Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[alarson]

I'd think that the only thing holding the Big10 back from announcing them is that they want to wait until after the UC regents vote on UCLA. To have the PAC implode with those two might prevent them from approving UCLA from going.

Once UCLA is in the clear, they'll pull that last domino and watch the whole thing tumble.

The thing is though, if the regents are looking at it objectively and not as fans, they'd still probably have to say yes to this.

The pac 12 is far behind as it is, even without losing these teams.

The regents can choose between having one program that is in the Power 2 or having zero. There's no option for both.

 

[CysRage]

The crazy thing is, whatever this jumbled up car wreck of college football is headed toward, is probably not anywhere close to a model designed to produce the most income across the board.

Nope. As said earlier in the thread if the Power 5 was smart, they would have joined forces to leverage a collective negotiation with the networks EVERYONE would come out ahead even the current Big Ten and SEC money.

 

[cyfan92]

Woof our "pod."

Utah and BYU in the West
ISU and KSU in the Central
OSU and BU in the South
Cincy in the East

Decent balance. REALLY GOOD conference for MBB.

Big 12 tournament stays in KC. Football championship can be farmed out annually to Dallas, Chiefs dome in the 2030's, Orlando, and Tempe

 

[nfrine]

My grandpa used to walk up hill to school both ways, in the cold and snow, with no shoes and no coat, and only had a lard sandwich for dinner......AND HE LIKED IT!!!

Luke, I am your father.

 

[Clonehomer]

The thing is though, if the regents are looking at it objectively and not as fans, they'd still probably have to say yes to this.

The pac 12 is far behind as it is, even without losing these teams.

The regents can choose between having one program that is in the Power 2 or having zero. There's no option for both.

Unless they think they have the power to stop it. Probably don't, but the Big12 schools to the PAC seemed like a done deal too.

 

[NWICY]

Has anyone done a welfare check on Bill Walton yet?

Deep bong hits tonight for him.

 

[2speedy1]

And how much does this rely on UCLA then? If the UC regents demand Berkeley to be included, does this blow up? Or does the Big10 just take Stanford then and leave the state schools behind?

Cause if it's USC, UCLA, Washington, and Oregon then Berkeley is going to get left in the cold with WSU and OSU.

The regents arent going to do anything, just like the regents in Texas didnt do anything for the other Texas schools when Texas went to the SEC.

This is about Money, they know if they say no then the deal is off and no one gets in. They may try to push for Cal, but when push comes to shove if it is UCLA or not then they will agree. Im sure their will be a dialogue and negotiation to see if they can get Cal in. But if the answer is no, they will still vote to allow UCLA to go. They would be stupid not to.

 

[Allikat]

I appreciate your optimism, but I don't think there is any way we are Tier 1. As far as brand goes, we are lucky if we are even considered in the top half of the new Big 12. I don't see us making the cut for 48. Top 60 maybe, but not top 48.

Perhaps I am optimistic, however as of this posting the current Oregon Ducks football forum had 31 replies on the subject. We have 55 pages.

Our online presence matters in the new world. We are certainly not USC from a brand standpoint but we are actually a little more appealing in the new media world.

 

[Trice]

Simpson isn’t very good now, but Central actually has the best winning percentage of any college football program in the state since 2016 (.825). Their coach was named national D3 football coach of the year. They went undefeated in the regular season last year and won two games in the D3 playoffs before losing in the quarterfinals.

(I went to Central in the 80s, I remember some of those Central/Simpson games you mean.)

Incorrect. Morningside (NAIA) is 0.950 over that span, with three NAIA national championships.

 

[alarson]

The regents arent going to do anything, just like the regents in Texas didnt do anything for the other Texas schools when Texas went to the SEC.

In texas's case, theyre separate regents systems. (As is A&M)

 

[CoKane]

If I am the Big 12 i would go after the ACC schools hard. Specially the basketball schools. If we arent going to be in one of the 2 super leagues for football, we can sure as hell make the premier super league for basketball.

Idk why someone dumbed this. Like it's not the ideal strategy but live sports are the thing now and its a gap in the market. Not the most profitable one but one nonetheless

Thoughts? Makes the UCF add look silly. Maybe add Va Tech and NCST?

