(04-28-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 01:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 01:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 07:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-27-2017 08:45 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Fair point, but consider also they bring down that money without having their content maximized by a major league. They get pretty good ratings and their average attendance is higher than a lot of P5 schools.

When it comes to major conferences, the value of the whole is always greater than the sum of the parts.

If 18 is a viable number for the SEC and IF Missouri moves to the B1G to even out numbers (allows the B1G and PAC to each have 16 schools which include: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Missouri) and IF the SEC takes the 4 Tejas schools to get to 17, which school becomes #18?


Using JR's money guide
Would it be
#39 West Virginia
#65 BYU
#68 SMU
#69 Tulane
#71 Houston?

Or does the SEC NOT take one of: Texas Tech, TCU or Baylor and remains at 16 while the ACC does expand to 16 with Notre Dame and Cincinnati or to 18 with Notre Dame, Cincinnati, UConn and West Virginia.
One other possibility for the ACC would be to take Cincinnati and UConn while Notre remains semi-independent (if the SEC does take West Virginia).

I don't see Missouri leaving, but there is another way to include BYU. That's for the SEC to go to 20.

West: BYU, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor

Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

South: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia

Since the ACC doesn't seem to want WVU anyway, why not just stick them in the SEC and create a slot for BYU? WVU can play Pitt and VT regularly and add to the SEC/ACC crossover content.

For the ACC, they could still go to 18, but with this combo...Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Navy, and UConn.

The thing about growing these conferences to such large numbers is we're inevitably going to have to increase the number of conference games and a lot of the FCS/G5 foes will be squeezed out. Consequently, you have to make sure the properties you really want are in the fold.

Stick Navy in a weaker division so their level of competition isn't exhausting. Of course, you'd make sure they play ND every year. The extra benefit for ND is that frees up some of the few OOC games for them to play Texas, Stanford, USC, and maybe a B1G school with greater regularity...especially Texas as that probably ends up being another annual SEC/ACC match-up. ESPN also gets back into the MD market and Navy is somewhat of a national draw. Navy could even play BYU every year or something like that...apparently they like going out West a lot to recruit so there you go.

If/when the two leagues essentially merge as JR has suggested then it doesn't really matter which conference has which school. As long as all the markets and the properties are covered.

I would think that keeping FOX out of the state of Texas would be a top priority for ESPN for multiple reasons.
In order for the whole P4 scenario to work the PAC and the B1G will have to have at least 16 teams each.
We are pretty sure that the PAC will not take BYU....right?
We are also pretty sure that the B1G will not take West Virginia....right?
We would think that ESPN would not want to give FOX access to the Mexican market, or to the 28 million folks in Tejas........right?
That would leave the B1G a choice of UConn and Cincinnati, and would also leave Missouri the only old Big 8 team not on the PAC/B1G team.
I have no other reason to believe that Missouri would leave the SEC for the PAC/B1G other than logic. But I have been wrong before and there is a lot about realignment that does not seem logical, but this seems like; as JR likes to say, Occam's razor.

Well, two things.

1. FOX can't make Missouri leave.
2. The Big Ten can't make Missouri leave.

Missouri is the only one who can make that decision. The SEC won't ask them to because we wouldn't have gone to the trouble of inviting them and integrating them if we had no interest in keeping them for the long term. Same thing for ESPN because it was their idea to take them in the first place. That and I don't see ESPN giving up content if they don't have to.

So from Missouri's perspective, I can't see them being interested in giving up the gravy train. One could theorize they would depart to be with their old conference mates, but I don't see that as a priority as they made the decision to leave their conference mates in the first place with no guarantee they'd ever be reunited. That and I don't think they'd want to be cut off from their new recruiting grounds.

The B1G getting to 16 is not hard at all. They can just take OU and KU. They're all done.

For the PAC, it's tougher. They can take ISU, KSU, OSU, and I'm not sure where they'd get the 4th one. I would think it would come from a list of Houston, New Mexico, UNLV, or Hawaii. But that's not really the B1G's problem. I don't see them giving up OU to the PAC. The B1G is paying more too so I'd think that's where OU would want to go and play Nebraska every year. They could play both Texas and Oklahoma State out of conference.

Just my opinion, but I can't think of a reason why Missouri would want to leave their current situation.

Well there is another possibility, but it wouldn't be my preference. We could have 3 cross conference games each between the ACC and SEC and two of those could be permitted to be annual games leaving one for a rotating opponent. You don't have to have two, but for schools with more than 1 rival on the other side it would work. For intance Georgia Tech / Georgia and Georgia Tech / Auburn. If we did something like that then there would be no reason the ACC could not have a Texas school. Texas would probably remain the center of their own division in the SEC, but Baylor would actually be an easy trip for the Southernmost part of the ACC. So the ACC could take N.D. / Cincy / Connecticut / and Baylor and Baylor could remain on both T.C.U's schedule and Texas's schedule as an annual cross over.

Look we are eventually going to squeeze the last nickel out of the networks by going to all P games. So the SEC moves to 9 conference games and plays 3 against the ACC. School like Texas could use their last OOC game for Oklahoma but those would be rare exceptions. Anyway that way the money all stays in house. It's not ideal but it would give a degree of flexibility to these kinds of discussions.

BTW: A Simple Concern: If we let B.Y.U. in do we have to put bicycle racks in front of our stadiums and basketball arenas?

(04-28-2017 04:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 01:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 01:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 07:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  If 18 is a viable number for the SEC and IF Missouri moves to the B1G to even out numbers (allows the B1G and PAC to each have 16 schools which include: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Missouri) and IF the SEC takes the 4 Tejas schools to get to 17, which school becomes #18?


Using JR's money guide
Would it be
#39 West Virginia
#65 BYU
#68 SMU
#69 Tulane
#71 Houston?

Or does the SEC NOT take one of: Texas Tech, TCU or Baylor and remains at 16 while the ACC does expand to 16 with Notre Dame and Cincinnati or to 18 with Notre Dame, Cincinnati, UConn and West Virginia.
One other possibility for the ACC would be to take Cincinnati and UConn while Notre remains semi-independent (if the SEC does take West Virginia).

I don't see Missouri leaving, but there is another way to include BYU. That's for the SEC to go to 20.

West: BYU, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor

Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

South: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia

Since the ACC doesn't seem to want WVU anyway, why not just stick them in the SEC and create a slot for BYU? WVU can play Pitt and VT regularly and add to the SEC/ACC crossover content.

For the ACC, they could still go to 18, but with this combo...Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Navy, and UConn.

The thing about growing these conferences to such large numbers is we're inevitably going to have to increase the number of conference games and a lot of the FCS/G5 foes will be squeezed out. Consequently, you have to make sure the properties you really want are in the fold.

Stick Navy in a weaker division so their level of competition isn't exhausting. Of course, you'd make sure they play ND every year. The extra benefit for ND is that frees up some of the few OOC games for them to play Texas, Stanford, USC, and maybe a B1G school with greater regularity...especially Texas as that probably ends up being another annual SEC/ACC match-up. ESPN also gets back into the MD market and Navy is somewhat of a national draw. Navy could even play BYU every year or something like that...apparently they like going out West a lot to recruit so there you go.

If/when the two leagues essentially merge as JR has suggested then it doesn't really matter which conference has which school. As long as all the markets and the properties are covered.

I would think that keeping FOX out of the state of Texas would be a top priority for ESPN for multiple reasons.
In order for the whole P4 scenario to work the PAC and the B1G will have to have at least 16 teams each.
We are pretty sure that the PAC will not take BYU....right?
We are also pretty sure that the B1G will not take West Virginia....right?
We would think that ESPN would not want to give FOX access to the Mexican market, or to the 28 million folks in Tejas........right?
That would leave the B1G a choice of UConn and Cincinnati, and would also leave Missouri the only old Big 8 team not on the PAC/B1G team.
I have no other reason to believe that Missouri would leave the SEC for the PAC/B1G other than logic. But I have been wrong before and there is a lot about realignment that does not seem logical, but this seems like; as JR likes to say, Occam's razor.

