(04-23-2017 12:15 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 09:37 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 07:41 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-22-2017 10:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-22-2017 09:21 AM)XLance Wrote:  Realignment moves up to this point make some sense and benefited the conferences. Moving forward, the moves that will be made, will benefit the payers (ESPN & FOX) the most (what JR calls content). Those moves make not make sense in a fans view of what he feels like his conference looks like.
Texas to the ACC is one such move, Kansas in the SEC would be another. The areas where the ESPN and FOX properties intersect are the most critical. Which is why the SEC's taking Missouri was such a brilliant move, when another Texas school for market penetration was called for. That Missouri "block" is what has stymied the entire process, and is the reason that we may not see things finalized until the Big 12 GOR's are closer to ending.

Missouri was an ESPN sponsored move to be sure. They suggested it. It had an orchestrated campaign in the media behind it, and it was done as you suggest as a a blocking maneuver, but making that move was not important to the SEC. It was important to the network which made it valuable to the SEC. It was also pushed our way in belief that it was necessary to complete a larger deal that involved our real target, Oklahoma.

Oklahoma is in an interesting position.
They have seen what has happened to Nebraska after being cut off from Texas and having to increase travel, but they don't really feel any cultural pull to the SEC. But they could (maybe) bring OSU with them if they wen't to the SEC. The ACC is not an option (even with Texas) and the PAC would probably require Texas to complete a deal.
At this point politics keeps them tied to the 'Pokes and they are dependent on Texas for the rest.....and ESPN holds Texas' leash.
Meanwhile the SEC really needs at last one other Big 8 school to keep Missouri company and one more Texas school for balance. The question then becomes do they trade Missouri to the B1G to be able to land Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and one more Texas school? Or do we all shed a few schools and move to a 6 X 12 alignment while we already have three access bowls?

X, the shedding of some schools may one day happen, but that cart is way before the horse in your thinking. We will grow much larger, time will pass, and some schools will distant themselves from others within their own larger conferences and eventually some schools will be shed. But that process won't be the same as say a misplaced school or two wanting a final move. But there will be few of those and leaving behind the financial security that has become the SEC will make it very hard on any of ours to make that move. The money is too good, the security too great, and the liability for the decision makers too obvious.

We will not see conferences of 12 again for a long long time. Anyone clinging to that hope will be inevitably disappointed. Anyone past 25 will likely never see it. We are essentially going to have leagues first. The economic crunch will have to be dealt with. Duplicated conference overhead will be eliminated, duplicated conference networks will be too, and cost effective strategies all point to the advancement of even more regional divisions, and more divisions within larger constructs so that the overhead that still remains is broken up and shared by as many as possible.

It is highly likely that we see conferences of 32 to 36 schools and then just two of them. And the shedding to which you refer will occur when those do eventually break up and form conferences of 10 once again. So the upper tier will eventually move from about 72 schools to 60 and then those conferences will consolidate again but will shed more schools in the process of consolidation and we will wind up with two conferences of about 24 each. Those will be the new upper tier and things will likely stay that way for quite some time if our country and culture are still viable.

JR, one must plan ahead, establish long term goals and work toward them.
For instance if we indeed end up with 72 in two or three leagues does that mean that money is not as important in the future as you make it out to be today? How long will it take to pare down from 72 to 48. Football may not be relevant in 50 years what will take it's place in the sports broadcasting business to generate income for the fab 48? And how will you tell a charter member of your conference that they just can't cut it anymore and have to leave?
Will the 48 still be able to stay in the NCAA, because the smaller schools may continue to impose restrictions on the larger to help themselves remain competitive. I would think we will see further scholarship reductions if stipends are paid to players at the highest level. Who would govern the 48 if they left the NCAA? These things need to be looked at now and not after we reach 72 (if that indeed comes to pass).

I used 72 as a hypothetical especially if some intermediate guarantees are made to those left behind when one of the P5 conferences is pieced out. Football may not be going anywhere, and more importantly even if it does it will still be 30 to 40 years away. What they do in 50 years will be their decision, but whatever is chosen it will be built on the back of football revenue amassed by the most successful schools. If the SEC ever gives up football they will become just as fanatical about whatever it is they choose as a replacement. These next 20 years are going to determine the schools with the biggest sports war chest going into the future beyond that.

And if you had read me carefully enough you would have seen that I said the shedding would occur with the distant future's move to smaller conferences. They won't be asked to leave the mega-conference, they just won't be invited into the smaller ones that ensue. I was particular about taking the politics of such into account before I posted.

We are in the first stages of a paring down of higher education period. State Flagships grouped in this last round of realignment, as I've posted before, because they are positioning themselves, and segregating themselves from some of those who will be downsized, or have their missions altered by state disbursements.

The are also regrouping for athletic revenue enhancements since this is one of few revenue streams that may yet be increased.

When we move to a more exclusive upper tier grouping it sure as hell won't be in the NCAA which functions like the socialist self serving confiscatory agency that it is. The Big guys aren't going to be bleeding funds to prop up the agency or those whose votes its buys.

We keep saying more regional and local for the fans, but you surely don't get that with a league of 36 teams and it's always a good idea for FOX of ESPN to deal with smaller entities to keep their overhead down rather than deal with a stronger bloc.

I still like the 12 & 5 x 11.
If ESPN can get the exclusive rights to the Big 12 and FOX can get an interest in the PAC we can solve the unsolvable.

PAC-remains as is
SEC-cedes Missouri and Arkansas to the Big 12, and South Carolina to the ACC
ACC-cedes Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville to the NEW conference along with Notre Dame.
B1G-cedes Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland
New Conference picks up West Virginia from the Big 12 and picks up Cincinnati and Temple/UConn to get to 11 (personally I would take Temple for "market") or since the PAC has 12 teams, maybe the NEW conference can have 12.

Since ESPN gets the Big 12 it's only fair that FOX gets the new conference.

Maryland, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn State, Rutgers, UConn and Temple
Ohio State, Mich., MSU, Ind, Ill. Pur.,NW, Wisc, Minn, Iowa, Neb.
Wash, WSU, Ore, OSU, Stan., Cal., USC, UCLA, Ariz ASU, Colo. Utah.