View attachment 100278

I'd like VT. NC State sucks at both major sports, pass. Aim for Miami if we can get them.

Louisville and Pitt would be fun due to the old Big East stuff though.

 

[2speedy1]

In texas's case, theyre separate regents systems. (As is A&M)

Not from Tech I dont believe. But maybe I am wrong.. Even still they they are not going to do anything to stop this, they will open a dialogue for Cal to get in but if there is no chance they will still vote to allow. They have to.

 

[Trice]

The crazy thing is, whatever this jumbled up car wreck of college football is headed toward, is probably not anywhere close to a model designed to produce the most income across the board.

Across the board, I'd agree. But if I'm an Ohio State or Alabama I'm less concerned about across the board potential and more concerned with what top-tier programs are getting. And I'd guess they're about to do as well as they possibly could.

The real test will be if viewership falls off among fans not in the B1G or SEC, or even among schools in those leagues who are used to losing 1-2 games a year and are suddenly squeaking into bowl games.

 

[CoKane]

And how much does this rely on UCLA then? If the UC regents demand Berkeley to be included, does this blow up? Or does the Big10 just take Stanford then and leave the state schools behind?

Cause if it's USC, UCLA, Washington, and Oregon then Berkeley is going to get left in the cold with WSU and OSU.

That's kinda what Cal's earned given their performance in spite of their location

 

[alarson]

Idk why someone dumbed this. Like it's not the ideal strategy but live sports are the thing now and its a gap in the market. Not the most profitable one but one nonetheless

I'd like VT. NC State sucks at both major sports, pass. Aim for Miami if we can get them.

Louisville and Pitt would be fun due to the old Big East stuff though.

I didn't dumb that post but i don't think its a smart idea either. Those basketball only schools will always be available and aren't exactly schools we need to 'go hard' for. They don't drive the realignment bus.

 

[2speedy1]

Idk why someone dumbed this. Like it's not the ideal strategy but live sports are the thing now and its a gap in the market. Not the most profitable one but one nonetheless

I'd like VT. NC State sucks at both major sports, pass. Aim for Miami if we can get them.

Louisville and Pitt would be fun due to the old Big East stuff though.

Probably because FB drives everything, no matter how much people like BBall. Second, the ACC GOR goes until 2036, no one has figured out how that is going to get broken yet. We all think the ACC will be the next to fall but maybe not for a while. Look at OUT they wont leave for 1 or 2 years of GOR money and the ACC has almost 15 years Left on their GOR.

 

[isucy86]

If all 6 are available and agree to a long term arrangement then you take all 6. If Oregon and Washington baulk at the idea of long term leave them out because they're just waiting for a Big10 invite.

I think this is a given for new members- a GOR equal to Big12's new TV contract.

Another issue I have seen with Oregon & Washington on revenue potential. Why is equal revenue sharing such a fundamental need between teams in the same conference?

I would take Oregon & Washington even if they get a greater share. As long as metrics were used instead of some fuzzy concept of brand value. If Oregon & Washington games are watched by more fans than ISU- why shouldn't they get more money?

I think ISU could thrive under such a model. With streaming, would think it would be pretty easy to tie a viewer profile to a fan base or being neutral.

 

[Rogue52]

Conference realignment is always looked through a bias lens depending on which side of the fence you are on, but I don’t really see how this is “good” for Iowa. They were already looking at a massive payday (~$100 million per year). Now, they just have two more blue bloods at the table that have no traditional affiliation.

 

[Pope]

I've read statements like that before.

Yeah, reminds me of a previous statement they made. Something about an alliance between the PAC 12, Big 10, and ACC that's based on a gentleman's handshake.

Guess there are no gentlemen when the money is this big.

 

[Acylum]

They aren’t right now. A lot of times you and I are on the same page on a lot of issues but I don’t understand the opinions that the b1g will be taking two other PAC teams. If that was the case, why wouldn’t they be involved In the current desertion? I find it difficult to believe the UCLA and USC ADs didn’t reach out to see if anybody else was interested.