Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[Gonzo]

Why on earth would the B1G bottom feeders be looking for ways out of the conference?

Ah, sorry, I misread your earlier post. So you're saying tOSU/Mich/USC/OR/PSU/etc. would look to exit the B1G for bigger dollars, similar to what happened to the PAC.

Still, comparing a conference that was financially dying to one that's making more than every other conference doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

 

[CascadeClone]

This has been discussed a lot and the simple reason isn’t show elite programs stay elite by exploiting many inherent advantages they have. Moving into a 20 team super league will cause massive damage to those brands as they regularly rack up losing seasons. In addition to the fact that a 20 team super league would alienate so many fan bases that the ratings would tank and the money would dry up.

That's a reasonable assumption, but I disagree. I don't think ANY of those schools will:
a) turn down the big money to win more games in the B-league
b) believe that they will be the ones losing all the time

Guess we will see who is right at some point. I just feel like all the pressure (i.e. money) is pushing for those big brands to go out on their own.

 

[Al_4_State]

Ah, sorry, I misread your earlier post. So you're saying tOSU/Mich/USC/OR/PSU/etc. would look to exit the B1G for bigger dollars, similar to what happened to the PAC.

Still, comparing a conference that was financially dying to one that's making more than every other conference doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Could Ohio State, Michigan, USC, etc make more money if they joined up with the top half of the SEC vs subsidizing Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland, etc?

We all know the answer is "yes". The only question is whether or not they want to do that for non-monetary reasons.

 

[Gonzo]

I never said the Big Ten (or SEC) is going to die. You are kidding yourself if you don't think that Michigan, OSU, USC, UW, OR, Bama, Georgia, Texas are just going to sit on their hands if they believe they can make more money by getting rid of teams not holding their weight. Just hope your hawks make the cut.

I'm sure they wouldn't make the cut if that were to happen. I just don't see SEC or B1G starting to boot member schools, seems like fantasyland for people who are hoping it will happen. But I guess we'll see.

 

[Al_4_State]

I'm sure they wouldn't make the cut if that were to happen. I just don't see SEC or B1G starting to boot member schools, seems like fantasyland for people who are hoping it will happen. But I guess we'll see.

Why?

The only thing that matters to these vultures is MOAR MONEY and eventually you will be in the way of that just like we were. For whatever reason, Ohio State and Michigan have been more content with propping up other schools than UT/OU/USC were. Good for you.

 

[Gonzo]

Could Ohio State, Michigan, USC, etc make more money if they joined up with the top half of the SEC vs subsidizing Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland, etc?

We all know the answer is "yes". The only question is whether or not they want to do that for non-monetary reasons.

Yeah but if they formed a superconference with nothing but bluebloods eventually there would be a top half and bottom half of that, and the top half would have to decide to carry the bottomfeeders along. If it's purely driven by money, they wouldn't. And the cycle repeats until we end up with a superduperconference of Georgia, Bama, tOSU, and Michigan.

Conferences need cannon fodder. The top programs of the top conferences know this.

 

[RustShack]

It will be interesting to see how many schools are interested in moving to the CSFL. The biggest thing is the media interest in it. Probably easier to get streaming giants involved in it too paying more money. Maybe the B1G SEC does its own thing like they want for a little bit and it all ends in a merger.

 

[Cyhig]

Ah, sorry, I misread your earlier post. So you're saying tOSU/Mich/USC/OR/PSU/etc. would look to exit the B1G for bigger dollars, similar to what happened to the PAC.

Still, comparing a conference that was financially dying to one that's making more than every other conference doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Everyone thinks their school is safe from realignment until it happens to them….

 

[isucy86]

I think it's funny how there are many schools in the Big 10 that are poor to mediocre at best in football who are on the same level playing field as everyone else in their conference for $$ distribution. I am a firm believer it's just a matter of time before the Michigan/OSU/PSU/USC/Wash/OR teams finally look at the Indiana, Maryland, NW, Purdon't, Minn, Rutgers, etc. and say "We're sick of carrying you guys along. We can make much more money without you guys"

The Harlem Globetrotters needed the Washington Generals. So why wouldn't the Buckeye's need the Terrapins or the Wolverines need the Hoosiers?

