Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[WhoISthis]

Someone literally came in here and asked if we dont announce adding people by today is it a sign we are week.
We have had people thinking this should have happened already, some thought it would happen the day after USCLA, So yes DAYS.

It is not a strawman when I have been reading this thread since day one.

I also dont know what was proven false last summer. Tell me what was proven false, I think what you tried to say I already proved was A)not the same argument, and B) we still arent past that length of time as last summer.

So if you want to go by last summers timeline fine, we still have a couple weeks at least yet. But that was not your narrative now was it.

LOL, yes, on twitter i am sure you could find a tweet that said hours too. Come on,

You responded to a post that had a multiple month time frame, as being too quick. Which was already proven false last summer. Whether it happens or not is one thing, but such follow-up moves happening with-in 60-90 days is very plausible.

 

[2speedy1]

Good god man

You are the one that said days. No one else. You also mistakenly ruled a time frame, not a specific amount of time, as too quickly.

AND you continue to miss the point- it is not about a certain amount of days- that was your deal- it is about passing on the risk of waiting. Don't be so pedantic, whether that is 30 more days or 60 or 90, who knows, but if you are going to be a simpleton, at least have your **** accurate.

Yormark will work to erase the false narrative that the 4 corners are takes whenever they want, risk free in waiting.

Again you are mixing up my posts. You comment on one about a different one. I am talking days and weeks because you did.

 

[BCClone]

Houston was only valuable because the Big12 had to add schools and no P5 team was going to join what appeared to be a sinking ship. It is still a very risky move adding G5 schools with no history of success and adding a 5th wouldn't help the conferences perception and might even decrease media payouts. The reality is that we don't know what the new big12's media dollar amounts will be. Everyone on her including myself thinks they will be higher then what the pac was offered but we don't really know for sure how much higher.

It’s funny how perceptions change. BYU, most people I know, are surprised they aren’t in a power conference and Cincinnati is a school that was in a power conference and got demoted. I don’t see either of those two being a risk. Central Florida is a shot to pull the Florida market and Houston is because the Texas schools think we need 4 Texas schools.

 

[Pope]

The Pac12 is dead regardless of taking SDSU. The big 12 already has a massive problem with perception and promoting another G5 team isnt going to help that. Its the same reason the Pac cant save its self by adding more teams, no one will come and promoting lower teams just makes your brand seem weak. The big12 is already taking a massive risk promoting 4 G5 teams, anything other then adding Pac or ACC schools isnt going to get he money needed to stay relevant.

Just one year ago the Big 12 lost its two marquee teams and managed to save itself by adding 4 G5 teams. But you say it's absolutely impossible for the Pac to do the same. I think you're a little biased.

Granted, there aren't many attractive G5 choices left for the PAC, so it's going to be difficult for them to follow the Big 12's example. However, if we took away the Pac's best G5 possibility, it basically kills the Pac's chances for survival.

 

[exCyDing]

How long do you think the USC move took? Let's not assume because you only have known for 4 weeks, things are only 4 weeks in.

Nevertheless, we are past 4 weeks, and the poster had another 4.5 at the minimum.

It is a different situation, but not as you think- the Big 12 had more ability to wait after the PAC and ACC passed with the Alliance. We could take out time. The 4 corners have a ticking time bomb with more BIG expansion.

You don't think the PAC is in a position of need? What? Did you listen to their media days? Did you listen to the BIG targeting more PAC? The PAC is considering Cal St schools and revenue raping current members with no alternatives. That is all you need to know about their position of need.

Jumping to the Big 12 from a PAC on life support isn't necessarily the lengthy decision you make it out to be- and is not exactly only 4 weeks in.

But back to the point- Yormark absolutely should be conveying the risk of the 4 corners waiting. It is not disingenuous. Whether it comes with hard time lines, I doubt, but first movers could be given preferential treatment in exchange for the certainty provided to all

You think the Big 10 and USC/UCLA talks only took a couple of weeks? Funny, because reports indicated that it took a couple of months, and that was a relatively simple, mostly 2-sided negotiation. I've no doubt the Big 10 as a whole discussed this well in advance of discussing it with Fox, all which happened before the couple of months they were talking with USC and UCLA. That's how institutional changes get made - slowly and with enough stakeholders agreeing to move forward at every stage.

There's no fire. Yes, the Big XII has leverage in that it is almost certainly going to be able to choose which PAC schools it would like to add and offer them a better situation than what that school would have by remaining in the PAC. At the same time, there only certain schools will increase or maintain Big XII distributions. The schools that do that today will be the ones that do that in three months or in a year. The Big XII isn't only going to take x number of schools.

The PAC will get bids from the open market, which can't even start until next week and it seems won't happen until the Big 10 deal is done late this month/early September. Based on what offers the PAC gets, the Big XII will be able to share projections with the schools that they choose to. A decision won't be made until all that is done. I think October announcements would be moving quickly, to be honest.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Just one year ago the Big 12 lost its two marquee teams and managed to save itself by adding 4 G5 teams. But you say it's absolutely impossible for the Pac to do the same. I think you're a little biased.

