Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #21
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(02-13-2021 03:58 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 05:17 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 01:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 11:24 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—where would you put the valuation of the SEC at per year at 24 members—

Oklahoma
Texas
Florida St
Clemson
Pick any 6 Big 12 or ACC schools you want

I think 24 would be a sweet spot where the conference could maximize both the individual value of its biggest brands and use its enormous market share to demand premium rates for their content.

What are your thoughts as the ideal size for revenue?

At 24 the SEC starts to lose per school revenue. Twenty could be justified. Texas and Oklahoma add 1.95 billion to the SEC's total. That is still the optimal move. But the SEC could justify for Winter sports sake the additions of Kansas and North Carolina to go with Kentucky to boost the SEC's basketball value. Add Florida State to control he top ad rates in Florida and Clemson for a content multiplier and maybe you could justify 20.

But in reality the SEC's payouts would never be higher that they would be if they just went to 16 with Texas and Oklahoma.

I like 20. Shoot for Clemson, Florida St, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, and Texas Tech. Actually 21 is not terrible - add Kansas.

21
East: Clemson, Florida, Florida St, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

(02-13-2021 03:29 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  This is what bothers me. Conferences may expand with schools thinking they are adding great new markets. It does not always synthesize very well. Even when Penn State moved to the BIG, there were plenty of disgruntled fans when it first happened. Much of the fan base travels, and heading deep into the midwest often wasn't so favorable.

West Virginia in the Big 12 is the blatant example of awkward placement. They would have fit well into the ACC, and provided the ACC fb (and bb really) more quality in the northern tier of the conference.

I am more optimistic about Mizzou. They are not an extreme outlier. They are cultivating good SEC rivalries. Note, being placed in the SEC-east, trips to/from Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and even Tennessee, cannot be described as close. On most other measures, it is a positive association.

1. Adding new markets opened a clause in the SEC TV contracts to reevaluate its value for the new members and add more cable boxes to the SeEC Network to aid its startup and success.

2. Mizzou playing in the East in football helped re-establish new recruiting grounds and connections. Winning the East twice proved Mizzou could succeed, not sure they would finish that high in the west.

3. We have a window for another round of expansion coming up, but is there a need or desire for teams to switch conferences. More importantly, is there a way to monetize it so all members come out ahead?

1. Missouri won the East twice because Pinkel was a better coach than those in the East at that time. Their fans want closer games, and preferably more meaningful ones to them.

2. Nobody really gets added for footprint anymore, but they will be added for national draw.

3. The reason things "could" change by 2024 is that the GOR's in the Big 12 and PAC expire meaning you don't have to make it profitable for everyone affected by a move. I doubt that corporate entities will let this opportunity pass without trying to utilize it to their advantage. Texas and Oklahoma also realize this is their only chance to make moves without having to insure the other 8.

Personally I think the SEC should consider moving to 18 and split the divisions in a truer East / West alignment. I say expand by 4 because you can accommodate Texas who already has 2 chief rivals and likely third in the SEC (A&M, Arky, & LSU) and add Kansas in the process with whichever other school is needed to make the deal whether that is Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor, or T.C.U.. At that point it doesn't really matter. UT and OU give you 57% of the value of the Big 12. Add Kansas and it is 62%. And any of the other 3 and you get close to 70% of the value of the Big 12 for the cost of 4 schools ( and actually get 70% with OSU as the choice). Even ESPN will be interested in that.

West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M

East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.

Only Mississippi/Mississippi State would need a protection and the easiest way to do that is for them to make each other an OOC P game and not count the win or loss against the conference record.
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2021 04:14 PM by JRsec.)
02-13-2021 04:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,199
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 154
I Root For: RU/Big Ten
Location:
Post: #22
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(02-09-2021 02:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-09-2021 09:47 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  Having a hard time fathoming why Mizzou can’t pull in $20M media value and why WVU and Rutgers are below $10M.

It's not hard at all when you stop and think about it. We are dividing the media revenue by the % of market value each school represents. In the Big 12 9 of the schools have history with one another meaning regional interest. One does not, WVU. I would venture to say that WVU's value would go way up in the Old Big East or even the ACC. But in the Big 12 nobody sees them as anything but an outlier and a mediocre one at that. Texas and Oklahoma are the only national draws in football.

With Rutgers nobody in the Big 10 wants to see those games, most resent them being in the conference and their sports programs have not been competitive for some time and New Jersey is a pro sports market.

With Missouri you have the problem of their fans buying into the SEC more than the other way around (which still has problems). Again they aren't a national brand and they are playing no school from the old Big 8 and only 1 from the Big 12. Interest drives value production as does branding. All 3 are to some extent average to poor products that no longer have regional interest in their schedules. Missouri at least neighbors some SEC states and can grow some in market reach. Rutgers over time may be able to as well. West Virginia is just plain screwed as far as developing regional interest.

This is where the Big 12 expanding East would be most valuable. Not only about West Virginia getting back old rivals like Pitt, Virginia Tech and Syracuse, but accessing new sources of revenue that they would not, otherwise.
04-09-2021 05:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,872
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 126
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #23
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(02-13-2021 04:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-13-2021 03:58 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 05:17 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 01:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 11:24 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—where would you put the valuation of the SEC at per year at 24 members—

Oklahoma
Texas
Florida St
Clemson
Pick any 6 Big 12 or ACC schools you want

I think 24 would be a sweet spot where the conference could maximize both the individual value of its biggest brands and use its enormous market share to demand premium rates for their content.

What are your thoughts as the ideal size for revenue?

At 24 the SEC starts to lose per school revenue. Twenty could be justified. Texas and Oklahoma add 1.95 billion to the SEC's total. That is still the optimal move. But the SEC could justify for Winter sports sake the additions of Kansas and North Carolina to go with Kentucky to boost the SEC's basketball value. Add Florida State to control he top ad rates in Florida and Clemson for a content multiplier and maybe you could justify 20.

But in reality the SEC's payouts would never be higher that they would be if they just went to 16 with Texas and Oklahoma.

I like 20. Shoot for Clemson, Florida St, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, and Texas Tech. Actually 21 is not terrible - add Kansas.

21
East: Clemson, Florida, Florida St, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

(02-13-2021 03:29 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  This is what bothers me. Conferences may expand with schools thinking they are adding great new markets. It does not always synthesize very well. Even when Penn State moved to the BIG, there were plenty of disgruntled fans when it first happened. Much of the fan base travels, and heading deep into the midwest often wasn't so favorable.

West Virginia in the Big 12 is the blatant example of awkward placement. They would have fit well into the ACC, and provided the ACC fb (and bb really) more quality in the northern tier of the conference.

I am more optimistic about Mizzou. They are not an extreme outlier. They are cultivating good SEC rivalries. Note, being placed in the SEC-east, trips to/from Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and even Tennessee, cannot be described as close. On most other measures, it is a positive association.

1. Adding new markets opened a clause in the SEC TV contracts to reevaluate its value for the new members and add more cable boxes to the SeEC Network to aid its startup and success.

2. Mizzou playing in the East in football helped re-establish new recruiting grounds and connections. Winning the East twice proved Mizzou could succeed, not sure they would finish that high in the west.

3. We have a window for another round of expansion coming up, but is there a need or desire for teams to switch conferences. More importantly, is there a way to monetize it so all members come out ahead?

1. Missouri won the East twice because Pinkel was a better coach than those in the East at that time. Their fans want closer games, and preferably more meaningful ones to them.

2. Nobody really gets added for footprint anymore, but they will be added for national draw.

3. The reason things "could" change by 2024 is that the GOR's in the Big 12 and PAC expire meaning you don't have to make it profitable for everyone affected by a move. I doubt that corporate entities will let this opportunity pass without trying to utilize it to their advantage. Texas and Oklahoma also realize this is their only chance to make moves without having to insure the other 8.

Personally I think the SEC should consider moving to 18 and split the divisions in a truer East / West alignment. I say expand by 4 because you can accommodate Texas who already has 2 chief rivals and likely third in the SEC (A&M, Arky, & LSU) and add Kansas in the process with whichever other school is needed to make the deal whether that is Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor, or T.C.U.. At that point it doesn't really matter. UT and OU give you 57% of the value of the Big 12. Add Kansas and it is 62%. And any of the other 3 and you get close to 70% of the value of the Big 12 for the cost of 4 schools ( and actually get 70% with OSU as the choice). Even ESPN will be interested in that.

West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M

East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.

Only Mississippi/Mississippi State would need a protection and the easiest way to do that is for them to make each other an OOC P game and not count the win or loss against the conference record.

To me, that could be a major hindrance in expansion as scheduling in football will start getting more difficult unless the conference rules or structure changes.

