(02-17-2017 11:38 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are a safe option, but a very good one and you don't have to worry about odd divisional setups.
Question...
We keep talking about conferences increasing revenue and what schools are necessary to do that under certain circumstances. Do the networks really care if a particular addition increases a conference's value?
It would seem to me that the networks will be more concerned about maintaining valuable content that pads their bottom line as opposed to reacting to moves a league might make and determining whether the additions will proportionally increase revenues.
For example, did Syracuse and Pittsburgh increase the value of the ACC? If it did, I don't see how.
Did Utah and Colorado really proportionally increase the value of the PAC considering the markets they already possessed? Who made those valuations?
Now obviously, Texas A&M and Missouri brought some serious weight to the SEC's footprint and such a move was necessary to make the SEC Network truly viable. But outside of that...
Perhaps then, these networks will simply pay for schools they want to keep and the conferences are expected to go along in order to keep the gravy train rolling. I'm not sure.
It keeps me guessing.
1. Syracuse and Pittsburgh were added under the market model. Pennsylvania and Syracuse are two whoppers in terms of markets. It was a nice addition.
2. Utah and Colorado were the most populous of the two states left to the PAC with regards to contiguity. And arguably they were the wealthiest they could acquire.
3. A&M & Missouri were not only great market adds, but at the time both were competitive in both football and basketball. Nobody could have foreseen Pinkel's cancer. I hope he's alright.
4. Unsaid but Maryland and Rutgers were great markets for the Big 10 as well.
5. At least OU & OSU are the 2nd & 5th (maybe 4th) most productive athletic departments in the Big 12.
And no matter what, it would behoove the networks to wrap this up, encourage a G5 playoff, and get on with life before they alienate even more viewers and fans.
Forget pods and 1/2 divisions for now. Wouldn't these additions make for reasonable divisions:
PAC North: California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
PAC South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech, T.C.U., Utah
Big 10 East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
Big 10 West: Illinois, Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
SEC East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
SEC West: Arkansas, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M
ACC North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
ACC South: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Now those are geographically sound, well balanced, and for football only. Basketball and Baseball could be handled quite differently.