Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[FinalFourCy]

Isn't that a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy though?

Investors (networks) aren’t in the business of proving or ruling out what schools can’t make top dollar.

Regardless, it’s more an example of the exclusivity of history and prestige in college football. With enough time, it will even out some in new era…which is why legacy elites do not benefit from continuing equal revenue sharing

 

[FinalFourCy]

Yes you proved me wrong by posting a three year old graph that showed blue bloods with primetime time slots make up 50% of viewership ratings. No ****.

It hasn’t changed much in 3 years. You think those schools were randomly put in top viewing windows?

You are clearly new to college football. It’s long been an oligarchy. Schools at the top aren’t looking to give that up, which is why unequal revenue sharing is coming

Another way to look at it- if the conferences voted to get rid of equal revenue sharing, who gets more, IU or OSU? Which school would networks pay much more to lure if starting a new conference?

 

[BadBoi]

It hasn’t changed much in 3 years. You think those schools were randomly put in top viewing windows?

You are clearly new to college football. It’s long been an oligarchy. Schools at the top aren’t looking to give that up, which is why unequal revenue sharing is coming

Another way to look at it- if the conferences voted to get rid of equal revenue sharing, who gets more, IU or OSU? Which school would networks pay much more to lure if starting a new conference?

I bet Indiana isn't in your graph.

"Sixteen of the league’s schools are fully vested members and received full shares, but their total amounts varied by CFP participation. Ohio State secured $91.55 million, Penn State earned $88.9 million, and Indiana collected $81 million, while 13 other members collected between $76 million and $79 million. Oregon and Washington receive only partial shares until 2030 and earned $48 million and $46 million, respectively. Oregon competed in the 2024-25 CFP, which explains the $2 million difference."

That's from Dochtermans article. There already is unequal revenue sharing. The teams that perform the best are being rewarded for it.

Big Ten schools receive record $1.37 billion from 2024-25 fiscal year

The 2024-25 fiscal year was the Big Ten’s first with 18 members and coincided with a new media rights deal and the new 12-team CFP.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Cyhig]

I bet Indiana isn't in your graph.

"Sixteen of the league’s schools are fully vested members and received full shares, but their total amounts varied by CFP participation. Ohio State secured $91.55 million, Penn State earned $88.9 million, and Indiana collected $81 million, while 13 other members collected between $76 million and $79 million. Oregon and Washington receive only partial shares until 2030 and earned $48 million and $46 million, respectively. Oregon competed in the 2024-25 CFP, which explains the $2 million difference."

That's from Dochtermans article. There already is unequal revenue sharing. The teams that perform the best are being rewarded for it.

Big Ten schools receive record $1.37 billion from 2024-25 fiscal year

The 2024-25 fiscal year was the Big Ten’s first with 18 members and coincided with a new media rights deal and the new 12-team CFP.

www.nytimes.com

It was “unequal” due to the teams making the CFP. Big 10 media rights are equal revenue sharing

 

[BadBoi]

It was “unequal” due to the teams making the CFP. Big 10 media rights are equal revenue sharing

Good lord

 

[CascadeClone]

I don't think we are in if the breakaway is 48 teams. Even if the breakaway is 64 teams, we are on the bubble. Iowa is not a talent rich state and not very populous, we don't have the athletic prestige, and there is already one big college from Iowa in the breakaway. What we have going for us are large university, good academics, our fan support, and recent success. But I still don't think that will do it for 48 teams.

I have looked at this several times, considering media brand value, alumi count, AD support - things that matter to money. ISU is in the mid 30s, they would absolutely make the cut for a 48 team deal.

For a 20 team, no way. Iowa might make that cut, but their odds would be much better at 24.

 

[CascadeClone]

Why do they need weak teams to beat up on? If you have a league of 30 or so teams, and top 3-4 teams all have 1-3 losses, so what? In fact, it would probably make things more interesting and draw more viewership to have some balance in that size of league, and not have the same teams dominate every year. There will be natural ebb and flow of team strength from year to year, like in the NFL.

I did the math on this about 500 pages ago, 24 is plenty to fill the prime TV slots and maximize value.

Agree on your analysis.

 

[CascadeClone]

So since TV money is what drives the money for programs. Let me ask what you what Fox or ESPN would prefer to see. Your best 12 teams (6 games a week) over the discussed P2 alignment with 48 teams (24 games a week) They will take the 24>6 every time.

Actually not, its profit not revenue that they want.

Those 6 games get you 80% of the revenue. But you can cut your costs by 40% if you have 24 teams rather than 48 (and still pay the top teams more per head). So 80% of the revenue, 60% of the cost... that's a winner.

 

[CascadeClone]

I’m kinda for watching it all burn to the ground at this point. It’s so sad to think where college athletics was 30 years ago vs now. Not one thing is better now.

I almost hit agree, but - the players have a lot more freedom, and aren't indentured serfs anymore. So that's good they aren't getting screwed and treated like crap anymore.

But yeah, everything else is much worse.

 

[cykadelic2]

More Fox Puppet Boy quotes. As noted by JP on Monday, Petitti is Fox's mouthpiece.

The most overlooked fact is that the oversized conferences have rendered SEC/B10 conference championships and CCGs meaningless with 12 teams and with expansion to 16 or 24, all P4 conference championship races will be meaningless.

7x10 rational realignment with a 16 team CFP would restore the value of conference championships as the 7 conference champs and top at-large would host 1st round CFP games:

 

[Cloneon]

Because of ratings. A more apt question is why one would think otherwise.

