In hopes of stating something real and logical away from that pit of a thread.

There a three kinds of schools in FBS.

There are 40 schools who don't spend much time thinking about realignment because they are in the SEC, B1G and P12 and there is nothin on the horizon that can help them and no one out there that can sink their ship. Another 6-8 who don't have to worry, they pick up the phone they have a new home when they want it but they are content in ACC/Big XII right now.

There are 17-19 who are really darn happy but keep an ear to the ground in case the power brokers of their league leave and turn them into AAC.

Then there is everyone else either looking to move out of their league or hoping things stay calm why they work on whatever they think is missing to keep them from moving.

It has always been somewhat similar to this and while changes in the marketplace cause teams to rise or fall in value (even when they've done nothing different) and in turn spurs realignment there are always those happy and those thinking something better is out there.

One thing is certain. Never mock or belittle as unworthy someone you leave behind because history shows over and over when you join those in a "more worthy" conference, the people you join most of the time want nothing more than to be away from you and if they accomplish that you end up buddying back up with people you left behind.

What's next?

Tell me whether Big 10 and SEC are happy at 14 or want 16 and tell me whether Big XII will stay at ten.

Tell me how much money CUSA will earn from TV and the NCAA Tournament in 2016-17.

Tell me whether NIU's great TV ratings translate into more TV money for the MAC.

If I know the answers to those questions I can tell you how stable things are.

Answer to question 1 may be hinted at from the results of the NCAA meetings this month.

As per whether those schools expand, it depends on the value. The SEC distributed more money to schools than any other conference, but the Big XII schools received more from the conference than any other because there were less mouths to feed. I'm not sure Missouri and Texas A&M added more revenue to offset the extra two divisions.

It makes sense for the Big 10, because the Big 10 network expands the revenue stream, although if you remember from a few months ago, the is a lawsuit to not make that a permanent part of basic cable.

Bottomline, if it brings in more money conferences will expand.

I am sticking to my prediction that by 2017 this all breaks down in the G5 as people start looking for better dance partners for themselves.

(01-07-2014 04:30 PM)panama Wrote:  I am sticking to my prediction that by 2017 this all breaks down in the G5 as people start looking for better dance partners for themselves.

If CUSA's TV deal comes in closer to the Sun Belt/MAC numbers than the current deal, 2017 would be about right.

No one would leave prior to the 2015-16 season and give up the money nor would they announce any change prior to distribution of the 15-16 revenue. That'd be about right for a 2017 split/new conference.

I tend to agree that outside of one SBC addition, we're going to sit quietly until 2016-2017, and then all hell is going to break loose.

(01-07-2014 04:39 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  I tend to agree that outside of one SBC addition, we're going to sit quietly until 2016-2017, and then all hell is going to break loose.

Here is the interesting factor to consider.

FS1 has a lot of second and third choice rights from the P5 and if they don't win the B10 deal post-2016 they have no first choice rights and will lose some of the SEC spillover thanks to the SEC Network.

MAC deal expires in 2016, CUSA in 16. After that there isn't much out there.

I think FS1 has to pay at least double what ESPN will offer to re-sign CUSA or to sign the MAC because of the audience delivery.

If you think back, Bankowsky was the one who floated the idea of 16, the assumption was he wanted 2 western schools in order to move UAB to the east.

But commissioners have at least quarterly talks with the TV folks on an informal basis.

Maybe the real thought toward 16 isn't UAB but rather increasing inventory for FS1 or he sees FS1 won't pay enough of a premium and moving back to ESPN means Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday games and adding teams lessens the impact by increasing inventory and reducing any school's need to play more than one or two weeknight games.

I give it 2 or 3 years before there's some more realignment. Maybe West Virginia + 1 other to the ACC and Houston + 2 to the Big 12 to get the ball rolling?

(01-07-2014 05:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 04:39 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  I tend to agree that outside of one SBC addition, we're going to sit quietly until 2016-2017, and then all hell is going to break loose.

Here is the interesting factor to consider.

FS1 has a lot of second and third choice rights from the P5 and if they don't win the B10 deal post-2016 they have no first choice rights and will lose some of the SEC spillover thanks to the SEC Network.

MAC deal expires in 2016, CUSA in 16. After that there isn't much out there.

