(06-28-2015 06:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So does anyone care to hazard a guess as to when things pop? I'd say if it happens this year there is a very safe bet that it has to be done prior to August 15th, so anytime in the next six weeks. If not it will be a few years.

I'm more conservative than you and H1. I say some pieces may drop by the time the B1G tv contract is renogiated, but more likely it will be towards the end of this decade or the beginning of the next.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-28-2015 04:50 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 02:05 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-27-2015 01:42 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-27-2015 12:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Neil I truly understand your line of reasoning here and I cannot deny that it has merit. But consider the moving parts and their value. Texas>Florida State. Right now T.C.U. and Baylor in football strength are both > Virginia Tech. Texas is the one with long standing relations with Notre Dame. Furthermore if T.C.U. and Baylor tag along the price to Texas would be full membership in the ACC, not some independent deal. There's your value added which exceeds value lost. You lose Florida State and you don't lose Florida. You pick up UT and at least T.C.U. and you gain virtually all of Texas. You lose Virginia Tech and you do not lose Virginia. It doesn't really matter who comes with Texas. Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State could just as easily work from an academic stand point and from a market standpoint would be better. But if football cache is to be replaced then the four I suggested would bring the biggest bang short of the ACC addding OU with Texas.

As ESPN themselves have said, value isn't based upon what have you done over the past decade or so. So your attempt to get equivalent value falls short, imho. We already know that in terms of the state of Florida the two most popular teams are the Gators and the Noles with the Gators ahead. Having Miami helps to even that out for the ACC. To take FSU out of the ACC means the ACC basically loses the state of Florida, even though Miami remains. Also, taking the most popular football team from the state of Virginia out of the ACC only does further damage. How does ESPN gain with the ACC by adding the state of Texas but losing its strongest presence in the states of Florida and Virginia?

ESPN has two basically exclusive properties - the SEC and the ACC. They have done more than enough in terms of the SEC to keep them happy through the next two decades. The SEC isn't going anywhere. If anything, I believe that when the next SEC national contract is up (which will end prior to the other stuff), the CBS part of their contract could likely become an exclusive ABC contract. But that's a ways off so that is certainly subject to change and probably more dependent upon what happens with the upcoming B1G Tier 1 contract, Texas, and ND prior to then.

After their love affair with the SEC (and well earned on the SEC's part) and owning the ACC (which was coveted by ESPN for its basketball more so than its football) it is no secret that ESPN covets the single entities of Texas and ND. I think if they truly coveted OU, they would have made a similar deal with the Sooners as thye did the Longhorns. So I see OU as a nice to have for ESPN, but not a necessity.

With the Irish, ESPN basically now has ND for everything but Irish home football games (while securing 2 or 3 football away games due to the ACC scheduling agreement) and their hockey games. That may be enough for them, since apparently they are unwilling to give ND the same guarantee that NBC does of televising every single home game on ABC. At least that is what I assume the stumbling block to be in getting the ND home football games contract.

In Texas, they have joint rights of the Tier 1 football games (with FOX) and then they have exclusive rights with LHN. Last year, Texas vs Oklahoma was on ABC at noon and Texas at KState on ESPN also at noon were the only two Texas games that were broadcast on ABC/ESPN. ISU at Texas and North Texas at Texas were the two LHN broadcasts. The previous year was only slightly better.

If they truly want to expand their inventory with Texas, I think we both agree that will only be achieved by either getting Texas into the SEC or in the ACC via full membership or an ND-type deal and converting the LHN contract into the equivalent of the ND NBC contract for home football games, but with Texas allowing for some of those games to be played on an ESPN/ESPN2 and an ACCN.

What the price would be for the ACC to get Texas either as a full member or as a partial with an ND type deal is unknown. And will the ACC be willing to paid whatever that price remains to be seen? I do know that they will strongly object to that price being both FSU and VT. How much their objections will influence the final outcome, if that is indeed part of the price, also remains to be seen.

Cheers,
Neil

I don't think that price will come in the form of a current conference member or members, but in money and television exposure.
The only option for Texas to the ACC scenario TODAY; is as a partial member. They could receive the same 5 game package as the Irish. And since there are only 14 teams to rotate, every third year the Longhorns and Irish could play a scheduled "conference" game. The real price for the ACC would be the willingness to select either Texas or Notre Dame to play in the conference championship game after only playing 5/6 conference games.
I would imagine you would see a renewal of the Texas/A&M game as part of the SEC/ACC rivalry series too.

