Occam's Razor:

ESPN will complete their goal of reducing the number of major conferences from 6 to four when they claim the remaining value of the Big 12 (Kansas and West Virginia).
Once there are 4 "super conferences", ESPN will collect their properties and place them in such a way that they will create two "A" leagues or an "A" league and one of a little lesser stature.
Interestingly ESPN will have completed this goal while leaving the B1G and PAC no real path to ever surpass their "A" league.

A playoff system will be developed that will benefit ESPN and their properties.

(05-14-2022 12:44 PM)XLance Wrote:  Occam's Razor:

ESPN will complete their goal of reducing the number of major conferences from 6 to four when they claim the remaining value of the Big 12 (Kansas and West Virginia).
Once there are 4 "super conferences", ESPN will collect their properties and place them in such a way that they will create two "A" leagues or an "A" league and one of a little lesser stature.
Interestingly ESPN will have completed this goal while leaving the B1G and PAC no real path to ever surpass their "A" league.

A playoff system will be developed that will benefit ESPN and their properties.

The chance of that decreased greatly when the projected disparity between the BIG/SEC and the three weak P5s ballooned- all while ACC is locked into a beneficial deal to ESPN. Listen to the ADs, we're already too far into it being a 2 super conference setup. And there are too any schools currently outside the P2 wanting a P2 invite for movement to stop.

And where are WVU and KU going?

If the ACC, that would require to open the deal in order to close the gap. If adding said schools triggered getting out of the bad deal and closing the gap, the time to do it was last fall when it could have been free. If the deal is going to open, ESPN unlikely to create little material value change AND pay the ACC enough to come even halfway close to P2? That is donating money. They get no significant gains on the Big 12 side, because that conference is already in kill-what-it-eats mode come 2025.

Say ESPN adds $20 million to a 16 team ACC to make it a P2.5 setup. The same money would go farther paying the top 8 schools to join the SEC, and those 8 schools would be at P2 level in their own ACC division. ESPN protects its inventory from Fox and the BIG. And there are 8 schools that would vote for dissolution to leave the ACC for the SEC.

(05-14-2022 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:38 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:29 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:04 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 10:48 AM)esayem Wrote:  Lol okay. ESPN controls this situation not FSU, ND etc

Are you another TBoy handle? You came out of the woodwork preaching the end of civilization. Maybe fine a new hobby for the next 14 years?

LOL. Who contended otherwise? You think it was implied the move subject of the FSU or ND leak wouldn't have been vetted with ESPN? ESPN is behind it, but the execution of such moves will not come from an announcement by ESPN. Come on. At least try to discuss earnestly.

Consolidation is not the end of civilization. Rather the opposite- a more refined, regulated, and stable outcome. A better product in which most important regional rivalries are maintained, but with the sport a more national product. It also lends to things like CBAs, which are needed to maintain the valuable aspects of amateurism.

The fact this is your reaction suggests you're a little too emotional about this. Perhaps realignment is not for you?

You literally said “what happens if they make off hand remarks”.

You know what happens? Nothing until the GOR is voided. That’s what happens. Oh, also you will continue to “predict” consolidation like people haven’t already been doing that for 50 years.

The flaw in consolidation is it doesn’t take into account the growth of universities, shifting population, state operated entities, potential anti-trust issues. There will never be some stagnant landscape that people like you desire.

Again, you think such remarks are not due to the hand they are sitting on with ESPN?

And that is a reference to the communication that occurs in situations in which collusion needs to happen.

Someone that is arguing a conference will sit in an out-of-the-money deal for 16 years should not be resorting to " there will never be some stagnant landscape that people like you desire"

Times change. There's never been this type of wealth inequality. Stagnant is thinking the ACC will survive because of history.

There will be a P2, it is only a question of whether some ACC schools are included, or if all will be middle class with the Big 12 and most of the Pac 12.

Parts might move around for sure. I’ve actually never said otherwise. I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS.

If you actually believe there will be a P2 with no moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education, you must not be familiar with the government.

Your poor rationale and logic isn't being open minded, although they do allow for more possible outcomes. I get that is why you tend to be pedantic and employ strawmans. No big deal, but glad we could move past the "but ESPN controls things" nonsense.

