(06-27-2017 01:08 PM)Win5002 Wrote: JRsec,
I didn't mean to tout Rittenberg as the realignment expert(who really expects BYU, BSU & Houston to be gaining homes and that is what he mentions) but more just to again point out the PAC problems that people don't factor into expansion very much.
The PAC and the ACC are very similar. They comprise some big markets but don't have the greatest fan support for football. They both are big on Olympic sports which don't pay the bills. Everyone felt the PAC was safe because of its geography, well maybe geography in the end will do the PAC in. The interest in the games that are geographical outliers complicated by many times late start times just don't translate well to tv. Maybe the ACC was saved because they are EST and the PAC instead of the Big 12 goes because it is PST. But maybe a group of USC/UCLA/Stanford/Wash/Oregon & Colorado works well for the B1G. Or maybe the California schools demand to stay together and bring Washington & Oregon. I could see how that 6 team contingent could work for the B1G. The only thing I see saving the PAC is a merger of Big 12 schools because Texas & OU are not going with just a 4 team contingent. Then you have to ask yourselves would the 6 schools above I mentioned prefer a Big 12 merger or those 6 schools joining the B1G, especially the academic types at those schools.
The Big 12 would pick up Az./ASU/Colorado & Utah. This only leaves out OSU & WSU. While some Big 12 content is not as valuable they are not 10-11 pm EST start times.
Maybe Texas & OU don't want to leave the Big 12 for a host of reasons.
You probably saw this but it continues to point to the tv issues the PAC faces.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/06/20/pac-12/
I didn't take your remarks that way. I was referring to the OP link. But let's say the Big 10 does make a move on the PAC (which I think is the best option for them at this time). Let's say they take 6 to go to 20. I believe those would be the 4 California schools along with Oregon and Washington. Those are after all the heart of the original PAC schools. That would leave Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Brigham Young available to the Big 12. While that would make them stronger does it add enough in markets to take them where they need to be in revenue? I don't think so. Utah and Arizona aren't the paragons of population. Now if you added San Diego State and U.N.L.V., and New Mexico do you have enough? Maybe. But who among those schools is a peer for either Texas or Oklahoma?
Remember if the Big 10 schools pick up those 6 PAC schools they are jumping up to close to 60 million in payouts. If the Big 12 adds those 6 schools I've suggested they might hit 45 million. And also, the networks have to want to pay for that alignment. I think FOX would wet the bed over picking up those West Coast schools for the B1G. On the other hand I think both FOX and ESPN would have a collective sigh over the six heading to the Big 12. ESPN wouldn't want to pay B.Y.U. anymore than what they are currently paying and San Diego State doesn't carry California and are clearly seen as 2nd tier there. And if you had every cactus in Arizona watching what would you have?
The issues over Big 12 expansion remain even if the Big 10 takes those 6 PAC schools. And that doesn't take into consideration an even more important factor, timing. I don't think the PAC will crack soon. They certainly could crack by 2024. But things are much more likely to crack in the Big 12 first.
We could wind up with a P3 fairly quickly here.
Let's say the Big 10 does move to 20. Now they have another issue. 6 of the schools they would be taking are all "on" the West Coast. They don't have a bridge and the division size doesn't work out for the additions. One would think with 20 you would have 4 divisions of five. So I think they have to take 10 to do it. That means they add Colorado and Utah and at that point they may as well take Arizona (AAU) and Arizona State. At 24 they can work out their divisional structure better. But that leaves nobody for the Big 12 to take.
On top of that the SEC would need to keep up. Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and either Iowa State or WVU takes us to 20.
Washington State, Oregon State, B.Y.U., Boise State, U.N.L.V., San Diego State all become potential expansion targets for the AAC WEST.
T.C.U., Baylor, and one of Iowa State / WVU become epansion targets for AAC as well. Toss in Air Force and Army and add Wichita and they are at 24.
At that point perhaps Cincinnati, Tulane, and Connecticut all head to the ACC with N.D. joining in full.
My point here Winchester is that I don't see enough of the PAC being left for there to be anything to build with. And at the end of the day Oklahoma and Texas are still more valuable elsewhere.
Slive said in Birmingham back in January that when the next realignment came (he thought within 4 or 5 years at that time) that we would have very very large conferences. What I've listed above is why.
The ACC is off limits to the Big 10 by virtue of the GOR and to the SEC by virtue of ESPN. Texas doesn't want to leave their region for conference membership, and if they did they want their own division of local schools. So no Big 10 for them because the Big 10 could only consider 3 or 4 Big 12 schools and two of them are North of Oklahoma.
That leaves the PAC for the Big 10 but how to bridge the gap is the issue. Colorado and Utah do that. There are 6 properties on the West Coast that are too valuable to leave. So going to 10 and picking up the Arizona's makes sense.
Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State in the SEC allows Texas to schedule Rice, or T.C.U. OOC. That's a good deal for them. Toss in Kansas and either WVU or Iowa State and the SEC sits a pretty nice 20 and probably getting paid in the mid to upper 50's. Close enough to the 60 million Big 10 that it doesn't matter. The question then becomes how does the ACC keep up? The answer is they probably don't.
So if ESPN wants to keep the ACC and SEC viable they expand out of the Big 12 for both and then partner the two conferences closely. The Big 10 expands out of the PAC. And, the AAC grows and becomes the 4th power conference, but with tweener brands.
This gives us enough top tier schools to keep those win loss records that fans like. It includes the upper tier of the G5 which prevents law suits. And it allows most rivalries to be restored by containing most rivalries within larger conferences and utilizing a single OOC game for the rest.
