(09-30-2022 11:32 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  B1G is already ahead of SEC in Revenue.

Questions is, will the SEC catch up?

This whole board needs to learn to read and do math, but hell, that's likely a public education issue for anyone born after 1984.

Media revenue is only a portion of total revenue. I can't remember the last time the B1G average gross total revenue was ahead of the SEC's? Most years in spite of the Big Ten's more "MEDIA" revenue which they get for residing in a region with more affluent people and (here's the important part) the second most avid college sports viewership, the SEC out earns them by an average of 5 million dollars per school.

Let that sink in!

The SEC's media revenue is usually close enough that gate, donations, concessions put them over the top in actual total earnings by a decent margin. Why? We live in the region with the most avid college sports fan base and while not as affluent still have a broad middle class.

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:05 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  ....
Considering that football drives the bus -- and that the SEC just added two of the top six brands in college football -- how can the Big Ten ever start competing on the field? And how long will it be before even the people in Big Ten country will come to admit that they are playing second fiddle?
....

That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Duke and UNC can absolutely win national championships in the Big Ten.

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:05 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  ....
Considering that football drives the bus -- and that the SEC just added two of the top six brands in college football -- how can the Big Ten ever start competing on the field? And how long will it be before even the people in Big Ten country will come to admit that they are playing second fiddle?
....

That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Playing devil's advocate... If the B1G decides it wants to put a dent into the SEC's prowess on the field and recruiting turf, it could pull it off by going really big. The B1G won't be able to just cherry pick UNC and FSU like the SEC could. It'll have to be willing to take some teams that it otherwise wouldn't want in order to sweeten the pot. And resolve the intra-state political issues in NC and VA. It's easy to say that the B1G will never take all of these schools. Fair enough and maybe they won't. But the B1G will then have to accept that the SEC will likely pick off the best brands from this group plus Clemson. The B1G can decide if it wants any of the leftovers. The SEC will then be the undisputed king forevermore, if there was ever any doubt.

UVA
VT
UNC
Duke
NCSU
GT
FSU
Miami/Clemson

(09-30-2022 11:33 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:10 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:02 AM)forphase1 Wrote:  Short answer is no, not very likely. Some of the built in advantages that the SEC enjoys are not going away (geography, recruiting, lack of pro competition, etc). I think the gap can be closed a bit, but actually catching them? No, I don't think so. The SEC has much more depth with 7 teams in the new SEC having won national championships since 2000 versus just 2 for the new Big10. The SEC is just so much deeper. In some years the 4th or 5th best SEC program would challenge for #1-2 in the Big10, while the opposite is rarely true. I don't see that substantially changing, though I expect the gap to close a bit as power/recruiting consolidates between the P2.

There are built in advantages, but there are also advantages that aren't built in.

The SEC has been vastly outspending the Big 10 on coaches and assistant coaches in football, especially the middle schools in each conference.

Michigan St would like a word with you on the spending on coaches point. But that was just this past off season, and overall you're right.

It's hubris to think that just b/c we've won 12/16 National Titles that this will continue indefinitely. Much more likely is that the B1G and others take advantage of the new transfer and NIL rules, or lack thereof, to become more competitive long term.

I remember reading an article on it 5 years or so ago. I think the Big 10 was well behind the Big 12 as well on assistant's salaries. Ohio St. has been competitive in salaries, but most of the conference has not.

(09-30-2022 12:19 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:05 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  ....
Considering that football drives the bus -- and that the SEC just added two of the top six brands in college football -- how can the Big Ten ever start competing on the field? And how long will it be before even the people in Big Ten country will come to admit that they are playing second fiddle?
....

That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Playing devil's advocate... If the B1G decides it wants to put a dent into the SEC's prowess on the field and recruiting turf, it will have to go big. It won't be able to just cherry pick UNC and FSU. It'll have to be willing to take some teams that it otherwise wouldn't want in order to sweeten the pot. And resolve the intra-state political issues in NC and VA. It's easy to say that the B1G will never take all of these schools. Fair enough and maybe they won't. But the B1G will then have to accept that the SEC will likely pick off the best brands from this group plus Clemson. And then the SEC will be the undisputed king forevermore, if there was ever any doubt.

UVA
VT
UNC
Duke
NCSU
GT
FSU
Miami/Clemson

Only the last 2 are essential, and oddly Ga Tech. The SEC makes no money in Virginia and North Carolina now. Ga Tech has only 15% of Georgia viewers. But is a very strong #2 in Atlanta.

