Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Thamel: Seismic change is coming
Author Message
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #21
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-13-2021 06:36 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 05:26 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  Anything can happen in realignment. But my money, and. I would guess house money too, is on an expanded playoff. Adds more inventory for the networks, addresses access concerns for the conferences, increases parity for the sport.

I would be surprised if the B1G or SEC expanded. I don’t see them being able to grab the inventory pieces they desire out of the ACC. The Big 12 could be an option, but I think Texas and OU are fine with the status quo so long as they still make their money and have access to the CFP. Texas could be a wildcard with the LHN winding up and losing that revenue stream. A Pac-12 merger might have some benefits for both parties, but there is a real question about differing cultures athletically and academically, commitment to high level competition, increased travel expenses, lack of fan interest in the tier 2 matchups, and not least of all who’s conference takes over? The PAC-12 leadership has been a disaster the past decade and the Big 12 has more or less stabilized.

But money talks...

LHN isn't winding up anywhere.. Still here for another 10 years

LHN is a disaster for everyone but Texas's bottom line, but it also helps the Big 12 when early concerns were that it would harm the Big 12. By basically giving Texas $15 million a year on top of the existing Big 12 media deals, it essentially ensures that Texas will be ballpark-competitive in media revenue with SEC and B1G schools, thus making it less tempting for them to seek greener conference pastures.

If the LHN didn't exist, the rest of the Big 12 might have had to chip in among themselves an amount similar to it - as the MW does with Boise - to keep the Big Kahuna happy.
(This post was last modified: 01-13-2021 11:21 PM by quo vadis.)
01-13-2021 11:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Thiefery Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 555
Joined: Feb 2020
Reputation: 16
I Root For: TEXAS
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-13-2021 11:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 06:36 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 05:26 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  Anything can happen in realignment. But my money, and. I would guess house money too, is on an expanded playoff. Adds more inventory for the networks, addresses access concerns for the conferences, increases parity for the sport.

I would be surprised if the B1G or SEC expanded. I don’t see them being able to grab the inventory pieces they desire out of the ACC. The Big 12 could be an option, but I think Texas and OU are fine with the status quo so long as they still make their money and have access to the CFP. Texas could be a wildcard with the LHN winding up and losing that revenue stream. A Pac-12 merger might have some benefits for both parties, but there is a real question about differing cultures athletically and academically, commitment to high level competition, increased travel expenses, lack of fan interest in the tier 2 matchups, and not least of all who’s conference takes over? The PAC-12 leadership has been a disaster the past decade and the Big 12 has more or less stabilized.

But money talks...

LHN isn't winding up anywhere.. Still here for another 10 years

LHN is a disaster for everyone but Texas's bottom line, but it also helps the Big 12 when early concerns were that it would harm the Big 12. By basically giving Texas $15 million a year on top of the existing Big 12 media deals, it essentially ensures that Texas will be ballpark-competitive in media revenue with SEC and B1G schools, thus making it less tempting for them to seek greener conference pastures.

If the LHN didn't exist, the rest of the Big 12 might have had to chip in among themselves an amount similar to it - as the MW does with Boise - to keep the Big Kahuna happy.

The rest of the conference schools are free to do whatever they like 3rd tier rights like UT. People think that's not fair? But it's cool for Purdue to get the same share as UM or tosu because everything is to be equaled?

Big 12 schools even without a TV network/channel like UT, still made more money than the Pac 12 and ACC schools.
01-14-2021 12:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,153
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1692
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-13-2021 11:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 06:36 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 05:26 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  Anything can happen in realignment. But my money, and. I would guess house money too, is on an expanded playoff. Adds more inventory for the networks, addresses access concerns for the conferences, increases parity for the sport.

I would be surprised if the B1G or SEC expanded. I don’t see them being able to grab the inventory pieces they desire out of the ACC. The Big 12 could be an option, but I think Texas and OU are fine with the status quo so long as they still make their money and have access to the CFP. Texas could be a wildcard with the LHN winding up and losing that revenue stream. A Pac-12 merger might have some benefits for both parties, but there is a real question about differing cultures athletically and academically, commitment to high level competition, increased travel expenses, lack of fan interest in the tier 2 matchups, and not least of all who’s conference takes over? The PAC-12 leadership has been a disaster the past decade and the Big 12 has more or less stabilized.

