Conference Efficiency:

The SEC and Big 10 have plenty of money and both have large market reach. How might they finish and why?

At 18 the SEC could efficiently complete what it has. Its needs are a hoops blueblood and a second Florida school with market penetration.

Florida State delivers the super majority of the Florida market when paired with the market leader in Florida, the University of Florida. Without further damaging the ACC which is our best barrier against Big 10 expansion if it is kept healthy. Best because? It is the most efficient way for the SEC to keep the Big 10 at bay. If they falter, we have to take too many lower value schools to keep them out. Kansas makes it 18.

Flaw: If North Carolina wants to cash in we have to act.

What else is beneficial in a 4 x 18?

It works for the Big 10 too. Washington and Stanford or Oregon gives them added penetration and helps draw more viewers from the Old PAC 12. They can stop there too and quite profitably.

Flaw: If Notre Dame finally decides to join the Big 10 will have to expand. The added value closes some gap in value with the SEC, but it could also destabilize the balance.

18 works well elsewhere too. Let's assume FSU did leave the ACC. At 13 they could pick up either USF or UCF and be at 14 again. West Virginia makes more sense with the old Big East schools. Cincinnati adds markets. Tulane or Temple expands their market. And Central Florida or South Florida could round them out.

The Big 12 is down 4 schools and back to 8. They could pick up: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah to get back to 12. They could then add Oregon State, Oregon, the remainder of Oregon and Stanford, and Cal if they would come, and if not San Diego State.

There would be balance:

SEC:
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.

B1G:
California Los Angeles, Minnesota, Nebraska, Stanford, Southern Cal, Washington
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

ACC:
Boston College, Louisville or Temple, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Central Florida, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Florida, Tulane (Louisville if Temple)

Big 12:
Boise State, Brigham Young, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, Washington State,
Arizona, Arizona State, *California, Colorado, San Diego State, Texas Tech
Baylor, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian

*If no California add Fresno State.

This covers most prospective G5 promotions, creates to higher paid conferences but leaves 2 decent conference to join them with access to the CFP in a new upper tier.

The other angles:

ESPN holds the SEC and ACC and half of the Big 12. FOX keeps the majority of the Big 10 rights and half of the Big 12. Not equitable but little different than now. So stable.
____________________________________________________________________

What if the Big 10 decides to move to 20 with or without Notre Dame?

If the Big 10 decides to fully monetize their westward expansion, then perhaps they decide to take the cream of the academic schools:

They add Washington, California, and Stanford to their West Coast holdings and pick up Colorado as a bridge.

I think the SEC responds to that kind of move and does so offensively with defense in mind. Virginia and North Carolina discourage Big 10 expansion down the coast. Florida State is still essential. With North Carolina Kansas is not as needed. Does the SEC protect its identity by taking the most SEC like school and campus in Clemson or does it add the only other must have ACC school for the Big 10, Duke? Does a Duke in the Big 10 really hurt the SEC? Not really. Duke's market reach is more into the Northeast and that could help the SEC market reach, but it doesn't hurt us. The more daunting question for Clemson would be does the SEC find more value in a third school in Florida in a part of the state where the SEC reach isn't nearly as strong? Miami? Clemson's recent history vs Miami's old history and market? Now that's a bit tougher. Here is where South Carolina's concern over keeping Clemson on the schedule makes the difference. Like Duke, Miami in the Big 10 doesn't really hurt the SEC if the Big 10 expand further. So, at 20 the SEC adds North Carolina, Virginia, Florida State and Clemson.

Now these moves destabilize the ACC significantly. They add fuel to the 3-conference model.

So how does the Big 12 or ACC respond? The Big 12 is still geographically best suited to be the compilation conference of those left behind but deserving of upper tier placement.

In this set of events the Big 12 loses nobody. They pick up Boston College, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse and Notre Dame as a partial. They pick up Duke, Virginia Tech, North Carolina State, Louisville, Georgia Tech and Miami.

24 seems reasonable now.
Big 12:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Houston, Miami, North Carolina State, Virginia Tech
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon, Texas Tech, Utah
*Notre Dame is a partial

Big 10:
California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC:
Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

These are 3 strong conferences but....
Duke, Wake Forest, Oregon State, and Washington State are demoted making cooperation in realigning impractical unless Wake drops out due to pay for play and Duke goes Ivy, while WSU without a GOR to protect them just get dropped. Also, San Diego State is not promoted. These are a lot of issues.

Other Angles: ESPN's hold is consolidated and some overhead cut, but their inventory takes a knock. FOX actually gains access to areas ESPN has held to itself.
It's problematic from the network perspective.

____________________________________________________________________

Why a 3 x 24?

With four more schools (which IMO only happens with unequal revenue sharing) The SEC goes into regional lock down. Duke to complete the Tobacco Trinity and eliminate another bridge South, Georgia Tech to close out Atlanta, Miami to lock down the Florida market and Kansas to balance the new West.

The SEC becomes 4 divisions of 6:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Carolina.

