Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[FinalFourCy]

Campbell's comments are based on what media industry experts are telling him and FBS Presidents/ADs as multiple outlets have reported.

By media experts you mean consultants hired by the American Conference.

And by FBS you mean G5 and M2.

That’s the issue. As Crakes points out in the CBS article, why would the most pertinent schools do this? The industry tends to rather make less as long as making less hurts competition

 

[1UNI2ISU]

By media experts you mean consultants hired by the American Conference.

And by FBS you mean G5 and M2.

That’s the issue. As Crakes points out in the CBS article, why would the most pertinent schools do this? The industry tends to rather make less as long as making less hurts competition

If this was a slam dunk deal, people that actually have influence would be shouting it from the mountaintop.

Yes, yes I know.... puppets and all...

 

[FinalFourCy]

If this was a slam dunk deal, people that actually have influence would be shouting it from the mountaintop.

Yes, yes I know.... puppets and all...

I actually disagree on that

Why would the buy side (networks) shout from the mountaintop that the schools could actually take more of the profits from the networks if they pooled, both schools and regular season with postseason?

And why would P4 conferences (HQ, not schools) shout that they should basically be replaced or marginalized? You would not have expected Big 12 and PAC to champion the fact their top brands would make more if leaving for other entity

There is an inefficiency. Schools are more concerned with how much they make relative to others, than how much their rights could make

PE is trying to exploit that, and I suspect the result will be the networks offering the P2 more, as well as add more schools, to decrease the opportunity for new entrants to disrupt

If I’m the P2 schools, flirting with pooling is a great way to extract more from the duopoly

 

[Cloneon]

Amistad: "...whoever tells the best story wins."

 

[cykadelic2]

By media experts you mean consultants hired by the American Conference.

And by FBS you mean G5 and M2.

That’s the issue. As Crakes points out in the CBS article, why would the most pertinent schools do this? The industry tends to rather make less as long as making less hurts competition

Yeah, by the "industry", you mean ESPN and Fox who obviously want cost containment with additional brand consolidation and relegation. The only parties that are concerned about the competition are ESPN, Fox and their respective puppets in the SEC and B10 Commissioner offices.

And Ross Bjork would disagree. He wants to make more money via pooling so that Ohio State can continue to support all of their existing sports without going in the red like they currently do. He isn't concerned about the "competition" especially when Ohio St would continue to make more money than anybody with pooling and unequal revenue sharing. And Bjork also wants wants an Anti-Trust exemption and if he wants that, he needs to agree to media rights pooling so that Olympic and non-rev sports can be saved at the G5 and P4 levels. The Anti-Trust exemption, the SBA amendment and media rights pooling for all FBS is all tied together.

And the media experts include many more beyond whoever the American hired. It is foolish on your end to think otherwise as you suggest.

 

[cykadelic2]

Schools are more concerned with how much they make relative to others, than how much their rights could make

That is complete BS. P4 School Presidents/ADs are not concerned with that. They only want to make more money to save and continue support of their Olympic and non-rev sports.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Yeah, by the "industry", you mean ESPN and Fox who obviously want cost containment with additional brand consolidation and relegation. The only parties that are concerned about the competition are ESPN, Fox and their respective puppets in the SEC and B10 Commissioner offices.

And Ross Bjork would disagree. He wants to make more money via pooling so that Ohio State can continue to support all of their existing sports without going in the red like they currently do. He isn't concerned about the "competition" especially when Ohio St would continue to make more money than anybody with pooling and unequal revenue sharing. And Bjork also wants wants an Anti-Trust exemption and if he wants that, he needs to agree to media rights pooling so that Olympic and non-rev sports can be saved at the G5 and P4 levels. The Anti-Trust exemption, the SBA amendment and media rights pooling for all FBS is all tied together.

And the media experts include many more beyond whoever the American hired. It is foolish on your end to think otherwise as you suggest.

Bjork is concerned with both- getting more revenue and keeping the revenue advantage

He can achieve both by leveraging pooling to get more from the “duopoly”, and likely unequal revenue sharing from BIG if needed

For mid and low level P2, making the same as the M1/M2 but in the P2 is superior to making the same as Big 12/ACC, but in a real P5. The status lost by the M schools is status gained by even low P2s

Most ADs will face more consequences from losing that superior status of being in the P2 than they will from cutting non-revenue sports

There is an inefficiency, one that will take PE posting a lot of cash to exploit. And they’ll need to do so before being in the P2 is of great value itself.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

Let's make something clear.

Saving non-revs isn't altruistic. It's so that they don't have to take the PR hit when they eliminate them.

When the rubber hits the road, all this extra money still goes directly to football.