I find it fascinating that this round of potential realignment has an ACC willing to put all options on the table to catch up to th dc SEC and B1G. The Pac is ditching their commissioner and reevaluating their rights and networks structure to close the financial gap. The Big 12 schools will have some options as they’ll be highly coveted. Now my only question is could any ACC school leave the conference before the early 2030’s and retain their tv rights or are they definitely trapped in the ACC GOR.
04-12-2021 08:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #24
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-12-2021 08:42 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(02-13-2021 04:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-13-2021 03:58 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 05:17 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 01:20 PM)JRsec Wrote:  At 24 the SEC starts to lose per school revenue. Twenty could be justified. Texas and Oklahoma add 1.95 billion to the SEC's total. That is still the optimal move. But the SEC could justify for Winter sports sake the additions of Kansas and North Carolina to go with Kentucky to boost the SEC's basketball value. Add Florida State to control he top ad rates in Florida and Clemson for a content multiplier and maybe you could justify 20.

But in reality the SEC's payouts would never be higher that they would be if they just went to 16 with Texas and Oklahoma.

I like 20. Shoot for Clemson, Florida St, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, and Texas Tech. Actually 21 is not terrible - add Kansas.

21
East: Clemson, Florida, Florida St, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

(02-13-2021 03:29 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  This is what bothers me. Conferences may expand with schools thinking they are adding great new markets. It does not always synthesize very well. Even when Penn State moved to the BIG, there were plenty of disgruntled fans when it first happened. Much of the fan base travels, and heading deep into the midwest often wasn't so favorable.

West Virginia in the Big 12 is the blatant example of awkward placement. They would have fit well into the ACC, and provided the ACC fb (and bb really) more quality in the northern tier of the conference.

I am more optimistic about Mizzou. They are not an extreme outlier. They are cultivating good SEC rivalries. Note, being placed in the SEC-east, trips to/from Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and even Tennessee, cannot be described as close. On most other measures, it is a positive association.

1. Adding new markets opened a clause in the SEC TV contracts to reevaluate its value for the new members and add more cable boxes to the SeEC Network to aid its startup and success.

2. Mizzou playing in the East in football helped re-establish new recruiting grounds and connections. Winning the East twice proved Mizzou could succeed, not sure they would finish that high in the west.

3. We have a window for another round of expansion coming up, but is there a need or desire for teams to switch conferences. More importantly, is there a way to monetize it so all members come out ahead?

1. Missouri won the East twice because Pinkel was a better coach than those in the East at that time. Their fans want closer games, and preferably more meaningful ones to them.

2. Nobody really gets added for footprint anymore, but they will be added for national draw.

3. The reason things "could" change by 2024 is that the GOR's in the Big 12 and PAC expire meaning you don't have to make it profitable for everyone affected by a move. I doubt that corporate entities will let this opportunity pass without trying to utilize it to their advantage. Texas and Oklahoma also realize this is their only chance to make moves without having to insure the other 8.

Personally I think the SEC should consider moving to 18 and split the divisions in a truer East / West alignment. I say expand by 4 because you can accommodate Texas who already has 2 chief rivals and likely third in the SEC (A&M, Arky, & LSU) and add Kansas in the process with whichever other school is needed to make the deal whether that is Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor, or T.C.U.. At that point it doesn't really matter. UT and OU give you 57% of the value of the Big 12. Add Kansas and it is 62%. And any of the other 3 and you get close to 70% of the value of the Big 12 for the cost of 4 schools ( and actually get 70% with OSU as the choice). Even ESPN will be interested in that.

West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M

East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.

Only Mississippi/Mississippi State would need a protection and the easiest way to do that is for them to make each other an OOC P game and not count the win or loss against the conference record.

To me, that could be a major hindrance in expansion as scheduling in football will start getting more difficult unless the conference rules or structure changes.

I find it fascinating that this round of potential realignment has an ACC willing to put all options on the table to catch up to th dc SEC and B1G. The Pac is ditching their commissioner and reevaluating their rights and networks structure to close the financial gap. The Big 12 schools will have some options as they’ll be highly coveted. Now my only question is could any ACC school leave the conference before the early 2030’s and retain their tv rights or are they definitely trapped in the ACC GOR.

This is the round of realignment where the Big 12 could survive. ACC AD's are in desperation mode and the PAC is so remote, and so politically out of touch with the Big 12 I just don't see that happening.

Truly you could dissolve the ACC this go around if ESPN acquires all of the rights to the Big 12 and if the ACC doesn't get a boost in pay that would have to be massive to make them competitive. North Carolina and Duke basketball are slipping. Florida State football is fading, Miami is irrelevant, Virginia Tech is a shadow of its former self, and B.C., Syracuse and Pitt are hardly relevant. Wake Forest and Georgia Tech are revenue laggards and Clemson knows what it faces if they can't get what they could easily exceed elsewhere. The whole conference has been out of touch with reality in focus, and poorly led under Swofford. Even Louisville is slipping and N.C. State is a doing nothing in any sport.

Was this true 10 years ago? No! So what has happened? They are getting lapped in revenue by their neighbors the SEC and B1G! Money and recruiting go hand in hand whether the whole hypocritical institution of the NCAA wants to admit it or not.

Since N.D. will never fully join them and will have much better options if forced to join in full by a structure change, the schools of the ACC have finally awakened to reality, only they did so after signing an egregious long term contract for which they only have 1 out for more revenue.....dissolution. It takes 12 to do it and ordinarily people would say, "No way!" and be correct, but not now. Not if the Big 12's new contract makes moving there an in house move for the ACC, or an SEC move an in house move the the SEC, or a Big 12 move a move in which ESPN would retain half of the rights to an ACC school they would then only pay half for in the Big 10, meaning no more than what they are currently paying for that product, and likely a product they don't make much money from even at ACC payout levels.

So 2 to the Big 10 (pick'em: Duke, North Carolina, Pitt, Virginia, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, and 2 to the SEC of the same schools, and 8 to the Big 12 from: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Louisville, N.C. State, or Virginia Tech and it's done. Notre Dame will attach itself wherever they wish and likely would get a partial deal (through ESPN help) with the Big 12.

Being able to pit the Irish against the Horns or Sooners would be mega dollars for ESPN, more than they make from them under the same deal now with the ACC.

Anyone placed from the football schools of the ACC against the Big 12 would generate more money.

Dividing the states of North Carolina and Virginia between the Big 10 and SEC would only put more eyes, and therefore more money, upon those two states.

Take the SEC and Big 10 to roughly 70 million and bounce the Big 12 up to about 55 million each by adding more than double their current market and putting 3 top 10 brands in the mix with N.D. as a partial and ESPN can certainly monetize it, especially by adding some of the better ACC brands to a dedicated football conference.

So move 12 and it can be done. Mover 10 of them in house and create larger conference market reach and add to the number of brands playing in each conference, or in the case of the SEC improving their hoops branding and it can be done.
04-12-2021 09:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,246
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #25
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
JRsec, you are very good at keeping up with the network agreements and figures. I know the generalities with each, but you are seasoned in the details. Sharing those specifics are appreciated.

In terms of value that could be added to the SEC, and looking at this from multiple angles, there is one school I deem most worthy to continue to pursue: Texas.

I am not a fan of Texas, but their athletics, academics, fan base, location, proximity, financial and physical resources, scope of rivalries, and established name and image, would be a major boost to the SEC. What could hold Texas back is largely attitudinal, along with their propensity to seek control within a collective structure.

While Oklahoma is another coveted school, I get the perception they are receptive to overtures from the BIG10. Then there is the question if they will still be opposed to a conference separation from Oklahoma State. That really is a good "duo". The PAC12 was short-sighted in not accepting this pair several years ago. If they had, the PAC12 situation would be much improved today. Texas Tech, in my opinion, would be a good addition to the PAC12 in terms of location and garnering a foothold in west Texas. Kansas State joining a package of schools heading west could be plausible.

As to the ACC, assuming their GoR firmly holds, adding West Virginia would be a quality athletic and contiguous addition. As Notre Dame is steadfastly against accepting conference football, personally, I would not be disappointed to see the ACC cut strings with them when the current contract expires. If the contract assures ND permanence for non-fb sports (excluding hockey), then the ACC has to live with it. The hybrid stuff, when there is a sport that a member could contribute, is a turn-off. I know that is an unpopular view on CSNBBS, but it is how I view it. At some future point, it could be a part of a motive for one or more southern, athletically elite, ACC schools to eventually depart for elsewhere. Schools such as Clemson and Florida State may not see themselves bonded in perceptual co-dependency with ND. If WVU became #15, and the ACC wanted #16, Cincinnati looks like a respectable prospect.

Maybe the BIG12 surprises, and they receive a very competitive/lucrative contract in a couple of years or so, and no school leaves. But if that happens, and they don't expand themselves, then some more enabling is going-on with just ten members per prime bowls, access to playoffs, etc. I haven't seen much in terms of signals on this from any of the schools or the Big12 conference. Holding information close to the vest can last only so long. On the other hand, they don't seem to be boasting how tight they are, and that everything is so wonderful.
(This post was last modified: 04-12-2021 08:37 PM by OdinFrigg.)
04-12-2021 01:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,199
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 154
I Root For: RU/Big Ten
Location:
Post: #26
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-12-2021 09:13 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(04-12-2021 08:42 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(02-13-2021 04:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-13-2021 03:58 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(02-12-2021 05:17 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  I like 20. Shoot for Clemson, Florida St, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, and Texas Tech. Actually 21 is not terrible - add Kansas.

