(02-05-2018 09:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 06:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 06:49 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 02:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 02:35 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think that's the question.

If Amazon or another plans on getting in then we should know before long. If they do then ESPN could face some difficulties.

The trick here guys is for ESPN to lock up the top product before an Amazon gets into the mix. ESPN won't mind leasing product to Amazon, but they dang sure don't want to bid against them for it.

And if this forces the PAC to merge with the Big 10 by dropping Washington State and Oregon State then so be it. We move to a P3 of a 20 team ACC, 20 team SEC, and a 24 team Big 10.

I concur JR, which is why if its going to happen, it’s got to be with either the SEC games on CBS, the B1G when the 6 year deal runs out or the B12 in 2024. The fact that FOX got TNF from the NFL without any real alt-media competition was telling IMO.

The key here is not to wait for Amazon to buy the rest of FOX's college product along with FS1 an FS2. ESPN has what is necessary in their power right now to wrap this up in house and renegotiate a deal well into the future for the ACC and SEC by simply absorbing the Big 12.

That's why my first post was so long. If they have the ACC and SEC with the Big 12 absorbed into it then ESPN has 8 of the top 10 products and 15 of the top 25. They don't have to hold the PAC contract or the Big 10's for that matter because they have not only the cream of the football product, but also of the basketball, baseball, softball, and gymnastics.

I do think that it is within the realm of possibility that if ESPN absorbs the Big 12, that the SEC could shift Arkansas and Missouri to the Big 12.

Or the ESPN conferences just absorb the Big 12 and instead of shifting two SEC schools to the Big 12 they simply add Louisville and Cincinnati to the Big 12 for 12. The ACC adds Notre Dame as a full time participant to get back to 14.

(02-06-2018 08:04 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 06:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 06:49 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 02:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The trick here guys is for ESPN to lock up the top product before an Amazon gets into the mix. ESPN won't mind leasing product to Amazon, but they dang sure don't want to bid against them for it.

And if this forces the PAC to merge with the Big 10 by dropping Washington State and Oregon State then so be it. We move to a P3 of a 20 team ACC, 20 team SEC, and a 24 team Big 10.

I concur JR, which is why if its going to happen, it’s got to be with either the SEC games on CBS, the B1G when the 6 year deal runs out or the B12 in 2024. The fact that FOX got TNF from the NFL without any real alt-media competition was telling IMO.

The key here is not to wait for Amazon to buy the rest of FOX's college product along with FS1 an FS2. ESPN has what is necessary in their power right now to wrap this up in house and renegotiate a deal well into the future for the ACC and SEC by simply absorbing the Big 12.

That's why my first post was so long. If they have the ACC and SEC with the Big 12 absorbed into it then ESPN has 8 of the top 10 products and 15 of the top 25. They don't have to hold the PAC contract or the Big 10's for that matter because they have not only the cream of the football product, but also of the basketball, baseball, softball, and gymnastics.

I do think that it is within the realm of possibility that if ESPN absorbs the Big 12, that the SEC could shift Arkansas and Missouri to the Big 12.

Or the ESPN conferences just absorb the Big 12 and instead of shifting two SEC schools to the Big 12 they simply add Louisville and Cincinnati to the Big 12 for 12. The ACC adds Notre Dame as a full time participant to get back to 14.

No need to absorb Big 12, just add piece by piece as Big 12 gets picked apart.

(02-06-2018 01:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 08:04 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 06:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 06:49 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I concur JR, which is why if its going to happen, it’s got to be with either the SEC games on CBS, the B1G when the 6 year deal runs out or the B12 in 2024. The fact that FOX got TNF from the NFL without any real alt-media competition was telling IMO.

The key here is not to wait for Amazon to buy the rest of FOX's college product along with FS1 an FS2. ESPN has what is necessary in their power right now to wrap this up in house and renegotiate a deal well into the future for the ACC and SEC by simply absorbing the Big 12.

That's why my first post was so long. If they have the ACC and SEC with the Big 12 absorbed into it then ESPN has 8 of the top 10 products and 15 of the top 25. They don't have to hold the PAC contract or the Big 10's for that matter because they have not only the cream of the football product, but also of the basketball, baseball, softball, and gymnastics.

