(12-24-2023 01:35 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  I have heard that the SEC would take FSU and Clemson. Interest in Miami is rather meh. Obviously, Notre Dame is the big prize but likely would go to the B1G if they decide to stop being indy. UNC and Virgina would likely be other targets of the B1G

I don't see the SEC or the B1G wanting to expand to 20. If anything, both conferences would like to replace their weaker programs with stronger ones. At some point we are going to see relegation out of the P2 down to less than 40 schools left. I think the number will be closer to 30 than 40. 32 works for the NFL.

I believe the ACC survives the loss of 4 members and backfills. If they want to support Calford then they would need to look west. But, once the final realignment happens we will see a return to regional conferences for those who don't make the P2 cut.

bolded - Though there are benefits to having a private school in a conference (as others have noted), I could see how some might think that there could be perceived benefits to a "swap" of Vanderbilt and FSU.

AAU school to the ACC, and a football-strong school to the SEC.

Or even a 3 for 1, to take the SEC to 18: FSU, Clemson, and Louisville, for Vanderbilt.

3 non-AAU, football schools, traded for 1 AAU school.

Leaves room for the ACC to backfill with USF and Tulane.

But for this to happen, I think Vanderbilt would need some sort of payoff, and long-term SEC scheduling agreements.

Yes, it doesn't address the NC question, but I think if the above was done, the NC question could be punted to the next media deal, since they have less of a motive to move (money is less of an issue to them, and due to all of their in-conference rivals).

(12-24-2023 07:44 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(12-24-2023 01:35 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  I have heard that the SEC would take FSU and Clemson. Interest in Miami is rather meh. Obviously, Notre Dame is the big prize but likely would go to the B1G if they decide to stop being indy. UNC and Virgina would likely be other targets of the B1G

I don't see the SEC or the B1G wanting to expand to 20. If anything, both conferences would like to replace their weaker programs with stronger ones. At some point we are going to see relegation out of the P2 down to less than 40 schools left. I think the number will be closer to 30 than 40. 32 works for the NFL.

I believe the ACC survives the loss of 4 members and backfills. If they want to support Calford then they would need to look west. But, once the final realignment happens we will see a return to regional conferences for those who don't make the P2 cut.

Vandy and Northwestern will fight relegation tooth & nail, IMO. Agree with everything else.

Stanford and Cal didn't want to be relegated either. Academically, they are bigger prizes than Northwestern and Vandy. Yeah, they are in the ACC but not getting what others are getting with travel that is not sustainable. Stanford can afford it, but they are putting a huge strain on the Olympic student athletes. And at Stanford, you are a student first. If it wasn't for SMU buying the three's invitation Calford would likely have to go indy in FB because there is no way they will be in a conference with Fresno and Boise. Hell, Cal was the only member of the PAC10 against adding SDSU.

(12-24-2023 05:18 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(12-24-2023 03:05 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here’s an M1 divided into 5 regional pods:

West: Cal, Stanford, Utah, BYU, Arizona, Arizona St (6)
Central: Colorado, Oklahoma St, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St (5)
Southwest: TCU, SMU, Texas Tech, Houston, Baylor (5)
East: BC, ‘Cuse, Pitt, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville (6)
Southeast: VT, UVA, Duke, WF, GT, UCF (6)

No to BYU.
No to SMU
No To Baylor
Boston College will wind up in the AAC.
Syracuse to the AAC
Pittsburgh could find themselves into the Big 10. Big 10 have eyes on 6 of the ACC schools. Pitt, Georgia Tech, FSU, Virginia, UNC and Notre Dame.
Duke is not wanted. They may wind up going indy and put themselves in the Big East for other sports.
Wake Forest to the AAC.

I think you're incorrect in your analysis about Duke (and Miami for that matter).

I think Pitt only gets a Big10 invite, if the SEC manages to scoop up everything else.

And I would be very surprised if BC and ND didn't have an immediate home in the BigEast. Probably Syracuse too.

(12-24-2023 08:02 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-24-2023 01:35 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  I have heard that the SEC would take FSU and Clemson. Interest in Miami is rather meh. Obviously, Notre Dame is the big prize but likely would go to the B1G if they decide to stop being indy. UNC and Virgina would likely be other targets of the B1G

I don't see the SEC or the B1G wanting to expand to 20. If anything, both conferences would like to replace their weaker programs with stronger ones. At some point we are going to see relegation out of the P2 down to less than 40 schools left. I think the number will be closer to 30 than 40. 32 works for the NFL.