View attachment 171093

All this validates is 'promotion' and timeslots.

 

[FinalFourCy]

All this validates is 'promotion' and timeslots.

Right, without that OSU is as valuable as Toledo

 

[FinalFourCy]

More Fox Puppet Boy quotes. As noted by JP on Monday, Petitti is Fox's mouthpiece.

The most overlooked fact is that the oversized conferences have rendered SEC/B10 conference championships and CCGs meaningless with 12 teams and with expansion to 16 or 24, all P4 conference championship races will be meaningless.

7x10 rational realignment with a 16 team CFP would restore the value of conference championships as the 7 conference champs and top at-large would host 1st round CFP games:

Haven’t you been begging for the CFP to go to market?


The expanded conferences have not killed the conference title games, if anything they are more important in unequal scheduling of large conferences.

It is the expanded CFP that kills them.

And an expanded CFP is much better for the sport than conference title games, particularly when conferences are smaller. No need to have conference title games after season of round robin play, unless the title game is actually just the CFP 1st round

It’s not overlooked. CFP expansion’s main drivers have been that conference title games are exhibitions with CFP at 12, bowls even more meaningless, and realignment.

 

[Jkclone15]

Because of ratings. A more apt question is why one would think otherwise.

View attachment 171093

People often look at charts like these and think "oh, those 18 schools must be the most valuable then"

What I think it really shows is that the tv networks only have prime slots for ~18 schools. You could replace ~14 of those with other P4 schools and none of the numbers would change. So the threat isn't be one of the top 20 schools, it's be one of the most convenient to tag along with the 4 schools that do move the needle. Which is why it's better to be Rutgers or Vanderbilt than FSU or Clemson right now.

 

[FinalFourCy]

People often look at charts like these and think "oh, those 18 schools must be the most valuable then"

What I think it really shows is that the tv networks only have prime slots for ~18 schools. You could replace ~14 of those with other P4 schools and none of the numbers would change. So the threat isn't be one of the top 20 schools, it's be one of the most convenient to tag along with the 4 schools that do move the needle. Which is why it's better to be Rutgers or Vanderbilt than FSU or Clemson right now.

You’re dreaming if you think there isn’t a stratification in value.

Context does matter. No one denies that. And the linear window math is what caps things right now. More games in those windows is cannibalism of viewers. Subscription revenue needed to justify that inventory

That’s largely the point. There are 10-20 schools that do well regardless of context, then a bunch of filler needed to fill windows and schedules of the 10-20.

P2 networks aren’t in the business of finding out if other schools, with exposure investments, could eventually become as valuable . Nor do they want new media to come in and do that, because it would take from their viewership

 

[cykadelic2]

Haven’t you been begging for the CFP to go to market?


The expanded conferences have not killed the conference title games, if anything they are more important in unequal scheduling of large conferences.

It is the expanded CFP that kills them.

And an expanded CFP is much better for the sport than conference title games, particularly when conferences are smaller. No need to have conference title games after season of round robin play, unless the title game is actually just the CFP 1st round

It’s not overlooked. CFP expansion’s main drivers have been that conference title games are exhibitions with CFP at 12, bowls even more meaningless, and realignment.

The CCGs for the B10 and SEC were rendered meaningless upon expansion to 12. They may still have value for the ACC and B12 if the CFP stays at 12.

Obviously CCGs would be eliminated with 7x10 realignment but the value of winning the conference title round robin would be greatly enhanced with an AQ and hosting a first round game in a 16 team CFP.

And CFP (and regular season) value is maximized with bid packages that would enable multiple bidders beyond ESPN (and potentially Fox) all having a piece of the CFP like the NFL does with its post-season. That will not occur as long as ESPN and Fox own all of the existing 16-team SEC and 18-team B10. And that is what the current nonsense all about anyway, the continued and desired control of the sport by ESPN and Fox at 50% (or less) of the real value of the inventory.

 

[Jkclone15]

You’re dreaming if you think there isn’t a stratification in value.

Context does matter. No one denies that. And the linear window math is what caps things right now. More games in those windows is cannibalism of viewers. Subscription revenue needed to justify that inventory

That’s largely the point. There are 10-20 schools that do well regardless of context, then a bunch of filler needed to fill windows and schedules of the 10-20.

P2 networks aren’t in the business of finding out if other schools, with exposure investments, could eventually become as valuable . Nor do they want new media to come in and do that, because it would take from their viewership

You're restating what I just said. The only difference is I think there are 4-5 schools that matter and you think 10-20.

 

[FinalFourCy]

You're restating what I just said. The only difference is I think there are 4-5 schools that matter and you think 10-20.

It’s more than 4. The difference is material to the point being made

 

[RustShack]

I think Oregon State and Washington State were both ranked when the PAC collapsed and they were left out.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

You're restating what I just said. The only difference is I think there are 4-5 schools that matter and you think 10-20.

It's more than 4 or 5, but less than 20, most likely around 10 to 12 schools that actually move the needle on a broadcast. OSU, Michigan, Oregon, Alabama, Georgia, ND, Texas, LSU, throw in schools like Indiana that are undefeated and on a nice run or schools that used to be good and have slipped, you are at the 10 to 12 number.

If you look at ISU media ratings it always comes down to time and the network, but an ISU game in prime time it does well, throw the same game on FX1 or some other network the numbers drop. Most schools just do not have a large enough fan base to go out, find the game and watch it. Stream it and the numbers drop unless you are one of the top 10 to 12 schools.