Perspective from the Big Ten and some much needed clarifications

[cymonw1980]

Yes... if you look at all games ISU played (including bowl game, B12 Champ game) ISU averaged 2.3M viewers. If you start comparing cross conferences it is fairest to eliminate post season (bowl, champ games) and focus only on conference games on espn/abc/fox/cbs/nbc. This way you get a better representation.

ISU overall: 2.3M
ISU minus bowl, B12 champ: 1.7M
ISU Conf Reg Season Only: 1.8M
ISU Conf Reg Season espn, fox, abc: 2.4M

I would focus on conference games on top networks from other teams and compare to the ~2.4M for ISU.

Here is a quick compare of the ISU vs. Wash (one of the top football brands on west coast):

I used Wash 2019 data since the 2020 data for washington was not really a fair compare... only played 4 games, average 1.5M on top tier networks (espn, fox, abc), and 1.3M overall in 2020. In 2019, the numbers are more comparable to ISU.. but still not as good. This looks at Conf games only for the compare.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Yes... if you look at all games ISU played (including bowl game, B12 Champ game) ISU averaged 2.3M viewers. If you start comparing cross conferences it is fairest to eliminate post season (bowl, champ games) and focus only on conference games on espn/abc/fox/cbs/nbc. This way you get a better representation.

ISU overall: 2.3M
ISU minus bowl, B12 champ: 1.7M
ISU Conf Reg Season Only: 1.8M
ISU Conf Reg Season espn, fox, abc: 2.4M

I would focus on conference games on top networks from other teams and compare to the ~2.4M for ISU.

The whole point of the original article was that OU and UT made up about 60 to 70% of the value of the entire Big 12, my point is simple, while they do bring in more value, looking at how they draw rating rise is a poor way of doing it. The rating for any team is higher just by being the prime time game no matter the time frame as opposed to being on BTN+ or FS1.
In the OP of the 38 games they looked at, 33 of those where on the primary network. They didn't break down the numbers to show how those other 5 games did ratings wise nor how OU and UT did on their 5 games that they were not on the primary network.
We know that the yearly game broadcast on the LHN did nothing ratings wise, why was it not included in the original article, because it was a bias article picking data that supported their case, while ignoring the data that did not.

 

[madguy30]

I think money gets talked about a lot when teams aren't living up to their expectations like Texas. They have this idea that if they could just make a little more money in the arms race it's going to get them a little better recruits, a little more money to hire better assistants, etc.

Good thoughts here...in short, they're not taking care of things internally, like the person who needs to buy new stuff to feel fulfilled, or reads every self help book under the sun without actually...helping themselves.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Here is a quick compare of the ISU vs. Wash (one of the top football brands on west coast):

I used Wash 2019 data since the 2020 data for washington was not really a fair compare... only played 4 games, average 1.5M on top tier networks (espn, fox, abc), and 1.3M overall in 2020. In 2019, the numbers are more comparable to ISU.. but still not as good. This looks at Conf games only for the compare.

View attachment 87608

Great information, now break down the games on FS1, For Wash. its 0.648 vs Wash. St, rivalry game on a Friday night no other competition that night. 0.73 vs. Ari and 0.323 vs Cal.
For ISU 0.487 vs Baylor, 0.346 vs TCU and finally the lowest 0.247 vs KU.

So the three ISU games are against 2 small private colleges with small fan bases and KU, who no one cares about in football, vs for Wash. a instate rivalry game and 2 games against larger public schools.
Really I am surprised the numbers are not larger in Wash. favor.

Its all about the platform the rest is just noise for about 90% of the schools.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Tell the truth, are you Kevin Warren?

If I was we would have handled the Covid situation better.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Thanks for sharing here. A question for you....

(EDIT: sorry this is so long!)

I see the SEC addition of OU, Texas as a phase one of a 10+ year plan. College athletics is changing and the SEC (in my humble opinion) is trying to take the lead role in defining the rules for the top level of college athletics (there is a power void in college athletics, sec is trying to step in and be THE decision maker).

I see the b10 as the last hope for college athletics as we know them. It would require partnerships with PAC/ACC/ND to build a coalition that defines the rules - transfer rules, salary caps (athletes will be paid soon based on the supreme court ruling it appears to be when, not if), TV revenue distributions (more even similar to NFL model vs. unique conf model), how many schools will be included in the "Power" divisions of the sport, etc.

