Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[Rods79]

Hopefully, this is not true...

There is no interest from Big12 to take any Pac12 schools

Although this is old and a generalization, this is a typical power move to smoke out more value. Puts the heat on PAC-12 teams wanting in, those unsure or feeling like they are too good for the alignment, and the media partners to pay up. In makes everyone work that wants it to work, and weeds out those that don’t.

 

[Cyclone27inQC]

I think the Super Conference will eventually fail, but it’s going to be awhile. Here’s how I see it playing out.

After the PAC situation sorts itself, we’re probably in the quiet period of realignment. The Big-10 will take what they want from the PAC. The Big-10 and SEC have taken all they want from the Big 12. The ACC is largely off the table for the next 8-10 years by contract and a buyout at this point would be insanely expensive.

The ACC paid out something like $40m per team last year. Buying out 14 years at that would be well over $500m per school. Maybe you could get that down a bit, but then again the rights for a given school would be worth well more than that otherwise it wouldn’t be worth discussing. If the money isn’t there between donors and network interest to get OUT into the SEC a couple years early, there’s no reason to expect 2-3x that amount would be available for a different school.

The last whale out there is ND, but they’re semi-tied to the ACC through the end of the ‘20s. At that time, the ACC GOR might look a lot more economical and I’d think the SEC and Big-10 will take what they want from the ACC. They’ll give ND the option to either join up or get frozen out and nobody from the SEC or Big 10 will schedule them.

Once all the desirable big names are in the P2, they’ll both get a monster media deal. But interest in the bottom half teams will start to wane as they’re perennially sub-500. Those teams won’t carry their weight and the top half of the P2 will break off for a P1. I’ll give them one media deal to figure this out before the top teams leave the SEC and Big-10 for a new joint conference.

The ACC/Big 12/PAC will still be around in some capacity, doing just fine on their own albeit at significantly less revenue. With the Big 10 and SEC names still available and with numerous spots available in each, there will be another top-to-bottom realignment to re-establish historical rivalries and more regionally-oriented conferences once again.

I’m short, we’ll be back to about where we were in 2000 (minus most of the blue bloods) by about 2045.

Agree 100%. I'll inject one last line to your write up. After 2045, it will start all over again when greed kicks in and the OuT's of the world think they are better and want more!

 

[WhoISthis]

But once they are "employees" then a salary structure is put into place, you no longer need NIL, they are being paid by the school. The players would have to form a union, to negotiate with each conference the rights and benefits of each player.

Amateurs in name only is the game both the schools and players are playing, there are lots of benefits for that system, becoming employees' changes everything.

All good things in terms of restoring order to this chaos, and why employment is needed.

good luck with competitive balance and fan interest with NIL and the inability to implement transfer rules. Amateurism has forced compensation under the table. Imagine the NFL with compensation not allowed from teams, annual free agency, and no rules. Popularity would dwindle. Parity would not exist. That is what college football is becoming with amateurism in this era of big business.

You very well could see the "3" in P3, the leftover conference, serve as the anti-trust to the P2's CBA.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

If there comes a time when college football is all about the P2 leagues...and Iowa State is not a part of those P2 leagues...will Iowa State be able to charge prices for games the same as Iowa will if Iowa is in the P2? Will Iowa State be able to pay coaches the same as Iowa? Market themselves the same as Iowa? There certainly will be a difference in revenue between those two schools if that happens. Just hope that difference isn't as predominant as the difference is now between say an Iowa State and a UNI type situation. Not saying Iowa State could become UNI...but there is a clear difference in those two programs based on their affiliations. If a clear difference occurs between the P2 and whatever we find ourselves in...it will show up. Will 50000 people want to continue packing the Jack under those circumstances? My heart says "I hope so"...but in reality I just don't know.

To be clear, this isn't about a competition between Iowa State, Iowa and UNI...just used those schools because we live in a space where we can potentially see as much of a direct impact of what is happening as any other state that has passionate college football fans.

