(04-04-2022 05:55 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 03:50 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 02:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 01:51 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Second scenario in this same mindset…the Alliance actually forms to transform collegiate athletics.

A) B1G accommodates schools from both coasts to form a 28-member national conference.
East - Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State and Indiana
Midwest - Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska
Atlantic - Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and Notre Dame
Pacific - Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC and Colorado

B) SEC prefers to only add four schools that augments its cultural and regional footprint. The 20-team SEC includes Kansas, Virginia Tech, NC State and Clemson.
.
C) Others from the ACC, B12 & PAC join together for a second national conference,
East - BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Wake, WVU and UCF
Central - Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor and Houston
West - Arizona, ASU, Utah, Oregon State, Washington State, BYU and San Diego State

What Alliance? The one in support of the NCAA, amateurism, and a botched scheduling alliance? The organizers are networks, the conferences are a brand label, and a collective product, and realignment the arrangement and culling of the product line. There are no ideals involved. It's simply business and pay for play and NIL negated any semblance of idealism which may have remained, and that wasn't very much at all. The NCAA served itself. Amateurism was a myth. And college sports have never been clean.

The third scenario is the SEC-led, and ESPN-financed, Southern brands strategy.

A) SEC (@ 24 universities) secures the Southern footprint and basketball with UVa, VT, UNC, Duke, Clemson, Florida State, Miami and Kansas.

B) B1G (@ 24) reacts by cornering Notre Dame plus nine from the PAC (Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Utah and Colorado)

C) The remaining schools with brand-value then combine for a 16-team grouping
East - BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, NC State, Wake, Georgia Tech and WVU
West - BYU, Arizona State, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas State and Iowa State
It's not realistic to expect this group to make more than their current levels.

Unfortunately, all three scenarios break-up the current ACC.

I see this one as the more likely. ESPN will segregate by pay the two collections of properties they wish to retain. And all of the non-alliance scenarios break up the PAC as well. Money is the catalyst that changes things for the lesser paid. It's simply a transformative amount which schools will see as essential to keeping status.

BTW, I think it's a coin flip between Miami (3rd Fla school and a different piece of the Florida market), Georgia Tech (essentially 80% of Atlanta with UGa, Clemson & Auburn) which is AAU, and Louisville (top 15 revenue producer. I agree on the other 7. The wild card is what if ND doesn't opt Big10 and doesn't want a partial with the ACC/B12 merger due to which schools would be in it? What if they opted for the Neo-SoCon for recruiting and markets in a more Catholic region?

With regards to the coin-flip...

ESPN wants Miami (better viewership); UF and FSU support this preference (better rivalries); and football coaches will make their preferences known (better recruits).

Academics will favor Georgia Tech; lots of historical rivals may concur (Georgia, Clemson, Auburn, Alabama & Tennessee could all financially leverage games in the big city); and the ACC blue bloods would support this addition.

Even though revenues are impressive, I don't believe that Louisville could outmaneuver the politicking by Georgia Tech or Miami.

If ESPN Keeps ND.

SEC:

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Tennessee, Virginia

Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M


B12/ACC

Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Cincinnati, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian

Baylor, Central Florida, Houston, Memphis, Miami, Tulane, Wake Forest

Boise State, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Oregon State, Texas Tech, Washington State


B1G:

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

Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Minnesota, Nebraska, Utah

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

If ESPN doesn't keep ND. The B1G drops Arizona State and adds N.D. The divisions shift. The SEC adds Virginia Tech in place of ND. The B12/ACC adds Arizona State adds Wake Forest in the North and drops Boise.

JR, you have been beating the three conference drum for a long time and perhaps it may come to pass, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the math.
Have you thought about dollar projections for those new conferences moving forward. Does conference #3 still project $53 million? Does the SEC still project $105 million per school or is it much higher due to content multiplying?

(04-05-2022 05:01 AM)XLance Wrote:  JR, you have been beating the three conference drum for a long time and perhaps it may come to pass, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the math.
Have you thought about dollar projections for those new conferences moving forward. Does conference #3 still project $53 million? Does the SEC still project $105 million per school or is it much higher due to content multiplying?

Of course I have X. The networks until just recently never gave any of us anything but peanuts. The NCAA gave us table scraps until 1983. The networks didn't know what we were really worth to them until the late 90's. Then they were afraid the would pay us too much and make us suspicious until an outside threat manifested (the rise of economic clout among the FAANG companies). Now they are beginning to work on honest percentages and now the upside for them is in culling unwanted product (third tier streaming where you may one day essentially pay the schools by view), and the brand mega draws playing other brand mega draws for consistent 5 million plus audiences (some double that or more).

Take the lid off basketball and you have a new frontier which had also been kneecapped by the NCAA.

Three years ago it was estimated (just for football) that one league of the top 48 programs would be worth 120 million plus and this was from one of those firms conferences go to before adding schools.

