Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[1SEIACLONE]

The comparison is made due to the likelihood that ISU's media payouts will be cut in half (or more) if Cruz-Cantwell doesn't get passed and Fox/ESPN are free to conduct additional brand consolidation. So yeah in that scenario, the ISU AD is essentially devastated like Wazzu and Oregon St were.

Washington State and Oregon State are hurt by being located in the far NW part of the country, with no other peers located anywhere close to them other than the other state school. Travel is difficult to get to either one, and is costly. Ames and ISU is not even close to having to overcome those types of obstacles, ISU is within easy driving distance to Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Missouri, and the Kansas schools, plus EIU. Not talking 10 to 12 hours but 5 or 6 to most of those locations, while Washington St. and Oregon State cannot say the same.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Here is the issue with this.

Saying something is undervalued or overvalued is great and all but in reality the only way that works out is if someone is willing to pay more.

You can say something is worth $X but if no one is willing to pay that much is it really worth it?

At the time of the CBS deal with the SEC, no one was willing to pay more, and sure by the end of the deal of course they were worth more. That is the way it is supposed to work unless you have a depreciating product, and we all know that is not the case. Hell inflation alone means the dollar amount value will increase at the end of a contract vs the beginning.

But in the grand scheme of things you can say this was a steal of a deal or that was way undervalued etc, but in the end if no one is willing to pay more then the value is what someone is willing to pay.

People try to do this all the time on EBAY and FB Marketplace. "Someone listed something for $X so it must be worth that" No ...... listing something is different from Selling something, so in the end, the value is what someone is willing to pay, not what the seller believes or wants the value to be.

Sure ESPN and Fox control the majority right now.... its not because they got some sweetheart deal, it is because no one was willing to pay more. All these conferences shop themselves out unofficially before taking the step to open up negotiations, and unless they see someone else is willing and able to come to the table with a better deal, they keep the negotiations closed with their media partner. We saw this play out first hand with the B12 and P12.

I just dont believe there are "more deep pockets" out there willing to significantly outbid ESPN and Fox to take on a full slate of content. Those types are happy subleasing a selection of games as they see fit. Maybe that will change, maybe not, but up to this point nothing shows me that there are big pockets lined up to pay 3x what ESPN and Fox are.

So I think there could be more deep pockets out there possibly but with the last media deal the conference wanted as little of a streaming presence as possible. If that shifts then it possibly could open some thing up more but every single other thing in your post I totally agree with

 

[FinalFourCy]

If Apple or one of the other streaming channels decided they wanted to get into college football, and would look at the ACC and B12, there could be a 3rd peer conference. Apple, YouTube and a few others have plenty of money to bring the other two conferences up to par with the B10 and SEC. Now doing it is totally different, but there would be a market there to make money as the regional provider for teams out of the two left over conferences.

Unless you’re talking about them using football as a loss leader, it’s not a question of having the money, it’s about whether there are enough viewers left after P2 get theirs (there are not)

there are not open windows. Any games they put on will compete for viewers with P2 games. It’s unlikely we pull enough viewers for the rate to be at P2 level.

Certainly not likely enough for a new entrant to pay that rate up front…unless they aren’t looking to make profit off the rights, but just sell Amazon prime or Apple TV

We could pull enough to cause some damage to P2, which is incentive for P2/P2 networks to expand and gut 3rd conference

 

[2speedy1]

So I think there could be more deep pockets out there possibly but with the last media deal the conference wanted as little of a streaming presence as possible. If that shifts then it possibly could open some thing up more but every single other thing in your post I totally agree with

I also think those with "deep pockets" dont want the entire media package, especially those that have little to no experience in broadcasting sports or college sports. In the future more may gain traction, and experience in the market, by sublicensing a small slate of games, to fill their wanted windows, and to gain some insight in how it will work for them.

If anything we know is things change and In a few years I am sure things will be different then today let alone a what the landscape was a few years ago when the current deals were done. But then again we may see the 2 major players continue to control everything and others happy to just buy the games they want too.

People can hate on ESPN and Fox, hell I am no fan of them myself, but I dont see a long line of companies or really anyone else beating down the door to outbid them.

 

[ISUinOR]

For fun, I asked ChatGPT to read this entire thread and respond with the next post that would sum up the entire thread. And it holds true for almost EVERY longer thread about almost any topic on the site. Here it is. Enjoy!

"The funniest part of this thread is that if you go back a few hundred pages, you'll find people who were absolutely certain about things that never happened, people who were laughed at for predictions that eventually did happen, and people who were right for reasons that turned out to be completely wrong.

After 30,000+ posts, the one lesson this thread should have taught all of us is that nobody outside a handful of university presidents, conference commissioners, network executives, and lawyers actually knows where this ends.

Every "it's obvious" scenario eventually runs into some combination of money, politics, contracts, ego, television strategy, litigation, or a completely unexpected event.

We're all trying to solve a puzzle without knowing what pieces are actually on the table.

So maybe the strongest opinion anyone can have at this point is: "We'll see."

History says the people speaking with the most certainty today are usually the ones getting quoted for laughs a year from now."

The last sentence is pure GOLD.