Fla, Ga, KY, Tenn, Vandy, Ala, Aub, Miss, Miss St, A&M, LSU.
UVa, VT, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Duke, Clem, SC, FSU, Miami, GT.
Texas, Baylor, TCU, TT, Ark, Missouri, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU.

There are six conferences wrapped into two leagues of 34 teams each.

(04-23-2017 02:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  We keep saying more regional and local for the fans, but you surely don't get that with a league of 36 teams and it's always a good idea for FOX of ESPN to deal with smaller entities to keep their overhead down rather than deal with a stronger bloc.

I still like the 12 & 5 x 11.
If ESPN can get the exclusive rights to the Big 12 and FOX can get an interest in the PAC we can solve the unsolvable.

PAC-remains as is
SEC-cedes Missouri and Arkansas to the Big 12, and South Carolina to the ACC
ACC-cedes Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville to the NEW conference along with Notre Dame.
B1G-cedes Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland
New Conference picks up West Virginia from the Big 12 and picks up Cincinnati and Temple/UConn to get to 11 (personally I would take Temple for "market")

Since ESPN gets the Big 12 it's only fair that FOX gets the new conference.

Maryland, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn State, Rutgers and Temple
Ohio State, Mich., MSU, Ind, Ill. Pur.,NW, Wisc, Minn, Iowa, Neb.
Wash, WSU, Ore, OSU, Stan., Cal., USC, UCLA, Ariz ASU, Colo. Utah.

Fla, Ga, KY, Tenn, Vandy, Ala, Aub, Miss, Miss St, A&M, LSU.
UVa, VT, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Duke, Clem, SC, FSU, Miami, GT.
Texas, Baylor, TCU, TT, Ark, Missouri, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU.

There are six conferences wrapped into two leagues..

That's not it all. You just don't want to admit that the divisions are how we become more regional and add to local appeal, but that the divisions can easily be part of a much larger conference and that both leverage, the elimination of duplicated expenses, and more local and regional participation can all be gained simultaneously. You don't want to admit it because it doesn't fit a model where North Carolina remains in control of its own conference to rule. It's very Bevoesque of you!

(04-23-2017 03:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 02:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  We keep saying more regional and local for the fans, but you surely don't get that with a league of 36 teams and it's always a good idea for FOX of ESPN to deal with smaller entities to keep their overhead down rather than deal with a stronger bloc.

I still like the 12 & 5 x 11.
If ESPN can get the exclusive rights to the Big 12 and FOX can get an interest in the PAC we can solve the unsolvable.

PAC-remains as is
SEC-cedes Missouri and Arkansas to the Big 12, and South Carolina to the ACC
ACC-cedes Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville to the NEW conference along with Notre Dame.
B1G-cedes Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland
New Conference picks up West Virginia from the Big 12 and picks up Cincinnati and Temple/UConn to get to 11 (personally I would take Temple for "market")

Since ESPN gets the Big 12 it's only fair that FOX gets the new conference.

Maryland, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn State, Rutgers and Temple
Ohio State, Mich., MSU, Ind, Ill. Pur.,NW, Wisc, Minn, Iowa, Neb.
Wash, WSU, Ore, OSU, Stan., Cal., USC, UCLA, Ariz ASU, Colo. Utah.

Fla, Ga, KY, Tenn, Vandy, Ala, Aub, Miss, Miss St, A&M, LSU.
UVa, VT, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Duke, Clem, SC, FSU, Miami, GT.
Texas, Baylor, TCU, TT, Ark, Missouri, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU.

There are six conferences wrapped into two leagues..

That's not it all. You just don't want to admit that the divisions are how we become more regional and add to local appeal, but that the divisions can easily be part of a much larger conference and that both leverage, the elimination of duplicated expenses, and more local and regional participation can all be gained simultaneously. You don't want to admit it because it doesn't fit a model where North Carolina remains in control of its own conference to rule. It's very Bevoesque of you!

And I would suggest that you don't like it because everything is not under the thumb of the SEC.
Touche'

(04-23-2017 03:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 02:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  We keep saying more regional and local for the fans, but you surely don't get that with a league of 36 teams and it's always a good idea for FOX of ESPN to deal with smaller entities to keep their overhead down rather than deal with a stronger bloc.

I still like the 12 & 5 x 11.
If ESPN can get the exclusive rights to the Big 12 and FOX can get an interest in the PAC we can solve the unsolvable.

PAC-remains as is
SEC-cedes Missouri and Arkansas to the Big 12, and South Carolina to the ACC
ACC-cedes Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville to the NEW conference along with Notre Dame.
B1G-cedes Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland
New Conference picks up West Virginia from the Big 12 and picks up Cincinnati and Temple/UConn to get to 11 (personally I would take Temple for "market")

Since ESPN gets the Big 12 it's only fair that FOX gets the new conference.

Maryland, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn State, Rutgers and Temple
Ohio State, Mich., MSU, Ind, Ill. Pur.,NW, Wisc, Minn, Iowa, Neb.
Wash, WSU, Ore, OSU, Stan., Cal., USC, UCLA, Ariz ASU, Colo. Utah.

Fla, Ga, KY, Tenn, Vandy, Ala, Aub, Miss, Miss St, A&M, LSU.
UVa, VT, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Duke, Clem, SC, FSU, Miami, GT.
Texas, Baylor, TCU, TT, Ark, Missouri, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU.

There are six conferences wrapped into two leagues..

That's not it all. You just don't want to admit that the divisions are how we become more regional and add to local appeal, but that the divisions can easily be part of a much larger conference and that both leverage, the elimination of duplicated expenses, and more local and regional participation can all be gained simultaneously. You don't want to admit it because it doesn't fit a model where North Carolina remains in control of its own conference to rule. It's very Bevoesque of you!

And I would suggest that you don't like it because everything is not under the thumb of the SEC.
Touche'

Never has everything been under the thumb of the SEC. But I'm just challenging anyone who thinks they are insulated from market forces. It's a business now and not a sleepy pass time for the local alums, so it will be conducted as a business. And in that world the SEC enjoys some advantages, as does the Big 10.

(04-23-2017 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 02:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  We keep saying more regional and local for the fans, but you surely don't get that with a league of 36 teams and it's always a good idea for FOX of ESPN to deal with smaller entities to keep their overhead down rather than deal with a stronger bloc.