Well, two things.

1. FOX can't make Missouri leave.
2. The Big Ten can't make Missouri leave.

Missouri is the only one who can make that decision. The SEC won't ask them to because we wouldn't have gone to the trouble of inviting them and integrating them if we had no interest in keeping them for the long term. Same thing for ESPN because it was their idea to take them in the first place. That and I don't see ESPN giving up content if they don't have to.

So from Missouri's perspective, I can't see them being interested in giving up the gravy train. One could theorize they would depart to be with their old conference mates, but I don't see that as a priority as they made the decision to leave their conference mates in the first place with no guarantee they'd ever be reunited. That and I don't think they'd want to be cut off from their new recruiting grounds.

The B1G getting to 16 is not hard at all. They can just take OU and KU. They're all done.

For the PAC, it's tougher. They can take ISU, KSU, OSU, and I'm not sure where they'd get the 4th one. I would think it would come from a list of Houston, New Mexico, UNLV, or Hawaii. But that's not really the B1G's problem. I don't see them giving up OU to the PAC. The B1G is paying more too so I'd think that's where OU would want to go and play Nebraska every year. They could play both Texas and Oklahoma State out of conference.

Just my opinion, but I can't think of a reason why Missouri would want to leave their current situation.

Well there is another possibility, but it wouldn't be my preference. We could have 3 cross conference games each between the ACC and SEC and two of those could be permitted to be annual games leaving one for a rotating opponent. You don't have to have two, but for schools with more than 1 rival on the other side it would work. For intance Georgia Tech / Georgia and Georgia Tech / Auburn. If we did something like that then there would be no reason the ACC could not have a Texas school. Texas would probably remain the center of their own division in the SEC, but Baylor would actually be an easy trip for the Southernmost part of the ACC. So the ACC could take N.D. / Cincy / Connecticut / and Baylor and Baylor could remain on both T.C.U's schedule and Texas's schedule as an annual cross over.

Look we are eventually going to squeeze the last nickel out of the networks by going to all P games. So the SEC moves to 9 conference games and plays 3 against the ACC. School like Texas could use their last OOC game for Oklahoma but those would be rare exceptions. Anyway that way the money all stays in house. It's not ideal but it would give a degree of flexibility to these kinds of discussions.

BTW: A Simple Concern: If we let B.Y.U. in do we have to put bicycle racks in front of our stadiums and basketball arenas?

and serve only caffeine free coke.
In Chapel Hill the drink vendors are hawking cokes as chasers and mixers..........caffeine?

Division of Product based on Big 8 and SWC borders:

SEC:
Arkansas, Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee


ACC:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, Georgia Tech, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, N.C. State, Miami, Wake Forest, West Virginia

Big 10:

Iowa, Iowa State, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Wisconsin

Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

PAC:

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Utah

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

(04-28-2017 04:41 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 01:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 01:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 07:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  If 18 is a viable number for the SEC and IF Missouri moves to the B1G to even out numbers (allows the B1G and PAC to each have 16 schools which include: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Missouri) and IF the SEC takes the 4 Tejas schools to get to 17, which school becomes #18?


Using JR's money guide
Would it be
#39 West Virginia
#65 BYU
#68 SMU
#69 Tulane
#71 Houston?

Or does the SEC NOT take one of: Texas Tech, TCU or Baylor and remains at 16 while the ACC does expand to 16 with Notre Dame and Cincinnati or to 18 with Notre Dame, Cincinnati, UConn and West Virginia.
One other possibility for the ACC would be to take Cincinnati and UConn while Notre remains semi-independent (if the SEC does take West Virginia).

I don't see Missouri leaving, but there is another way to include BYU. That's for the SEC to go to 20.

West: BYU, Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor

Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

South: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia

Since the ACC doesn't seem to want WVU anyway, why not just stick them in the SEC and create a slot for BYU? WVU can play Pitt and VT regularly and add to the SEC/ACC crossover content.

For the ACC, they could still go to 18, but with this combo...Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Navy, and UConn.

The thing about growing these conferences to such large numbers is we're inevitably going to have to increase the number of conference games and a lot of the FCS/G5 foes will be squeezed out. Consequently, you have to make sure the properties you really want are in the fold.

Stick Navy in a weaker division so their level of competition isn't exhausting. Of course, you'd make sure they play ND every year. The extra benefit for ND is that frees up some of the few OOC games for them to play Texas, Stanford, USC, and maybe a B1G school with greater regularity...especially Texas as that probably ends up being another annual SEC/ACC match-up. ESPN also gets back into the MD market and Navy is somewhat of a national draw. Navy could even play BYU every year or something like that...apparently they like going out West a lot to recruit so there you go.

If/when the two leagues essentially merge as JR has suggested then it doesn't really matter which conference has which school. As long as all the markets and the properties are covered.

I would think that keeping FOX out of the state of Texas would be a top priority for ESPN for multiple reasons.
In order for the whole P4 scenario to work the PAC and the B1G will have to have at least 16 teams each.
We are pretty sure that the PAC will not take BYU....right?
We are also pretty sure that the B1G will not take West Virginia....right?
We would think that ESPN would not want to give FOX access to the Mexican market, or to the 28 million folks in Tejas........right?
That would leave the B1G a choice of UConn and Cincinnati, and would also leave Missouri the only old Big 8 team not on the PAC/B1G team.
I have no other reason to believe that Missouri would leave the SEC for the PAC/B1G other than logic. But I have been wrong before and there is a lot about realignment that does not seem logical, but this seems like; as JR likes to say, Occam's razor.

Well, two things.

1. FOX can't make Missouri leave.
2. The Big Ten can't make Missouri leave.

Missouri is the only one who can make that decision. The SEC won't ask them to because we wouldn't have gone to the trouble of inviting them and integrating them if we had no interest in keeping them for the long term. Same thing for ESPN because it was their idea to take them in the first place. That and I don't see ESPN giving up content if they don't have to.

So from Missouri's perspective, I can't see them being interested in giving up the gravy train. One could theorize they would depart to be with their old conference mates, but I don't see that as a priority as they made the decision to leave their conference mates in the first place with no guarantee they'd ever be reunited. That and I don't think they'd want to be cut off from their new recruiting grounds.

The B1G getting to 16 is not hard at all. They can just take OU and KU. They're all done.

For the PAC, it's tougher. They can take ISU, KSU, OSU, and I'm not sure where they'd get the 4th one. I would think it would come from a list of Houston, New Mexico, UNLV, or Hawaii. But that's not really the B1G's problem. I don't see them giving up OU to the PAC. The B1G is paying more too so I'd think that's where OU would want to go and play Nebraska every year. They could play both Texas and Oklahoma State out of conference.

Just my opinion, but I can't think of a reason why Missouri would want to leave their current situation.

Well there is another possibility, but it wouldn't be my preference. We could have 3 cross conference games each between the ACC and SEC and two of those could be permitted to be annual games leaving one for a rotating opponent. You don't have to have two, but for schools with more than 1 rival on the other side it would work. For intance Georgia Tech / Georgia and Georgia Tech / Auburn. If we did something like that then there would be no reason the ACC could not have a Texas school. Texas would probably remain the center of their own division in the SEC, but Baylor would actually be an easy trip for the Southernmost part of the ACC. So the ACC could take N.D. / Cincy / Connecticut / and Baylor and Baylor could remain on both T.C.U's schedule and Texas's schedule as an annual cross over.

Look we are eventually going to squeeze the last nickel out of the networks by going to all P games. So the SEC moves to 9 conference games and plays 3 against the ACC. School like Texas could use their last OOC game for Oklahoma but those would be rare exceptions. Anyway that way the money all stays in house. It's not ideal but it would give a degree of flexibility to these kinds of discussions.

BTW: A Simple Concern: If we let B.Y.U. in do we have to put bicycle racks in front of our stadiums and basketball arenas?

Bicycle racks? Probably.