Well these estimates are a long way from that, but then we haven't culled down to 48 either. And now basketball can factor in so we might not have to do so.

A 24 member SEC and 24 member B1G at top pay creates a bridge to that exclusive league. A 24 member B12/ACC remnant would easily be worth 53 million or more and creates a safe space legally, while factoring in hoops potential, and keeping the fans oriented in conference thinking comfort. It's one reason I call it a transitional phase.

From there you could split back up into regional conferences, or move to a super league, whichever proves to be more conducive to viewing and profits. So a P3 of ~20-24 each is a safe place for the schools right now in that it eliminates nearly 3 sets of duplicated administrative expenses, and creates more saleable inventory, a safe place legally due to realistic access, and it's more malleable scheduling wise for networks tweaking ratings while remaining lucrative live entertainment easily scheduled around pro sports. And now for the Networks they have the kickback from the sports betting angle greasing their control.

(04-05-2022 07:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 05:01 AM)XLance Wrote:  JR, you have been beating the three conference drum for a long time and perhaps it may come to pass, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the math.
Have you thought about dollar projections for those new conferences moving forward. Does conference #3 still project $53 million? Does the SEC still project $105 million per school or is it much higher due to content multiplying?

Of course I have X. The networks until just recently never gave any of us anything but peanuts. The NCAA gave us table scraps until 1983. The networks didn't know what we were really worth to them until the late 90's. Then they were afraid the would pay us too much and make us suspicious until an outside threat manifested (the rise of economic clout among the FAANG companies). Now they are beginning to work on honest percentages and now the upside for them is in culling unwanted product (third tier streaming where you may one day essentially pay the schools by view), and the brand mega draws playing other brand mega draws for consistent 5 million plus audiences (some double that or more).

Take the lid off basketball and you have a new frontier which had also been kneecapped by the NCAA.

Three years ago it was estimated (just for football) that one league of the top 48 programs would be worth 120 million plus and this was from one of those firms conferences go to before adding schools.

Well these estimates are a long way from that, but then we haven't culled down to 48 either. And now basketball can factor in so we might not have to do so.

A 24 member SEC and 24 member B1G at top pay creates a bridge to that exclusive league. A 24 member B12/ACC remnant would easily be worth 53 million or more and creates a safe space legally, while factoring in hoops potential, and keeping the fans oriented in conference thinking comfort. It's one reason I call it a transitional phase.

From there you could split back up into regional conferences, or move to a super league, whichever proves to be more conducive to viewing and profits. So a P3 of ~20-24 each is a safe place for the schools right now in that it eliminates nearly 3 sets of duplicated administrative expenses, and creates more saleable inventory, a safe place legally due to realistic access, and it's more malleable scheduling wise for networks tweaking ratings while remaining lucrative live entertainment easily scheduled around pro sports. And now for the Networks they have the kickback from the sports betting angle greasing their control.

I guess that what I am looking for is how paying 24 teams top dollar while paying another 24 what they would have made anyway more profitable for ESPN?
ESPN increases their overhead $500 million per year to get matchups they could have scheduled anyway?
A Carolina vs. Virginia game or a Duke vs. Notre Dame game won't generate increased fan participation just because it's in the SEC as opposed to the ACC. Would an average Kentucky team sell out Kenan against an average Carolina team just because it's a conference game. Even the Notre Dame game's attendance has started to wane in several ACC stadiums as the novelty has started to wear off.
The basketball thing is not relevant because it would exist even if the teams stayed in their current configuration.

I understand this thing would work for Carolina and would give the Heels increased revenue, but I am just not sure that ESPN would look on it as a wise long term business move.
Just a thought.

(04-05-2022 08:11 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 07:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 05:01 AM)XLance Wrote:  JR, you have been beating the three conference drum for a long time and perhaps it may come to pass, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around the math.
Have you thought about dollar projections for those new conferences moving forward. Does conference #3 still project $53 million? Does the SEC still project $105 million per school or is it much higher due to content multiplying?

Of course I have X. The networks until just recently never gave any of us anything but peanuts. The NCAA gave us table scraps until 1983. The networks didn't know what we were really worth to them until the late 90's. Then they were afraid the would pay us too much and make us suspicious until an outside threat manifested (the rise of economic clout among the FAANG companies). Now they are beginning to work on honest percentages and now the upside for them is in culling unwanted product (third tier streaming where you may one day essentially pay the schools by view), and the brand mega draws playing other brand mega draws for consistent 5 million plus audiences (some double that or more).

Take the lid off basketball and you have a new frontier which had also been kneecapped by the NCAA.

Three years ago it was estimated (just for football) that one league of the top 48 programs would be worth 120 million plus and this was from one of those firms conferences go to before adding schools.

Well these estimates are a long way from that, but then we haven't culled down to 48 either. And now basketball can factor in so we might not have to do so.

