ESPN is apparently out and CBS and NBC are possibly in, additionally Apple or Amazon may get in on the streaming. Certainly a lot of cash and exposure for the B1G.
Before I get to the point of this post, I'd like to do a quick pros and cons as I see moving away from ESPN.

Pro: Cord cutting is real. By reverting back to primarily over-the-air broadcasts, households that choose to cut the cord are still contributing to eyeball watching B1G football. This almost looks to me like a Wallstreet guy that sees the fundamentals deteriorating with the ESPN model and going back to old faithful while still keeping a toe in the cable business. There will still be cable exposure with FS1, FS2, & BTN however the Worldwide Leader won't be among them as their business model seems to be crumbling the fastest.

Pro: on a marginal level this puts downward pressure on ESPN carriage fees in B1G states. Why should B1G states pay full freight when no local team is being supported by those rates?

Con: ESPN drives the narrative in College football so I fully expect ABC/ESPN to really crank up the SEC bias and do everything they can to downplay or ignore B1G programs.

Con: Reduces likelihood of B1G expansion into ACC territory because why expand past 20?

Neutral: Bad for Pac 12 but good for Big 12. ESPN now has more slots to fill and some extra money to burn. The Big 12 stands to pick up most of those slots along with a nice payday. The Pac 12 has a beautiful late window that only they can fill, if they can stay together, BUT that late window also makes them more attractive for B1G expansion.

On to the main point. NBC has pitched and apparently sold the B1G on a prime time window. In other news, the B1G doesn't usually play prime time games in November for obvious reason.
Does this portend more West Coast teams being added? I think so, here are my reasons:
1. Keep a good amount of inventory available for the 7:00 EST slot. USC and UCLA will probably dominate late season prime time games but there is room for more potential content in that late slot from other Western teams.
2. Possibly create a super-late slot starting at 10 EST / 7 PST. I say limit this to 2 ish games per year. The east coast is starting to doze of to sleep so overall exposure suffers in the super late window, but it is still live content, and if it an important conference game, it may draw some east/central viewership.
3. Shut out ESPN from super-late start window, or bring them back to the table for that window. ESPN pioneered the After dark programing and is has been a success relative to other content in that window. It would hurt ESPN if the previously rumored combo of Cal, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington were gone from that window.
4. Grow Fox/CBS/NBC viewership in college football out West at the expense of ESPN and their associated properties. The SEC is great, but not everyone likes or watches the SEC...or B1G for that matter. ESPN is focusing on the South East almost to the exclusion of the rest of the country. By contrast the B1G is coast to coast and though mostly regional can still boast of NYC, DC, & LA. If the 4 aforementioned Pac-12 school go to the B1G, that would be the entire Left Coast not really caring what is going on with ESPN.

In the final analysis, I don't think another league could pull this off, the Big Ten/ESPN relationship is a long-standing one and no other league has (to my knowledge) walked away from ESPN. I don't think they are enemies but going West adds opportunities for the B1G and their partners while simultaneously removing them from ESPN and decimating the Pac12.

CUSA walked away from ESPN. Different situations, obviously, but didn’t work out too well for them.
ETA: Really hurt the Big East when it was a football conference as well.

MWC also walked away, jury still out on that move.

what i don't understand, lack of intrest in 10:30 window from networks.

(08-10-2022 12:17 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  MWC also walked away, jury still out on that move.

what i don't understand, lack of intrest in 10:30 window from networks.

Not hard to understand. 75% if the country is falling asleep.

(08-09-2022 11:23 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  ESPN is apparently out and CBS and NBC are possibly in, additionally Apple or Amazon may get in on the streaming. Certainly a lot of cash and exposure for the B1G.
Before I get to the point of this post, I'd like to do a quick pros and cons as I see moving away from ESPN.

Pro: Cord cutting is real. By reverting back to primarily over-the-air broadcasts, households that choose to cut the cord are still contributing to eyeball watching B1G football. This almost looks to me like a Wallstreet guy that sees the fundamentals deteriorating with the ESPN model and going back to old faithful while still keeping a toe in the cable business. There will still be cable exposure with FS1, FS2, & BTN however the Worldwide Leader won't be among them as their business model seems to be crumbling the fastest.