The SEC and ACC make solid money in Florida because ESPN holds all of those rights.

Only those 3 give you Deep South recruiting and damage the SEC revenue base.

The SEC only has to ask to have two of them. Miami would likely make all 3 if asked, but I'm just not as sure about them. Why FSU and Tech? Fan base and desire of regional play.

(09-30-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:19 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:05 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  ....
Considering that football drives the bus -- and that the SEC just added two of the top six brands in college football -- how can the Big Ten ever start competing on the field? And how long will it be before even the people in Big Ten country will come to admit that they are playing second fiddle?
....

That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Playing devil's advocate... If the B1G decides it wants to put a dent into the SEC's prowess on the field and recruiting turf, it will have to go big. It won't be able to just cherry pick UNC and FSU. It'll have to be willing to take some teams that it otherwise wouldn't want in order to sweeten the pot. And resolve the intra-state political issues in NC and VA. It's easy to say that the B1G will never take all of these schools. Fair enough and maybe they won't. But the B1G will then have to accept that the SEC will likely pick off the best brands from this group plus Clemson. And then the SEC will be the undisputed king forevermore, if there was ever any doubt.

UVA
VT
UNC
Duke
NCSU
GT
FSU
Miami/Clemson

Only the last 2 are essential, and oddly Ga Tech. The SEC makes no money in Virginia and North Carolina now. Ga Tech has only 15% of Georgia viewers. But is a very strong #2 in Atlanta.

The SEC and ACC make solid money in Florida because ESPN holds all of those rights.

Only those 3 give you Deep South recruiting and damage the SEC revenue base.

The SEC only has to ask to have two of them. Miami would likely make all 3 if asked, but I'm just not as sure about them. Why FSU and Tech? Fan base and desire of regional play.

If the B1G only invited GT and Miami (I don't see them inviting Clemson), I would imagine those schools would think "They're only inviting us to use our locations. Will it be worth being outposts in the long haul?" I think it would be a very odd arrangement and wouldn't have much consistent impact on the SEC.

(09-30-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:19 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:05 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  ....
Considering that football drives the bus -- and that the SEC just added two of the top six brands in college football -- how can the Big Ten ever start competing on the field? And how long will it be before even the people in Big Ten country will come to admit that they are playing second fiddle?
....

That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Playing devil's advocate... If the B1G decides it wants to put a dent into the SEC's prowess on the field and recruiting turf, it will have to go big. It won't be able to just cherry pick UNC and FSU. It'll have to be willing to take some teams that it otherwise wouldn't want in order to sweeten the pot. And resolve the intra-state political issues in NC and VA. It's easy to say that the B1G will never take all of these schools. Fair enough and maybe they won't. But the B1G will then have to accept that the SEC will likely pick off the best brands from this group plus Clemson. And then the SEC will be the undisputed king forevermore, if there was ever any doubt.

UVA
VT
UNC
Duke
NCSU
GT
FSU
Miami/Clemson

Only the last 2 are essential, and oddly Ga Tech. The SEC makes no money in Virginia and North Carolina now. Ga Tech has only 15% of Georgia viewers. But is a very strong #2 in Atlanta.

The SEC and ACC make solid money in Florida because ESPN holds all of those rights.

Only those 3 give you Deep South recruiting and damage the SEC revenue base.

The SEC only has to ask to have two of them. Miami would likely make all 3 if asked, but I'm just not as sure about them. Why FSU and Tech? Fan base and desire of regional play.

This is why the B10's best next move is to add all 3 Florida schools: Florida, Florida State, Miami.

I don't think anything else in any other conference comes close to this.

I used to think they they needed to bring along the rivals of GA, LSU,Tamu, but really, those are just OOC scheduled games.

Add those 3 Florida schools plus Stanford for the third California school, and there's that 20 everyone seems to think is the target number.

I have no doubt there are those who would say that those 3 schools wouldn't leave to join the B10, but, grouped together, I think they might.

And the SEC has plenty of backfill choices from the ACC and B12 to choose from.