21
East: Clemson, Florida, Florida St, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee
West: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

(02-13-2021 03:29 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  This is what bothers me. Conferences may expand with schools thinking they are adding great new markets. It does not always synthesize very well. Even when Penn State moved to the BIG, there were plenty of disgruntled fans when it first happened. Much of the fan base travels, and heading deep into the midwest often wasn't so favorable.

West Virginia in the Big 12 is the blatant example of awkward placement. They would have fit well into the ACC, and provided the ACC fb (and bb really) more quality in the northern tier of the conference.

I am more optimistic about Mizzou. They are not an extreme outlier. They are cultivating good SEC rivalries. Note, being placed in the SEC-east, trips to/from Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and even Tennessee, cannot be described as close. On most other measures, it is a positive association.

1. Adding new markets opened a clause in the SEC TV contracts to reevaluate its value for the new members and add more cable boxes to the SeEC Network to aid its startup and success.

2. Mizzou playing in the East in football helped re-establish new recruiting grounds and connections. Winning the East twice proved Mizzou could succeed, not sure they would finish that high in the west.

3. We have a window for another round of expansion coming up, but is there a need or desire for teams to switch conferences. More importantly, is there a way to monetize it so all members come out ahead?

1. Missouri won the East twice because Pinkel was a better coach than those in the East at that time. Their fans want closer games, and preferably more meaningful ones to them.

2. Nobody really gets added for footprint anymore, but they will be added for national draw.

3. The reason things "could" change by 2024 is that the GOR's in the Big 12 and PAC expire meaning you don't have to make it profitable for everyone affected by a move. I doubt that corporate entities will let this opportunity pass without trying to utilize it to their advantage. Texas and Oklahoma also realize this is their only chance to make moves without having to insure the other 8.

Personally I think the SEC should consider moving to 18 and split the divisions in a truer East / West alignment. I say expand by 4 because you can accommodate Texas who already has 2 chief rivals and likely third in the SEC (A&M, Arky, & LSU) and add Kansas in the process with whichever other school is needed to make the deal whether that is Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Baylor, or T.C.U.. At that point it doesn't really matter. UT and OU give you 57% of the value of the Big 12. Add Kansas and it is 62%. And any of the other 3 and you get close to 70% of the value of the Big 12 for the cost of 4 schools ( and actually get 70% with OSU as the choice). Even ESPN will be interested in that.

West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M

East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.

Only Mississippi/Mississippi State would need a protection and the easiest way to do that is for them to make each other an OOC P game and not count the win or loss against the conference record.

To me, that could be a major hindrance in expansion as scheduling in football will start getting more difficult unless the conference rules or structure changes.

I find it fascinating that this round of potential realignment has an ACC willing to put all options on the table to catch up to th dc SEC and B1G. The Pac is ditching their commissioner and reevaluating their rights and networks structure to close the financial gap. The Big 12 schools will have some options as they’ll be highly coveted. Now my only question is could any ACC school leave the conference before the early 2030’s and retain their tv rights or are they definitely trapped in the ACC GOR.

This is the round of realignment where the Big 12 could survive. ACC AD's are in desperation mode and the PAC is so remote, and so politically out of touch with the Big 12 I just don't see that happening.

Truly you could dissolve the ACC this go around if ESPN acquires all of the rights to the Big 12 and if the ACC doesn't get a boost in pay that would have to be massive to make them competitive. North Carolina and Duke basketball are slipping. Florida State football is fading, Miami is irrelevant, Virginia Tech is a shadow of its former self, and B.C., Syracuse and Pitt are hardly relevant. Wake Forest and Georgia Tech are revenue laggards and Clemson knows what it faces if they can't get what they could easily exceed elsewhere. The whole conference has been out of touch with reality in focus, and poorly led under Swofford. Even Louisville is slipping and N.C. State is a doing nothing in any sport.

Was this true 10 years ago? No! So what has happened? They are getting lapped in revenue by their neighbors the SEC and B1G! Money and recruiting go hand in hand whether the whole hypocritical institution of the NCAA wants to admit it or not.

Since N.D. will never fully join them and will have much better options if forced to join in full by a structure change, the schools of the ACC have finally awakened to reality, only they did so after signing an egregious long term contract for which they only have 1 out for more revenue.....dissolution. It takes 12 to do it and ordinarily people would say, "No way!" and be correct, but not now. Not if the Big 12's new contract makes moving there an in house move for the ACC, or an SEC move an in house move the the SEC, or a Big 12 move a move in which ESPN would retain half of the rights to an ACC school they would then only pay half for in the Big 10, meaning no more than what they are currently paying for that product, and likely a product they don't make much money from even at ACC payout levels.

So 2 to the Big 10 (pick'em: Duke, North Carolina, Pitt, Virginia, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, and 2 to the SEC of the same schools, and 8 to the Big 12 from: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Louisville, N.C. State, or Virginia Tech and it's done. Notre Dame will attach itself wherever they wish and likely would get a partial deal (through ESPN help) with the Big 12.

Being able to pit the Irish against the Horns or Sooners would be mega dollars for ESPN, more than they make from them under the same deal now with the ACC.

Anyone placed from the football schools of the ACC against the Big 12 would generate more money.

Dividing the states of North Carolina and Virginia between the Big 10 and SEC would only put more eyes, and therefore more money, upon those two states.

Take the SEC and Big 10 to roughly 70 million and bounce the Big 12 up to about 55 million each by adding more than double their current market and putting 3 top 10 brands in the mix with N.D. as a partial and ESPN can certainly monetize it, especially by adding some of the better ACC brands to a dedicated football conference.

So move 12 and it can be done. Mover 10 of them in house and create larger conference market reach and add to the number of brands playing in each conference, or in the case of the SEC improving their hoops branding and it can be done.


What would happen if, say, Duke and Wake Forest decided they're not going to bother with trying to win in football and took their programs to the Big East? How would the breakdown change?
04-13-2021 06:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,962
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 738
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #27
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-12-2021 01:42 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  JRsec, you are very good at keeping up with the network agreements and figures. I know the generalities with each, but you are seasoned in the details. Sharing those specifics are appreciated.

In terms of value that could be added to the SEC, and looking at this from multiple angles, there is one school I deem most worthy to continue to pursue: Texas.

I am not a fan of Texas, but their athletics, academics, fan base, location, proximity, financial and physical resources, scope of rivalries, and established name and image, would be a major boost to the SEC. What could hold Texas back is largely attitudinal, along with their propensity to seek control within a collective structure.

While Oklahoma is another coveted school, I get the perception they are receptive to overtures from the BIG10. Then there is the question if they will still be opposed to a conference separation from Oklahoma State. That really is a good "duo". The PAC12 was short-sighted in not accepting this pair several years ago. If they had, the PAC12 situation would be much improved today. Texas Tech, in my opinion, would be a good addition to the PAC12 in terms of location and garnering a foothold in west Texas. Kansas State joining a package of schools heading west could be plausible.

As to the ACC, assuming their GoR firmly holds, adding West Virginia would be a quality athletic and contiguous addition. As Notre Dame is steadfastly against accepting conference football, personally, I would not be disappointed to see the ACC cut strings with them when the current contract expires. If the contract assures ND permanence for non-fb sports (excluding hockey), then the ACC has to live with it. The hybrid stuff, when there is a sport that a member could contribute, is a turn-off. I know that is an unpopular view on CSNBBS, but it is how I view it. At some future point, it could be a part of a motive for one or more southern, athletically elite, ACC schools to eventually depart for elsewhere. Schools such as Clemson and Florida State may not see themselves bonded in perceptual co-dependency with ND. If WVU became #15, and the ACC wanted #16, Cincinnati looks like a respectable prospect.

Maybe the BIG12 surprises, and they receive a very competitive/lucrative contract in a couple of years or so, and no school leaves. But if that happens, and they don't expand themselves, then some more enabling is going-on with just ten members per prime bowls, access to playoffs, etc. I haven't seen much in terms of signals on this from any of the schools or the Big12 conference. Holding information close to the vest can last only so long. On the other hand, they don't seem to be boasting how tight they are, and that everything is so wonderful.



ND is a full voting member of the ACC, just like Duke, North Carolina and Clemson.

There is no difference in the legal status between those schools and their relationship with the ACC and that of ND.

ND is also a huge reason that the ACC Network exists. John Swofford and a number of others have so proclaimed early and often.

ND gets a full share of the net profits from the ACC Network, just like the other 14 ACC schools. What does that tell you?