Pro: on a marginal level this puts downward pressure on ESPN carriage fees in B1G states. Why should B1G states pay full freight when no local team is being supported by those rates?

Con: ESPN drives the narrative in College football so I fully expect ABC/ESPN to really crank up the SEC bias and do everything they can to downplay or ignore B1G programs.

Con: Reduces likelihood of B1G expansion into ACC territory because why expand past 20?

Neutral: Bad for Pac 12 but good for Big 12. ESPN now has more slots to fill and some extra money to burn. The Big 12 stands to pick up most of those slots along with a nice payday. The Pac 12 has a beautiful late window that only they can fill, if they can stay together, BUT that late window also makes them more attractive for B1G expansion.

On to the main point. NBC has pitched and apparently sold the B1G on a prime time window. In other news, the B1G doesn't usually play prime time games in November for obvious reason.
Does this portend more West Coast teams being added? I think so, here are my reasons:
1. Keep a good amount of inventory available for the 7:00 EST slot. USC and UCLA will probably dominate late season prime time games but there is room for more potential content in that late slot from other Western teams.
2. Possibly create a super-late slot starting at 10 EST / 7 PST. I say limit this to 2 ish games per year. The east coast is starting to doze of to sleep so overall exposure suffers in the super late window, but it is still live content, and if it an important conference game, it may draw some east/central viewership.
3. Shut out ESPN from super-late start window, or bring them back to the table for that window. ESPN pioneered the After dark programing and is has been a success relative to other content in that window. It would hurt ESPN if the previously rumored combo of Cal, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington were gone from that window.
4. Grow Fox/CBS/NBC viewership in college football out West at the expense of ESPN and their associated properties. The SEC is great, but not everyone likes or watches the SEC...or B1G for that matter. ESPN is focusing on the South East almost to the exclusion of the rest of the country. By contrast the B1G is coast to coast and though mostly regional can still boast of NYC, DC, & LA. If the 4 aforementioned Pac-12 school go to the B1G, that would be the entire Left Coast not really caring what is going on with ESPN.

In the final analysis, I don't think another league could pull this off, the Big Ten/ESPN relationship is a long-standing one and no other league has (to my knowledge) walked away from ESPN. I don't think they are enemies but going West adds opportunities for the B1G and their partners while simultaneously removing them from ESPN and decimating the Pac12.

Neither NBC or CBS have ever shown interest in late night football, especially since they have local and national programming already in place. The late night time slots would only be of interest to Fox on FS1, and Fox already has MWC games for late nights. So I don't see a network push for more west coast schools to the B1G..

(08-09-2022 11:23 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  ESPN is apparently out and CBS and NBC are possibly in, additionally Apple or Amazon may get in on the streaming. Certainly a lot of cash and exposure for the B1G.
Before I get to the point of this post, I'd like to do a quick pros and cons as I see moving away from ESPN.

Pro: Cord cutting is real. By reverting back to primarily over-the-air broadcasts, households that choose to cut the cord are still contributing to eyeball watching B1G football. This almost looks to me like a Wallstreet guy that sees the fundamentals deteriorating with the ESPN model and going back to old faithful while still keeping a toe in the cable business. There will still be cable exposure with FS1, FS2, & BTN however the Worldwide Leader won't be among them as their business model seems to be crumbling the fastest.

Pro: on a marginal level this puts downward pressure on ESPN carriage fees in B1G states. Why should B1G states pay full freight when no local team is being supported by those rates?

Con: ESPN drives the narrative in College football so I fully expect ABC/ESPN to really crank up the SEC bias and do everything they can to downplay or ignore B1G programs.

Con: Reduces likelihood of B1G expansion into ACC territory because why expand past 20?

