Can we clean out the hawk turds from this thread?
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
As stated earlier by @2speedy1, this is directly tied to conference affiliation. USC moving to the Big 10 bumps them up to a top 10-ish value. Iowa moving to the Pac 12 would drop them to a late 20-ish value.College Football Value Rankings
graphics.wsj.com
Ranking 84 major college football programs by brand value
One month ago, I ranked 73 college football programs by the value they bring in conference realignment, using four metrics: Home…medium.com
Iowa is 18th in brand value. 6th or 7th in the B10. There’d be a long list of schools cut out before Iowa.
Why do we give a ****? Of course you ******** hope ISU is left out somehow.
Also it always sounds good at first to have all the big dogs team up to be on the same side. Until ego's get in the way of it all. Don't believe me? Just go watch some WCW and the NWO. We knew that would never last.
Well For the ACC GOR there is 14 years left, you figure they are paying about $40M per year roughly right now. Then you have to compound that by 5-10% annually for growth, over 14 years. Then you have to add additional exit fees most likely in the $100-200M per school. You are looking at a ball park $1B, for any team to leave the ACC right now.
Texas and OU wont leave even 1 year early to pay 1 year of media rights and exit fees to the Big 12 but people think ACC teams will pay 14 years...Get real.
Here you go, found you a conference mate board. https://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/97817-usc-and-ucla-to-the-b1g/
At this point, it looks like the Big 10 is only looking at schools that bring a better than average (for the Big 10) value. Washington and Oregon are probably just below that level.
Exactly what I said later in the post. Theres not a single reason being passive is a good idea in realignment. The passive conferences die, the aggressive ones survive
I think the PAC brand will win out because of history and tenure but it’ll be a merger of some sorts with a PAC brand. B12 name goes away.
That's a very important distinction. The brand value is based on a lot of things that bring little to no value to the conference. A school with a bunch of donors pumping in revenue doesn't help the conference directly. A team that draws great at home but sucks on TV (hello, Washington) doesn't really help the conference.
I still think Iowa is good enough of a TV product to be safely in a 30 team league, but these are good points.
Things would be really interesting if leagues start figuring out how to dump teams. Maybe we'll see the magic number of teams needed in the SEC to dissolve all "leave" the conference only to get back together to form a new conference without the likes of Vandy, Mizzou, and Arkansas. This might be the next step when expansion seems to have hit the point of negative returns.
RIP Coe College to the Big 10
That's what I mean. I'm not sure even Miami would qualify now that Big Ten teams are so boosted up from all the cash. Clemson, FSU, ND...and raiding SEC. You certainly wouldn't add BOTH Miami and FSU if you were Big Ten or SEC going by that law.
They always bring up UNC to Big Ten, is UNC more valuable than Oregon and Washington? I've never seen any metrics that show they are.
I think it's a bit of a lie that they wouldn't ever add Washington/Oregon...probably connected to quest for Notre Dame.
I think they are saying that to give themselves cover that they didn't just break the Pac 10 permanently.
Last edited:
Iowa picked a great time to have a consistent successful 2 decades plus coach...if this breakaway super league emerges soon.
More likely the Vandy/NW/MissSt/Illinois crowd just gets grandfathered into the "Power 2", but I'll give credit to Iowa football that they put themselves in position where they could be part of a breakaway league if they wanted. I'd definitely say Iowa and Wisconsin have played their way to a station above Nebraska quite clearly.
I'm just concerned (maybe concerned isn't the right word) that athletics at UCLA may become nearly irrelevant. If they can't draw greater interest in a basketball program with that much tradition when they make really good runs, it just doesn't seem to bode well for athletics overall. I guess I don't blame UCLA fans for that. There is so much to do in the area and you're rarely ever forced to be inside. When I was younger, I was a big UCLA fan. The uniforms looked cool and (like the kid from My Tutor) the thought of studying astronomy at UCLA seemed cool. I guess I was just missing the hot tutor.
Ugh a Nebraska board? No thanks I’ll linger here where people don’t think it’s still 1990
LOL, I remember those days when people were actually believing that Dave Wannstedt of all people would have any inside info on conference realignment.