The Big 10 adds Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Oregon, and Arizona. Why Pitt? More NE exposure for ND. They also balance the division.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin
California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington


The Big 12 is radically altered but not in a bad way, just a different way.
Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon State, San Diego State, Utah, Washington State
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Central Florida, Houston, N.C. State, South Florida, Tulane, Wake Forest

Issues and Angles: Everyone in the P5 is included. Promotions are made. ESPN holds onto everything it essentially has exclusive rights to in the East while losing Pitt and Notre Dame which move as a pair, and loses exclusivity in Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida but with brands which don't carry the states (Virginia Tech does). B.C. and Syracuse they give up half rights. FOX gains some SE exposure but not much and certainly nothing in terms of T1 broadcasts. FOX picks up most of the West Coast and ESPN gains some late slots, just not with prime games. The Big 12 has a very consistent balance of added programs and it does span the nation. A national conference network would nicely add to their revenue.

The biggest issue that this division of schools will face is unequal revenue sharing. That can be mitigated with a slightly disproportionate split of any future contracts to slowly balance it, or by the schools included just accepting it. Where unequal revenue sharing has led to division when the top school or schools insisted on more, this is quite different. The top schools aren't losing anything, the lower value schools are just accepting their value and are happy to keep associations up. Here it is used to include the lowest valued, not enhance the richest.

********************************************************************'

Of these 3 models the 18 team four conference model offers the fewest problems, IMO. It is clear the additions will receive full shares; no conference is obliterated but the PAC which is mortally wounded now.

The two 20 team models serve the SEC and Big 10 better in terms of fulfilling more of their likely desires for market reach and workable divisions. It just creates too many issues for the networks and leaves too little for there to be 4 healthy conferences which causes an odd division of schools for the Big 12 and leads to some current P5 likely being left out which opens legal issues.

The 24 / 3 conference model divides nicely and is workable. The network positions are likely acceptable though not ideal for either. It does however give FOX/ESPN tacit control of the CFP structure and coverage if schools they control vote for their plan, which would be likely.

Unequal revenue sharing, even when done for the inclusion of the lowest valued rather than to enrich the strongest is untested in that regard and it leaves some questions to be answered.

Right now, if I had to pick a model, while the 3 by 24 is logical and easier to control, the 4 x18 model has fewer issues. The complaints would be by schools that would likely be in at 20 and but would have to settle for less. The networks aren't really impacted, the conferences keep equal revenue sharing, and the 2 lesser valued conferences remain well constructed and healthy.

****************

Now your thoughts and opinions or alternative suggestions for each?

In the long run JR, I don't think that 24 team conferences are feasible. The idea of taking the current 69 and expand it to 72 divided into 4 conferences is much superior.

I give you a realistic divide into four conferences, giving a little boost to the SEC and to the B1G while using some of their own teams to fill in in the other two leagues.

SEC
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisville, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Auburn, Alabama, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, TCU, Texas, Texas A&M.

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Virginia Tech, Virginia, NC State, Wake Forest, Duke, N. Carolina, S. Carolina, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Central Florida, South Florida, Miami, Temple/Navy.

B1G
Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Ohio State, Stanford, California, UCLA, USC.

Big 12/PAC
Houston, Baylor, SMU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Iowa State, Colorado, Utah, BYU, Arizona, Arizona State, Washington Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State.

(02-18-2023 03:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Conference Efficiency:

The SEC and Big 10 have plenty of money and both have large market reach. How might they finish and why?

At 18 the SEC could efficiently complete what it has. Its needs are a hoops blueblood and a second Florida school with market penetration.

Florida State delivers the super majority of the Florida market when paired with the market leader in Florida, the University of Florida. Without further damaging the ACC which is our best barrier against Big 10 expansion if it is kept healthy. Best because? It is the most efficient way for the SEC to keep the Big 10 at bay. If they falter, we have to take too many lower value schools to keep them out. Kansas makes it 18.

Flaw: If North Carolina wants to cash in we have to act.

What else is beneficial in a 4 x 18?

It works for the Big 10 too. Washington and Stanford or Oregon gives them added penetration and helps draw more viewers from the Old PAC 12. They can stop there too and quite profitably.

Flaw: If Notre Dame finally decides to join the Big 10 will have to expand. The added value closes some gap in value with the SEC, but it could also destabilize the balance.

18 works well elsewhere too. Let's assume FSU did leave the ACC. At 13 they could pick up either USF or UCF and be at 14 again. West Virginia makes more sense with the old Big East schools. Cincinnati adds markets. Tulane or Temple expands their market. And Central Florida or South Florida could round them out.

The Big 12 is down 4 schools and back to 8. They could pick up: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah to get back to 12. They could then add Oregon State, Oregon, the remainder of Oregon and Stanford, and Cal if they would come, and if not San Diego State.

There would be balance:

SEC:
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.

B1G:
California Los Angeles, Minnesota, Nebraska, Stanford, Southern Cal, Washington
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

ACC:
Boston College, Louisville or Temple, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Central Florida, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Florida, Tulane (Louisville if Temple)

Big 12:
Boise State, Brigham Young, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, Washington State,
Arizona, Arizona State, *California, Colorado, San Diego State, Texas Tech
Baylor, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian

*If no California add Fresno State.

This covers most prospective G5 promotions, creates to higher paid conferences but leaves 2 decent conference to join them with access to the CFP in a new upper tier.

The other angles:

ESPN holds the SEC and ACC and half of the Big 12. FOX keeps the majority of the Big 10 rights and half of the Big 12. Not equitable but little different than now. So stable.
____________________________________________________________________

What if the Big 10 decides to move to 20 with or without Notre Dame?

If the Big 10 decides to fully monetize their westward expansion, then perhaps they decide to take the cream of the academic schools:

They add Washington, California, and Stanford to their West Coast holdings and pick up Colorado as a bridge.

