Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[isucy86]

Game is being played in the Pacific time zone at 8pm. Saying it is one hour from being played on a Saturday is factually false. If you use that argument, a person watching in London could already state that it is being played on Saturday. Just because Rutgers is in it doesn’t change the fact that the game is being played at 8pm local time.

I hope that both sides of the equation matter. Time zone where the game is played matters for the players and home team fans. Would also hope the TV folks heavily consider game time for away team fans. On the surface playing an 11pm ET kickoff for many Rutgers fans doesn't seem in their best interest.

But who knows. Things get started later on the east coast, so maybe its a good time for the Friday night drinking crowd (18-35 yo) demographic. The game will be shown on FOX OTA, so could be FOX feels they will get a lot of football fans to stick around and watch after the early MLB World Series game. So we'll see how ratings end up.

 

[FerShizzle]

The funny thing is if Clemson or Florida State leave, why would Utah want to step into that tire fire just to play Cal and Stanford again and make less money?

Because they very much don’t want to be in the same conference as BYU and they think the ACC is a superior conference for academics. They spent a decade and a half talking **** about being a prestigious pac12 school and now it’s awkward.

 

[FerShizzle]

This guy is talking about market sizes like it's 2005.

This. So much this. The ACC media and ADs have about a decade of catching up to do and think their privilege will save them, just like the pac 12. This is why BY will run train on the ACC. Those of us already acclimated to and living in the realignment wasteland are going to eat these newbs for dinner, literally.

 

[exCyDing]

Stanford and Cal aren’t taking full ACC TV shares for 9 years and are only getting 30% for the first 7 years. SMU isn’t taking a TV distribution for like 10 years.

Why would Utah join the ACC when a.) FSU, Clemson, and North Carolina at a minimum won’t be there AND/OR b.) the terms would presumably similar to Stanford and Cal’s at best and SMU at worst. And that’s not even taking into account the massive cost increases with travel and buyout of Big 12 contract

Twitter going to Twitter

None of it makes any sense. The ACC is going to go through some things at some point in the next 10 years. If Utah wants to relive the experience of being in a disintegrating conference with no media deal or offers worth what they need, and everyone scramble to jump ship, the ACC is the mostly likely conference to give them that experience.

 

[2speedy1]

Weiss likely got his "info" from this Georgia Tech guy who doesn't realize UU has significant exit fees and a GOR buyout unlike the other 3 schools mentioned:

This is funny because what percentage of some of these markets do the teams mentioned have.

I think it is hilarious to say SMU brings the Dallas/FW market, when they probably account for less than 5% of the fanbase there.

Then you have Stan/Cal, that bring a market that could care less about CFB let alone Stan and Cal.

 

[2speedy1]

Stanford and Cal aren’t taking full ACC TV shares for 9 years and are only getting 30% for the first 7 years. SMU isn’t taking a TV distribution for like 10 years.

Why would Utah join the ACC when a.) FSU, Clemson, and North Carolina at a minimum won’t be there AND/OR b.) the terms would presumably similar to Stanford and Cal’s at best and SMU at worst. And that’s not even taking into account the massive cost increases with travel and buyout of Big 12 contract

Twitter going to Twitter

Not to mention if those teams leave, ESPN will most likely drop their contract as they have that option regardless in a couple years, which they may drop it either way depending on how things shake out.

 

[Rogue52]

These tweets from ACC reporters resemble what we saw from the PAC 12 in the 12 months leading up to their death.

 

[KnappShack]

This is funny because what percentage of some of these markets do the teams mentioned have.

I think it is hilarious to say SMU brings the Dallas/FW market, when they probably account for less than 5% of the fanbase there.

Then you have Stan/Cal, that bring a market that could care less about CFB let alone Stan and Cal.

5% is a stretch IMHO and I can't imagine it would increase any time soon.

But but but Craig James and Eric Dickerson!!!

 

[CrossCyed]

Because they very much don’t want to be in the same conference as BYU and they think the ACC is a superior conference for academics. They spent a decade and a half talking **** about being a prestigious pac12 school and now it’s awkward.

You're confusing random fans on Twitter with the Athletics Department. There's literally no reason to believe the rumor.

 

[HouClone]

Say Utah leaves to the ACC and then later ACC craters with the brands leaving. I would rather invite any team, even Alcorn State, than any team that left the Big 12 (all due respect to Colorado which I blame Texas).

 

[Nolaeer]

If Utah leaves and the ACC implodes, Utah will be down there with BC and wake in terms of getting an invite again.

 

[CascadeClone]

You're confusing random fans on Twitter with the Athletics Department. There's literally no reason to believe the rumor.

Yeah, there's no way anyone in a leadership position would entertain that move, even assuming the legalities of Big12 exit are easy (which they aren't). There's plenty of risk and cost, and very little (if any) benefit - except maybe crowing about academics and sticking your finger in BYU's eye.

 

[CascadeClone]

Have watched a couple ACC pods about realignment et al, from the "others" not FSU or Clemson. They're not near as arrogant as P12 folks were, but still a lot of hubris.