I do think that it is within the realm of possibility that if ESPN absorbs the Big 12, that the SEC could shift Arkansas and Missouri to the Big 12.

Or the ESPN conferences just absorb the Big 12 and instead of shifting two SEC schools to the Big 12 they simply add Louisville and Cincinnati to the Big 12 for 12. The ACC adds Notre Dame as a full time participant to get back to 14.

No need to absorb Big 12, just add piece by piece as Big 12 gets picked apart.

The best reason to keep the Big 12 intact is INVENTORY.

(02-06-2018 01:57 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 01:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 08:04 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 06:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The key here is not to wait for Amazon to buy the rest of FOX's college product along with FS1 an FS2. ESPN has what is necessary in their power right now to wrap this up in house and renegotiate a deal well into the future for the ACC and SEC by simply absorbing the Big 12.

That's why my first post was so long. If they have the ACC and SEC with the Big 12 absorbed into it then ESPN has 8 of the top 10 products and 15 of the top 25. They don't have to hold the PAC contract or the Big 10's for that matter because they have not only the cream of the football product, but also of the basketball, baseball, softball, and gymnastics.

I do think that it is within the realm of possibility that if ESPN absorbs the Big 12, that the SEC could shift Arkansas and Missouri to the Big 12.

Or the ESPN conferences just absorb the Big 12 and instead of shifting two SEC schools to the Big 12 they simply add Louisville and Cincinnati to the Big 12 for 12. The ACC adds Notre Dame as a full time participant to get back to 14.

No need to absorb Big 12, just add piece by piece as Big 12 gets picked apart.

The best reason to keep the Big 12 intact is INVENTORY.

The problem is that UT and OU will bail in that scenario. They can make more money elsewhere if they leave by themselves or with a couple of little brothers.

Theoretically, ESPN could pay prime rates to keep the Big 12 together as it stands, but then they're getting less bang for their buck because most of the Big 12 properties would garner better returns when paired with powers in the other leagues. That and ESPN stands to make more from their conference networks that way.

Other than that, it behooves ESPN to make a move sooner than later so they don't have to bid against any new players for content.

(02-06-2018 02:22 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 01:57 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 01:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 08:04 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  I do think that it is within the realm of possibility that if ESPN absorbs the Big 12, that the SEC could shift Arkansas and Missouri to the Big 12.

Or the ESPN conferences just absorb the Big 12 and instead of shifting two SEC schools to the Big 12 they simply add Louisville and Cincinnati to the Big 12 for 12. The ACC adds Notre Dame as a full time participant to get back to 14.

No need to absorb Big 12, just add piece by piece as Big 12 gets picked apart.

The best reason to keep the Big 12 intact is INVENTORY.

The problem is that UT and OU will bail in that scenario. They can make more money elsewhere if they leave by themselves or with a couple of little brothers.

Theoretically, ESPN could pay prime rates to keep the Big 12 together as it stands, but then they're getting less bang for their buck because most of the Big 12 properties would garner better returns when paired with powers in the other leagues. That and ESPN stands to make more from their conference networks that way.

Other than that, it behooves ESPN to make a move sooner than later so they don't have to bid against any new players for content.

If you are ESPN you sure don't want to see Texas and OU bolt to your competitor for more money if you can keep their gang relatively together and use it to boost the value of the ACC and enhance the reach of the SEC.

Waiting is way too risky when you have an opportunity to lock it up now. Besides Texas could get a short term boost if ESPN just paid them half of the value of the LHN to make the move. Then Texas has what they would have had until 2031 by having a 50 million dollar payout in their new conference home plus the half buyout of the LHN. So it could be made profitable for them. OU will make more with any move to the SEC or Big 10. So bringing along OSU is good for back home politics and keeping familiar games with Missouri and A&M and Kansas and Iowa State would help them decide matters pretty quickly. Plus the RRR is in house.

(02-06-2018 03:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 02:22 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 01:57 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 01:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 08:04 AM)XLance Wrote:  Or the ESPN conferences just absorb the Big 12 and instead of shifting two SEC schools to the Big 12 they simply add Louisville and Cincinnati to the Big 12 for 12. The ACC adds Notre Dame as a full time participant to get back to 14.

No need to absorb Big 12, just add piece by piece as Big 12 gets picked apart.

