First a few assumptions:

1. It's about product acquisition and Conference placement is a distant second priority.

2. It's about control of markets and brands and efficiency will be a priority.

3. Nobody's timelines will be the same but the one with the most power will dictate the timeline.

ESPN currently has the most power and they will dictate the timeline and it may already be set. They have announced that the ACCN will debut in 2019. In the last realignment ESPN lined up two large markets for the SEC prior to the debut. And while there is a shift on away from market driven pay models and the reliance upon cable subscriptions they will still look for added markets for the ACCN, but they will also look for brands. So I expect there to be some kind of movement, or announcement of movement by the end of the 2018-9 season.

XLance reminded me that the AAC contract is up in 2019 as well. This will prove to be important as well. As X pointed out ESPN holds that contract and therefore holds the most likely landing spot of any schools in the Big 12 that find themselves left out of moves to the other P4 conferences.

It has been pointed out that in a time of shifting models that efficiency will be essential. ESPN has committed to the SEC and ACC which already between them control the vast majority of the East Coast markets. The also currently control virtually all of the Gulf Coast except for the 50% stake that FOX has through the Texas side and their investment in the Big 12. This will be a target of ESPN in my opinion. And one they have already tethered, Texas along with A&M secure that coast. But Texas will have a price. They will want to keep a few Texas schools and secure the RRR.

So it seems pretty clear to me that Texas and Oklahoma will be an objective that will require the salvation of Texas Tech and Oklahoma State. Kansas would be a plus but not an essential.

So what i suggest is a fairly simple straight forward approach. For the cost of 50% of the present value of the Big 10 ESPN can gain 80% of the total value of the conference if they take Texa-homa. If that requires another school West Virginia has a shot.

The issue here isn't SEC or ACC. The issue here is FOX. ESPN doesn't want, and can't let, Texas got to a FOX network. Why? Because Texas gives any other network at least equal footing in the largest state with a rabid college football fan base. If you take UT and you are ESPN then with A&M you have the state period. Without Texas Oklahoma is just a good brand. With Texas Oklahoma is domination of DFW. The cost of Texas and Oklahoma will be two little brothers. West Virginia would simply be a favor paid back since WVU stabilized the Big 12 in the midst of an ESPN deal gone bad. I think the Eers get paid back.

If Texas wants the flexibility of independent status they will take the ACC. If they prefer full inclusion in a conference that offers them a place for all sports with friends it will be the SEC. The may think about the PAC, and it might be where they could move and bring the most balance to college football provided they take Oklahoma with them, but it is not where either of those brands will be worth the most. And that this point I don't see ESPN investing in a product that can't even attract enough eyes from its own region to be significant.

So, if Texas chooses the ACC as an independent then Cincinnati becomes the market addition, West Virginia the a regional brand competitive in all sports like Louisville, and the ACC winds up as 16 + 2. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and possibly Kansas wind up in the SEC.

If Texas rejects independence then Texa-homa becomes a real possibility for the SEC. Cincinnati joins in full with N.D. and West Virginia and UConn eliminate FOX avenues into the New England/Beltway area.

What does this do? it gives ESPN 8 of the top 10 athletic departments in the United States. It gives them 16 of the top 20. It gives them all of the states that have the highest % of actual viewers for College Sports and the largest market. it contains the vast majority of key rivalry games watched annually. And through Notre Dame's OOC games it gives them access to USC, Stanford, and Big 10 schools.

It also means that ESPN can reach the majority of the Big 10's major cities without having to buy into the Big 10. That's efficiency. Let FOX support the conference that gives you 50% branding and 50% dregs with not much in the middle. And if they marry that to the PAC what have they gained? USC and Washington and that's about it.

Since Espn has locked down programming in the east coast and southeast, all they have to do is secure the brands in the Big 12 from Fox. That's a huge amount of inventory the mouse is making a to if money on.

Now ESPN didn't want to match what Fox was willing to pay the B1G for the second half of the Tier 1/2 rights that were up for bids. All ESPN would need in order to still command top subscription rates is enough content from the B1G that still forces their fans to watch their product/school on the family of ESPN channels.

My idea for ESPN would be, in order to reduce payouts to B1G, let Fox have the weekly top pick & 3rd of the week 75% of the time, pick two & 4 to ESPN. Also, let Fox have the Big Ten CCG. As for the west coast, continue splitting the PAC in half.

(06-20-2017 11:58 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If Texas wants the flexibility of independent status they will take the ACC. If they prefer full inclusion in a conference that offers them a place for all sports with friends it will be the SEC. The may think about the PAC, and it might be where they could move and bring the most balance to college football provided they take Oklahoma with them, but it is not where either of those brands will be worth the most. And that this point I don't see ESPN investing in a product that can't even attract enough eyes from its own region to be significant.