Neutral: Bad for Pac 12 but good for Big 12. ESPN now has more slots to fill and some extra money to burn. The Big 12 stands to pick up most of those slots along with a nice payday. The Pac 12 has a beautiful late window that only they can fill, if they can stay together, BUT that late window also makes them more attractive for B1G expansion.

On to the main point. NBC has pitched and apparently sold the B1G on a prime time window. In other news, the B1G doesn't usually play prime time games in November for obvious reason.
Does this portend more West Coast teams being added? I think so, here are my reasons:
1. Keep a good amount of inventory available for the 7:00 EST slot. USC and UCLA will probably dominate late season prime time games but there is room for more potential content in that late slot from other Western teams.
2. Possibly create a super-late slot starting at 10 EST / 7 PST. I say limit this to 2 ish games per year. The east coast is starting to doze of to sleep so overall exposure suffers in the super late window, but it is still live content, and if it an important conference game, it may draw some east/central viewership.
3. Shut out ESPN from super-late start window, or bring them back to the table for that window. ESPN pioneered the After dark programing and is has been a success relative to other content in that window. It would hurt ESPN if the previously rumored combo of Cal, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington were gone from that window.
4. Grow Fox/CBS/NBC viewership in college football out West at the expense of ESPN and their associated properties. The SEC is great, but not everyone likes or watches the SEC...or B1G for that matter. ESPN is focusing on the South East almost to the exclusion of the rest of the country. By contrast the B1G is coast to coast and though mostly regional can still boast of NYC, DC, & LA. If the 4 aforementioned Pac-12 school go to the B1G, that would be the entire Left Coast not really caring what is going on with ESPN.

In the final analysis, I don't think another league could pull this off, the Big Ten/ESPN relationship is a long-standing one and no other league has (to my knowledge) walked away from ESPN. I don't think they are enemies but going West adds opportunities for the B1G and their partners while simultaneously removing them from ESPN and decimating the Pac12.

Interesting post.

If B10 does add 2-4 more, I don't think Cal is in the mix. I think Arizona state is more likely.

I also don't think the streaming or cable model is over. I think this is more of a case of not putting one's eggs all in one basket.

plus by having multiple payers, each pays a lesser amount, but the totals for the conference is far greater.

diversification of revenue.

Meanwhile, espn will likely go and grab other - cheaper - content. (Likely including, yes, out west.)

Stanford ND is the best possible prime time combo. You get the last ND game every year. It looks really good on prime time TV, especially if they are playing for playoff positioning.

UO UW is less impactful, but it's too valuable a market(s) to completely ignore.

I would add UO WU at 70 million each. Stanford can also come in at 70 million. You can have a sliding scale based on performance. Take it or leave it.

Fox will have no interest footing the bill so it comes down to CBS and NBC. Either of those would not agree to pay full shares to any remaining PAC school. Still, you can remain in the PAC or still earn double taking less shares in the B1G

Airing USC and UCLA OOC games against G5/FCS competition in the late night slot makes a lot of sense, but those are probably BTN level games and we are talking no more than 4 of those ever happening in the same season and the real number is probably closer to 2-3. For that slot to be something marketable to the Networks, they need probably another 2-4 West Coast teams. I just don’t see the late night slot being quite as critical to the Big 10’s media strategy. I wouldn’t be surprised if getting away from that late night slot and boosting their exposure on the East Coast wasn’t a factor in their decision to leave.

(08-10-2022 05:20 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Stanford ND is the best possible prime time combo. You get the last ND game every year. It looks really good on prime time TV, especially if they are playing for playoff positioning.

UO UW is less impactful, but it's too valuable a market(s) to completely ignore.

I would add UO WU at 70 million each. Stanford can also come in at 70 million. You can have a sliding scale based on performance. Take it or leave it.