I think FS1 has to pay at least double what ESPN will offer to re-sign CUSA or to sign the MAC because of the audience delivery.

If you think back, Bankowsky was the one who floated the idea of 16, the assumption was he wanted 2 western schools in order to move UAB to the east.

But commissioners have at least quarterly talks with the TV folks on an informal basis.

Maybe the real thought toward 16 isn't UAB but rather increasing inventory for FS1 or he sees FS1 won't pay enough of a premium and moving back to ESPN means Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday games and adding teams lessens the impact by increasing inventory and reducing any school's need to play more than one or two weeknight games.

Bankowsky wants to take CUSA to 16 members, no doubt. He was ready to invite ASU and ULL when we added WKU, but he was unable to get the support of enough of the university presidents at the time. I think that as more time passes, more schools move into the pool of competitors for those 15th and 16th spots. Right now, I still give the edge to ASU and ULL, but USA and TX St are gaining ground, and JMU is definitely a possibility.

(01-07-2014 06:16 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 05:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 04:39 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  I tend to agree that outside of one SBC addition, we're going to sit quietly until 2016-2017, and then all hell is going to break loose.

Here is the interesting factor to consider.

FS1 has a lot of second and third choice rights from the P5 and if they don't win the B10 deal post-2016 they have no first choice rights and will lose some of the SEC spillover thanks to the SEC Network.

MAC deal expires in 2016, CUSA in 16. After that there isn't much out there.

I think FS1 has to pay at least double what ESPN will offer to re-sign CUSA or to sign the MAC because of the audience delivery.

If you think back, Bankowsky was the one who floated the idea of 16, the assumption was he wanted 2 western schools in order to move UAB to the east.

But commissioners have at least quarterly talks with the TV folks on an informal basis.

Maybe the real thought toward 16 isn't UAB but rather increasing inventory for FS1 or he sees FS1 won't pay enough of a premium and moving back to ESPN means Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday games and adding teams lessens the impact by increasing inventory and reducing any school's need to play more than one or two weeknight games.

Bankowsky wants to take CUSA to 16 members, no doubt. He was ready to invite ASU and ULL when we added WKU, but he was unable to get the support of enough of the university presidents at the time. I think that as more time passes, more schools move into the pool of competitors for those 15th and 16th spots. Right now, I still give the edge to ASU and ULL, but USA and TX St are gaining ground, and JMU is definitely a possibility.

I would guess that ASU and ULL are still trying to package themselves together to CUSA right now. It would explain why ASU is so quiet during realignment, and ULL is well...not.

Given the title of this thread, I thought this was about Bobby Petrino.

I'm still hoping that if an invite comes from C-USA that the Cajuns are the first program to tell them to sit on it and rotate slowly.

(01-07-2014 06:18 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 06:16 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 05:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 04:39 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  I tend to agree that outside of one SBC addition, we're going to sit quietly until 2016-2017, and then all hell is going to break loose.

Here is the interesting factor to consider.

FS1 has a lot of second and third choice rights from the P5 and if they don't win the B10 deal post-2016 they have no first choice rights and will lose some of the SEC spillover thanks to the SEC Network.

MAC deal expires in 2016, CUSA in 16. After that there isn't much out there.

I think FS1 has to pay at least double what ESPN will offer to re-sign CUSA or to sign the MAC because of the audience delivery.

If you think back, Bankowsky was the one who floated the idea of 16, the assumption was he wanted 2 western schools in order to move UAB to the east.

But commissioners have at least quarterly talks with the TV folks on an informal basis.

Maybe the real thought toward 16 isn't UAB but rather increasing inventory for FS1 or he sees FS1 won't pay enough of a premium and moving back to ESPN means Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday games and adding teams lessens the impact by increasing inventory and reducing any school's need to play more than one or two weeknight games.

Bankowsky wants to take CUSA to 16 members, no doubt. He was ready to invite ASU and ULL when we added WKU, but he was unable to get the support of enough of the university presidents at the time. I think that as more time passes, more schools move into the pool of competitors for those 15th and 16th spots. Right now, I still give the edge to ASU and ULL, but USA and TX St are gaining ground, and JMU is definitely a possibility.

I would guess that ASU and ULL are still trying to package themselves together to CUSA right now. It would explain why ASU is so quiet during realignment, and ULL is well...not.

