(11-03-2015 12:46 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 11:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 07:30 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think the question then is what makes ESPN the most money?

Content matters, quality of content matters, market penetration matters, overall ratings matter.

Does ESPN profit more from consolidating leagues and pawning the schools left out to a leftover league? Something akin to the old system where the Big East provided some bargain content while the major leagues provided the Tier 1 stuff?

Currently, the ACC is underfunded which causes instability because certain programs need more money to compete with their rivals. The ACCN has been delayed while apparently a bump in pay has been added to stem the tide. The question is does that payment mean ESPN is committed to an ACCN or that they are just stalling? Dan Wolken's comments suggest that the ACC is on the outside looking in and that the clock is ticking.

The B1G contract is coming up and I imagine ESPN wants a nice slice of the pie. Even though most of the league is very average, the average ratings are still better than the ACC.

The SEC is the cash cow and would certainly be a home for the major products from the ACC that ESPN wants to keep. The same could be said for the Big 12 although ESPN doesn't have full control over that conference.

The vote to deregulate conference championships is coming in Jan. What effect does this have on potential realignment?

ND is not going to join the ACC unless it's proven they can't make the playoff with a reasonable resume.

Texas, I don't think, wants to join the ACC or any other league because they have a fiefdom in the Big 12. They get to play neighbors and be the boss although time is ticking on the LHN and the media footprint for the league is abysmal for creating their own network. The Big 12 was overpaid to stay together in part because FOX wanted a tent pole for their new venture. My theory as well is that ESPN went along with it because realignment was happening too fast. They weren't in total control so they used a new Big 12 TV contract to hit the pause button. They still maintain control of Texas, however.

So what makes ESPN the most money given all the fluid dynamics of the situation?

Oklahoma and Texas to the SEC. Notre Dame and whoever Notre Dame wants to the ACC. That's what makes them the most money.

I don't see ND heading to the ACC anytime soon though. They are currently getting all the perks of ACC membership without any of the compromises. Unless the playoff committee starts snubbing them on a regular basis, I don't see it.

I'd welcome OU and Texas although I would prefer to go ahead and grab everything we would need for the future.

What are your thoughts on this:

Oklahoma, Texas, and Kansas along with UVA, VT, UNC, Duke, Clemson, GT, and FSU

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

That would pretty much consolidate everything ESPN cares about under one roof. No need to spend money on an ACC Network. Getting a T1 deal for the B1G would include most Notre Dame games, more than they've got now probably. Unless, of course, ND wanted to head South then arrangements could be made to trade off one of the listed additions or add a few more to make the numbers work.

Let's say the B1G gets Notre Dame, Syracuse, Boston College, and NC State

The Big 12 reforms with:

Big 12 West: Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma State

Big 12 Central: Kansas State, Iowa State, Cincinnati, Louisville, West Virginia

Big 12 North: Pittsburgh, Temple, UConn, Wake Forest, East Carolina

Big 12 South: Tulane, Miami, UCF, USF, Navy

That's a reasonably decent league that fills out ESPN's roster with watchable games at bargain basement prices.

Of course, some sort of Big 12/Pac 12 merger could take place as well, but the decent markets available would be limited to TX. I could see the PAC taking a couple of TX schools and being done with it.

"If" the ACC becomes vulnerable due to revenue disparity, they and the Big 12 won't both get hit at the same time. The only way I see an ACC implosion failing to help the Big 12 is if the SEC and Big 10 both took 6 ACC schools each. Then the Big 12 would be forced into a merger with the PAC and vice versa. Now if the Big 12 gets nibbled by the Big 10 or SEC or both and then later the ACC falls even farther behind because of the revenue enhancement of content brands into the Big 10 or SEC you might wind up with a scenario where the Big 10 and SEC picked up more than 16 schools by going to 20 out of the ACC.

If it goes down that path a 4th conference of lesser brands and privates will likely be formed, earn less than the other three P conferences, but could likely find inclusion in the P system. Let's say for instance that Oklahoma, Texas, and Kansas left the Big 12 for either of the SEC or Big 10. At some point the Virginia schools and North Carolina schools might have to make some moves. Then a conference of non flagship state schools and privates would likely be formed.

The most likely course however is that either the Big 12 implodes and the ACC is stabilized or the ACC implodes and the Big 12 is stabilized. If the Big 12 goes the ACC likely lands N.D. because we are moving to a P4. If the ACC implodes the Big 12 expands with quality additions.