Granted, there aren't many attractive G5 choices left for the PAC, so it's going to be difficult for them to follow the Big 12's example. However, if we took away the Pac's best G5 possibility, it basically kills the Pac's chances for survival.

Yep its impossible. The pac just was offered less then 30 mil per school adding G5 schools is just going to make that number go down even more. There isn't a realistic path for the Pac to survive this.

 

[BCClone]

Just one year ago the Big 12 lost its two marquee teams and managed to save itself by adding 4 G5 teams. But you say it's absolutely impossible for the Pac to do the same. I think you're a little biased.

Granted, there aren't many attractive G5 choices left for the PAC, so it's going to be difficult for them to follow the Big 12's example. However, if we took away the Pac's best G5 possibility, it basically kills the Pac's chances for survival.

This where I think you are wrong. The PACs issue is timeslots. They can’t deliver the early games, so how does SDSU help that? They need to push east. We are talking SMU, Memphis, Air Force, Boise is even an improvement. Why rice gets mentioned. Maybe Tulsa or a Tulane (just spitballing teams that I know would give them a noon ET kickoff, no fully suggesting them).

That is why I don’t see SDSU as their best back filler.

 

[WhoISthis]

Yep its impossible. The pac just was offered less then 30 mil per school adding G5 schools is just going to make that number go down even more. There isn't a realistic path for the Pac to survive this.

I don't think we have to worry about it. The Big 12 is making informed decisions.

But your overall point is spot on.

That it is even being considered by the PAC is the issue with the leftovers. Wounded pride has all three conferences wanting to survive, even if rump conferences (and ESPN's long position on ACC leftovers). But 24 former P5 benefit far more consolidating in to the 3rd super conference and locking out everyone else ASAP , while there still is any notion of a P5. Although these 60+ schools have been peers for decades, that will last mere seasons more- if not already nearly gone imo. But last year, what did we have? The PAC and ACC in the Alliance, locking out the Big 12, which was then forced to add G5

Getting to a critical mass of 20-24 P5s in a 3rd conference and cashing in on any "fairness" leverage that still exists to get auto berths should be what the PAC schools are thinking. Adding Mountain West to PAC, 3 separate weak conferences fading is far easier to shutout, or not give autos to. Judging by Warren's recent comments, it may already be too late for that.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

What is the difference in taking SDSU versus taking WAZZU or Oregon state?

Taking or not taking SDSU does nothing to P12, if they want to expand, they still could take UNLV, CSU or Boise just as easily. The B12 taking SDSU would have little to no effect on the P12 other than a 3rd major conference now has a team in California. But it does make the B12 look like they are just adding teams to be adding teams, and that is not a good look either.

San Diego will be there, once this is all said and done for the B12, if they need or want them, expanding an invite now, when better schools are available would be a huge mistake for the league.

 

[exCyDing]

Just one year ago the Big 12 lost its two marquee teams and managed to save itself by adding 4 G5 teams. But you say it's absolutely impossible for the Pac to do the same. I think you're a little biased.

Granted, there aren't many attractive G5 choices left for the PAC, so it's going to be difficult for them to follow the Big 12's example. However, if we took away the Pac's best G5 possibility, it basically kills the Pac's chances for survival.

Conference survival is all about keeping ahead of the competition. The Big XII started from the #3 position, while the PAC is starting from #5. The Big XII had enough of a lead on the ACC and PAC that they could take a hit when OUT left and still stay #3.

Basically, the Big XII was able to stay ahead of the PAC and ACC, so it was the best choice for its members outside the P2, and they didn't send an invitation. The PAC has a $15m+ hole to dig itself out of to be able to say the same thing, and there aren't any schools available that can help them make it up.

 

[BryceC]

They could believe they are BIG bound too, but you still present the logical arguments otherwise. That is not strong-arming.

You think the odds are zero that waiting means not all 4 have a Big 12 offer?

We have consultants working on the numbers and there is a reason why AZ is the most inclined to jump

How confident are you that there are not Big 12 schools that would prefer helping ESPN solve their ACC issue? 6 of R8 in ACC gets dissolution, gets the SEC OUT sooner, gives the ACC schools a look-in on their deal, and is rumored to appease several ACC schools with unequal revenue sharing getting the football schools close enough to P2.

We could take all of those ACC schools and we'd still take Oregon and Washington and others probably.

His other point that the Big 12 might not exist if they don't jump now isn't a selling point. You'd never say that.

 

[isucy86]

Houston was only valuable because the Big12 had to add schools and no P5 team was going to join what appeared to be a sinking ship. It is still a very risky move adding G5 schools with no history of success and adding a 5th wouldn't help the conferences perception and might even decrease media payouts. The reality is that we don't know what the new big12's media dollar amounts will be. Everyone on her including myself thinks they will be higher then what the pac was offered but we don't really know for sure how much higher.

Agree. I don't work in the TV business, so tough to know what they value. Although market size seems pretty high up on the list. Not just for the Big10.

My guess is that SDSU falls below the 4 teams the Big12 added last summer, but if the Big12 has a growth spurt westward, that might change. Also how important is it for the Big12 to add an even # teams?