Fox will have no interest footing the bill so it comes down to CBS and NBC. Either of those would not agree to pay full shares to any remaining PAC school. Still, you can remain in the PAC or still earn double taking less shares in the B1G

I may be wrong, but I think Notre Dame doesn't want to and probably won't join a conference. Let's not forget that Notre Dame did apply and was rejected by the Big Ten a couple of times about a century ago. The reason to my understanding was schools like Michigan didn't want those Catholics in the Big Ten. They haven't really forgotten about the bias and bigotry they felt from the Big Ten, in fact the Big Ten blackballed them forcing thsm to play a national schedule and leading to the reputation the Irish have today as a National brand. I'm not sure the Notre Dame brand doesn't lose a little something by joining a conference and a part of what has made them so special over the years.

(08-10-2022 06:43 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 05:20 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Stanford ND is the best possible prime time combo. You get the last ND game every year. It looks really good on prime time TV, especially if they are playing for playoff positioning.

UO UW is less impactful, but it's too valuable a market(s) to completely ignore.

I would add UO WU at 70 million each. Stanford can also come in at 70 million. You can have a sliding scale based on performance. Take it or leave it.

Fox will have no interest footing the bill so it comes down to CBS and NBC. Either of those would not agree to pay full shares to any remaining PAC school. Still, you can remain in the PAC or still earn double taking less shares in the B1G

I may be wrong, but I think Notre Dame doesn't want to and probably won't join a conference. Let's not forget that Notre Dame did apply and was rejected by the Big Ten a couple of times about a century ago. The reason to my understanding was schools like Michigan didn't want those Catholics in the Big Ten. They haven't really forgotten about the bias and bigotry they felt from the Big Ten, in fact the Big Ten blackballed them forcing thsm to play a national schedule and leading to the reputation the Irish have today as a National brand. I'm not sure the Notre Dame brand doesn't lose a little something by joining a conference and a part of what has made them so special over the years.

I like history as much as the next person.

But you or I are not guilty of actions those before us may have done, unless we continue those actions.

The past is the past.

And does anyone seriously think that such prior attitudes represent the B10's current thinking?

I highly doubt it.

All that said, I really don't think ND is joining a conference any time soon.

If ACC resolves its current instability issues, I think ND will stay there and maintain its football independence.

(08-10-2022 06:13 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I wouldn’t be surprised if getting away from that late night slot and boosting their exposure on the East Coast wasn’t a factor in their decision to leave.

I agree, and that's why I don't think it'll be more than 2ish games per year per team. With 6 Left Coast teams, each playing 2 games per year, that would give a 12ish game schedule for the late window. Most of they West Coast games would still fall into the 3:00 or 7:00 EST windows while carving out a little something for additional content. They could even spread out OOC games against former Pac-12 rivals or PST teams and occasionally have a conference games. It could be done in a way that adds value and doesn't disturb National Exposure.

(08-10-2022 06:51 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I like history as much as the next person.

But you or I are not guilty of actions those before us may have done, unless we continue those actions.

The past is the past.

And does anyone seriously think that such prior attitudes represent the B10's current thinking?

I highly doubt it.

Whether the historical background for the animosity to the Big Ten is still part of the current strong preference among ND donors for independence is a moot point, since that current strong preference does indeed exist. So long as a credible path to a national championship exists for ND playing as an independent, we should expect ND to remain independent.

However, the Big Ten is still a conference with an academic snob block of votes, and both Stanford and Washington are, for example, higher ranked in the ARWU than any current Big Ten member (mind, Stanford at number two in the world is higher ranked than any University not named Harvard). Meanwhile, Oregon is in the 301-400 tier, below Nebraska in the 201-300 tier.

Now, Cal is higher ranked than Washington, but from the network perspective, having two schools for the Greater SF Bay Area of 7.7m is a bit redundant, while Washington State is about 7.5m people.

Also, under the new state quo, at 16 with no divisions and scheduling each school with three schools they play annually, every "non big brand name" school gets to play every brand name school twice in four years, and host them once ... even if they are not an annual game. That would be an appeal of the new status quo to the Western Division schools, that they get to host OSU, Penn State and That School Up North more often, now along with USC. Adding schools past 16 means that some schools will be seeing each other twice in six years in a schedule cycle.