I just don't see ESPN being happy with the ACC "cutting strings" with ND.

ESPN wants just the opposite, it wants all of ND.

ND has 24 sports programs (except football and hockey, the latter which the ACC doesn't sponsor----more is the pity) competing in the ACC. I bet that ranks up there high with how many programs other schools have competing in the conference.

The five game football deal per year, the GOR and the contract ND signed saying if it ever joined a football conference it has to be the ACC, all expire after 2036.

But, ND is a permanent, full member of the ACC otherwise.

"Cutting strings" with ND would require the same effort as cutting ties with Virginia Tech, Florida State or Miami.

(One has to question why the ACC would take on Notre Dame in this manner. What would be the goal? The gain?

I think that it would hurt the ACC, not help it at all).

That is my understanding of the relationship between ND and the ACC.

JR or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.
(This post was last modified: 04-13-2021 09:13 AM by TerryD.)
04-13-2021 08:18 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,018
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 234
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #28
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-13-2021 08:18 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-12-2021 01:42 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  JRsec, you are very good at keeping up with the network agreements and figures. I know the generalities with each, but you are seasoned in the details. Sharing those specifics are appreciated.

In terms of value that could be added to the SEC, and looking at this from multiple angles, there is one school I deem most worthy to continue to pursue: Texas.

I am not a fan of Texas, but their athletics, academics, fan base, location, proximity, financial and physical resources, scope of rivalries, and established name and image, would be a major boost to the SEC. What could hold Texas back is largely attitudinal, along with their propensity to seek control within a collective structure.

While Oklahoma is another coveted school, I get the perception they are receptive to overtures from the BIG10. Then there is the question if they will still be opposed to a conference separation from Oklahoma State. That really is a good "duo". The PAC12 was short-sighted in not accepting this pair several years ago. If they had, the PAC12 situation would be much improved today. Texas Tech, in my opinion, would be a good addition to the PAC12 in terms of location and garnering a foothold in west Texas. Kansas State joining a package of schools heading west could be plausible.

As to the ACC, assuming their GoR firmly holds, adding West Virginia would be a quality athletic and contiguous addition. As Notre Dame is steadfastly against accepting conference football, personally, I would not be disappointed to see the ACC cut strings with them when the current contract expires. If the contract assures ND permanence for non-fb sports (excluding hockey), then the ACC has to live with it. The hybrid stuff, when there is a sport that a member could contribute, is a turn-off. I know that is an unpopular view on CSNBBS, but it is how I view it. At some future point, it could be a part of a motive for one or more southern, athletically elite, ACC schools to eventually depart for elsewhere. Schools such as Clemson and Florida State may not see themselves bonded in perceptual co-dependency with ND. If WVU became #15, and the ACC wanted #16, Cincinnati looks like a respectable prospect.

Maybe the BIG12 surprises, and they receive a very competitive/lucrative contract in a couple of years or so, and no school leaves. But if that happens, and they don't expand themselves, then some more enabling is going-on with just ten members per prime bowls, access to playoffs, etc. I haven't seen much in terms of signals on this from any of the schools or the Big12 conference. Holding information close to the vest can last only so long. On the other hand, they don't seem to be boasting how tight they are, and that everything is so wonderful.



ND is a full voting member of the ACC, just like Duke, North Carolina and Clemson.

There is no difference in the legal status between those schools and their relationship with the ACC and that of ND.

ND is also a huge reason that the ACC Network exists. John Swofford and a number of others have so proclaimed early and often.

ND gets a full share of the net profits from the ACC Network, just like the other 14 ACC schools. What does that tell you?

I just don't see ESPN being happy with the ACC "cutting strings" with ND.

ESPN wants just the opposite, it wants all of ND.

ND has 24 sports programs (except football and hockey, the latter which the ACC doesn't sponsor----more is the pity) competing in the ACC. I bet that ranks up there high with how many programs other schools have competing in the conference.

The five game football deal per year, the GOR and the contract ND signed saying if it ever joined a football conference it has to be the ACC, all expire after 2036.

But, ND is a permanent, full member of the ACC otherwise.

"Cutting strings" with ND would require the same effort as cutting ties with Virginia Tech, Florida State or Miami.

(One has to question why the ACC would take on Notre Dame in this manner. What would be the goal? The gain?

I think that it would hurt the ACC, not help it at all).

That is my understanding of the relationship between ND and the ACC.

JR or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

Went to look this up (on Wikipedia, of course)...

1. (tie) Duke / North Carolina - 27
3. (tie) Boston College / Virginia - 25
5. Notre Dame - 24
6. Louisville - 23
7. Virginia Tech - 22
8. North Carolina St - 21
9. (tie) Clemson / Florida St - 19
11. (tie) Syracuse / Wake Forest - 18
13. Miami - 17.5^
14. (tie) Georgia Tech / Pittsburgh - 17

^ Miami participates in diving only but the sport is technically "swimming and diving" under the NCAA
04-13-2021 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,246
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #29
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
4
(04-13-2021 11:21 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 08:18 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-12-2021 01:42 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  JRsec, you are very good at keeping up with the network agreements and figures. I know the generalities with each, but you are seasoned in the details. Sharing those specifics are appreciated.

In terms of value that could be added to the SEC, and looking at this from multiple angles, there is one school I deem most worthy to continue to pursue: Texas.

I am not a fan of Texas, but their athletics, academics, fan base, location, proximity, financial and physical resources, scope of rivalries, and established name and image, would be a major boost to the SEC. What could hold Texas back is largely attitudinal, along with their propensity to seek control within a collective structure.

While Oklahoma is another coveted school, I get the perception they are receptive to overtures from the BIG10. Then there is the question if they will still be opposed to a conference separation from Oklahoma State. That really is a good "duo". The PAC12 was short-sighted in not accepting this pair several years ago. If they had, the PAC12 situation would be much improved today. Texas Tech, in my opinion, would be a good addition to the PAC12 in terms of location and garnering a foothold in west Texas. Kansas State joining a package of schools heading west could be plausible.

As to the ACC, assuming their GoR firmly holds, adding West Virginia would be a quality athletic and contiguous addition. As Notre Dame is steadfastly against accepting conference football, personally, I would not be disappointed to see the ACC cut strings with them when the current contract expires. If the contract assures ND permanence for non-fb sports (excluding hockey), then the ACC has to live with it. The hybrid stuff, when there is a sport that a member could contribute, is a turn-off. I know that is an unpopular view on CSNBBS, but it is how I view it. At some future point, it could be a part of a motive for one or more southern, athletically elite, ACC schools to eventually depart for elsewhere. Schools such as Clemson and Florida State may not see themselves bonded in perceptual co-dependency with ND. If WVU became #15, and the ACC wanted #16, Cincinnati looks like a respectable prospect.

Maybe the BIG12 surprises, and they receive a very competitive/lucrative contract in a couple of years or so, and no school leaves. But if that happens, and they don't expand themselves, then some more enabling is going-on with just ten members per prime bowls, access to playoffs, etc. I haven't seen much in terms of signals on this from any of the schools or the Big12 conference. Holding information close to the vest can last only so long. On the other hand, they don't seem to be boasting how tight they are, and that everything is so wonderful.



ND is a full voting member of the ACC, just like Duke, North Carolina and Clemson.

There is no difference in the legal status between those schools and their relationship with the ACC and that of ND.

ND is also a huge reason that the ACC Network exists. John Swofford and a number of others have so proclaimed early and often.

ND gets a full share of the net profits from the ACC Network, just like the other 14 ACC schools. What does that tell you?

I just don't see ESPN being happy with the ACC "cutting strings" with ND.

ESPN wants just the opposite, it wants all of ND.

ND has 24 sports programs (except football and hockey, the latter which the ACC doesn't sponsor----more is the pity) competing in the ACC. I bet that ranks up there high with how many programs other schools have competing in the conference.

The five game football deal per year, the GOR and the contract ND signed saying if it ever joined a football conference it has to be the ACC, all expire after 2036.

But, ND is a permanent, full member of the ACC otherwise.

"Cutting strings" with ND would require the same effort as cutting ties with Virginia Tech, Florida State or Miami.

(One has to question why the ACC would take on Notre Dame in this manner. What would be the goal? The gain?

I think that it would hurt the ACC, not help it at all).

That is my understanding of the relationship between ND and the ACC.

JR or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

Went to look this up (on Wikipedia, of course)...