But money talks...

LHN isn't winding up anywhere.. Still here for another 10 years

LHN is a disaster for everyone but Texas's bottom line, but it also helps the Big 12 when early concerns were that it would harm the Big 12. By basically giving Texas $15 million a year on top of the existing Big 12 media deals, it essentially ensures that Texas will be ballpark-competitive in media revenue with SEC and B1G schools, thus making it less tempting for them to seek greener conference pastures.

If the LHN didn't exist, the rest of the Big 12 might have had to chip in among themselves an amount similar to it - as the MW does with Boise - to keep the Big Kahuna happy.

You need better information.

LHN became profitable for ESPN about 5 years ago. Now with cord cutters, maybe that isn't true anymore. But its not a big money loser. Its just not what it was projected to be.

And Texas agreed to stay in the Big 12 when they thought the LHN would generate no more than $3 million a year.
01-14-2021 12:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,492
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 260
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #24
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
The LHN will give Texas an average of almost $18m per year from 2025-31, the final 6 years of the contract (it's on a 3% escalator, started just under $11m in 2012 and finishes above $19 in 2031). That means Texas would not feel any pinch should the Big 12 compensation be within $25m per year of the SEC and B1G. They could even handle a year or two $30m less.

But Oklahoma doesn't have that almost $20m per year cushion. A B12 contract $25-30m less per year means they would fall as much as $200m short of their SEC and B1G rivals over that 6 years stretch, and perhaps $250-300m over a decade. A $50m SoonerTV extension for that decade doesn't come close. The B12 Network deal the little 8 are getting that is maybe $1-2m per year after production costs wont do it either. The only way I think the B12 can help OU keep pace if for the little 8 to agree to no pay raise at all in the next contract and via unequal distribution the big raise all go to OU and Texas so they can keep pace with B1G and SEC revenue growth.

To me that is the real pressure point for realignment. The SEC and B1G it's about consolidation of what they have. For the ACC it's finding ways to boost the ACCN revenue higher than the typical 3% per year to handle the typical 20% bump you can expect others to get with the next round of contracts. So far the ACCN is growing much faster than 3%, although this year probably put a dent in that, and at some point soon it will plateau when it reaches most of it's potential base.

The B12 and P12 would be wise to align with each other to mutually support each other, since neither has enough audience alone. But ESPN seems to have deep hooks in the B12 and that will prevent that.

Where I can see a big shakeout is in 10 game conference schedules for some conferences and 9 for the rest. I think that Covid-19 situation has accelerated the timeline for that shift. Conference games are where more revenue can be had, where fans care more. I can honestly see Notre Dame, as their football contract runs out, fully joining the ACC and the ACC using that as away to get a contract boost. Either that or NBC or CBS will have to shell out a lot more money to keep the Irish Independent.

Besides Notre Dame for the ACC and Oklahoma for either the B1G or SEC, there is not school available this decade that improves any P5 conference media revenue (that is net revenue per member), and nobody else out there that anyone feels they have to have.

The 10 game schedule,greater revenue, perhaps expanded 8 team playoff that will add half a dozen schools to the three locks (so top recruits will distribute a bit better than know) will increase the gas from P5 to G5. Paying players, if they can figure out a way to do it without a title IX tax. I don't see how you can pay 60 football players and 10 basketball players without also paying 70 women --at many schools with 56% to 59% female student body, perhaps as many as 90 to 110 women-- the same level of money without running afoul of Title IX. (1) G5 schools will struggle even more to compete.

So I see an acceleration of current trends more than a great new shift.


Note:
(1) actually I do see a way: contracts that pay team players a share of gate receipts above production/operating costs. Women's sports mostly do not get any significant gate, so they would not get paid much. Men's Basketball and Football do have significant gate, so they might get decent checks. This might give UConn women an even bigger recruiting advantage.
01-14-2021 01:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,030
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 232
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 01:55 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The LHN will give Texas an average of almost $18m per year from 2025-31, the final 6 years of the contract (it's on a 3% escalator, started just under $11m in 2012 and finishes above $19 in 2031). That means Texas would not feel any pinch should the Big 12 compensation be within $25m per year of the SEC and B1G. They could even handle a year or two $30m less.