I think the SEC responds to that kind of move and does so offensively with defense in mind. Virginia and North Carolina discourage Big 10 expansion down the coast. Florida State is still essential. With North Carolina Kansas is not as needed. Does the SEC protect its identity by taking the most SEC like school and campus in Clemson or does it add the only other must have ACC school for the Big 10, Duke? Does a Duke in the Big 10 really hurt the SEC? Not really. Duke's market reach is more into the Northeast and that could help the SEC market reach, but it doesn't hurt us. The more daunting question for Clemson would be does the SEC find more value in a third school in Florida in a part of the state where the SEC reach isn't nearly as strong? Miami? Clemson's recent history vs Miami's old history and market? Now that's a bit tougher. Here is where South Carolina's concern over keeping Clemson on the schedule makes the difference. Like Duke, Miami in the Big 10 doesn't really hurt the SEC if the Big 10 expand further. So, at 20 the SEC adds North Carolina, Virginia, Florida State and Clemson.

Now these moves destabilize the ACC significantly. They add fuel to the 3-conference model.

So how does the Big 12 or ACC respond? The Big 12 is still geographically best suited to be the compilation conference of those left behind but deserving of upper tier placement.

In this set of events the Big 12 loses nobody. They pick up Boston College, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse and Notre Dame as a partial. They pick up Duke, Virginia Tech, North Carolina State, Louisville, Georgia Tech and Miami.

24 seems reasonable now.
Big 12:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Houston, Miami, North Carolina State, Virginia Tech
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon, Texas Tech, Utah
*Notre Dame is a partial

Big 10:
California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC:
Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

These are 3 strong conferences but....
Duke, Wake Forest, Oregon State, and Washington State are demoted making cooperation in realigning impractical unless Wake drops out due to pay for play and Duke goes Ivy, while WSU without a GOR to protect them just get dropped. Also, San Diego State is not promoted. These are a lot of issues.

Other Angles: ESPN's hold is consolidated and some overhead cut, but their inventory takes a knock. FOX actually gains access to areas ESPN has held to itself.
It's problematic from the network perspective.

____________________________________________________________________

Why a 3 x 24?

With four more schools (which IMO only happens with unequal revenue sharing) The SEC goes into regional lock down. Duke to complete the Tobacco Trinity and eliminate another bridge South, Georgia Tech to close out Atlanta, Miami to lock down the Florida market and Kansas to balance the new West.

The SEC becomes 4 divisions of 6:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Carolina.

The Big 10 adds Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Oregon, and Arizona. Why Pitt? More NE exposure for ND. They also balance the division.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin
California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington


The Big 12 is radically altered but not in a bad way, just a different way.
Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon State, San Diego State, Utah, Washington State
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Central Florida, Houston, N.C. State, South Florida, Tulane, Wake Forest

Issues and Angles: Everyone in the P5 is included. Promotions are made. ESPN holds onto everything it essentially has exclusive rights to in the East while losing Pitt and Notre Dame which move as a pair, and loses exclusivity in Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida but with brands which don't carry the states (Virginia Tech does). B.C. and Syracuse they give up half rights. FOX gains some SE exposure but not much and certainly nothing in terms of T1 broadcasts. FOX picks up most of the West Coast and ESPN gains some late slots, just not with prime games. The Big 12 has a very consistent balance of added programs and it does span the nation. A national conference network would nicely add to their revenue.

The biggest issue that this division of schools will face is unequal revenue sharing. That can be mitigated with a slightly disproportionate split of any future contracts to slowly balance it, or by the schools included just accepting it. Where unequal revenue sharing has led to division when the top school or schools insisted on more, this is quite different. The top schools aren't losing anything, the lower value schools are just accepting their value and are happy to keep associations up. Here it is used to include the lowest valued, not enhance the richest.

********************************************************************'

Of these 3 models the 18 team four conference model offers the fewest problems, IMO. It is clear the additions will receive full shares; no conference is obliterated but the PAC which is mortally wounded now.

The two 20 team models serve the SEC and Big 10 better in terms of fulfilling more of their likely desires for market reach and workable divisions. It just creates too many issues for the networks and leaves too little for there to be 4 healthy conferences which causes an odd division of schools for the Big 12 and leads to some current P5 likely being left out which opens legal issues.

The 24 / 3 conference model divides nicely and is workable. The network positions are likely acceptable though not ideal for either. It does however give FOX/ESPN tacit control of the CFP structure and coverage if schools they control vote for their plan, which would be likely.

Unequal revenue sharing, even when done for the inclusion of the lowest valued rather than to enrich the strongest is untested in that regard and it leaves some questions to be answered.

Right now, if I had to pick a model, while the 3 by 24 is logical and easier to control, the 4 x18 model has fewer issues. The complaints would be by schools that would likely be in at 20 and but would have to settle for less. The networks aren't really impacted, the conferences keep equal revenue sharing, and the 2 lesser valued conferences remain well constructed and healthy.

****************

Now your thoughts and opinions or alternative suggestions for each?

If in, let's say, 8 or 10 years they go to 24, I don't think it's long after that they will then split back into conferences of 8-12. There are just a lot of internal issues that would seem to lend towards that. Compare to why companies spin off whole parts. It usually isn't just due to making a buck off of the spin off.

But if the PAC is gone, I agree that we are more likely to see the P4 be sized 16-20.