Bold #1 - Even assuming that they decide football independence is the best of several options available, does UT truly want to play 5 ACC teams annually?

ND did for exposure in the northeast, Florida, and Georgia. I don't think that Texas cares that much about the northeast.

Bold #2 - The only way I see this happening is, first UT needs to agree to the ND type deal. And then the league would need to go to three divisions (which may mean expansion to 15 full members) and then football championship tourney rules say that the three division winners and the highest rated team from ND, Texas, or a non-ACC division winner gets the open semi-final slot.

Not sure how the full members of the ACC would react to the possibility that ND or UT could be crowned the football champion while only playing a 5/8th schedule. Not even sure they would like it if it were increased to a 6/8th conference schedule.

Is this somewhat along the lines of what you were thinking when you wrote this?

Cheers,
Neil

Neil,
I don't think Texas really wants to play as many as 5 games, but the ACC would have to insist on it. Notre Dame only wanted to play 4 and the ACC wanted 6. Five games per year was the compromise for Notre Dame, I don't believe that Texas could get away with playing less.

(06-28-2015 07:00 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 06:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So does anyone care to hazard a guess as to when things pop? I'd say if it happens this year there is a very safe bet that it has to be done prior to August 15th, so anytime in the next six weeks. If not it will be a few years.

I'm more conservative than you and H1. I say some pieces may drop by the time the B1G tv contract is renogiated, but more likely it will be towards the end of this decade or the beginning of the next.

Cheers,
Neil

Lot's of money to be lost, by pretty much everyone if that happens. That is why this wont be done slowly.

(06-28-2015 08:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:00 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 06:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So does anyone care to hazard a guess as to when things pop? I'd say if it happens this year there is a very safe bet that it has to be done prior to August 15th, so anytime in the next six weeks. If not it will be a few years.

I'm more conservative than you and H1. I say some pieces may drop by the time the B1G tv contract is renogiated, but more likely it will be towards the end of this decade or the beginning of the next.

Cheers,
Neil

Lot's of money to be lost, by pretty much everyone if that happens. That is why this wont be done slowly.

Yep we agree on that. Two additions of the right sort for the SEC and Big 10 pushes both of us past 45 million in payout. For those joining the difference between what they have now and would be making later is massive. That's why I don't think issues have been resolved yet as to which group suffers the losses.

(06-28-2015 02:36 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 02:05 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-27-2015 01:42 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-27-2015 12:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Neil I truly understand your line of reasoning here and I cannot deny that it has merit. But consider the moving parts and their value. Texas>Florida State. Right now T.C.U. and Baylor in football strength are both > Virginia Tech. Texas is the one with long standing relations with Notre Dame. Furthermore if T.C.U. and Baylor tag along the price to Texas would be full membership in the ACC, not some independent deal. There's your value added which exceeds value lost. You lose Florida State and you don't lose Florida. You pick up UT and at least T.C.U. and you gain virtually all of Texas. You lose Virginia Tech and you do not lose Virginia. It doesn't really matter who comes with Texas. Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State could just as easily work from an academic stand point and from a market standpoint would be better. But if football cache is to be replaced then the four I suggested would bring the biggest bang short of the ACC addding OU with Texas.

As ESPN themselves have said, value isn't based upon what have you done over the past decade or so. So your attempt to get equivalent value falls short, imho. We already know that in terms of the state of Florida the two most popular teams are the Gators and the Noles with the Gators ahead. Having Miami helps to even that out for the ACC. To take FSU out of the ACC means the ACC basically loses the state of Florida, even though Miami remains. Also, taking the most popular football team from the state of Virginia out of the ACC only does further damage. How does ESPN gain with the ACC by adding the state of Texas but losing its strongest presence in the states of Florida and Virginia?

ESPN has two basically exclusive properties - the SEC and the ACC. They have done more than enough in terms of the SEC to keep them happy through the next two decades. The SEC isn't going anywhere. If anything, I believe that when the next SEC national contract is up (which will end prior to the other stuff), the CBS part of their contract could likely become an exclusive ABC contract. But that's a ways off so that is certainly subject to change and probably more dependent upon what happens with the upcoming B1G Tier 1 contract, Texas, and ND prior to then.