A local media person asking Scott Farmer a few questions doesn't equate to UL actively campaigning to leave the SBC. Anymore then ASU's silence equates to your president accepting the SBC as his permanent residencey. There is no one actively campaigning for UL to any conference at this time. Farmer has continued to sell the future SBC to Cajun supporters while giving lip service in the media to being open to any other conference option. He is doing it because he knows a large number of UL money people don't want to hear his selling points on the SBC and his contract is up in June.

(01-07-2014 05:07 PM)HCJag Wrote:  I give it 2 or 3 years before there's some more realignment. Maybe West Virginia + 1 other to the ACC and Houston + 2 to the Big 12 to get the ball rolling?

The Big XII will never have more than four Texas teams. The non-Texas Big XII schools are adamant about that and even some of the Texas schools don't want this to turn in the Southwest Conference lite.

(01-07-2014 08:00 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 05:07 PM)HCJag Wrote:  I give it 2 or 3 years before there's some more realignment. Maybe West Virginia + 1 other to the ACC and Houston + 2 to the Big 12 to get the ball rolling?

The Big XII will never have more than four Texas teams. The non-Texas Big XII schools are adamant about that and even some of the Texas schools don't want this to turn in the Southwest Conference lite.

Yeah, TCU had enough trouble. I think Houston is going to run into a brick wall there.

(01-07-2014 06:18 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 06:16 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 05:01 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 04:39 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  I tend to agree that outside of one SBC addition, we're going to sit quietly until 2016-2017, and then all hell is going to break loose.

Here is the interesting factor to consider.

FS1 has a lot of second and third choice rights from the P5 and if they don't win the B10 deal post-2016 they have no first choice rights and will lose some of the SEC spillover thanks to the SEC Network.

MAC deal expires in 2016, CUSA in 16. After that there isn't much out there.

I think FS1 has to pay at least double what ESPN will offer to re-sign CUSA or to sign the MAC because of the audience delivery.

If you think back, Bankowsky was the one who floated the idea of 16, the assumption was he wanted 2 western schools in order to move UAB to the east.

But commissioners have at least quarterly talks with the TV folks on an informal basis.

Maybe the real thought toward 16 isn't UAB but rather increasing inventory for FS1 or he sees FS1 won't pay enough of a premium and moving back to ESPN means Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday games and adding teams lessens the impact by increasing inventory and reducing any school's need to play more than one or two weeknight games.

Bankowsky wants to take CUSA to 16 members, no doubt. He was ready to invite ASU and ULL when we added WKU, but he was unable to get the support of enough of the university presidents at the time. I think that as more time passes, more schools move into the pool of competitors for those 15th and 16th spots. Right now, I still give the edge to ASU and ULL, but USA and TX St are gaining ground, and JMU is definitely a possibility.

I would guess that ASU and ULL are still trying to package themselves together to CUSA right now. It would explain why ASU is so quiet during realignment, and ULL is well...not.

I don't think that the two have ever tried to package themselves together. Either one would leave the other behind in a heartbeat, especially with JMU being a very good possibility for one of the spots. At this late stage in the game, I think everyone has to look out for their own best interests.

(01-07-2014 08:23 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 08:00 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 05:07 PM)HCJag Wrote:  I give it 2 or 3 years before there's some more realignment. Maybe West Virginia + 1 other to the ACC and Houston + 2 to the Big 12 to get the ball rolling?

The Big XII will never have more than four Texas teams. The non-Texas Big XII schools are adamant about that and even some of the Texas schools don't want this to turn in the Southwest Conference lite.

Yeah, TCU had enough trouble. I think Houston is going to run into a brick wall there.

Probably right. Unless a Texas team leaves, its going to be difficult for us to make it into the B-12. There is just too much Texas representation already present to warrant another addition (though there isn't a B12 team in S Texas).

On the issue of CUSA tv rights---Im not sure what will happen. One thing is clear from the AAC trials and tribulations. There had better be several willing bidders or the contract value will disappoint. The AAC only had NBC. They were interested and willing to give great exposure---but once they found they were bidding against nobody---they bid cheap. They knew ESPN had the right to match, but they figured ESPN would never match the exposure---so the low end NBC bid would be safe. ESPN saw a chance to pick up inventory for less than they had originally been willing to pay---so they matched the exposure and grabbed the inventory.