I still like the 12 & 5 x 11.
If ESPN can get the exclusive rights to the Big 12 and FOX can get an interest in the PAC we can solve the unsolvable.

PAC-remains as is
SEC-cedes Missouri and Arkansas to the Big 12, and South Carolina to the ACC
ACC-cedes Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville to the NEW conference along with Notre Dame.
B1G-cedes Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland
New Conference picks up West Virginia from the Big 12 and picks up Cincinnati and Temple/UConn to get to 11 (personally I would take Temple for "market")

Since ESPN gets the Big 12 it's only fair that FOX gets the new conference.

Maryland, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn State, Rutgers and Temple
Ohio State, Mich., MSU, Ind, Ill. Pur.,NW, Wisc, Minn, Iowa, Neb.
Wash, WSU, Ore, OSU, Stan., Cal., USC, UCLA, Ariz ASU, Colo. Utah.

Fla, Ga, KY, Tenn, Vandy, Ala, Aub, Miss, Miss St, A&M, LSU.
UVa, VT, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Duke, Clem, SC, FSU, Miami, GT.
Texas, Baylor, TCU, TT, Ark, Missouri, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU.

There are six conferences wrapped into two leagues..

That's not it all. You just don't want to admit that the divisions are how we become more regional and add to local appeal, but that the divisions can easily be part of a much larger conference and that both leverage, the elimination of duplicated expenses, and more local and regional participation can all be gained simultaneously. You don't want to admit it because it doesn't fit a model where North Carolina remains in control of its own conference to rule. It's very Bevoesque of you!

And I would suggest that you don't like it because everything is not under the thumb of the SEC.
Touche'

Never has everything been under the thumb of the SEC. But I'm just challenging anyone who thinks they are insulated from market forces. It's a business now and not a sleepy pass time for the local alums, so it will be conducted as a business. And in that world the SEC enjoys some advantages, as does the Big 10.

They both have a Daddy.

(04-23-2017 04:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 02:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  We keep saying more regional and local for the fans, but you surely don't get that with a league of 36 teams and it's always a good idea for FOX of ESPN to deal with smaller entities to keep their overhead down rather than deal with a stronger bloc.

I still like the 12 & 5 x 11.
If ESPN can get the exclusive rights to the Big 12 and FOX can get an interest in the PAC we can solve the unsolvable.

PAC-remains as is
SEC-cedes Missouri and Arkansas to the Big 12, and South Carolina to the ACC
ACC-cedes Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt and Louisville to the NEW conference along with Notre Dame.
B1G-cedes Penn State, Rutgers and Maryland
New Conference picks up West Virginia from the Big 12 and picks up Cincinnati and Temple/UConn to get to 11 (personally I would take Temple for "market")

Since ESPN gets the Big 12 it's only fair that FOX gets the new conference.

Maryland, WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn State, Rutgers and Temple
Ohio State, Mich., MSU, Ind, Ill. Pur.,NW, Wisc, Minn, Iowa, Neb.
Wash, WSU, Ore, OSU, Stan., Cal., USC, UCLA, Ariz ASU, Colo. Utah.

Fla, Ga, KY, Tenn, Vandy, Ala, Aub, Miss, Miss St, A&M, LSU.
UVa, VT, UNC, NCSU, Wake, Duke, Clem, SC, FSU, Miami, GT.
Texas, Baylor, TCU, TT, Ark, Missouri, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU.

There are six conferences wrapped into two leagues..

That's not it all. You just don't want to admit that the divisions are how we become more regional and add to local appeal, but that the divisions can easily be part of a much larger conference and that both leverage, the elimination of duplicated expenses, and more local and regional participation can all be gained simultaneously. You don't want to admit it because it doesn't fit a model where North Carolina remains in control of its own conference to rule. It's very Bevoesque of you!

And I would suggest that you don't like it because everything is not under the thumb of the SEC.
Touche'

Never has everything been under the thumb of the SEC. But I'm just challenging anyone who thinks they are insulated from market forces. It's a business now and not a sleepy pass time for the local alums, so it will be conducted as a business. And in that world the SEC enjoys some advantages, as does the Big 10.

They both have a Daddy.

No, they both have a business consultant. And those guys will make the decisions that profit them as well. Skipper's allegiance can only go so far before either Disney or the shareholders make a change.

(04-23-2017 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  That's not it all. You just don't want to admit that the divisions are how we become more regional and add to local appeal, but that the divisions can easily be part of a much larger conference and that both leverage, the elimination of duplicated expenses, and more local and regional participation can all be gained simultaneously. You don't want to admit it because it doesn't fit a model where North Carolina remains in control of its own conference to rule. It's very Bevoesque of you!

And I would suggest that you don't like it because everything is not under the thumb of the SEC.
Touche'

Never has everything been under the thumb of the SEC. But I'm just challenging anyone who thinks they are insulated from market forces. It's a business now and not a sleepy pass time for the local alums, so it will be conducted as a business. And in that world the SEC enjoys some advantages, as does the Big 10.

They both have a Daddy.

No, they both have a business consultant. And those guys will make the decisions that profit them as well. Skipper's allegiance can only go so far before either Disney or the shareholders make a change.

Skipper will come out smelling like a rose, and the time is running short where you will be able to beat your income discrepancy drum.

(04-24-2017 07:40 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  And I would suggest that you don't like it because everything is not under the thumb of the SEC.
Touche'

Never has everything been under the thumb of the SEC. But I'm just challenging anyone who thinks they are insulated from market forces. It's a business now and not a sleepy pass time for the local alums, so it will be conducted as a business. And in that world the SEC enjoys some advantages, as does the Big 10.

They both have a Daddy.

No, they both have a business consultant. And those guys will make the decisions that profit them as well. Skipper's allegiance can only go so far before either Disney or the shareholders make a change.

Skipper will come out smelling like a rose, and the time is running short where you will be able to beat your income discrepancy drum.

X, ACC network or not, nothing will have magically changed overnight that improves your conference statistically. Your viewers aren't growing new habits overnight. Your venues will not magically jump in capacity, nor will they suddenly fill up should Jack's magic beans grow them. And if the ACC wasn't worth more than the SEC or Big 10 under the market model it sure won't be worth more under one based on actual viewers.