(09-30-2022 01:04 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:19 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Playing devil's advocate... If the B1G decides it wants to put a dent into the SEC's prowess on the field and recruiting turf, it will have to go big. It won't be able to just cherry pick UNC and FSU. It'll have to be willing to take some teams that it otherwise wouldn't want in order to sweeten the pot. And resolve the intra-state political issues in NC and VA. It's easy to say that the B1G will never take all of these schools. Fair enough and maybe they won't. But the B1G will then have to accept that the SEC will likely pick off the best brands from this group plus Clemson. And then the SEC will be the undisputed king forevermore, if there was ever any doubt.

UVA
VT
UNC
Duke
NCSU
GT
FSU
Miami/Clemson

Only the last 2 are essential, and oddly Ga Tech. The SEC makes no money in Virginia and North Carolina now. Ga Tech has only 15% of Georgia viewers. But is a very strong #2 in Atlanta.

The SEC and ACC make solid money in Florida because ESPN holds all of those rights.

Only those 3 give you Deep South recruiting and damage the SEC revenue base.

The SEC only has to ask to have two of them. Miami would likely make all 3 if asked, but I'm just not as sure about them. Why FSU and Tech? Fan base and desire of regional play.

This is why the B10's best next move is to add all 3 Florida schools: Florida, Florida State, Miami.

I don't think anything else in any other conference comes close to this.

I used to think they they needed to bring along the rivals of GA, LSU,Tamu, but really, those are just OOC scheduled games.

Add those 3 Florida schools plus Stanford for the third California school, and there's that 20 everyone seems to think is the target number.

I have no doubt there are those who would say that those 3 schools wouldn't leave to join the B10, but, grouped together, I think they might.

And the SEC has plenty of backfill choices from the ACC and B12 to choose from.

I give UF less than a 1% chance of joining the Big Ten.

(09-30-2022 10:33 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:28 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

Yeah, I can't deny that I'm just looking for some entertainment on a Friday morning...

Toll please.


Seriously, as long as the B1G looks at teams like the 'Ferd as expansion targets, I still say the SEC is supreme.

(09-30-2022 12:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:33 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:10 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:02 AM)forphase1 Wrote:  Short answer is no, not very likely. Some of the built in advantages that the SEC enjoys are not going away (geography, recruiting, lack of pro competition, etc). I think the gap can be closed a bit, but actually catching them? No, I don't think so. The SEC has much more depth with 7 teams in the new SEC having won national championships since 2000 versus just 2 for the new Big10. The SEC is just so much deeper. In some years the 4th or 5th best SEC program would challenge for #1-2 in the Big10, while the opposite is rarely true. I don't see that substantially changing, though I expect the gap to close a bit as power/recruiting consolidates between the P2.

There are built in advantages, but there are also advantages that aren't built in.

The SEC has been vastly outspending the Big 10 on coaches and assistant coaches in football, especially the middle schools in each conference.

Michigan St would like a word with you on the spending on coaches point. But that was just this past off season, and overall you're right.

It's hubris to think that just b/c we've won 12/16 National Titles that this will continue indefinitely. Much more likely is that the B1G and others take advantage of the new transfer and NIL rules, or lack thereof, to become more competitive long term.

I remember reading an article on it 5 years or so ago. I think the Big 10 was well behind the Big 12 as well on assistant's salaries. Ohio St. has been competitive in salaries, but most of the conference has not.

And I really don’t think that Mel Tucker is a good coach. His record as a head coach is 20-16, and after this year he might have 3 losing seasons in 4 years as a head coach. He got a big salary because of one season where his team’s rankings in analytical systems (FPI, SP+) really wasn’t as good as their won-loss record indicated.

Michigan State will probably want to fire him after about five years, but I don’t know how the hell they’ll be able to afford to do so.

(09-30-2022 01:04 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  This is why the B10's best next move is to add all 3 Florida schools: Florida, Florida State, Miami.

I don't think anything else in any other conference comes close to this.

I used to think they they needed to bring along the rivals of GA, LSU,Tamu, but really, those are just OOC scheduled games.

Add those 3 Florida schools plus Stanford for the third California school, and there's that 20 everyone seems to think is the target number.

I have no doubt there are those who would say that those 3 schools wouldn't leave to join the B10, but, grouped together, I think they might.

And the SEC has plenty of backfill choices from the ACC and B12 to choose from.

Even grouped together: there is a negative percent chance UF leaves the SEC. Negative. Less than zero.

(09-30-2022 01:21 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 01:04 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  This is why the B10's best next move is to add all 3 Florida schools: Florida, Florida State, Miami.

I don't think anything else in any other conference comes close to this.