A 24 member SEC and 24 member B1G at top pay creates a bridge to that exclusive league. A 24 member B12/ACC remnant would easily be worth 53 million or more and creates a safe space legally, while factoring in hoops potential, and keeping the fans oriented in conference thinking comfort. It's one reason I call it a transitional phase.

From there you could split back up into regional conferences, or move to a super league, whichever proves to be more conducive to viewing and profits. So a P3 of ~20-24 each is a safe place for the schools right now in that it eliminates nearly 3 sets of duplicated administrative expenses, and creates more saleable inventory, a safe place legally due to realistic access, and it's more malleable scheduling wise for networks tweaking ratings while remaining lucrative live entertainment easily scheduled around pro sports. And now for the Networks they have the kickback from the sports betting angle greasing their control.

I guess that what I am looking for is how paying 24 teams top dollar while paying another 24 what they would have made anyway more profitable for ESPN?
ESPN increases their overhead $500 million per year to get matchups they could have scheduled anyway?
A Carolina vs. Virginia game or a Duke vs. Notre Dame game won't generate increased fan participation just because it's in the SEC as opposed to the ACC. Would an average Kentucky team sell out Kenan against an average Carolina team just because it's a conference game. Even the Notre Dame game's attendance has started to wane in several ACC stadiums as the novelty has started to wear off.
The basketball thing is not relevant because it would exist even if the teams stayed in their current configuration.

I understand this thing would work for Carolina and would give the Heels increased revenue, but I am just not sure that ESPN would look on it as a wise long term business move.
Just a thought.

Duke plays Carolina twice in the regular season. These are strong draws and solid TV.
Add two games of Duke and Kentucky and Carolina and Kentucky. Now toss a strong regional draw like Virginia and Tennessee into that divisional mix. That's quite the dish of basketball and you haven't even factored in Arkansas, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas in West. Even Auburn, Alabama, LSU, and Vandy are good TV. And Florida, South Carolina, FSU, & Clemson are solid.

Where else is ESPN going get top notch football and hoops in one place for $320 (40 million x 8) million which is the actual projected difference? The upside is massive for them content value wise.

And X, it may not be a top money sport, but the baseball would be unsurpassed.

(04-04-2022 01:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Kansas and North Carolina end basketball season tomorrow. We will begin what always appears to be the quiet season. It isn't. More things, including realignment discussions, get done in the still of Summer than people realize. I suspect this Summer to be rife with behind-the-scenes machinations. The reasons will be discussed but suffice it as a preface to say the national and international political and financial scenes offer any number of precarious possibilities and everyone realizes money, due to inflation, is going to be tight. They also understand demographics, namely the Boomers will not be pushing trends societally beyond 2035. This means ticket sales for college athletics will continue to drop placing more dependence upon media deals for revenue. Loose translation, Networks will have an ever-increasing power in structuring college sports and no doubt will do so to meet their own goals.

Conferences will still lay out parameters, but in a quasi-professional pay for play world where basketball monetization will be important, and separation from the NCAA
essential to accomplishing it, how conferences are structured will likely be handled in a manner which ensures full seasonal fare, and at quality, for the Networks.

Make no mistake football will be King, but hoops will be Queen, and diamond sports a Jack. Branding will be the Ace. Into this milieu these things will be impactful, and massive change more likely. And for reasons I will enumerate. If you are one who is banking on status quo for the next 14 years you may wish to avert your eyes.

1. NIL and Pay for Play Will be a factor at the Network, Conference, and School Level

The advent of these legal rulings will render moot the organizing principle of the NCAA, amateurism, end some, at this point, really stupid violation charges against some schools, and make monetizing hoops an essential, which means beyond NCAA control. Think football after OU/UGa vs the NCAA 1983 different.

Corporate NIL money will play into advertising revenues, likely creating some synergy which Schools and Conferences might also share if players are shown in school jerseys, using settings with conference logos, etc. So, all revenue and some non-revenue sports could see a financial tide which lifts and benefits all 3. Making sure the NCAA doesn't try to horn in eliminates a complication and another mouth to feed.

2. While Money will be a motivation for movement, it won't be the only major reason. Surviving in the Highest Division of play will also be a major motivator.

$40-50 million gaps between the SEC / B1G and the B12/ ACC / PAC will cause movement. This represents a gap of 400 million to a half billion over the coming decade. Major schools have moved for 20 million tops and much less so far. There will be movement.

The unspoken part of this will be driven by a downsizing and streamlining of higher education which is well under way. Texas in part move to again distinguish themselves from all other Texas schools but A&M. Oklahoma moved in part to remain the dominant school in Oklahoma. Many might shake their heads over this assertion but being in conferences comprised of state flagship schools of academic standing and with sports brand recognition will be key is setting themselves apart. Schools like North Carolina, Virginia, and Kansas will want to do the same. But moves can't be made against fan culture, old rivals and annual games. For this reason, the SEC will be attractive to each of these. Brand name privates will also seek being set apart with distinction. Duke, Notre Dame, USC, and Stanford may avail themselves of the funding and elite company as things move forward.