The best reason to keep the Big 12 intact is INVENTORY.

The problem is that UT and OU will bail in that scenario. They can make more money elsewhere if they leave by themselves or with a couple of little brothers.

Theoretically, ESPN could pay prime rates to keep the Big 12 together as it stands, but then they're getting less bang for their buck because most of the Big 12 properties would garner better returns when paired with powers in the other leagues. That and ESPN stands to make more from their conference networks that way.

Other than that, it behooves ESPN to make a move sooner than later so they don't have to bid against any new players for content.

If you are ESPN you sure don't want to see Texas and OU bolt to your competitor for more money if you can keep their gang relatively together and use it to boost the value of the ACC and enhance the reach of the SEC.

Waiting is way too risky when you have an opportunity to lock it up now. Besides Texas could get a short term boost if ESPN just paid them half of the value of the LHN to make the move. Then Texas has what they would have had until 2031 by having a 50 million dollar payout in their new conference home plus the half buyout of the LHN. So it could be made profitable for them. OU will make more with any move to the SEC or Big 10. So bringing along OSU is good for back home politics and keeping familiar games with Missouri and A&M and Kansas and Iowa State would help them decide matters pretty quickly. Plus the RRR is in house.

Lacrosse played in cowboy boots!

(02-06-2018 09:33 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 03:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 02:22 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 01:57 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 01:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  No need to absorb Big 12, just add piece by piece as Big 12 gets picked apart.

The best reason to keep the Big 12 intact is INVENTORY.

The problem is that UT and OU will bail in that scenario. They can make more money elsewhere if they leave by themselves or with a couple of little brothers.

Theoretically, ESPN could pay prime rates to keep the Big 12 together as it stands, but then they're getting less bang for their buck because most of the Big 12 properties would garner better returns when paired with powers in the other leagues. That and ESPN stands to make more from their conference networks that way.

Other than that, it behooves ESPN to make a move sooner than later so they don't have to bid against any new players for content.

If you are ESPN you sure don't want to see Texas and OU bolt to your competitor for more money if you can keep their gang relatively together and use it to boost the value of the ACC and enhance the reach of the SEC.

Waiting is way too risky when you have an opportunity to lock it up now. Besides Texas could get a short term boost if ESPN just paid them half of the value of the LHN to make the move. Then Texas has what they would have had until 2031 by having a 50 million dollar payout in their new conference home plus the half buyout of the LHN. So it could be made profitable for them. OU will make more with any move to the SEC or Big 10. So bringing along OSU is good for back home politics and keeping familiar games with Missouri and A&M and Kansas and Iowa State would help them decide matters pretty quickly. Plus the RRR is in house.

Lacrosse played in cowboy boots!

Maybe the SEC and ACC should start rodeo leagues...

I mean, the PBR is fairly popular in certain places. I bet it would be a hit

(02-06-2018 05:59 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  But I'm going to stand by my old contingency here anyway. It is far more likely that ESPN tries to consume the Big 12 before it comes on the market in 2023 for 2025 than it is that it will split any of its more fully owned product. The only question is how?

Well, if it occurs what is paid out will defy conventional wisdom. Why? Texas will want it's 50 million a year that it gets now. The ACC for the trouble wants to have the economic gap which is currently its only threat removed, and the Big 12 schools other than Texas will need enough of a bump to cover minor sports competition.

So something like this might be worked out:
Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, West Virginia to the SEC.

Baylor, Notre Dame, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U. to the ACC.

Both conferences move up in revenue. The SEC settles in a 55-60 million pay out per school the ACC settles into a 50-55 million payout per school. The Big 12 decides to dissolve early the LHN is folded back into ESPN's hands to use as it sees fit, or to dismantle. But personally I think it would be the home studio of the Spanish versions of the SECN and ACCN.

The interesting part is the money.

ESPN would have to agree to pay both leagues more money than what the additions would demand. They might well do it for the reasons you're stating.

Would the leagues go all in on that assuming the money was guaranteed? I think they probably would.

I would suggest maybe a couple of alterations though. If we're promoting a single school from the G5 then I think Cincinnati would be the more economical decision. Something like this...

