Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
8,304
6,749
113
Dubuque
Attendance again means nothing. All sports attendance is going down due to cost and the fact that the in home experience is incredible now. Ratings are all that matter you can’t extrapolate anything from attendance but with ratings you can.
IMO attendance and strong fan interest will become more critical when fans will have to pay $5--$25/month to watch their team.

Ratings ARE are the ultimate measuring stick. But will a school's ratings be the same in 5-10 years when their casual fans have to pay to see their team.

It will never be a question for the top 20ish teams, but what about after that?

Last year NBC experimented putting the ND v Toledo game on Peacock- just a question how quickly that happens with Disney & Fox. All depends how well cable & multi-channel streamers keep customers.
 

Clark

Well-Known Member
Jun 24, 2009
17,892
4,052
113
Altoona
I think there is a lull period for everyone to evaluate next steps. Keep in mind that USC/UCLA had two months of serious talks to digest their choice. PAC 10 schools want to know their options before making their choice.



I agree and with the season coming up I'd guess it will be next summer before we hear anything. Honestly I think it will be the SEC that makes the next move. I think there's a decent chance that the Pac 12 adds a couple teams and survives for several years while the ACC teams wait out the GOR. By then, maybe the power structures will look vastly different.
How the national media views the Big 12 versus the competitive product quality:

what does that even mean?
 

PickSix

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2013
819
1,276
93
GOR haven't been tested in court. If UNC, Clemson, Miami, UVA and other are all running for the exit. What is a GOR worth?

Perhaps, but there’s no incentive for the SEC to add. ESPN controls both conferences, and I don’t see why they would give up their sweetheart ACC deal.

So realistically, it’s MAYBE UNC/VA to the B1G. But would those two schools have enough momentum to overturn the whole GOR? Are the potential gains worth it for the B1G to wage a major legal battle? Perhaps, but it’s hard for me to view any of it as likely or imminent.
 

Triggermv

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2010
7,907
4,318
113
39
Marion, IA


I wouldn't be shocked if 1) is their preference if no GOR is required in order to pursue that option. However, my guess is when the rubber meets the road, both 1) and 2) will be requiring a GOR, which then tips the scales to 2) being the better long-term option. I have zero doubt they are wanting an option which both maximizes current comfort while also leaving their options completely wide open for futures opportunities in the Big 10. The trouble is that I don't think there will be that option. Its poop or get off the pot.
 

NorthCyd

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 22, 2011
18,722
30,270
113
Updates from Wilner and Canzano this morning. Nothing super newsworthy.

But I agree with @cyman05 's post here...we might just be in a lull for awhile. Just effing great.
Big XII is fine. At worst we are in the same position we were before all this went down. PAC-12 certainly is in no position to damage the Big XII. We'll see if ESPN and FOX want the PAC-12 to die or they want to throw them a lifeline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cyclonepride

Clark

Well-Known Member
Jun 24, 2009
17,892
4,052
113
Altoona


My opinion is that the Big 10 and ND are content to wait until the SEC/ACC situation resolves itself one way or the other. If it isn't resolved by the time Texas and OU are slated to join the league then we might be waiting a while.

Thinking about it, what we could see is something similar to what OU and Texas (and ESPN) attempted to do with the Big 12, have Clemson, Miami, Florida St, and Va Tech announce their intention to join the SEC to destabilize the league and have the other members look for other conferences to join to end the league so the GOR doesn't come into effect.
 

Rods79

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2006
3,543
1,236
113
Des Moines
All the more reason why it’s crucial to secure ASU/AZ/CO/Utah ASAP. Do that, and option 1 is eliminated. We’re about to see what Yormark is made of.

With the numbers being thrown around, Option 1 is already pretty much eliminated. Of course they’d prefer to stay together, but if you’re going to be making 4-5x less than the B1G/SEC and 2x less than the Big 12 for ~10 years with all expansion options out there…the writing is on the wall. I don’t even see unequal sharing as an option…just more discontent and instability. Add to that the fact that FOX has pretty much shunned them and ESPN is the only partner in play for 30 days…yikes.
 

JUKEBOX

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2008
7,895
1,349
113
I don't think there's anything left in the Pac 12 for Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah.

Higher-earning members are going to be constantly looking for an exit, and the only thing that can sustain the conference existence in P5 is probably temporary life-support measures.

Big 12 offers longer-term stability and greater earnings. For those schools, the longer they would try to wait it out, probably the worse off they'll be in terms of leverage.
 

cayin

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 11, 2006
9,079
9,100
113
Updates from Wilner and Canzano this morning. Nothing super newsworthy.

But I agree with @cyman05 's post here...we might just be in a lull for awhile. Just effing great.
this doesn't not look good for the Big 12. The ACC and PAC are setting this up that they are the tie for the number 3 league. By scheduling each other they are creating big games, big intersectional matchups that will draw a lot of interest and better ratings. Of course, aren't a lot of the non con schedules in football already set for the next few years? If so, how far in the future are they scheduling each other?
 

Trice

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2010
7,103
11,781
113
Big XII is fine. At worst we are in the same position we were before all this went down. PAC-12 certainly is in no position to damage the Big XII. We'll see if ESPN and FOX want the PAC-12 to die or they want to throw them a lifeline.

I don't think that's a certainty at all. I don't think we're in danger of being destabilized or threatened with extinction, but depending on what the TV networks decide, we might end up as the #4 conference with a lower TV payout than we expected.
 

CyJack13

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2010
12,666
1,665
113
this doesn't not look good for the Big 12. The ACC and PAC are setting this up that they are the tie for the number 3 league. By scheduling each other they are creating big games, big intersectional matchups that will draw a lot of interest and better ratings. Of course, aren't a lot of the non con schedules in football already set for the next few years? If so, how far in the future are they scheduling each other?

Very few of those matchups will be big games, Oregon - Clemson will be about the only big time match up that could happen. Nobody cares about 90% of those conference teams, Louisville-Arizona isn't drawing eyeballs.
 

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
7,449
7,892
113
38
IMO attendance and strong fan interest will become more critical when fans will have to pay $5--$25/month to watch their team.

Ratings ARE are the ultimate measuring stick. But will a school's ratings be the same in 5-10 years when their casual fans have to pay to see their team.

It will never be a question for the top 20ish teams, but what about after that?

Last year NBC experimented putting the ND v Toledo game on Peacock- just a question how quickly that happens with Disney & Fox. All depends how well cable & multi-channel streamers keep customers.
Honest question here, do you think a ton of isu fans would pay $25 per month to watch their team? Only reason why I ask is people keep pointing out how cheap the fan base is. I have no idea if this is actually true but it is something I see posted regularly in regards to donations and NIL. Obv paying to watch the games is different then those things which is why I ask the question.
 

MLawrence

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2010
11,842
4,672
113
35
I think there is a lull period for everyone to evaluate next steps. Keep in mind that USC/UCLA had two months of serious talks to digest their choice. PAC 10 schools want to know their options before making their choice.



Agreed. Also, I would have to imagine the ACC schools are trying to get a better understanding of their GOR to see if they would be able to challenge it court or if some ACC members are communicating with each other to see if they could potentially dissolve the conference and not have to worry about the longevity of their GOR. All of this probably takes more than a couple of days to figure out.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron