Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[FinalFourCy]

Indiana is where they are because A) they have a great coach, and B) they have billionaire sports fan alums that have given a ton of Over-The-Top NIL.

MAC schools could do what Indiana did if they had a Mark Cuban

If that MAC school could also move to P2, perhaps

Unfortunately way too much weight is already given to playing in the P2

We’re also diminishing the elite job by the IU staff. It wasn’t that expensive of a roster, particularly in 2024. How did their roster cost compared to the other playoff teams? Elite player evaluation, coaching, and the benefit of the doubt of playing in the P2

 

[FinalFourCy]

Sure it is to ESPN's sole benefit as it relates to CFB. They and Fox control the sport to the point they currently get a market discount on P4 CFB rights and then inexplicably have the right to sublicense rights as they see fit with the CFP being the most glaring fiasco. That doesn't happen with the NBA and NFL.

And streamers have already made big bets on full season inventory with the NBA's Prime and Peacock deals and the NFL's TNF package with Prime. If given a fair shot at P4 CFB inventory, Prime, Peacock, Paramount all would likely bid on full season inventory.

They don’t get a market discount as much as they are the market.

ESPN’s ability to sell the games is a big factor in their bids. Even more so in future bids.

I hate to break it to you, but for schools to make (more) money the buyers of their rights need to make (more) money

 

[Al_4_State]

If that MAC school could also move to P2, perhaps

Unfortunately way too much weight is already given to playing in the P2

We’re also diminishing the elite job by the IU staff. It wasn’t that expensive of a roster, particularly in 2024. How did their roster cost compared to the other playoff teams? Elite player evaluation, coaching, and the benefit of the doubt of playing in the P2

As long as there's a G6 spot in the playoff, what I said stands. If a multi-billionaire was a fan of a mid-major they could absolutely prop them up in spite of the smaller TV pay off.

Yes, elite coaching matters too. Unlimited funds can help procure an elite coach.

I'm just saying that access to insane money can allow an also-ran to quickly climb the ladder if they make good decisions with that money.

 

[FinalFourCy]

As long as there's a G6 spot in the playoff, what I said stands. If a multi-billionaire was a fan of a mid-major they could absolutely prop them up in spite of the smaller TV pay off.

Yes, elite coaching matters too. Unlimited funds can help procure an elite coach.

I'm just saying that access to insane money can allow an also-ran to quickly climb the ladder if they make good decisions with that money.

I agree with your overall point on money being the ultimate equalizer, but I don’t see IU as the best example.

What you said has always been true. As long as there has been access, any G6 with elite coaching and evaluation “could” win the title. Particularly if backed by a billionaire that helps them compete in arms race.

It’s even more true now. A fact that we should be celebrating. Pay to play is a parity driver, true.

But Indiana’s recent success is not because of disproportionate funding to competition. It was coaching and evaluation, luck, and the P2 benefit

ASU likely is in the title game with similar P2 benefit gaining them the 3 seed.

 

[isucy86]

Indiana has money and a great coach—they’ll sustain success. They’re also a unicorn, and the suggestion that a super league isn’t the inevitable endpoint of everything we’ve argued about over 1,829 pages because there are other Indianas out there is belied by all evidence in the player-compensation era

We'll see if they sustain their current levels. Over long haul, at max, I see IU competing at level that Iowa did under Hayden Fry or Whisky under Barry Alvarez.

 

[cykadelic2]

They don’t get a market discount as much as they are the market. ESPN’s ability to sell the games is a big factor in their bids. Even more so in future bids.

I hate to break it to you, but for schools to make (more) money the buyers of their rights need to make (more) money

Yeah, since ESPN/Fox currently are the market, they get a huge a market discount.

And CFB shouldn't care about providing ESPN a discounted market contract that enables ESPN to make more money, especially in the current environment where ESPN/Fox control the sport to their financial benefit.

 

[FinalFourCy]

We'll see if they sustain their current levels. Over long haul, at max, I see IU competing at level that Iowa did under Hayden Fry or Whisky under Barry Alvarez.

Given the level of last two years, of course it will be difficult to sustain.

Even in the era of no parity, very very few schools maintained such a level of CFP and title level. Bama under Saban most recently being one of the bigger historical outliers

With more parity from pay to play, it’s even less likely for any program. I doubt even the UGa, Bama, UT types can sustain this level for more than a few years

 

[FinalFourCy]

Yeah, since ESPN/Fox currently are the market, they get a huge a market discount.

