Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[alarson]

I find this difficult to believe.

It makes sense.

You had the 10-2 ducks vs the 9-3 utes. Both teams were out of the playoff picture and the ducks were only #10. There was little of national interest to this game.

The AAC had Cincy, who were in the top 4 in the playoff picture at that point, vs a top 25 houston team that still held with Cincy in the first half. People would tune in to see if Cincy could hold on and get a bid or lose and open up a slot for someone else.

The big 12 had two top 10 teams, #5 vs #9. Had OSU won, Oklahoma State could have potentially slid up into that #4 slot, especially if Cincy had lost.

 

[WhoISthis]

You can’t revoke an accepted offer, bro.

Nor would we want to. At some point we'll be going through this with the ACC.

Plus, there needs to be no doubt the Big 12 has the best of the rest. Taking the top of the G5 is likely needed in that.

A Mountain West with Oregon St, WSU, SMU, Houston, maybe even Memphis and UCF is too much of a headache.

 

[WhoISthis]

Every team in the Big 12 would take a B1G or SEC invite instantly. So what this really means is that the league would have an upper limit on how valuable a school could be in order to get in. That’s backwards to me. Get the best programs you can. Oregon and Washington would be huge assets to the Big 12 even if they left at the next round in 5-10-15 years.

Exactly, the goal is to be a P3 and consolidate the best of the rest- being the most accommodating to P2 candidates is good for that. If executed correctly, it helps you add stability because no school of value would want to be in any other conference.

This isn't the P5 era. It is not too prohibitive for the networks to price in what happens if school x goes to P2, and if Fox owns the Big 12 and BIG, it gets very easy on that clause.

 

[NorthCyd]

Not to derail the thread, but I think the hope for ala carte was always a fantasy. Streaming companies had to start cheap and be creative to steal people from cable/DTV, but that was always going to be as short-lived as it took to get a foothold.

Now they are the cable companies or DirecTV in just about every way. To maximize their potential revenue, they're going to continue to slowly increase prices to the point it's no longer a net positive. They're going to keep trying to show maximum value by including a bunch of channels nobody wants so they can say they have more channels than XYZ provider.

They may also have ala carte options like adding a whole set of networks (i.e. Hulu has an addon I have to subscribe to for my Discovery channels), a suite of sports networks, etc but that will be the exception and require the larger bulk base package. As ESPN, Fox, etc get into bigger deals, that cost will funnel to the streaming companies just like it did cable/DTV - it will either be in big sports packages or the base package... most likely a mix of both.

While we still pay less than the $250/mo we did on DirecTV, it adds up quickly when you look at our subs ($85/mo for Hulu, $20/mo for Netflix, $10/mo for Apple TV+, Discovery+, HBO Max, and Disney+).

Eh, current system is still way better. You mention all those subscriptions but you don't HAVE to have all those. The fact is you can still get a lot of entertainment at a fraction of the cost that you use to be able to if you want to and locals are still available OTA for free. The ease with which one can drop and add subscriptions is a huge plus. No 2 year contract to avoid paying for equipment and instillation fees. Only want to sign up for ESPN+ during football and basketball season? No problem. Plus the fact that there are way more providers, and subscribers can easily change providers, makes it a highly competitive environment that will help prices from getting out of control.

 

[Pope]

SMU? Yikes

Boy, this Jon Wilner guy is doing everything he can to try to push ways for saving the PAC.

 

[Drew0311]

That #beardown threw me for a loop. Somebody explain that.

I have been trying to figure out for the last hour why we were inviting Cal Golden Bears into the fold and not Arizona. Geesh

 

[WhoISthis]

None of the teams in the Big 12 are likely going to ever get a Big Ten or SEC invite, which is what brings stability and might encourage another media entity to dump some serious cash into the media fray. Have you been paying attention to the chaos in the Big 12 over the last decade? Why in the hell would you bring that back by adding teams that really don't want to be in the conference, and who would be whoring behind the conference's back to go somewhere else?

Totally different, unfortunately, in the P2 era.

Having that in the P5 era brought stability. At some point in the P2 era, it doesn't add stability, just makes it more likely you are unable to consolidate all the top schools.

If the Big 12 was the only conference to have modest P2 buyout clauses inits GOR, and UW, Oregon and the ACC schools also coming up on a new deal, what conference ends up with the top schools, Pac, ACC or Big 12? What conference would survive as the P3?

 

[Drew0311]

We should take 6 Pac12 schools and revoke the invite to Houston and UCF

UCF is a sleeping giant in football. In 20 years they will be a top ten team every year. Huge college, growing alumni, fertile recruit, and now a big conference to back them up. That team is a long term team. Might not be a big add right now, but 5-10 years it will be

 

[Trice]

Boy, this Jon Wilner guy is doing everything he can to try to push ways for saving the PAC.

He covers Pac teams, he's going to report out potential survival options for that league. He's talked quite openly about all the possibilities, including the potential end of the league.

 

[CoKane]

Anything go down since like noon today?

 

[CRcyclone6]

PAC 12 football exists so bars can have something on the TV at midnight.