I know we on the forums want them all to be the same size, but I think reality's gonna end up to be far messier.

You and I (slightly) disagree about Kansas/Washington, but that's cool. I wouldn't be surprised if KS ends up in the SEC and WA in the B10. Though if that does happen, I think it's only because they are bowing to external pressuring rather than internal wants/needs.

For the ACC, I don't know... From what little we could hear back then, BC seemed to have issues with UConn, and Temple, and apparently helped get both blocked at various times. But if the ACC expands with Cin and WV, I wonder if that blocking would stand. Internal voting factions can shift. It's something that all too often isn't taken under consideration when assembling realignment lists. I think UConn might make it in, but I'm not so sure about Temple. But maybe. I also think that, if Memphis is considered too far outside the footprint, then Tulane definitely is.

And yes, I don't know how Cal's going to be able to rehabilitate itself with other schools, much less conferences, after the show the BoG put on. Not just because of the drama. But they shined a light on things that probably needed light. And as you know, recipients all too often kill the messenger. They seem to be kinda persona-non-grata right now, and in general the other PAC schools are seeming to be painted with a similar brush - even if geography or internal politics weren't issues. I think the PAC situation is much more complicated than we tend to talk about in these forums.

If the Big12 wants PAC schools, going for the easiest pulls is the smartest - As you note, some subset of the 4Cs, plus a california presence.

Then, if Washington is pulled by the B10, Oregon, Utah, and the state schools, may then run to the B12.

But if the B10 doesn't take WA, I think the PAC7/8 stay together. Colorado is the big if here. I think they likely want to stay with USC/UCLA and so they have a real quandary. I think if the AZ schools plus SDSU and Fresno get B12 invites, then - if it was handled well - the B12 might shake Colorado loose too. But I don't think any of the others moves unless/until WA does. (With the possible exception of Stanford to B10.)

So I dunno.

There are moves that I think would be smart both for the conferences, as well as strategically. But. Every day I become less and less confident that any moves are actually going to happen.

Risk averse? more like fault/blame averse.

No one seems to want to move.

I don't know if even Archimedes could use a lever to move these schools to action.

(02-21-2023 04:57 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(02-18-2023 03:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Conference Efficiency:

The SEC and Big 10 have plenty of money and both have large market reach. How might they finish and why?

At 18 the SEC could efficiently complete what it has. Its needs are a hoops blueblood and a second Florida school with market penetration.

Florida State delivers the super majority of the Florida market when paired with the market leader in Florida, the University of Florida. Without further damaging the ACC which is our best barrier against Big 10 expansion if it is kept healthy. Best because? It is the most efficient way for the SEC to keep the Big 10 at bay. If they falter, we have to take too many lower value schools to keep them out. Kansas makes it 18.

Flaw: If North Carolina wants to cash in we have to act.

What else is beneficial in a 4 x 18?

It works for the Big 10 too. Washington and Stanford or Oregon gives them added penetration and helps draw more viewers from the Old PAC 12. They can stop there too and quite profitably.

Flaw: If Notre Dame finally decides to join the Big 10 will have to expand. The added value closes some gap in value with the SEC, but it could also destabilize the balance.

18 works well elsewhere too. Let's assume FSU did leave the ACC. At 13 they could pick up either USF or UCF and be at 14 again. West Virginia makes more sense with the old Big East schools. Cincinnati adds markets. Tulane or Temple expands their market. And Central Florida or South Florida could round them out.

The Big 12 is down 4 schools and back to 8. They could pick up: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah to get back to 12. They could then add Oregon State, Oregon, the remainder of Oregon and Stanford, and Cal if they would come, and if not San Diego State.

There would be balance:

SEC:
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.

B1G:
California Los Angeles, Minnesota, Nebraska, Stanford, Southern Cal, Washington
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

ACC:
Boston College, Louisville or Temple, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Central Florida, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Florida, Tulane (Louisville if Temple)

Big 12:
Boise State, Brigham Young, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, Washington State,
Arizona, Arizona State, *California, Colorado, San Diego State, Texas Tech
Baylor, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian

*If no California add Fresno State.

This covers most prospective G5 promotions, creates to higher paid conferences but leaves 2 decent conference to join them with access to the CFP in a new upper tier.

The other angles:

ESPN holds the SEC and ACC and half of the Big 12. FOX keeps the majority of the Big 10 rights and half of the Big 12. Not equitable but little different than now. So stable.
____________________________________________________________________

What if the Big 10 decides to move to 20 with or without Notre Dame?

If the Big 10 decides to fully monetize their westward expansion, then perhaps they decide to take the cream of the academic schools:

They add Washington, California, and Stanford to their West Coast holdings and pick up Colorado as a bridge.

I think the SEC responds to that kind of move and does so offensively with defense in mind. Virginia and North Carolina discourage Big 10 expansion down the coast. Florida State is still essential. With North Carolina Kansas is not as needed. Does the SEC protect its identity by taking the most SEC like school and campus in Clemson or does it add the only other must have ACC school for the Big 10, Duke? Does a Duke in the Big 10 really hurt the SEC? Not really. Duke's market reach is more into the Northeast and that could help the SEC market reach, but it doesn't hurt us. The more daunting question for Clemson would be does the SEC find more value in a third school in Florida in a part of the state where the SEC reach isn't nearly as strong? Miami? Clemson's recent history vs Miami's old history and market? Now that's a bit tougher. Here is where South Carolina's concern over keeping Clemson on the schedule makes the difference. Like Duke, Miami in the Big 10 doesn't really hurt the SEC if the Big 10 expand further. So, at 20 the SEC adds North Carolina, Virginia, Florida State and Clemson.