The problem is ESPN really didnt need all that inventory and didnt want to air it all. They created some space by showing games on ESPN-News and the AAC allowed them to sublicense some of the games to other networks.

So there lies the problem I see for CUSA. Fox has a lot of inventory and really doesn't need that much from CUSA. They mainly use it to fill their Fox regionals. So come negotiation time---Fox could opt to walk away from CUSA and just buy some of the AAC games from ESPN. There's also some left over inventory in the MW stockpiles. I also suspect that ESPN might could work a deal to sell some MAC or Sunbelt games to the Fox Regionals. Bottom line, CUSA may not have the leverage they were hoping for.

On the other hand---maybe NBC gets serious and runs up the price. They have a reputation for being cheap, but at some point they are going to get tired of airing Ivy League football and ice skating on Saturdays while the other sports networks are showing FBS football. I'd rather have CUSA than the Ivy League.

(01-07-2014 07:47 PM)CrazyCajun Wrote:  A local media person asking Scott Farmer a few questions doesn't equate to UL actively campaigning to leave the SBC. Anymore then ASU's silence equates to your president accepting the SBC as his permanent residencey. There is no one actively campaigning for UL to any conference at this time. Farmer has continued to sell the future SBC to Cajun supporters while giving lip service in the media to being open to any other conference option. He is doing it because he knows a large number of UL money people don't want to hear his selling points on the SBC and his contract is up in June.

I've heard the claim (not from anyone at AState) that Farmer sort of walks to the beat of a different drum and can be hard to work with.

Is he solid with the key players at UL?
Is contract renewal a formality, a given if nothing weird happens, or something he should be concerned about.

Mohajir is golden at AState so he doesn't have too many worries and I know he generally gives the "we are always trying to improve" answer when asked but has also turned the tables on reporters and asked them to explain just what the benefit would be and pointed out some faulty assumptions.

(01-07-2014 09:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 08:23 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 08:00 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 05:07 PM)HCJag Wrote:  I give it 2 or 3 years before there's some more realignment. Maybe West Virginia + 1 other to the ACC and Houston + 2 to the Big 12 to get the ball rolling?

The Big XII will never have more than four Texas teams. The non-Texas Big XII schools are adamant about that and even some of the Texas schools don't want this to turn in the Southwest Conference lite.

Yeah, TCU had enough trouble. I think Houston is going to run into a brick wall there.

Probably right. Unless a Texas team leaves, its going to be difficult for us to make it into the B-12. There is just too much Texas representation already present to warrant another addition (though there isn't a B12 team in S Texas).

On the issue of CUSA tv rights---Im not sure what will happen. One thing is clear from the AAC trials and tribulations. There had better be several willing bidders or the contract value will disappoint. The AAC only had NBC. They were interested and willing to give great exposure---but once they found they were bidding against nobody---they bid cheap. They knew ESPN had the right to match, but they figured ESPN would never match the exposure---so the low end NBC bid would be safe. ESPN saw a chance to pick up inventory for less than they had originally been willing to pay---so they matched the exposure and grabbed the inventory.

The problem is ESPN really didnt need all that inventory and didnt want to air it all. They created some space by showing games on ESPN-News and the AAC allowed them to sublicense some of the games to other networks.

So there lies the problem I see for CUSA. Fox has a lot of inventory and really doesn't need that much from CUSA. They mainly use it to fill their Fox regionals. So come negotiation time---Fox could opt to walk away from CUSA and just buy some of the AAC games from ESPN. There's also some left over inventory in the MW stockpiles. I also suspect that ESPN might could work a deal to sell some MAC or Sunbelt games to the Fox Regionals. Bottom line, CUSA may not have the leverage they were hoping for.

On the other hand---maybe NBC gets serious and runs up the price. They have a reputation for being cheap, but at some point they are going to get tired of airing Ivy League football and ice skating on Saturdays while the other sports networks are showing FBS football. I'd rather have CUSA than the Ivy League.

ESPN made an offer (they had an exclusive negotiation window) and the NBC offer was nearly double. A TV consultant a couple months out made a prediction on what AAC would get. He missed it by less than $200k a team (it came in higher with more exposures) and said at the time if ESPN matched it would be because paying double what they considered it worth a cheap price to keep NBC out of college football (sans Notre Dame).