But Oklahoma doesn't have that almost $20m per year cushion. A B12 contract $25-30m less per year means they would fall as much as $200m short of their SEC and B1G rivals over that 6 years stretch, and perhaps $250-300m over a decade. A $50m SoonerTV extension for that decade doesn't come close. The B12 Network deal the little 8 are getting that is maybe $1-2m per year after production costs wont do it either. The only way I think the B12 can help OU keep pace if for the little 8 to agree to no pay raise at all in the next contract and via unequal distribution the big raise all go to OU and Texas so they can keep pace with B1G and SEC revenue growth.

To me that is the real pressure point for realignment. The SEC and B1G it's about consolidation of what they have. For the ACC it's finding ways to boost the ACCN revenue higher than the typical 3% per year to handle the typical 20% bump you can expect others to get with the next round of contracts. So far the ACCN is growing much faster than 3%, although this year probably put a dent in that, and at some point soon it will plateau when it reaches most of it's potential base.

The B12 and P12 would be wise to align with each other to mutually support each other, since neither has enough audience alone. But ESPN seems to have deep hooks in the B12 and that will prevent that.

Where I can see a big shakeout is in 10 game conference schedules for some conferences and 9 for the rest. I think that Covid-19 situation has accelerated the timeline for that shift. Conference games are where more revenue can be had, where fans care more. I can honestly see Notre Dame, as their football contract runs out, fully joining the ACC and the ACC using that as away to get a contract boost. Either that or NBC or CBS will have to shell out a lot more money to keep the Irish Independent.

Besides Notre Dame for the ACC and Oklahoma for either the B1G or SEC, there is not school available this decade that improves any P5 conference media revenue (that is net revenue per member), and nobody else out there that anyone feels they have to have.

The 10 game schedule,greater revenue, perhaps expanded 8 team playoff that will add half a dozen schools to the three locks (so top recruits will distribute a bit better than know) will increase the gas from P5 to G5. Paying players, if they can figure out a way to do it without a title IX tax. I don't see how you can pay 60 football players and 10 basketball players without also paying 70 women --at many schools with 56% to 59% female student body, perhaps as many as 90 to 110 women-- the same level of money without running afoul of Title IX. (1) G5 schools will struggle even more to compete.

So I see an acceleration of current trends more than a great new shift.


Note:
(1) actually I do see a way: contracts that pay team players a share of gate receipts above production/operating costs. Women's sports mostly do not get any significant gate, so they would not get paid much. Men's Basketball and Football do have significant gate, so they might get decent checks. This might give UConn women an even bigger recruiting advantage.

That's why Oklahoma will move first. They have the motivation. They were antsy a few years ago and nothing much has changed.

If Oklahoma is happy making less than the SEC or Big Ten, and if they're happy making less than Texas while occupying the same conference then the Big 12 will be fine. But does that really make sense at the end of the day?
01-14-2021 04:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,051
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2898
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
1. Adding inventory is adding revenue if you add both content and market schools.

2. NIL will cull the existing herd and when it does it will make replacing what will mostly be bottom earners and privates with better earning programs a way to stay he same size and increase revenue. Should it happen a conference like the ACC would benefit more than the SEC or Big 10 if they had a just a couple of open slots as opposed to 4 or 5.

3. Three conferences of 20 is not too much inventory as it is 5 schools less than the P5 has now. It's just streamlined and more efficient.

4. There are only 3 schools which add enough value to the SEC and Big 10 at over 60 million to justify their additions: Texas, Notre Dame, and Oklahoma in that order. Perhaps a case could be made for F.S.U.

But, if moves were made to 20 it would be for adding market reach, building sports branding in what your conference was weakest in, and content. The networks would have to pay pro rata for the SEC and Big 10 and I don't see that happening. Therefore I could easily see the cherry picking of the Big 12 by either of the two strongest and their network partners. Unfortunately that move would likely destabilize the ACC and PAC further.

5. Geography will play a part. And this won't help the PAC. The SEC and Big 10 being more in the middle and much stronger than the Big 12 in markets and revenue are best positioned to grow without harming geography. Each could grow out of the Big 12 or ACC equally well.

If NIL goes in Vanderbilt might be one who opts out. This solves problems for ESPN as the SEC could move to 16 with Texas, Kansas and Oklahoma giving Disney the majority of value in the Big 12 with 3 easy pieces.