1. (tie) Duke / North Carolina - 27
3. (tie) Boston College / Virginia - 25
5. Notre Dame - 24
6. Louisville - 23
7. Virginia Tech - 22
8. North Carolina St - 21
9. (tie) Clemson / Florida St - 19
11. (tie) Syracuse / Wake Forest - 18
13. Miami - 17.5^
14. (tie) Georgia Tech / Pittsburgh - 17

^ Miami participates in diving only but the sport is technically "swimming and diving" under the NCAA
Football is the biggie and certainly the prime measure of assessment for this aspect.
Any school in a conference receiving a "special contract" does have distinctions not applied to the rest. Partisan fans may deem Swofford had been masterful and savvy in this set-up. Perhaps to the same fans, losing Maryland was brilliant as well.
I don't fault Notre Dame for negotiating/accepting this deal with the ACC. They are the smarter partner.
On the one hand, multiple posters here (board-wise, not SEC threads specifically) have posts after post on how the BIG, SEC, w/ESPN, and even a partially depleted B12, are going to divide-up the better ACC schools. Maybe that happens one day.
On the other hand, some of the same posters express how extraordinarily positive it is to have the ND agreement and that it has saved and stabilized the ACC. Talking about both ways?????
My prior comments focused on potential ACC expansion with an unsteady assumption the B12 would have departures in a few years. ND is a factor because ND is not going to be a fb expansion component. I am not sure all of the ACC interests want to accept the reality.
My remarks were how to deal with that practically. i. e. add WVU, possibly Cincy, and so forth. Debate it. But that's what I believe the ACC needs to pursue if they choose to expand with all-sports-in schools.
(This post was last modified: 04-13-2021 04:47 PM by OdinFrigg.)
04-13-2021 04:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,962
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 738
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #30
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-13-2021 04:12 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  4
(04-13-2021 11:21 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 08:18 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-12-2021 01:42 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  JRsec, you are very good at keeping up with the network agreements and figures. I know the generalities with each, but you are seasoned in the details. Sharing those specifics are appreciated.

In terms of value that could be added to the SEC, and looking at this from multiple angles, there is one school I deem most worthy to continue to pursue: Texas.

I am not a fan of Texas, but their athletics, academics, fan base, location, proximity, financial and physical resources, scope of rivalries, and established name and image, would be a major boost to the SEC. What could hold Texas back is largely attitudinal, along with their propensity to seek control within a collective structure.

While Oklahoma is another coveted school, I get the perception they are receptive to overtures from the BIG10. Then there is the question if they will still be opposed to a conference separation from Oklahoma State. That really is a good "duo". The PAC12 was short-sighted in not accepting this pair several years ago. If they had, the PAC12 situation would be much improved today. Texas Tech, in my opinion, would be a good addition to the PAC12 in terms of location and garnering a foothold in west Texas. Kansas State joining a package of schools heading west could be plausible.

As to the ACC, assuming their GoR firmly holds, adding West Virginia would be a quality athletic and contiguous addition. As Notre Dame is steadfastly against accepting conference football, personally, I would not be disappointed to see the ACC cut strings with them when the current contract expires. If the contract assures ND permanence for non-fb sports (excluding hockey), then the ACC has to live with it. The hybrid stuff, when there is a sport that a member could contribute, is a turn-off. I know that is an unpopular view on CSNBBS, but it is how I view it. At some future point, it could be a part of a motive for one or more southern, athletically elite, ACC schools to eventually depart for elsewhere. Schools such as Clemson and Florida State may not see themselves bonded in perceptual co-dependency with ND. If WVU became #15, and the ACC wanted #16, Cincinnati looks like a respectable prospect.

Maybe the BIG12 surprises, and they receive a very competitive/lucrative contract in a couple of years or so, and no school leaves. But if that happens, and they don't expand themselves, then some more enabling is going-on with just ten members per prime bowls, access to playoffs, etc. I haven't seen much in terms of signals on this from any of the schools or the Big12 conference. Holding information close to the vest can last only so long. On the other hand, they don't seem to be boasting how tight they are, and that everything is so wonderful.



ND is a full voting member of the ACC, just like Duke, North Carolina and Clemson.

There is no difference in the legal status between those schools and their relationship with the ACC and that of ND.

ND is also a huge reason that the ACC Network exists. John Swofford and a number of others have so proclaimed early and often.

ND gets a full share of the net profits from the ACC Network, just like the other 14 ACC schools. What does that tell you?

I just don't see ESPN being happy with the ACC "cutting strings" with ND.

ESPN wants just the opposite, it wants all of ND.

ND has 24 sports programs (except football and hockey, the latter which the ACC doesn't sponsor----more is the pity) competing in the ACC. I bet that ranks up there high with how many programs other schools have competing in the conference.

The five game football deal per year, the GOR and the contract ND signed saying if it ever joined a football conference it has to be the ACC, all expire after 2036.

But, ND is a permanent, full member of the ACC otherwise.

"Cutting strings" with ND would require the same effort as cutting ties with Virginia Tech, Florida State or Miami.

(One has to question why the ACC would take on Notre Dame in this manner. What would be the goal? The gain?

I think that it would hurt the ACC, not help it at all).

That is my understanding of the relationship between ND and the ACC.

JR or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

Went to look this up (on Wikipedia, of course)...

1. (tie) Duke / North Carolina - 27
3. (tie) Boston College / Virginia - 25
5. Notre Dame - 24
6. Louisville - 23
7. Virginia Tech - 22
8. North Carolina St - 21
9. (tie) Clemson / Florida St - 19
11. (tie) Syracuse / Wake Forest - 18
13. Miami - 17.5^
14. (tie) Georgia Tech / Pittsburgh - 17

^ Miami participates in diving only but the sport is technically "swimming and diving" under the NCAA
Football is the biggie and certainly the prime measure of assessment for this aspect.
Any school in a conference receiving a "special contract" does have distinctions not applied to the rest. Partisan fans may deem Swofford had been masterful and savvy in this set-up. Perhaps to the same fans, losing Maryland was brilliant as well.
I don't fault Notre Dame for negotiating/accepting this deal with the ACC. They are the smarter partner.
On the one hand, multiple posters here (board-wise, not SEC threads specifically) have posts after post on how the BIG, SEC, w/ESPN, and even a partially depleted B12, are going to divide-up the better ACC schools. Maybe that happens one day.
On the other hand, some of the same posters express how extraordinarily positive it is to have the ND agreement and that it has saved and stabilized the ACC. Talking about both ways?????
My prior comments focused on potential ACC expansion with an unsteady assumption the B12 would have departures in a few years. ND is a factor because ND is not going to be a fb expansion component. I am not sure all of the ACC interests want to accept the reality.
My remarks were how to deal with that practically. i. e. add WVU, possibly Cincy, and so forth. Debate it. But that's what I believe the ACC needs to pursue if they choose to expand with all-sports-in schools.

Notre Dame's deal is not stopping the ACC from adding WVU and Cincy today. How could it, exactly?

It is not affecting their ability to do so in any way. Their reluctance or inability to do so is not Notre Dame's "fault".

That would be 16 football playing members and 17 basketball playing members.

Currently, those numbers sit at 14 and 15, respectively. How would the new additions be much of a problem, with ND still there?

Why would the ACC try to kick a full member out to do so, especially when that member is fulfilling all requirements and contracts?

Do you think that the ACC is better off or worse off, TV money wise, with ND in the conference with a partial deal?

Do you think that ESPN would prefer ND to stay where it is, or do you think that ESPN would prefer that the ACC kick ND out?

That would be an exceedingly dumb and bizarre way to add numbers, value and revenue to the conference.
(This post was last modified: 04-13-2021 05:27 PM by TerryD.)
04-13-2021 05:19 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,246
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #31
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-13-2021 05:19 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 04:12 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  4
(04-13-2021 11:21 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 08:18 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-12-2021 01:42 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  JRsec, you are very good at keeping up with the network agreements and figures. I know the generalities with each, but you are seasoned in the details. Sharing those specifics are appreciated.

In terms of value that could be added to the SEC, and looking at this from multiple angles, there is one school I deem most worthy to continue to pursue: Texas.

I am not a fan of Texas, but their athletics, academics, fan base, location, proximity, financial and physical resources, scope of rivalries, and established name and image, would be a major boost to the SEC. What could hold Texas back is largely attitudinal, along with their propensity to seek control within a collective structure.

While Oklahoma is another coveted school, I get the perception they are receptive to overtures from the BIG10. Then there is the question if they will still be opposed to a conference separation from Oklahoma State. That really is a good "duo". The PAC12 was short-sighted in not accepting this pair several years ago. If they had, the PAC12 situation would be much improved today. Texas Tech, in my opinion, would be a good addition to the PAC12 in terms of location and garnering a foothold in west Texas. Kansas State joining a package of schools heading west could be plausible.

As to the ACC, assuming their GoR firmly holds, adding West Virginia would be a quality athletic and contiguous addition. As Notre Dame is steadfastly against accepting conference football, personally, I would not be disappointed to see the ACC cut strings with them when the current contract expires. If the contract assures ND permanence for non-fb sports (excluding hockey), then the ACC has to live with it. The hybrid stuff, when there is a sport that a member could contribute, is a turn-off. I know that is an unpopular view on CSNBBS, but it is how I view it. At some future point, it could be a part of a motive for one or more southern, athletically elite, ACC schools to eventually depart for elsewhere. Schools such as Clemson and Florida State may not see themselves bonded in perceptual co-dependency with ND. If WVU became #15, and the ACC wanted #16, Cincinnati looks like a respectable prospect.