After their love affair with the SEC (and well earned on the SEC's part) and owning the ACC (which was coveted by ESPN for its basketball more so than its football) it is no secret that ESPN covets the single entities of Texas and ND. I think if they truly coveted OU, they would have made a similar deal with the Sooners as thye did the Longhorns. So I see OU as a nice to have for ESPN, but not a necessity.

With the Irish, ESPN basically now has ND for everything but Irish home football games (while securing 2 or 3 football away games due to the ACC scheduling agreement) and their hockey games. That may be enough for them, since apparently they are unwilling to give ND the same guarantee that NBC does of televising every single home game on ABC. At least that is what I assume the stumbling block to be in getting the ND home football games contract.

In Texas, they have joint rights of the Tier 1 football games (with FOX) and then they have exclusive rights with LHN. Last year, Texas vs Oklahoma was on ABC at noon and Texas at KState on ESPN also at noon were the only two Texas games that were broadcast on ABC/ESPN. ISU at Texas and North Texas at Texas were the two LHN broadcasts. The previous year was only slightly better.

If they truly want to expand their inventory with Texas, I think we both agree that will only be achieved by either getting Texas into the SEC or in the ACC via full membership or an ND-type deal and converting the LHN contract into the equivalent of the ND NBC contract for home football games, but with Texas allowing for some of those games to be played on an ESPN/ESPN2 and an ACCN.

What the price would be for the ACC to get Texas either as a full member or as a partial with an ND type deal is unknown. And will the ACC be willing to paid whatever that price remains to be seen? I do know that they will strongly object to that price being both FSU and VT. How much their objections will influence the final outcome, if that is indeed part of the price, also remains to be seen.

Cheers,
Neil

I don't think that price will come in the form of a current conference member or members, but in money and television exposure.
The only option for Texas to the ACC scenario TODAY; is as a partial member. They could receive the same 5 game package as the Irish. And since there are only 14 teams to rotate, every third year the Longhorns and Irish could play a scheduled "conference" game. The real price for the ACC would be the willingness to select either Texas or Notre Dame to play in the conference championship game after only playing 5/6 conference games.
I would imagine you would see a renewal of the Texas/A&M game as part of the SEC/ACC rivalry series too.

Texas and Notre Dame will be giving up the option of playing in future conference tournaments of the ACC. Why would they do that? Their brands are strong enough that they could easily slip into a six team or eight team national tournament with a strong enough 12 game record. That is all the assurance they need. There is a lot of reward to taking part in a conference championship/tournament in football but there is also risk involved. For some programs, its a proving ground that they are worthy. For other programs, there is more perceived risk involved with losing in those kinds of games.

My personal opinion is that Texas would end up negotiated into a six game agreement because they would be bringing another program with them. My guess is they bring Baylor and they are given a yearly match up with Baylor which is the sixth game of the deal.

H1, I think that Texas comes to the ACC alone and Baylor ends up in the SEC.

(06-28-2015 08:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 02:36 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 02:05 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-27-2015 01:42 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-27-2015 12:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Neil I truly understand your line of reasoning here and I cannot deny that it has merit. But consider the moving parts and their value. Texas>Florida State. Right now T.C.U. and Baylor in football strength are both > Virginia Tech. Texas is the one with long standing relations with Notre Dame. Furthermore if T.C.U. and Baylor tag along the price to Texas would be full membership in the ACC, not some independent deal. There's your value added which exceeds value lost. You lose Florida State and you don't lose Florida. You pick up UT and at least T.C.U. and you gain virtually all of Texas. You lose Virginia Tech and you do not lose Virginia. It doesn't really matter who comes with Texas. Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State could just as easily work from an academic stand point and from a market standpoint would be better. But if football cache is to be replaced then the four I suggested would bring the biggest bang short of the ACC addding OU with Texas.