But what is most likely to happen is for the Big 10 and SEC to make contiguous additions that add to the total pie and stop at 16. I do not see anything that makes me believe Texas will opt for an independent schedule in an era where added conference games become the pay points with networks at contract time. Why? Because the more conference games conferences play the less total games there are for scheduling an independent Notre Dame or Texas, and certainly not with a slate that includes 3 or 4 quality schools. Those schools have better ways to make money than risking a bad day against Texas or Notre Dame and that is just reality.

So if Texas moves at all it will be where their fans can drive, inclusive of at least 2 if not more Texas schools, and improves their home football schedule while providing minor sports a nearby but suitably competitive home. For this reason I will not rule Notre Dame out of the Big 10. It covers their minor sports and pays them the most. If you have to give up independence do you do it for 32 million a year or 60? Ditto for Texas to the SEC.

So Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10, Texas and a buddy to the SEC. Maybe Colorado becomes possible for Big 10. Colorado and Notre Dame to the Big 10 would be a decent counter to Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC. Why would N.D. do that? Because if the SEC landed Texas and Oklahoma they would know that there was nothing but trouble ahead for the ACC.

Those are my best guesses but it will be fascinating to see it play out.

Oh, and one other thing. I don't think the Big 10 or SEC will be concerned that they will unbalance anything or that another conference could pull even or ahead of them. The whole ball game in landing one of the 3 prizes with somebody decent as a companion. Taking 2 of the 3 is a grand slam. That's the only ball game for them because if it happens there's no way the others ever catch up even if they all merged. And if there was really somebody they did want in the ACC and they already had the value of a Texas or Oklahoma or Notre Dame it would be pretty easy to get them any time they wanted them.

An SEC or Big 10 invite post COVID would be Willy Wonka's golden ticket to a cash strapped institution, and even more exposure is great for enrollment. It's the exact opposite of 2008 and the banking debacle when my best friend sent me a piece of a cardboard box flap with a stamp and my address on the front and this note on the back, "Money's tight and times are hard, so here's your damned old Christmas Card!" Well when the wealthy send out an invitation to a proud school that is in a tight due to COVID offering a 30 million dollar a year cash infusion into part of their budget and great exposure, it will be damn hard for them to turn it down. They could, but the pressure would be on at all levels within that state.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021 05:55 AM by JRsec.)
01-14-2021 05:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawaiiMongoose Online
All American
*

Posts: 2,891
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 158
I Root For: Hawaii
Location: Honolulu
Post: #27
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
What we've seen historically is that the rich feed on the less rich. In the world of P5 conferences the SEC and Big 10 are the rich, the AAC and Pac-12 are the less rich and the Big 12 is in between.

Given that I expect both the SEC and Big 10 to expand at the expense of the ACC and the Big 12 to expand at the expense of the Pac-12. The ACC and Pac-12 will be forced to backfill from the AAC and MWC respectively and will drop from the top tier of FBS conferences to a middle tier that's still well above the G5 but no longer considered on par with SEC, Big 10 and Big 12.

It's too early to predict the details but directionally that's how I see things playing out.
01-14-2021 05:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,051
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2898
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 05:56 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  What we've seen historically is that the rich feed on the less rich. In the world of P5 conferences the SEC and Big 10 are the rich, the AAC and Pac-12 are the less rich and the Big 12 is in between.

Given that I expect both the SEC and Big 10 to expand at the expense of the ACC and the Big 12 to expand at the expense of the Pac-12. The ACC and Pac-12 will be forced to backfill from the AAC and MWC respectively and will drop from the top tier of FBS conferences to a middle tier that's still well above the G5 but no longer considered on par with SEC, Big 10 and Big 12.

It's too early to predict the details but directionally that's how I see things playing out.

That's where 3 twenty team conferences come into play, and personally it would bring the best balance coming out of another big shuffle. I just think that is too many moving parts under different contractual obligations for it to play out that way. But we can hope.
01-14-2021 05:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,626
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 60
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #29
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-13-2021 05:18 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  Whatever the SEC/Big 10 try to do, you can bet that they will first calculate how the other conferences are likely to respond.