So, if Texas chooses the ACC as an independent then Cincinnati becomes the market addition, West Virginia the a regional brand competitive in all sports like Louisville, and the ACC winds up as 16 + 2. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and possibly Kansas wind up in the SEC.

If Texas rejects independence then Texa-homa becomes a real possibility for the SEC. Cincinnati joins in full with N.D. and West Virginia and UConn eliminate FOX avenues into the New England/Beltway area.

The dynamics that happen in Austin when the B12 starts to fall apart again will be the key to everything.

If WVU or KU leave, the B12 just replaces and moves on. If Oklahoma leaves, Texas' decision will be based on a couple of things:
1. TV contract evaluations with remaining schools and expansion targets--With new contract, I doubt any broadcaster is willing to overpay for this product on purpose especially in this landscape.
2. Internal Politics in Austin--what does the President want to do and what are the fans pushing for?

If OU/OSU is the first move to the SEC, I doubt WVU/Tech come in at 17/18. Only adding Texas at 17 plus KU or WVU or Tech could make financial sense. I just think Tech without Texas would and should get major push back from A&M as Tech doesn't really add much that OU doesn't.

ESPN already more or less sold out to get Texas...the LHN.

They'll have to do it again to make sure UT is fully in the fold for the future. I can see Texas Tech being a requirement to land UT fully although I think Texas will angle for as much as they can reasonably get.

The B1G won't take anyone other than UT...that alone makes it a bad option in addition to the other issues.

The PAC desperately needs Texas, but probably won't take very many little brothers in TX because they like their club the way it is. Add that to the fact that the PACN will never achieve equality with the SECN or BTN and you have a disincentive for UT.

The ACC could offer partial membership and that could benefit UT to the highest degree directly, but it doesn't do much for the little brothers as the SEC would have little incentive to take anyone other than maybe TCU in that scenario.

The ACC conversely doesn't have much incentive to take TX schools outside of UT. In my last scenario in another thread, I put out the idea that TCU could be an option. I have no idea if that's realistic, but I remember that TCU was on its way to the Big East before everything fell apart there. Let's remember that many of those same schools that recruited TCU are now in the ACC. TCU is also located near a major airport in a major metro area so the travel wouldn't be as horrendous as it would be with some.

The SEC does offer the best deal for Texas as it can take Texahoma and perhaps even agree to a scheduling arrangement with whatever is left of the Big 12/AAC. If numerous TX schools are given a home in that league then they probably get the best deal they can get as well...

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State

ACC takes Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, and TCU

B1G takes Kansas and UConn

While Kansas is probably desirable to ESPN, it will be tough to fit them in if Texahoma is on the table. For UConn, not sure they bring enough market share in the NE/NYC to justify a spot for the ACC. More importantly, their football is still woeful and the ACC still needs more eyeballs during football season. Apparently there's some bad blood at that. They would probably fit better in the B1G.

PAC stays put

The leftover league would essentially be best of the rest at a bargain price and if you combine that with a scheduling agreement with both SEC schools and ACC schools for OOC content then you can get a little extra bang for your buck.

(06-20-2017 02:41 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(06-20-2017 11:58 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If Texas wants the flexibility of independent status they will take the ACC. If they prefer full inclusion in a conference that offers them a place for all sports with friends it will be the SEC. The may think about the PAC, and it might be where they could move and bring the most balance to college football provided they take Oklahoma with them, but it is not where either of those brands will be worth the most. And that this point I don't see ESPN investing in a product that can't even attract enough eyes from its own region to be significant.

So, if Texas chooses the ACC as an independent then Cincinnati becomes the market addition, West Virginia the a regional brand competitive in all sports like Louisville, and the ACC winds up as 16 + 2. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and possibly Kansas wind up in the SEC.

If Texas rejects independence then Texa-homa becomes a real possibility for the SEC. Cincinnati joins in full with N.D. and West Virginia and UConn eliminate FOX avenues into the New England/Beltway area.

The dynamics that happen in Austin when the B12 starts to fall apart again will be the key to everything.

If WVU or KU leave, the B12 just replaces and moves on. If Oklahoma leaves, Texas' decision will be based on a couple of things:
1. TV contract evaluations with remaining schools and expansion targets--With new contract, I doubt any broadcaster is willing to overpay for this product on purpose especially in this landscape.
2. Internal Politics in Austin--what does the President want to do and what are the fans pushing for?

If OU/OSU is the first move to the SEC, I doubt WVU/Tech come in at 17/18. Only adding Texas at 17 plus KU or WVU or Tech could make financial sense. I just think Tech without Texas would and should get major push back from A&M as Tech doesn't really add much that OU doesn't.