The Big12's next media partner will call the shots. They're the one paying the bills.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Conference survival is all about keeping ahead of the competition. The Big XII started from the #3 position, while the PAC is starting from #5. The Big XII had enough of a lead on the ACC and PAC that they could take a hit when OUT left and still stay #3.

Basically, the Big XII was able to stay ahead of the PAC and ACC, so it was the best choice for its members outside the P2, and they didn't send an invitation. The PAC has a $15m+ hole to dig itself out of to be able to say the same thing, and there aren't any schools available that can help them make it up.

This might be a bit of revisionist history. The big 12 at 8 teams wasn't considered the #3 by anyone but big 12 fans. Grabbing the 4 G5 schools is a nice bandaid but we still dont know what the media dollars are going to be for the big12. No one expected the pac's deal to be THAT low, low sure but not that low. Also while the ACC has a horrific deal they do have a consistent playoff contender in clemson, something that the Pac and Big12 are lacking right now. While I personally think the big 12 is number 3 now, quite a few people look at the conference as a bunch of mid tier teams without any serious contenders which will hurt perception, recruiting, etc. I am very interested to see what the big12 gets for their media deal.

 

[GoldCy]

This might be a bit of revisionist history. The big 12 at 8 teams wasn't considered the #3 by anyone but big 12 fans. Grabbing the 4 G5 schools is a nice bandaid but we still dont know what the media dollars are going to be for the big12. No one expected the pac's deal to be THAT low, low sure but not that low. Also while the ACC has a horrific deal they do have a consistent playoff contender in clemson, something that the Pac and Big12 are lacking right now. While I personally think the big 12 is number 3 now, quite a few people look at the conference as a bunch of mid tier teams without any serious contenders which will hurt perception, recruiting, etc. I am very interested to see what the big12 gets for their media deal.

Mid tier teams like b10 without it's marque teams.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Agree. I don't work in the TV business, so tough to know what they value. Although market size seems pretty high up on the list. Not just for the Big10.

My guess is that SDSU falls below the 4 teams the Big12 added last summer, but if the Big12 has a growth spurt westward, that might change. Also how important is it for the Big12 to add an even # teams?

The Big12's next media partner will call the shots. They're the one paying the bills.

Market size is important if you actually bring the market. It's not 2011 trying to get the BTN into homes in NY and the big12 doesn't even have a channel to make that possible. Just like San Francisco University doesn't bring the bay area market I don't think Houston really brings the Houston market. The big12 made some moves buying potential growth teams and they could look brilliant in a couple years or those teams could fall flat and bring very little.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Mid tier teams like b10 without it's marque teams.

Yep if you got rid of the top 5/6 teams in the big ten then big ten would be in the same boat.

 

[BCClone]

Agree. I don't work in the TV business, so tough to know what they value. Although market size seems pretty high up on the list. Not just for the Big10.

My guess is that SDSU falls below the 4 teams the Big12 added last summer, but if the Big12 has a growth spurt westward, that might change. Also how important is it for the Big12 to add an even # teams?

The Big12's next media partner will call the shots. They're the one paying the bills.

Even matters only if we want 9 conference games. 13 or 15 we can do 8 or 10 conference games.

 

[BCClone]

Yep if you got rid of the top 5/6 teams in the big ten then big ten would be in the same boat.

I would say top 3 teams, before USC shows up.

 

[isucy86]

For reference, I would guess these G5 schools had similar exposure. Added a few P5s for reference. Also note several of these did not have near the season that SDSU had or has had recently.

27.Iowa State — 1.219M

28.Cincinnati — 1.216M
34.Navy — 1.039M
44.Army — 804K
49.Boise State — 657K
55.Kansas — 540K
59.Washington State — 483K
63.UCF — 407K
65.Tulsa — 358K
66.Tulane — 356K
69.Oregon State — 321K
70.South Florida — 303K
71.East Carolina — 301K
72.Air Force — 255K
73.Appalachian State — 241K
74.Houston — 232K
75.Coastal Carolina — 223K
76.California — 222K
77.Syracuse — 219K
***78.San Diego State — 198K
79.Memphis — 193K

I realize where SDSU is in the pecking order. But it is based on 2 games after 9pm ET on FS1. Put SDSU on Fox, ABC or CBS at noon, 3 or 7 and we would see SDSU draw 1M+ viewers.

As ISU fans we justify our lower 1.2M figure when compared to Iowa, Nebraska, Texas, Okie State, etc based on the number of prime slots on our schedule.

No different than when the Pac12 shiill starts using viewership #'s to say how great a draw Washington State is- look at the individual games. Or in the case of Washington State, games on Pac12N that aren't counted.

 

[Boxerdaddy]

Oregon - To my knowledge this hasn't really been talked about but, I think if they get turned down by the B1G, they're lobbying to the SEC. I don't see them going to the B12 unless they've been turned down by both SEC and B1G.

Which leads to another reason that we're off a bit before hearing anything. Originally thought we'd start to hear things at the end of this 30 day window, but it looks like the first domino is the B1G contract. Once that gets locked in the rest of the dominos will fall.

IMHO, ND isn't going anywhere.