This is an era ending and era beginning shift and administrations know this.

To make this mass transition easier politically, I look for a third conference comprised or 2nd state schools from smaller states or 3rd schools from larger states, and well known and prominent privates which aren't nationally dominant.

A 20-24 member SEC and Big 10 would not be out of the question. A third conference of like size would be practical. N.C. State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Oregon State, Arizona State, Washington State, and privates like Miami, Boston College, Syracuse, Baylor, and TCU fit here as well along with a hybrid like Pitt and a small state Flagship like WVU, and some top up and comers.

Why? The Flagships can't leave them behind or take them with them. Their inclusion preserves important in state rivalries and makes the transition possible. So, they will be included, perhaps with a nice bump in pay, just not at SEC & B1G levels, and they will offer networks a solid product which can be marketed well.

3. Basketball will play a bigger part in selections, as will national branding, and state flagship status.

Basketball first state flagships have the branding and with a earning potential 2.25 times what they earn now under the NCAA. They are valuable and provide balance for top heavy football scheduling.

4. Size of conference will only be determined by what is profitable. No NCAA, no restrictions on how a conference is structured.

With no structure requirements larger conferences add profit with conference semis, more inventory, and expenses share with many more, and by the elimination of duplicated conference overhead. A P3 has much less administrative overhead without 5 conferences and adds to their bargaining strength with numbers.

5. Network Rights desires will Trump Conference wants. And Networks will determine profitability.

Look for networks to encourage consolidation in order to market the most popular brands over larger market footprints which impacts ad revenues. Old valuations on who is profitable will be moot. Networks will pay for market reach and market penetration, and for a greater versatility in scheduling.

Networks will encourage playoff expansion. A new model will profit all and since conference semis will be the profit of the conference taking the 12 divisional champs the 3 champs will automatically be included with the next best seeded, and 4 more at large bids issued. This will mean some conference runners up will get new life.


6. GORs may not play a part, but even if the do movement within a network family can be managed at the Network / Conference level.

GOR's may be rendered moot by Pay for Play. If not if everyone earns more movement is possible. If few if any of current P5 schools are left out there will be no monetary loss, and no loss of inclusion. No damage, no damages. If ESPN & FOX and any other network likes their lineup we move without fear.

7. Expect 2 truly super conferences and 1 which is paid less but has access and earns more than any of its members do now.


So, time frame? As early as 2023 on some moves, likely 2025 if movement is wholesale and at once. It takes time to work out new schedules.

Money, Law, Recession and Inflation, Demographics, and Resources say we move in this direction. And, the sooner the better.

Superb work!

Expect you to to be proven correct on much of what you lay out here

(04-04-2022 07:19 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 06:16 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 04:26 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  A couple questions...

1) Who will decide to not compete at this level? I might be wrong but IMO there will be a couple universities that will self demote.
2) Are the networks going to allow dead weight to stay aligned with their current conferences? My example is Mississippi State, they really don't bring anything for football or basketball that say a school like Florida State could bring. Does the mouse allow schools like this to stay? MSU isn't the only one either...
3) Why only 3 conferences? I know someone is going to yell at me but I feel like symmetry rules in professional sports, There is equal divisions and conferences in all of the 4 major north American sports so why not in what would become the 5th?
4) What will be the the cue that we can all look to and know unequivocally that this massive transition has begun?

1. If anyone opts out they are just out. I'm not sure unless it is a B1G or SEC member that it would make much difference.

2. Mississippi State won the national championship in baseball last year, and recently enough was a final game away in Women's hoops. They are charter members and no one is mucking around with core SEC members or core B1G members which is just good fortune for some.

3. Why a P5 if we love symmetry? It will eventually be a P2, the third conference is a necessary transitional phase. Some will make it and some eventually will not but nature will decide that.

4. Unless you are blind it has already begun. NIL was one symptom, Texas and Oklahoma leaving is your cue, and Pay for Play will be the starting gun for the race for a place to which some have already been working.

1. Makes Sense

2. Not a shot at Miss St, I guess I don't see how they're more valuable than an Arizona state or a Virginia Tech. Might just be a case of right place right time, I can accept that.

3. If a P2 is the end game, that pretty much answers the question.

4. Not blind, just wondering if there is another proverbial "shoe to drop", that I should be aware of or that is not being mentioned.

I'm not going to say that Mississippi State is less than or greater in value than Arizona State or VaTech. However, to their credit, Mississippi State is a founding member of the SEC, they do bring in some major markets (Jackson, MS is nothing to sneeze at, and MSU has a small portion of the Birmingham, AL market as well.). The national championship in baseball bolsters MSU's case even more!!!