Maybe the BIG12 surprises, and they receive a very competitive/lucrative contract in a couple of years or so, and no school leaves. But if that happens, and they don't expand themselves, then some more enabling is going-on with just ten members per prime bowls, access to playoffs, etc. I haven't seen much in terms of signals on this from any of the schools or the Big12 conference. Holding information close to the vest can last only so long. On the other hand, they don't seem to be boasting how tight they are, and that everything is so wonderful.



ND is a full voting member of the ACC, just like Duke, North Carolina and Clemson.

There is no difference in the legal status between those schools and their relationship with the ACC and that of ND.

ND is also a huge reason that the ACC Network exists. John Swofford and a number of others have so proclaimed early and often.

ND gets a full share of the net profits from the ACC Network, just like the other 14 ACC schools. What does that tell you?

I just don't see ESPN being happy with the ACC "cutting strings" with ND.

ESPN wants just the opposite, it wants all of ND.

ND has 24 sports programs (except football and hockey, the latter which the ACC doesn't sponsor----more is the pity) competing in the ACC. I bet that ranks up there high with how many programs other schools have competing in the conference.

The five game football deal per year, the GOR and the contract ND signed saying if it ever joined a football conference it has to be the ACC, all expire after 2036.

But, ND is a permanent, full member of the ACC otherwise.

"Cutting strings" with ND would require the same effort as cutting ties with Virginia Tech, Florida State or Miami.

(One has to question why the ACC would take on Notre Dame in this manner. What would be the goal? The gain?

I think that it would hurt the ACC, not help it at all).

That is my understanding of the relationship between ND and the ACC.

JR or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

Went to look this up (on Wikipedia, of course)...

1. (tie) Duke / North Carolina - 27
3. (tie) Boston College / Virginia - 25
5. Notre Dame - 24
6. Louisville - 23
7. Virginia Tech - 22
8. North Carolina St - 21
9. (tie) Clemson / Florida St - 19
11. (tie) Syracuse / Wake Forest - 18
13. Miami - 17.5^
14. (tie) Georgia Tech / Pittsburgh - 17

^ Miami participates in diving only but the sport is technically "swimming and diving" under the NCAA
Football is the biggie and certainly the prime measure of assessment for this aspect.
Any school in a conference receiving a "special contract" does have distinctions not applied to the rest. Partisan fans may deem Swofford had been masterful and savvy in this set-up. Perhaps to the same fans, losing Maryland was brilliant as well.
I don't fault Notre Dame for negotiating/accepting this deal with the ACC. They are the smarter partner.
On the one hand, multiple posters here (board-wise, not SEC threads specifically) have posts after post on how the BIG, SEC, w/ESPN, and even a partially depleted B12, are going to divide-up the better ACC schools. Maybe that happens one day.
On the other hand, some of the same posters express how extraordinarily positive it is to have the ND agreement and that it has saved and stabilized the ACC. Talking about both ways?????
My prior comments focused on potential ACC expansion with an unsteady assumption the B12 would have departures in a few years. ND is a factor because ND is not going to be a fb expansion component. I am not sure all of the ACC interests want to accept the reality.
My remarks were how to deal with that practically. i. e. add WVU, possibly Cincy, and so forth. Debate it. But that's what I believe the ACC needs to pursue if they choose to expand with all-sports-in schools.

Notre Dame's deal is not stopping the ACC from adding WVU and Cincy today. How could it, exactly?

It is not affecting their ability to do so in any way. Their reluctance or inability to do so is not Notre Dame's "fault".

That would be 16 football playing members and 17 basketball playing members.

Currently, those numbers sit at 14 and 15, respectively. How would the new additions be much of a problem, with ND still there?

Why would the ACC try to kick a full member out to do so, especially when that member is fulfilling all requirements and contracts?.

That would be an exceedingly dumb and bizarre way to add numbers to the conference.

Calling ND a full ACC member while defending fb independence is rather odd. I get the relationship, membership role, non-fb voting rights, sports they play, etc.

You twisted my argument. My point is that the ACC should not expect ND FT fb if they intend to expand.
04-13-2021 05:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,962
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 738
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #32
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-13-2021 05:34 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 05:19 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 04:12 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  4
(04-13-2021 11:21 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 08:18 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND is a full voting member of the ACC, just like Duke, North Carolina and Clemson.

There is no difference in the legal status between those schools and their relationship with the ACC and that of ND.

ND is also a huge reason that the ACC Network exists. John Swofford and a number of others have so proclaimed early and often.

ND gets a full share of the net profits from the ACC Network, just like the other 14 ACC schools. What does that tell you?

I just don't see ESPN being happy with the ACC "cutting strings" with ND.

ESPN wants just the opposite, it wants all of ND.

ND has 24 sports programs (except football and hockey, the latter which the ACC doesn't sponsor----more is the pity) competing in the ACC. I bet that ranks up there high with how many programs other schools have competing in the conference.

The five game football deal per year, the GOR and the contract ND signed saying if it ever joined a football conference it has to be the ACC, all expire after 2036.

But, ND is a permanent, full member of the ACC otherwise.

"Cutting strings" with ND would require the same effort as cutting ties with Virginia Tech, Florida State or Miami.

(One has to question why the ACC would take on Notre Dame in this manner. What would be the goal? The gain?

I think that it would hurt the ACC, not help it at all).

That is my understanding of the relationship between ND and the ACC.

JR or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

Went to look this up (on Wikipedia, of course)...

1. (tie) Duke / North Carolina - 27
3. (tie) Boston College / Virginia - 25
5. Notre Dame - 24
6. Louisville - 23
7. Virginia Tech - 22
8. North Carolina St - 21
9. (tie) Clemson / Florida St - 19
11. (tie) Syracuse / Wake Forest - 18
13. Miami - 17.5^
14. (tie) Georgia Tech / Pittsburgh - 17

^ Miami participates in diving only but the sport is technically "swimming and diving" under the NCAA
Football is the biggie and certainly the prime measure of assessment for this aspect.
Any school in a conference receiving a "special contract" does have distinctions not applied to the rest. Partisan fans may deem Swofford had been masterful and savvy in this set-up. Perhaps to the same fans, losing Maryland was brilliant as well.
I don't fault Notre Dame for negotiating/accepting this deal with the ACC. They are the smarter partner.
On the one hand, multiple posters here (board-wise, not SEC threads specifically) have posts after post on how the BIG, SEC, w/ESPN, and even a partially depleted B12, are going to divide-up the better ACC schools. Maybe that happens one day.
On the other hand, some of the same posters express how extraordinarily positive it is to have the ND agreement and that it has saved and stabilized the ACC. Talking about both ways?????
My prior comments focused on potential ACC expansion with an unsteady assumption the B12 would have departures in a few years. ND is a factor because ND is not going to be a fb expansion component. I am not sure all of the ACC interests want to accept the reality.
My remarks were how to deal with that practically. i. e. add WVU, possibly Cincy, and so forth. Debate it. But that's what I believe the ACC needs to pursue if they choose to expand with all-sports-in schools.

Notre Dame's deal is not stopping the ACC from adding WVU and Cincy today. How could it, exactly?

It is not affecting their ability to do so in any way. Their reluctance or inability to do so is not Notre Dame's "fault".

That would be 16 football playing members and 17 basketball playing members.

Currently, those numbers sit at 14 and 15, respectively. How would the new additions be much of a problem, with ND still there?

Why would the ACC try to kick a full member out to do so, especially when that member is fulfilling all requirements and contracts?.

That would be an exceedingly dumb and bizarre way to add numbers to the conference.

Calling ND a full ACC member while defending fb independence is rather odd. I get the relationship, membership role, non-fb voting rights, sports they play, etc.

You twisted my argument. My point is that the ACC should not expect ND FT fb if they intend to expand.


Oh, agreed.

I have been saying that ad nauseum here and elsewhere for years.

I thought you were advocating that the ACC kick out ND and add WVU and Cincy in your original post.
04-13-2021 06:58 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,246
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #33
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
*Two established super-power conferences, financially and athletically: BIG10 & the SEC.

*To be enhanced and solidified via expansion with deemed ace jewels.

*Suppliers: From the ranks of the Big12 & the ACC. Maybe a segment from the PAC12.

*The BIG10 & the SEC shall increase in size from 14 currently, to a minimum of 18 or more each. 16 will not be enough to absorb all the ace/prime schools currently in the ACC or BIG12.

*ACC leftovers, primarily but not limited to, the northern sector, join-up with several Big12 schools. UNLESS, the BIG12 desire/allow that the ACC/BIG12 assimilation contain certain power schools from the ACC, perhaps Clemson and FSU, for example, leading the way. And, the Big 12 schools retains a couple of ace schools themselves for the new product. Thus, this could be a third mega-conference nipping at the heals of the BIG10 & the SEC in the revenue quest.