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Cincinnati, and West Virginia

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi State
South: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, West Virginia, Cincinnati

ACC adds Notre Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, and Kansas State

West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Reason being is this:

ESPN will own the TX market handily without Houston. While UH is probably the better long term prospect for football success, that can also be used to the network's advantage in the tweener league. More Sun Belt products in the AAC will lead to better quality and more watchable games.

Meanwhile, Cincinnati offers a large new market for the conglomerate. That's especially true if they abandon the Big Ten's contract. OH is a great college football market and if UC has better resources they could likely make a dent in OSU's overall support although obviously the two would never be truly equal. Nonetheless, it's a large market with a lot of recruits and I think it would pay dividends to have it in the fold especially if the SECN and ACCN are bundled together...plenty of Notre Dame fans in OH.

For the SEC specifically, Texas Tech is a decent program, but they don't really give us anything we wouldn't already have. The additions of OU and OSU would supplement our support in TX and I think Tech would probably be more valuable if they were playing their more familiar regional schools.

The thing here is the SEC has not felt the need to associate itself with city schools and Vandy is a private school, so that doesn't really count. Should Oklahoma and Oklahoma State be in a division that's separate from Arkansas' then it make some sense for Tech to be in a division with Arkansas. Tech could replace A&M in the Jerry Dome game, giving A&M the opportunity to back out of that game since they already have a huge stadium to fill up themselves. A win for A&M and continued exposure for Tech and Arkansas in Dallas.

Maybe the ACC could pick up South Florida instead of Houston. It's in the footprint but it's a new television market. USF would give the ACC a greater presence in the state of Florida and a major growing market in Tampa

West: Texas, Louisville, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, USF, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Auburn

(02-07-2018 02:14 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:59 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  But I'm going to stand by my old contingency here anyway. It is far more likely that ESPN tries to consume the Big 12 before it comes on the market in 2023 for 2025 than it is that it will split any of its more fully owned product. The only question is how?

Well, if it occurs what is paid out will defy conventional wisdom. Why? Texas will want it's 50 million a year that it gets now. The ACC for the trouble wants to have the economic gap which is currently its only threat removed, and the Big 12 schools other than Texas will need enough of a bump to cover minor sports competition.

So something like this might be worked out:
Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, West Virginia to the SEC.

Baylor, Notre Dame, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U. to the ACC.

Both conferences move up in revenue. The SEC settles in a 55-60 million pay out per school the ACC settles into a 50-55 million payout per school. The Big 12 decides to dissolve early the LHN is folded back into ESPN's hands to use as it sees fit, or to dismantle. But personally I think it would be the home studio of the Spanish versions of the SECN and ACCN.

The interesting part is the money.

ESPN would have to agree to pay both leagues more money than what the additions would demand. They might well do it for the reasons you're stating.

Would the leagues go all in on that assuming the money was guaranteed? I think they probably would.

I would suggest maybe a couple of alterations though. If we're promoting a single school from the G5 then I think Cincinnati would be the more economical decision. Something like this...

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Cincinnati, and West Virginia

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi State
South: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, West Virginia, Cincinnati

ACC adds Notre Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, and Kansas State

West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Reason being is this:

ESPN will own the TX market handily without Houston. While UH is probably the better long term prospect for football success, that can also be used to the network's advantage in the tweener league. More Sun Belt products in the AAC will lead to better quality and more watchable games.

Meanwhile, Cincinnati offers a large new market for the conglomerate. That's especially true if they abandon the Big Ten's contract. OH is a great college football market and if UC has better resources they could likely make a dent in OSU's overall support although obviously the two would never be truly equal. Nonetheless, it's a large market with a lot of recruits and I think it would pay dividends to have it in the fold especially if the SECN and ACCN are bundled together...plenty of Notre Dame fans in OH.

For the SEC specifically, Texas Tech is a decent program, but they don't really give us anything we wouldn't already have. The additions of OU and OSU would supplement our support in TX and I think Tech would probably be more valuable if they were playing their more familiar regional schools.

The thing here is the SEC has not felt the need to associate itself with city schools and Vandy is a private school, so that doesn't really count. Should Oklahoma and Oklahoma State be in a division that's separate from Arkansas' then it make some sense for Tech to be in a division with Arkansas. Tech could replace A&M in the Jerry Dome game, giving A&M the opportunity to back out of that game since they already have a huge stadium to fill up themselves. A win for A&M and continued exposure for Tech and Arkansas in Dallas.

