia Tech and N.C. State, two schools that arguably were not the flagships of their respective states, although both are solid academic and athletic additions to the middle and upper middle of the SEC lineup.

That said, I think permitting Texas and Oklahoma to go the ACC while the SEC lands N.C. State and Virginia Tech would be giving the ACC too much in this trade.

So I would suggest this trade instead using your thought process here. The SEC adds Virginia Tech and N.C. State from the ACC and adds Kansas and Oklahoma from the Big 12.

The ACC adds Texas, T.C.U., Baylor and Kansas State to get to 18.

Then to clean up the mess and extinguish the Big 12 the SEC picks up Texas Tech as a second Texas school and Oklahoma State to appease the Sooners scheduling dilemma. The ACC adds West Virginia, Notre Dame, and Iowa State, and Cincinnati.

The ACC now looks like this:

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U.

Boston College, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, Cincinnati, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami

The SEC now looks like this:

Alabama, N.C. State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina

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

Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech

So why do this if you are the ACC? Iowa State with Notre Dame gives the ACC deeper penetration into Chicago and Cincinnati puts the ACCN into Ohio and elevates an Ohio school to P5 status creating an interesting paradigm with regard to Ohio State. No doubt the Buckeyes would absolutely still be #1 in Ohio, but it would be a new wrinkle for them to compete with another P designated Ohio school. Texas, Baylor, and TCU gives them coverage from DFW through Houston and into Austin. That's a massive market for the ACCN with multiple available time slots for the viewing interests of 28 million people. Kansas State is the market addition that is a solid middle add in all sports. But most of all they add a massive content multiplier in Texas which helps them play catch up with N.D. going all in. In effect it doubles the branding of the ACC in football overnight. What do they lose? A strong upper middle duplicate in Virginia Tech, and the #3 school in brand recognition in a state they dominate.

So why do this if you are the SEC? You pick up top cable rates for 19 million between North Carolina and Virginia. You add a Basketball blue blood in Kansas, a very solid program in N.C. State, and a program getting better in hoops at Va Tech. Texas Tech is competitive in all sports and gives the SEC two State schools from the Lone Star state. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State both draw well in DFW. So we get a national band and a school that is competitive in all sports both of which when coupled with Arkansas and Texas A&M give the SEC the % of DFW they want. What do we lose? Nothing.

(01-12-2019 08:06 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  And the B1G and PAC just watch and get left behind? Idk, I think if this is the direction then the other conferences would smell this coming and react. But if not, then it could be very beneficial for both the ACC and SEC!

SEC
West: TCU, Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas
South: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Kentucky, South Carolina, Clemson, Georgia, Florida, Florida St

ACC
North: Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston Collegr, Georgia Tech, Miami
East: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest
South: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Louisville, West Virginia

I really don't think the PAC will be able to help their situation. Their revenue model is jacked up and they have no media backer.

The B1G is a different story, but I just think it will be hard for them to get what they want.

(01-12-2019 06:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I like this concept and all of the additions to the SEC well enough, but the only thing I am compelled to say is that the two teams the ACC can least afford to lose, even if they are gaining Texas and Oklahoma, are Clemson and Florida State. Losing those 2 diminishes the addition of Texas and Oklahoma significantly.

I think this is why in 2009-11 all of the talk was about Virginia Tech and N.C. State, two schools that arguably were not the flagships of their respective states, although both are solid academic and athletic additions to the middle and upper middle of the SEC lineup.

That said, I think permitting Texas and Oklahoma to go the ACC while the SEC lands N.C. State and Virginia Tech would be giving the ACC too much in this trade.

So I would suggest this trade instead using your thought process here. The SEC adds Virginia Tech and N.C. State from the ACC and adds Kansas and Oklahoma from the Big 12.

The ACC adds Texas, T.C.U., Baylor and Kansas State to get to 18.

Then to clean up the mess and extinguish the Big 12 the SEC picks up Texas Tech as a second Texas school and Oklahoma State to appease the Sooners scheduling dilemma. The ACC adds West Virginia, Notre Dame, and Iowa State, and Cincinnati.

The ACC now looks like this:

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U.

Boston College, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, Cincinnati, North Carolina, Virginia, Wake Forest

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami

The SEC now looks like this:

Alabama, N.C. State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina

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

Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech

So why do this if you are the ACC? Iowa State with Notre Dame gives the ACC deeper penetration into Chicago and Cincinnati puts the ACCN into Ohio and elevates an Ohio school to P5 status creating an interesting paradigm with regard to Ohio State. No doubt the Buckeyes would absolutely still be #1 in Ohio, but it would be a new wrinkle for them to compete with another P designated Ohio school. Texas, Baylor, and TCU gives them coverage from DFW through Houston and into Austin. That's a massive market for the ACCN with multiple available time slots for the viewing interests of 28 million people. Kansas State is the market addition that is a solid middle add in all sports. But most of all they add a massive content multiplier in Texas which helps them play catch up with N.D. going all in. In effect it doubles the branding of the ACC in football overnight. What do they lose? A strong upper middle duplicate in Virginia Tech, and the #3 school in brand recognition in a state they dominate.