I am not certain what you're trying to say on the last sentence, but you exemplify someone viewing a future contingent on "no moving parts and the one with restrictions on upward mobility". I enjoy your use of projection though.

Try being open minded to the fact the ACC is in a bad spot. Projections have it right near the picked apart Big 12 even. I am sure you'll need some time to cope with that aspect. But once you are open to accepting that, you'll understand why a vast majority of outcomes for the sport include the death of the ACC. A bad deal and a lot of deadweight that pulls in the worst ratings this side of the Pac12 is not a good spot to be in.

(05-14-2022 02:06 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:38 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:29 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:04 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  LOL. Who contended otherwise? You think it was implied the move subject of the FSU or ND leak wouldn't have been vetted with ESPN? ESPN is behind it, but the execution of such moves will not come from an announcement by ESPN. Come on. At least try to discuss earnestly.

Consolidation is not the end of civilization. Rather the opposite- a more refined, regulated, and stable outcome. A better product in which most important regional rivalries are maintained, but with the sport a more national product. It also lends to things like CBAs, which are needed to maintain the valuable aspects of amateurism.

The fact this is your reaction suggests you're a little too emotional about this. Perhaps realignment is not for you?

You literally said “what happens if they make off hand remarks”.

You know what happens? Nothing until the GOR is voided. That’s what happens. Oh, also you will continue to “predict” consolidation like people haven’t already been doing that for 50 years.

The flaw in consolidation is it doesn’t take into account the growth of universities, shifting population, state operated entities, potential anti-trust issues. There will never be some stagnant landscape that people like you desire.

Again, you think such remarks are not due to the hand they are sitting on with ESPN?

And that is a reference to the communication that occurs in situations in which collusion needs to happen.

Someone that is arguing a conference will sit in an out-of-the-money deal for 16 years should not be resorting to " there will never be some stagnant landscape that people like you desire"

Times change. There's never been this type of wealth inequality. Stagnant is thinking the ACC will survive because of history.

There will be a P2, it is only a question of whether some ACC schools are included, or if all will be middle class with the Big 12 and most of the Pac 12.

Parts might move around for sure. I’ve actually never said otherwise. I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS.

If you actually believe there will be a P2 with no moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education, you must not be familiar with the government.

Your poor rationale and logic isn't being open minded, although they do allow for more possible outcomes. I get that is why you tend to be pedantic and employ strawmans. No big deal, but glad we could move past the "but ESPN controls things" nonsense.

I am not certain what you're trying to say on the last sentence, but you exemplify someone viewing a future contingent on "no moving parts and the one with restrictions on upward mobility". I enjoy your use of projection though.

Try being open minded to the fact the ACC is in a bad spot. Projections have it right near the picked apart Big 12 even. I am sure you'll need some time to cope with that aspect. But once you are open to accepting that, you'll understand why a vast majority of outcomes for the sport include the death of the ACC. A bad deal and a lot of deadweight that pulls in the worst ratings this side of the Pac12 is not a good spot to be in.

“Poor rationale and logic” “straw man” “pedantic”

Typical buzzwords used by someone who isn’t actually saying anything of consequence or addressing points presented to them.

ESPN is controlling the situation and has been for some time. They put the ACC together, invested in its own network, and will want to hold onto their most valuable properties. I’ll take that over the Big XII any day.

(05-14-2022 07:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 02:06 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:38 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:29 AM)esayem Wrote:  You literally said “what happens if they make off hand remarks”.

You know what happens? Nothing until the GOR is voided. That’s what happens. Oh, also you will continue to “predict” consolidation like people haven’t already been doing that for 50 years.

The flaw in consolidation is it doesn’t take into account the growth of universities, shifting population, state operated entities, potential anti-trust issues. There will never be some stagnant landscape that people like you desire.

Again, you think such remarks are not due to the hand they are sitting on with ESPN?

And that is a reference to the communication that occurs in situations in which collusion needs to happen.

Someone that is arguing a conference will sit in an out-of-the-money deal for 16 years should not be resorting to " there will never be some stagnant landscape that people like you desire"

Times change. There's never been this type of wealth inequality. Stagnant is thinking the ACC will survive because of history.

