I was saying 5/6 before usc just based on ratings over the last couple years. Last year the big ten had 3/4 highest rated teams (with the obvious 3), sparty was higher rated then ND, sparty, Wisconsin and Nebraska we all higher then A&M, Florida, Texas, LSU, Clemson, etc.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
If I could make a bet, I would lean Notre Dame doing whatever they can to stay independent. Then if they are a required piece for the B1G to expand further, I think B1G is done for now, they'll wrap up the TV deal, and the rest of the Pac-12 schools are not getting added.
Then it comes down to whether or not the Pac-12 survives as a B1G waiting-room or if the top brands get packaged into the Big 12.
Last edited:
Absolutely, the Big XII at 8 teams was not a viable conference, IMO. They had to add quickly to keep those 8 together. My point was, the Big XII was #3 with OUT, replaced them with 4 G5 teams and is still projected to keep the #3 spot just ahead of the ACC for the next couple of years, at least.
Maybe projections were low for the PAC and someone is willing to pay a lot more than ESPN's $25m offer. Maybe the Big XII's projection at $40m or so is high. Maybe deeper dives into viewership numbers offers a vastly different understanding of what the value of those watching PAC games vs ACC games vs Big XII games than raw numbers indicate. There are a shitload of unknowns, but those of us here have to go with what we do know because it's July, baseball doesn't get interesting for another month and NFL preseason is still a couple weeks away.
Along those lines, it's hard to say what the perception of the Big XII will be with OUT out of the equation. Do other programs step up and shine? The CFP committee freaking loved us in 2020 for reasons that weren't entirely quantifiable. As for recruits, their perception is heavily influenced by who's been good the past 5-10 years (ie, what they experienced/remember) and who's gotten players into the NFL or at least in position to earn a spot there.
If they want to play an odd number of conference games, they cant have an odd number of teams. It is mathematically impossible to put together a schedule. So they would have to go to 8 or 10 games if that happened.
MSU rides the coattails of their loaded schedule with bigger fanbases and favorable time slots. When they’re alone they bring 300k like the game against Youngstown State last year.
The two big draws in the big ten are Michigan and OSU. Teams that play them get a bump. Did the two west teams play them? Penn state is the other ratings drawer.
Hmmm they drew 4.4 mil against purdue last year. Also most teams draw bad playing against teams they are expected to slaughter, ND barely broke 100K playing kent state last year. Obv playing against top drawing teams helps but they do more to help beef up those numbers then a bunch of other teams.
Penn state was 4th over all, sparty was 8, Wisconsin 10 and Nebraska 11. Of course it helps playing against other top teams thats kind of the point to all this. Even bama in the third spot had a game barely over 100K when they played a nothing team. OSU is the only team that drew over a mil for each of their games last year.
I can’t think of a single scenario where the tipping point to the pac surviving or dying as a power conference is the availability of SDSU.
If Oregon leaves the PAC dies
If UW and Stanford leave, the PAC dies
If 3-4 of Utah, CU, ASU and UA leave the PAC dies
The only possible scenario where SDSU has any influence is if only Stanford goes to the Big 10. The logical expansion target is SDSU, but they are pretty worthless anyway. Add some rando school out west or in Texas and it won’t make a bit of difference.
Even if just Stanford went they are still dead. That 27mil per school payout was with the current ten teams. Any other team that was added would cause that horrific number to drop even more.
L'Ville is Baylor North? Same ethical standards enforced at both.
Good summary. San Diego State is not the Jenga-block to topple PAC.
If people want to argue what value SDSU (or ilk) would offer as a Pac backfill, or perhaps eventual Big 12 add if leagues have to balloon to 20+, that's a separate topic.
Which begs the question: Does a bad/losing team in a large market draw more eyes/$ than a good/winning team in a smaller market? If Cal does get into the B1G, do they become the Vandy of B1G and are perennial bottom of conference dwellers? Does that kill off even more of their already smaller fanbase?
Absolutely not true about the chargers. Regardless, people don’t follow the Aztecs.
Hey now. USF is on the upswing. They made the tournament this year!
While your plucky little MSU basketball program has managed to match them in NCAA tournament titles, it is pretty safe to say there will never be a Spartan player as good as the Don’s greatest player. *Never*.
For the record, Magic was pretty OK too.
And sometimes Draymond is my second favorite Warrior…after Victor Alexander of course.
The Vandy of the B1G might be one of the most competitive titles in all of sports now that Michigan finally beat OSU and temporarily relinquished the crown.
I think the Big12 is hoping that Houston and UCF can do what Cincy has done the last 2 years. Both are located in recruiting hotbeds and large DMA's.
If they would become consistent top 20 teams awesome. That is made easier where they are located.
If AZ plus SDSU were suitable enough to get AZ to move, while also taking the PACs top backfill. I don’t see it because AZ should want nothing to do with SDSU getting promoted- they should kill the Pac before allowing any more CA schools at their level. But some think have a conference peer in SoCal is important to them.
Unequal revenue sharing helps their “worth” to PAC. If SDSU is getting paid at a huge discount, they add a few million to the top pac schools. Big 12 interest can help them get more, so it’s not surprising if we’re giving them some leverage