Right now the SEC & Big 10 are on top. The very last thing they want to do is take the first step that will lead to a system with 3 strong conferences at the top.

They also don't want to empower the other top conference & let them get ahead. For example, the Big 10 would benefit a lot from adding UNC & UVA. But they won't do it if they think that it will lead to the SEC getting Clemson, FSU, Virginia Tech, and Oklahoma.

(01-13-2021 09:17 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  I’ve said it many times on this board before: at some point a football first ACC school will start getting anxious on the long term contract the conference signed. I can see an scenario where Clemson and Florida State see their in-state SEC rivals make over $25-30 million more than them and start challenging the GOR. It’s one thing to be behind Alabama and Ohio State monetarily if you’re Clemson and Florida State and another thing is to behind Missouri and Minnesota.

(01-13-2021 11:04 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 10:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  ACC has a couple of outs.
1) disband and send members to Big 10 and SEC. You may have a few remnants go to Big 12 if Big 10 and SEC both go to 20. If they go to 2 leagues each under the Big 10 and SEC brand, then all the ACC moves to those 2 conferences.

Too much inventory (schools) to be absorbed by two conferences. Very difficult to see either conference showing sustained interest in Boston College, Wake Forest, or a post-Krzyzewski Duke. In addition, if the SEC were to pick up Clemson and FSU, stay at 16--Miami or NC State isn't even needed at that point.

This is why I don't see ACC schools going anywhere until the GOR expires. Disbanding the ACC has been discussed but that would require a lot of schools to leave it. If enough schools stay, they can enforce the GOR and the schools leaving would have no media money for the length of the contract. I've discussed a plan where the Big Ten takes the "ACC North" and the SEC takes the "ACC South" but that's a ton of schools leaving and that assumes neither the Big Ten nor SEC is able to get either Texas or Oklahoma and that the Big Ten is able to convince Notre Dame to come along (they'd be included in "ACC North"). It also requires both the Big Ten and SEC to act virtually simultaneously. If either side says no, then no deal. It also requires probably at least 10 teams to find new homes in the Big Ten or SEC (or maybe some would be OK moving to the Big 12). Even if say 5 or 6 schools say they want to stay, they can insist there's still an "ACC" and they can tell the other schools they aren't going anywhere. It's not like the Big East split. In that case, the Catholic 7 "left" but left together and was able to take the Big East name. You can't have Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pittsburgh going to the Big Ten and taking the ACC name with them. And why will the Big Ten and SEC go through that much effort to destroy the ACC when they can destroy the Big 12 way easier by taking TWO teams?

People think the ACC contract is bad because it locked them in for a long time. But we'll see how the Big 12 and Pac 12 come out in their next contracts. Who knows, the Big 12 might not even make it (or if they do they could be the next AAC). I doubt the Pac 12 won't survive but I don't see them getting a hefty raise. If the ACC hadn't signed a long term deal, there would be nothing stopping the SEC and/or Big Ten sharks from circling them now. Their long term deal might be a good thing in a few years. We'll see.
01-14-2021 07:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,597
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 12:02 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 11:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 06:36 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 05:26 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  Anything can happen in realignment. But my money, and. I would guess house money too, is on an expanded playoff. Adds more inventory for the networks, addresses access concerns for the conferences, increases parity for the sport.

I would be surprised if the B1G or SEC expanded. I don’t see them being able to grab the inventory pieces they desire out of the ACC. The Big 12 could be an option, but I think Texas and OU are fine with the status quo so long as they still make their money and have access to the CFP. Texas could be a wildcard with the LHN winding up and losing that revenue stream. A Pac-12 merger might have some benefits for both parties, but there is a real question about differing cultures athletically and academically, commitment to high level competition, increased travel expenses, lack of fan interest in the tier 2 matchups, and not least of all who’s conference takes over? The PAC-12 leadership has been a disaster the past decade and the Big 12 has more or less stabilized.

But money talks...

LHN isn't winding up anywhere.. Still here for another 10 years

LHN is a disaster for everyone but Texas's bottom line, but it also helps the Big 12 when early concerns were that it would harm the Big 12. By basically giving Texas $15 million a year on top of the existing Big 12 media deals, it essentially ensures that Texas will be ballpark-competitive in media revenue with SEC and B1G schools, thus making it less tempting for them to seek greener conference pastures.