Now these moves destabilize the ACC significantly. They add fuel to the 3-conference model.

So how does the Big 12 or ACC respond? The Big 12 is still geographically best suited to be the compilation conference of those left behind but deserving of upper tier placement.

In this set of events the Big 12 loses nobody. They pick up Boston College, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse and Notre Dame as a partial. They pick up Duke, Virginia Tech, North Carolina State, Louisville, Georgia Tech and Miami.

24 seems reasonable now.
Big 12:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Houston, Miami, North Carolina State, Virginia Tech
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon, Texas Tech, Utah
*Notre Dame is a partial

Big 10:
California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC:
Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

These are 3 strong conferences but....
Duke, Wake Forest, Oregon State, and Washington State are demoted making cooperation in realigning impractical unless Wake drops out due to pay for play and Duke goes Ivy, while WSU without a GOR to protect them just get dropped. Also, San Diego State is not promoted. These are a lot of issues.

Other Angles: ESPN's hold is consolidated and some overhead cut, but their inventory takes a knock. FOX actually gains access to areas ESPN has held to itself.
It's problematic from the network perspective.

____________________________________________________________________

Why a 3 x 24?

With four more schools (which IMO only happens with unequal revenue sharing) The SEC goes into regional lock down. Duke to complete the Tobacco Trinity and eliminate another bridge South, Georgia Tech to close out Atlanta, Miami to lock down the Florida market and Kansas to balance the new West.

The SEC becomes 4 divisions of 6:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami, South Carolina.

The Big 10 adds Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Oregon, and Arizona. Why Pitt? More NE exposure for ND. They also balance the division.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin
California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington


The Big 12 is radically altered but not in a bad way, just a different way.
Arizona State, Brigham Young, Oregon State, San Diego State, Utah, Washington State
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Central Florida, Houston, N.C. State, South Florida, Tulane, Wake Forest

Issues and Angles: Everyone in the P5 is included. Promotions are made. ESPN holds onto everything it essentially has exclusive rights to in the East while losing Pitt and Notre Dame which move as a pair, and loses exclusivity in Kentucky, North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida but with brands which don't carry the states (Virginia Tech does). B.C. and Syracuse they give up half rights. FOX gains some SE exposure but not much and certainly nothing in terms of T1 broadcasts. FOX picks up most of the West Coast and ESPN gains some late slots, just not with prime games. The Big 12 has a very consistent balance of added programs and it does span the nation. A national conference network would nicely add to their revenue.

The biggest issue that this division of schools will face is unequal revenue sharing. That can be mitigated with a slightly disproportionate split of any future contracts to slowly balance it, or by the schools included just accepting it. Where unequal revenue sharing has led to division when the top school or schools insisted on more, this is quite different. The top schools aren't losing anything, the lower value schools are just accepting their value and are happy to keep associations up. Here it is used to include the lowest valued, not enhance the richest.

********************************************************************'

Of these 3 models the 18 team four conference model offers the fewest problems, IMO. It is clear the additions will receive full shares; no conference is obliterated but the PAC which is mortally wounded now.

The two 20 team models serve the SEC and Big 10 better in terms of fulfilling more of their likely desires for market reach and workable divisions. It just creates too many issues for the networks and leaves too little for there to be 4 healthy conferences which causes an odd division of schools for the Big 12 and leads to some current P5 likely being left out which opens legal issues.

The 24 / 3 conference model divides nicely and is workable. The network positions are likely acceptable though not ideal for either. It does however give FOX/ESPN tacit control of the CFP structure and coverage if schools they control vote for their plan, which would be likely.

Unequal revenue sharing, even when done for the inclusion of the lowest valued rather than to enrich the strongest is untested in that regard and it leaves some questions to be answered.

Right now, if I had to pick a model, while the 3 by 24 is logical and easier to control, the 4 x18 model has fewer issues. The complaints would be by schools that would likely be in at 20 and but would have to settle for less. The networks aren't really impacted, the conferences keep equal revenue sharing, and the 2 lesser valued conferences remain well constructed and healthy.

****************

Now your thoughts and opinions or alternative suggestions for each?

If in, let's say, 8 or 10 years they go to 24, I don't think it's long after that they will then split back into conferences of 8-12. There are just a lot of internal issues that would seem to lend towards that. Compare to why companies spin off whole parts. It usually isn't just due to making a buck off of the spin off.

But if the PAC is gone, I agree that we are more likely to see the P4 be sized 16-20.

1)I know we on the forums want them all to be the same size, but I think reality's gonna end up to be far messier.

You and I (slightly) disagree about Kansas/Washington, but that's cool. I wouldn't be surprised if KS ends up in the SEC and WA in the B10. Though if that does happen, I think it's only because they are bowing to external pressuring rather than internal wants/needs.

For the ACC, I don't know... From what little we could hear back then, 2)BC seemed to have issues with UConn, and Temple, and apparently helped get both blocked at various times. But if the ACC expands with Cin and WV, I wonder if that blocking would stand. Internal voting factions can shift. It's something that all too often isn't taken under consideration when assembling realignment lists. I think UConn might make it in,3) but I'm not so sure about Temple. But maybe. I also think that, if Memphis is considered too far outside the footprint, then Tulane definitely is.