Maybe the ACC could pick up South Florida instead of Houston. It's in the footprint but it's a new television market. USF would give the ACC a greater presence in the state of Florida and a major growing market in Tampa

West: Texas, Louisville, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, USF, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Auburn

True, but there aren't a lot of city schools nearby. Most of those types of schools in the South are G5 with rare exception. And actually, there was a time the SEC was having conversations with Houston although that was around the time the SWC was breaking apart. Even today, UH would make some sense for the SEC, but it's not necessary now that we have A&M.

Even now, I don't think the league would have a problem with a school like Miami or TCU despite the fact they aren't large state flagships.

UC wouldn't be an ideal option for the SEC, but if ESPN goes Machiavellian then it does make sense. There is no other Power school in the state of OH and one would think that leaves room for an opportunity. All the major bases would be covered in TX even if Houston didn't make the cut.

(02-07-2018 01:49 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:14 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:59 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  But I'm going to stand by my old contingency here anyway. It is far more likely that ESPN tries to consume the Big 12 before it comes on the market in 2023 for 2025 than it is that it will split any of its more fully owned product. The only question is how?

Well, if it occurs what is paid out will defy conventional wisdom. Why? Texas will want it's 50 million a year that it gets now. The ACC for the trouble wants to have the economic gap which is currently its only threat removed, and the Big 12 schools other than Texas will need enough of a bump to cover minor sports competition.

So something like this might be worked out:
Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, West Virginia to the SEC.

Baylor, Notre Dame, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U. to the ACC.

Both conferences move up in revenue. The SEC settles in a 55-60 million pay out per school the ACC settles into a 50-55 million payout per school. The Big 12 decides to dissolve early the LHN is folded back into ESPN's hands to use as it sees fit, or to dismantle. But personally I think it would be the home studio of the Spanish versions of the SECN and ACCN.

The interesting part is the money.

ESPN would have to agree to pay both leagues more money than what the additions would demand. They might well do it for the reasons you're stating.

Would the leagues go all in on that assuming the money was guaranteed? I think they probably would.

I would suggest maybe a couple of alterations though. If we're promoting a single school from the G5 then I think Cincinnati would be the more economical decision. Something like this...

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Cincinnati, and West Virginia

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi State
South: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, West Virginia, Cincinnati

ACC adds Notre Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, and Kansas State

West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Reason being is this:

ESPN will own the TX market handily without Houston. While UH is probably the better long term prospect for football success, that can also be used to the network's advantage in the tweener league. More Sun Belt products in the AAC will lead to better quality and more watchable games.

Meanwhile, Cincinnati offers a large new market for the conglomerate. That's especially true if they abandon the Big Ten's contract. OH is a great college football market and if UC has better resources they could likely make a dent in OSU's overall support although obviously the two would never be truly equal. Nonetheless, it's a large market with a lot of recruits and I think it would pay dividends to have it in the fold especially if the SECN and ACCN are bundled together...plenty of Notre Dame fans in OH.

For the SEC specifically, Texas Tech is a decent program, but they don't really give us anything we wouldn't already have. The additions of OU and OSU would supplement our support in TX and I think Tech would probably be more valuable if they were playing their more familiar regional schools.

The thing here is the SEC has not felt the need to associate itself with city schools and Vandy is a private school, so that doesn't really count. Should Oklahoma and Oklahoma State be in a division that's separate from Arkansas' then it make some sense for Tech to be in a division with Arkansas. Tech could replace A&M in the Jerry Dome game, giving A&M the opportunity to back out of that game since they already have a huge stadium to fill up themselves. A win for A&M and continued exposure for Tech and Arkansas in Dallas.

Maybe the ACC could pick up South Florida instead of Houston. It's in the footprint but it's a new television market. USF would give the ACC a greater presence in the state of Florida and a major growing market in Tampa

West: Texas, Louisville, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, USF, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Auburn

True, but there aren't a lot of city schools nearby. Most of those types of schools in the South are G5 with rare exception. And actually, there was a time the SEC was having conversations with Houston although that was around the time the SWC was breaking apart. Even today, UH would make some sense for the SEC, but it's not necessary now that we have A&M.