While I agree, if Texas's move to the ACC is predicated upon Tech having a P5 home I would fully expect ESPN to ask the SEC to take one for team ESPN. Of course we would be compensated. But if we are taking OU & OSU and had to take Tech we would still have room for Kansas. W.V.U. would be off to the ACC and that covers the top product in the Big 12 and leaves no state option into Texas for another network.

(06-20-2017 11:58 AM)JRsec Wrote:  First a few assumptions:

1. It's about product acquisition and Conference placement is a distant second priority.

2. It's about control of markets and brands and efficiency will be a priority.

3. Nobody's timelines will be the same but the one with the most power will dictate the timeline.

ESPN currently has the most power and they will dictate the timeline and it may already be set. They have announced that the ACCN will debut in 2019. In the last realignment ESPN lined up two large markets for the SEC prior to the debut. And while there is a shift on away from market driven pay models and the reliance upon cable subscriptions they will still look for added markets for the ACCN, but they will also look for brands. So I expect there to be some kind of movement, or announcement of movement by the end of the 2018-9 season.

XLance reminded me that the AAC contract is up in 2019 as well. This will prove to be important as well. As X pointed out ESPN holds that contract and therefore holds the most likely landing spot of any schools in the Big 12 that find themselves left out of moves to the other P4 conferences.

It has been pointed out that in a time of shifting models that efficiency will be essential. ESPN has committed to the SEC and ACC which already between them control the vast majority of the East Coast markets. The also currently control virtually all of the Gulf Coast except for the 50% stake that FOX has through the Texas side and their investment in the Big 12. This will be a target of ESPN in my opinion. And one they have already tethered, Texas along with A&M secure that coast. But Texas will have a price. They will want to keep a few Texas schools and secure the RRR.

So it seems pretty clear to me that Texas and Oklahoma will be an objective that will require the salvation of Texas Tech and Oklahoma State. Kansas would be a plus but not an essential.

So what i suggest is a fairly simple straight forward approach. For the cost of 50% of the present value of the Big 10 ESPN can gain 80% of the total value of the conference if they take Texa-homa. If that requires another school West Virginia has a shot.

The issue here isn't SEC or ACC. The issue here is FOX. ESPN doesn't want, and can't let, Texas got to a FOX network. Why? Because Texas gives any other network at least equal footing in the largest state with a rabid college football fan base. If you take UT and you are ESPN then with A&M you have the state period. Without Texas Oklahoma is just a good brand. With Texas Oklahoma is domination of DFW. The cost of Texas and Oklahoma will be two little brothers. West Virginia would simply be a favor paid back since WVU stabilized the Big 12 in the midst of an ESPN deal gone bad. I think the Eers get paid back.

If Texas wants the flexibility of independent status they will take the ACC. If they prefer full inclusion in a conference that offers them a place for all sports with friends it will be the SEC. The may think about the PAC, and it might be where they could move and bring the most balance to college football provided they take Oklahoma with them, but it is not where either of those brands will be worth the most. And that this point I don't see ESPN investing in a product that can't even attract enough eyes from its own region to be significant.

So, if Texas chooses the ACC as an independent then Cincinnati becomes the market addition, West Virginia the a regional brand competitive in all sports like Louisville, and the ACC winds up as 16 + 2. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and possibly Kansas wind up in the SEC.

If Texas rejects independence then Texa-homa becomes a real possibility for the SEC. Cincinnati joins in full with N.D. and West Virginia and UConn eliminate FOX avenues into the New England/Beltway area.

What does this do? it gives ESPN 8 of the top 10 athletic departments in the United States. It gives them 16 of the top 20. It gives them all of the states that have the highest % of actual viewers for College Sports and the largest market. it contains the vast majority of key rivalry games watched annually. And through Notre Dame's OOC games it gives them access to USC, Stanford, and Big 10 schools.

It also means that ESPN can reach the majority of the Big 10's major cities without having to buy into the Big 10. That's efficiency. Let FOX support the conference that gives you 50% branding and 50% dregs with not much in the middle. And if they marry that to the PAC what have they gained? USC and Washington and that's about it.

JR, I don't think that Notre Dame joins the ACC full time if Texas moves to the SEC. The ACC may pick up another game (from 5 to 6) and or the SEC picks up an annual contest vs Notre Dame or at least one every other year. Notre Dame will be moved around like a free agent to provide ESPN/ABC premier national matchups (Michigan, Stanford, Southern Cal, Texas, Oklahoma) TerryD had a map of where Notre Dame's games were (up and down the east coast, gulf coast and west coast it looked like the shape of a U). Notre dame does not need to be playing two games a year in North Carolina if ESPN is trying to use them to capture a national audience.
Also, I think you may see ABC make a play to purchase Notre Dame's TV contract from NBC.
I would expect the ACC to add Cincinnati and West Virginia, but not UConn.