And yes, I don't know how Cal's going to be able to rehabilitate itself with other schools, much less conferences, after the show the BoG put on. Not just because of the drama. But they shined a light on things that probably needed light. And as you know, recipients all too often kill the messenger. They seem to be kinda persona-non-grata right now, and in general the other PAC schools are seeming to be painted with a similar brush - even if geography or internal politics weren't issues. I think the PAC situation is much more complicated than we tend to talk about in these forums.

4)If the Big12 wants PAC schools, going for the easiest pulls is the smartest - As you note, some subset of the 4Cs, plus a california presence.

Then, if Washington is pulled by the B10, Oregon, Utah, and the state schools, may then run to the B12.

But if the B10 doesn't take WA, I think the PAC7/8 stay together. Colorado is the big if here. I think they likely want to stay with USC/UCLA and so they have a real quandary. I think if the AZ schools plus SDSU and Fresno get B12 invites, then - if it was handled well - the B12 might shake Colorado loose too. But I don't think any of the others moves unless/until WA does. (With the possible exception of Stanford to B10.)

So I dunno.

There are moves that I think would be smart both for the conferences, as well as strategically. But. Every day I become less and less confident that any moves are actually going to happen.

Risk averse? more like fault/blame averse.

No one seems to want to move.

I don't know if even Archimedes could use a lever to move these schools to action.

1)As we move into the playoff era, it's important to have symmetry.
It's something the fans understand because of the professional model.

2)There are only enough college football fans in New England to support one football team (barely). There is no room for a second team

3) see above. A Temple addition is all about filling a market hole on the eastern seaboard. UConn has no market.

4)The Big 12 would be smart to stay completely out of California leaving it to the B1G. It would make it easier for all of the Big 12 schools to recruit California and keep them out of direct competition with any California school.

If the Big 10 and SEC only take 4, I think its Washington, Oregon, FSU and Clemson.

Then you have all the contenders except Notre Dame and Miami. There are still decent programs in the other 2. But the champs will be in the P2, not the M2.

UConn and SMU are the two biggest spenders outside the P5. So I think one of them beats out Temple or Tulane for that last ACC slot in your scenario. USF probably does get in.
In the west, they might well take SMU with SDSU instead of Boise.

With Clemson in the SEC instead of Kansas, the Big Pac only needs one G5, so its SDSU. The Big ACC needs 3, so its USF, UConn and a tossup between Memphis, SMU, Temple and Tulane.

I think come 2036, the B$G and $EC decide 20 is their number. Notre Dame realizes they need to join or get left behind.

B$G
Notre Dame, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn St., Ohio St., Michigan, Michigan St., Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern,
Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Washington, Oregon, Stanford, USC, UCLA

$EC
Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. St., Alabama, Auburn,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, FSU, Clemson, UNC, Virginia

ACC
Miami, Georgia Tech, N. Carolina St., Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, Pitt, BC, Syracuse, Louisville,
WVU, Cincinnati, UCF, USF, UConn, Temple

Big Pac
Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Oklahoma St., Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa St., BYU, Utah,
Colorado, Arizona, Arizona St., Cal, Washington St., Oregon St.

Two of 20 and two of 16. Maybe the Big Pac adds SDSU and SMU or Boise. For the ACC to get to 18, it would be Memphis and Tulane, so probably they stop at 16.

(02-21-2023 12:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think come 2036, the B$G and $EC decide 20 is their number. Notre Dame realizes they need to join or get left behind.

B$G
Notre Dame, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn St., Ohio St., Michigan, Michigan St., Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern,
Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Washington, Oregon, Stanford, USC, UCLA

$EC
Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss. St., Alabama, Auburn,
Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, FSU, Clemson, UNC, Virginia

ACC
Miami, Georgia Tech, N. Carolina St., Duke, Wake Forest, Virginia Tech, Pitt, BC, Syracuse, Louisville,
WVU, Cincinnati, UCF, USF, UConn, Temple

Big Pac
Houston, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Oklahoma St., Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa St., BYU, Utah,
Colorado, Arizona, Arizona St., Cal, Washington St., Oregon St.

Two of 20 and two of 16. Maybe the Big Pac adds SDSU and SMU or Boise. For the ACC to get to 18, it would be Memphis and Tulane, so probably they stop at 16.

Interesting.

I think ND still stays independent, and in the ACC, though.

For the B10, just swap in Kansas.

For 18 to the ACC, I think Memphis and Tulane round it out.

Drop Cal from Big12/PAC, add SDSU, Fresno State, SMU, and Boise state for 18.

Becomes: 20/20/18/18+1

I think that adds all 10 from your "best of G5" list except ECU.

B1G and SEC to 20 each. ACC, PAC, and XII add a few schools and merge to form the Alliance.

Major Powers

B1G
Central: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Eastern: Maryland, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Penn St, Rutgers
Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio St, Purdue
Pacific: Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington

SEC
East: Clemson, Florida St, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia
South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St
Southeast: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Southwest: Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

ALLIANCE
Central: Baylor, Houston, Iowa St, Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech
East: Boston College, Duke, North Carolina St, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Temple, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest, West Virginia
Metro: Central Florida, Cincinnati, East Carolina, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Memphis, Miami, South Florida, Tulane
West: Arizona, Arizona St, BYU, California, Colorado, Oregon St, San Diego St, Utah, Washington St

For too long ESPN has been worried about splits.
Primarily because they were looking at pulling inventory for all conferences. Now that the B1G has cut the mouse off, ESPN should be looking at providing inventory for it's own platforms instead of looking all over the map.

