I think the difficult part would be any network agreeing to pay 50-60mil per year just for USC. Their ratings (and performance) lately make that a very dubious proposition. Any less then that and they might as well stay in the Pac12.
Big 12 Expansion (new thread)
- Thread starter Gilbyone
- Start date
I agree with alot of this but a school like USC would never align themselves with the SEC. What many people forget is that these decisions are made by university presidents/boards who look at a lot of other things besides football when determining who their schools are associated with.
But per school payout is not going to be the key question. For the SEC and Big it will be how many teams in a league are needed to keep it rolling. The short answer is maybe nobody short of ND increase per team payout, and most current BIG and SEC schools are way on the wrong side of the per team value equation and are being carried by a handful of huge names.
But what maximizes for the BIG and SEC is getting to X number of teams in a division. I think that is 45-60. But rather than expand and probably take on teams that lower per team payout, better to work out agreements with the other leagues for scheduling, playoff, etc.
Expansion doesn’t make sense for BIG and SEC (short of a couple options) but neither does EXCLUSION. Keep a big, 45-60 team division with national exposure and interest, maintain a big $ advantage over the other conferences and have no financial responsibility for them. The networks also do not want to see exclusion. The networks do not look at or give a crap about payout per school. That is meaningless to them. For them it is about marginal profit over alternative programming. CFB of any of the current P5 fit that bill, but if teams are relegated, that probably plummets the calue of that programming.
We may see some realignment, but I do t see major expansion in Big 10 or SEC. I see deals on playoff expansion that include the ACC, Big 12 and PAC.
People need to dump the per team payout as having any effect on who is part of an exclusive league. It effects conference expansion, but not who is in a “division.” An exclusive League with many current P5 teams relegated out of the club is not an advantage to the customer in this relationship, who are the networks.
Not to mention IF there were to be a 32 ish team league, this could be very valuable, but ultimately getting rights to that will be very expensive when it goes to market.
I see no chance any tier other than the best is economically viable. This basically removes the one differentiation from the NFL that makes it valuable - a huge national division with regional conferences/divisions. A small elite league of similar size to the NFL wipes out it’s NFL product differentiation. Now it’s just the NFL with less talent. The other levels probably all start shifting closer to FCS in value and interest. A “B” league team isn’t probably getting 2 million viewers.
I heard the same from some prominent BIG people for 10 years in regard to UT to SEC.
College athletics increasingly important in product differentiation as on-campus education becomes a luxury good. And USC has never shared Berkeley’s draconian approach to maintaining academic branding. And they are in a conference with Oregon St, and WSU, ASU after all. In the news jumping the gun on pay to play too
Going to the Big with 8 other Pac institutions makes more sense on nearly every level, and better for the sport, but if that’s off the table, snd the SEC separates further as the top level of play, it wouldn’t be shocking imo
We obv know different people becuase not only did I never hear anyone doubt that texas would go to the SEC but almost everyone I know thinks that Texas is a better fit in the SEC. Football is life in that state.
The current setup is very regional. That’s why you have people starting boycott threads when the clear two best teams matchup in the title game but from same conference
It needs to go more national. The ratings better if people in the Midwest or south care more about the Pac12 teams for example. You do that with a similar structure as NFL- two conferences, smaller divisions the old conference.
Imo the main differentiation with the NFL is how people become fans. That’s how you hsve millions supporting an inferior product in which coaches and athletic budgets already making huge money.
Even if paid, it’s not comparable to all these failed low paying leagues or minors. Pay isn’t the ris Imo. It’s competitive integrity that comes with unregulated pay and transfer portal. The NFL would be far less popular if no salary cap, under table payment widespread, and guys always on one year contracts able to sitout and leave for another team
Well you are a MSU guy.
Let’s put it this way, it’s not surprising the BIG was scrambling after OUT and their response needing to be to cost the Alliance millions and stall on CFP.
Warren has been in catchup mode for 6 months
Actually 100% agree on this. That move blindsided just about everyone outside of the SEC. The big ten has absolutely no response to it which is probably part of the reason they really don't want anymore expansion or change. However the other reason they don't want things to change is that regardless of what ESPN says the Big Ten crushed everyone in ratings this year. 9/13 weeks the BIG had the top rated game or was in a few 100K of the top rated game. Also had the highest regular season game at 15mil which was 5mil higher then the second highest rated game.