Pay to play is the other shoe to drop, IMO.

As to who won't compete at this level, it's a mystery. I would start with D3 schools who have no desire to move up though.

The Jackson, MS market has less than 1 million people and assuming the SEC keeps Mississippi they will still have a team in it. They don't need both. If you want to say Mississippi State is more valuable because of their baseball championship and women's final, drop Ole Miss then. A small portion of the Birmingham market? Right, the SEC needs more of the Birmingham market, they don't have any schools that penetrate the Birmingham market now. Virginia Tech and Arizona State might be second schools in their states but would you rather have two schools in Mississippi, Arizona (which includes Phoenix), or Virginia (in which the Northern suburbs are right outside of Washington DC)?

(04-05-2022 11:26 AM)schmolik Wrote:  The Jackson, MS market has less than 1 million people and assuming the SEC keeps Mississippi they will still have a team in it. They don't need both. If you want to say Mississippi State is more valuable because of their baseball championship and women's final, drop Ole Miss then.

Schools pulling out of a conference to join another (e.g. Oklahoma and Texas) and leaving behind longtime partners is one thing.

Conferences kicking out founding members is something else entirely

I'm under no delusions that ECU can be competitive at this upper level. That said what happens to schools like ECU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Houston, SMU, Cincinnati, Tulane, etc? (In other words, mostly the old southern Indy's, SWC castaways and the Johnny come lately's too big to be ignored.)

(04-04-2022 04:26 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  A couple questions...

1) Who will decide to not compete at this level? I might be wrong but IMO there will be a couple universities that will self demote.
2) Are the networks going to allow dead weight to stay aligned with their current conferences? My example is Mississippi State, they really don't bring anything for football or basketball that say a school like Florida State could bring. Does the mouse allow schools like this to stay? MSU isn't the only one either...
3) Why only 3 conferences? I know someone is going to yell at me but I feel like symmetry rules in professional sports, There is equal divisions and conferences in all of the 4 major north American sports so why not in what would become the 5th?
4) What will be the the cue that we can all look to and know unequivocally that this massive transition has begun?

No one is going to willingly walk away from that much guaranteed money, especially not people as risk averse as college administrators. Maybe there could be expulsions but idk what kind of legal can of worms that would open. I agree that there will be symmetry. I don't think you can set up 2 premier leagues and a 3rd lesser league. IMO what's more likely is the SEC and B10 go beyond 24 each absorbing what would've been the 3rd wheel conference and have multiple divisions each operating similarly to every other major professional sport in America. I think that would make for more competitive balance between and in the 2 leagues and house every program with a decent case for being at the top level.

(04-05-2022 01:34 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 04:26 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  A couple questions...

1) Who will decide to not compete at this level? I might be wrong but IMO there will be a couple universities that will self demote.
2) Are the networks going to allow dead weight to stay aligned with their current conferences? My example is Mississippi State, they really don't bring anything for football or basketball that say a school like Florida State could bring. Does the mouse allow schools like this to stay? MSU isn't the only one either...
3) Why only 3 conferences? I know someone is going to yell at me but I feel like symmetry rules in professional sports, There is equal divisions and conferences in all of the 4 major north American sports so why not in what would become the 5th?
4) What will be the the cue that we can all look to and know unequivocally that this massive transition has begun?

No one is going to willingly walk away from that much guaranteed money, especially not people as risk averse as college administrators. Maybe there could be expulsions but idk what kind of legal can of worms that would open. I agree that there will be symmetry. I don't think you can set up 2 premier leagues and a 3rd lesser league. IMO what's more likely is the SEC and B10 go beyond 24 each absorbing what would've been the 3rd wheel conference and have multiple divisions each operating similarly to every other major professional sport in America. I think that would make for more competitive balance between and in the 2 leagues and house every program with a decent case for being at the top level.

I have always thought that 3 conferences would be a strange set up. I always envisioned the breakaway being 60-80 teams situated into 4 conferences with the ability in the future to cull the herd even further to get to the final solution of 2 super conferences.

I will take JR's word for it though.

(04-05-2022 03:15 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 01:34 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 04:26 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  A couple questions...

1) Who will decide to not compete at this level? I might be wrong but IMO there will be a couple universities that will self demote.
2) Are the networks going to allow dead weight to stay aligned with their current conferences? My example is Mississippi State, they really don't bring anything for football or basketball that say a school like Florida State could bring. Does the mouse allow schools like this to stay? MSU isn't the only one either...
3) Why only 3 conferences? I know someone is going to yell at me but I feel like symmetry rules in professional sports, There is equal divisions and conferences in all of the 4 major north American sports so why not in what would become the 5th?
4) What will be the the cue that we can all look to and know unequivocally that this massive transition has begun?