As ESPN themselves have said, value isn't based upon what have you done over the past decade or so. So your attempt to get equivalent value falls short, imho. We already know that in terms of the state of Florida the two most popular teams are the Gators and the Noles with the Gators ahead. Having Miami helps to even that out for the ACC. To take FSU out of the ACC means the ACC basically loses the state of Florida, even though Miami remains. Also, taking the most popular football team from the state of Virginia out of the ACC only does further damage. How does ESPN gain with the ACC by adding the state of Texas but losing its strongest presence in the states of Florida and Virginia?

ESPN has two basically exclusive properties - the SEC and the ACC. They have done more than enough in terms of the SEC to keep them happy through the next two decades. The SEC isn't going anywhere. If anything, I believe that when the next SEC national contract is up (which will end prior to the other stuff), the CBS part of their contract could likely become an exclusive ABC contract. But that's a ways off so that is certainly subject to change and probably more dependent upon what happens with the upcoming B1G Tier 1 contract, Texas, and ND prior to then.

After their love affair with the SEC (and well earned on the SEC's part) and owning the ACC (which was coveted by ESPN for its basketball more so than its football) it is no secret that ESPN covets the single entities of Texas and ND. I think if they truly coveted OU, they would have made a similar deal with the Sooners as thye did the Longhorns. So I see OU as a nice to have for ESPN, but not a necessity.

With the Irish, ESPN basically now has ND for everything but Irish home football games (while securing 2 or 3 football away games due to the ACC scheduling agreement) and their hockey games. That may be enough for them, since apparently they are unwilling to give ND the same guarantee that NBC does of televising every single home game on ABC. At least that is what I assume the stumbling block to be in getting the ND home football games contract.

In Texas, they have joint rights of the Tier 1 football games (with FOX) and then they have exclusive rights with LHN. Last year, Texas vs Oklahoma was on ABC at noon and Texas at KState on ESPN also at noon were the only two Texas games that were broadcast on ABC/ESPN. ISU at Texas and North Texas at Texas were the two LHN broadcasts. The previous year was only slightly better.

If they truly want to expand their inventory with Texas, I think we both agree that will only be achieved by either getting Texas into the SEC or in the ACC via full membership or an ND-type deal and converting the LHN contract into the equivalent of the ND NBC contract for home football games, but with Texas allowing for some of those games to be played on an ESPN/ESPN2 and an ACCN.

What the price would be for the ACC to get Texas either as a full member or as a partial with an ND type deal is unknown. And will the ACC be willing to paid whatever that price remains to be seen? I do know that they will strongly object to that price being both FSU and VT. How much their objections will influence the final outcome, if that is indeed part of the price, also remains to be seen.

Cheers,
Neil

I don't think that price will come in the form of a current conference member or members, but in money and television exposure.
The only option for Texas to the ACC scenario TODAY; is as a partial member. They could receive the same 5 game package as the Irish. And since there are only 14 teams to rotate, every third year the Longhorns and Irish could play a scheduled "conference" game. The real price for the ACC would be the willingness to select either Texas or Notre Dame to play in the conference championship game after only playing 5/6 conference games.
I would imagine you would see a renewal of the Texas/A&M game as part of the SEC/ACC rivalry series too.

Texas and Notre Dame will be giving up the option of playing in future conference tournaments of the ACC. Why would they do that? Their brands are strong enough that they could easily slip into a six team or eight team national tournament with a strong enough 12 game record. That is all the assurance they need. There is a lot of reward to taking part in a conference championship/tournament in football but there is also risk involved. For some programs, its a proving ground that they are worthy. For other programs, there is more perceived risk involved with losing in those kinds of games.

My personal opinion is that Texas would end up negotiated into a six game agreement because they would be bringing another program with them. My guess is they bring Baylor and they are given a yearly match up with Baylor which is the sixth game of the deal.

H1, I think that Texas comes to the ACC alone and Baylor ends up in the SEC.

Now tell him the other half of what you think. You know the part that has the SEC's two additions being Oklahoma and Baylor.

You guys are welcome to think what you will as do I. The simple fact is that Texas will never go to the ACC all by themselves. That is silly homer thinking. I am sorry but the ACC's negotiating position is not that strong.

The ACC wants that ACC Network far too much and yes....Texas is tied into that.

(06-28-2015 08:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:00 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 06:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So does anyone care to hazard a guess as to when things pop? I'd say if it happens this year there is a very safe bet that it has to be done prior to August 15th, so anytime in the next six weeks. If not it will be a few years.

