(03-26-2020 12:09 AM)johnintx Wrote: (03-25-2020 09:12 PM)JRsec Wrote: I just don't think that's going to happen. There's way too much money to be made for Oklahoma in the East where the better recruiting grounds are.
This is partly wishful thinking on my part, but OU to the SEC makes business sense on both ends. OU gets a stable conference, the ability to generate the maximum amount of income (with no equity purchase of a share in a network), and the ability to recruit enough to win a national championship in football. The SEC gets a college football blueblood and a top 5 brand name. The SEC can use OU to grab Texas, or if it doesn't work out, bring in Kansas or Oklahoma State as #16.
I do believe there needs to be an improved "P" western conference. If Texas is willing to work with the California schools, it can happen. They would have plenty of willing partners in the current Big 12. Take the Pac 12 minus Oregon State & Washington State (10). Add 6 Big 12 schools (UT, Tech, TCU, Kansas State, Iowa State, and either Kansas or Oklahoma State, whichever one does not go to the SEC with OU) (6). If the new conference doesn't want another private school, replace TCU with Houston. Utah and Colorado would need to come east, against their desires.
There are a lot of eyeballs in both California and Texas. But, those eyeballs out west aren't watching college football at the rate that it's watched in the South and Midwest. Therefore, I'm not sure if they can get a SEC-level TV package. However, they will get a representative media deal, and Texas could potentially keep LHN until it runs out in 2031.
I think legitimately that ESPN would have to be involved to make any move of Texas to the PAC 12 possible.
Here's the whole issue as simply as I know how to put it. Texas and Oklahoma account for 2 billion in total value out of the Big 12's entire value of 3.5 billion. That's 57% of the total value of the Big 12. What many don't realize is that Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas combined equal the entire value of the full members of the ACC and about 70% of the total value of the PAC 12 in business terms.
Of course anyone would take Texas and virtually anyone would be interested in Oklahoma. Notre Dame is the only other school out there worth as much.
But that said I don't think the PAC can afford to take 2 other Texas schools with them let alone 5 other lesser brands. The money and value just isn't there for that.
Texas can justify 1 tag-along, not 2. To calculate this you take the average value of a school in the inviting conference and the combined value of Texas (1.2 billion) and whoever it is you think should move with them and add that value and divide by 2. The farther they are over the inviting conference's average the more likely that move is to be considered. The PAC average valuation per school is 250 million or .25 billion. Texas Tech's value is .244 So with Texas their average would be .7 so absolutely the PAC should be willing to do that. There are only 4 more schools within the Big 12 that are over .25 billion in value. Kansas State at .27, Kansas at .3, OSU at .27, and OU at.885. I think Notre Dame is ~.93.
Now if Texas takes 2 schools with them to the PAC then Kansas State or Kansas would have to be with them. Remember the PAC balked at OSU with OU before.
Oklahoma and Oklahoma State together average .557 billion in value. The conference average for a school in the SEC is .534 billion in value.
So if the SEC takes both Oklahoma schools it only slightly adds to its value and gets no addition benefit in terms of potential viewers from OSU. Oklahoma and Kansas together would be about .560 billion. That's not much more value at all but Kansas is AAU and they do add a new state.
There really is not enough value to bring in a 2nd Texas school unless it is UT and that value is massive.
I really think the trick for the Big 10 is to land 1 of Texas, Oklahoma, and Notre Dame. Two would bring them close to the SEC in total valuation provided the SEC didn't land the third.
The trick for the SEC is to land one of Oklahoma and Texas because that locks them in the #1 spot in total valuation. Should they land both that puts the SEC's total value at ~9.7 billion to the Big 10's ~5.4 billion. That's lights out come contract time. Even if the Big 10 added N.D with another whose value was around .3 that only takes them to 6.6 billion.
There's your ball game going on behind the scenes. If Texas and Oklahoma joined the PAC 12 with nobody else it only raises that conferences' value to 5 billion.
The entire ACC's valuation is 2.4 billion. Texas and Notre Dame as partials and independents would have a value of 2.1 billion which wouldn't help the ACC very much at all. The ACC between those two should they rotate their home and away promised games, would only give the ACC 5 games a year to sell to add their value.
This is why this partial membership deal really isn't provide much of a lift to the ACC schools who share bowl access with Notre Dame.
It is also why I emphatically doubt that either Texas or Oklahoma would join the PAC or the ACC.
Remember the total valuation of the 10 member Big 12 exceeds the value of the 14.5 member ACC by 1.1 billion, and it exceeds that of the 12 member PAC by 500 million. So it profits them nothing to associate with the ACC and even if they picked the PAC it doesn't make them the #2 valued conference and with PAC viewership vs that of the Big 10 or SEC such a move would be more doomed than standing pat. The travel alone would kill them. And the exposure would be awful.
So I just don't see any real options other than these 3:
1. Big 12 stands pat.
2. Texas and Oklahoma join either the Big 10 or SEC.
3. Oklahoma and Texas each take 1 other school with them to either the Big 10 or SEC.
I do think Texas will try to protect the other Texas state school.
So where Oklahoma moves with Kansas will be dependent upon where Texas moves with Tech. And that's how I see it.
And none of this factors in these other crucial details:
1. Obligated existing contracts of duration.
2. Best fit for sports.
3. Best fit for business model.
4. Strategically the best move for maintained dominance over their home region.
5. Money.
6. Academics
Now let's consider why I think it is that Texas and Tech will consider the SEC from a strategic standpoint.
1. It reduces essentially the number of P schools in Texas to 3. This is important because recruiting is only going to get more difficult with fewer top athletes choosing football over basketball or baseball due chiefly to CTE's.
2. It levels any brand advantage Texas A&M has by being in the SEC so that means that Texas once again has every advantage in branding within their home state and that puts them undeniably back on top in all regards.
3. Such a move suits their sports tastes and their business model.
4. It increases their academic recruiting exposure in key growth states like Georgia and Florida.
5. It's the best travel package they can get outside of the Big 12.
6. It sends their chief rival Oklahoma with Kansas to the Big 10 and further distances Texas's recruiting advantages within their home state.
7. It pisses off Aggie.
So what I'm saying is that Texas wouldn't necessarily want to move with Oklahoma at all, as long as they keep the RRR. Oklahoma on the other hand needs to move either with Texas, or to the SEC where they would have A&M, or their recruiting gets hosed and they know this.
This is a good as it gets in drama as we tick down to 2024 when the SEC and Big 10 will be looking.