There will be a P2, it is only a question of whether some ACC schools are included, or if all will be middle class with the Big 12 and most of the Pac 12.

Parts might move around for sure. I’ve actually never said otherwise. I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS.

If you actually believe there will be a P2 with no moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education, you must not be familiar with the government.

Your poor rationale and logic isn't being open minded, although they do allow for more possible outcomes. I get that is why you tend to be pedantic and employ strawmans. No big deal, but glad we could move past the "but ESPN controls things" nonsense.

I am not certain what you're trying to say on the last sentence, but you exemplify someone viewing a future contingent on "no moving parts and the one with restrictions on upward mobility". I enjoy your use of projection though.

Try being open minded to the fact the ACC is in a bad spot. Projections have it right near the picked apart Big 12 even. I am sure you'll need some time to cope with that aspect. But once you are open to accepting that, you'll understand why a vast majority of outcomes for the sport include the death of the ACC. A bad deal and a lot of deadweight that pulls in the worst ratings this side of the Pac12 is not a good spot to be in.

“Poor rationale and logic” “straw man” “pedantic”

Typical buzzwords used by someone who isn’t actually saying anything of consequence or addressing points presented to them.

ESPN is controlling the situation and has been for some time. They put the ACC together, invested in its own network, and will want to hold onto their most valuable properties. I’ll take that over the Big XII any day.

"I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS"

That is what you responded with. Is that of anything of consequence? Is that addressing points?

I'm interested in how viewing the formation of the P2 due to never before seen wealth disparity, is the side of "moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education"

Please explain.

(05-14-2022 09:15 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 07:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 02:06 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 11:38 AM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  Again, you think such remarks are not due to the hand they are sitting on with ESPN?

And that is a reference to the communication that occurs in situations in which collusion needs to happen.

Someone that is arguing a conference will sit in an out-of-the-money deal for 16 years should not be resorting to " there will never be some stagnant landscape that people like you desire"

Times change. There's never been this type of wealth inequality. Stagnant is thinking the ACC will survive because of history.

There will be a P2, it is only a question of whether some ACC schools are included, or if all will be middle class with the Big 12 and most of the Pac 12.

Parts might move around for sure. I’ve actually never said otherwise. I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS.

If you actually believe there will be a P2 with no moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education, you must not be familiar with the government.

Your poor rationale and logic isn't being open minded, although they do allow for more possible outcomes. I get that is why you tend to be pedantic and employ strawmans. No big deal, but glad we could move past the "but ESPN controls things" nonsense.

I am not certain what you're trying to say on the last sentence, but you exemplify someone viewing a future contingent on "no moving parts and the one with restrictions on upward mobility". I enjoy your use of projection though.

Try being open minded to the fact the ACC is in a bad spot. Projections have it right near the picked apart Big 12 even. I am sure you'll need some time to cope with that aspect. But once you are open to accepting that, you'll understand why a vast majority of outcomes for the sport include the death of the ACC. A bad deal and a lot of deadweight that pulls in the worst ratings this side of the Pac12 is not a good spot to be in.

“Poor rationale and logic” “straw man” “pedantic”

Typical buzzwords used by someone who isn’t actually saying anything of consequence or addressing points presented to them.

ESPN is controlling the situation and has been for some time. They put the ACC together, invested in its own network, and will want to hold onto their most valuable properties. I’ll take that over the Big XII any day.

"I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS"

That is what you responded with. Is that of anything of consequence? Is that addressing points?

I'm interested in how viewing the formation of the P2 due to never before seen wealth disparity, is the side of "moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education"

Please explain.

Do you remember the BCS system? Do you recall how politicians influenced the change that allowed more access? You honestly see a breakaway that will shut out other universities as the population shifts and more alumni are becoming influential? I’ve said this before you were posting here often, but ultimately many of these entities are government institutions.

As far as the bs, you’re acting like you know exactly how schools will spend their tv revenue — which is only one revenue stream btw — and exactly how pay for play will work. You seem overly confident as to how this will turn out and I believe your view is influenced by the demise of the Big XII, which is down to only half of its original membership.

(05-14-2022 10:58 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 09:15 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 07:28 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 02:06 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(05-14-2022 12:26 PM)esayem Wrote:  Parts might move around for sure. I’ve actually never said otherwise. I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS.