I'm more conservative than you and H1. I say some pieces may drop by the time the B1G tv contract is renogiated, but more likely it will be towards the end of this decade or the beginning of the next.

Cheers,
Neil

Lot's of money to be lost, by pretty much everyone if that happens. That is why this wont be done slowly.

Yep we agree on that. Two additions of the right sort for the SEC and Big 10 pushes both of us past 45 million in payout. For those joining the difference between what they have now and would be making later is massive. That's why I don't think issues have been resolved yet as to which group suffers the losses.

The Big Ten negotiations for upcoming contracts are for the 2016 season. That is next year.

You want to know the deadline? The Big Ten's negotiations are what is pushing this right now and the fact that it is Oklahoma playing the public PR game right now shows us that they know they are going to face some choppy waters over the choice they are planning to make.

Joining the SEC would draw less t shirt criticism than joining the Big Ten.

(06-28-2015 09:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 07:00 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 06:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So does anyone care to hazard a guess as to when things pop? I'd say if it happens this year there is a very safe bet that it has to be done prior to August 15th, so anytime in the next six weeks. If not it will be a few years.

I'm more conservative than you and H1. I say some pieces may drop by the time the B1G tv contract is renogiated, but more likely it will be towards the end of this decade or the beginning of the next.

Cheers,
Neil

Lot's of money to be lost, by pretty much everyone if that happens. That is why this wont be done slowly.

Yep we agree on that. Two additions of the right sort for the SEC and Big 10 pushes both of us past 45 million in payout. For those joining the difference between what they have now and would be making later is massive. That's why I don't think issues have been resolved yet as to which group suffers the losses.

The Big Ten negotiations for upcoming contracts are for the 2016 season. That is next year.

You want to know the deadline? The Big Ten's negotiations are what is pushing this right now and the fact that it is Oklahoma playing the public PR game right now shows us that they know they are going to face some choppy waters over the choice they are planning to make.

Joining the SEC would draw less t shirt criticism than joining the Big Ten.

I know the deadlines and the requirement periods for notifying the Big 12 that you are leaving. For the Sooners to be in the Big 10 for the 2017 season they have to notify the Big 12 by August 15th of this year. The timing is indeed interesting. But it is the same deadline they would need to join the SEC and we do have escalators in our contract, especially for the SECN. The escalator is 1.40 vs .25 per state. The regular contract with ESPN has renegotiating clauses. The interesting part for us is that ABC is interested in our T1 rights so that movement between Disney properties is going to get easier for us should that arrangement come about in the early 20's. Now if Disney wants rights to Oklahoma now's the time to grab them. You do know that the buyout of Kansas's T3 with ESPN is almost identical to the buyout of Oklahoma's T3 with FOX. I wonder why ESPN did that? Game on.

It's going to happen fast, if it is happening soon. Like this summer fast and work out the fine details/legal issues over the next year. If it happens soon, I think ESPN will land the B1G's T1 since I believe they will be the first conference to add more. FOX gains on the B1GN regardless of if they get the T1. ESPN is the hurdle.

(06-28-2015 11:44 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  It's going to happen fast, if it is happening soon. Like this summer fast and work out the fine details/legal issues over the next year. If it happens soon, I think ESPN will land the B1G's T1 since I believe they will be the first conference to add more. FOX gains on the B1GN regardless of if they get the T1. ESPN is the hurdle.

Actually Fox is a major hurdle. They will be the entity most harmed by the indirect voiding of the GoR that happens due to the vote of dissolution.

They have enough clout and legal muscle to make life very difficult due to that loss. They will also have all that big 12 money available to themselves to put forward in a bidding war against ESPN.

ESPN would be best served to come to an agreement to split the rights with Fox else it will either be extremely costly for them to maintain full rights or no movement happens at all which is a major opportunity cost to ESPN.

If it is indeed OU and KU to the B1G, then both FOX and ESPN lose T3 content from OU and KU. If ESPN retains sole T1 content for the B1G in this upcoming round, FOX also loses T1 and T2 content for both.

I think if this happens, ESPN and FOX share the rights to the B1G in this next round.