Furthermore, if Notre Dame does go all in with the ACC it will help you, but now only to 7/12th's of one major brand because that is what has not already been factored into your valuations. Notre Dame is the rough equivalent of Auburn in Revenue production. So they will bump your average attendance numbers and they will help your MEAN Gross Revenue and perhaps their biggest bump for you will be in their viewing numbers for football. But you will be lucky if their full inclusion NETS the ACC 2 million more per school.

I don't think your network is going to generate anywhere near what is projected. The components of success simply aren't there. We talk a lot about the disinterest in college sports on the West Coast but in truth the East Coast numbers are as bad. In truth the ACC only carries two states North Carolina and Duke, and are in a virtual tie in two others South Carolina and Florida. But Florida is a different animal. It takes two schools there to capture about 50% of the sports viewing market where it takes the SEC only one. So in Florida your yield per school is lower in Florida. But in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky your market share is in the minority. In Kentucky you are closer, but Tech doesn't even carry Atlanta and UGA dominates the rest of the state. Pitt just doesn't keep pace with Penn State. Syracuse is probably as good as you get in New York and Boston College when winning is okay but neither carry the kind of viewership that a college sports program would carry in your Mid-Atlantic or Southern States. So the numbers just aren't there.

Then there is content. Your basketball content is probably as good or better than anyone's. You have enough depth to generate more high content games between members but that's dominating a statistic that only accounts for 15% of the total revenue. Your football is substantially weaker. Florida State is your only national brand until N.D. is all in. Clemson is one of the strongest regional brands in the country right now, but they aren't a national brand. Miami and Virginia Tech are regional brands but have faded a great deal from their zeniths. Miami still has national brand capability but desperately need a couple of years in which they can contend to return to that status. Louisville has strong regional potential but even if they have a great year they still don't carry what other national brands might and that is even true regionally. The greatest upside for the ACC is with football but that's only true because it is your worst performing sector as a whole, national championship or no national championship. Since that about 80% of the total revenue this is why I doubt your ability to close that monetary gap. That's why in 2010-1 a deal that would have spiked your branding was the best avenue for closing that gap.

If Texas and Oklahoma go to other conferences the gap will never close. Texas could really help you, but only as a full member. Texas won't come alone. You will need to create a division for them and I don't see that happening even if you could afford to take 4 more current Big 12 friends of Texas.

Oklahoma would have no incentive to head to the ACC.

IMO the best you could do is to take N.D. all in and create a 5 school Western division for Texas. It's the only plan which would not utilize the SEC to accomplish it. Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State might be such a division. But the football is only helped here by Baylor (if they can remain in their present state of the program which may not be easy to do) and Kansas State (as long as Snyder stays). I don't think OU would want this so I didn't include their schools.

So forgive me, but if N.D. goes all in it helps. It helps with your stability and it helps you some with revenue. But the new ACCN is not going to be a game changer, or a major gap closer.

And should OU find their way into the SEC and Texas goes anywhere other than the ACC that gap will never be closed, will grow, and will remain the biggest threat to your future stability.

(04-24-2017 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:40 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Never has everything been under the thumb of the SEC. But I'm just challenging anyone who thinks they are insulated from market forces. It's a business now and not a sleepy pass time for the local alums, so it will be conducted as a business. And in that world the SEC enjoys some advantages, as does the Big 10.

They both have a Daddy.

No, they both have a business consultant. And those guys will make the decisions that profit them as well. Skipper's allegiance can only go so far before either Disney or the shareholders make a change.

Skipper will come out smelling like a rose, and the time is running short where you will be able to beat your income discrepancy drum.

X, ACC network or not, nothing will have magically changed overnight that improves your conference statistically. Your viewers aren't growing new habits overnight. Your venues will not magically jump in capacity, nor will they suddenly fill up should Jack's magic beans grow them. And if the ACC wasn't worth more than the SEC or Big 10 under the market model it sure won't be worth more under one based on actual viewers.

Furthermore, if Notre Dame does go all in with the ACC it will help you, but now only to 7/12th's of one major brand because that is what has not already been factored into your valuations. Notre Dame is the rough equivalent of Auburn in Revenue production. So they will bump your average attendance numbers and they will help your MEAN Gross Revenue and perhaps their biggest bump for you will be in their viewing numbers for football. But you will be lucky if their full inclusion NETS the ACC 2 million more per school.

I don't think your network is going to generate anywhere near what is projected. The components of success simply aren't there. We talk a lot about the disinterest in college sports on the West Coast but in truth the East Coast numbers are as bad. In truth the ACC only carries two states North Carolina and Duke, and are in a virtual tie in two others South Carolina and Florida. But Florida is a different animal. It takes two schools there to capture about 50% of the sports viewing market where it takes the SEC only one. So in Florida your yield per school is lower in Florida. But in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky your market share is in the minority. In Kentucky you are closer, but Tech doesn't even carry Atlanta and UGA dominates the rest of the state. Pitt just doesn't keep pace with Penn State. Syracuse is probably as good as you get in New York and Boston College when winning is okay but neither carry the kind of viewership that a college sports program would carry in your Mid-Atlantic or Southern States. So the numbers just aren't there.

Then there is content. Your basketball content is probably as good or better than anyone's. You have enough depth to generate more high content games between members but that's dominating a statistic that only accounts for 15% of the total revenue. Your football is substantially weaker. Florida State is your only national brand until N.D. is all in. Clemson is one of the strongest regional brands in the country right now, but they aren't a national brand. Miami and Virginia Tech are regional brands but have faded a great deal from their zeniths. Miami still has national brand capability but desperately need a couple of years in which they can contend to return to that status. Louisville has strong regional potential but even if they have a great year they still don't carry what other national brands might and that is even true regionally. The greatest upside for the ACC is with football but that's only true because it is your worst performing sector as a whole, national championship or no national championship. Since that about 80% of the total revenue this is why I doubt your ability to close that monetary gap. That's why in 2010-1 a deal that would have spiked your branding was the best avenue for closing that gap.

If Texas and Oklahoma go to other conferences the gap will never close. Texas could really help you, but only as a full member. Texas won't come alone. You will need to create a division for them and I don't see that happening even if you could afford to take 4 more current Big 12 friends of Texas.

Oklahoma would have no incentive to head to the ACC.