I could go for playing extra OOC games against the ACC. I would like one game for each school to play someone from another region though. Bama has become accustomed to playing a neutral site game to kick off the season, for example. Although half the time we're playing ACC schools anyway.

Interesting thought on Baylor to the ACC. Could do it that way. The ACC does need a little extra pop on the football side.

(04-28-2017 10:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Division of Product based on Big 8 and SWC borders:

SEC:
Arkansas, Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee


ACC:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, Georgia Tech, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, N.C. State, Miami, Wake Forest, West Virginia

Big 10:

Iowa, Iowa State, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Wisconsin

Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

PAC:

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Utah

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

I like it but I would swap Louisville and Miami.
Looks lie a finished product to me.

(04-25-2017 07:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 05:45 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  For those of you unfamiliar with what exactly I'm referring to when I say Plan B, here it is:

Texas takes the rest of the TX schools in the Big 12, partners with BYU and Houston, and then shops the whole bloc to another conference. A little bizarre right? More bizarre than most suggestions, but it's starting to make more sense.

When JR mentioned yesterday that ESPN may want to protect their TX properties in the SEC, something clicked. I realized I had heard something similar in the past and went back to put my finger on it. That's when I remembered Montemayor's prediction.

He said that this bloc would get shopped to another conference. He never said it would happen, he just said it was the plan. He specifically did not say which conference the group would end up in and said, in fact, that he didn't know. He said only that the plan had been formed. He did say though that 20 team conferences were entirely realistic. Well, 14+6=20

If plan B were to start rolling, it would mean that Oklahoma had just left the B12. They could go to the B1G with KU, but I'm sure the SEC would offer OU and OSU prior to any Delaney news conference of that sorts.

That would leave Texas and seven dwarfs to make the best decisions for themselves at that point. This is where I think the SEC might get lucky and finally have a shot at landed UT as their fan base might finally push their administration to rejoin their old historic rivals in the SEC. if not , plan B will have the old Big 8 schools plus WVU looking for new homes.

I think Texas might be better off staying at 8 members or reshuffle with other schools but reduce the number of conference games and schedule more P5 schools to make up the difference.

I could see it settling like this:
Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston, BYU, KSU, ISU

SEC 14 + OU, OSU, KU, WVU

If the PAC was still courting Texas:
PAC 12 + Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU
SEC + OU, OSU
American + KU, KSU, ISU, WVU

I don't see ESPN paying BYU 5X what they are making now for no real additional benefit. BYU can spit time with the PAC and SEC to cover half of the country for 20% of the price of the SEC.
There is now way that that ESPN lets Texas get out of their "contract". JR had the right idea of the Big 8 schools going to the PAC/B1G and the SWC schools going to the SEC.......but there is and always has been a problem.....what to do with West Virginia because they make 19 and the ACC isn't going to take them.

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and West Virginia and sends South Carolina to the ACC that also adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati and UConn/Temple.

The major flaw in that theory, or any involving an SEC school moving, is they have to want to move. I've told you that there is a 13 million dollar difference between what schools earn on average in the SEC and what they earn on average in the Big 10. Well it's really 13.5 million, but I was being kind. The real issue is that the SEC NET Profit was 11 million per school. The Big 10 NET Profit was 1 million per school. I say that to point out that there is a very real likelihood that Missouri prefers to stay in the SEC. Currently the difference between the SEC and ACC is 34 million dollars in Gross Revenue. South Carolina would have to want to leave, and I seriously doubt they do.

I'm pretty sure you guys are the ones that ESPN will call upon to give the Eers a home. And remember that Missouri is still 6.5 million to ESPN.

I agree that B.Y.U. is probably better served by being an independent. But the flaw in that line of thought is who will they play when these vastly expanded conferences play only conference games with a few games against their sister conference and nobody else? That's why N.D. will join. It's a Zach Mayo moment from "An Officer and a Gentleman", "I got nowhere else to go!"

So I suggest that if WVU is the only real pill you have to swallow then just chug it down with some shine and move on.

(04-28-2017 10:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Division of Product based on Big 8 and SWC borders:

SEC:
Arkansas, Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee


ACC:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, Georgia Tech, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, N.C. State, Miami, Wake Forest, West Virginia

Big 10:

Iowa, Iowa State, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Wisconsin

Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

PAC:

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Utah

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

But Realistically you can remove B.Y.U. and insert Missouri because that is what we will more likely wind up with if should something like this go through.

(04-28-2017 11:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 07:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 05:45 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  For those of you unfamiliar with what exactly I'm referring to when I say Plan B, here it is:

Texas takes the rest of the TX schools in the Big 12, partners with BYU and Houston, and then shops the whole bloc to another conference. A little bizarre right? More bizarre than most suggestions, but it's starting to make more sense.

When JR mentioned yesterday that ESPN may want to protect their TX properties in the SEC, something clicked. I realized I had heard something similar in the past and went back to put my finger on it. That's when I remembered Montemayor's prediction.

He said that this bloc would get shopped to another conference. He never said it would happen, he just said it was the plan. He specifically did not say which conference the group would end up in and said, in fact, that he didn't know. He said only that the plan had been formed. He did say though that 20 team conferences were entirely realistic. Well, 14+6=20

If plan B were to start rolling, it would mean that Oklahoma had just left the B12. They could go to the B1G with KU, but I'm sure the SEC would offer OU and OSU prior to any Delaney news conference of that sorts.

That would leave Texas and seven dwarfs to make the best decisions for themselves at that point. This is where I think the SEC might get lucky and finally have a shot at landed UT as their fan base might finally push their administration to rejoin their old historic rivals in the SEC. if not , plan B will have the old Big 8 schools plus WVU looking for new homes.

I think Texas might be better off staying at 8 members or reshuffle with other schools but reduce the number of conference games and schedule more P5 schools to make up the difference.

I could see it settling like this:
Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston, BYU, KSU, ISU

SEC 14 + OU, OSU, KU, WVU

If the PAC was still courting Texas:
PAC 12 + Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU
SEC + OU, OSU
American + KU, KSU, ISU, WVU

I don't see ESPN paying BYU 5X what they are making now for no real additional benefit. BYU can spit time with the PAC and SEC to cover half of the country for 20% of the price of the SEC.
There is now way that that ESPN lets Texas get out of their "contract". JR had the right idea of the Big 8 schools going to the PAC/B1G and the SWC schools going to the SEC.......but there is and always has been a problem.....what to do with West Virginia because they make 19 and the ACC isn't going to take them.

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and West Virginia and sends South Carolina to the ACC that also adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati and UConn/Temple.

The major flaw in that theory, or any involving an SEC school moving, is they have to want to move. I've told you that there is a 13 million dollar difference between what schools earn on average in the SEC and what they earn on average in the Big 10. Well it's really 13.5 million, but I was being kind. The real issue is that the SEC NET Profit was 11 million per school. The Big 10 NET Profit was 1 million per school. I say that to point out that there is a very real likelihood that Missouri prefers to stay in the SEC. Currently the difference between the SEC and ACC is 34 million dollars in Gross Revenue. South Carolina would have to want to leave, and I seriously doubt they do.

I'm pretty sure you guys are the ones that ESPN will call upon to give the Eers a home. And remember that Missouri is still 6.5 million to ESPN.

I agree that B.Y.U. is probably better served by being an independent. But the flaw in that line of thought is who will they play when these vastly expanded conferences play only conference games with a few games against their sister conference and nobody else? That's why N.D. will join. It's a Zach Mayo moment from "An Officer and a Gentleman", "I got nowhere else to go!"

So I suggest that if WVU is the only real pill you have to swallow then just chug it down with some shine and move on.

I guess that's why I've been thinking of ways to do 20 with BYU. I can see us taking the TX schools. I don't see Missouri leaving, and there really aren't a lot of good options for the ACC outside of WVU unless they're going to expand deep into the CTZ.

If BYU is left out there in no-man's land then there aren't going to be many decent games on their slate and they seem too good a content provider to be relegated to that fate.