I believe that a merger (of sorts) will occur between the SEC and the ACC. It will be called a merger, but in reality it will just be an excuse to rearrange the deck chairs and place several schools where they can maximize their potential as well as bumping revenue for ESPN.

To SEC from the ACC: Florida State and Clemson
To the ACC from the SEC: Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina

This gives each conference 15 members that will play in 5 team divisions, playing each team in division every year while playing three from one, and two from the other division in a rotating basis for 9 conference games.

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Kentucky
Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State
UVa, Duke, Carolina, Virginia Tech, Miami

SEC
Florida, FSU, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia
Tennessee, Alabama, Old Miss, Mississippi State, LSU
Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

The Big 12 is then free to take the 4 corners schools, which gives ESPN some late night time slot inventory, while the rest of the PAC can be divided between the B1G and the Mountain West.

(03-05-2023 02:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  For too long ESPN has been worried about splits.
Primarily because they were looking at pulling inventory for all conferences. Now that the B1G has cut the mouse off, ESPN should be looking at providing inventory for it's own platforms instead of looking all over the map.

I believe that a merger (of sorts) will occur between the SEC and the ACC. It will be called a merger, but in reality it will just be an excuse to rearrange the deck chairs and place several schools where they can maximize their potential as well as bumping revenue for ESPN.

To SEC from the ACC: Florida State and Clemson
To the ACC from the SEC: Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina

This gives each conference 15 members that will play in 5 team divisions, playing each team in division every year while playing three from one, and two from the other division in a rotating basis for 9 conference games.

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Kentucky
Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State
UVa, Duke, Carolina, Virginia Tech, Miami

SEC
Florida, FSU, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia
Tennessee, Alabama, Old Miss, Mississippi State, LSU
Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

The Big 12 is then free to take the 4 corners schools, which gives ESPN some late night time slot inventory, while the rest of the PAC can be divided between the B1G and the Mountain West.

X, a full merger accomplishes all of that without the problem of forcing anyone down in pay. It also gives us the opportunity to pick up two more and 32 is leverage against future decisions with ESPN holding a 50% interest in the Big 12 and possibly controlling their T3 future.

(03-05-2023 02:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  For too long ESPN has been worried about splits.
Primarily because they were looking at pulling inventory for all conferences. Now that the B1G has cut the mouse off, ESPN should be looking at providing inventory for it's own platforms instead of looking all over the map.

I believe that a merger (of sorts) will occur between the SEC and the ACC. It will be called a merger, but in reality it will just be an excuse to rearrange the deck chairs and place several schools where they can maximize their potential as well as bumping revenue for ESPN.

To SEC from the ACC: Florida State and Clemson
To the ACC from the SEC: Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina

This gives each conference 15 members that will play in 5 team divisions, playing each team in division every year while playing three from one, and two from the other division in a rotating basis for 9 conference games.

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Kentucky
Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State
UVa, Duke, Carolina, Virginia Tech, Miami

SEC
Florida, FSU, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia
Tennessee, Alabama, Old Miss, Mississippi State, LSU
Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

The Big 12 is then free to take the 4 corners schools, which gives ESPN some late night time slot inventory, while the rest of the PAC can be divided between the B1G and the Mountain West.

X, a full merger accomplishes all of that without the problem of forcing anyone down in pay. It also gives us the opportunity to pick up two more and 32 is leverage against future decisions with ESPN holding a 50% interest in the Big 12 and possibly controlling their T3 future.

JR, picking up two more may be a problem without tapping into the Big 12, which may or may not be possible. FOX has already proven that they will take a pound of flesh if they have a chance.
Adjustments in distribution could easily be made in that the cost of competition would not be the same for each league.

(03-05-2023 04:17 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  For too long ESPN has been worried about splits.
Primarily because they were looking at pulling inventory for all conferences. Now that the B1G has cut the mouse off, ESPN should be looking at providing inventory for it's own platforms instead of looking all over the map.

I believe that a merger (of sorts) will occur between the SEC and the ACC. It will be called a merger, but in reality it will just be an excuse to rearrange the deck chairs and place several schools where they can maximize their potential as well as bumping revenue for ESPN.

To SEC from the ACC: Florida State and Clemson
To the ACC from the SEC: Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina

This gives each conference 15 members that will play in 5 team divisions, playing each team in division every year while playing three from one, and two from the other division in a rotating basis for 9 conference games.

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Kentucky
Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State
UVa, Duke, Carolina, Virginia Tech, Miami

SEC
Florida, FSU, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia
Tennessee, Alabama, Old Miss, Mississippi State, LSU
Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

The Big 12 is then free to take the 4 corners schools, which gives ESPN some late night time slot inventory, while the rest of the PAC can be divided between the B1G and the Mountain West.

X, a full merger accomplishes all of that without the problem of forcing anyone down in pay. It also gives us the opportunity to pick up two more and 32 is leverage against future decisions with ESPN holding a 50% interest in the Big 12 and possibly controlling their T3 future.

JR, picking up two more may be a problem without tapping into the Big 12, which may or may not be possible. FOX has already proven that they will take a pound of flesh if they have a chance.
Adjustments in distribution could easily be made in that the cost of competition would not be the same for each league.