Media rights is about brands and ratings. Ohio State could play Valley HS and it would draw 3M viewers on CBS at 2:30p. So its more about the top 15-20 brands playing the next best group of 15-20 brands.

IMO it will not come down to "we can make much more money without you guys" because that isn't a new thing. There may be a sliver of a chance that a Vanderbilt or Northwestern feel the investment/potential liability to support a Big10 or SEC football program is beyond their school's core mission.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

That's a reasonable assumption, but I disagree. I don't think ANY of those schools will:
a) turn down the big money to win more games in the B-league
b) believe that they will be the ones losing all the time

Guess we will see who is right at some point. I just feel like all the pressure (i.e. money) is pushing for those big brands to go out on their own.

Yeah that’s the tricky part. Obv saying “never” is stupid because 50 years from now anything could happen. We could be celebrating Cambells son winning his 3rd natty at ISU for all we know.

But similarly those that think this will happen because they experienced OUT leave are just very jaded. Like the people that got cheated on so think every relationship ends in infidelity.

Pac12 is a different thing all together as they were so massively incompetent and oblivious. The Big12 was being fairly well run when OUT left, not as good as it is now with the current commish but no where close to the PAC.

 

[SolterraCyclone]

I'm sure they wouldn't make the cut if that were to happen. I just don't see SEC or B1G starting to boot member schools, seems like fantasyland for people who are hoping it will happen. But I guess we'll see.

The conferences wouldn't boot teams. Teams would leave the conferences to join a Super League. Similar to what the select Euro soccer teams were trying to do a few years back.

There is only one constant in realignment. Schools will always take the option to make more money. Prior to USC/UCLA departing, I'd imagine most Pac 12 fans would says the Pac 12 ending (for all intents and purposes) by year 2024 was fantasyland.

No blue blood is going to balk at a Super League because they're worried they won't win enough. They all think they'll win enough. No school has ever made the decision to forego more money in order to keep or increase their chances of winning football games. Because money will trump winning every time.

 

[HFCS]

Ah, sorry, I misread your earlier post. So you're saying tOSU/Mich/USC/OR/PSU/etc. would look to exit the B1G for bigger dollars, similar to what happened to the PAC.

Still, comparing a conference that was financially dying to one that's making more than every other conference doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Texas was making more than every other program in the country for quite a while and bolted pretty much the exact minute they were no longer clearly #1 in payday.

They didn't even need a huge increase, just the idea that they were no longer making the most had them ready to bolt.

In 5-10 years if somebody shows Texas they could make more in Big Ten, they'll bolt. In 5-10 years if someone shows Texas they could make more $ breaking away with 15-20 other programs I'm positive they'd do it and leave the Iowa programs of the world in the dust. I don't think they'd even remotely consider the long term consequences of their actions or what's good for the long term of the sport.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

The Harlem Globetrotters needed the Washington Generals. So why wouldn't the Buckeye's need the Terrapins or the Wolverines need the Hoosiers?

Media rights is about brands and ratings. Ohio State could play Valley HS and it would draw 3M viewers on CBS at 2:30p. So its more about the top 15-20 brands playing the next best group of 15-20 brands.

IMO it will not come down to "we can make much more money without you guys" because that isn't a new thing. There may be a sliver of a chance that a Vanderbilt or Northwestern feel the investment/potential liability to support a Big10 or SEC football program is beyond their school's core mission.

Nah both those schools are stupid rich, 10+ billion dollar endowments. They wouldn’t do it for money. Only if it somehow hurt academics

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Texas was making more than every other program in the country for quite a while and bolted pretty much the exact minute they were no longer clearly #1 in payday.

They didn't even need a huge increase, just the idea that they were no longer making the most had them ready to bolt.

In 5-10 years if somebody shows Texas they could make more in Big Ten, they'll bolt. In 5-10 years if someone shows Texas they could make more $ breaking away with 15-20 other programs I'm positive they'd do it and leave the Iowa programs of the world in the dust. I don't think they'd even remotely consider the long term consequences of their actions or what's good for the long term of the sport.