I see two potential outcomes (obviously, may not be exactly these, but something along these lines):

1) The B10 could raid the PAC (add 6-10 AAU schools) and set up a scenario where SEC raids ACC in 10 yrs or so once GoR can be solved (adding schools like Clemson, FSU, VT, etc). I am sure clemson, fsu, others are watching the B12 battle closely for loop holes . Likely ends with one or two power divisions... could be one group of 24-32 teams (many b10, sec schools dropped and only blue bloods move to one, new super conference) or could be 2 power conferences with 40-48 teams all the current sec / b10 members (including ou/tex) plus 10-18 adds from the rest of the conferences. In this scenario, sec/b10 have a super league(s) that exclude most of the other power conf schools and establish a new tier (solid line vs. current dotted line) that does not allow others to compete - payment to players will eliminate any school in the rest of the sport from having any shot at competing.

2) The alternative is a partnership approach. In this model the b10 does not add schools (or maybe adds 2 at most to get to 16 and move to a 4x4 model which has some advantages) that creates balance across the conference landscape and minimizes potential for conference realignment in the future... They would need to partner with PAC/ACC/ND and retake control of the sport - working together to define the rules. They would then define salary caps, transfer rules, how TV money is distributed, etc. This would minimize incentive for ACC, PAC members to leave for other conferences. Also, if college TV money is distributed evenly with all conferences negotiating rights together experts have argued that pooling all conferences creates more value collectively than each conference individually negotiating rights - although sec, b10 would likely go down. If they do not do this, SEC just raids the conferences b10 does not. The net of this, we end up with a product much closer to what we have today and minimal reduction in membership moving forward...


I am not sure if either of these alternatives would include ISU (could easily be left out of both scenarios). But, if I look at the future of college athletics, there will need to be a leadership team that defines the rules that will significantly impact competitive balance moving forward. If players are paid more for example in conf A vs. conf B and are able to transfer freely, what stops a player from jumping schools every year to make more money? For example, if clemson is making $35M from ACC and SEC is paying out $80M, sec sets transfer and salary cap rules, Trevor Lawrence never picks clemson over bama, or if he does he transfers to bama as a sophmore. In this scenario, clemson is forced to leave the ACC... if SEC is able (may not be) to collect all of the brands not named osu, mich, psu those institutions will need to decide if they want to be like the ivy's - once winning at the highest level of college football, now not even playing the top teams in the sport.

If the B10 wants to define the rules of the sport and shape the future of college athletics, they will need to think much bigger than how do I maximize revenue for my members. Yes, revenue will be very important and is currently a key source of their power. But, I really believe they will need to be creative to out maneuver the SEC.

Is Kevin Warren the leader to this? Do you see the B10 taking this leadership role away from the SEC (scenario 2) or forming a partnership with them (scenario 1)?

Kevin Warren is not the leader to do this, delany for sure would try but warren is more of a follower of the university presidents then an innovator like delany was.

One quick caveat to this is that there will never be a "salary cap" because none of the schools want to call athletes employees because it opens up a massive can of worms. NIL still has a lot to figure out but there isn't a governing body to regulate it so its going to be chaos for the next 5 years at least.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Great information, now break down the games on FS1, For Wash. its 0.648 vs Wash. St, rivalry game on a Friday night no other competition that night. 0.73 vs. Ari and 0.323 vs Cal.
For ISU 0.487 vs Baylor, 0.346 vs TCU and finally the lowest 0.247 vs KU.

So the three ISU games are against 2 small private colleges with small fan bases and KU, who no one cares about in football, vs for Wash. a instate rivalry game and 2 games against larger public schools.
Really I am surprised the numbers are not larger in Wash. favor.

Its all about the platform the rest is just noise for about 90% of the schools.

Its also about if your school is ranked and playing another ranked team or if your school is a traditional power (unranked) playing a ranked team. Ranked teams playing each other draws a lot of casual fans and gamblers. A ranked ISU vs a ranked OkSt is going to draw alot more viewers regardless of channel then if both teams were unranked but played on a big network. To be fair networks know this and thats why you always see those traditional powers and ranked teams get the best tv slots. Now is it a little bit of a self fulling prophecy? Sure but media companies arent about to rock the boat and try something new with the amount of dollars at stake.

 

[cymonw1980]

Kevin Warren is not the leader to do this, delany for sure would try but warren is more of a follower of the university presidents then an innovator like delany was.