I don't think FOX would care much about WVU. Kansas would be another matter. And if they are making room for PAC 12 schools they might not care. Won't know unless we cross that bridge.

(03-05-2023 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 04:17 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  For too long ESPN has been worried about splits.
Primarily because they were looking at pulling inventory for all conferences. Now that the B1G has cut the mouse off, ESPN should be looking at providing inventory for it's own platforms instead of looking all over the map.

I believe that a merger (of sorts) will occur between the SEC and the ACC. It will be called a merger, but in reality it will just be an excuse to rearrange the deck chairs and place several schools where they can maximize their potential as well as bumping revenue for ESPN.

To SEC from the ACC: Florida State and Clemson
To the ACC from the SEC: Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina

This gives each conference 15 members that will play in 5 team divisions, playing each team in division every year while playing three from one, and two from the other division in a rotating basis for 9 conference games.

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Kentucky
Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State
UVa, Duke, Carolina, Virginia Tech, Miami

SEC
Florida, FSU, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia
Tennessee, Alabama, Old Miss, Mississippi State, LSU
Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

The Big 12 is then free to take the 4 corners schools, which gives ESPN some late night time slot inventory, while the rest of the PAC can be divided between the B1G and the Mountain West.

X, a full merger accomplishes all of that without the problem of forcing anyone down in pay. It also gives us the opportunity to pick up two more and 32 is leverage against future decisions with ESPN holding a 50% interest in the Big 12 and possibly controlling their T3 future.

JR, picking up two more may be a problem without tapping into the Big 12, which may or may not be possible. FOX has already proven that they will take a pound of flesh if they have a chance.
Adjustments in distribution could easily be made in that the cost of competition would not be the same for each league.

I don't think FOX would care much about WVU. Kansas would be another matter. And if they are making room for PAC 12 schools they might not care. Won't know unless we cross that bridge.

You would have to wonder if the cable operators in Ohio might be pushing against Cincinnati being added to the ACC since they would have pay a higher rate for the ACCN if Cincinnati were added to the ACC. An increase they wouldn't be responsible for with Cincinnati in the Big 12.

(03-05-2023 05:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 04:17 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  For too long ESPN has been worried about splits.
Primarily because they were looking at pulling inventory for all conferences. Now that the B1G has cut the mouse off, ESPN should be looking at providing inventory for it's own platforms instead of looking all over the map.

I believe that a merger (of sorts) will occur between the SEC and the ACC. It will be called a merger, but in reality it will just be an excuse to rearrange the deck chairs and place several schools where they can maximize their potential as well as bumping revenue for ESPN.

To SEC from the ACC: Florida State and Clemson
To the ACC from the SEC: Vanderbilt, Kentucky and South Carolina

This gives each conference 15 members that will play in 5 team divisions, playing each team in division every year while playing three from one, and two from the other division in a rotating basis for 9 conference games.

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Kentucky
Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State
UVa, Duke, Carolina, Virginia Tech, Miami

SEC
Florida, FSU, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia
Tennessee, Alabama, Old Miss, Mississippi State, LSU
Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

The Big 12 is then free to take the 4 corners schools, which gives ESPN some late night time slot inventory, while the rest of the PAC can be divided between the B1G and the Mountain West.

X, a full merger accomplishes all of that without the problem of forcing anyone down in pay. It also gives us the opportunity to pick up two more and 32 is leverage against future decisions with ESPN holding a 50% interest in the Big 12 and possibly controlling their T3 future.

JR, picking up two more may be a problem without tapping into the Big 12, which may or may not be possible. FOX has already proven that they will take a pound of flesh if they have a chance.
Adjustments in distribution could easily be made in that the cost of competition would not be the same for each league.

I don't think FOX would care much about WVU. Kansas would be another matter. And if they are making room for PAC 12 schools they might not care. Won't know unless we cross that bridge.

You would have to wonder if the cable operators in Ohio might be pushing against Cincinnati being added to the ACC since they would have pay a higher rate for the ACCN if Cincinnati were added to the ACC. An increase they wouldn't be responsible for with Cincinnati in the Big 12.

Can you imagine the fit they would pitch if Cincinnati joined the ACC and the ACC then merged with the SEC? There would be a new level of squirm in the Buckeye state.

(03-05-2023 05:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 05:02 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 04:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 04:17 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2023 02:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  X, a full merger accomplishes all of that without the problem of forcing anyone down in pay. It also gives us the opportunity to pick up two more and 32 is leverage against future decisions with ESPN holding a 50% interest in the Big 12 and possibly controlling their T3 future.

JR, picking up two more may be a problem without tapping into the Big 12, which may or may not be possible. FOX has already proven that they will take a pound of flesh if they have a chance.
Adjustments in distribution could easily be made in that the cost of competition would not be the same for each league.

I don't think FOX would care much about WVU. Kansas would be another matter. And if they are making room for PAC 12 schools they might not care. Won't know unless we cross that bridge.

You would have to wonder if the cable operators in Ohio might be pushing against Cincinnati being added to the ACC since they would have pay a higher rate for the ACCN if Cincinnati were added to the ACC. An increase they wouldn't be responsible for with Cincinnati in the Big 12.

Can you imagine the fit they would pitch if Cincinnati joined the ACC and the ACC then merged with the SEC? There would be a new level of squirm in the Buckeye state.

I think that Cincinnati is in the Big 12 for the duration.