If you actually believe there will be a P2 with no moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education, you must not be familiar with the government.

Your poor rationale and logic isn't being open minded, although they do allow for more possible outcomes. I get that is why you tend to be pedantic and employ strawmans. No big deal, but glad we could move past the "but ESPN controls things" nonsense.

I am not certain what you're trying to say on the last sentence, but you exemplify someone viewing a future contingent on "no moving parts and the one with restrictions on upward mobility". I enjoy your use of projection though.

Try being open minded to the fact the ACC is in a bad spot. Projections have it right near the picked apart Big 12 even. I am sure you'll need some time to cope with that aspect. But once you are open to accepting that, you'll understand why a vast majority of outcomes for the sport include the death of the ACC. A bad deal and a lot of deadweight that pulls in the worst ratings this side of the Pac12 is not a good spot to be in.

“Poor rationale and logic” “straw man” “pedantic”

Typical buzzwords used by someone who isn’t actually saying anything of consequence or addressing points presented to them.

ESPN is controlling the situation and has been for some time. They put the ACC together, invested in its own network, and will want to hold onto their most valuable properties. I’ll take that over the Big XII any day.

"I’m just more open minded than you and that’s why I’m calling out your BS"

That is what you responded with. Is that of anything of consequence? Is that addressing points?

I'm interested in how viewing the formation of the P2 due to never before seen wealth disparity, is the side of "moving parts including restrictions against the upward mobility for institutions of higher education"

Please explain.

Do you remember the BCS system? Do you recall how politicians influenced the change that allowed more access? You honestly see a breakaway that will shut out other universities as the population shifts and more alumni are becoming influential? I’ve said this before you were posting here often, but ultimately many of these entities are government institutions.

As far as the bs, you’re acting like you know exactly how schools will spend their tv revenue — which is only one revenue stream btw — and exactly how pay for play will work. You seem overly confident as to how this will turn out and I believe your view is influenced by the demise of the Big XII, which is down to only half of its original membership.

1. We are at critical mass monetarily.
2. The SCOTUS affirmed NIL even suggesting Player's Unions.
3. It's a safe bet Pay for Play will also become law. The SCOTUS is a government institution.
4. The national debt is significantly higher than the life expectancy of the Sun.
5. Higher Ed is about to go through a downsizing nationally as neither the Federal or State governments can continue to support at current levels.
6. Sports revenue will have to be self sufficient. Bye bye subsidized programs.
7. Therefore mass movement is likely once the SCOTUS rules. The SEC didn't cause this. ESPN didn't cause this. The government you think will rescue state schools did because of decades of abuse the NCAA ignored.
8. It isn't a debate. It's now reality. And it doesn't matter what any of us think ought to happen.
9. North Carolina and every other major school is about to adapt.
10. You and B12 fan too, and everyone else will just have to wait and see what happens next. It's a train wreck in slow motion. We are horrified and mesmerized at the same time.

JR, you’re missing my point.

Pay for play will happen, but nobody knows what it will look like. Will all athletes at the university be paid the same hourly wage across the board? Will contracts be involved like other university employees? Will state’s be given the power to govern pay for play differently?

A lot to unpack, and I don’t see pay for play being as significant as NIL.


FBS football should absolutely be a separately governed entity. This would allow sensible regional conferences for other sports, including subsidized sports that will continue to be propped up by all that tv revenue.

(05-15-2022 08:36 AM)esayem Wrote:  JR, you’re missing my point.

Pay for play will happen, but nobody knows what it will look like. Will all athletes at the university be paid the same hourly wage across the board? Will contracts be involved like other university employees? Will state’s be given the power to govern pay for play differently?

A lot to unpack, and I don’t see pay for play being as significant as NIL.


FBS football should absolutely be a separately governed entity. This would allow sensible regional conferences for other sports, including subsidized sports that will continue to be propped up by all that tv revenue.

We don’t know exactly, but in terms of realignment implications we know enough that decision makers are not falling for nihilism. They know that the revenue disparity will be greatly be coupled to paying players. As well as the traditional advantage in paying staff.

Whether employment or NIL, the flood gates are opening on the players being able to extract a lot more money when choosing where to play.