I'm also assuming that Texas might actually want them to come along for some reason. Makes sense that someone at BYU would leak that rumor before anyone else really started talking about all the TX schools moving to the same place.

If we were to go to 20 then Houston doesn't make a lot of sense as they are so redundant at that point. If FOX is getting 5 from the Big 12 then those are off the table. Not sure what we do at that point.

(04-28-2017 11:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 07:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 05:45 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  For those of you unfamiliar with what exactly I'm referring to when I say Plan B, here it is:

Texas takes the rest of the TX schools in the Big 12, partners with BYU and Houston, and then shops the whole bloc to another conference. A little bizarre right? More bizarre than most suggestions, but it's starting to make more sense.

When JR mentioned yesterday that ESPN may want to protect their TX properties in the SEC, something clicked. I realized I had heard something similar in the past and went back to put my finger on it. That's when I remembered Montemayor's prediction.

He said that this bloc would get shopped to another conference. He never said it would happen, he just said it was the plan. He specifically did not say which conference the group would end up in and said, in fact, that he didn't know. He said only that the plan had been formed. He did say though that 20 team conferences were entirely realistic. Well, 14+6=20

If plan B were to start rolling, it would mean that Oklahoma had just left the B12. They could go to the B1G with KU, but I'm sure the SEC would offer OU and OSU prior to any Delaney news conference of that sorts.

That would leave Texas and seven dwarfs to make the best decisions for themselves at that point. This is where I think the SEC might get lucky and finally have a shot at landed UT as their fan base might finally push their administration to rejoin their old historic rivals in the SEC. if not , plan B will have the old Big 8 schools plus WVU looking for new homes.

I think Texas might be better off staying at 8 members or reshuffle with other schools but reduce the number of conference games and schedule more P5 schools to make up the difference.

I could see it settling like this:
Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston, BYU, KSU, ISU

SEC 14 + OU, OSU, KU, WVU

If the PAC was still courting Texas:
PAC 12 + Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU
SEC + OU, OSU
American + KU, KSU, ISU, WVU

I don't see ESPN paying BYU 5X what they are making now for no real additional benefit. BYU can spit time with the PAC and SEC to cover half of the country for 20% of the price of the SEC.
There is now way that that ESPN lets Texas get out of their "contract". JR had the right idea of the Big 8 schools going to the PAC/B1G and the SWC schools going to the SEC.......but there is and always has been a problem.....what to do with West Virginia because they make 19 and the ACC isn't going to take them.

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and West Virginia and sends South Carolina to the ACC that also adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati and UConn/Temple.

The major flaw in that theory, or any involving an SEC school moving, is they have to want to move. I've told you that there is a 13 million dollar difference between what schools earn on average in the SEC and what they earn on average in the Big 10. Well it's really 13.5 million, but I was being kind. The real issue is that the SEC NET Profit was 11 million per school. The Big 10 NET Profit was 1 million per school. I say that to point out that there is a very real likelihood that Missouri prefers to stay in the SEC. Currently the difference between the SEC and ACC is 34 million dollars in Gross Revenue. South Carolina would have to want to leave, and I seriously doubt they do.

I'm pretty sure you guys are the ones that ESPN will call upon to give the Eers a home. And remember that Missouri is still 6.5 million to ESPN.

I agree that B.Y.U. is probably better served by being an independent. But the flaw in that line of thought is who will they play when these vastly expanded conferences play only conference games with a few games against their sister conference and nobody else? That's why N.D. will join. It's a Zach Mayo moment from "An Officer and a Gentleman", "I got nowhere else to go!"

So I suggest that if WVU is the only real pill you have to swallow then just chug it down with some shine and move on.

Speaking of shine, I read a tweet from a WVU person that this year's B12-SEC BB challenge might have Kentucky visiting Morgantown. I would love to see a Hatfield vs McCoy rivalry kick off between those two.

(04-29-2017 12:08 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 11:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 07:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 05:45 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  For those of you unfamiliar with what exactly I'm referring to when I say Plan B, here it is:

Texas takes the rest of the TX schools in the Big 12, partners with BYU and Houston, and then shops the whole bloc to another conference. A little bizarre right? More bizarre than most suggestions, but it's starting to make more sense.

When JR mentioned yesterday that ESPN may want to protect their TX properties in the SEC, something clicked. I realized I had heard something similar in the past and went back to put my finger on it. That's when I remembered Montemayor's prediction.

He said that this bloc would get shopped to another conference. He never said it would happen, he just said it was the plan. He specifically did not say which conference the group would end up in and said, in fact, that he didn't know. He said only that the plan had been formed. He did say though that 20 team conferences were entirely realistic. Well, 14+6=20

If plan B were to start rolling, it would mean that Oklahoma had just left the B12. They could go to the B1G with KU, but I'm sure the SEC would offer OU and OSU prior to any Delaney news conference of that sorts.

That would leave Texas and seven dwarfs to make the best decisions for themselves at that point. This is where I think the SEC might get lucky and finally have a shot at landed UT as their fan base might finally push their administration to rejoin their old historic rivals in the SEC. if not , plan B will have the old Big 8 schools plus WVU looking for new homes.

I think Texas might be better off staying at 8 members or reshuffle with other schools but reduce the number of conference games and schedule more P5 schools to make up the difference.

I could see it settling like this:
Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston, BYU, KSU, ISU

SEC 14 + OU, OSU, KU, WVU

If the PAC was still courting Texas:
PAC 12 + Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU
SEC + OU, OSU
American + KU, KSU, ISU, WVU

I don't see ESPN paying BYU 5X what they are making now for no real additional benefit. BYU can spit time with the PAC and SEC to cover half of the country for 20% of the price of the SEC.
There is now way that that ESPN lets Texas get out of their "contract". JR had the right idea of the Big 8 schools going to the PAC/B1G and the SWC schools going to the SEC.......but there is and always has been a problem.....what to do with West Virginia because they make 19 and the ACC isn't going to take them.

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and West Virginia and sends South Carolina to the ACC that also adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati and UConn/Temple.

The major flaw in that theory, or any involving an SEC school moving, is they have to want to move. I've told you that there is a 13 million dollar difference between what schools earn on average in the SEC and what they earn on average in the Big 10. Well it's really 13.5 million, but I was being kind. The real issue is that the SEC NET Profit was 11 million per school. The Big 10 NET Profit was 1 million per school. I say that to point out that there is a very real likelihood that Missouri prefers to stay in the SEC. Currently the difference between the SEC and ACC is 34 million dollars in Gross Revenue. South Carolina would have to want to leave, and I seriously doubt they do.

I'm pretty sure you guys are the ones that ESPN will call upon to give the Eers a home. And remember that Missouri is still 6.5 million to ESPN.

I agree that B.Y.U. is probably better served by being an independent. But the flaw in that line of thought is who will they play when these vastly expanded conferences play only conference games with a few games against their sister conference and nobody else? That's why N.D. will join. It's a Zach Mayo moment from "An Officer and a Gentleman", "I got nowhere else to go!"

So I suggest that if WVU is the only real pill you have to swallow then just chug it down with some shine and move on.

Speaking of shine, I read a tweet from a WVU person that this year's B12-SEC BB challenge might have Kentucky visiting Morgantown. I would love to see a Hatfield vs McCoy rivalry kick off between those two.

Thanks for the tip. I'll be buying stock in couches, gasoline and matches and maybe some bail bonding agencies in Morgantown. One of them is going to lose so I can't miss!

OK let me chime in here. BYU in the SEC is the silliest proposition I have ever read on this board, and all the old Big East expansion/replacement options were pretty silly. Yes, there was a time Mizzou would have been happy to be a B1G member. The SEC was not even an option for them during that era. Today, as things stand, there is no way Missouri will uproot itself from the SEC. They left a messy, corrupt conference in the Big XII to join a solid, caring, and fair SEC. To buy in to the B1G and their egotistical offers of 1/2 profit conference shares for years is nonsense.