If the LHN didn't exist, the rest of the Big 12 might have had to chip in among themselves an amount similar to it - as the MW does with Boise - to keep the Big Kahuna happy.

The rest of the conference schools are free to do whatever they like 3rd tier rights like UT. People think that's not fair? But it's cool for Purdue to get the same share as UM or tosu because everything is to be equaled?

Big 12 schools even without a TV network/channel like UT, still made more money than the Pac 12 and ACC schools.

There is no danger of UM and tOSU falling behind Purdue in revenue. Those two can outraise the other Big Ten programs with some comfortable margin. However, if those three want to share the privileges of being members of a particular conference and they choose to have an equitable distribution of TV revenues then that is the business of the conference as a whole.

Not saying one is better than the other but it's different. I think what many outside Big 12 country believe is that inequitable distribution would create resentment in the long run. Human beings are complicated that way. The method of distribution may be fine for Big 12 members but may not work in areas where they have to worry about perceptions of structural disadvantages, which is a constant topic of discussion in academia these days.

In any case, I don't disagree that there will be pressure to change. The question is what type of pressure. I don't think money would be as much of a stress as people think because the networks may not be as willing to cover as much of a shortfall for the expected gain in earnings. That might prevent realignment in the near future.

Like I said in another thread, the bigger the program, the harder for that program to move. Since the subject of Oklahoma was mentioned, there might be a gain for both the program and a future conference in a move but if the gain isn't sufficient to overcome the loss of old rivalries like Oklahoma State (while there will be a price that would force them to move it might be higher than thought) then OU might take a pass even with the added incentives. Perhaps they value the Kansas State game more than people outside the plains think. There are still factors other than dollars and cents.
01-14-2021 07:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ESE84 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,618
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 108
I Root For: Rice then UH
Location: Houston

New Orleans BowlDonators
Post: #31
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
So much to unpack here. I talked to a friend connected to the Texas program on Tuesday. He said UT is concerned about the overall strength of the SEC and that it is increasingly difficult to recruit the best kids away from the SEC West including A&M. If Bevo bails on the Big 12, I can see the seismic shift leaving the PAC, Big 12 leftovers, and G5 scrambling. Interesting if the AAC is choosing to expand at this time. The AAC must think they are in danger of being poached in this seismic shift rather than pick up the Baylors and Wake Forests that might be vulnerable.
01-14-2021 08:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #32
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 12:02 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 11:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 06:36 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(01-13-2021 05:26 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  Anything can happen in realignment. But my money, and. I would guess house money too, is on an expanded playoff. Adds more inventory for the networks, addresses access concerns for the conferences, increases parity for the sport.

I would be surprised if the B1G or SEC expanded. I don’t see them being able to grab the inventory pieces they desire out of the ACC. The Big 12 could be an option, but I think Texas and OU are fine with the status quo so long as they still make their money and have access to the CFP. Texas could be a wildcard with the LHN winding up and losing that revenue stream. A Pac-12 merger might have some benefits for both parties, but there is a real question about differing cultures athletically and academically, commitment to high level competition, increased travel expenses, lack of fan interest in the tier 2 matchups, and not least of all who’s conference takes over? The PAC-12 leadership has been a disaster the past decade and the Big 12 has more or less stabilized.

But money talks...

LHN isn't winding up anywhere.. Still here for another 10 years

LHN is a disaster for everyone but Texas's bottom line, but it also helps the Big 12 when early concerns were that it would harm the Big 12. By basically giving Texas $15 million a year on top of the existing Big 12 media deals, it essentially ensures that Texas will be ballpark-competitive in media revenue with SEC and B1G schools, thus making it less tempting for them to seek greener conference pastures.

If the LHN didn't exist, the rest of the Big 12 might have had to chip in among themselves an amount similar to it - as the MW does with Boise - to keep the Big Kahuna happy.

The rest of the conference schools are free to do whatever they like 3rd tier rights like UT. People think that's not fair? But it's cool for Purdue to get the same share as UM or tosu because everything is to be equaled?

Big 12 schools even without a TV network/channel like UT, still made more money than the Pac 12 and ACC schools.