So while the Big Ten has reportedly negotiated an opportunity to expand into the upcoming contract, a next move to 18 is more likely than a move to 20, and a move to 20 more likely than a move to 22 or 24.

Indeed, since there are rising opportunity costs to expansion with declining benefits to the conference, unless ND is on offer, standing pat at 16 is also a real possibility.

(08-10-2022 12:39 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 12:17 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  MWC also walked away, jury still out on that move.

what i don't understand, lack of intrest in 10:30 window from networks.

Not hard to understand. 75% if the country is falling asleep.

But 80 million still awake. Which isn’t many, in comparison, but, what else are the networks gonna broadcast in that window?

Basically, I can’t see fox/cbs/nbc stopping with just 2 teams out west (USCLA). But I doubt they go after Pac10 teams for the BigTen…this round of realignment, anyway. But I can see Big12 going west. And I wonder if B1G expansion westward is baked into their tv deal. I doubt it, but wouldn’t be surprised. I doubt it because why would Fox (and all not espn) want to pay more for non-USCLA west teams in the B1G when they can get a bargain for them in the B12? So that’s the PAC-B12-ESPN-Fox war’s maginot line now.

So the war is on…even hotter, now that B1G tv (near) finalization.

MWC, or a few teams from, may get a bump in pay. Not much, tho. And I don’t think Fox, CBS, NBC, ESPN or any others will give PAC or Big12 much of a pay raise either. Mainly because the networks will be saving for the ND and (8? 12? 16?)-team playoff negotiations.

Welcome to the P2-M3(or2?)-G5 college football era!

(08-09-2022 11:23 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  ESPN is apparently out and CBS and NBC are possibly in, additionally Apple or Amazon may get in on the streaming. Certainly a lot of cash and exposure for the B1G.
Before I get to the point of this post, I'd like to do a quick pros and cons as I see moving away from ESPN.

Pro: Cord cutting is real. By reverting back to primarily over-the-air broadcasts, households that choose to cut the cord are still contributing to eyeball watching B1G football. This almost looks to me like a Wallstreet guy that sees the fundamentals deteriorating with the ESPN model and going back to old faithful while still keeping a toe in the cable business. There will still be cable exposure with FS1, FS2, & BTN however the Worldwide Leader won't be among them as their business model seems to be crumbling the fastest.

Pro: on a marginal level this puts downward pressure on ESPN carriage fees in B1G states. Why should B1G states pay full freight when no local team is being supported by those rates?

Con: ESPN drives the narrative in College football so I fully expect ABC/ESPN to really crank up the SEC bias and do everything they can to downplay or ignore B1G programs.

Con: Reduces likelihood of B1G expansion into ACC territory because why expand past 20?

Neutral: Bad for Pac 12 but good for Big 12. ESPN now has more slots to fill and some extra money to burn. The Big 12 stands to pick up most of those slots along with a nice payday. The Pac 12 has a beautiful late window that only they can fill, if they can stay together, BUT that late window also makes them more attractive for B1G expansion.

On to the main point. NBC has pitched and apparently sold the B1G on a prime time window. In other news, the B1G doesn't usually play prime time games in November for obvious reason.
Does this portend more West Coast teams being added? I think so, here are my reasons:
1. Keep a good amount of inventory available for the 7:00 EST slot. USC and UCLA will probably dominate late season prime time games but there is room for more potential content in that late slot from other Western teams.
2. Possibly create a super-late slot starting at 10 EST / 7 PST. I say limit this to 2 ish games per year. The east coast is starting to doze of to sleep so overall exposure suffers in the super late window, but it is still live content, and if it an important conference game, it may draw some east/central viewership.
3. Shut out ESPN from super-late start window, or bring them back to the table for that window. ESPN pioneered the After dark programing and is has been a success relative to other content in that window. It would hurt ESPN if the previously rumored combo of Cal, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington were gone from that window.
4. Grow Fox/CBS/NBC viewership in college football out West at the expense of ESPN and their associated properties. The SEC is great, but not everyone likes or watches the SEC...or B1G for that matter. ESPN is focusing on the South East almost to the exclusion of the rest of the country. By contrast the B1G is coast to coast and though mostly regional can still boast of NYC, DC, & LA. If the 4 aforementioned Pac-12 school go to the B1G, that would be the entire Left Coast not really caring what is going on with ESPN.