*What does the PAC12 do? Do a few join-up with the Big12-ACC structure, but some other current Big12 schools formally connect with the lower/non-pusued PAC12 schools? The BIG10 may want a school such as Colorado.

Are there to be 2 mega-conferences? 3? or 4?
The Big loser in all this: the ACC. Can they be proactive and expand themselves and hold? For the short-term, a decade or more, I made a frequent and practical suggestion for site chat.
Long-term, I'd bet otherwise. (I am taking liberties here with the GoR factors that could erupt based on mass initiatives).

The number 2 loser: PAC12. Coming out relatively fine: the Big12 due to having fewer schools in the first place.

Notre Dame: Where will they fit? Stay fb independent and BE bb?

These are not my ideas beyond questions and speculation.

I do think there will be at least two power mega-conferences, and one of the P5 conference will be heavily downgraded or eventually cease to exist. The networks may force it per $$$$ distributions.

I think 4 tidy and equitable power conference @ 16 each will not happen. The trend, financially, is already set for something different.
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2021 08:49 PM by OdinFrigg.)
04-14-2021 06:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,199
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 154
I Root For: RU/Big Ten
Location:
Post: #34
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(02-09-2021 01:07 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Here is a revealing look at what each conference's media payouts would be if they were apportioned on the basis of all factors that go into the valuation of a schools athletic programs as per the Wall Street Journals assessment of those values.

Each of the P5 schools valuations were divided by that conferences total valuation to come up with a percentage of the total value that each school represents. Then the media revenue from the 2018-9 season was divided by that percentage to reveal what each school might have made if conference media contracts were not share and share alike.

I want you to pay close attention to the wide variations from top to bottom and in some cases long held beliefs of values in realignment might be shattered. Take each conference unto itself and try not to make cross comparisons as each has different percentages valid only within that conference. That said it should give you a strong indication of how solid conferences are based upon how tight the groupings are or are not. The PAC for instance is relatively compact in the difference between first and last, as is the ACC. The Big 10 is strong at the top and week at the bottom. The ACC's laggards are rather obvious and each conference's drag on revenue is clearly revealed. But perhaps no conference is more top heavy with a greater divide than the Big 12.

It is also interesting to note how many of the programs that realigned in 2012 because of market size actually have little real value when branding, market reach, and other factors are considered.



SEC
Total Value of Media Contract $651,000,000 / Per School Payout: $46.5 million
Total WSJ valuation of the Conference $7,491,918,011

Alabama / 13.5% of Conference Value / $87,885,000 value of media share
Georgia / 11.9% of Conference Value / $77,469,000 value of media share
Auburn / 11.6% of Conference Value / $75,516,000 value of media share
Louisiana St./ 11.4% of Conference Value / $74,214,000 value of media share
Tennessee / 9.7% of Conference Value / $63,147,000 value of media share
Florida / 8.5% of Conference Value / $55,335,000 value of media share
Texas A&M / 7.2% of Conference Value / $46,872,000 value of media share
Arkansas/ 6.2% of Conference Value / $40,362,000 value of media share
South Carolina / 6.2% of Conference Value / $40,362,000 value of media share
Mississippi / 4.6% of Conference Value / $29,946,000 value of media share
Kentucky / 3.6% of Conference Value / $23,436,000 value of media share
Mississippi St./ 3.0% of Conference Value / $19,530,000 value of media share
Missouri / 1.6% of Conference Value / $10,416,000 value of media share
Vanderbilt / 1.1% of Conference Value / $7,161,000 value of media share

Well, the program with the 1.1% of conference value has decided that it intends to keep in the game:

Quote:Athletic director Candice Storey Lee said that Vanderbilt would reveal more details in the coming weeks, and that began on Thursday. The university will build new luxury seating into the North end zone of Vanderbilt Stadium, which currently is semi-open without bleachers, in time for the 2021 season.

Vanderbilt Stadium's largest video board stands in the North end zone, below which limited fans can sit on a small, grassy area behind the end zone. It is unclear whether the addition of luxury seating in the end zone will increase the stadium's current capacity of 40,350. Vanderbilt says it will complete the project in July.

“Renovating the north end zone space and adding a premium element for the upcoming season is one aspect of our larger commitment to improve our fan experience in Vanderbilt Stadium,” Lee said in a release.

https://247sports.com/college/vanderbilt...164206296/
04-15-2021 05:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #35
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-15-2021 05:43 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(02-09-2021 01:07 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Here is a revealing look at what each conference's media payouts would be if they were apportioned on the basis of all factors that go into the valuation of a schools athletic programs as per the Wall Street Journals assessment of those values.

Each of the P5 schools valuations were divided by that conferences total valuation to come up with a percentage of the total value that each school represents. Then the media revenue from the 2018-9 season was divided by that percentage to reveal what each school might have made if conference media contracts were not share and share alike.

I want you to pay close attention to the wide variations from top to bottom and in some cases long held beliefs of values in realignment might be shattered. Take each conference unto itself and try not to make cross comparisons as each has different percentages valid only within that conference. That said it should give you a strong indication of how solid conferences are based upon how tight the groupings are or are not. The PAC for instance is relatively compact in the difference between first and last, as is the ACC. The Big 10 is strong at the top and week at the bottom. The ACC's laggards are rather obvious and each conference's drag on revenue is clearly revealed. But perhaps no conference is more top heavy with a greater divide than the Big 12.

It is also interesting to note how many of the programs that realigned in 2012 because of market size actually have little real value when branding, market reach, and other factors are considered.



SEC
Total Value of Media Contract $651,000,000 / Per School Payout: $46.5 million
Total WSJ valuation of the Conference $7,491,918,011

Alabama / 13.5% of Conference Value / $87,885,000 value of media share
Georgia / 11.9% of Conference Value / $77,469,000 value of media share
Auburn / 11.6% of Conference Value / $75,516,000 value of media share
Louisiana St./ 11.4% of Conference Value / $74,214,000 value of media share
Tennessee / 9.7% of Conference Value / $63,147,000 value of media share
Florida / 8.5% of Conference Value / $55,335,000 value of media share
Texas A&M / 7.2% of Conference Value / $46,872,000 value of media share
Arkansas/ 6.2% of Conference Value / $40,362,000 value of media share
South Carolina / 6.2% of Conference Value / $40,362,000 value of media share
Mississippi / 4.6% of Conference Value / $29,946,000 value of media share
Kentucky / 3.6% of Conference Value / $23,436,000 value of media share
Mississippi St./ 3.0% of Conference Value / $19,530,000 value of media share
Missouri / 1.6% of Conference Value / $10,416,000 value of media share
Vanderbilt / 1.1% of Conference Value / $7,161,000 value of media share

Well, the program with the 1.1% of conference value has decided that it intends to keep in the game:

Quote:Athletic director Candice Storey Lee said that Vanderbilt would reveal more details in the coming weeks, and that began on Thursday. The university will build new luxury seating into the North end zone of Vanderbilt Stadium, which currently is semi-open without bleachers, in time for the 2021 season.

Vanderbilt Stadium's largest video board stands in the North end zone, below which limited fans can sit on a small, grassy area behind the end zone. It is unclear whether the addition of luxury seating in the end zone will increase the stadium's current capacity of 40,350. Vanderbilt says it will complete the project in July.

“Renovating the north end zone space and adding a premium element for the upcoming season is one aspect of our larger commitment to improve our fan experience in Vanderbilt Stadium,” Lee said in a release.

https://247sports.com/college/vanderbilt...164206296/

It will still be up in the air with Vandy until the court cases are decided. These plans could see a quick reversal depending upon all of that. It's not the first time Vanderbilt has announced major plans. The last few times they would up being much less substantial than advertised. I do think they are serious this time, but these cases could change their minds in a hurry.
04-15-2021 05:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardFan1 Offline
Red Thunderbird
*

Posts: 14,540
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 601
I Root For: Louisville ACC
Location:
Post: #36
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(04-13-2021 05:19 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 04:12 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  4
(04-13-2021 11:21 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 08:18 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(04-12-2021 01:42 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  JRsec, you are very good at keeping up with the network agreements and figures. I know the generalities with each, but you are seasoned in the details. Sharing those specifics are appreciated.

In terms of value that could be added to the SEC, and looking at this from multiple angles, there is one school I deem most worthy to continue to pursue: Texas.

I am not a fan of Texas, but their athletics, academics, fan base, location, proximity, financial and physical resources, scope of rivalries, and established name and image, would be a major boost to the SEC. What could hold Texas back is largely attitudinal, along with their propensity to seek control within a collective structure.

While Oklahoma is another coveted school, I get the perception they are receptive to overtures from the BIG10. Then there is the question if they will still be opposed to a conference separation from Oklahoma State. That really is a good "duo". The PAC12 was short-sighted in not accepting this pair several years ago. If they had, the PAC12 situation would be much improved today. Texas Tech, in my opinion, would be a good addition to the PAC12 in terms of location and garnering a foothold in west Texas. Kansas State joining a package of schools heading west could be plausible.

