JRsec
Super Moderator
Posts: 40,290
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 9772
I Root For: SEC
Location:
|
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(07-12-2021 04:03 PM)Win5002 Wrote: (03-09-2021 06:34 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote: (03-08-2021 01:02 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote: (03-07-2021 05:03 PM)JRsec Wrote: Just forget about the GOR's for a moment and ask yourself which 2 conferences could make leaving profitable enough for ACC schools to make a final movement to 4 conferences of 18 possible? The SEC and Big 10 will essentially be doubling the ACC's media rights by 2024-5. Couple that with the bleak outlook afferward due to a post COVID debt load by many athletic departments, the declining viewership for cable TV, the rise of streaming, the aging of the Boomers, and the negative impacts of NIL and Pay for Play with the court cases pending, and political fallout and the future looks a lot bleaker than it did 2 years ago. So even the most supposedly secure of the ACC schools might be interested in doubling those revenue streams. Place 12 of them and the GOR is moot. The circumstances make it much more feasible.
So the Big 10 picks up: Notre Dame, Virginia, Missouri, Kansas
Think 75 million per school in media payouts
Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Wisconsin
The SEC picks up: Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, and Florida State
Think 75 million per school in media payouts
Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M
Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
The Big 12 and PAC use the expiration of GOR's to build another conference:
Think 65 million per school in media payouts.
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, Colorado, Texas Tech, Utah
California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Clemson, Miami, Oklahoma, Georgia Tech, Oklahoma State, Texas
And the New and Improved AAC:
Think 45 million per school in media payouts
Army, Boston College, Navy, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Air Force, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oregon State, Texas Christian, Washington State
Baylor, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Louisville, South Florida, Wake Forest
Now those would become the four P conferences comprised of 72 teams and each champion would be invited to a 4 team CFP. Conference champions would be decided in a 3 game playoff between the 3 divisional champs and the best at large.
The only thing that a committee of non participating coaches would do is seed the field for the CFP. No more committees.
All 12 games would be P games with 1 preseason game against any other FCS or former FBS school not in the P4.
This is the 65 former P schools plus (Air Force, Army, Brigham Young, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Navy, and South Florida
Flip Missouri and Kansas for Duke and UNC, and I think it works, though the new Big 12/PAC winding up with Clemson/Miami is an odd fit.
Probably because UNC is paranoid about its position within the educational institution hierarchy in the state of NC. Should the SEC take all three of the Raleigh-area programs then that fear is mitigated somewhat.
Mizzou could establish rivalries with Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin and Minnesota, as well as renewing hostilities with Nebraska. So they would be a fit there.
You're right on Clemson/Miami being an odd fit but I think he'll argue that those two wouldn't add any more value to the SEC once other top properties from the ACC are taken. The Big Ten would be too far for them to make an impact. So putting them together with UT/OU would be the next best thing.
There is a couple of problems with this. First of all there is no way the AAC division you listed commands 45M per team.
Secondly, and the bigger problem with going to essentially 3 power divisions and a leftover conference is you devalue the 3 power conferences because when you put all the heavy weight teams in one league you end up with more losses. Its not a big deal for the teams undefeated or those with one, sometimes two losses. BUT all those games that now have teams at .500, a game above .500 or even below .500 get devalued in content value.
There is only 1 problem and that one applies to all realignment scenarios and those from anyone. Pay for play is about to change the nature of everything, has the power to bring changes to any conference, will draw a new line for what schools can and can't afford, will negate the organizing principle of the NCAA, and ultimately will alter the way fans look at the game.
Some times we kill time here with idle models and sometimes we get serious. The model you criticize was a dead time speculation of how to create 3 super conferences within a competitive economic range of one another and to create a buffer conference which could make 45 if the total number of schools in FBS was reduced. But it was still a mental exercise. When we know who can afford to be in and who can't then we can have a serious speculation about who winds up where.
If all things had remained as they were then the game would have been about UT and OU and who they might take with them. It's all moot until the cap on stipends is ruled upon next Summer.
|
|