I love it at Starlite Room on a Sat night!

 

[Cloneon]

Eh, current system is still way better. You mention all those subscriptions but you don't HAVE to have all those. The fact is you can still get a lot of entertainment at a fraction of the cost that you use to be able to if you want to and locals are still available OTA for free. The ease with which one can drop and add subscriptions is a huge plus. No 2 year contract to avoid paying for equipment and instillation fees. Only want to sign up for ESPN+ during football and basketball season? No problem. Plus the fact that there are way more providers, and subscribers can easily change providers, makes it a highly competitive environment that will help prices from getting out of control.

Are we forgetting infrastructure costs? Streaming companies are 100% content and equipment behind the scenes; not the millions of miles of coax, fiber, or whatever. These are investments that need to be recuperated. 'Streaming' currently has more flexibility in pricing. That said, cable WITH streaming is the entity that has the most control because they can 'package' internet in more creative ways. From an industry perspective, this is still shaking out.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

None of the teams in the Big 12 are likely going to ever get a Big Ten or SEC invite, which is what brings stability and might encourage another media entity to dump some serious cash into the media fray. Have you been paying attention to the chaos in the Big 12 over the last decade? Why in the hell would you bring that back by adding teams that really don't want to be in the conference, and who would be whoring behind the conference's back to go somewhere else?

This doesn’t make sense. The instability in the Big 12 has been the threat of collapse - that bluebloods leaving would cause an exodus that killed that conference and left a small group demoted to G5. That’s why OU and UT were bad - because they threatened the very existence of schools like Kansas State.

If the B1G and SEC will never ever take any of the current Big 12, then that’s impossible. There is no concern there if you’re right!

Take Oregon and Washington; maybe they stay (great). If not they leave and nobody else does. Still stable and you get a handful of years of their TV money value and maybe CFP bids. Just try to get the best schools you can and don’t worry that they’ll leave you.

 

[CascadeClone]

It makes sense.

You had the 10-2 ducks vs the 9-3 utes. Both teams were out of the playoff picture and the ducks were only #10. There was little of national interest to this game.

The AAC had Cincy, who were in the top 4 in the playoff picture at that point, vs a top 25 houston team that still held with Cincy in the first half. People would tune in to see if Cincy could hold on and get a bid or lose and open up a slot for someone else.

The big 12 had two top 10 teams, #5 vs #9. Had OSU won, Oklahoma State could have potentially slid up into that #4 slot, especially if Cincy had lost.

That kind of implies that the playoff is a much stronger draw for viewers than anything else - team or conference. Which makes the espn plan to focus on a big playoff make a lot of sense. Plus they will have the most games with playoff implications holding the sec, thus making those games more valuable.
A lot of us here have been saying people wont watch a superleague as much, but what if we are wrong? What if there are a lot more casual viewers than we think?

 

[Dr.bannedman]

UCF is a sleeping giant in football. In 20 years they will be a top ten team every year. Huge college, growing alumni, fertile recruit, and now a big conference to back them up. That team is a long term team. Might not be a big add right now, but 5-10 years it will be

na dog. 8 SEC teams have more fans in central florida.

 

[Dr.bannedman]

na dog. 8 SEC teams have more fans in central florida.

thats not counting u of florida

 

[JM4CY]

UCF is a sleeping giant in football. In 20 years they will be a top ten team every year. Huge college, growing alumni, fertile recruit, and now a big conference to back them up. That team is a long term team. Might not be a big add right now, but 5-10 years it will be

Yeah, they could be good. They also haven’t been close to that year that Frosty won all them games. Cincy is sustainable because their coach and his system is still in place. UCF got overhauled. It isn’t the same. They are primed to get humbled and at best are TCU/Tech level. They won’t compete at the top for a long time and will need to prove a lot.

 

[JM4CY]

thats not counting u of florida

This. I know several UCF grads. The sense I get is that there’s a strong UNI/Iowa paradigm going on there. Very few actual true UCF fans.

 

[CascadeClone]

This. I know several UCF grads. The sense I get is that there’s a strong UNI/Iowa paradigm going on there. Very few actual true UCF fans.

Things can change. Playing in a bigger league, alumni outreach, winning - all can help grow their following. Give them time.

Hell look to ISU as a blueprint. We have a much bigger following than 20 years ago. And will be even better 20 years from now when all the kids going to games grow up.

 

[BryceC]

Reading message boards of Fl St, Clemson, and Miami... the ACC is toast. There is too different of a pay differential and those teams will be gone. It's not a matter of if it's when. PAC is grasping at straws with the talk of ACC partnership. I find it funny Oregon/Washington are talking out both ends, keeping Pac alive while actively looking to go elsewhere. Ore/Washington might add to our pie, but honestly if they don't come in wanting to be equal to all the big 12 teams, I say leave them. They don't move the pie that much, its not worth keeping the EGO schools around.

The ACC and PAC teaming up is the two worst conferences as far as TV revenue go, which will only get worse. I don't understand what the appeal is there for anybody unless it's just more comfortable to go to your death clutching somebody else.