My understanding about Big 12 concerns back in 2011 - 2012 is that they were partially about a money gap - which as you say was none of their business - but also about a competitive advantage. IIRC, there was originally a proposal floated to show Texas HS games on the LHN, which would have given TX a recruiting advantage. That idea didn't pass muster with the NCAA.

Anyway, the LHN hasn't been objected to by anyone, Big 12 or otherwise, in a "long" time. I believe that a good 7-8 years ago everyone came to the same conclusion about it - colossally dumb move by ESPN, a colossally smart money move by Texas, with no real ancillary value beyond that to anyone. I doubt many Texas fans spend too much time watching the LHN. ESPN gets to write off $15 million a year in losses against their taxes, and the LHN just kind of grinds on like a perpetual (20 year) motion machine, existing purely because of ironclad signed contracts from a decade ago. As someone recently said "you can only watch Vince Young sprint in to the Rose Bowl end zone so many times".
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021 08:57 AM by quo vadis.)
01-14-2021 08:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #33
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 12:13 AM)bullet Wrote:  You need better information.

LHN became profitable for ESPN about 5 years ago. Now with cord cutters, maybe that isn't true anymore. But its not a big money loser. Its just not what it was projected to be.

That's a very interesting claim. Do you have any references for that?

IIRC, back around 2015 when the LHN was losing money for ESPN hand over fist, there were projections that said it would make money soon, but I've never seen any confirmation that it has. If you have that, please share.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021 09:41 AM by quo vadis.)
01-14-2021 09:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,606
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 570
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #34
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
My sense is that the phrase "seismic shift" is just a way to drive clicks. For one important point JRsec made, I think change, if any, will be modest and incremental. There are too many moving parts to enable anything greater than a small tremor.

The first thing that needs to be emphasized, IMO, is that the B1G and the SEC don't need to do anything. There are no chess moves anyone else can make that will close the gap between them and the rest of the college football world. Unless they do something crazy that would cause them to self-implode, they're going to be the big dogs for the foreseeable future.

And there is not enough of a disparity among the next tier of conferences, the ACC, B12 and PAC, to justify any moves that try to defy geography. That's not to say they absolutely won't flirt with some of those moves. But at some point I think they are just going to have find a way to accept their station and do their best to grow where they are planted.
01-14-2021 09:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 37,744
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1156
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #35
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 09:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  My sense is that the phrase "seismic shift" is just a way to drive clicks. For one important point JRsec made, I think change, if any, will be modest and incremental. There are too many moving parts to enable anything greater than a small tremor.

The first thing that needs to be emphasized, IMO, is that the B1G and the SEC don't need to do anything. There are no chess moves anyone else can make that will close the gap between them and the rest of the college football world. Unless they do something crazy that would cause them to self-implode, they're going to be the big dogs for the foreseeable future.

And there is not enough of a disparity among the next tier of conferences, the ACC, B12 and PAC, to justify any moves that try to defy geography. That's not to say they absolutely won't flirt with some of those moves. But at some point I think they are just going to have find a way to accept their station and do their best to grow where they are planted.

All my instincts agree with you and JR about incremental change. But, we are living in tumultuous times. The full ramifications of the virus have not played out, there is litigation in the courts about the fundamental compensation model of college athletics, and a new liberal-democrat legislative/executive regime is taking over in Washington. Those ingredients suggest to me that there is a non-trivial chance that *something* epochal will erupt that changes things far more dramatically and systemically. I'm not betting on it, but it's a possibility that is on the table, IMO.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021 09:21 AM by quo vadis.)
01-14-2021 09:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DFW HOYA Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,305
Joined: May 2004
Reputation: 95
I Root For: The Hoyas
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #36
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 07:04 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Even if say 5 or 6 schools say they want to stay, they can insist there's still an "ACC" and they can tell the other schools they aren't going anywhere. It's not like the Big East split. In that case, the Catholic 7 "left" but left together and was able to take the Big East name. You can't have Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pittsburgh going to the Big Ten and taking the ACC name with them.

In the Big East case, the IP and history of the Big East was sold by the former conference, (Big East Conference, a partnership based in Providence, aka American Athletic Conference) to Big East LLC, based in New York.