ISU and the B12 schools are behind the Big 10 schools now in terms of payout, the question is not how much money the B10 gets under this new deal, it's how much the B12 gets. Right now, the league was giving each school around 36 million, without UT and OU does that number drop to 20 million, or does adding the four schools we already added keep it in the 36-million-dollar area? How much more does adding CU, UU and the Arizona schools increase that amount, to maybe 40 to 45 million?

A school like UNI is getting at most 1 to 3 million from TV, that is why they are struggling, and they average less than 15K in fans. ISU is a far cry from those numbers. ISU will never match up with EIU in terms of money coming in, but they do not have too, just be close enough to where they are now to be relevant. Keep expanding facilities, being able to pay coaches, not 7 million but 5 million and keep the fans coming to the games.

Money like any product becomes less and less valuable as you have more of it, for the B10 and SEC schools, are they going to start adding sports, everyone already has built or improved their stadiums, the locker rooms, all the coaches are already paid millions, and they cannot pay the players, so these schools getting this money is not going to help after they have reached a certain amount, which most are already at.

 

[WhoISthis]

WhoIsThis entered the fray that’s what happened. The condescending tones that guy spits out when addressing others are when things on conference expansion typically get weird. He never acknowledges it either.

I find him to be super smart and think his ideas are great additions to these conversations but the snarky/elitist tones (his laughing emojis on people's posts is so obviously done in a "Holy crap you are so stupid!" kind of way) to his posts are always so off putting. Now he will come at me like the last time I called this out because he can’t handle criticism.

Didn't you learn anything from last time? I am here for criticism- both giving and my statements being challenged. Let's hear yours.

What I can't "handle" is your emotion. All you've done here is make it about us, which is weird. A PM is much more appropriate.

 

[isucy86]

Or maybe they realize they already had those type of matchups in their current conference too. Who’s getting excited for a UCLA Oregon St basketball game on a random Thursday? Or a USC Washington St football game. Of course they will still have some less than exciting matchups but now they will have a whole lot more big name programs to compete against too.

Bill Walton

 

[jctisu]

Didn't you learn anything from last time? I am here for criticism- both giving and my statements being challenged. Let's hear yours.

What I can't "handle" is your emotion. All you've done here is make it about us, which is weird. A PM is much more appropriate.

My point was just made with your reply (called it too in my post and like clockwork you did just that). And I agreed with your last post and even said how much I like what you bring to the discussion. As I said my thoughts on how you post to many aren’t alone. I have many DMs from others and posts from others that agree. Just have a discussion man. You don’t need to be so condescending to others on here.

Enjoy your day!

 

[agrabes]

Yeah there’s lots of fans who will watch any big matchup. You’re really under estimating the sports betting aspect of it. In the midwest, I would bet college football is the most heavily bet sport and it sure isn’t just people betting on Iowa and Iowa St.

The G-League comparison is extremely dumb. College football has established brands, most of who are now in the B1G and SEC, that draw in large amounts of casual fans.

Sports betting is fine and I don't disagree that a lot of people bet on college football. But are the people who bet on college football tuning in and watching every game they bet on? And why do they place these bets? I would imagine that people place bets on college football because they have a rooting interest in the sport. If they lose their rooting interest, they will be less inclined to engage with it and place bets. There are always going to be some people who place bets just because they like to gamble, but I have to imagine that they are a small percentage of overall college football TV viewers.

Your point about the G-League and established brands is completely off. I'm not arguing that casual fans of the major college football brand name teams will stop watching those teams. Of course not, no one is arguing that. Those in favor of the P2 are saying that if that league splits off from FBS college football it will suck up the vast majority of fans and money in CFB. The entire argument I, and others, are making is that if the P2 thing really does come to pass and they break off into their own league entirely, many college football fans won't watch it. You will have fans of the teams included (both casual and hardcore) watching it. Fans of those teams not included will not watch it, they will follow the league and division their own team is in. In this context a "casual fan" is referring to someone who would just tune into a football game because they want to see some football and don't care who is playing. Those people are going to watch the NFL. For the most part, they already do.