So why do this if you are the SEC? You pick up top cable rates for 19 million between North Carolina and Virginia. You add a Basketball blue blood in Kansas, a very solid program in N.C. State, and a program getting better in hoops at Va Tech. Texas Tech is competitive in all sports and gives the SEC two State schools from the Lone Star state. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State both draw well in DFW. So we get a national band and a school that is competitive in all sports both of which when coupled with Arkansas and Texas A&M give the SEC the % of DFW they want. What do we lose? Nothing.

I've always liked the idea of Virginia Tech and I think NC State could be an asset as well if they moved away from UNC, but that presents a problem. Would the UNC board allow them to go? I don't think they would. That and the UNC-centric voting bloc may still find the solution unpalatable. They may very well be emboldened given the conditions of their survival thus far. For the big players, they'll have a nice landing spot either way so perhaps they'd rather take their chances that they can have their cake and eat it too.

My thought on the large scale brokering of the Big 12 between multiple leagues is that it probably would have happened by now if everyone was interested. The biggest problem with it is the endless number of moving parts. I think the likelihood is low that all parties would be interested in breaking the Big 12 up in the way we tend to discuss it.

-I think the biggest question facing ESPN is how successful will the ACC Network be? If it's a decent money-maker then maybe they can afford to expand the ACC footprint, but it will be hard to jump over the core of the SEC to do it.

-I think the biggest question facing FOX is they don't have the quality platform necessary to compete with ESPN punch for punch. Their portfolio is obviously above average, but that doesn't necessarily mean much. They'll also have plenty of money to spend once the deal with Disney is complete, but they must be wise or they'll just waste it. They will experiment with making the FOX broadcast network more of a top tier sports channel and it might work, but Disney/ABC could follow up and do the same thing and probably do it better.

-I think the biggest question facing the SEC is the political entanglements that might come with acquiring the most valuable pieces of the Big 12.

-I think the biggest question facing the Big 12 is that there's nowhere to go to strengthen their brand. They may yet survive if there are too many political entanglements for other leagues to make moves on their star players. That and it's always possible another media entity steps up to make them tentpole content.

-I think the biggest question facing the ACC is the political question within its own ranks. There are 6 schools between NC and VA along with a few in the same mold of thinking. The most valuable pieces, however, are of a different breed and it appears there is a constant tug of war over what the best course for the league to follow is. That might just get the league annihilated one day so can they agree on an aggressive expansion strategy? I don't know.

-I think the biggest question facing the Big Ten is an economic one. They'll always make plenty of money, but they don't appear to be in position to attract the type of players they really want. Their problem is they could add to their bottom line with some very solid schools that they would probably never take.

-I think the biggest question facing the PAC 12 is...well...a lot of things so they might be lucky not to lose schools in the near term.

If I were ESPN then I would strike some sort of deal with FOX to split contracts with conferences rather than to split schools into one camp or another. It wouldn't just be for college content either...I would be interested in squeezing CBS out, for example.

CBS has the NFL, SEC, March Madness along with a good chunk of regular season games, and a good bit of the PGA. If I'm ESPN and FOX then I would be a big believer in my ability to bid for that content and cover it better than anyone else.

If I'm ESPN then I want my online platform to be a must have, and that requires key content. Not to mention, I want better content for my secondary channels and conference networks.

If I'm FOX then I want the same thing, but I can't have everything that ESPN has. What I can have is ESPN in my corner rather than ESPN in my face.

(01-12-2019 10:15 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-12-2019 08:06 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  And the B1G and PAC just watch and get left behind? Idk, I think if this is the direction then the other conferences would smell this coming and react. But if not, then it could be very beneficial for both the ACC and SEC!

SEC
West: TCU, Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas
South: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Kentucky, South Carolina, Clemson, Georgia, Florida, Florida St

ACC
North: Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston Collegr, Georgia Tech, Miami
East: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest
South: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Louisville, West Virginia

I really don't think the PAC will be able to help their situation. Their revenue model is jacked up and they have no media backer.

The B1G is a different story, but I just think it will be hard for them to get what they want.

The PAC has major financial issues and diminishing fan support issues to be ignored. Their only saving grace might be a new commissioner or realignment if they don’t want to get left way behind the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC.

(01-13-2019 11:32 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(01-12-2019 10:15 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-12-2019 08:06 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  And the B1G and PAC just watch and get left behind? Idk, I think if this is the direction then the other conferences would smell this coming and react. But if not, then it could be very beneficial for both the ACC and SEC!

SEC
West: TCU, Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Kansas
South: Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Kentucky, South Carolina, Clemson, Georgia, Florida, Florida St

ACC
North: Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston Collegr, Georgia Tech, Miami
East: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest
South: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Louisville, West Virginia

I really don't think the PAC will be able to help their situation. Their revenue model is jacked up and they have no media backer.

The B1G is a different story, but I just think it will be hard for them to get what they want.

The PAC has major financial issues and diminishing fan support issues to be ignored. Their only saving grace might be a new commissioner or realignment if they don’t want to get left way behind the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and ACC.

I actually agree with y’all. I always thought we’d get to a 5 power conference system with the B1G, SEC, and PAC being the top with a West/Central conference and an East conference. Now, I think we see the B1G and SEC at the top with the ACC and a West/Central conference and an Eastern conference as the remaining lesser two in the power ranks.