Well no ****, that’s Texas lol could say almost the same thing for the state with how much they talk about cecceding

 

[SolterraCyclone]

Yeah that’s the tricky part. Obv saying “never” is stupid because 50 years from now anything could happen. We could be celebrating Cambells son winning his 3rd natty at ISU for all we know.

But similarly those that think this will happen because they experienced OUT leave are just very jaded. Like the people that got cheated on so think every relationship ends in infidelity.

Pac12 is a different thing all together as they were so massively incompetent and oblivious. The Big12 was being fairly well run when OUT left, not as good as it is now with the current commish but no where close to the PAC.

Obviously two rounds of realignment have made us cynical. But I point to every decision that has been made around conference realignment since the 2010 Big 12 implosion. Everyone will chase the money. Always.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Obviously two rounds of realignment have made us cynical. But I point to every decision that has been made around conference realignment since the 2010 Big 12 implosion. Everyone will chase the money. Always.

Totally agree with OUT. At the time many of the others left the media deals were no where near as different. Then you have the PAC which was just the stupidest conference from a leadership perspective.

 

[Cyhig]

The Harlem Globetrotters needed the Washington Generals. So why wouldn't the Buckeye's need the Terrapins or the Wolverines need the Hoosiers?

Media rights is about brands and ratings. Ohio State could play Valley HS and it would draw 3M viewers on CBS at 2:30p. So its more about the top 15-20 brands playing the next best group of 15-20 brands.

IMO it will not come down to "we can make much more money without you guys" because that isn't a new thing. There may be a sliver of a chance that a Vanderbilt or Northwestern feel the investment/potential liability to support a Big10 or SEC football program is beyond their school's core mission.

Georgia Alabama just drew 12 million. I think networks would want to find ways to guarantee marquee matchups like that each week that would generate that kind of viewership IMO.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Georgia Alabama just drew 12 million. I think networks would want to find ways to guarantee marquee matchups like that each week that would generate that kind of viewership IMO.

They generate that because they are both highly ranked and considered for the championship. A 2-2 bama vs a 1-4 Georgia isn’t drawing that

Also not getting that number alienating a bunch of fans whose teams no longer matter

Edit* this is also the second time in a decade these teams are meeting outside a championship or playoff.

 

[FinalFourCy]

This has been discussed a lot and the simple reason isn’t show elite programs stay elite by exploiting many inherent advantages they have. Moving into a 20 team super league will cause massive damage to those brands as they regularly rack up losing seasons. In addition to the fact that a 20 team super league would alienate so many fan bases that the ratings would tank and the money would dry up.

That’s very questionable, given being in the premier league would be tremendously valuable in itself, not to mention you’re overestimating the increase in “losing season” risk.

Having a losing season, but being in the top league is better branding than in the P5/P4 era in which a school like Florida or UT or Nebraska or even Bama have all had down periods, but without the benefit of being in the P1 branding.

Plus, it would likely be closer to 30 schools, and not formally separate. They can have a P1 super league but give CFP access to the other 30 to 40 schools as a cheap subsidy that keeps fan engagement. For the MSU types, being in a mid level Big 10 along with Purdue, NW, IU, MN, Illinois, Iowa, etc would arguably be better access than ever

OU and UT left a superior path to CFP and wins, the old fashioned way to get money and prestige, instead just opting to move conferences in order to get money and prestige. If an entity offers enough to get SEC or BIG schools to leave, expect similar

 

[FriendlySpartan]

That’s very questionable, given being in the premier league would be tremendously valuable in itself, not to mention you’re overestimating the change in “losing season” risk.

Having a losing season, but being in the top league is better branding the P5/P4 era in which a school like Florida or UT or Nebraska or even Bama have all had down periods, but without the benefit of being in the P1

Plus, it would likely be closer to 30 schools, and not formally separate. They can have a P1 super league but give CFP access to the other 30 to 40 schools as a cheap subsidy that keeps fan engagement. For the MSU types, being in a mid level Big 10 along with Purdue, NW, IU, MN, Illinois, Iowa, etc that would arguably be better access than ever

The premier league has relegation, I also didn’t bring it up but it’s impossible to compare for that reason.

And no when those teams get regular losses in the super league the brand takes a hit and programs fall off. Then you’re just back into a normal league with 3-4 teams regularly being a cut above.