And CFB shouldn't care about providing ESPN a discounted market contract that enables ESPN to make more money, especially in the current environment where ESPN/Fox control the sport to their financial benefit.

Welcome to illiquid markets.

CFB doesn’t care about providing espn a discount. Factions care about only their bottom line and making more than others, which has benefited ESPN

ESPN having the ability to make money off the rights whether via ads or reselling, helps CFB make more money off the rights

The issue isn’t with there being a middle man, in this case ESPN. It’s in agreeing to an a more illiquid market

Let’s hope the main reason why Yormark is getting PE involved with the Big 12 is to mitigate such market inefficiencies

 

[Al_4_State]

I agree with your overall point on money being the ultimate equalizer, but I don’t see IU as the best example.

What you said has always been true. As long as there has been access, any G6 with elite coaching and evaluation “could” win the title. Particularly if backed by a billionaire that helps them compete in arms race.

It’s even more true now. A fact that we should be celebrating. Pay to play is a parity driver, true.

But Indiana’s recent success is not because of disproportionate funding to competition. It was coaching and evaluation, luck, and the P2 benefit

ASU likely is in the title game with similar P2 benefit gaining them the 3 seed.

It’s more true now because you can openly buy rosters.

I don’t think the Big 10 has much to do with Indiana’s success. If you put Curt Cignetti in Lubbock he’s winning natties.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

I was responding to your comment regarding the importance or significance of a larger stadium. As several others point out, stadium size and attendance means nothing.

I just stated they have a smaller stadium, and were at capacity almost last year. So unless they are going to add on, then they are going to average less than !SU each game.
I was only stating the size of their stadium, nothing more.

They had great media numbers last season, but I tend to think that was because of their situation more than anything else. Long time loser making good, draws in the average fan, it does not mean they have a hard core football fan base. Let's see how they do the next few years to determine that.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

Yep that’s the same for every conference the part is that the 30% can be in flux. Penn State had an awful year and if it wasn’t for their cake schedule this year would continue to be a dumpster fire. They go down, Indiana goes up.

A lot of this is cyclical just some blue bloods have a much higher floor when they are down as long as they don’t stay down too long

BS, Penn State had an awful year for Penn State, but five years ago Indiana would have taken 7 wins and a bowl game in a NY minute.
Campbell is a very good coach, and the difference between him and Franklin is Campbell will beat the top 10 teams while Franklin didn't. Penn State will be fine because they are Penn State, and have the staying power that few school have.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

Given the level of last two years, of course it will be difficult to sustain.

Even in the era of no parity, very very few schools maintained such a level of CFP and title level. Bama under Saban most recently being one of the bigger historical outliers

With more parity from pay to play, it’s even less likely for any program. I doubt even the UGa, Bama, UT types can sustain this level for more than a few years

Indiana's ability to maintain this is directly tied to nailing the hire after Cignetti retires. He's 64 so that isn't too far off on the horizon at this point.

They'll likely never be as bad as they were but the new staff is going to determine the ceiling.

 

[isucy86]

I’ve said it for a couple years but not with a high degree of confidence but I also think it’s possible that realignment chills for a bit. Unless the big12 and ACC do some kind of merger with the current media deals it doesn’t make a ton of sense to add anyone outside of ND.

UNC and Miami are really the only options out there but UNC is kinda a joke right now and would have to take a deal where their media payout is basically the same as it is now. Might have a little stability but that’s kinda it and very little upside for the big ten (doubt SEC is an option)

IMO the realignment choices run deeper because adding populous territory is just-as or more important than adding brand names. Also, adding fan bases will grow in importance as most live sporting events are moved behind a paywall

Feel like the Big 10/SEC will fight for the following schools: ND, UVA, UNC, FSU, Miami.

And depending where those 5 schools drop, there is a 2nd tier that are 100% takes if they replace or compliment the top 5. Those would be:

• Big10- GT, Stanford(pair w ND), Duke (if miss on UNC).
• SEC- NCST (if miss on UNC), VT (if miss on UVA)

Then there is the "Go West" desire.

• The Big10 will want 6 former Pac12 schools. Stanford is a given if ND comes on board. Then who does TV value more? Utah or ASU.
• Depending on SEC adds from the "top 5", they too could also look West and add: KU (hoops blue blood), ISU, ASU, UU. Also Clemson if they only add a couple schools from Top 5.