Everyone says NBC is cheap, I think the more accurate term is selective.

They paid big for the Olympics, they paid big for Sunday night NFL, they pay well for NBC, they threw a nice offer at the NHL to avoid going to bid, they blew up the market for English soccer taking all of it unlike ESPN who split with Fox and blew Fox's MLS offer out of the water because it includes part of the US Men's National Team rights and they've actually given MLS more games than contracted.

NBC plays Moneyball. They pick targets that can be had for a good price or that provide an audience in a demographic that provides value or product that can draw a big audience to promote other programming.

(01-07-2014 10:27 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 09:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 08:23 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 08:00 PM)FoUTASportscaster Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 05:07 PM)HCJag Wrote:  I give it 2 or 3 years before there's some more realignment. Maybe West Virginia + 1 other to the ACC and Houston + 2 to the Big 12 to get the ball rolling?

The Big XII will never have more than four Texas teams. The non-Texas Big XII schools are adamant about that and even some of the Texas schools don't want this to turn in the Southwest Conference lite.

Yeah, TCU had enough trouble. I think Houston is going to run into a brick wall there.

Probably right. Unless a Texas team leaves, its going to be difficult for us to make it into the B-12. There is just too much Texas representation already present to warrant another addition (though there isn't a B12 team in S Texas).

On the issue of CUSA tv rights---Im not sure what will happen. One thing is clear from the AAC trials and tribulations. There had better be several willing bidders or the contract value will disappoint. The AAC only had NBC. They were interested and willing to give great exposure---but once they found they were bidding against nobody---they bid cheap. They knew ESPN had the right to match, but they figured ESPN would never match the exposure---so the low end NBC bid would be safe. ESPN saw a chance to pick up inventory for less than they had originally been willing to pay---so they matched the exposure and grabbed the inventory.

The problem is ESPN really didnt need all that inventory and didnt want to air it all. They created some space by showing games on ESPN-News and the AAC allowed them to sublicense some of the games to other networks.

So there lies the problem I see for CUSA. Fox has a lot of inventory and really doesn't need that much from CUSA. They mainly use it to fill their Fox regionals. So come negotiation time---Fox could opt to walk away from CUSA and just buy some of the AAC games from ESPN. There's also some left over inventory in the MW stockpiles. I also suspect that ESPN might could work a deal to sell some MAC or Sunbelt games to the Fox Regionals. Bottom line, CUSA may not have the leverage they were hoping for.

On the other hand---maybe NBC gets serious and runs up the price. They have a reputation for being cheap, but at some point they are going to get tired of airing Ivy League football and ice skating on Saturdays while the other sports networks are showing FBS football. I'd rather have CUSA than the Ivy League.

ESPN made an offer (they had an exclusive negotiation window) and the NBC offer was nearly double. A TV consultant a couple months out made a prediction on what AAC would get. He missed it by less than $200k a team (it came in higher with more exposures) and said at the time if ESPN matched it would be because paying double what they considered it worth a cheap price to keep NBC out of college football (sans Notre Dame).

Everyone says NBC is cheap, I think the more accurate term is selective.

They paid big for the Olympics, they paid big for Sunday night NFL, they pay well for NBC, they threw a nice offer at the NHL to avoid going to bid, they blew up the market for English soccer taking all of it unlike ESPN who split with Fox and blew Fox's MLS offer out of the water because it includes part of the US Men's National Team rights and they've actually given MLS more games than contracted.

NBC plays Moneyball. They pick targets that can be had for a good price or that provide an audience in a demographic that provides value or product that can draw a big audience to promote other programming.

From what I heard it was exactly opposite. The ESPN offer was supposedly almost double the NBC deal, but had limited windows with lots of mid-week and ESPN-3. It offered less exposure than the expiring deal. The AAC felt that exposure was more important than the dollars and worked with NBC to get an exposure package they could live with. The dollars ESPN paid in the end were the same NBC offered---but they actually offered slightly better exposure than NBC (the ESPN and ABC slots are clearly defined where as the NBC broadcast slots were at NBC's option).

Regardless of what actually transpired, my main point still stands. Without several bidders, it was going to be difficult to get much value for the AAC media contract. CUSA has to hope for plenty of interested parties when it comes time to bid thier deal.