I used to think they they needed to bring along the rivals of GA, LSU,Tamu, but really, those are just OOC scheduled games.

Add those 3 Florida schools plus Stanford for the third California school, and there's that 20 everyone seems to think is the target number.

I have no doubt there are those who would say that those 3 schools wouldn't leave to join the B10, but, grouped together, I think they might.

And the SEC has plenty of backfill choices from the ACC and B12 to choose from.

Even grouped together: there is a negative percent chance UF leaves the SEC. Negative. Less than zero.

Why?

I expected there to be those who would be opposed to the idea of any school leaving the SEC, but I'm curious - Why in this specific case?

What's the rationale?

Fit? Tradition? Wouldn't leave their friends for money?

I think we've already seen those kinds of bridges be burned in realignment of late.

So, I'm curious - What's the rationale?

(09-30-2022 01:25 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 01:21 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  Even grouped together: there is a negative percent chance UF leaves the SEC. Negative. Less than zero.

Why?

Well first, let's ask the opposite question: Why WOULD they leave? The Gators have as many national titles since 1970 as the entire Big Ten conference. Honestly, how would their lot possibly improve by jumping ship?

Now there is one SEC school that may make sense for both parties to join the Big Ten. They're in College Station and they have blossomed after getting out of Big Brother's shadow. The Big Ten would get a huge brand and enter the Texas market. A&M could make more money and again not get that little brother treatment that happens when you're an in-state rival of the flagship. I don't think it happens, but it's not too hard to see how it could.

(09-30-2022 02:27 PM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 01:25 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 01:21 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  Even grouped together: there is a negative percent chance UF leaves the SEC. Negative. Less than zero.

Why?

Well first, let's ask the opposite question: Why WOULD they leave? The Gators have as many national titles since 1970 as the entire Big Ten conference. Honestly, how would their lot possibly improve by jumping ship?

Now there is one SEC school that may make sense for both parties to join the Big Ten. They're in College Station and they have blossomed after getting out of Big Brother's shadow. The Big Ten would get a huge brand and enter the Texas market. A&M could make more money and again not get that little brother treatment that happens when you're an in-state rival of the flagship. I don't think it happens, but it's not too hard to see how it could.

There is a lot more to realignment than success on the field.

(09-30-2022 02:27 PM)OneSockUp Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 01:25 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 01:21 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  Even grouped together: there is a negative percent chance UF leaves the SEC. Negative. Less than zero.

Why?

Well first, let's ask the opposite question: Why WOULD they leave? The Gators have as many national titles since 1970 as the entire Big Ten conference. Honestly, how would their lot possibly improve by jumping ship?

Now there is one SEC school that may make sense for both parties to join the Big Ten. They're in College Station and they have blossomed after getting out of Big Brother's shadow. The Big Ten would get a huge brand and enter the Texas market. A&M could make more money and again not get that little brother treatment that happens when you're an in-state rival of the flagship. I don't think it happens, but it's not too hard to see how it could.

And this is an absurd suggestion on 2 points:
1. Schools in the SEC earn more money in total than Big 10 schools. Media money is only one ledger line in Gross Total Revenue. The SEC leads in total revenue by an average of around 5 million a year most years over the Big 10. It's why Big Ten fans only talk about "media revenue" as it's the only revenue stat in which they lead in athletics.
2. A&M would lose money by leaving in travel, donor base, and fan interest. They are very well suited in the SEC even if Jimbo sticks it to Bama every time he gets a chance.

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:05 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  ....
Considering that football drives the bus -- and that the SEC just added two of the top six brands in college football -- how can the Big Ten ever start competing on the field? And how long will it be before even the people in Big Ten country will come to admit that they are playing second fiddle?
....

That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

I still think that, by the time the ACC GoR is gone, the B1G is going to look at Clemson and think "hmmmmm, they're a whole lot like Iowa. Or Nebraska. We could use another school like that."

Here are a few things in favor of Clemson to the B1G:

A bit more athletics revenue than Iowa or Nebraska
higher ranking in USN&WR than Iowa or Nebraska
Better in Football than Iowa, comparable all time to Nebraska
Bigger football stadium than Iowa, but smaller than Nebraska
Bigger National Brand than Iowa, probably equivalent to Nebraska
Deep South. 'nuff said
269 miles from Sankey's front door?! Yes, please.