The SEC dominates on the field but as far as eyeballs are concerned they aren't ahead at all and might be behind. Plus an all SEC championship just had the lowest ratings of all time (except for the covid year).
Going indy for USC only works if their other programs land in the WCC and accept a level of devaluing those programs. Otherwise, it will never happen.
The Texas to SEC dynamic drastically changed when President Bill Powers and AD DeLoss Dodds were cycled out. Those two were anti-SEC to the max. Powers badly wanted to go to the P12 but Dodds cut the LHN deal with ESPN to keep UT in the B12 and that long term LHN deal thru 2031 is a big reason why UT is now going to ESPN/SEC. ESPN wants to decommission LHN ASAP and UT wants to continue getting the extra T3 LHN proceeds. UT to the SEC solves both issues.
OU's expiring T3 deal with a financially unstable Bally Sports also had OU in panic mode for their future T3 revenue streams and ESPN exploited that panic before ESPN's exclusive negotiating window with the B12 expired. And ESPN obviously didn't want the B12 deal with OU/UT being formally bid on by Fox, NBC, CBS, Amazon, etc. before that B12's exclusive negotiating window with ESPN closed.
Yes people do ultimately make the decision but you know at UT there are a lot of cooks in the kitchen.
The biggest change was A&M using the SEC to close the gap. The state of Texas had become SEC. Many influential people at both UT and OU, particularly OU, accepted that.
Boren had been tipping their hand for nearly a decade. OU was leaving.
Would it even be a devaluing of the basketball brand at this point? The PAC12 is actually having a decent year compared to the last few, in that it has 3 teams nationally ranked. And the WCC is still nearly as well regarded. Gonzaga alone gets nearly as much attention as the PAC12 as a whole
OU certainly has not been impacted by aggy's move to the SEC and UT's demise has been more self inflicted than anything having to do with aggy and the SEC. aggy has had one NY6 bowl appearance since joining the SEC and that was with B12 recruits.
The moves of OU and UT to the SEC are more a function of a power play by ESPN to acquire 100% of their rights before getting into a bidding war with other networks and tech streamers. Not much of anything to do with aggy.
Agree, but if UT didn't have all their ego-driven angst about TAMU et al, they may not have jumped. ESPN handed them the oar, but UT did their own rowing.
OU was all about FOMO; didn't want to be left behind.
In 5 or 10 years the college athletics environment could look entirely different. The NCAA may not exist, we may just have specific sport governing bodies. Olympic sports could evolve out of athletic departments and take more of a Club Sports governance model.
I would be really surprised if USC couldn't find a home for sports other than FB in WCC or MWC.
But I agree being an independent is probably their 3rd option. Options 1&2 are a group of 4-6 Pac12 schools approaching Big10 or SEC if the upcoming Pac12 media rights negotiations don't bump up their initial year payouts/school to $45M ish.
I think this may have been true in the past but Nebraska being admitted to the Big Ten was all about football. They snuck in before Nebraska was kicked out of the AAU to maintain a facade that other things mattered but it was all about football, 100%.
Also, Texas and Oklahoma moving to the SEC is all about football.
Nebraska was about football but it was a hard sell for university presidents. Considering since they joined they have dropped from being ranked 100 (not that big of an outlier for the rest of the BIG) to 136 they are now an anchor for academic big ten rankings. Next lowest is a tie with sparty and Iowa at 83. That’s a big drop off that matters to university presidents.
To quote varsity blues “in texas football is life” so it’s not surprising they would make the move and OK is also much more SEC then a lot of other schools.
Culturally, Oklahoma does fit in with the SEC. We'll see how they like it there. TBH, depending upon which face Texas decides to show, they can fit in (and ruin) pretty much any conference.
While I have only heard about texas being a **** I’m going to laugh when they get the Nebraska treatment of getting slapped down when they step out of line. All texas does is ensure that the SEC has another mediocre team. Either from texas itself or from texas taking another schools point.