 

[cykadelic2]

Bjork is concerned with both- getting more revenue and keeping the revenue advantage

He can achieve both by leveraging pooling to get more from the “duopoly”, and likely unequal revenue sharing from BIG if needed

For mid and low level P2, making the same as the M1/M2 but in the P2 is superior to making the same as Big 12/ACC, but in a real P5. The status lost by the M schools is status gained by even low P2s

Most ADs will face more consequences from losing that superior status of being in the P2 than they will from cutting non-revenue sports

There is an inefficiency, one that will take PE posting a lot of cash to exploit. And they’ll need to do so before being in the P2 is of great value itself.

......and you continue to completely ignore the Anti-Trust exemption aspect of this.

 

[cykadelic2]

Let's make something clear.

Saving non-revs isn't altruistic. It's so that they don't have to take the PR hit when they eliminate them.

When the rubber hits the road, all this extra money still goes directly to football.

The only thing that needs to be made clear is how stupid of a hot take this is.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Let's make something clear.

Saving non-revs isn't altruistic. It's so that they don't have to take the PR hit when they eliminate them.

When the rubber hits the road, all this extra money still goes directly to football.

Agree

Presidents/ADs aren’t losing that much sleep over needing to cut non-revenue, regardless of what they say in public

in theory all but 10-15 schools benefit from pooling imo. But changing the mindset unlikely. It would take a lot of new entrant money upfront

 

[FinalFourCy]

......and you continue to completely ignore the Anti-Trust exemption aspect of this.

Wrong. You just don’t understand the topic well enough to see that. Instead just shout non sequiturs over and over.

 

[cykadelic2]

Wrong. You just don’t understand the topic well enough to see that. Instead just shout non sequiturs over and over.

There is no effin way an Anti-Trust Exemption or any other Fed legislation gets approved if the "plan" is more SEC/B10 brand consolidation and financial relegation of 88+ FBS schools (including ISU) that results in hundreds of Olympic/Non-Rev schollie opportunities being eliminated. Especially when the alternative is all 136 FBS schools can presumably double their revenues (with SEC and B10 maintaining revenue advantages) and existing Olympic/Non-Rev sports are saved for the most part.

Even a P2 Boy like you should understand that.

 

[MartyFine]

 

[cykadelic2]

Presidents/ADs aren’t losing that much sleep over needing to cut non-revenue, regardless of what they say in public

You truly have your head up your ass with this hot take.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

You truly have your head up your ass with this hot take.

Dude, you need to breathe.

You've gotten yourself so dug in to this that you believe the hypothetical is the stone cold truth even when people use decades of evidence to the contrary you just lash out. I appreciate your passion but it's getting really hard to have a conversation with you when everybody is a puppet or a P2 boy or has their head up their ass every time they present a conflicting thought.

1000 steps have to happen before we get anywhere near your dreams of consolidation and you act like it's just going to sail through congress and the courts, the NFL isn't going to get involved, the G6 are going to accept relegation, etc. It may happen but it's not going to be smooth sailing to get there and it's not going to happen with current systems in place. Paying SAs took 30 years and this is way more complex than that.

 

[cykadelic2]

Dude, you need to breathe.

You've gotten yourself so dug in to this that you believe the hypothetical is the stone cold truth even when people use decades of evidence to the contrary you just lash out. I appreciate your passion but it's getting really hard to have a conversation with you when everybody is a puppet or a P2 boy or has their head up their ass every time they present a conflicting thought.

1000 steps have to happen before we get anywhere near your dreams of consolidation and you act like it's just going to sail through congress and the courts, the NFL isn't going to get involved, the G6 are going to accept relegation, etc. It may happen but it's not going to be smooth sailing to get there and it's not going to happen with current systems in place. Paying SAs took 30 years and this is way more complex than that.

Yeah, it's not going to be smooth sailing but the some of the BS arguments that you and the P2 Boy put forth against it are truly mind boggling (e.g. the NFL intervening to undercut CFB if CFB gets a SBA amendment approved for them; Presidents/ADs don't care if they cut non-rev sports, etc.)

 

[ClubCy]

SEC here we come.

 

[BMWallace]

Just more evidence that time slot and network has more to impact viewership than which teams are playing.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Yeah, it's not going to be smooth sailing but the some of the BS arguments that you and the P2 Boy put forth against it are truly mind boggling (e.g. the NFL intervening to undercut CFB if CFB gets a SBA amendment approved for them; Presidents/ADs don't care if they cut non-rev sports, etc.)

You’re doing the plan/strategy a disservice with your ignorance on this

Pooling is possible, but it’s unlikely and will take Wall St more than Fed intervention, short of the executive branch going rogue