One quick caveat to this is that there will never be a "salary cap" because none of the schools want to call athletes employees because it opens up a massive can of worms. NIL still has a lot to figure out but there isn't a governing body to regulate it so its going to be chaos for the next 5 years at least.

That's unfortunate. I hope I am wrong... but if b10 does not step in to try to do what is best for CFB, SEC will continue to consolidate brands and eventually control the sport.

What happens in 10 years if SEC has consolidated 4-8 more key brands and has basically every team other than OSU that has a chance at the playoff? At that point SEC breaks away and big ten can play by themselves or the big 3 (osu, psu, mich) can join the rest of the brands in a super conference.

May seem crazy now... but if no one (b10 is only one who can do this) forces a single tv package for all power conferences with equal payouts across the entire P4 the pac and acc will fold just like the B12 (may take time, but it will happen).

 

[FriendlySpartan]

That's unfortunate. I hope I am wrong... but if b10 does not step in to try to do what is best for CFB, SEC will continue to consolidate brands and eventually control the sport.

What happens in 10 years if SEC has consolidated 4-8 more key brands and has basically every team other than OSU that has a chance at the playoff? At that point SEC breaks away and big ten can play by themselves or the big 3 (osu, psu, mich) can join the rest of the brands in a super conference.

May seem crazy now... but if no one (b10 is only one who can do this) forces a single tv package for all power conferences with equal payouts across the entire P4 the pac and acc will fold just like the B12 (may take time, but it will happen).

The big ten isn't going to just stay stagnant for the next ten years but I also don't think they will become the leaders of the other conferences. The big ten is a very wealthy and powerful conference, the nightmare scenario for CFB is they try to become the SEC north grab 6 other schools and then its just SEC vs Big ten. Also there is nothing to say that the SEC will even be that good 10 years from now with NIL. That money could very quickly push a lot of big ten schools above sec schools with on field talent. OSU has the number one QB recruit in 2022 who is reclassifying to 2021 just to get the millions of NIL money. Heck maybe the ivy's decide they want to be awesome at athletics again and their donors fund a bunch of 5 stars to Harvard and Yale.

 

[Mississippi Clone]

The big ten isn't going to just stay stagnant for the next ten years but I also don't think they will become the leaders of the other conferences. The big ten is a very wealthy and powerful conference, the nightmare scenario for CFB is they try to become the SEC north grab 6 other schools and then its just SEC vs Big ten. Also there is nothing to say that the SEC will even be that good 10 years from now with NIL. That money could very quickly push a lot of big ten schools above sec schools with on field talent. OSU has the number one QB recruit in 2022 who is reclassifying to 2021 just to get the millions of NIL money. Heck maybe the ivy's decide they want to be awesome at athletics again and their donors fund a bunch of 5 stars to Harvard and Yale.

lol I never thought of that, but wouldn't that be interesting/funny: Harvard with the number 1 recruiting class.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

The big ten isn't going to just stay stagnant for the next ten years but I also don't think they will become the leaders of the other conferences. The big ten is a very wealthy and powerful conference, the nightmare scenario for CFB is they try to become the SEC north grab 6 other schools and then its just SEC vs Big ten. Also there is nothing to say that the SEC will even be that good 10 years from now with NIL. That money could very quickly push a lot of big ten schools above sec schools with on field talent. OSU has the number one QB recruit in 2022 who is reclassifying to 2021 just to get the millions of NIL money. Heck maybe the ivy's decide they want to be awesome at athletics again and their donors fund a bunch of 5 stars to Harvard and Yale.

This is correct, and right now we are playing for time and money until the Big 10, Pac 12 and Fox decide how they are going to counter the moves that the SEC made.

Fox has two choices here that I can see, One is follow what the SEC take the six best teams from the Pac 12 and fold them into a 20 team Big 10, but do the Pac 12 teams want this travel wise and the rest of it. If this would happen then the remaining teams are then grouped with the remaining Big 12 teams to form a counter to the ACC. So you have Big 10 vs SEC and new league vs ACC one owned and controlled by Fox and the other ESPN.

The 2nd option is to enlarge the Pac 12 by 4 schools and the Big 10 by 2. Two strong leagues for FOX to counter the SEC and ACC, but no league as strong as the SEC. This works out best geography wise for both the Big 10, and the Pac 12 teams. At worst for the Pac. 12 they go to the central time zone, but are not playing games in eastern time zone.