I believe the ACC survives the loss of 4 members and backfills. If they want to support Calford then they would need to look west. But, once the final realignment happens we will see a return to regional conferences for those who don't make the P2 cut.

bolded - Though there are benefits to having a private school in a conference (as others have noted), I could see how some might think that there could be perceived benefits to a "swap" of Vanderbilt and FSU.

AAU school to the ACC, and a football-strong school to the SEC.

Or even a 3 for 1, to take the SEC to 18: FSU, Clemson, and Louisville, for Vanderbilt.

3 non-AAU, football schools, traded for 1 AAU school.

Leaves room for the ACC to backfill with USF and Tulane.

But for this to happen, I think Vanderbilt would need some sort of payoff, and long-term SEC scheduling agreements.

Yes, it doesn't address the NC question, but I think if the above was done, the NC question could be punted to the next media deal, since they have less of a motive to move (money is less of an issue to them, and due to all of their in-conference rivals).

I see 3 potential problems, Skyhawk:

A. Vandy has not yet determined if they are going to be in the P2 long-term or not. Notice I said "long-term;" in order to be in the P2 long-term, Vandy will need to commit to pay for play in football as well as basketball, although, I am sure that the SEC might be willing to reconsider its stance on olympic sports only members, given Vandy's long history with the
SEC.

B. While "A" could force Vandy into the ACC, it is far from a sure thing, IMO. I have seen Notre Dame pull off some absolutely incredible moves for a private school-Vandy might have some tricks up its sleeve as well. At any rate, Vandy is not going to "volunteer" for the ACC

C. Vandy is a charter member of the SEC. It is extremely rare for a charter member to get the boot, although that did happen to Louisville once.

(12-24-2023 05:55 PM)Utgrizfan Wrote:  I'm thinking it's going to shake out like this:

-Miami and FSU will go to the Big10. ESPN/Disney has pretty much made an enemy of the State of Florida and vice versa, going to the Fox led Big10 seems to be ideal.

-The SEC if it wants to get to 20 teams will go with UNC, NC-State, UVA and Clemson. My understanding is State politics prevent NC and NC-State from separating.

-The Big12 I feel will be able to step in and claim a few schools as it will look more attractive to some remaining members: Pitt, Louisville, GT and VT would be my picks.

-The remaining ACC schools will become a Private School heavy Conference with R1 and AAU schools:

BC, Wake, Syracuse, SMU, CAL, Stanford, Duke, *Tulane, *Rice, *USF, *Memphis, *UConn, *ND (Affiliate)

Bssed upon your analysis of what the remaining ACC looks like, I think it's more likely VT to the SEC than VA.

And GT is also more likely to stay regional in the ACC, than move to the B12, in that scenario. Pitt could go either way, but I think they'd stay in the ACC.

(12-24-2023 07:06 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-24-2023 01:41 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(12-23-2023 11:31 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  My analysis of the ACC members:

FSU: will be courted by both Big 10/SEC
Clemson: top companion option for FSU in SEC
UNC: has potential to be courted by both leagues, stands good odds of leaving ACC
Miami: solid contender to be paired with FSU in a Big 10 deal, added by Big 10 in lieu of FSU, or could tag along to SEC in big 4+ expansion
ND: will be courted by Big 10, ESPN will look for ways to keep them Indy and within Mickey’s sphere of influence


NC St: possible tagalong to SEC with UNC in 4+ expansion
UVA: needs a big expansion by a P2 to be included
VT: needs a big SEC expansion to be included
Louisville: should be a school the SEC has interest in but for some reason isn’t
GT: needs either a 24-team SEC or ND to lobby for them in the Big 10

Pitt, Stanford, and Cal: slim hope for a future as a Big 10 filler school in a 24-team league
Duke: outlook is pretty dim
WF, BC, Syracuse, & SMU: no hope at all

I'll never understand why so many people just assume that FSU is a perfect B1G candidate but Clemson is not. From the snobby B1G President perspective, they're both Southern schools that move the needle financially but are lacking academically. Clemson gives them a solid presence across much of the Deep South, FSU gives them a solid presence across much of Florida. FSU averaged 5m viewers in my chat above, Clemson averaged 4.69m. Both would fit comfortably in the top half of the B1G. Neither is an actual State Flagship, though they're both very strong co-Flagships. More Michigan St than Michigan, right? Would the B1G Presidents invite Michigan St today if they weren't AAU? Maybe. If MSU was in South Carolina or Florida, they'd be more likely to do so.