Cheers,
Neil

There is a chance that Boren is announcing that expansion is finally coming. A Texas deal has not worked out with the ACC so far. I think they get one last chance to play ball but then what? Syracuse, Boston College, and Pittsburgh, were seen as a survival move for the ACC when they happened. At that time I said that ESPN was stockpiling inventory that Delany might be interested in. The SEC's desire for market expansion into Virginia and North Carolina are well established. The LHN held Texas in place. Then there's the question of why FOX and ESPN would want the trouble of splitting up what has been an amicable distribution of rights in the Big 12? And finally hanging over all of this is the ACCN issue.

ESPN might have held out hopes of rebuilding the ACC with Texas and Notre Dame as football anchors but that can change too. The SEC / Big 12 partnership was about football. It is easier to build a football conference around Texas and OU and make it profitable as must see TV than it is around the ACC.

This is what yet could happen. ESPN lands T1 rights for the Big 10 but does so by permitting Delany to move on into New England, Virginia and North Carolina. They maximize the SECN's revenue and avoid duplicating expenses on the ACCN by allowing the SEC to move into Virginia and North Carolina as well. Then both ESPN and FOX continue to split the Big 12 by rebuilding it with the ACC football properties only this time ESPN gets the Network. ESPN loses nothing, regains the Big 10's T1 rights, profits from increases in the SECN and makes Texas happy long term. N.D. gets a Big 12 deal to remain independent, keeps access to Georgia and Florida, gains access to the Sugar Bowl, gets a series with the SEC every now and then and Chapel Hill loses everything by refusing to cooperate. Anything that ESPN was making off of its properties in the ACC is covered now with what they make in the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12. Game over. In that light Boren's remarks are the harbinger of better schools to select from in Big 12 expansion.

While not popular, it is possible.

(06-29-2015 07:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  There is a chance that Boren is announcing that expansion is finally coming. A Texas deal has not worked out with the ACC so far. I think they get one last chance to play ball but then what? Syracuse, Boston College, and Pittsburgh, were seen as a survival move for the ACC when they happened. At that time I said that ESPN was stockpiling inventory that Delany might be interested in. The SEC's desire for market expansion into Virginia and North Carolina are well established. The LHN held Texas in place. Then there's the question of why FOX and ESPN would want the trouble of splitting up what has been an amicable distribution of rights in the Big 12? And finally hanging over all of this is the ACCN issue.

ESPN might have held out hopes of rebuilding the ACC with Texas and Notre Dame as football anchors but that can change too. The SEC / Big 12 partnership was about football. It is easier to build a football conference around Texas and OU and make it profitable as must see TV than it is around the ACC.

This is what yet could happen. ESPN lands T1 rights for the Big 10 but does so by permitting Delany to move on into New England, Virginia and North Carolina. They maximize the SECN's revenue and avoid duplicating expenses on the ACCN by allowing the SEC to move into Virginia and North Carolina as well. Then both ESPN and FOX continue to split the Big 12 by rebuilding it with the ACC football properties only this time ESPN gets the Network. ESPN loses nothing, regains the Big 10's T1 rights, profits from increases in the SECN and makes Texas happy long term. N.D. gets a Big 12 deal to remain independent, keeps access to Georgia and Florida, gains access to the Sugar Bowl, gets a series with the SEC every now and then and Chapel Hill loses everything by refusing to cooperate. Anything that ESPN was making off of its properties in the ACC is covered now with what they make in the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12. Game over. In that light Boren's remarks are the harbinger of better schools to select from in Big 12 expansion.

While not popular, it is possible.

Loses everything?
There could be a lot worse things than moving to the B1G with UVa, Dook and Georgia Tech.
We have already made arrangements to play Wake Forest OOC and we could finally rid ourselves of those guys in Raleigh. I would miss Clemson however.
Carolina is the 11th largest research institution in the country and Dook is in the top 5. UVa draws mostly from Virginia northward. I can't see any problems there, we would just be joining peers instead of having to put up with an overgrown women's college in the middle of the Florida panhandle.
For us we, would just move from Swofford, class of '71 to Delany, class of '70.

I just hope that its all over soon. From Indy to CUSA to the BE/AAC & now the ACC, it's been a long road. It would be nice to find conference stability.

Any chance the B1G extends their negotiations a year?