Even now, I don't think the league would have a problem with a school like Miami or TCU despite the fact they aren't large state flagships.

UC wouldn't be an ideal option for the SEC, but if ESPN goes Machiavellian then it does make sense. There is no other Power school in the state of OH and one would think that leaves room for an opportunity. All the major bases would be covered in TX even if Houston didn't make the cut.

Regarding city schools, in my opinion, the XII should've pre-empted the SEC and taken West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, TCU, Houston, Memphis, and Syracuse simultaneously to get to 16.

The SEC should only take private, city schools with good academics - if any city schools. Louisville doesn't add too much other than a brand name and their performance on the field/court is slipping. In the current climate only Texas, Oklahoma, maybe Kansas, maybe Oklahoma St, Florida St, and Clemson truly make sense. TCU and Miami as private, city schools could be options.

The SEC will get the pick of the litter. The B1G will tout "academics" and get AAU schools that likely won't help them win many championships.

I guess it all boils down to whether you see realignment as a struggle between the SEC and Big Ten or between ESPN and Fox.

(02-11-2018 04:06 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I guess it all boils down to whether you see realignment as a struggle between the SEC and Big Ten or between ESPN and Fox.

Well, there's no longer a struggle between ESPN and FOX. FOX now profits when ESPN profits. The competition will be between ESPN and any new money that wants to get into broadcasting life sporting events.

The SEC and Big 10 are in competition, but right now we are unsure as to who will be backing the Big 10.

Ultimately whether a push is made for Oklahoma or not will depend upon who it is that ultimately backs the Big 10.

If ESPN goes all out for the Big 10 rights in a few years then the distribution of the final product of the Big 12 could get quite interesting. If ESPN doesn't land the Big 10 then I like the SEC's chances of landing OU. If ESPN does land a lot more of the Big 10's rights then anything is possible. I say anything because we don't yet know who will be taking Skipper's place full time.

(02-07-2018 02:47 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:49 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:14 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:59 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  But I'm going to stand by my old contingency here anyway. It is far more likely that ESPN tries to consume the Big 12 before it comes on the market in 2023 for 2025 than it is that it will split any of its more fully owned product. The only question is how?

Well, if it occurs what is paid out will defy conventional wisdom. Why? Texas will want it's 50 million a year that it gets now. The ACC for the trouble wants to have the economic gap which is currently its only threat removed, and the Big 12 schools other than Texas will need enough of a bump to cover minor sports competition.

So something like this might be worked out:
Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, West Virginia to the SEC.

Baylor, Notre Dame, Houston, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U. to the ACC.

Both conferences move up in revenue. The SEC settles in a 55-60 million pay out per school the ACC settles into a 50-55 million payout per school. The Big 12 decides to dissolve early the LHN is folded back into ESPN's hands to use as it sees fit, or to dismantle. But personally I think it would be the home studio of the Spanish versions of the SECN and ACCN.

The interesting part is the money.

ESPN would have to agree to pay both leagues more money than what the additions would demand. They might well do it for the reasons you're stating.

Would the leagues go all in on that assuming the money was guaranteed? I think they probably would.

I would suggest maybe a couple of alterations though. If we're promoting a single school from the G5 then I think Cincinnati would be the more economical decision. Something like this...

SEC adds Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Cincinnati, and West Virginia

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi State
South: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, West Virginia, Cincinnati

ACC adds Notre Dame, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, and Kansas State

West: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Reason being is this:

ESPN will own the TX market handily without Houston. While UH is probably the better long term prospect for football success, that can also be used to the network's advantage in the tweener league. More Sun Belt products in the AAC will lead to better quality and more watchable games.

Meanwhile, Cincinnati offers a large new market for the conglomerate. That's especially true if they abandon the Big Ten's contract. OH is a great college football market and if UC has better resources they could likely make a dent in OSU's overall support although obviously the two would never be truly equal. Nonetheless, it's a large market with a lot of recruits and I think it would pay dividends to have it in the fold especially if the SECN and ACCN are bundled together...plenty of Notre Dame fans in OH.

For the SEC specifically, Texas Tech is a decent program, but they don't really give us anything we wouldn't already have. The additions of OU and OSU would supplement our support in TX and I think Tech would probably be more valuable if they were playing their more familiar regional schools.