Academically, Athletically, Geographically, FSU and Clemson are 2 sides of the same coin. If the B1G Presidents would take one, they'd take the other. It seems highly likely that the B1G office would love to have them both, but we've heard nothing from any actual B1G school sources. Their track record of inviting Athletically Superior but Academically Inferior schools is currently, well, nonexistent.

Because the Big 10 presidents are still academically minded. Florida St is on a trajectory to be AAU in the next decade. Clemson is not. This is why Clemson is not a candidate.

FOX, ESPN, NBC, CBS and ABC don't give a flying you know what about academics. OK, they won't admit that too loudly, but they look to be driving the bus. Clemson and FSU are targets for the SEC in the short term should someone find a way out of the ACC GOR. Were the B1G to feel the need to counter then they would look at UNC and Virginia. Of course, Notre Dame is the one both want but I see them staying independent until they have no choice but to join the P2 league when it is formed.

(12-24-2023 07:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-24-2023 03:05 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here’s an M1 divided into 5 regional pods:

West: Cal, Stanford, Utah, BYU, Arizona, Arizona St (6)
Central: Colorado, Oklahoma St, Kansas, Kansas St, Iowa St (5)
Southwest: TCU, SMU, Texas Tech, Houston, Baylor (5)
East: BC, ‘Cuse, Pitt, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville (6)
Southeast: VT, UVA, Duke, WF, GT, UCF (6)

I’ll take this a step further:

That first pod is the spiritual successor of the PAC 10/original WAC
“ “ Big 8
“ “ SWC
“ “ Big East
“ “ ACC

In essence, each pod represents a former power conference.

For scheduling, play your 5 pod mates (the 2 pods with 5 schools, SWC & Big 8, play an opponent from the other 5 member pods for their 5th game), and then everyone plays 1 school from each of the other pods (4 games) for a total of 9 games within the M mega league.

I'd like it better if you then split that conference in two.

A 12-member ACC/BigEast eastern conference, and a 16 member PAC/SWC/Big8 western conference

Leaves room in the east to add:

USF, UConn, Tulane, and Memphis (or Navy)

and of course ND as non-fb.

B1G - UNC, UVA, Miami possibly FSU if they waive there AAU requirement, UVA will come in at no full share like Oregon/UW, That's the only way imo, FOX is not paying full share for them if FOX wants them at all just like they rejected StanCal, much to everyone surprise who thought Stanford was shoo in for the B1G.FOX may say nyet to UVA.


.SEC- Really doesn't want to expand, hand me be forced to block B1G from being in the there backyard, still may not be able to block B1G, FSU will end up.with FOX, due to lawsuit fallout, there not going to.the SEC/ESPN. So who does the SEC invite and ESPN will pay for? After looking at all options they stand pat at 16.


B12- now, Yormark has got to be salivating a ESPN/ FOX co media rights partner so who are they willing to pay for to be in the B12? Is the question. Imo Clemson that's right Clemson in the B12,, in no particular order Pitt, Louisville, NCST, VT, Gtech, Miami if they don't end up in the B1G there not ever going to be in the SEC don't fit there profile. B12 affiliate with ND just like the ACC did all sports with the B,12 except FB. Go out on a branch and pick

1. Clemson
2. Miami/ if no B1G hen it will be Louisville
3. Pitt
4. Gtech
ND affiliated
The rest NCST, VT, if the media partners want them I think there's great chance they will at the right price


B12 gets a slight bump in revenue 5-7M

(11-28-2023 12:19 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Indiana's stadium/facilities are lightyears ahead of what they were 10-15 years ago, but that's tru

(12-08-2023 08:45 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-08-2023 08:28 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(12-08-2023 07:59 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-08-2023 07:49 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  [quote='Fighting Muskie' pid='19350948' dateline='1702005368']
Our southern sage hits it on all points.

I just wish the ACC would figure out that there’s no use fighting the inevitable. Let the schools who have a way out go. Backfill with the usual suspects—UConn, USF, Tulane, Memphis at partial shares and pocket the remaining dollars among the old guard schools who hang around. Ease into the next phase gracefully rather than dragging this mess out.

I think that's a decent solution.

But it takes strong leadership "somewhere" to get things like that done.

And I'm not necessarily dropping this in Phillips' direction (or ESPN's for that matter) - good, creative, smart, effective, strong, leadership can potentially come from anywhere.

But right now, it seems the various decision-makers are acting at cross-purposes.