In the final analysis, I don't think another league could pull this off, the Big Ten/ESPN relationship is a long-standing one and no other league has (to my knowledge) walked away from ESPN. I don't think they are enemies but going West adds opportunities for the B1G and their partners while simultaneously removing them from ESPN and decimating the Pac12.

ESPN could gain keeping Ohio fees with bringing in Cincinnati to the ACC to go along with Pitt , Syracuse, Boston, College, Notre Dame in their 5 B1G states if They actually count Rutgers as NY

(08-10-2022 07:35 AM)Fresno Fanatic Wrote:  But 80 million still awake. Which isn’t many, in comparison, but, what else are the networks gonna broadcast in that window?

Basically, I can’t see fox/cbs/nbc stopping with just 2 teams out west (USCLA). But I doubt they go after Pac10 teams for the BigTen…this round of realignment, anyway. But I can see Big12 going west. And I wonder if B1G expansion westward is baked into their tv deal. I doubt it, but wouldn’t be surprised. I doubt it because why would Fox (and all not espn) want to pay more for non-USCLA west teams in the B1G when they can get a bargain for them in the B12? So that’s the PAC-B12-ESPN-Fox war’s maginot line now.

So the war is on…even hotter, now that B1G tv (near) finalization.

MWC, or a few teams from, may get a bump in pay. Not much, tho. And I don’t think Fox, CBS, NBC, ESPN or any others will give PAC or Big12 much of a pay raise either. Mainly because the networks will be saving for the ND and (8? 12? 16?)-team playoff negotiations.

Welcome to the P2-M3(or2?)-G5 college football era!

The Big 12 is a big loser here as well. CBS/NBC are out. Viacom is in terminal decline with no notable streaming service. They put their money in the B1G and that's that. NBC will have their lineup set once they extend with ND.

I have to think Fox prefers the Big 12 in the Big Noon slot. The problem is, where is tier one PAC games going to go? That's why the PAC is THE loser here. Oregon is basically forced to go to ESPN for tier one games, H2H vs B1G/SEC in the afternoon/primetime. This is a TERRIBLE place to be.

The PAC4 need to get out. Wine and dine whoever you need to at NBC/CBS. The PAC has no standalone content on network television and ESPN is not going to put them on ABC aside from perhaps the PAC Championship Game on a Friday night.

(08-10-2022 07:07 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 06:51 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I like history as much as the next person.

But you or I are not guilty of actions those before us may have done, unless we continue those actions.

The past is the past.

And does anyone seriously think that such prior attitudes represent the B10's current thinking?

I highly doubt it.

Whether the historical background for the animosity to the Big Ten is still part of the current strong preference among ND donors for independence is a moot point, since that current strong preference does indeed exist. So long as a credible path to a national championship exists for ND playing as an independent, we should expect ND to remain independent.

However, the Big Ten is still a conference with an academic snob block of votes, and both Stanford and Washington are, for example, higher ranked in the ARWU than any current Big Ten member (mind, Stanford at number two in the world is higher ranked than any University not named Harvard). Meanwhile, Oregon is in the 301-400 tier, below Nebraska in the 201-300 tier.

Now, Cal is higher ranked than Washington, but from the network perspective, having two schools for the Greater SF Bay Area of 7.7m is a bit redundant, while Washington State is about 7.5m people.

Also, under the new state quo, at 16 with no divisions and scheduling each school with three schools they play annually, every "non big brand name" school gets to play every brand name school twice in four years, and host them once ... even if they are not an annual game. That would be an appeal of the new status quo to the Western Division schools, that they get to host OSU, Penn State and That School Up North more often, now along with USC. Adding schools past 16 means that some schools will be seeing each other twice in six years in a schedule cycle.