You know I don't subscribe to the "defensive play" theory that has been so important in SEC circles for 30 years. But all the things that make Clemson desirable to the B1G apply to the SEC, too. We have an Iowa- or Nebraska-level school in our back yard, we're not letting them get away.

The minute Clemson is available, they're joining the SEC.

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:05 AM)OneSockUp Wrote:  ....
Considering that football drives the bus -- and that the SEC just added two of the top six brands in college football -- how can the Big Ten ever start competing on the field? And how long will it be before even the people in Big Ten country will come to admit that they are playing second fiddle?
....

That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Yeah, that's the really interesting part. The SEC sets out to dominate any sport it hosts; the Big Ten has different goals.

In addition to football, the SEC has dominant programs from top to near bottom in baseball and softball. And based on the coaching hires the league has done in mens basketball over the past decade (Bruce Pearl, Buzz Williams, Rick Barnes, and even Nate Oates) they aren't sleeping on hoops either.

The Big Ten has bigger schools, more alumni, and -- for now at least -- bigger populations. At some point, though, the midwest will actually wake up to the fact that the Big Ten has only won three national titles in football since the Nixon administration, and hasn't won a basketball title since Daniel Radcliff was being cast as Harry Potter.

Most of the time they're just playing for second place.

(09-30-2022 12:38 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:19 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 10:30 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  That's why the Big Ten intends to poach schools from the ACC. It needs members who can beat the SEC.

Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Playing devil's advocate... If the B1G decides it wants to put a dent into the SEC's prowess on the field and recruiting turf, it will have to go big. It won't be able to just cherry pick UNC and FSU. It'll have to be willing to take some teams that it otherwise wouldn't want in order to sweeten the pot. And resolve the intra-state political issues in NC and VA. It's easy to say that the B1G will never take all of these schools. Fair enough and maybe they won't. But the B1G will then have to accept that the SEC will likely pick off the best brands from this group plus Clemson. And then the SEC will be the undisputed king forevermore, if there was ever any doubt.

UVA
VT
UNC
Duke
NCSU
GT
FSU
Miami/Clemson

Only the last 2 are essential, and oddly Ga Tech. The SEC makes no money in Virginia and North Carolina now. Ga Tech has only 15% of Georgia viewers. But is a very strong #2 in Atlanta.

The SEC and ACC make solid money in Florida because ESPN holds all of those rights.

Only those 3 give you Deep South recruiting and damage the SEC revenue base.

The SEC only has to ask to have two of them. Miami would likely make all 3 if asked, but I'm just not as sure about them. Why FSU and Tech? Fan base and desire of regional play.

If the B1G only invited GT and Miami (I don't see them inviting Clemson), I would imagine those schools would think "They're only inviting us to use our locations. Will it be worth being outposts in the long haul?" I think it would be a very odd arrangement and wouldn't have much consistent impact on the SEC.

It wouldn't have any impact at all. As bad as those schools have been on the field in the ACC, they would be at least as bad in the B1G. They would just transition from losing to Duke/Wake to losing to Iowa/Illinois.

It would be better for those schools in that they'd be getting a huge revenues boost, but they wouldn't get a huge boost everywhere else (attendance, concessions, donor gifts, etc) the way A&M did and the way that USCLA and OU/tx expect to.

I HOPE that the B1G gets so desperate that they decide that their best move is GT + Miami. They can add those 2 and dilute their revenues while we add major brands/market/further solidify the South with UNC/FSU/Clemson/ a Virginia school. Or, maybe...UNC/FSU/Clemson/ND. Everyone in the B1G would go out of their minds with that one.

(09-30-2022 01:17 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:33 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:10 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:02 AM)forphase1 Wrote:  Short answer is no, not very likely. Some of the built in advantages that the SEC enjoys are not going away (geography, recruiting, lack of pro competition, etc). I think the gap can be closed a bit, but actually catching them? No, I don't think so. The SEC has much more depth with 7 teams in the new SEC having won national championships since 2000 versus just 2 for the new Big10. The SEC is just so much deeper. In some years the 4th or 5th best SEC program would challenge for #1-2 in the Big10, while the opposite is rarely true. I don't see that substantially changing, though I expect the gap to close a bit as power/recruiting consolidates between the P2.

There are built in advantages, but there are also advantages that aren't built in.

The SEC has been vastly outspending the Big 10 on coaches and assistant coaches in football, especially the middle schools in each conference.

Michigan St would like a word with you on the spending on coaches point. But that was just this past off season, and overall you're right.