In the end, the TV folks will be very happy with a P2 that's 44-48 teams. And it will make sense for the current Big10 & SEC schools because most of the adds will be willing to come onboard at 70% shares for 10-20 years. Maybe permanently.

 

[isucy86]

Given the level of last two years, of course it will be difficult to sustain.

Even in the era of no parity, very very few schools maintained such a level of CFP and title level. Bama under Saban most recently being one of the bigger historical outliers

With more parity from pay to play, it’s even less likely for any program. I doubt even the UGa, Bama, UT types can sustain this level for more than a few years

I probably wasn't clear, but I consider IU sustaining as achieving what Fry & Alvarez did over a 15 year period.

I went to grad school at IU and the football program has historically been an afterthought for fans. Drawing 35k fans was a battle. It's going to take more than 3-5 years of great football to create fans-for-life among Hoosier faithful.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Indiana's ability to maintain this is directly tied to nailing the hire after Cignetti retires. He's 64 so that isn't too far off on the horizon at this point.

They'll likely never be as bad as they were but the new staff is going to determine the ceiling.

Wouldn’t you short them regardless?

Sustaining their current level has been very unlikely throughout history of the sport, and increased parity only makes it more difficult

 

[FinalFourCy]

I probably wasn't clear, but I consider IU sustaining as achieving what Fry & Alvarez did over a 15 year period.

I went to grad school at IU and the football program has historically been an afterthought for fans. Drawing 35k fans was a battle. It's going to take more than 3-5 years of great football to create fans-for-life among Hoosier faithful.

Are you asking whether they can consistently draw sellouts? Because fan attendance isn’t material to success with a P2 paycheck

I think they can average 9+ wins and compete for berths as long as they have this level of coaching

 

[1UNI2ISU]

Wouldn’t you short them regardless?

Sustaining their current level has been very unlikely throughout history of the sport, and increased parity only makes it more difficult

If you're asking if I think they go 15-0 every year? Of course not.

Can they be consistently in the Big Ten title picture and in the playoff consistently? Absoloutely.

 

[FinalFourCy]

I’ve said it for a couple years but not with a high degree of confidence but I also think it’s possible that realignment chills for a bit. Unless the big12 and ACC do some kind of merger with the current media deals it doesn’t make a ton of sense to add anyone outside of ND.

UNC and Miami are really the only options out there but UNC is kinda a joke right now and would have to take a deal where their media payout is basically the same as it is now. Might have a little stability but that’s kinda it and very little upside for the big ten (doubt SEC is an option)

This is as likely to age as well as most of your BIG and realignment predictions

Before 2032 there will very likely be more announced moves. I’m guessing by summer 2028.

It’s more true now because you can openly buy rosters.

I don’t think the Big 10 has much to do with Indiana’s success. If you put Curt Cignetti in Lubbock he’s winning natties.

The fact you can now buy players making things more accessible, and IU winning, isn’t that much of a causative relationship.

You put Cignetti at ISU and he’s winning a title. We could afford that JMU ladened class. If he had CMC’s roster of last two years he’s at least making the CFP, assuming equal luck on health etc as he’s had at IU

 

[isucy86]

Are you asking whether they can consistently draw sellouts? Because fan attendance isn’t material to success with a P2 paycheck

I think they can average 9+ wins and compete for berths as long as they have this level of coaching

No I'm not talking sellouts vs. Big10 money.

I am saying IU has a lot of bandwagon football fans because of the last 2 years. If Cignetti starts going 8-4, some of those fans go away. And if 6 years from now the Hoosiers are a 6-6 type team, they'll struggle to attract 40k fans.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

This is as likely to age as well as most of your BIG and realignment predictions

Before 2032 there will very likely be more announced moves. I’m guessing by summer 2028.

The fact you can now buy players making things more accessible, and IU winning, isn’t that much of a causative relationship.

You put Cignetti at ISU and he’s winning a title. We could afford that JMU ladened class. If he had CMC’s roster of last two years he’s at least making the CFP, assuming equal luck on health etc as he’s had at IU

Outside of the Cali schools move I’ve been pretty accurate on here but I did say not a high degree of confidence on this one.

I’d be shocked if any were announced in 2028 like you are thinking