The big 12 right now is waiting for Fox and those to league to decide what they are going to do, before this league does anything.

There is a 3rd option, neither the Big 10 nor Pac 12 expand, but stay put thereby forcing the remaining Big 12 teams to bring in teams from the AAC and MW and try to make a go of it. This is the worst outcome for ISU.

 

[cymonw1980]

The big ten isn't going to just stay stagnant for the next ten years but I also don't think they will become the leaders of the other conferences. The big ten is a very wealthy and powerful conference, the nightmare scenario for CFB is they try to become the SEC north grab 6 other schools and then its just SEC vs Big ten. Also there is nothing to say that the SEC will even be that good 10 years from now with NIL. That money could very quickly push a lot of big ten schools above sec schools with on field talent. OSU has the number one QB recruit in 2022 who is reclassifying to 2021 just to get the millions of NIL money. Heck maybe the ivy's decide they want to be awesome at athletics again and their donors fund a bunch of 5 stars to Harvard and Yale.

i guess we will see what happens... when do teams in the b10 not named OSU, Mich, PSU start paying players $1M? There are about to be (with ou and tx) 7-8 teams in the SEC that will be at a similar level to OSU/Mich/PSU. Yes, b10 prints money today and has tons of power. however, the SEC is catching up to the b10 in the new deal (and adding tx, ou will help them). So, even with the big 10 media rights advantage, teams like tex, texas a&m were making more than osu. With the addition of 2 more brands and new media deals coming (i am sure the espn deal gets sweeter for the sec once the b12 blows up) they will be nearly on par (may even pass?) the big 10 deal.

If the sec starts adding more brands (espn owns sec/acc, let's say they want to consolidate the acc brands next? b12 is just a practice round). If (big if) ND, Clem, FSU, UNC and say USC and maybe miami? or VT? join the sec they would have about 12-14 brands nearly at the level of b10's top 3. At that point, b10 will have 3 carrying 11, sec will have 12-14 carrying 6-8. Money could go against the b10 at that point. If that happens, osu, psu, mich group will wake up and find out the money they are subsidizing the others with is impacting their ability to compete against the first super conference in college sports.

I believe b10 has all the power now. But if they let sec add the key football brands that are left it would be bad.

I believe their choice is, consolidate brands or create equity between the power leagues. If they do neither I think they could end up in trouble. Yes OSU, Mich, PSU are some of the biggest brands out there. But if its 14 brands vs. 3 they will eventually lose out. Right now there is one school that matters in the playoffs in the b10 and 3 major brands on par with the top 20 or so brands in the sport. SEC has about 8. give them 6 more doesn't matter how much osu loves purdue.... they either leave the big 10 or become the ivy league.

I agree - If big 10 decides to just go 16 vs. 16 (or 20 vs. 20) with the sec that is the nightmare scenario for CFB as basically every other non-blue blood from every other league is done.

I would argue though, at that point espn will find out how valuable cfb is without anyone outside of those 32 caring. The 8 teams left out in this deal is not a big issue. That is fare. But it is not just the 8 teams from the former Big 12... it is all of the others... There are 130 schools in FBS. All of those fans tune in to watch cfb today. If they are cut out of a super league they will no longer care nearly as much and all ratings will suffer. No, ISU does not have as many eyeballs on them as osu. But how many fans of other FBS schools watch OSU today that won't when they are eleminated? Who watches the brands? The people that hate them... I hate osu, so I would tune in anytime they have a close game to cheer against them. now... just won't watch any more. I would argue a significant number of fans tuning into the "blue blood" games are fans of the 98 getting left out. Eliminate them at your own risk.

If b10 is a leader they stand up to sec/espn and step into the void that is the leadership position in CFB. Otherwise it goes away.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

i guess we will see what happens... when do teams in the b10 not named OSU, Mich, PSU start paying players $1M? There are about to be (with ou and tx) 7-8 teams in the SEC that will be at a similar level to OSU/Mich/PSU. Yes, b10 prints money today and has tons of power. however, the SEC is catching up to the b10 in the new deal (and adding tx, ou will help them). So, even with the big 10 media rights advantage, teams like tex, texas a&m were making more than osu. With the addition of 2 more brands and new media deals coming (i am sure the espn deal gets sweeter for the sec once the b12 blows up) they will be nearly on par (may even pass?) the big 10 deal.

