Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,985
20,912
113
I am curious why the PAC isn’t in a better position? They still have UW and Oregon. Two almost flagship level schools. Big12 has? OSU and KU for bball? Is it it just strength in numbers?
Last year’s viewership among remaining Big 12 and PAC 12 schools less OUT:
1. Oregon
2. OKie St
3. ISU
4. Baylor

So that would be why for starters.
 

1776

Active Member
May 7, 2020
645
35
28
57
As someone mentioned before, if I was an ISU fan I would want Oregon and Washington to go to the Big10. This would ensure that the Pac12 implodes and gives the Big12 the best chance of getting the four corners. As long as Oregon and Washington are in the Pac12, they still have a pulse
 

StateThrowdown

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2008
365
344
63
Jasper County
Last year’s viewership among remaining Big 12 and PAC 12 schools less OUT:
1. Oregon
2. OKie St
3. ISU
4. Baylor

So that would be why for starters.
This is what I don’t understand. People say “Iowa State adds no value” but these stats clearly say otherwise. This isn’t a case of potential eyeballs, these are the numbers of people actually watching the damn games!

The same thing kind of showed when the Rams moved out of St. Louis. Ratings were way down (at least at first, I’m sure they’re better now) when they moved to LA but the franchise got a huge jump in worth solely do to the potential of the market. What the hell is the difference if less people are actually watching them?
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,985
20,912
113
I agree with everything you wrote. I just hate to see ISU fans be complicit in the "X school has no redeeming value" position. It was and is used to describe us, and it sucks.
The difference is people were using that against ISU, who was #27 in viewership and #21 in attendance. We are using it to describe teams that draw like KU and are in the 50s-70s in viewership.

In short, we are correct, the Mandel’s of the world are clueless or liars.
 

cycloneML

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2008
5,207
2,071
113
As someone mentioned before, if I was an ISU fan I would want Oregon and Washington to go to the Big10. This would ensure that the Pac12 implodes and gives the Big12 the best chance of getting the four corners. As long as Oregon and Washington are in the Pac12, they still have a pulse
Who are we counting as the NW corner?
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,985
20,912
113
This is what I don’t understand. People say “Iowa State adds no value” but these stats clearly say otherwise. This isn’t a case of potential eyeballs, these are the numbers of people actually watching the damn games!

The same thing kind of showed when the Rams moved out of St. Louis. Ratings were way down (at least at first, I’m sure they’re better now) when they moved to LA but the franchise got a huge jump in worth solely do to the potential of the market. What the hell is the difference if less people are actually watching them?
Because writing for a newspaper, sports site or having Twitter has no requirement to be smart, accurate or know what the hell you are talking about.
 

exCyDing

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2017
5,569
10,013
113
As someone mentioned before, if I was an ISU fan I would want Oregon and Washington to go to the Big10. This would ensure that the Pac12 implodes and gives the Big12 the best chance of getting the four corners. As long as Oregon and Washington are in the Pac12, they still have a pulse
The question is if other teams are going to sit around and wait for it.

Colorado circa 2010 is a good allegory. They weren’t agitating for the breakup of of Big XII like Nebraska, A&M and Mizzou were. Nobody was hot after them to jump into a new conference and make waves. But they got an opportunity to jump from the unstable conference to one that was more stable. I have no recollection on the money angle, but it very well could have been more at the time.

So, the question is, who is the Colorado in the PAC? Who could be peeled away, and would that tumble the rest of the conference? If one more jumps, I think the run would be on.
 

AlaCyclone

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2007
5,581
6,779
113
Houston's two periods of dominance in basketball put them on par with majority of Big 12 schools if not above.

If Phi Slamma Jamma happened at ISU it would still be all we ever talked about. Any fan of modern basketball (pro or college) owes some of their fandom to those teams. Those teams gave birth to above the rim basketball.

vs UCF basketball is a legit gripe...but you're adding three good ones along with the one that has zero history
I saw Phi Slamma Jamma in person! @ LSU in 1983-4. Man, could they PLAY!
 

jakemcilroy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 26, 2006
1,229
668
113
48
I realy don't care about either Washngton or Oregon. They would be nice to have, but I sense too much drama with those two and most of it not good for the Big Xii. Let's invite ASU, UA, UU and CU and be done with it.
I'm with you. My post wasn't "do you care/want Oregon and Washington." My post was "What do you think Oregon and Washington are going to do (with no Big 10 invite)?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlaCyclone

jakemcilroy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 26, 2006
1,229
668
113
48
The question is if other teams are going to sit around and wait for it.

Colorado circa 2010 is a good allegory. They weren’t agitating for the breakup of of Big XII like Nebraska, A&M and Mizzou were. Nobody was hot after them to jump into a new conference and make waves. But they got an opportunity to jump from the unstable conference to one that was more stable. I have no recollection on the money angle, but it very well could have been more at the time.

So, the question is, who is the Colorado in the PAC? Who could be peeled away, and would that tumble the rest of the conference? If one more jumps, I think the run would be on.
My answer to this is Arizona and Arizona State. They fit REALLY well culture-wise in the new Big 12.
 

Scruff

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2008
1,022
1,426
113
Coralville, IA
Many PAC teams still aren't looking at it correctly. There seems to be a strong mindset there that academics matter more than revenue and they don't associate with average or below-average schools. When counting championships they're looking at all sports, not just sports they should care about. I expected that sentiment from Stanford-Cal, but feel I've seen it from a few of their other schools as well. Until they realize they're being left way behind, you might see them try to stick it out together.
 

simply1

Rec Center HOF
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 10, 2009
45,595
34,336
113
Pdx
I realy don't care about either Washngton or Oregon. They would be nice to have, but I sense too much drama with those two and most of it not good for the Big Xii. Let's invite ASU, UA, UU and CU and be done with it.
What sort of drama are you looking at?
 

AlaCyclone

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2007
5,581
6,779
113
What sort of drama are you looking at?
Not being able to make up their mind whether they should hold out for B1G or not mainly. Just flat out being wishy washy. The Big Xii teams should really want to be in the Big Xii. I think that would be the case with the four corner schools.
 

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,620
3,569
113
I agree with how crazy everything is shaking out but one thing that I keep seeing people throw out like it is an easy thing to do is going independent. That is such and insane minefield that would not only be impossible for most schools but would also involve negotiating a media rights deal just for the school that would make them almost no money and they would be trapped in for years to come.

This reminds me of the conversations about USC having independent in its pocket when reaching out to the BIG.

Going independent like BYU did or like the proposal in which UW and Oregon are co independent is different than when GT tried it. For many reasons, namely the end goal in mind and different broadcasts rights era.

For somewhat the same reason ESPN making USC independent was on the table, ESPN would likely actually prefer to extract the top remaining value from the PAC without having to pay for anything else. If you're on team ESPN, you're not really independent, you're in the SEC-ACC. It is do able, and imo likely preferred over this Pac-ACC joint agreement, and certainly way above merger.

It is just taking this consolidation of brands that is driving realignment to an extreme, in this case, down to two schools, then just taking your other ESPN inventory (SEC, ACC, soon Big 12) and maximizing ESPN return according to scheduling constraints (in which case UW and Oregon not having any is much better than if a conference)
 

simply1

Rec Center HOF
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 10, 2009
45,595
34,336
113
Pdx
Some of this ratings stuff takes more to parse. For example when Washington State has a good year, they get better placement than say the pac12 network and their ratings improve.