No one is going to willingly walk away from that much guaranteed money, especially not people as risk averse as college administrators. Maybe there could be expulsions but idk what kind of legal can of worms that would open. I agree that there will be symmetry. I don't think you can set up 2 premier leagues and a 3rd lesser league. IMO what's more likely is the SEC and B10 go beyond 24 each absorbing what would've been the 3rd wheel conference and have multiple divisions each operating similarly to every other major professional sport in America. I think that would make for more competitive balance between and in the 2 leagues and house every program with a decent case for being at the top level.

I have always thought that 3 conferences would be a strange set up. I always envisioned the breakaway being 60-80 teams situated into 4 conferences with the ability in the future to cull the herd even further to get to the final solution of 2 super conferences.

I will take JR's word for it though.

Four isn't impossible, it's just very hard to believe it can happen that way. You will have 2 conferences making 40-45 million more than any neighboring conferences. You have 9 possible members in the PAC 12 which could do quite well in the Big 10. You have 5 in the ACC which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. You have at least 1 in the B12 which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. If any of these opt for an extra 45 million a year we don't have enough value to keep 4 conferences. We have enough for two true super conferences, and have a reasonably strong third.

So what do you believe?

A. The B1G adds Notre Dame and 1 other, possibly Kansas and stops at 16. The ACC stands at 14, somewhat further diminished. The SEC sits fat and happy at 16. The PAC 12 adds enough old B12 schools to end it as a power conference taking Texas Tech, T.C.U., Oklahoma State and Kansas State to stop at 16.

B. Duke, UNC, and Virginia ponder the Texas and Oklahoma decisions and the obvious disadvantages of their current contract and jump with ESPN's blessing to another ESPN property where they make ESPN more money. Or, that a B1G seeing the SEC make a power move to 20 decides to lure PAC schools.

If any schools leave the PAC 12 or ACC we are looking at 3 conferences.

(04-05-2022 03:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 03:15 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 01:34 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 04:26 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  A couple questions...

1) Who will decide to not compete at this level? I might be wrong but IMO there will be a couple universities that will self demote.
2) Are the networks going to allow dead weight to stay aligned with their current conferences? My example is Mississippi State, they really don't bring anything for football or basketball that say a school like Florida State could bring. Does the mouse allow schools like this to stay? MSU isn't the only one either...
3) Why only 3 conferences? I know someone is going to yell at me but I feel like symmetry rules in professional sports, There is equal divisions and conferences in all of the 4 major north American sports so why not in what would become the 5th?
4) What will be the the cue that we can all look to and know unequivocally that this massive transition has begun?

No one is going to willingly walk away from that much guaranteed money, especially not people as risk averse as college administrators. Maybe there could be expulsions but idk what kind of legal can of worms that would open. I agree that there will be symmetry. I don't think you can set up 2 premier leagues and a 3rd lesser league. IMO what's more likely is the SEC and B10 go beyond 24 each absorbing what would've been the 3rd wheel conference and have multiple divisions each operating similarly to every other major professional sport in America. I think that would make for more competitive balance between and in the 2 leagues and house every program with a decent case for being at the top level.

I have always thought that 3 conferences would be a strange set up. I always envisioned the breakaway being 60-80 teams situated into 4 conferences with the ability in the future to cull the herd even further to get to the final solution of 2 super conferences.

I will take JR's word for it though.

Four isn't impossible, it's just very hard to believe it can happen that way. You will have 2 conferences making 40-45 million more than any neighboring conferences. You have 9 possible members in the PAC 12 which could do quite well in the Big 10. You have 5 in the ACC which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. You have at least 1 in the B12 which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. If any of these opt for an extra 45 million a year we don't have enough value to keep 4 conferences. We have enough for two true super conferences, and have a reasonably strong third.

So what do you believe?

A. The B1G adds Notre Dame and 1 other, possibly Kansas and stops at 16. The ACC stands at 14, somewhat further diminished. The SEC sits fat and happy at 16. The PAC 12 adds enough old B12 schools to end it as a power conference taking Texas Tech, T.C.U., Oklahoma State and Kansas State to stop at 16.

B. Duke, UNC, and Virginia ponder the Texas and Oklahoma decisions and the obvious disadvantages of their current contract and jump with ESPN's blessing to another ESPN property where they make ESPN more money. Or, that a B1G seeing the SEC make a power move to 20 decides to lure PAC schools.

If any schools leave the PAC 12 or ACC we are looking at 3 conferences.

Who says you have to pay every school in each league the same amount? Why would television want to pay Rutgers the same amount as Ohio State? Missouri the same as Texas? etc...

(04-05-2022 03:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 03:15 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 01:34 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 04:26 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  A couple questions...