So while the Big Ten has reportedly negotiated an opportunity to expand into the upcoming contract, a next move to 18 is more likely than a move to 20, and a move to 20 more likely than a move to 22 or 24.

Indeed, since there are rising opportunity costs to expansion with declining benefits to the conference, unless ND is on offer, standing pat at 16 is also a real possibility.

My guess is that the new B1G TV deal only increases ND's likelihood of staying independent. With all due respect to Cincinnati, ND is the only school in the midwest that is a major brand that is not a member of the B1G. This will drive interest from ESPN in the ND package even beyond the existing level in order to fill this geographic gap. The B1G deal also leaves an open late afternoon slot on both Fox and NBC, and an evening slot on Fox, that could be partially filled by ND, thereby driving their potential interest. Finally, the B1G has established the value of a 13 game package at $350 million/year. ND's seven game package may not be worth 7/13's of that, but 1/4 of that (~$90 million per year) seems plausible. Combined with the money ND gets from its membership in the ACC, ND may be able to earn in excess of B1G members.

The one thing that could prompt ND to reconsider would be if they are denied reasonable access to the CFP.

(08-10-2022 12:17 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  MWC also walked away, jury still out on that move.

what i don't understand, lack of intrest in 10:30 window from networks.

ESPN tried to kill them with the potential moves to the AAC by Air Force and others

I don't think P12 nor B12 are big losers here.

(08-10-2022 07:07 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 06:51 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  I like history as much as the next person.

But you or I are not guilty of actions those before us may have done, unless we continue those actions.

The past is the past.

And does anyone seriously think that such prior attitudes represent the B10's current thinking?

I highly doubt it.

Whether the historical background for the animosity to the Big Ten is still part of the current strong preference among ND donors for independence is a moot point, since that current strong preference does indeed exist. So long as a credible path to a national championship exists for ND playing as an independent, we should expect ND to remain independent.

However, the Big Ten is still a conference with an academic snob block of votes, and both Stanford and Washington are, for example, higher ranked in the ARWU than any current Big Ten member (mind, Stanford at number two in the world is higher ranked than any University not named Harvard). Meanwhile, Oregon is in the 301-400 tier, below Nebraska in the 201-300 tier.

Now, Cal is higher ranked than Washington, but from the network perspective, having two schools for the Greater SF Bay Area of 7.7m is a bit redundant, while Washington State is about 7.5m people.

Also, under the new state quo, at 16 with no divisions and scheduling each school with three schools they play annually, every "non big brand name" school gets to play every brand name school twice in four years, and host them once ... even if they are not an annual game. That would be an appeal of the new status quo to the Western Division schools, that they get to host OSU, Penn State and That School Up North more often, now along with USC. Adding schools past 16 means that some schools will be seeing each other twice in six years in a schedule cycle.

So while the Big Ten has reportedly negotiated an opportunity to expand into the upcoming contract, a next move to 18 is more likely than a move to 20, and a move to 20 more likely than a move to 22 or 24.

Indeed, since there are rising opportunity costs to expansion with declining benefits to the conference, unless ND is on offer, standing pat at 16 is also a real possibility.

Nothing to really argue with here.

Stanford really does sound like it's #17. I don't think they'll let that opportunity go by.

I think what you said about Cal, plus it's recent drama, etc., really suggests to me, that others will be added to the Big10 before Cal.

And I think that it's "flip a coin" whether either WA alone or WA+OR get an invite. being so far north creates another island, and I just am doubtful. If they are, then the B10 goes to 20, if not, I think they stand at 18.

So I'm leaning towards thinking Arizona state would be #18, though Kansas or Colorado could be possible as well. All 3 (plus Stanford) could be possible, but I think doubtful, if the Big10 still wants any ACC or SEC schools.

(08-10-2022 12:39 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 12:17 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  MWC also walked away, jury still out on that move.

what i don't understand, lack of intrest in 10:30 window from networks.

Not hard to understand. 75% if the country is falling asleep.

The rest are at the bar, playing video games or watching movies.