(04-29-2017 10:37 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  OK let me chime in here. BYU in the SEC is the silliest proposition I have ever read on this board, and all the old Big East expansion/replacement options were pretty silly. Yes, there was a time Mizzou would have been happy to be a B1G member. The SEC was not even an option for them during that era. Today, as things stand, there is no way Missouri will uproot itself from the SEC. They left a messy, corrupt conference in the Big XII to join a solid, caring, and fair SEC. To buy in to the B1G and their egotistical offers of 1/2 profit conference shares for years is nonsense.

I totally agree with you about Missouri.

To BYU, it's crazy, but still workable. If they're in a division with a bunch of TX schools then the travel issues are mitigated significantly. The rest of the league would only make a trip out there on rare occasion.

But no, BYU would never replace Missouri in the lineup.

(04-29-2017 12:07 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 11:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 07:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 05:45 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 02:56 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  For those of you unfamiliar with what exactly I'm referring to when I say Plan B, here it is:

Texas takes the rest of the TX schools in the Big 12, partners with BYU and Houston, and then shops the whole bloc to another conference. A little bizarre right? More bizarre than most suggestions, but it's starting to make more sense.

When JR mentioned yesterday that ESPN may want to protect their TX properties in the SEC, something clicked. I realized I had heard something similar in the past and went back to put my finger on it. That's when I remembered Montemayor's prediction.

He said that this bloc would get shopped to another conference. He never said it would happen, he just said it was the plan. He specifically did not say which conference the group would end up in and said, in fact, that he didn't know. He said only that the plan had been formed. He did say though that 20 team conferences were entirely realistic. Well, 14+6=20

If plan B were to start rolling, it would mean that Oklahoma had just left the B12. They could go to the B1G with KU, but I'm sure the SEC would offer OU and OSU prior to any Delaney news conference of that sorts.

That would leave Texas and seven dwarfs to make the best decisions for themselves at that point. This is where I think the SEC might get lucky and finally have a shot at landed UT as their fan base might finally push their administration to rejoin their old historic rivals in the SEC. if not , plan B will have the old Big 8 schools plus WVU looking for new homes.

I think Texas might be better off staying at 8 members or reshuffle with other schools but reduce the number of conference games and schedule more P5 schools to make up the difference.

I could see it settling like this:
Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston, BYU, KSU, ISU

SEC 14 + OU, OSU, KU, WVU

If the PAC was still courting Texas:
PAC 12 + Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU
SEC + OU, OSU
American + KU, KSU, ISU, WVU

I don't see ESPN paying BYU 5X what they are making now for no real additional benefit. BYU can spit time with the PAC and SEC to cover half of the country for 20% of the price of the SEC.
There is now way that that ESPN lets Texas get out of their "contract". JR had the right idea of the Big 8 schools going to the PAC/B1G and the SWC schools going to the SEC.......but there is and always has been a problem.....what to do with West Virginia because they make 19 and the ACC isn't going to take them.

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and West Virginia and sends South Carolina to the ACC that also adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati and UConn/Temple.

The major flaw in that theory, or any involving an SEC school moving, is they have to want to move. I've told you that there is a 13 million dollar difference between what schools earn on average in the SEC and what they earn on average in the Big 10. Well it's really 13.5 million, but I was being kind. The real issue is that the SEC NET Profit was 11 million per school. The Big 10 NET Profit was 1 million per school. I say that to point out that there is a very real likelihood that Missouri prefers to stay in the SEC. Currently the difference between the SEC and ACC is 34 million dollars in Gross Revenue. South Carolina would have to want to leave, and I seriously doubt they do.

I'm pretty sure you guys are the ones that ESPN will call upon to give the Eers a home. And remember that Missouri is still 6.5 million to ESPN.

I agree that B.Y.U. is probably better served by being an independent. But the flaw in that line of thought is who will they play when these vastly expanded conferences play only conference games with a few games against their sister conference and nobody else? That's why N.D. will join. It's a Zach Mayo moment from "An Officer and a Gentleman", "I got nowhere else to go!"

So I suggest that if WVU is the only real pill you have to swallow then just chug it down with some shine and move on.

I guess that's why I've been thinking of ways to do 20 with BYU. I can see us taking the TX schools. I don't see Missouri leaving, and there really aren't a lot of good options for the ACC outside of WVU unless they're going to expand deep into the CTZ.

If BYU is left out there in no-man's land then there aren't going to be many decent games on their slate and they seem too good a content provider to be relegated to that fate.

I'm also assuming that Texas might actually want them to come along for some reason. Makes sense that someone at BYU would leak that rumor before anyone else really started talking about all the TX schools moving to the same place.

If we were to go to 20 then Houston doesn't make a lot of sense as they are so redundant at that point. If FOX is getting 5 from the Big 12 then those are off the table. Not sure what we do at that point.

Why are you having a hard time believing that not only is it possible, but that it's likely that Missouri would go to the B1G.
Nothing works unless that happens, and ultimately the Missouri move will give ESPN "dibs" on Texas. And as many have been saying for years......nothing happens until the Texas question is answered.
The B1G and PAC at 16 each while the SEC and ACC both move to 18. And yes, all of the ACC content will be in the ETZ by adding Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, and UConn (which as you know doesn't do much for me).
Missouri has to move out to give the PAC/B1G some balance and an even numbe of teams.
While I understand the BYU play (the Morman card) but in the spirit of regionalism for the SEC west and the melding of the Houston market between the Central and Western divisions, I would give a really hard look at Tulane to join the Texas schools and Arkansas.......who doesn't want to travel to NOLA. That Houston market interplay is why A&M should stay in the Central with LSU and needs to have access by the West through Texas/Tulane.

(04-29-2017 10:37 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  OK let me chime in here. BYU in the SEC is the silliest proposition I have ever read on this board, and all the old Big East expansion/replacement options were pretty silly. Yes, there was a time Mizzou would have been happy to be a B1G member. The SEC was not even an option for them during that era. Today, as things stand, there is no way Missouri will uproot itself from the SEC. They left a messy, corrupt conference in the Big XII to join a solid, caring, and fair SEC. To buy in to the B1G and their egotistical offers of 1/2 profit conference shares for years is nonsense.

There were no Big East replacement scenarios. If FOX and ESPN divide the properties of the current Big 12 using the SWC / Big 8 division lines it is both geographically and equitably compelling. The Texas schools are really too far (except Tech and possibly T.C.U.) from the PAC, and Kansas, Oklahoma and Iowa are all much closer to Colorado and the Big 10 and that doesn't even account for Oklahoma's depression connection to California. West Virginia is just a total outlier. It is equitable because ESPN would acquire the #1 & #4 brands of the Big 12 while FOX acquired the #2 and #3 brands.

Add to that the fact that UT's #1 issue is keeping their buddies in Texas with them and that historically the old SWC schools shared more games with L.S.U. and Arkansas and it makes sense.

It's the off season so B.Y.U. was kicked around since they are an ESPN property and we are likely headed toward a College Football world in which the PAC and Big 10 are FOX properties and the SEC and ACC are ESPN properties and the relationships between Network properties will not only include more cross conference games, but may in the future share cable footprints. Therefore the reason that X and ATU brought up B.Y.U. is that they would be a lone outpost for ESPN in the West and possibly excluded from the PAC / Big 10 scheduling.

AS to Missouri, it is not unfair to assume that there are still academics and alums that want them in the Big 10. Why? They have a danged hard time controlling the mouths of those who work for them who publicly pine for their Northern brethren, or who disparage the political leanings of the South. It is a conflicted school and that political divide has reared its ugly head these past two years. It's divided at the school because the entire state is conflicted and because the PC elite on your campus confuse an athletic association that is a huge blessing for that school with their own damned political leanings and yearn for an association with Chicago and/or Berkeley.

The SEC has 13 schools inside it that love their associations with one another and state so publicly, and there alums show it at games, and if they have a professor that feels otherwise you never hear about it because those profs know the commitment of their school historically and financially so they don't act like jerks in public.