1) Who will decide to not compete at this level? I might be wrong but IMO there will be a couple universities that will self demote.
2) Are the networks going to allow dead weight to stay aligned with their current conferences? My example is Mississippi State, they really don't bring anything for football or basketball that say a school like Florida State could bring. Does the mouse allow schools like this to stay? MSU isn't the only one either...
3) Why only 3 conferences? I know someone is going to yell at me but I feel like symmetry rules in professional sports, There is equal divisions and conferences in all of the 4 major north American sports so why not in what would become the 5th?
4) What will be the the cue that we can all look to and know unequivocally that this massive transition has begun?

No one is going to willingly walk away from that much guaranteed money, especially not people as risk averse as college administrators. Maybe there could be expulsions but idk what kind of legal can of worms that would open. I agree that there will be symmetry. I don't think you can set up 2 premier leagues and a 3rd lesser league. IMO what's more likely is the SEC and B10 go beyond 24 each absorbing what would've been the 3rd wheel conference and have multiple divisions each operating similarly to every other major professional sport in America. I think that would make for more competitive balance between and in the 2 leagues and house every program with a decent case for being at the top level.

I have always thought that 3 conferences would be a strange set up. I always envisioned the breakaway being 60-80 teams situated into 4 conferences with the ability in the future to cull the herd even further to get to the final solution of 2 super conferences.

I will take JR's word for it though.

Four isn't impossible, it's just very hard to believe it can happen that way. You will have 2 conferences making 40-45 million more than any neighboring conferences. You have 9 possible members in the PAC 12 which could do quite well in the Big 10. You have 5 in the ACC which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. You have at least 1 in the B12 which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. If any of these opt for an extra 45 million a year we don't have enough value to keep 4 conferences. We have enough for two true super conferences, and have a reasonably strong third.

So what do you believe?

A. The B1G adds Notre Dame and 1 other, possibly Kansas and stops at 16. The ACC stands at 14, somewhat further diminished. The SEC sits fat and happy at 16. The PAC 12 adds enough old B12 schools to end it as a power conference taking Texas Tech, T.C.U., Oklahoma State and Kansas State to stop at 16.

B. Duke, UNC, and Virginia ponder the Texas and Oklahoma decisions and the obvious disadvantages of their current contract and jump with ESPN's blessing to another ESPN property where they make ESPN more money. Or, that a B1G seeing the SEC make a power move to 20 decides to lure PAC schools.

If any schools leave the PAC 12 or ACC we are looking at 3 conferences.

Option A isn't super exciting but it seems clean. It does leave a lot of room for the PAC and ACC to be raided by the B1G and SEC.

Option B is more fun and there's already precedent with Oklahoma and Texas (albeit from the XII).

Let's look at Option B with some tweaks:

SEC + Clemson, Duke, Florida St, Kansas, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

B1G + Arizona, California, Colorado, Notre Dame, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington

The rest merge and add a few:
AAC: Memphis, SMU, South Florida, Temple
ACC: Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, North Carolina St, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Wake Forest
MWC: Boise St*, Colorado St, San Diego St
PAC: Arizona St, Oregon St, Washington St
XII: Baylor, BYU, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Iowa St, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, Texas Tech, West Virginia

* I rarely ever pimp my school in these but we do fill a hole here

SEC
Central: Arkansas, Kansas, LSU, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech
East: Clemson, Duke, Florida St, Miami, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi St, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

B1G
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
East: Maryland, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue, Rutgers
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington

XXIV
Central: Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech
North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Temple, West Virginia
South: Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Houston, Memphis, North Carolina St, South Florida, Wake Forest
West: Arizona St, Boise St, BYU, Colorado St, Oregon St, San Diego St, Washington St

(04-05-2022 03:56 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 03:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 03:15 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 01:34 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(04-04-2022 04:26 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  A couple questions...

1) Who will decide to not compete at this level? I might be wrong but IMO there will be a couple universities that will self demote.
2) Are the networks going to allow dead weight to stay aligned with their current conferences? My example is Mississippi State, they really don't bring anything for football or basketball that say a school like Florida State could bring. Does the mouse allow schools like this to stay? MSU isn't the only one either...
3) Why only 3 conferences? I know someone is going to yell at me but I feel like symmetry rules in professional sports, There is equal divisions and conferences in all of the 4 major north American sports so why not in what would become the 5th?
4) What will be the the cue that we can all look to and know unequivocally that this massive transition has begun?

No one is going to willingly walk away from that much guaranteed money, especially not people as risk averse as college administrators. Maybe there could be expulsions but idk what kind of legal can of worms that would open. I agree that there will be symmetry. I don't think you can set up 2 premier leagues and a 3rd lesser league. IMO what's more likely is the SEC and B10 go beyond 24 each absorbing what would've been the 3rd wheel conference and have multiple divisions each operating similarly to every other major professional sport in America. I think that would make for more competitive balance between and in the 2 leagues and house every program with a decent case for being at the top level.