The thing here is the SEC has not felt the need to associate itself with city schools and Vandy is a private school, so that doesn't really count. Should Oklahoma and Oklahoma State be in a division that's separate from Arkansas' then it make some sense for Tech to be in a division with Arkansas. Tech could replace A&M in the Jerry Dome game, giving A&M the opportunity to back out of that game since they already have a huge stadium to fill up themselves. A win for A&M and continued exposure for Tech and Arkansas in Dallas.

Maybe the ACC could pick up South Florida instead of Houston. It's in the footprint but it's a new television market. USF would give the ACC a greater presence in the state of Florida and a major growing market in Tampa

West: Texas, Louisville, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State
North: Notre Dame, USF, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College
Atlantic: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke
South: Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest

Midwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri
West: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Auburn

True, but there aren't a lot of city schools nearby. Most of those types of schools in the South are G5 with rare exception. And actually, there was a time the SEC was having conversations with Houston although that was around the time the SWC was breaking apart. Even today, UH would make some sense for the SEC, but it's not necessary now that we have A&M.

Even now, I don't think the league would have a problem with a school like Miami or TCU despite the fact they aren't large state flagships.

UC wouldn't be an ideal option for the SEC, but if ESPN goes Machiavellian then it does make sense. There is no other Power school in the state of OH and one would think that leaves room for an opportunity. All the major bases would be covered in TX even if Houston didn't make the cut.

Regarding city schools, in my opinion, the XII should've pre-empted the SEC and taken West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, TCU, Houston, Memphis, and Syracuse simultaneously to get to 16.

The SEC should only take private, city schools with good academics - if any city schools. Louisville doesn't add too much other than a brand name and their performance on the field/court is slipping. In the current climate only Texas, Oklahoma, maybe Kansas, maybe Oklahoma St, Florida St, and Clemson truly make sense. TCU and Miami as private, city schools could be options.

The SEC will get the pick of the litter. The B1G will tout "academics" and get AAU schools that likely won't help them win many championships.

Well Pittsburgh & Syracuse knew they were about to be off the market and Cincinnati, Louisville, Houston, and Memphis weren't going to get ESPN support because they owned their rights already and for much much less.

(02-11-2018 05:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-11-2018 04:06 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I guess it all boils down to whether you see realignment as a struggle between the SEC and Big Ten or between ESPN and Fox.

Well, there's no longer a struggle between ESPN and FOX. FOX now profits when ESPN profits. The competition will be between ESPN and any new money that wants to get into broadcasting life sporting events.

The SEC and Big 10 are in competition, but right now we are unsure as to who will be backing the Big 10.

Ultimately whether a push is made for Oklahoma or not will depend upon who it is that ultimately backs the Big 10.

If ESPN goes all out for the Big 10 rights in a few years then the distribution of the final product of the Big 12 could get quite interesting. If ESPN doesn't land the Big 10 then I like the SEC's chances of landing OU. If ESPN does land a lot more of the Big 10's rights then anything is possible. I say anything because we don't yet know who will be taking Skipper's place full time.

It will be interesting to see if ESPN makes an offer for FOX's controlling interest in the devalued BTN.

(02-13-2018 04:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-11-2018 05:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-11-2018 04:06 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  I guess it all boils down to whether you see realignment as a struggle between the SEC and Big Ten or between ESPN and Fox.

Well, there's no longer a struggle between ESPN and FOX. FOX now profits when ESPN profits. The competition will be between ESPN and any new money that wants to get into broadcasting life sporting events.

The SEC and Big 10 are in competition, but right now we are unsure as to who will be backing the Big 10.

Ultimately whether a push is made for Oklahoma or not will depend upon who it is that ultimately backs the Big 10.

If ESPN goes all out for the Big 10 rights in a few years then the distribution of the final product of the Big 12 could get quite interesting. If ESPN doesn't land the Big 10 then I like the SEC's chances of landing OU. If ESPN does land a lot more of the Big 10's rights then anything is possible. I say anything because we don't yet know who will be taking Skipper's place full time.

It will be interesting to see if ESPN makes an offer for FOX's controlling interest in the devalued BTN.

Amazon withstanding, that will be a huge tell as to which direction this goes.