If the sec starts adding more brands (espn owns sec/acc, let's say they want to consolidate the acc brands next? b12 is just a practice round). If (big if) ND, Clem, FSU, UNC and say USC and maybe miami? or VT? join the sec they would have about 12-14 brands nearly at the level of b10's top 3. At that point, b10 will have 3 carrying 11, sec will have 12-14 carrying 6-8. Money could go against the b10 at that point. If that happens, osu, psu, mich group will wake up and find out the money they are subsidizing the others with is impacting their ability to compete against the first super conference in college sports.

I believe b10 has all the power now. But if they let sec add the key football brands that are left it would be bad.

I believe their choice is, consolidate brands or create equity between the power leagues. If they do neither I think they could end up in trouble. Yes OSU, Mich, PSU are some of the biggest brands out there. But if its 14 brands vs. 3 they will eventually lose out. Right now there is one school that matters in the playoffs in the b10 and 3 major brands on par with the top 20 or so brands in the sport. SEC has about 8. give them 6 more doesn't matter how much osu loves purdue.... they either leave the big 10 or become the ivy league.

I agree - If big 10 decides to just go 16 vs. 16 (or 20 vs. 20) with the sec that is the nightmare scenario for CFB as basically every other non-blue blood from every other league is done.

I would argue though, at that point espn will find out how valuable cfb is without anyone outside of those 32 caring. The 8 teams left out in this deal is not a big issue. That is fare. But it is not just the 8 teams from the former Big 12... it is all of the others... There are 130 schools in FBS. All of those fans tune in to watch cfb today. If they are cut out of a super league they will no longer care nearly as much and all ratings will suffer. No, ISU does not have as many eyeballs on them as osu. But how many fans of other FBS schools watch OSU today that won't when they are eleminated? Who watches the brands? The people that hate them... I hate osu, so I would tune in anytime they have a close game to cheer against them. now... just won't watch any more. I would argue a significant number of fans tuning into the "blue blood" games are fans of the 98 getting left out. Eliminate them at your own risk.

If b10 is a leader they stand up to sec/espn and step into the void that is the leadership position in CFB. Otherwise it goes away.

I think you are misunderstanding a key factor in NLI which is that schools cannot pay the players. It doesnt matter if Alabama gets a billion dollars a year in rights deals they cant pay the players a cent. They can give them amazing facilities and living conditions but not actual money. Only companies can give out the sponsorships and while nike and adidas will always try to target the best athletes nationally donors are the real people funding NIL. The big ten has far more megadonors then the SEC by an insane amount. Those are the people that are going to be paying players the mega bucks to play for their universities.

 

[CyrideAllstar]

Yes.. the sport has lost value in parts of the country over the decades. Once teams like Army, Navy, Yale, Harvard ran the sport... Now none of those teams have a shot to compete for titles - Ivy's don't even play against the top tier of teams anymore.

I used to live in NY/Conn area - there is no one talking about college football ever. No one cares. It is a professional market only. I predict the same will happen to many other regions and fan bases if other schools are left behind. If they move to a "Power 32" league for example that only includes the top blue bloods and many other schools are cut these schools will still have athletics but it will be kind of like the gap between the Ivy's and the P5 today... they will no longer play each other and college football will suffer.

If ISU is cut out, I will still watch and cheer for my Cyclones but it won't be the appointment TV it is today (likely will not even be on TV much). More importantly, I will not watch the rest of college football. Do they care about losing me or the collective fan bases of the 8 teams being left behind? Probably not. But when the same happens to the ACC and PAC in the next 10 yrs (+/-) it could start to have a bigger impact on the popularity of the sport then some experts may realize.

Today, college football is a national pastime with many tuning in to see what is happening across the country. The 12 team playoff created an opportunity to make the product even better. Realignment could reduce the sport to regional interest with much more attention paid to professional teams in markets and fan bases that are excluded.

Maybe if football pulls back we can get into soccer and actually competing in world cups.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Maybe if football pulls back we can get into soccer and actually competing in world cups.

This is my hope. I honestly think with how some of the best atheltes get turned into running backs that with how disposable RB's are in the nfl some of these athletes have to consider other sports right? Could be a huge boon for soccer or baseball.