The genius of this move that the terms of the sale was largely in transferring exit fees by former members to the AAC, so the net cost by the schools of the current Big East was marginal.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021 09:32 AM by DFW HOYA.)
01-14-2021 09:29 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 4,556
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 140
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
Nobody expects things to remain the same but until we have an idea of what dollars the B12/P12/ACC are potentially looking at it's going to be up in the air.
01-14-2021 09:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,729
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 305
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #38
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
I'll take a stab at it. I think the end game is the SEC and B1G expanding their footprints and brands exponentially, creating a massive conference content provider with significant exposure across multiple platforms and distributors (not unlike the NFL, which isn't tied to one network, but shared among several). So, here we go:

SEC adds Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU, Iowa State and West Virginia from the Big 12, and Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Miami and NC State from the ACC. That gets them to 28 total teams. I go back and forth, but I do not see Vanderbilt leaving. When they see other programs like Stanford, Northwestern, Notre Dame, etc. staying in, I think they push forward too (especially because no school in their right mind would willingly give up the fees and monies that are projected for years and decades down the road).

The B1G adds Arizona, California, UCLA, Colorado, Oregon, USC, Stanford, Washington and Utah from the PAC, Kansas from the Big 12, and Virginia, North Carolina and Duke from the ACC, and Notre Dame. That get's them to 28 teams as well.

So, who gets left out, unfortunately? Well, that would be Washington State, Oregon State and Arizona State from the PAC-12, Baylor and Kansas State from the Big 12, Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Wake Forest from the ACC.

Each Super Conference would be composed of four divisions of seven, with six divisional games and one rotating game from each of the other three divisions, creating a nine-game conference schedule. Divisional champions would meet, followed by a conference semifinal, then the conference championship. The conference champions (SEC/B1G) would then meet in a National Championship game.
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021 10:30 AM by GoldenWarrior11.)
01-14-2021 10:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,729
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 305
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #39
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-14-2021 10:30 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  I'll take a stab at it. I think the end game is the SEC and B1G expanding their footprints and brands exponentially, creating a massive conference content provider with significant exposure across multiple platforms and distributors (not unlike the NFL, which isn't tied to one network, but shared among several). So, here we go:

SEC adds Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU, Iowa State and West Virginia from the Big 12, and Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Miami and NC State from the ACC. That gets them to 28 total teams. I go back and forth, but I do not see Vanderbilt leaving. When they see other programs like Stanford, Northwestern, Notre Dame, etc. staying in, I think they push forward too (especially because no school in their right mind would willingly give up the fees and monies that are projected for years and decades down the road).

The B1G adds Arizona, California, UCLA, Colorado, Oregon, USC, Stanford, Washington and Utah from the PAC, Kansas from the Big 12, and Virginia, North Carolina and Duke from the ACC, and Notre Dame. That get's them to 28 teams as well.

So, who gets left out, unfortunately? Well, that would be Washington State, Oregon State and Arizona State from the PAC-12, Baylor and Kansas State from the Big 12, Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Wake Forest from the ACC.

Each Super Conference would be composed of four divisions of seven, with six divisional games and one rotating game from each of the other three divisions, creating a nine-game conference schedule. Divisional champions would meet, followed by a conference semifinal, then the conference championship. The conference champions (SEC/B1G) would then meet in a National Championship game.

A more detailed map of my set-up:

SEC

SEC - West
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M

SEC - South
Alabama, Auburn, Iowa State, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri


SEC - North
Kentucky, Louisville, NC State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

SEC - East
Clemson, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina

B1G

B1G Pacific
Arizona, California, UCLA, Oregon, USC, Stanford, Washington

B1G West
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Utah, Wisconsin

B1G East
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State, Purdue

B1G Atlantic
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021 10:52 AM by GoldenWarrior11.)
01-14-2021 10:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,628
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 164
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Thamel: Seismic change is coming
(01-13-2021 09:17 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  I’ve said it many times on this board before: at some point a football first ACC school will start getting anxious on the long term contract the conference signed. I can see an scenario where Clemson and Florida State see their in-state SEC rivals make over $25-30 million more than them and start challenging the GOR. It’s one thing to be behind Alabama and Ohio State monetarily if you’re Clemson and Florida State and another thing is to behind Missouri and Minnesota.

FSU maybe

One of Clemsons biggest advantages is having an ACC schedule every year for multiple reasons. They have plenty of money and no desire to change.
01-14-2021 12:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 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, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.