IMO the best you could do is to take N.D. all in and create a 5 school Western division for Texas. It's the only plan which would not utilize the SEC to accomplish it. Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State might be such a division. But the football is only helped here by Baylor (if they can remain in their present state of the program which may not be easy to do) and Kansas State (as long as Snyder stays). I don't think OU would want this so I didn't include their schools.

So forgive me, but if N.D. goes all in it helps. It helps with your stability and it helps you some with revenue. But the new ACCN is not going to be a game changer, or a major gap closer.

And should OU find their way into the SEC and Texas goes anywhere other than the ACC that gap will never be closed, will grow, and will remain the biggest threat to your future stability.

Thank the Lord for the Market model, because you don't have to have viewers in huge numbers, you just have to have huge numbers (which we have) and if Texas does join we'll pass your numbers in half of the time.

(04-24-2017 12:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:40 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  They both have a Daddy.

No, they both have a business consultant. And those guys will make the decisions that profit them as well. Skipper's allegiance can only go so far before either Disney or the shareholders make a change.

Skipper will come out smelling like a rose, and the time is running short where you will be able to beat your income discrepancy drum.

X, ACC network or not, nothing will have magically changed overnight that improves your conference statistically. Your viewers aren't growing new habits overnight. Your venues will not magically jump in capacity, nor will they suddenly fill up should Jack's magic beans grow them. And if the ACC wasn't worth more than the SEC or Big 10 under the market model it sure won't be worth more under one based on actual viewers.

Furthermore, if Notre Dame does go all in with the ACC it will help you, but now only to 7/12th's of one major brand because that is what has not already been factored into your valuations. Notre Dame is the rough equivalent of Auburn in Revenue production. So they will bump your average attendance numbers and they will help your MEAN Gross Revenue and perhaps their biggest bump for you will be in their viewing numbers for football. But you will be lucky if their full inclusion NETS the ACC 2 million more per school.

I don't think your network is going to generate anywhere near what is projected. The components of success simply aren't there. We talk a lot about the disinterest in college sports on the West Coast but in truth the East Coast numbers are as bad. In truth the ACC only carries two states North Carolina and Duke, and are in a virtual tie in two others South Carolina and Florida. But Florida is a different animal. It takes two schools there to capture about 50% of the sports viewing market where it takes the SEC only one. So in Florida your yield per school is lower in Florida. But in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky your market share is in the minority. In Kentucky you are closer, but Tech doesn't even carry Atlanta and UGA dominates the rest of the state. Pitt just doesn't keep pace with Penn State. Syracuse is probably as good as you get in New York and Boston College when winning is okay but neither carry the kind of viewership that a college sports program would carry in your Mid-Atlantic or Southern States. So the numbers just aren't there.

Then there is content. Your basketball content is probably as good or better than anyone's. You have enough depth to generate more high content games between members but that's dominating a statistic that only accounts for 15% of the total revenue. Your football is substantially weaker. Florida State is your only national brand until N.D. is all in. Clemson is one of the strongest regional brands in the country right now, but they aren't a national brand. Miami and Virginia Tech are regional brands but have faded a great deal from their zeniths. Miami still has national brand capability but desperately need a couple of years in which they can contend to return to that status. Louisville has strong regional potential but even if they have a great year they still don't carry what other national brands might and that is even true regionally. The greatest upside for the ACC is with football but that's only true because it is your worst performing sector as a whole, national championship or no national championship. Since that about 80% of the total revenue this is why I doubt your ability to close that monetary gap. That's why in 2010-1 a deal that would have spiked your branding was the best avenue for closing that gap.

If Texas and Oklahoma go to other conferences the gap will never close. Texas could really help you, but only as a full member. Texas won't come alone. You will need to create a division for them and I don't see that happening even if you could afford to take 4 more current Big 12 friends of Texas.

Oklahoma would have no incentive to head to the ACC.

IMO the best you could do is to take N.D. all in and create a 5 school Western division for Texas. It's the only plan which would not utilize the SEC to accomplish it. Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State might be such a division. But the football is only helped here by Baylor (if they can remain in their present state of the program which may not be easy to do) and Kansas State (as long as Snyder stays). I don't think OU would want this so I didn't include their schools.

So forgive me, but if N.D. goes all in it helps. It helps with your stability and it helps you some with revenue. But the new ACCN is not going to be a game changer, or a major gap closer.

And should OU find their way into the SEC and Texas goes anywhere other than the ACC that gap will never be closed, will grow, and will remain the biggest threat to your future stability.

Thank the Lord for the Market model, because you don't have to have viewers in huge numbers, you just have to have huge numbers (which we have) and if Texas does join we'll pass your numbers in half of the time.

Quite frankly I'm stunned that you would believe in that. It simply defies logic. So in the words of a general (Cornwallis) whose subordinate officer suggested that a defeat may yet be turned into victory, "You dream Sir!"

(04-24-2017 12:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:40 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  They both have a Daddy.

No, they both have a business consultant. And those guys will make the decisions that profit them as well. Skipper's allegiance can only go so far before either Disney or the shareholders make a change.

Skipper will come out smelling like a rose, and the time is running short where you will be able to beat your income discrepancy drum.

X, ACC network or not, nothing will have magically changed overnight that improves your conference statistically. Your viewers aren't growing new habits overnight. Your venues will not magically jump in capacity, nor will they suddenly fill up should Jack's magic beans grow them. And if the ACC wasn't worth more than the SEC or Big 10 under the market model it sure won't be worth more under one based on actual viewers.

Furthermore, if Notre Dame does go all in with the ACC it will help you, but now only to 7/12th's of one major brand because that is what has not already been factored into your valuations. Notre Dame is the rough equivalent of Auburn in Revenue production. So they will bump your average attendance numbers and they will help your MEAN Gross Revenue and perhaps their biggest bump for you will be in their viewing numbers for football. But you will be lucky if their full inclusion NETS the ACC 2 million more per school.