Nobody in the SEC is clamoring for Mizzou's departure, but most of the alums and folks I talk to from other SEC schools are just as perplexed as I am over the division within your ranks that still gets airtime and gives the impression that too many on your campus still want to be elsewhere. Our response is a simple one. If you want to be part of us then be part of us wholeheartedly and without reservation and we'll love you as an equal. But if you can't make up your mind or govern your unofficial statements by faculty, and sanction or release the recalcitrant faction on your campus which constitutes a constant source of embarrassment for not only the school but for us, then leave.

I haven't talked about this because I know where your heart is in this matter and I respect you. But no other SEC school expresses this from within faculty and staff like Missouri. We have some fans of other SEC schools who are old and opine for lost rivalries like Arkansas fans do with Texas, but that's about it. However, I can't ignore the widespread feeling among other conference member's alums that Missouri will never fit in until they get their house in order, and that house is in the news far too often for our liking. You will never be voted out because that is not our way, but your administration has tried our patience because of their inability to manage this for these past two years running and they are the ones who are wearing out the welcome that would remain yours as family if it was publicly reciprocated. Missouri's inability to present a unified front is disenchanting to those who were happy to receive you, and disgusting to those who were not enthralled with your entrance but who were willing to give it a shot.

Your travel fans are great, your sports teams, although down these past two years, remain competitive, but your administration's ability to govern its the plethora of internally expressed opinions leaves us all shaking our heads and when there are still blogs or news articles where those on your campus express desires to be elsewhere, or give interviews to that effect, I hope you can understand the destructive quality of having a member where that happens.

I have squelched open talk about that on this board, out of respect for you, and because in house I consider such to be inappropriate. But the reality is that the vast majority of the SEC folks are not liking the fit and almost all of the reasoning behind that sentiment can be laid at the feet of your administration's inability to constrain in a productive way their opposing factions on campus. While your president and A.D. have expressed constant support of the decision to move to the SEC, there remains those on your campus who have not. That needs to stop. I can't imagine a business anywhere that allows individuals in their employ to keep their paychecks while undermining the direction chosen by its leadership! And of course they are free to express their political views, but conference affiliation for athletics doesn't fall under that realm.

(04-29-2017 11:19 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-29-2017 12:07 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 11:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 07:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 05:45 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  If plan B were to start rolling, it would mean that Oklahoma had just left the B12. They could go to the B1G with KU, but I'm sure the SEC would offer OU and OSU prior to any Delaney news conference of that sorts.

That would leave Texas and seven dwarfs to make the best decisions for themselves at that point. This is where I think the SEC might get lucky and finally have a shot at landed UT as their fan base might finally push their administration to rejoin their old historic rivals in the SEC. if not , plan B will have the old Big 8 schools plus WVU looking for new homes.

I think Texas might be better off staying at 8 members or reshuffle with other schools but reduce the number of conference games and schedule more P5 schools to make up the difference.

I could see it settling like this:
Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston, BYU, KSU, ISU

SEC 14 + OU, OSU, KU, WVU

If the PAC was still courting Texas:
PAC 12 + Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU
SEC + OU, OSU
American + KU, KSU, ISU, WVU

I don't see ESPN paying BYU 5X what they are making now for no real additional benefit. BYU can spit time with the PAC and SEC to cover half of the country for 20% of the price of the SEC.
There is now way that that ESPN lets Texas get out of their "contract". JR had the right idea of the Big 8 schools going to the PAC/B1G and the SWC schools going to the SEC.......but there is and always has been a problem.....what to do with West Virginia because they make 19 and the ACC isn't going to take them.

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and West Virginia and sends South Carolina to the ACC that also adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati and UConn/Temple.

The major flaw in that theory, or any involving an SEC school moving, is they have to want to move. I've told you that there is a 13 million dollar difference between what schools earn on average in the SEC and what they earn on average in the Big 10. Well it's really 13.5 million, but I was being kind. The real issue is that the SEC NET Profit was 11 million per school. The Big 10 NET Profit was 1 million per school. I say that to point out that there is a very real likelihood that Missouri prefers to stay in the SEC. Currently the difference between the SEC and ACC is 34 million dollars in Gross Revenue. South Carolina would have to want to leave, and I seriously doubt they do.

I'm pretty sure you guys are the ones that ESPN will call upon to give the Eers a home. And remember that Missouri is still 6.5 million to ESPN.

I agree that B.Y.U. is probably better served by being an independent. But the flaw in that line of thought is who will they play when these vastly expanded conferences play only conference games with a few games against their sister conference and nobody else? That's why N.D. will join. It's a Zach Mayo moment from "An Officer and a Gentleman", "I got nowhere else to go!"

So I suggest that if WVU is the only real pill you have to swallow then just chug it down with some shine and move on.

I guess that's why I've been thinking of ways to do 20 with BYU. I can see us taking the TX schools. I don't see Missouri leaving, and there really aren't a lot of good options for the ACC outside of WVU unless they're going to expand deep into the CTZ.

If BYU is left out there in no-man's land then there aren't going to be many decent games on their slate and they seem too good a content provider to be relegated to that fate.

I'm also assuming that Texas might actually want them to come along for some reason. Makes sense that someone at BYU would leak that rumor before anyone else really started talking about all the TX schools moving to the same place.

If we were to go to 20 then Houston doesn't make a lot of sense as they are so redundant at that point. If FOX is getting 5 from the Big 12 then those are off the table. Not sure what we do at that point.

Why are you having a hard time believing that not only is it possible, but that it's likely that Missouri would go to the B1G.
Nothing works unless that happens, and ultimately the Missouri move will give ESPN "dibs" on Texas. And as many have been saying for years......nothing happens until the Texas question is answered.
The B1G and PAC at 16 each while the SEC and ACC both move to 18. And yes, all of the ACC content will be in the ETZ by adding Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, and UConn (which as you know doesn't do much for me).
Missouri has to move out to give the PAC/B1G some balance and an even numbe of teams.
While I understand the BYU play (the Morman card) but in the spirit of regionalism for the SEC west and the melding of the Houston market between the Central and Western divisions, I would give a really hard look at Tulane to join the Texas schools and Arkansas.......who doesn't want to travel to NOLA. That Houston market interplay is why A&M should stay in the Central with LSU and needs to have access by the West through Texas/Tulane.

I really don't see your reasoning.

Missouri is not a necessary variable in this particular arrangement. Odds are we're just adding the TX schools while the ACC adds WVU and the others you mentioned and that's most likely the end of it. I don't see why Missouri needs to be traded to the FOX team. Unless ESPN is getting a property in exchange for that move then I don't see why the topic would be broached.

I can see why you might balk at the idea of the PAC taking a 4th school that isn't a current P5 member, but in this scenario we're saying the ACC will take 2 G5 members so I don't see why ESPN would particularly care if the PAC has to grab someone else outside of the P5.

I don't see why the B1G wouldn't be satisfied with OU and KU. They need OU's football product pretty badly.

I don't see Texas and friends worrying about where Missouri is before they make their decision.

The only party I see concerned about this would possibly be FOX who would rather have Missouri over a G5 school. I get that, but ESPN isn't getting everything they want either. That's the nature of dealing and compromise.

My theory on BYU is admittedly a little crazy. I think it's workable, but I don't expect it to happen. Of course, if we do end up with BYU then expect me to brag about being Nostradamus...lol

I don't think Tulane is a possibility. LSU would probably flip out over that and I don't blame them. That and Tulane brings essentially no value.

(04-29-2017 02:46 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-29-2017 11:19 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-29-2017 12:07 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-28-2017 11:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-25-2017 07:39 PM)XLance Wrote:  I don't see ESPN paying BYU 5X what they are making now for no real additional benefit. BYU can spit time with the PAC and SEC to cover half of the country for 20% of the price of the SEC.
There is now way that that ESPN lets Texas get out of their "contract". JR had the right idea of the Big 8 schools going to the PAC/B1G and the SWC schools going to the SEC.......but there is and always has been a problem.....what to do with West Virginia because they make 19 and the ACC isn't going to take them.

SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and West Virginia and sends South Carolina to the ACC that also adds Notre Dame, Cincinnati and UConn/Temple.

The major flaw in that theory, or any involving an SEC school moving, is they have to want to move. I've told you that there is a 13 million dollar difference between what schools earn on average in the SEC and what they earn on average in the Big 10. Well it's really 13.5 million, but I was being kind. The real issue is that the SEC NET Profit was 11 million per school. The Big 10 NET Profit was 1 million per school. I say that to point out that there is a very real likelihood that Missouri prefers to stay in the SEC. Currently the difference between the SEC and ACC is 34 million dollars in Gross Revenue. South Carolina would have to want to leave, and I seriously doubt they do.

I'm pretty sure you guys are the ones that ESPN will call upon to give the Eers a home. And remember that Missouri is still 6.5 million to ESPN.

I agree that B.Y.U. is probably better served by being an independent. But the flaw in that line of thought is who will they play when these vastly expanded conferences play only conference games with a few games against their sister conference and nobody else? That's why N.D. will join. It's a Zach Mayo moment from "An Officer and a Gentleman", "I got nowhere else to go!"

So I suggest that if WVU is the only real pill you have to swallow then just chug it down with some shine and move on.

I guess that's why I've been thinking of ways to do 20 with BYU. I can see us taking the TX schools. I don't see Missouri leaving, and there really aren't a lot of good options for the ACC outside of WVU unless they're going to expand deep into the CTZ.

If BYU is left out there in no-man's land then there aren't going to be many decent games on their slate and they seem too good a content provider to be relegated to that fate.

I'm also assuming that Texas might actually want them to come along for some reason. Makes sense that someone at BYU would leak that rumor before anyone else really started talking about all the TX schools moving to the same place.

If we were to go to 20 then Houston doesn't make a lot of sense as they are so redundant at that point. If FOX is getting 5 from the Big 12 then those are off the table. Not sure what we do at that point.

Why are you having a hard time believing that not only is it possible, but that it's likely that Missouri would go to the B1G.
Nothing works unless that happens, and ultimately the Missouri move will give ESPN "dibs" on Texas. And as many have been saying for years......nothing happens until the Texas question is answered.
The B1G and PAC at 16 each while the SEC and ACC both move to 18. And yes, all of the ACC content will be in the ETZ by adding Notre Dame, Cincinnati, West Virginia, and UConn (which as you know doesn't do much for me).
Missouri has to move out to give the PAC/B1G some balance and an even numbe of teams.
While I understand the BYU play (the Morman card) but in the spirit of regionalism for the SEC west and the melding of the Houston market between the Central and Western divisions, I would give a really hard look at Tulane to join the Texas schools and Arkansas.......who doesn't want to travel to NOLA. That Houston market interplay is why A&M should stay in the Central with LSU and needs to have access by the West through Texas/Tulane.

I really don't see your reasoning.

Missouri is not a necessary variable in this particular arrangement. Odds are we're just adding the TX schools while the ACC adds WVU and the others you mentioned and that's most likely the end of it. I don't see why Missouri needs to be traded to the FOX team. Unless ESPN is getting a property in exchange for that move then I don't see why the topic would be broached.

I can see why you might balk at the idea of the PAC taking a 4th school that isn't a current P5 member, but in this scenario we're saying the ACC will take 2 G5 members so I don't see why ESPN would particularly care if the PAC has to grab someone else outside of the P5.

I don't see why the B1G wouldn't be satisfied with OU and KU. They need OU's football product pretty badly.

I don't see Texas and friends worrying about where Missouri is before they make their decision.

The only party I see concerned about this would possibly be FOX who would rather have Missouri over a G5 school. I get that, but ESPN isn't getting everything they want either. That's the nature of dealing and compromise.

My theory on BYU is admittedly a little crazy. I think it's workable, but I don't expect it to happen. Of course, if we do end up with BYU then expect me to brag about being Nostradamus...lol

I don't think Tulane is a possibility. LSU would probably flip out over that and I don't blame them. That and Tulane brings essentially no value.

It's not that Tulane brings essentially no value, but rather that they bring no value at all. They have a minuscule alumni base, extra lousy attendance, and LSU carries New Orleans in a landslide. If the SEC want's to have a physical presence in New Orleans then L.S.U. should play a neutral site game there from time to time.

I feel compelled to make this post in this thread. But, the other possibility that exists and is more likely than the one we have been discussing, is that either FOX doesn't acquire the PACN, or that if they do ESPN and the Big 12's top schools will not agree to any deal and we will wait until 2022-3 to start lining up the package that simply best suits the SEC.

Would the SEC agree to the deal we've been talking about? I think so if we get paid to help ESPN and everyone else to end this mess called realignment. But deep down we really have no other valid reason to cooperate with any of it.

We out earn the Big 10 by 13.5 million on average per school. Our NET profit average per school is 10 million higher than the Big 10. And we have a much deeper war chest. If we wait the best we can do is simply to add Texas and Oklahoma. The worst we could do, and it is very unlikely, would be to add T.C.U. and West Virginia and even those give us DFW and a content multiplier with a small new state. But more likely we land the two Oklahoma's, which is still fairly decent. But the huge ace in the hole that will make the other conference's consider the first deal we have been discussing is the SEC's ability to offer Texa-homa and to do it with more money, better geography, and old rivals.

That last option is why there is a first option at all. The only way the PAC and Big 10 could acquire Oklahoma to go with Kansas is if the SEC never gets to make their offer for Texa-homa. Pressure in the state of Oklahoma would be for a safe landing spot for both schools. Texas plus any other Texas school they choose and the opportunity to play the Aggies and Hogs again on a regular basis would be a huge reason for the Horns to throw in with the Sooners. And guys the Big 10 and PAC don't want to fall that far behind. That's why if FOX does get part of the PACN there will at least be the offer of a deal. More than that ESPN would likely get the advantage of the SEC's stronger position and would not have to give up any Texas schools to make it happen.

So never forget what all other message boards never want to even hint at in all of their grandiose speculations about why OU sees itself as academically superior enough to go to the Big 10 and to refuse the SEC again. They simply don't want to admit that an SEC offer particularly to OU and UT with baggage is probably an offer they can't refuse. The claim that OU turned down the SEC already is internet BS. They came to us and wanted an offer but wanted one for OSU too and in place of A&M. My family uses an apt movie quote to respond to things as preposterous as that, "not now, not ever, presumptuous little *^#@!" The academic snobbery is hooey too because OU is only at the SEC's MEAN academically. So, all of that talk is BS on their part. Nobody wants Kansas because they average 24,000 in home attendance at football games (which is a lot of lost gate) and only adds hoops value. Their brand in basketball, and their history in basketball are what they have, as well as their AAU status. But as far as adding significantly to the bottom line, they don't. None of those sites grasp or admit that reality. Why? Because Texas is hated, but financially they are all of that and a bag of chips, it's just that they come with nuts also. And all of them know that the difference in earnings will give the SEC a 15 million leg up on even the Big 10 if Texas comes our way. So if the Big 12 is to safely find all of its members a home the time to do it is now. None of the other conferences want to see a Texas / Oklahoma entourage in the SEC. They have next year to work this out before the ACCN opens and before we get even closer to the end of the Big 12 GOR and their current contract. ESPN would deal right now to set up their two conference networks like they want them and to cement Texas's participation. The Big 10 and PAC would deal better if FOX speaks for them both but neither can afford to see both Texas and Oklahoma enticed to the SEC.

Texas has lost ground to Oklahoma in the past 10 years. Texas in the SEC and Oklahoma in either the PAC or Big 10 ends that and does so in spades. Texas will never have more leverage than they do right now to get at least a division of all former SWC mates. I think they take that deal. ESPN lands Texas, excludes rivals from the largest potential market on the board which keeps their advantage in markets, and they keep the 2nd best schools at saturating their markets. The % of viewers who watch vs the total possible viewership is only 2nd to that of the SEC. And they get out of it with only having to take 5 schools which is all they fully pay for now.