Well Skyhawk what is the profile of the average college president when it comes to business matters?

1. They aren't good businessmen and women for the most part. They are academicians who are accustomed to apportionments from their states and to COLAs for their raises. The build budgets to fall just short to assist with demands for increased apportionments next year.

2. They are politically aware to the point that they are not always practical.

3. They rely on information compiled by others and the evaluations of those compiling it. Data is great. Applying it in real time to your situation is a rare gift even in business, and again these are not businesspeople.

4. They are not risk takers; they are risk adverse. Therefore, proactive measures in real time scare the hell out them. You do not want the average college president leading you into battle. You would sit in a foxhole staring at the enemies advance and your leadership would be paralyzed to have to make a decision in a fluid situation. Being the decisive voice in a perilous situation is not what career minded bureaucrats do well.

These are the reasons Muskie's desire isn't likely. The desire is realistic and has merit and logic. But those in charge of making such decisions are the least capable group of doing it.

sigh. the world of "if only"...

As you, know, I've been very disappointed for years now, that the ACC has been seemingly sitting on their hands.

But then we see things like: Swarbrick's not-very-subtle comments about Tallahassee, or the so-called M7, or the vote on adding the PAC refugees; and we can see "something" has to be going on behind the scenes.

Is it the indeciveness you layout above? maybe, but I really have a hard time believing that everyone falls into those categories.

Sad to say, I think it's like most things that involve large groups of people - "follow the money".

With everything else we've seen, it's kinda difficult not to place this all at espn's feet. With the ACC's, and the ACC's schools' various leaderships being crushed by the wheel of future money.

Apparently, it isn't Money that's killing college sports, but rather, Big Money is.

You are wrong. It's not Big Money killing college sports, it is the "Fear" of losing revenue that is driving movement. Texas and Oklahoma have plenty of money, particularly Texas. Why did they move? They will publicly say to maintain the highest level of competition and there is some truth in that. But it was mostly to set themselves apart from the schools around them at a time in which we will enter declining enrollment. The exposure in the news for the moves, and later in association with other top brands in the favored sports will keep their names and profiles set apart when the low birth rate generation starts college.

I have spoken for 10 years or longer here about the coming downsizing in higher education. It is well underway with the numerous closings of small private schools and the mergers of some smaller state schools under the wing of a larger school.

It is not Big Money driving anything. Big Money made status quo possible for years. it is the fear of not being positioned to attract students and keep "Big" money that has the movement happening.

The courts could have ruled at any time about things like Alston. Why did they wait until now? In part because the case was there to be sure, but also because nobody in higher education wants to be responsible for downsizing and they also don't want to be responsible for abandoning old associations. All of this gives great cover for higher ed to downsize and consolidate. It also gives states an opportunity to downsize spending on multiple duplications of FBS football where the majority of schools in a state are subsidized well in excess of 25% of the total athletic budget, many above 50% and some even higher than that. And what for? Egos mostly. Yet while states are scrambling for revenue increases (meaning more taxes to meet the necessities in budgets) it is politically challenging to cut any of these athletic programs let alone whole schools.

Again, the court rulings have the ball rolling on all of it. This whole consolidation of football and basketball schools into a smaller group with the excuse of we have to make more because we now have to pay players. Is the perfect excuse for politicians and academicians everywhere to point to and say "We didn't want this, but we have no choice!"

So here we are. And it is just the tip of what will follow as demographics and tax generated revenue tightens. And automation and job skills play into that equation as well.

The SEC not really wanting to expand is only a partial truth. They whole truth is that the SEC has been prepared to expand to defend its hold over the advertising and branding of Southeastern Football since 1991 when they first developed 2 plans for expansion. The first was for the acquisition of the schools they felt would build and add value to the SEC. While they wound up adding only Arkansas and South Carolina the original 6 targets to reach 16 members were: Arkansas, Clemson, Florida State, Oklahoma (as a silent partner of Texas at the time), Texas, and Texas A&M. Here we are 31 years later, and they have 4 of them in hand, with South Carolina replacing Clemson and Missouri instead of Florida State.

It is a serious error in judgment to believe that the SEC will simply sit idly by and lose some of its advertising revenue from the Southeast by allowing the Big 10 to expand into the region. That's not happening!