(06-29-2015 10:31 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I just hope that its all over soon. From Indy to CUSA to the BE/AAC & now the ACC, it's been a long road. It would be nice to find conference stability.

Any chance the B1G extends their negotiations a year?

Nope. But I don't think Louisville has anything to worry about. You're more than competitive in all major sports, operate well into the black for your athletic department and can reach into some markets that Kentucky can't. If anything ever happens to the ACC I think you either land in the Big 12 or a large SEC. West Virginia needs things to break the right way should something happen to the Big 12. If the ACC is relatively unscathed through what is coming then WVU likely finds a home there. If not it gets tougher. T.C.U. needs to head west. Otherwise they can't offer anything that Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech don't already offer. Wake Forest can't afford anything to happen to the ACC. B.C. has some allure to the Big 10 because of their hockey and market. Pitt is the tougher sell to the Big 10. Whatever happens there are clearly going to be some losers. IMO Louisville won't be one of them.

Percentages of Likelihood of Various Possible Outcomes of What Boren has set in Motion:

1. Oklahoma and Texas move to the SEC. 30%

2. Oklahoma and Kansas move to the Big 10. 30%

3. N.C. State and Virginia Tech move to the SEC. 10%

4. Kansas and Virginia Tech move to the Big 10 and Oklahoma and Florida State move to the SEC. 10%

5. Nothing Happens. 20%

(06-29-2015 06:52 AM)omniorange Wrote:  If it is indeed OU and KU to the B1G, then both FOX and ESPN lose T3 content from OU and KU. If ESPN retains sole T1 content for the B1G in this upcoming round, FOX also loses T1 and T2 content for both.

I think if this happens, ESPN and FOX share the rights to the B1G in this next round.

Cheers,
Neil

It's inevitable, it HAS to happen or else the wheels won't be greased enough. I have been adamantly opposed to seeing The Big Ten cede any of it's top rights to Fox. In this situation though, the opportunity cost is too great if it doesn't happen. It's not a situation of wanting it to happen, it simply has to happen.

(06-29-2015 08:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-29-2015 07:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  There is a chance that Boren is announcing that expansion is finally coming. A Texas deal has not worked out with the ACC so far. I think they get one last chance to play ball but then what? Syracuse, Boston College, and Pittsburgh, were seen as a survival move for the ACC when they happened. At that time I said that ESPN was stockpiling inventory that Delany might be interested in. The SEC's desire for market expansion into Virginia and North Carolina are well established. The LHN held Texas in place. Then there's the question of why FOX and ESPN would want the trouble of splitting up what has been an amicable distribution of rights in the Big 12? And finally hanging over all of this is the ACCN issue.

ESPN might have held out hopes of rebuilding the ACC with Texas and Notre Dame as football anchors but that can change too. The SEC / Big 12 partnership was about football. It is easier to build a football conference around Texas and OU and make it profitable as must see TV than it is around the ACC.

This is what yet could happen. ESPN lands T1 rights for the Big 10 but does so by permitting Delany to move on into New England, Virginia and North Carolina. They maximize the SECN's revenue and avoid duplicating expenses on the ACCN by allowing the SEC to move into Virginia and North Carolina as well. Then both ESPN and FOX continue to split the Big 12 by rebuilding it with the ACC football properties only this time ESPN gets the Network. ESPN loses nothing, regains the Big 10's T1 rights, profits from increases in the SECN and makes Texas happy long term. N.D. gets a Big 12 deal to remain independent, keeps access to Georgia and Florida, gains access to the Sugar Bowl, gets a series with the SEC every now and then and Chapel Hill loses everything by refusing to cooperate. Anything that ESPN was making off of its properties in the ACC is covered now with what they make in the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12. Game over. In that light Boren's remarks are the harbinger of better schools to select from in Big 12 expansion.

While not popular, it is possible.

Loses everything?
There could be a lot worse things than moving to the B1G with UVa, Dook and Georgia Tech.
We have already made arrangements to play Wake Forest OOC and we could finally rid ourselves of those guys in Raleigh. I would miss Clemson however.
Carolina is the 11th largest research institution in the country and Dook is in the top 5. UVa draws mostly from Virginia northward. I can't see any problems there, we would just be joining peers instead of having to put up with an overgrown women's college in the middle of the Florida panhandle.
For us we, would just move from Swofford, class of '71 to Delany, class of '70.