I don't think your network is going to generate anywhere near what is projected. The components of success simply aren't there. We talk a lot about the disinterest in college sports on the West Coast but in truth the East Coast numbers are as bad. In truth the ACC only carries two states North Carolina and Duke, and are in a virtual tie in two others South Carolina and Florida. But Florida is a different animal. It takes two schools there to capture about 50% of the sports viewing market where it takes the SEC only one. So in Florida your yield per school is lower in Florida. But in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky your market share is in the minority. In Kentucky you are closer, but Tech doesn't even carry Atlanta and UGA dominates the rest of the state. Pitt just doesn't keep pace with Penn State. Syracuse is probably as good as you get in New York and Boston College when winning is okay but neither carry the kind of viewership that a college sports program would carry in your Mid-Atlantic or Southern States. So the numbers just aren't there.

Then there is content. Your basketball content is probably as good or better than anyone's. You have enough depth to generate more high content games between members but that's dominating a statistic that only accounts for 15% of the total revenue. Your football is substantially weaker. Florida State is your only national brand until N.D. is all in. Clemson is one of the strongest regional brands in the country right now, but they aren't a national brand. Miami and Virginia Tech are regional brands but have faded a great deal from their zeniths. Miami still has national brand capability but desperately need a couple of years in which they can contend to return to that status. Louisville has strong regional potential but even if they have a great year they still don't carry what other national brands might and that is even true regionally. The greatest upside for the ACC is with football but that's only true because it is your worst performing sector as a whole, national championship or no national championship. Since that about 80% of the total revenue this is why I doubt your ability to close that monetary gap. That's why in 2010-1 a deal that would have spiked your branding was the best avenue for closing that gap.

If Texas and Oklahoma go to other conferences the gap will never close. Texas could really help you, but only as a full member. Texas won't come alone. You will need to create a division for them and I don't see that happening even if you could afford to take 4 more current Big 12 friends of Texas.

Oklahoma would have no incentive to head to the ACC.

IMO the best you could do is to take N.D. all in and create a 5 school Western division for Texas. It's the only plan which would not utilize the SEC to accomplish it. Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State might be such a division. But the football is only helped here by Baylor (if they can remain in their present state of the program which may not be easy to do) and Kansas State (as long as Snyder stays). I don't think OU would want this so I didn't include their schools.

So forgive me, but if N.D. goes all in it helps. It helps with your stability and it helps you some with revenue. But the new ACCN is not going to be a game changer, or a major gap closer.

And should OU find their way into the SEC and Texas goes anywhere other than the ACC that gap will never be closed, will grow, and will remain the biggest threat to your future stability.

Thank the Lord for the Market model, because you don't have to have viewers in huge numbers, you just have to have huge numbers (which we have) and if Texas does join we'll pass your numbers in half of the time.

So if the ACCN is ultimately more valuable than the SECN then why did it take so long for ESPN to commit to it? Shouldn't they have been on that project from day one as opposed to the SECN? Was Skipper so incompetent that he let slide a major revenue producer for the better part of a decade?

I mean, if it's all about the market model then that's the only conclusion that makes sense.

(04-24-2017 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:40 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-23-2017 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  No, they both have a business consultant. And those guys will make the decisions that profit them as well. Skipper's allegiance can only go so far before either Disney or the shareholders make a change.

Skipper will come out smelling like a rose, and the time is running short where you will be able to beat your income discrepancy drum.

X, ACC network or not, nothing will have magically changed overnight that improves your conference statistically. Your viewers aren't growing new habits overnight. Your venues will not magically jump in capacity, nor will they suddenly fill up should Jack's magic beans grow them. And if the ACC wasn't worth more than the SEC or Big 10 under the market model it sure won't be worth more under one based on actual viewers.

Furthermore, if Notre Dame does go all in with the ACC it will help you, but now only to 7/12th's of one major brand because that is what has not already been factored into your valuations. Notre Dame is the rough equivalent of Auburn in Revenue production. So they will bump your average attendance numbers and they will help your MEAN Gross Revenue and perhaps their biggest bump for you will be in their viewing numbers for football. But you will be lucky if their full inclusion NETS the ACC 2 million more per school.

I don't think your network is going to generate anywhere near what is projected. The components of success simply aren't there. We talk a lot about the disinterest in college sports on the West Coast but in truth the East Coast numbers are as bad. In truth the ACC only carries two states North Carolina and Duke, and are in a virtual tie in two others South Carolina and Florida. But Florida is a different animal. It takes two schools there to capture about 50% of the sports viewing market where it takes the SEC only one. So in Florida your yield per school is lower in Florida. But in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky your market share is in the minority. In Kentucky you are closer, but Tech doesn't even carry Atlanta and UGA dominates the rest of the state. Pitt just doesn't keep pace with Penn State. Syracuse is probably as good as you get in New York and Boston College when winning is okay but neither carry the kind of viewership that a college sports program would carry in your Mid-Atlantic or Southern States. So the numbers just aren't there.

Then there is content. Your basketball content is probably as good or better than anyone's. You have enough depth to generate more high content games between members but that's dominating a statistic that only accounts for 15% of the total revenue. Your football is substantially weaker. Florida State is your only national brand until N.D. is all in. Clemson is one of the strongest regional brands in the country right now, but they aren't a national brand. Miami and Virginia Tech are regional brands but have faded a great deal from their zeniths. Miami still has national brand capability but desperately need a couple of years in which they can contend to return to that status. Louisville has strong regional potential but even if they have a great year they still don't carry what other national brands might and that is even true regionally. The greatest upside for the ACC is with football but that's only true because it is your worst performing sector as a whole, national championship or no national championship. Since that about 80% of the total revenue this is why I doubt your ability to close that monetary gap. That's why in 2010-1 a deal that would have spiked your branding was the best avenue for closing that gap.

If Texas and Oklahoma go to other conferences the gap will never close. Texas could really help you, but only as a full member. Texas won't come alone. You will need to create a division for them and I don't see that happening even if you could afford to take 4 more current Big 12 friends of Texas.

Oklahoma would have no incentive to head to the ACC.

IMO the best you could do is to take N.D. all in and create a 5 school Western division for Texas. It's the only plan which would not utilize the SEC to accomplish it. Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State might be such a division. But the football is only helped here by Baylor (if they can remain in their present state of the program which may not be easy to do) and Kansas State (as long as Snyder stays). I don't think OU would want this so I didn't include their schools.

So forgive me, but if N.D. goes all in it helps. It helps with your stability and it helps you some with revenue. But the new ACCN is not going to be a game changer, or a major gap closer.