I have always thought that 3 conferences would be a strange set up. I always envisioned the breakaway being 60-80 teams situated into 4 conferences with the ability in the future to cull the herd even further to get to the final solution of 2 super conferences.

I will take JR's word for it though.

Four isn't impossible, it's just very hard to believe it can happen that way. You will have 2 conferences making 40-45 million more than any neighboring conferences. You have 9 possible members in the PAC 12 which could do quite well in the Big 10. You have 5 in the ACC which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. You have at least 1 in the B12 which could do well in either the SEC or B1G. If any of these opt for an extra 45 million a year we don't have enough value to keep 4 conferences. We have enough for two true super conferences, and have a reasonably strong third.

So what do you believe?

A. The B1G adds Notre Dame and 1 other, possibly Kansas and stops at 16. The ACC stands at 14, somewhat further diminished. The SEC sits fat and happy at 16. The PAC 12 adds enough old B12 schools to end it as a power conference taking Texas Tech, T.C.U., Oklahoma State and Kansas State to stop at 16.

B. Duke, UNC, and Virginia ponder the Texas and Oklahoma decisions and the obvious disadvantages of their current contract and jump with ESPN's blessing to another ESPN property where they make ESPN more money. Or, that a B1G seeing the SEC make a power move to 20 decides to lure PAC schools.

If any schools leave the PAC 12 or ACC we are looking at 3 conferences.

Who says you have to pay every school in each league the same amount? Why would television want to pay Rutgers the same amount as Ohio State? Missouri the same as Texas? etc...

Well, it's in the SEC and B1G's bylaws (other than the B1G buy in). And if we don't pay everyone the same conferences are doomed. Lose conference branding and two horrible things happen to profits. One, you lose the branding of SEC and B1G and PAC 12 all of which carry loyal followings based on those brands in addition to loyalty to one school, not to mention familiar returns on advertising. And two, you create an even smaller upper tier of bluebloods, which will tune out millions of followers.

So, networks are mostly pleased to stick with conferences, their branding, and their compilation of schools scheduled to play each other.

Therefore as long as conferences exist each member will receive the same share of media revenue.

(04-05-2022 03:56 PM)b2b Wrote:  Who says you have to pay every school in each league the same amount? Why would television want to pay Rutgers the same amount as Ohio State? Missouri the same as Texas? etc...

Why in the heck would ESPN want to get in the business of telling a conference "we want you to pay School A this much, pay School B that much and pay School C half the amount as School B?"

That's just asking for one, big, completely unnecessary headache.

Even if that's how ESPN values those particular schools, much easier to say this is what we're paying for the whole league — and let the conference office and school administrators sort out the split.

Interesting that we hear of Bob Bowlsby retiring just as we're starting to speculate in earnest what will be the next major move.

(04-05-2022 05:29 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Interesting that we hear of Bob Bowlsby retiring just as we're starting to speculate in earnest what will be the next major move.

Isn't it! Do Texas and Oklahoma leave early? I've been expecting 2023. Does Kansas leave? Is anyone else from the Old B12 headed anywhere? What would more instability do to worried parties in the ACC and PAC 12? I promise you that during the tourney wheels were turning everywhere.

(04-05-2022 05:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 05:29 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Interesting that we hear of Bob Bowlsby retiring just as we're starting to speculate in earnest what will be the next major move.

Isn't it! Do Texas and Oklahoma leave early? I've been expecting 2023. Does Kansas leave? Is anyone else from the Old B12 headed anywhere? What would more instability do to worried parties in the ACC and PAC 12? I promise you that during the tourney wheels were turning everywhere.

He just brought up the possibility of them signing a new GoR. Irrespective of whether these would survive changes in federal law, if there are any programs that wouldn't sign it then it can only mean that they have an option to move to a better conference.

Oh, and the Domers just scheduled their first FCS opponent, Tennessee State. That can't be an unimportant detail in the grand scheme of things.

(04-05-2022 06:06 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 05:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-05-2022 05:29 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Interesting that we hear of Bob Bowlsby retiring just as we're starting to speculate in earnest what will be the next major move.

Isn't it! Do Texas and Oklahoma leave early? I've been expecting 2023. Does Kansas leave? Is anyone else from the Old B12 headed anywhere? What would more instability do to worried parties in the ACC and PAC 12? I promise you that during the tourney wheels were turning everywhere.

He just brought up the possibility of them signing a new GoR. Irrespective of whether these would survive changes in federal law, if there are any programs that wouldn't sign it then it can only mean that they have an option to move to a better conference.

Oh, and the Domers just scheduled their first FCS opponent, Tennessee State. That can't be an unimportant detail in the grand scheme of things.

FCS games are easily bought out. So yeah, it just means they are keeping ease of scheduling changes in mind.