Personally I would love to see UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU and Syracuse join up for a 20 team conference that would see divisions as such.

UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU
OSU, PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse
Michigan, MSU, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois
Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern

That would be my preferred set up for The Big Ten but, I just don't see it happening. Perhaps we would let Notre Dame have Syracuse's spot but personally, at this point with all that has been done and said, I would just let Notre Dame walk on over to the big 12 with the rest of the ACC that didn't get into The Big Ten or The SEC. Hell, the SEC could have Notre Dame so that those Southerners could believe that they successfully invaded the North and stole it's best brand. Fine by me.

(06-29-2015 05:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-29-2015 08:03 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-29-2015 07:06 AM)JRsec Wrote:  There is a chance that Boren is announcing that expansion is finally coming. A Texas deal has not worked out with the ACC so far. I think they get one last chance to play ball but then what? Syracuse, Boston College, and Pittsburgh, were seen as a survival move for the ACC when they happened. At that time I said that ESPN was stockpiling inventory that Delany might be interested in. The SEC's desire for market expansion into Virginia and North Carolina are well established. The LHN held Texas in place. Then there's the question of why FOX and ESPN would want the trouble of splitting up what has been an amicable distribution of rights in the Big 12? And finally hanging over all of this is the ACCN issue.

ESPN might have held out hopes of rebuilding the ACC with Texas and Notre Dame as football anchors but that can change too. The SEC / Big 12 partnership was about football. It is easier to build a football conference around Texas and OU and make it profitable as must see TV than it is around the ACC.

This is what yet could happen. ESPN lands T1 rights for the Big 10 but does so by permitting Delany to move on into New England, Virginia and North Carolina. They maximize the SECN's revenue and avoid duplicating expenses on the ACCN by allowing the SEC to move into Virginia and North Carolina as well. Then both ESPN and FOX continue to split the Big 12 by rebuilding it with the ACC football properties only this time ESPN gets the Network. ESPN loses nothing, regains the Big 10's T1 rights, profits from increases in the SECN and makes Texas happy long term. N.D. gets a Big 12 deal to remain independent, keeps access to Georgia and Florida, gains access to the Sugar Bowl, gets a series with the SEC every now and then and Chapel Hill loses everything by refusing to cooperate. Anything that ESPN was making off of its properties in the ACC is covered now with what they make in the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12. Game over. In that light Boren's remarks are the harbinger of better schools to select from in Big 12 expansion.

While not popular, it is possible.

Loses everything?
There could be a lot worse things than moving to the B1G with UVa, Dook and Georgia Tech.
We have already made arrangements to play Wake Forest OOC and we could finally rid ourselves of those guys in Raleigh. I would miss Clemson however.
Carolina is the 11th largest research institution in the country and Dook is in the top 5. UVa draws mostly from Virginia northward. I can't see any problems there, we would just be joining peers instead of having to put up with an overgrown women's college in the middle of the Florida panhandle.
For us we, would just move from Swofford, class of '71 to Delany, class of '70.

Personally I would love to see UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU and Syracuse join up for a 20 team conference that would see divisions as such.

UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU
OSU, PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse
Michigan, MSU, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois
Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern

That would be my preferred set up for The Big Ten but, I just don't see it happening. Perhaps we would let Notre Dame have Syracuse's spot but personally, at this point with all that has been done and said, I would just let Notre Dame walk on over to the big 12 with the rest of the ACC that didn't get into The Big Ten or The SEC. Hell, the SEC could have Notre Dame so that those Southerners could believe that they successfully invaded the North and stole it's best brand. Fine by me.

Why would we want them? They don't fit. Let them go to the Big 12 and continue their bro-love with Texas. But unlike you I don't see the move to 20 unless the PAC raids the Big 12 after the Big 10 and SEC take from the ACC. Then I think both the SEC and Big 10 might grab some niche markets.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and Syracuse would finish out the Big 10.

Virginia Tech, N.C. State, and perhaps Clemson and Florida State finish out the SEC.

The Big 12 goes to 18 as well.
Boston College, Connecticut, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State,
Baylor, B.Y.U., Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Miami
* Notre Dame playing the part of the good friend at the family reunion.