(01-01-2016 02:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I'm working on the theory that the SEC plans to pick apart the Big 12 at some point in the future.

Who's worth having? Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas, I think, are the top 4 programs and are very much worth having for a variety of reasons. I think all of these additions would be a plus in the streaming model.

Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas

Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn

Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

I still think there is a chance that an additional 6 teams from the ACC could prove profitable as well as long as FSU and Clemson are among them. The reason I think that is because the more conference games you play among a larger group of schools, the more content is under one roof. Is there really a need to play non-conference games when you could play at least 11 strong and varied opponents within your league? Each games that adds to the outcome of the conference race adds value as opposed to playing 2 or more non-conference games and splitting the value with another league. You could save true non-conference games for the postseason. It would probably make the bowl games more special and slightly more valuable as well.

The other reason is basic market dynamics. I seriously doubt ESPN wants to pay for a 20+ team league. But...they'll have to or risk losing the content. Monopolization of the product is the key. The bigger the primary leagues become the fewer relevant leagues there will be. Entities like ESPN or FOX can save money by not having to go to the trouble of paying decent rates to lesser leagues. If all the leftovers are essentially relegated to G5-like leagues with the rates that go with them then there's a potential for significant savings there. Does ESPN care if there are 60 or 72 major programs as long as there are more conference games between power programs? I doubt it.

Who could provide great content from the ACC?

Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, NC State, Virginia Tech, and Pittsburgh

I'm excluding the possibility of UNC, Duke, and UVA here as I don't think those schools will want to leave unless the league is falling apart. It's entirely possible that the league's value could collapse with the invitation of FSU and Clemson, but even then they may choose the B1G. It's not such a bad thing though as VT is a better brand to have than UVA. Pitt taps another new market plus bringing another AAU school. GT's inclusion also brings another AAU school and also helps to renew some regional rivalries with old SEC teams. I think that helps to multiply interest within the region that cares about college football the most. NC State is not a great brand, but it taps a new market and with SEC money it will develop into a much more relevant brand.

Playing 11 league games, as I think the Power leagues are going to end up doing before much longer anyway, will allow a regular rotation and an increased amount of content.

5 division games, 1 permanent rival against each of the other 3, 1 rotating game against each of the other 3. You play everyone in the league at least once every 5 years.

Maybe the 12th game is a non-conference rivalry or G5 team. Then you add the value of 4 division winners playing in a conference semi-final. I think it would work.

I agree that even with streaming that taking Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas would be a NET gain.