 

[OnlyCyclones]

I’m probably

At michigan state they made decisions to make the game day experience more "family friendly". The closest areas around the field they made alcohol free and they actually heavily enforce this even though open intox is allowed on campus on game days. Also (this is being changed this year i believe) the student sections don't have assigned seating so alot of students dont even bother to show up to games against lesser teams because they dont want to sit in the nose bleeds to watch sparty vs illinois. There are some other things like concession prices and agressive searches on entry for students that really make it difficult to draw fans when the team is doing poorly or if we are playing a bad opponent.

Michigan's game experience is pretty awesome but most of the non student section tickets go to more affluent people who tend to not cheer as aggressively. Also the sheer size of the stadium and the way it is shaped allows most of the noise to escape. There are always over 110K people at every game but it never sounds very loud on the field.

I’m probably opening a whole new can of worms in this thread, but I’m fascinated by this. ISU has leaned heavily into the family friendly atmosphere idea. Some will disagree but I think it has been really successful. No alcohol is sold at games and the north end zone remains as hillsides mostly to allow young families a price point and an opportunity to attend games. I grew up attending games from the north hillsides, and I think it helped hook me into my fandom. I can only confirm this to about 2010 or so, but our students don’t have assigned seating for most* football or basketball games either.

*Assigned seating will sometimes be used for basketball games expected to have exceptional demand. KU or Iowa if they are good.

Now I really want to attend some MSU games and compare and contrast.

 

[t-noah]

I think you are misunderstanding a key factor in NLI which is that schools cannot pay the players. It doesnt matter if Alabama gets a billion dollars a year in rights deals they cant pay the players a cent. They can give them amazing facilities and living conditions but not actual money. Only companies can give out the sponsorships and while nike and adidas will always try to target the best athletes nationally donors are the real people funding NIL. The big ten has far more megadonors then the SEC by an insane amount. Those are the people that are going to be paying players the mega bucks to play for their universities.

You may be still missing the point. OK yes the BIG is in a good position, they have the academics, the donors, they can maybe compete with the SEC.

Do they want to let SEC dictate terms? Do they really want it to come to that? Do they want to see a wholly different college football landscape than what is essentially here now?

 

[t-noah]

Kevin Warren is not the leader to do this, delany for sure would try but warren is more of a follower of the university presidents then an innovator like delany was.

One quick caveat to this is that there will never be a "salary cap" because none of the schools want to call athletes employees because it opens up a massive can of worms. NIL still has a lot to figure out but there isn't a governing body to regulate it so its going to be chaos for the next 5 years at least.

That's unfortunate. I hope I am wrong... but if b10 does not step in to try to do what is best for CFB, SEC will continue to consolidate brands and eventually control the sport.

What happens in 10 years if SEC has consolidated 4-8 more key brands and has basically every team other than OSU that has a chance at the playoff? At that point SEC breaks away and big ten can play by themselves or the big 3 (osu, psu, mich) can join the rest of the brands in a super conference.

May seem crazy now... but if no one (b10 is only one who can do this) forces a single tv package for all power conferences with equal payouts across the entire P4 the pac and acc will fold just like the B12 (may take time, but it will happen).

Kevin Warren will be as strong or as weak as the rest of the BIG (with all its resources) want him to be.

 

[Yellow Snow]

You may be still missing the point. OK yes the BIG is in a good position, they have the academics, the donors, they can maybe compete with the SEC.

Do they want to let SEC dictate terms? Do they really want it to come to that? Do they want to see a wholly different college football landscape than what is essentially here now?

They may not want any of that. In fact they probably don't. But what are they supposed to do about it?

With the currently unfolding ******** happening regarding "conference/ESPN" expansion, they shouldn't touch anything with a ten foot pole any time soon. I know I wouldn't.

Who is going to risk trying to leave a conference for a different one for ANY reason at this point in time? They'll wait out the carnage and see what shakes out. IMO of course.

 

[t-noah]

They may not want any of that. In fact they probably don't. But what are they supposed to do about it?

With the currently unfolding ******** happening regarding "conference/ESPN" expansion, they shouldn't touch anything with a ten foot pole any time soon. I know I wouldn't.

Who is going to risk trying to leave a conference for a different one for ANY reason at this point in time? They'll wait out the carnage and see what shakes out. IMO of course.

They have the power to make this go as they want (with the PAC and to a lesser extent, ACC). IMO they'd be foolish to stand pat (for a few years OK maybe).

They (teams) won't be leaving their conference, just making it stronger. And if the BIG consults with the PAC and ACC, they (not the SEC) dictate terms.