(06-20-2017 07:40 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-20-2017 11:58 AM)JRsec Wrote:  First a few assumptions:

1. It's about product acquisition and Conference placement is a distant second priority.

2. It's about control of markets and brands and efficiency will be a priority.

3. Nobody's timelines will be the same but the one with the most power will dictate the timeline.

ESPN currently has the most power and they will dictate the timeline and it may already be set. They have announced that the ACCN will debut in 2019. In the last realignment ESPN lined up two large markets for the SEC prior to the debut. And while there is a shift on away from market driven pay models and the reliance upon cable subscriptions they will still look for added markets for the ACCN, but they will also look for brands. So I expect there to be some kind of movement, or announcement of movement by the end of the 2018-9 season.

XLance reminded me that the AAC contract is up in 2019 as well. This will prove to be important as well. As X pointed out ESPN holds that contract and therefore holds the most likely landing spot of any schools in the Big 12 that find themselves left out of moves to the other P4 conferences.

It has been pointed out that in a time of shifting models that efficiency will be essential. ESPN has committed to the SEC and ACC which already between them control the vast majority of the East Coast markets. The also currently control virtually all of the Gulf Coast except for the 50% stake that FOX has through the Texas side and their investment in the Big 12. This will be a target of ESPN in my opinion. And one they have already tethered, Texas along with A&M secure that coast. But Texas will have a price. They will want to keep a few Texas schools and secure the RRR.

So it seems pretty clear to me that Texas and Oklahoma will be an objective that will require the salvation of Texas Tech and Oklahoma State. Kansas would be a plus but not an essential.

So what i suggest is a fairly simple straight forward approach. For the cost of 50% of the present value of the Big 10 ESPN can gain 80% of the total value of the conference if they take Texa-homa. If that requires another school West Virginia has a shot.

The issue here isn't SEC or ACC. The issue here is FOX. ESPN doesn't want, and can't let, Texas got to a FOX network. Why? Because Texas gives any other network at least equal footing in the largest state with a rabid college football fan base. If you take UT and you are ESPN then with A&M you have the state period. Without Texas Oklahoma is just a good brand. With Texas Oklahoma is domination of DFW. The cost of Texas and Oklahoma will be two little brothers. West Virginia would simply be a favor paid back since WVU stabilized the Big 12 in the midst of an ESPN deal gone bad. I think the Eers get paid back.

If Texas wants the flexibility of independent status they will take the ACC. If they prefer full inclusion in a conference that offers them a place for all sports with friends it will be the SEC. The may think about the PAC, and it might be where they could move and bring the most balance to college football provided they take Oklahoma with them, but it is not where either of those brands will be worth the most. And that this point I don't see ESPN investing in a product that can't even attract enough eyes from its own region to be significant.

So, if Texas chooses the ACC as an independent then Cincinnati becomes the market addition, West Virginia the a regional brand competitive in all sports like Louisville, and the ACC winds up as 16 + 2. Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and possibly Kansas wind up in the SEC.

If Texas rejects independence then Texa-homa becomes a real possibility for the SEC. Cincinnati joins in full with N.D. and West Virginia and UConn eliminate FOX avenues into the New England/Beltway area.

What does this do? it gives ESPN 8 of the top 10 athletic departments in the United States. It gives them 16 of the top 20. It gives them all of the states that have the highest % of actual viewers for College Sports and the largest market. it contains the vast majority of key rivalry games watched annually. And through Notre Dame's OOC games it gives them access to USC, Stanford, and Big 10 schools.

It also means that ESPN can reach the majority of the Big 10's major cities without having to buy into the Big 10. That's efficiency. Let FOX support the conference that gives you 50% branding and 50% dregs with not much in the middle. And if they marry that to the PAC what have they gained? USC and Washington and that's about it.

JR, I don't think that Notre Dame joins the ACC full time if Texas moves to the SEC. The ACC may pick up another game (from 5 to 6) and or the SEC picks up an annual contest vs Notre Dame or at least one every other year. Notre Dame will be moved around like a free agent to provide ESPN/ABC premier national matchups (Michigan, Stanford, Southern Cal, Texas, Oklahoma) TerryD had a map of where Notre Dame's games were (up and down the east coast, gulf coast and west coast it looked like the shape of a U). Notre dame does not need to be playing two games a year in North Carolina if ESPN is trying to use them to capture a national audience.
Also, I think you may see ABC make a play to purchase Notre Dame's TV contract from NBC.
I would expect the ACC to add Cincinnati and West Virginia, but not UConn.

Well, whatever is the most profitable approach.