It's hubris to think that just b/c we've won 12/16 National Titles that this will continue indefinitely. Much more likely is that the B1G and others take advantage of the new transfer and NIL rules, or lack thereof, to become more competitive long term.

I remember reading an article on it 5 years or so ago. I think the Big 10 was well behind the Big 12 as well on assistant's salaries. Ohio St. has been competitive in salaries, but most of the conference has not.

And I really don’t think that Mel Tucker is a good coach. His record as a head coach is 20-16, and after this year he might have 3 losing seasons in 4 years as a head coach. He got a big salary because of one season where his team’s rankings in analytical systems (FPI, SP+) really wasn’t as good as their won-loss record indicated.

Michigan State will probably want to fire him after about five years, but I don’t know how the hell they’ll be able to afford to do so.

Michigan St can afford to hire a new coach with the same salary every 3 years as long as they keep getting $75m/yr from their Conference. Now that the genie is out of the bottle, we're going to see a significant escalation of coaching salaries in the coming years. If Tucker is barely above .500 and makes $9m a year, how much is Dabo or Kirby really worth? $15m? 20m? I'd say that Saban is worth more than that on the open market today. How much would texas pay to get him right now? Or LSU? Or...gasp...Auburn? If I was an Auburn booster with really deep pockets, I'd offer Saban $20m + per year and see if he considers it.

That Tucker deal is going to age really well I think, even though he probably doesn't last through the end of it.

(09-30-2022 03:05 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:38 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 12:19 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(09-30-2022 11:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Except they won't take Clemson and won't get FSU. So, who else is there which qualifies as an occasional slayer of SEC schools? Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, or used to be SEC Georgia Tech?

Playing devil's advocate... If the B1G decides it wants to put a dent into the SEC's prowess on the field and recruiting turf, it will have to go big. It won't be able to just cherry pick UNC and FSU. It'll have to be willing to take some teams that it otherwise wouldn't want in order to sweeten the pot. And resolve the intra-state political issues in NC and VA. It's easy to say that the B1G will never take all of these schools. Fair enough and maybe they won't. But the B1G will then have to accept that the SEC will likely pick off the best brands from this group plus Clemson. And then the SEC will be the undisputed king forevermore, if there was ever any doubt.

UVA
VT
UNC
Duke
NCSU
GT
FSU
Miami/Clemson

Only the last 2 are essential, and oddly Ga Tech. The SEC makes no money in Virginia and North Carolina now. Ga Tech has only 15% of Georgia viewers. But is a very strong #2 in Atlanta.

The SEC and ACC make solid money in Florida because ESPN holds all of those rights.

Only those 3 give you Deep South recruiting and damage the SEC revenue base.

The SEC only has to ask to have two of them. Miami would likely make all 3 if asked, but I'm just not as sure about them. Why FSU and Tech? Fan base and desire of regional play.

If the B1G only invited GT and Miami (I don't see them inviting Clemson), I would imagine those schools would think "They're only inviting us to use our locations. Will it be worth being outposts in the long haul?" I think it would be a very odd arrangement and wouldn't have much consistent impact on the SEC.

It wouldn't have any impact at all. As bad as those schools have been on the field in the ACC, they would be at least as bad in the B1G. They would just transition from losing to Duke/Wake to losing to Iowa/Illinois.

It would be better for those schools in that they'd be getting a huge revenues boost, but they wouldn't get a huge boost everywhere else (attendance, concessions, donor gifts, etc) the way A&M did and the way that USCLA and OU/tx expect to.

I HOPE that the B1G gets so desperate that they decide that their best move is GT + Miami. They can add those 2 and dilute their revenues while we add major brands/market/further solidify the South with UNC/FSU/Clemson/ a Virginia school. Or, maybe...UNC/FSU/Clemson/ND. Everyone in the B1G would go out of their minds with that one.

As I mentioned above, I think Florida's the move.

While I can see the B10 might be interested in some of the academically strong basketball schools from the ACC, really, the winning move is Florida.

And 3 seems to be the magic number.

So getting FSU and Miami, plus Florida (if they can), or GT if they can't, would seem to be the best next move.

And looking at everything - realignment is about more than money or success on the field, though both of those give "cover" to the decisions - I just think that Florida's next.

Texas, then California, then Texas again, then maybe California again (Stanford).

Florida's the next obvious state.

We may see other movement, but that's the "big next move".