And should OU find their way into the SEC and Texas goes anywhere other than the ACC that gap will never be closed, will grow, and will remain the biggest threat to your future stability.

Thank the Lord for the Market model, because you don't have to have viewers in huge numbers, you just have to have huge numbers (which we have) and if Texas does join we'll pass your numbers in half of the time.

Quite frankly I'm stunned that you would believe in that. It simply defies logic. So in the words of a general (Cornwallis) whose subordinate officer suggested that a defeat may yet be turned into victory, "You dream Sir!"

Cornwallis held the field in Greensboro (the Battle of Guilford Courthouse) but :

Unwilling to the risk the destruction of his army, and realizing that he had inflicted massive casualties on the British, Greene withdrew his army to Troublesome Ironworks nearly fifteen miles away
The battered British army did not pursue. Although Cornwallis’s army held the field, the Americans had punished them severely. Twenty-seven percent of Cornwallis’s army lay dead or wounded on the field. The Foot Guards battalions, considered the finest troops in the entire British army, suffered fifty-six percent casualties, including nearly all of their officers.

After the battle, Cornwallis withdrew his army first to Ramsey’s Mill and then through southeastern North Carolina to the British base at Wilmington, where he resupplied his army. British Parliamentarian Charles James Fox told the House of Commons, “Another such victory would ruin the British army.” Fox’s assertion would be borne out in the following months. In late April 1781, Cornwallis marched north from Wilmington, focusing his strategy on Virginia instead of the entire South. Despite skirmishes at Swift Creek, Peacock Bridge, and Halifax, he and his men crossed into Virginia in mid-May. Five months later, Cornwallis surrendered his army to George Washington at the little seaside village of Yorktown, effectively ending major fighting in the southern colonies, and speeding along American victory in the war.

There is more than one way to skin a cat......or win a war

(04-24-2017 01:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 07:40 AM)XLance Wrote:  Skipper will come out smelling like a rose, and the time is running short where you will be able to beat your income discrepancy drum.

X, ACC network or not, nothing will have magically changed overnight that improves your conference statistically. Your viewers aren't growing new habits overnight. Your venues will not magically jump in capacity, nor will they suddenly fill up should Jack's magic beans grow them. And if the ACC wasn't worth more than the SEC or Big 10 under the market model it sure won't be worth more under one based on actual viewers.

Furthermore, if Notre Dame does go all in with the ACC it will help you, but now only to 7/12th's of one major brand because that is what has not already been factored into your valuations. Notre Dame is the rough equivalent of Auburn in Revenue production. So they will bump your average attendance numbers and they will help your MEAN Gross Revenue and perhaps their biggest bump for you will be in their viewing numbers for football. But you will be lucky if their full inclusion NETS the ACC 2 million more per school.

I don't think your network is going to generate anywhere near what is projected. The components of success simply aren't there. We talk a lot about the disinterest in college sports on the West Coast but in truth the East Coast numbers are as bad. In truth the ACC only carries two states North Carolina and Duke, and are in a virtual tie in two others South Carolina and Florida. But Florida is a different animal. It takes two schools there to capture about 50% of the sports viewing market where it takes the SEC only one. So in Florida your yield per school is lower in Florida. But in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky your market share is in the minority. In Kentucky you are closer, but Tech doesn't even carry Atlanta and UGA dominates the rest of the state. Pitt just doesn't keep pace with Penn State. Syracuse is probably as good as you get in New York and Boston College when winning is okay but neither carry the kind of viewership that a college sports program would carry in your Mid-Atlantic or Southern States. So the numbers just aren't there.

Then there is content. Your basketball content is probably as good or better than anyone's. You have enough depth to generate more high content games between members but that's dominating a statistic that only accounts for 15% of the total revenue. Your football is substantially weaker. Florida State is your only national brand until N.D. is all in. Clemson is one of the strongest regional brands in the country right now, but they aren't a national brand. Miami and Virginia Tech are regional brands but have faded a great deal from their zeniths. Miami still has national brand capability but desperately need a couple of years in which they can contend to return to that status. Louisville has strong regional potential but even if they have a great year they still don't carry what other national brands might and that is even true regionally. The greatest upside for the ACC is with football but that's only true because it is your worst performing sector as a whole, national championship or no national championship. Since that about 80% of the total revenue this is why I doubt your ability to close that monetary gap. That's why in 2010-1 a deal that would have spiked your branding was the best avenue for closing that gap.

If Texas and Oklahoma go to other conferences the gap will never close. Texas could really help you, but only as a full member. Texas won't come alone. You will need to create a division for them and I don't see that happening even if you could afford to take 4 more current Big 12 friends of Texas.

Oklahoma would have no incentive to head to the ACC.

IMO the best you could do is to take N.D. all in and create a 5 school Western division for Texas. It's the only plan which would not utilize the SEC to accomplish it. Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State might be such a division. But the football is only helped here by Baylor (if they can remain in their present state of the program which may not be easy to do) and Kansas State (as long as Snyder stays). I don't think OU would want this so I didn't include their schools.

So forgive me, but if N.D. goes all in it helps. It helps with your stability and it helps you some with revenue. But the new ACCN is not going to be a game changer, or a major gap closer.

And should OU find their way into the SEC and Texas goes anywhere other than the ACC that gap will never be closed, will grow, and will remain the biggest threat to your future stability.

Thank the Lord for the Market model, because you don't have to have viewers in huge numbers, you just have to have huge numbers (which we have) and if Texas does join we'll pass your numbers in half of the time.

Quite frankly I'm stunned that you would believe in that. It simply defies logic. So in the words of a general (Cornwallis) whose subordinate officer suggested that a defeat may yet be turned into victory, "You dream Sir!"

Cornwallis held the field in Greensboro (the Battle of Guilford Courthouse) but :

Unwilling to the risk the destruction of his army, and realizing that he had inflicted massive casualties on the British, Greene withdrew his army to Troublesome Ironworks nearly fifteen miles away
The battered British army did not pursue. Although Cornwallis’s army held the field, the Americans had punished them severely. Twenty-seven percent of Cornwallis’s army lay dead or wounded on the field. The Foot Guards battalions, considered the finest troops in the entire British army, suffered fifty-six percent casualties, including nearly all of their officers.

