(06-14-2018 09:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 09:11 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(06-14-2018 01:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 11:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(06-13-2018 02:55 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I like that arrangement at 20. If we were thoroughly convinced that the ACC would remain and not be poached that would be a pretty nice way to finish things out.

I think the plan is to move to 16 with two more from the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma are the preferred pairing. But whether we did that with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, or Texas and Texas Tech, I think our preference would be to wait and see what happens to the East before committing more slots.

That's why the only thing that could make us take more would be the acceptance of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State only to have Texas say they were ready to join too. At 18 I think we hold 1 slot each for a school from North Carolina and Virginia.

But if we were assured the ACC would be a gestalt, then finishing out with Kansas and another, West Virginia makes sense, could very well prove to be a decisive move that from that point on hamstrings our competition to match our branding and markets.

I noticed that the FSU President publicly stated that he expected anywhere from a 10-15 million dollar boost for the ACC Network when it comes online.

I'm not sure I buy that. It's entirely possible he's just saying that to give the donors what they want to hear. In the event it doesn't pan out then no harm, no foul as a school like FSU will have a home elsewhere if they want one. It's not like anyone would blame the Presidents for the failure of the network anyway should things turn out poorly.

On the other hand, it's entirely possible things work out pretty well. If the SEC and ACC Networks are bundled together then that's a pretty strong footprint with a lot of content. Maybe they make pretty good money on it.

The long term issue is the survival of the cable model itself. The content is valuable, but eventually a system that rewards multiple feeds will lose popularity.

I think the ACCN will payout around 7 million by the 3rd or 4th years. All of their schools will be recouping fronted overhead for at least the first two years if not 3. After that they should see around 7 million. Remember their rate won't be as high as ours initially. If they really drive their alums to subscribe they could catch up a bit more and wind up NETTING around 10 million a year which puts them in the 36 to 37 million range with contract escalation they could hit 40 million.

But you hit on a good point with regards to the FSU president. If they wind up with a windfall great. If they don't he's set up a future move by touting it. So he's placed it where it can be played either way regardless of outcome.

But as to multiple feeds, I think if Comcast wins somebody buys out ESPN and finances the moves anyway. If Disney wins they do it. But no matter what it will still be a battle for the rights and the 4 remaining conferences will be utilized to try to land the key properties.

AllTideUp, you made a good point about the SEC schools being in decent proximity to one another in the context of conference geography. With a few exceptions, most are within driving distances to most others. Places such as Kentucky, South Carolina, Florida, Mizzou, and Texas A&M, are not centralized, so travel may be a bit extended depending on whom they are playing.

Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Kentucky have in-state rivalries with OOC P5 schools, all from the ACC.
I keep wondering if it would be advantageous if schools such as Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas, and LSU each had a permanent, yearly P5 rivalry from another conference? That could be a nice attraction for TV + streaming, conference rivalries, etc. Such could look something like this:

Kentucky - Louisville (ongoing)
South Carolina - Clemson (ongoing)
Georgia - Georgia Tech (ongoing)
Florida - Florida State (ongoing)
Vanderbilt - Wake Forest (often play) option- Duke
Tennessee - North Carolina or Va. Tech
Texas A&M - Texas
Arkansas - Oklahoma State?
Missouri - Kansas or Illinois
Auburn - Miami, FL (like that JR? went to one of those
games years back).
Alabama - Oklahoma? Ohio State? TCU? Penn St. (tough
one)
Mississippi State - Kansas State? Texas Tech? NC State?
Ole Miss - Indiana? WVU?
LSU - Nebraska? Wisconsin?

Everyone has 9 power game assured. Some are not particularly realistic, but you get the idea.

Do I like it? As a concept maybe. As for Auburn? No. We've played Miami a few times over the years but a game played in an actual Hurricane in the 70's which we won 3 - 0 was the most memorable. No team kept the ball for four downs. Both sides tried to advance the ball on the first two downs and didn't want to risk a punt unless there was an extra down. Ah, the good old days before mandatory lightening delays (never mind that prior to the advent of the mandatory delay nobody was killed by lightening at a game). And in the days before everyone started wussing out of contracts because of a threat of a hurricane (not necessarily an actual land falling event like the one Auburn played in back then as the visiting team). I guess that's one reason some of the new generation think I'm calloused.

Our oldest OOC rival is Georgia Tech which was played every year from 1892 until 1978 with the exception of a couple of years during WWII. That game was the first, but forgotten, lost rivalry of realignment. Tech canceled the series in order to accommodate their scheduling in the ACC.

Ole Miss actually has a rivalry with Vanderbilt in addition to those of L.S.U. and State and they don't have many outside of the conference other than Memphis.

Anything with Miss State would be a pure contrivance.

As for Alabama make it Notre Dame. Let Arkansas have Oklahoma. Missouri would be Kansas. I'd say set Auburn up with N.C. State or North Carolina and L.S.U. with Miami. Tennessee and Virginia Tech could work quite well.

But the point here is that none of that happens unless all of those schools are under ESPN contract. So Texas / Texas A&M or Arkansas/Oklahoma would be conference games if that were to happen. Otherwise whoever controls their rights won't go for it and have to split the revenues with ESPN every two years.

Now if the Big 12 survives and is under ESPN contract solely, then maybe we could do this.

I think the major problem is that the annual OOC games are major in-state rivals with longstanding traditions. They're the sort of games that are fitting the cap the season with, something that everyone looks forward to.

Outside of UT/A&M and Mizzou/KU, those games don't exist for the others. Well, they do mostly exist, but they're already conference games so I think it loses some of its punch if these sort of OOC games were scheduled the first couple of weeks of the season. Pulling it off would be difficult I think if for no more reason than convincing a lot of these schools a certain counterpart in another league was worth playing every single season.

I think any rivalry game worth having is worth bringing under one roof so that OOC games can be more varied.