I think the TV networks, etc, are smart enough to know this. They will probably establish a playoff system that keeps a guaranteed spot in the playoffs for the B12/P12/ACC so that they don't lose 70% of the fanbases in the league. As long as the P5 conferences (in whatever form they exist in) keep that path into the playoffs, fans of those conferences will stay part of the sport and stay engaged. Then, it'll just be the way CFB has always been, only more so with a great disparity in budgets than ever before.

 

[Cloneon]

ISU and the B12 schools are behind the Big 10 schools now in terms of payout, the question is not how much money the B10 gets under this new deal, it's how much the B12 gets. Right now, the league was giving each school around 36 million, without UT and OU does that number drop to 20 million, or does adding the four schools we already added keep it in the 36-million-dollar area? How much more does adding CU, UU and the Arizona schools increase that amount, to maybe 40 to 45 million?

A school like UNI is getting at most 1 to 3 million from TV, that is why they are struggling, and they average less than 15K in fans. ISU is a far cry from those numbers. ISU will never match up with EIU in terms of money coming in, but they do not have too, just be close enough to where they are now to be relevant. Keep expanding facilities, being able to pay coaches, not 7 million but 5 million and keep the fans coming to the games.

Money like any product becomes less and less valuable as you have more of it, for the B10 and SEC schools, are they going to start adding sports, everyone already has built or improved their stadiums, the locker rooms, all the coaches are already paid millions, and they cannot pay the players, so these schools getting this money is not going to help after they have reached a certain amount, which most are already at.

That number (bold) is thrown around a lot. 'Marketing' by the TV provider will determine that number. What people are really saying is that the media has an easier job marketing the Alabama's than the ISU's. While the current trend is that, I don't believe for one second the right media partner can't reverse that trend. Especially, as close as the competition is. Right now everyone is genuflecting to the NIL. But, in all honesty, I believe it's the accelerated development of an athlete post high school which defines the success of a college program. Will we see players we've developed high tail for more money? Absolutely. But, let's take a breath for a second and see how these players fare at their new locations. People have to realize these high profile Universities were not at one time. That's how upstarts succeed. They don't bow down to intimidation.

 

[besserheimerphat]

Be aggressive be be aggressive.

B-E
A-G-G
R-E-S-S-I-V-E!
[hands raised, high kicks]

 

[cyfanatic]

ISU and the B12 schools are behind the Big 10 schools now in terms of payout, the question is not how much money the B10 gets under this new deal, it's how much the B12 gets. Right now, the league was giving each school around 36 million, without UT and OU does that number drop to 20 million, or does adding the four schools we already added keep it in the 36-million-dollar area? How much more does adding CU, UU and the Arizona schools increase that amount, to maybe 40 to 45 million?

A school like UNI is getting at most 1 to 3 million from TV, that is why they are struggling, and they average less than 15K in fans. ISU is a far cry from those numbers. ISU will never match up with EIU in terms of money coming in, but they do not have too, just be close enough to where they are now to be relevant. Keep expanding facilities, being able to pay coaches, not 7 million but 5 million and keep the fans coming to the games.

Money like any product becomes less and less valuable as you have more of it, for the B10 and SEC schools, are they going to start adding sports, everyone already has built or improved their stadiums, the locker rooms, all the coaches are already paid millions, and they cannot pay the players, so these schools getting this money is not going to help after they have reached a certain amount, which most are already at.

I guess where I was going was more of a if Iowa State were to be relagated to a non-P2 situation...and if there is a clear distinction between P2s and non P2s...would Iowa State be able to expect the same amount of support (not talking direct financials, more of fans gobbling up tickets, parking lots filled to the brim, etc)? I mean all levels have fans for whatever reasons...D3 football games have people that attend religiously...same with FCS. But obviously the numbers aren't remotely close to FBS numbers. Would the excitement still be there if we were not viewed as being in that top tier of opportunity? I agree with the poster who responded by saying if we have a legitimate route to the playoffs then we are OK. And we still have no idea how all of this is going to shake out in 2 or 3 years. But I just wonder what going to an Iowa State football game might be like in 8 years if we weren't considered a part of that top tier of opportunity (not saying the best program, just a part of the top tier)? There is no right or wrong as that involves a lot of projection in a topic that is still evolving. It would suck to be left out though...and would that feeling eventually impact the gameday experience?