But, all of this merely puts the SEC in the catbirds seat. If the deal goes down realignment is over and we have the most valuable content and the best overall market with the greatest saturation of that market. If the deal doesn't go through we can offer 4 schools sweep the best two brands from the market and no other conference will ever touch our earnings again.

Think about that! ESPN has. They will deal because they know that if the SEC lands Texa-homa it doesn't have any good reason to be helpful partners with the ACC. Do the deal and we do. Either way we're fine. But that either way part doesn't apply to any other conference.

Just to make sure I understand you correctly JR...

You think Texas would prefer to have a division with the old SWC mates, and I'm assuming that means all the other TX schools, rather than a division with Oklahoma?

It does make sense as they can always play OU out of conference. I can see why ESPN would be interested in that play as well.

(04-29-2017 07:01 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Just to make sure I understand you correctly JR...

You think Texas would prefer to have a division with the old SWC mates, and I'm assuming that means all the other TX schools, rather than a division with Oklahoma?

It does make sense as they can always play OU out of conference. I can see why ESPN would be interested in that play as well.

The answer to the first question is yes. They would want the Texas schools with Arkansas and A&M all of which were SWC schools.

I specifically said it would work to Texas's advantage to have OU in either the PAC or the Big 10 and for their annual game in Dallas to be the only one the Sooners played in Texas against a brand school. It would severely hinder OU recruiting in the state they must have to avoid becoming another Nebraska.

Where I connected OU and UT was in the threat of the SEC taking a Texa-homa combination and distancing ourselves from every other conference. The Big 10 and PAC if under FOX control would gladly deal to avoid that potentiality.

A division of Texas, Texas Tech (or another Texas school), Oklahoma, O.S.U., Missouri and Arkansas would be extremely hard for those schools to pass up. It's more money than they could get anywhere else in spite of what Big 10 fanboys say. We already out earn them by 13.5 million average per school of which 10 million is more profit than they show, and we are closer and stronger in the minor sports they care about. Women's softball and basketball is important to both schools as are track and field, country club sports, and swimming and diving for Texas. Travel for minor sports would cost them a lot less and their fans would be very appreciative not to have to fly to see those events or any events. On the men's side they both treasure baseball too. It sucks in the Big 10 as does softball and most of their women's basketball. The SEC is a no brainer for their AD's and the other conferences know it. It seems the most misinformed as usual are the message board guys.

So the threat of that move is what motivates all of the others and ESPN to find a way to do a deal. ESPN wants Texas, Texas wants other Texas schools, and Kansas, Oklahoma and Iowa are much closer to the Big 10 and to Colorado. It isn't hard to figure it out from there.

(04-29-2017 11:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-29-2017 10:37 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  OK let me chime in here. BYU in the SEC is the silliest proposition I have ever read on this board, and all the old Big East expansion/replacement options were pretty silly. Yes, there was a time Mizzou would have been happy to be a B1G member. The SEC was not even an option for them during that era. Today, as things stand, there is no way Missouri will uproot itself from the SEC. They left a messy, corrupt conference in the Big XII to join a solid, caring, and fair SEC. To buy in to the B1G and their egotistical offers of 1/2 profit conference shares for years is nonsense.

There were no Big East replacement scenarios. If FOX and ESPN divide the properties of the current Big 12 using the SWC / Big 8 division lines it is both geographically and equitably compelling. The Texas schools are really too far (except Tech and possibly T.C.U.) from the PAC, and Kansas, Oklahoma and Iowa are all much closer to Colorado and the Big 10 and that doesn't even account for Oklahoma's depression connection to California. West Virginia is just a total outlier. It is equitable because ESPN would acquire the #1 & #4 brands of the Big 12 while FOX acquired the #2 and #3 brands.

Add to that the fact that UT's #1 issue is keeping their buddies in Texas with them and that historically the old SWC schools shared more games with L.S.U. and Arkansas and it makes sense.

It's the off season so B.Y.U. was kicked around since they are an ESPN property and we are likely headed toward a College Football world in which the PAC and Big 10 are FOX properties and the SEC and ACC are ESPN properties and the relationships between Network properties will not only include more cross conference games, but may in the future share cable footprints. Therefore the reason that X and ATU brought up B.Y.U. is that they would be a lone outpost for ESPN in the West and possibly excluded from the PAC / Big 10 scheduling.

AS to Missouri, it is not unfair to assume that there are still academics and alums that want them in the Big 10. Why? They have a danged hard time controlling the mouths of those who work for them who publicly pine for their Northern brethren, or who disparage the political leanings of the South. It is a conflicted school and that political divide has reared its ugly head these past two years. It's divided at the school because the entire state is conflicted and because the PC elite on your campus confuse an athletic association that is a huge blessing for that school with their own damned political leanings and yearn for an association with Chicago and/or Berkeley.

The SEC has 13 schools inside it that love their associations with one another and state so publicly, and there alums show it at games, and if they have a professor that feels otherwise you never hear about it because those profs know the commitment of their school historically and financially so they don't act like jerks in public.

Nobody in the SEC is clamoring for Mizzou's departure, but most of the alums and folks I talk to from other SEC schools are just as perplexed as I am over the division within your ranks that still gets airtime and gives the impression that too many on your campus still want to be elsewhere. Our response is a simple one. If you want to be part of us then be part of us wholeheartedly and without reservation and we'll love you as an equal. But if you can't make up your mind or govern your unofficial statements by faculty, and sanction or release the recalcitrant faction on your campus which constitutes a constant source of embarrassment for not only the school but for us, then leave.

I haven't talked about this because I know where your heart is in this matter and I respect you. But no other SEC school expresses this from within faculty and staff like Missouri. We have some fans of other SEC schools who are old and opine for lost rivalries like Arkansas fans do with Texas, but that's about it. However, I can't ignore the widespread feeling among other conference member's alums that Missouri will never fit in until they get their house in order, and that house is in the news far too often for our liking. You will never be voted out because that is not our way, but your administration has tried our patience because of their inability to manage this for these past two years running and they are the ones who are wearing out the welcome that would remain yours as family if it was publicly reciprocated. Missouri's inability to present a unified front is disenchanting to those who were happy to receive you, and disgusting to those who were not enthralled with your entrance but who were willing to give it a shot.

Your travel fans are great, your sports teams, although down these past two years, remain competitive, but your administration's ability to govern its the plethora of internally expressed opinions leaves us all shaking our heads and when there are still blogs or news articles where those on your campus express desires to be elsewhere, or give interviews to that effect, I hope you can understand the destructive quality of having a member where that happens.

I have squelched open talk about that on this board, out of respect for you, and because in house I consider such to be inappropriate. But the reality is that the vast majority of the SEC folks are not liking the fit and almost all of the reasoning behind that sentiment can be laid at the feet of your administration's inability to constrain in a productive way their opposing factions on campus. While your president and A.D. have expressed constant support of the decision to move to the SEC, there remains those on your campus who have not. That needs to stop. I can't imagine a business anywhere that allows individuals in their employ to keep their paychecks while undermining the direction chosen by its leadership! And of course they are free to express their political views, but conference affiliation for athletics doesn't fall under that realm.

The sword cuts both ways Jr. For five years I, along with a multitude of Missourians, have read posts and reports regarding our geography, cultural fit, competitiveness , and a plethora of reasons why we do not fit in the SEC. Every time the subject of realignment comes up, someone is willing to throw us to the wolves. It gets really frustrating. Many at the university were wary of being accepted by the SEC. Most SEC folks have, however, some within the SEC have not. Liberal B1G factions exist at Columbia. They exposed themselves publicly when the whole racial issue blew up. Trust me, Missouri is a conservative minded state holding to many cultural and political beliefs that parallel southern thinking. At the same time Missouri has apparently become an SEC problem child, with Missouri having "conflicts", Kansas and BYU are being discussed as SEC possibilities. Having a really tough time swallowing that one. Everything takes time to gel. If it doesn't, I guess Texas will take our place. I guess time will tell. Thanks for your honesty Jr.