One LVille guy was "hoping for B1G, obviously LV is a great fit" but said probably the Big12 was more likely. That's a good example of where they are mentally. Just haven't been thru the battles and faced reality yet.

They think the ACC > Big12, so if the Big12 is OK, then ACC will be OK too. I think they just don't feel the existential risk that is actually there, they think the 3 teams they added will duplicate what the Big12 did to protect them. It might, but I am not so sure.

They don't see how unstable everything becomes without incredibly strong leadership and trust. Big12 had Yormark, Pollard, Mack Rhoades, Holcutt, Gene Taylor-- who chose to hang together rather than hang separately. They had worked together for years, trusted each other, and they knew what time it was.

Even if only 2-4 of the top schools leave, then will the mid-tiers like VT, NCSt, LV, Pitt rather be in that conference with Cal, Stanford, WF, BC -- or the Big12? It's like the Mountain 4 again, except this time its the Appalachians. There's a lot of push, and then you have Yormark pulling. Unstable.

 

[Al_4_State]

I legitimately don't understand why fans of non blue blood schools want to be in the SEC or Big 10.

I understand why admins want to be there, but not fans.

If we got the Big 10 invite tomorrow, we'd obviously take it, but I would not be excited as a fan. Our absolutely ceiling would be between 6-8 wins and we'd never have any shot at the playoffs. Iowa and Nebraska would be the only schools we'd have any history with on our schedule and we already play Iowa annually as it is.

The current Big 12 is going to provide a school like us (and all of our peers) far more entertainment than being a member of one of those leagues would.

 

[laminak]

I legitimately don't understand why fans of non blue blood schools want to be in the SEC or Big 10.

I understand why admins want to be there, but not fans.

If we got the Big 10 invite tomorrow, we'd obviously take it, but I would not be excited as a fan. Our absolutely ceiling would be between 6-8 wins and we'd never have any shot at the playoffs. Iowa and Nebraska would be the only schools we'd have any history with on our schedule and we already play Iowa annually as it is.

The current Big 12 is going to provide a school like us (and all of our peers) far more entertainment than being a member of one of those leagues would.

Fans want to be in the SEC or Big 10 since they don't want to be left behind like OreSt and Wazzou.

 

[Al_4_State]

Fans want to be in the SEC or Big 10 since they don't want to be left behind like OreSt and Wazzou.

If the SEC and Big 10 broke away, then I get it. This is assuming they don't and the Big 12 and ACC have the same playoff access they currently have.

Again, bragging about being in a conference while winning 4 games a year seems like an empty and miserable existence to me.

 

[Clonehomer]

If the SEC and Big 10 broke away, then I get it. This is assuming they don't and the Big 12 and ACC have the same playoff access they currently have.

Again, bragging about being in a conference while winning 4 games a year seems like an empty and miserable existence to me.

This is a good point. Even with the advantage the Big10 has in the CFP, I don’t really see Iowa having a better chance of making it than ISU.

 

[Al_4_State]

This is a good point. Even with the advantage the Big10 has in the CFP, I don’t really see Iowa having a better chance of making it than ISU.

They don't at all.

That said, Iowa's saving grace is locking in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Nebraska every year. There will still be years that they only play maybe 2 of the really good Big 10 teams (like this year).

They can easily have a conference slate that looks like this:
Nebraska
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Ohio State
Northwestern
Indiana
Maryland
Purdue
UCLA

ISU this year is probably going 8-1 against that slate, as would Iowa. I suspect when Iowa's dodging the big boys, they'll get their schedule picked apart. Plus, they'd get blasted in the Big 10 CCG if that happens.

 

[SCNCY]

Say Utah leaves to the ACC and then later ACC craters with the brands leaving. I would rather invite any team, even Alcorn State, than any team that left the Big 12 (all due respect to Colorado which I blame Texas).

I think it'd be halirious if Utah leaves the Big 12 for the ACC, only for UNC, Clemson, and FSU to leave, thus crumbling the ACC. Only for the Big 12 to invite ACC teams except Utah; relegating them back to G5.

 

[Gonzo]

They don't at all.

That said, Iowa's saving grace is locking in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Nebraska every year. There will still be years that they only play maybe 2 of the really good Big 10 teams (like this year).

They can easily have a conference slate that looks like this:
Nebraska
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Ohio State
Northwestern
Indiana
Maryland
Purdue
UCLA

ISU this year is probably going 8-1 against that slate, as would Iowa. I suspect when Iowa's dodging the big boys, they'll get their schedule picked apart. Plus, they'd get blasted in the Big 10 CCG if that happens.

Possible but I think a conference slate like that would be an anomaly, and even if it did happen, the schedule the following season (and probably the next couple) would be brutal.

2024 will be the easiest and closest to your example, except we have Washington instead of Purdue.

2025 we have Oregon, Penn St., and @USC.
2026 we have Ohio St., Michigan, and @Wash.
2027 we have Michigan, USC, UCLA, and @Oregon.
2028 we have @Penn St. and @USC.

I also think Ruhle and Fickell could do good things at Nebby and Wisco, so I'm not looking at them as pushovers moving ahead either.