As to the ACC, assuming their GoR firmly holds, adding West Virginia would be a quality athletic and contiguous addition. As Notre Dame is steadfastly against accepting conference football, personally, I would not be disappointed to see the ACC cut strings with them when the current contract expires. If the contract assures ND permanence for non-fb sports (excluding hockey), then the ACC has to live with it. The hybrid stuff, when there is a sport that a member could contribute, is a turn-off. I know that is an unpopular view on CSNBBS, but it is how I view it. At some future point, it could be a part of a motive for one or more southern, athletically elite, ACC schools to eventually depart for elsewhere. Schools such as Clemson and Florida State may not see themselves bonded in perceptual co-dependency with ND. If WVU became #15, and the ACC wanted #16, Cincinnati looks like a respectable prospect.

Maybe the BIG12 surprises, and they receive a very competitive/lucrative contract in a couple of years or so, and no school leaves. But if that happens, and they don't expand themselves, then some more enabling is going-on with just ten members per prime bowls, access to playoffs, etc. I haven't seen much in terms of signals on this from any of the schools or the Big12 conference. Holding information close to the vest can last only so long. On the other hand, they don't seem to be boasting how tight they are, and that everything is so wonderful.



ND is a full voting member of the ACC, just like Duke, North Carolina and Clemson.

There is no difference in the legal status between those schools and their relationship with the ACC and that of ND.

ND is also a huge reason that the ACC Network exists. John Swofford and a number of others have so proclaimed early and often.

ND gets a full share of the net profits from the ACC Network, just like the other 14 ACC schools. What does that tell you?

I just don't see ESPN being happy with the ACC "cutting strings" with ND.

ESPN wants just the opposite, it wants all of ND.

ND has 24 sports programs (except football and hockey, the latter which the ACC doesn't sponsor----more is the pity) competing in the ACC. I bet that ranks up there high with how many programs other schools have competing in the conference.

The five game football deal per year, the GOR and the contract ND signed saying if it ever joined a football conference it has to be the ACC, all expire after 2036.

But, ND is a permanent, full member of the ACC otherwise.

"Cutting strings" with ND would require the same effort as cutting ties with Virginia Tech, Florida State or Miami.

(One has to question why the ACC would take on Notre Dame in this manner. What would be the goal? The gain?

I think that it would hurt the ACC, not help it at all).

That is my understanding of the relationship between ND and the ACC.

JR or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

Went to look this up (on Wikipedia, of course)...

1. (tie) Duke / North Carolina - 27
3. (tie) Boston College / Virginia - 25
5. Notre Dame - 24
6. Louisville - 23
7. Virginia Tech - 22
8. North Carolina St - 21
9. (tie) Clemson / Florida St - 19
11. (tie) Syracuse / Wake Forest - 18
13. Miami - 17.5^
14. (tie) Georgia Tech / Pittsburgh - 17

^ Miami participates in diving only but the sport is technically "swimming and diving" under the NCAA
Football is the biggie and certainly the prime measure of assessment for this aspect.
Any school in a conference receiving a "special contract" does have distinctions not applied to the rest. Partisan fans may deem Swofford had been masterful and savvy in this set-up. Perhaps to the same fans, losing Maryland was brilliant as well.
I don't fault Notre Dame for negotiating/accepting this deal with the ACC. They are the smarter partner.
On the one hand, multiple posters here (board-wise, not SEC threads specifically) have posts after post on how the BIG, SEC, w/ESPN, and even a partially depleted B12, are going to divide-up the better ACC schools. Maybe that happens one day.
On the other hand, some of the same posters express how extraordinarily positive it is to have the ND agreement and that it has saved and stabilized the ACC. Talking about both ways?????
My prior comments focused on potential ACC expansion with an unsteady assumption the B12 would have departures in a few years. ND is a factor because ND is not going to be a fb expansion component. I am not sure all of the ACC interests want to accept the reality.
My remarks were how to deal with that practically. i. e. add WVU, possibly Cincy, and so forth. Debate it. But that's what I believe the ACC needs to pursue if they choose to expand with all-sports-in schools.

Notre Dame's deal is not stopping the ACC from adding WVU and Cincy today. How could it, exactly?

It is not affecting their ability to do so in any way. Their reluctance or inability to do so is not Notre Dame's "fault".

That would be 16 football playing members and 17 basketball playing members.

Currently, those numbers sit at 14 and 15, respectively. How would the new additions be much of a problem, with ND still there?

Why would the ACC try to kick a full member out to do so, especially when that member is fulfilling all requirements and contracts?

Do you think that the ACC is better off or worse off, TV money wise, with ND in the conference with a partial deal?

Do you think that ESPN would prefer ND to stay where it is, or do you think that ESPN would prefer that the ACC kick ND out?

That would be an exceedingly dumb and bizarre way to add numbers, value and revenue to the conference.

Only an Idiot would dream of kicking out ND. Myself I'm perfectly fine with the arrangement We have. ND has great Basketball , Baseball and Women's sports. The Football games are of High interest when ever an ACC Football school has a game with ND. What's there not to like ?
07-07-2022 12:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,005
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 750
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #37
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
Pittsburgh / 4.8% of Conference Value / $21,638,400 value of media share

I think I'd take that value and think it's fair; however, if Pitt was in the B1G and in the division with PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, Miami, and Notre Dame, for example, I can see Pitt's media value double what it's ACC value of the media share is. Three of those games are already rivalry games, to some degree and has had national tv coverage, and Maryland definitely has the potential to be a rivalry game.

Is there an updated version for 2022?
07-10-2022 03:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 31,861
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 4741
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #38
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(07-10-2022 03:40 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Pittsburgh / 4.8% of Conference Value / $21,638,400 value of media share

I think I'd take that value and think it's fair; however, if Pitt was in the B1G and in the division with PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, Miami, and Notre Dame, for example, I can see Pitt's media value double what it's ACC value of the media share is. Three of those games are already rivalry games, to some degree and has had national tv coverage, and Maryland definitely has the potential to be a rivalry game.

Is there an updated version for 2022?

Yes, Pitts value goes up as you are averaged with better valued schools. And no on 2022, they come out a year in arrears.
07-10-2022 04:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,005
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 750
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #39
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
(07-10-2022 04:23 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(07-10-2022 03:40 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  Pittsburgh / 4.8% of Conference Value / $21,638,400 value of media share

I think I'd take that value and think it's fair; however, if Pitt was in the B1G and in the division with PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, Miami, and Notre Dame, for example, I can see Pitt's media value double what it's ACC value of the media share is. Three of those games are already rivalry games, to some degree and has had national tv coverage, and Maryland definitely has the potential to be a rivalry game.

Is there an updated version for 2022?

Yes, Pitts value goes up as you are averaged with better valued schools. And no on 2022, they come out a year in arrears.

The better valued schools plays a hella role, but fan interests increases just due to the rivalries alone without even factoring in what the value, of the opponents, is. I see Maryland generating more interest than say Ga Tech or Virginia even though Ga Tech and Virginia has a higher value than Maryland. Maryland is something that could end up being a Backyard Brawl Pt. 2. Many kids from the WPIAL play for Team PA vs Maryland in the Big 33 Classic, as well as many PA HS teams play against Maryland teams; things like that tend to carry over into the college level.
07-10-2022 04:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,246
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Canine & Avian
Location: 4,250 mi sw of Oslo
Post: #40
RE: A Different Way to Look at the Value of Schools with Regard to Realignment
Rumors are flying around, some perpetuated by bloggers and amateurish writers for elementary-level sports news websites. These aren’t discussions, but some allow comments to be posted. Are any of them getting it right? Maybe by luck. And these “basement dudes” on Twitter that some posters will quote/reference in the general threads, becomes more comical than carrying any respectable level of credibility.

Speculation is great for this board. JRSEC could have had a lucrative career in fortune-telling. The timing of the announced moves of OU & UT to the SEC, and the announced moves of UCLA & USC to the BIG, were impressive calls. I was quite skeptical on the later.

I do believe something is up with the SEC. The conference brass and Presidents are being too quiet right now. They are not saying “we are sticking with 16”. They are not denying certain rumored discussions.

One intriguing rumor is that Notre Dame, Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, Duke, GA Tech, and Virginia, will be the schools to fracture the ACC’s GoR. Are the SEC and BIG with ESPN and perhaps Fox, secretly collaborating on this? Could there be something akin to the following:

To the BIG: Notre Dame, UVA, UNC, and Georgia Tech

To the SEC: Clemson, FSU, Miami, and Duke.

20 teams each. Something such as this would not shock me.
(This post was last modified: 07-12-2022 10:25 AM by OdinFrigg.)
07-12-2022 10:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2023 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2023 MyBB Group.