Whether Florida State is too wound around the cord to join the SEC and would prefer the Big 10 is a matter of conjecture, but one I readily admit could be true. I don't know. But I do know the SEC for over a decade has had a scheduling problem in house with more member schools wanting games in the State of Florida and that with the Gators in the Eastern Division where they were committed to 6 conference games that meant opportunities for the schools in the Western division were rare in an 8-game conference schedule. Now that the expansion to 16 doesn't include additional Florida schools the priority in the next expansion will be to obtain one. Florida State has the greatest market reach in the state behind Florida and would be within the easiest driving distance. Miami however would place the SEC in an area of the state where their reach isn't nearly as strong. Much of FSU's footprint resides inside the Gator's footprint. USF has a great location, but just hasn't developed enough yet.

The SEC will make a push to get into North Carolina and would quite likely be willing to take a school of UNC's choice to land them. The University System of North Carolina which overseas state schools would no doubt prefer that school be N.C. State. UNC may prefer Duke, they did in 2011 when they spoke with the SEC, but that could have changed. But does UNC really want to move?

The SEC could/would be content with either of the Virginia schools for reach into a market of 9 million plus. But do they want to move?

There are good arguments to made for expansion to 18, 20, or 24. And those arguments will be controlled by Network demand for inventory of games available to the number of broadcast windows required for their weekend scheduling and the needs of both OTA networks with a piece of the rights and cable channels, plus conference Networks.

18 is enough if you still have the Big 12 and ACC to fill in the off-day broadcasts and late nighttime slots. If not 20 would be the minimum need with 24 being likelier. It won't be about who adds revenue value, but who can draw eyes. And at that number, while basketball is not relevant to the cash cow that will be the CFP, which should earn FOX and ESPN each over 3/4 of a billion a year, they will be worth it when any breakaway upper tier decides to host its own hoops tournament for those conferences and a few basketball only conferences which may emerge with the breakaway. That would be worth another half billion each to the networks.

I would not rule out hoops first additions to any of these conferences, particularly the ones not known for being strong hoops conferences now.

The disposition of FSU could go either way. The ability of the SEC to compromise a bit more means UNC and a companion are more likely than not, but only if expansion goes beyond 18.

Should FSU negotiate its way out of the ACC it is even conceivable that they are the only one to move from the ACC which will reload with USF. If their destination is the SEC and the SEC picks up another to move to 18, the Big 10 may be the one to stand pat for now at their 18. If they choose the Big 10 and the Big 10 picks up a companion for them, the SEC would be free to make some solid offers on the rest. Virginia and Virginia Tech in a state of 9 million. North Carolina and North Carolina State in state of 11 million. Clemson for branding. Possibly Miami, possibly Duke, or possibly all plus Kansas.

My point is they are quite prepared to do what is necessary. The travel would be better for the schools involved, the sports like softball, baseball, and women's gymnastics would be much better suited in the SEC, and the fan interests of both align.

Whatever the aspirations of the fans are here, Sankey is quite prepared to secure the region, and the advertising revenue interests for the SEC are issues for ESPN as well. And for the uninformed here who think that ESPN is strapped they were still Disney's top earning holding last year earning over 2 billion in profits. They'll protect their own interests, and their big interests are shared with FOX, and it's called the CFP. Consolidation helps them group the schools they want into the two bestselling brands. FOX's marketing strategy would be better served by Miami than FSU.

There are no safe bets either way. It just depends on the number of schools the networks want in the Big 10 and SEC and those schools will need to fit within the conference preferences of each conference. Any of them could go either way, if they want to go. And it is the want to go part that people here are overestimating. Florida State wants to go. Maybe, and I mean maybe, Clemson does or Miami. I wouldn't bet on any of the rest either way if only 1 or 2 leave.

Merry Christmas to all!

I think FSU would be willing to pay the ACC even more money to ditch the SEC/ESPN. SEC truthers will soon get past the shock and into the denial phase.

The notion of Miami as an SEC team was always ridiculous, but I believe Sankey already had the backroom conversations and said “you go after girl A (FSU) and we’ll get girl A+ while singing Carolina Blues.” UNC’s tropical fruity colors fit the SEC better anyhow. I think it’ll be between Duke NCSU and Clemson for the 18th spot, but not all three, unless partial shares. UNC would likely just share some of the revenue with the NC system ala UCLA. I’d prefer Sankey deliver the kill shot once four schools leave, because I don’t see the ACC having P4 status once the first dominoes fall. P3 would suit the interests of the B1G/SEC much more. Plus, it opens the door for ND to clinch a bye in a 12-team playoff.

In think ESPN wants to protect Duke and Clemson. NCSU is more dead weight, but a VA school may not be possible. Duke NCSU could get partial shares for the first TV cycle.