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

All good things in terms of restoring order to this chaos, and why employment is needed.

good luck with competitive balance and fan interest with NIL and the inability to implement transfer rules. Amateurism has forced compensation under the table. Imagine the NFL with compensation not allowed from teams, annual free agency, and no rules. Popularity would dwindle. Parity would not exist. That is what college football is becoming with amateurism in this era of big business.

You very well could see the "3" in P3, the leftover conference, serve as the anti-trust to the P2's CBA.

All of the bolded is true, but the path to getting sanity back into college sports is not making the athletes employees of the school, because the schools will never agree to that.

Some sort of regulation is going to be required, whether is from the Fed, or maybe by conferences themselves. The NCAA is afraid of getting sued, so they have backed off and this in turn has what as developed, but it cannot go on forever. Rules will be put into place, the question is by whom and when, but employment of the players by the school is the last measure, it just brings in too many other factors to go down that path.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

I guess where I was going was more of a if Iowa State were to be relagated to a non-P2 situation...and if there is a clear distinction between P2s and non P2s...would Iowa State be able to expect the same amount of support (not talking direct financials, more of fans gobbling up tickets, parking lots filled to the brim, etc)? I mean all levels have fans for whatever reasons...D3 football games have people that attend religiously...same with FCS. But obviously the numbers aren't remotely close to FBS numbers. Would the excitement still be there if we were not viewed as being in that top tier of opportunity? I agree with the poster who responded by saying if we have a legitimate route to the playoffs then we are OK. And we still have no idea how all of this is going to shake out in 2 or 3 years. But I just wonder what going to an Iowa State football game might be like in 8 years if we weren't considered a part of that top tier of opportunity (not saying the best program, just a part of the top tier)? There is no right or wrong as that involves a lot of projection in a topic that is still evolving. It would suck to be left out though...and would that feeling eventually impact the gameday experience?

If we are moving to a College Football super league, which everyone is saying, then this is just another step in that direction, but it is NOT the final step. The final step will be when the Ohio St's and Alabama's of the world realize that they can make a lot more money by splitting off from their current conference and form this new 24 to 32 team super league. And when that happens, they are not taking everyone, just because you are now in the SEC or B10. does not mean that you are assured of getting an invite.

The left-over schools will reform and try to work together to make a go out of it. There is still a lot of value in a program like ISU, as well as the other schools. Not 100 million a year value, but 45 to 60 million. With 24 to 32 teams that means only 12 to 16 games are going to be played each week, and that is not enough to fill all the airtime the networks want.

 

[WhoISthis]

All of the bolded is true, but the path to getting sanity back into college sports is not making the athletes employees of the school, because the schools will never agree to that.

Some sort of regulation is going to be required, whether is from the Fed, or maybe by conferences themselves. The NCAA is afraid of getting sued, so they have backed off and this in turn has what as developed, but it cannot go on forever. Rules will be put into place, the question is by whom and when, but employment of the players by the school is the last measure, it just brings in too many other factors to go down that path.

The schools will do whatever the the courts say they have to do.

The NCAA is afraid of getting smoked in court and then having zero ability to dictate. Which it may be too late. They made a pivot to opening things up in effort to avoid a court ruling of full employment imo.

The Fed, other than the courts? What would that look like? Do you think Congress is going to codify college athletes can't transfer without sitting out and what NIL they can get? Seems very unlikely, would be challenged in court, and that would just mean MORE unregulated compensation. There does not seem to be a path towards going back to restrictive transfer rules and no NIL. The only way to implement restrictions and regulation is via compensation in return..employment.

The conferences are the schools. And there very much are schools ready for pay-to-play. So at least some schools would agree to leaving amateurism. The more schools embrace willingly paying players, the more they control what that looks like

 

[CoKane]

For those who still think we might as well be the CUSA or whatever post texas and ou

New-Look Big 12 Revenue Reportedly Just Shy of Current Revenue

The story of Oklahoma and Texas’ departure from the Big 12 has had a woeful theme for the remaining eight teams – in the approximate words of Bob Bowlsby, the conference would lose half of its TV value without OU and UT. However, the last two weeks have seen this sad Big 12 swan song […]

www.heartlandcollegesports.com

 

[jmkc12]

As long as I can wake up on Saturday mornings and have a cold beer knowing Iowa State is involved in a season that has a shot (no matter how small that shot is) to get to the CFP, I’m fine with whatever happens

 

[Clonehomer]

I think the Super Conference will eventually fail, but it’s going to be awhile. Here’s how I see it playing out.

After the PAC situation sorts itself, we’re probably in the quiet period of realignment. The Big-10 will take what they want from the PAC. The Big-10 and SEC have taken all they want from the Big 12. The ACC is largely off the table for the next 8-10 years by contract and a buyout at this point would be insanely expensive.

The ACC paid out something like $40m per team last year. Buying out 14 years at that would be well over $500m per school. Maybe you could get that down a bit, but then again the rights for a given school would be worth well more than that otherwise it wouldn’t be worth discussing. If the money isn’t there between donors and network interest to get OUT into the SEC a couple years early, there’s no reason to expect 2-3x that amount would be available for a different school.

The last whale out there is ND, but they’re semi-tied to the ACC through the end of the ‘20s. At that time, the ACC GOR might look a lot more economical and I’d think the SEC and Big-10 will take what they want from the ACC. They’ll give ND the option to either join up or get frozen out and nobody from the SEC or Big 10 will schedule them.

Once all the desirable big names are in the P2, they’ll both get a monster media deal. But interest in the bottom half teams will start to wane as they’re perennially sub-500. Those teams won’t carry their weight and the top half of the P2 will break off for a P1. I’ll give them one media deal to figure this out before the top teams leave the SEC and Big-10 for a new joint conference.

The ACC/Big 12/PAC will still be around in some capacity, doing just fine on their own albeit at significantly less revenue. With the Big 10 and SEC names still available and with numerous spots available in each, there will be another top-to-bottom realignment to re-establish historical rivalries and more regionally-oriented conferences once again.

I’m short, we’ll be back to about where we were in 2000 (minus most of the blue bloods) by about 2045.

As far as the ACC GOR, technically it's not necessarily a buyout situation. The ACC has the rights to televise their home games. So even if Clemson left, that Clemson/Bama game at Clemson could be on the ACC package. This is assuming the ACC wants to play hardball in the negotiations. But Clemson would then presumably still get the ACC payout.

 

[Clonehomer]

As long as I can wake up on Saturday mornings and have a cold beer knowing Iowa State is involved in a season that has a shot (no matter how small that shot is) to get to the CFP, I’m fine with whatever happens

They don't have that shot now. ISU could go undefeated and ESPN would still be saying a 2 loss tOSU deserves a spot because of the eye test.

 

[JHUNSY]

For those who still think we might as well be the CUSA or whatever post texas and ou

New-Look Big 12 Revenue Reportedly Just Shy of Current Revenue

The story of Oklahoma and Texas’ departure from the Big 12 has had a woeful theme for the remaining eight teams – in the approximate words of Bob Bowlsby, the conference would lose half of its TV value without OU and UT. However, the last two weeks have seen this sad Big 12 swan song […]

www.heartlandcollegesports.com

Tldr summary?

 

[Rods79]

Tldr summary?

Old Big 12 Total Payouts per team (with OuT): $47.2 million
New Big 12 Total Payouts per team (without OuT, with new teams): $42.4 million

Edit:
PAC-12 expected renegotiation (with USC/UCLA): ~$50 million
PAC-12 expected renegotiation (without USC/UCLA): ~$30 million
PAC-12 current deal-projected (pre-defection and pre-renegotiation): ~$33-34 million
PAC-12 payouts in 2021: $19.8 million