Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
69,420 ********. Do you even internet?
Analysis: Where will Washington land? Here are all of the Huskies’ conference realignment options.
Will Washington follow UCLA and USC to the Big Ten? What about the Big 12 or Pac-12? As UW’s athletic future stalls at a conference crossroads, let’s examine each conceivable landing spot.
To be clear, I'm not comparing SDSU relative to Houston, UCF, BYU, or Cincinnati. I don't think that anyone else is doing that either. I'm comparing SDSU to the PAC12 schools which all have very long history of being in major conferences and playing at the highest level.
If you want my opinion on SDSU vs. the B12's recent additions - BYU and Cincinnati are a significant improvement over SDSU. BYU for its history of success and widespread appeal to members of the LDS church, Cincinnati for its recent high levels of success on the field and the fact that prior to the implosion of the Big East football conference it had been in a major conference since 2005, was relegated back to Mid-Major status for 10 years, then will rejoin a major conference in 2023. Both these schools have very strong resumes. UCF and Houston are slight upgrades over SDSU because they've had more success at the highest levels relative to SDSU (both have appeared in and won NY6 bowl games which SDSU has never come close to doing). The B12 and network execs ran the numbers last year and clearly the people who had access to the real data determined that SDSU was not as good as the four additions from last year.
Do you have hard data or evidence on the calculations being used by Fox, ESPN, and the conferences to develop the precise value of SDSU vs the PAC12 teams? I don't, so I can't provide it. The only thing I can say for certain is that you can't just quote the size of the city where the university is located as a selling point, unless you are talking about that school's value to the B1G. Here is why: one of the B1G's key strategies in their 2010 expansion was to increase revenue by forcing local cable/satellite providers to carry its Big 10 Network channel on basic or expanded basic cable. This essentially captured subscription fees from most of the residents of those cities, who had to pay for the BTN because they wanted the History Channel. This was the primary reason for them adding Rutgers - to capture all those TV subscription dollars from the NYC and NJ TV markets. No other conference has a conference TV network with enough fan support to force local providers to carry it on a basic cable package.
Therefore - TV revenue from all other conferences comes from actual viewers of their televised games. TV Networks must have some formula they use to calculate the value of a school's TV revenue, probably based on viewership of games that a school participates in, normalized for the influence of the other team's fanbase. I don't know the formula, but I think it's common sense to say that the size of the city where the university is located doesn't play into it at all. Simply living in San Diego has very little factor into whether or not you watch SDSU football.
By the time I made my post, others had already pointed out that SDSU has low attendance numbers and poor football results compared to the P12 teams under consideration so I didn't feel the need to repeat that. If you want to speculate that SDSU might someday grow into a P5 school, that's fine. But we're not in a position to be taking fliers on mid majors who have had moderate success when P5 schools with proven track records at the highest level are available. If you wanted to argue SDSU vs. Houston last year, that makes sense. Arguing SDSU vs. Colorado is just foolish.
Analysis: Where will Washington land? Here are all of the Huskies’ conference realignment options.
Will Washington follow UCLA and USC to the Big Ten? What about the Big 12 or Pac-12? As UW’s athletic future stalls at a conference crossroads, let’s examine each conceivable landing spot.www.seattletimes.com
If B10 added Stanford how many traditional opponents of ND would be in that league? It’s like the Big 10 is using the anaconda strategy on ND. At what point can the B10 tell ND to join or no new games against B10 members past x date?
The problem is the two on the right have crabs and chlamydia.
Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Stanford, USC. Look for Navy to join the B10.
Makes perfect sense that they'd wait at the very least to get an idea of what the numbers would be for a PAC-back-to-10 or any different combinations that they might be considering for expanding membership. San Diego St is the only one I see that seems marginally plausible for them to try to add. The PAC looked down their noses at the Big XII last year, so I'd be very surprised if they turned around and added UNLV, Boise St, Fresno St, etc.
Anyone making a decision to jump ship will have to justify the decision to a lot of different stakeholders. To do that, they're going to have to compare the deals. If reports are true, the Big XII has their numbers in already, but it'll probably take a couple of weeks to get their own figures.
I am not convinced that the B1G really wanted UCLA all that badly. Since 2000, they have averaged only 6.6 wins per season (excluding 2020), and have finished in the top 25 only 3 times. Not exactly blue blood numbers, especially when you consider the conference they are in.
IMO, the B1G felt they needed UCLA to get their real target USC, and they wanted USC for the brand and to lure ND into the fold. True, they want the LA market, but USC alone would have given them that. Nobody really wants to see UCLA vs (Indiana | Purdue | Rutgers, etc).
The TV numbers back that up. UCLA ranked 32nd nationally in TV viewership for football.
H
I mean this sincerely - I really hope ND goes to the Big 10 right now. They will be the ultimate stick up their butt, thumbing their nose at everybody else in the conference program you've ever seen. The Big 10 appears to be actively trying to screw ND by picking all of their rivals up with the hope of getting ND pregnant and into a shotgun wedding they can't get out of. Nothing like trying to force them into the conference by taking away their other options.
I've read local articles from Arizona, Colorado and now Washington. They all seem to indicate the Big 12 is likely their best option if a Big 10 invite isn't forthcoming. So I guess we are just waiting to see (a) what the Big 10 is going to do and (b) what Fox/ESPN come up with as the PAC's value for the remaining 10 schools (which can't be good considering how bad their attendance and viewership have been the last few years).Analysis: Where will Washington land? Here are all of the Huskies’ conference realignment options.
Will Washington follow UCLA and USC to the Big Ten? What about the Big 12 or Pac-12? As UW’s athletic future stalls at a conference crossroads, let’s examine each conceivable landing spot.
Logic suggests that eventually:
B10 adds UND, Stanford, UNC, UVA.
SEC adds FSU, Clemson, Miami, NC State, V'tech
B12 adds Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Pittsburgh, Louisville.
B10 adds UND, Stanford, UNC, UVA.
SEC adds FSU, Clemson, Miami, NC State, V'tech
B12 adds Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Pittsburgh, Louisville.
I think Stanford and maybe even Virginia are not value adds for the B1G. It’s all driven by money.
Maybe Stanford gets BTN on in the Bay Area - I would buy that as plausible, even if carriage fees are not the reason to be expanding in 2022 like they were ten years ago. So then what does Virginia get you? Maryland already got BTN onto cable packages in the DC market, which includes the most populated parts of Virginia.
I’m also skeptical that NC State or Virginia Tech would add to the SEC’s pocketbooks. It is very difficult for a given school to be a value add when the value is so high after it got inflated by bringing in more bluebloods.
I believe that the two "flagships" want to stick together so they can be ready to jump to the B1G when the time comes. They're the ones driving that. The 4-corners won't stick around if they feel UO/UW are in a holding pattern.
When GoR times comes and they aren't willing to sign then the others will leave.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
I kinda like this idea, play some hardball with the Mountain 4.
”Yeah, see, you guys sign on the line today and agree to come over in 2024, this is what your conference money will be. You wanna think it over? Stick it out with your PAC buddies? Fine with me, but this is a limited-time offer. You come back to us in a couple of years after the Ducks and the Huskies bail on you, you ain’t getting this deal again. Ball’s in your court.”