After the battle, Cornwallis withdrew his army first to Ramsey’s Mill and then through southeastern North Carolina to the British base at Wilmington, where he resupplied his army. British Parliamentarian Charles James Fox told the House of Commons, “Another such victory would ruin the British army.” Fox’s assertion would be borne out in the following months. In late April 1781, Cornwallis marched north from Wilmington, focusing his strategy on Virginia instead of the entire South. Despite skirmishes at Swift Creek, Peacock Bridge, and Halifax, he and his men crossed into Virginia in mid-May. Five months later, Cornwallis surrendered his army to George Washington at the little seaside village of Yorktown, effectively ending major fighting in the southern colonies, and speeding along American victory in the war.

There is more than one way to skin a cat......or win a war

So you are saying the ACC will hold a meeting at Yorktown and then capitulate?

Have you kept up with the PAC situation today? It could change everything speculated upon heretofore.

(04-24-2017 03:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 01:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 01:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 12:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  X, ACC network or not, nothing will have magically changed overnight that improves your conference statistically. Your viewers aren't growing new habits overnight. Your venues will not magically jump in capacity, nor will they suddenly fill up should Jack's magic beans grow them. And if the ACC wasn't worth more than the SEC or Big 10 under the market model it sure won't be worth more under one based on actual viewers.

Furthermore, if Notre Dame does go all in with the ACC it will help you, but now only to 7/12th's of one major brand because that is what has not already been factored into your valuations. Notre Dame is the rough equivalent of Auburn in Revenue production. So they will bump your average attendance numbers and they will help your MEAN Gross Revenue and perhaps their biggest bump for you will be in their viewing numbers for football. But you will be lucky if their full inclusion NETS the ACC 2 million more per school.

I don't think your network is going to generate anywhere near what is projected. The components of success simply aren't there. We talk a lot about the disinterest in college sports on the West Coast but in truth the East Coast numbers are as bad. In truth the ACC only carries two states North Carolina and Duke, and are in a virtual tie in two others South Carolina and Florida. But Florida is a different animal. It takes two schools there to capture about 50% of the sports viewing market where it takes the SEC only one. So in Florida your yield per school is lower in Florida. But in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky your market share is in the minority. In Kentucky you are closer, but Tech doesn't even carry Atlanta and UGA dominates the rest of the state. Pitt just doesn't keep pace with Penn State. Syracuse is probably as good as you get in New York and Boston College when winning is okay but neither carry the kind of viewership that a college sports program would carry in your Mid-Atlantic or Southern States. So the numbers just aren't there.

Then there is content. Your basketball content is probably as good or better than anyone's. You have enough depth to generate more high content games between members but that's dominating a statistic that only accounts for 15% of the total revenue. Your football is substantially weaker. Florida State is your only national brand until N.D. is all in. Clemson is one of the strongest regional brands in the country right now, but they aren't a national brand. Miami and Virginia Tech are regional brands but have faded a great deal from their zeniths. Miami still has national brand capability but desperately need a couple of years in which they can contend to return to that status. Louisville has strong regional potential but even if they have a great year they still don't carry what other national brands might and that is even true regionally. The greatest upside for the ACC is with football but that's only true because it is your worst performing sector as a whole, national championship or no national championship. Since that about 80% of the total revenue this is why I doubt your ability to close that monetary gap. That's why in 2010-1 a deal that would have spiked your branding was the best avenue for closing that gap.

If Texas and Oklahoma go to other conferences the gap will never close. Texas could really help you, but only as a full member. Texas won't come alone. You will need to create a division for them and I don't see that happening even if you could afford to take 4 more current Big 12 friends of Texas.

Oklahoma would have no incentive to head to the ACC.

IMO the best you could do is to take N.D. all in and create a 5 school Western division for Texas. It's the only plan which would not utilize the SEC to accomplish it. Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Kansas State might be such a division. But the football is only helped here by Baylor (if they can remain in their present state of the program which may not be easy to do) and Kansas State (as long as Snyder stays). I don't think OU would want this so I didn't include their schools.

So forgive me, but if N.D. goes all in it helps. It helps with your stability and it helps you some with revenue. But the new ACCN is not going to be a game changer, or a major gap closer.

And should OU find their way into the SEC and Texas goes anywhere other than the ACC that gap will never be closed, will grow, and will remain the biggest threat to your future stability.

Thank the Lord for the Market model, because you don't have to have viewers in huge numbers, you just have to have huge numbers (which we have) and if Texas does join we'll pass your numbers in half of the time.

Quite frankly I'm stunned that you would believe in that. It simply defies logic. So in the words of a general (Cornwallis) whose subordinate officer suggested that a defeat may yet be turned into victory, "You dream Sir!"

Cornwallis held the field in Greensboro (the Battle of Guilford Courthouse) but :

Unwilling to the risk the destruction of his army, and realizing that he had inflicted massive casualties on the British, Greene withdrew his army to Troublesome Ironworks nearly fifteen miles away
The battered British army did not pursue. Although Cornwallis’s army held the field, the Americans had punished them severely. Twenty-seven percent of Cornwallis’s army lay dead or wounded on the field. The Foot Guards battalions, considered the finest troops in the entire British army, suffered fifty-six percent casualties, including nearly all of their officers.

After the battle, Cornwallis withdrew his army first to Ramsey’s Mill and then through southeastern North Carolina to the British base at Wilmington, where he resupplied his army. British Parliamentarian Charles James Fox told the House of Commons, “Another such victory would ruin the British army.” Fox’s assertion would be borne out in the following months. In late April 1781, Cornwallis marched north from Wilmington, focusing his strategy on Virginia instead of the entire South. Despite skirmishes at Swift Creek, Peacock Bridge, and Halifax, he and his men crossed into Virginia in mid-May. Five months later, Cornwallis surrendered his army to George Washington at the little seaside village of Yorktown, effectively ending major fighting in the southern colonies, and speeding along American victory in the war.

There is more than one way to skin a cat......or win a war

So you are saying the ACC will hold a meeting at Yorktown and then capitulate?

Have you kept up with the PAC situation today? It could change everything speculated upon heretofore.

Maybe we should send the Account of the Battle of Guilford Courthouse to Jim Boeheim the next time he says something bad about Greensboro.