Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[WhoISthis]

The problem is you could replace SDSU with SMU or BSU, and it's pretty much the same situation. Any of these would likely take a similar deal, and all have limited media value. Any difference in media value between them is in the absolute margins, and won't matter.

Unless the PAC would simply rather die as a conference than elevate any G5 other than SDSU, there's no situation where SDSU's availability will impact the PAC's survival as a power conference.

You can? You think the PAC views adding BSU the same as adding SDSU? No.

You think AZ thinks the same about coupling with BSU as they do SDSU? no.

If the Big 12 causes those schools to get added to the PAC because SDSU thinks it can go to Big 12, job well done.

If nothing else, this is about driving up the cost of adding to the PAC. If there is a market for SDSU, the PAC can't revenue rape them as badly.

 

[BCClone]

You can? You think the PAC views adding BSU the same as adding SDSU? No.

You think AZ thinks the same about coupling with BSU as they do SDSU? no.

If the Big 12 causes those schools to get added to the PAC because SDSU thinks it can go to Big 12, job well done.

If nothing else, this is about driving up the cost of adding to the PAC. If there is a market for SDSU, the PAC can't revenue rape them as badly.

The PAC doesn’t fix their MAJOR issue with SDSU. Why I believe they will look at SMU and try to pry some big XII teams out. If they get it close with a few big XII teams, it could make the big XII be in danger. If the big XII sticks together, it will be the best of the rest, problem is you can’t trust those Texas schools much.

 

[nfrine]

I'm just gonna go back to posting Miss Spiranac.

I'm guessing this could raise a lot of support for NIL...I Wood Would.

 

[WhoISthis]

Let's say the the 4 corners decide to wait.

How sure are we there would be a Big 12 for them to later join when the Big 10 adds 1-4 PAC schools?

As much as I like the Big 12's position, if 2-3 Big 12 schools wanted to build the ACC, it is not too hard to see the Big 12 being vulnerable to ACC.

The bait and switch risk would seem high, but what if WVU and Cincinnati don't care? Say 8-10 Big 12 schools work together with ESPN/ACC to make that the "3rd" conference? If no ACC schools get moved to P2, that is a very good conference. If 4 football schools do leave, I would guess UCF and even USF would be ahead of some PAC to replace FSU and Miami.

If FSU, Miami, Clemson, VT went to SEC (SEC Network only missing out on state of North Carolina):

East

UNC, Duke, UVa, NC St, Wake, Pitt, Cuse, BC, GT, UCF

West

WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ISU, KU, Baylor, Houston, Ok St, TT, TCU

Only UNC and UVa are missing out on P2 offer, but UNC keeps its basketball conference together, and likely gets a UT-like special offer from ESPN.

Having ISU over BYU may be a homer pick, but it does better allow for Utah to be added when 4 corners give up on PAC. I think at least 6 of the R8 would be included to get dissolution and OUT for free. But they could go with less than 6, planning on PAC picking up a few.

 

[WhoISthis]

The PAC doesn’t fix their MAJOR issue with SDSU. Why I believe they will look at SMU and try to pry some big XII teams out. If they get it close with a few big XII teams, it could make the big XII be in danger. If the big XII sticks together, it will be the best of the rest, problem is you can’t trust those Texas schools much.

They don't fix their MAJOR issue with any additions. The BIG is their major issue.

 

[BCClone]

They don't fix their MAJOR issue with any additions. The BIG is their major issue.

Big ten is an issue, but the reason the big ten is/was an issue is they don’t have any early games. They are banking on people not falling asleep during their games. If they want to survive, they gotta go east with teams.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Let's say the the 4 corners decide to wait.

How sure are we there would be a Big 12 for them to later join when the Big 10 adds 1-4 PAC schools?

As much as I like the Big 12's position, if 2-3 Big 12 schools wanted to build the ACC, it is not too hard to see the Big 12 race to the ACC.

The bait and switch risk would seem high, but what if WVU and Cincinnati don't care? Say 8-10 Big 12 schools work together with ESPN/ACC to make that the "3rd" conference? If no ACC schools get moved to P2, that is a very good conference. If 4 football schools do leave, I would guess UCF and even USF would be ahead of some PAC to replace FSU and Miami.

If FSU, Miami, Clemson, VT went to SEC (SEC Network only missing out on state of North Carolina):

East

UNC, Duke, UVa, NC St, Wake, Pitt, Cuse, BC, GT, UCF

West

WVU, Cincinnati, Louisville, ISU, KU, Baylor, Houston, Ok St, TT, TCU

Only UNC and UVa are missing out on P2 offer, but UNC keeps its basketball conference together, and likely gets a UT-like special offer from ESPN.

Having ISU over BYU may be a homer pick, but it does better allow for Utah to be added when 4 corners give up on PAC. If FSU, Miami, Clemson, and VT didn't leave (unequal revenue sharing?). The ACCN adds a lot of markets.

The B10 will take UNC and UVA for sure, I could easily see them going to the B10 along with ND and Stanford, may also take Oregon and Washington.

 

[WhoISthis]

Big ten is an issue, but the reason the big ten is/was an issue is they don’t have any early games. They are banking on people not falling asleep during their games. If they want to survive, they gotta go east with teams.

No, the BIG is THE issue is because they make more than anyone. They are a P2, and there is nothing the PAC can do to join them. which is why USC left

That isn't changing regardless of the PAC adding schools. It would not have changed a thing had the PAC added some Big 12 last summer- which is why USC shut it down.

 

[BryceC]

I'm just gonna go back to posting Miss Spiranac.

I mean this sincerely I think this weird online market of young women making a living off sticking their butt out on instagram is honestly just gross. I guess I've become a prude in my old age.

 

[cykadelic2]

The Pac10's sustainability is not based on adding to the bottom, but protecting the top. If any single team among Oregon, Washington, Utah or Arizona State leave the Pac10- they are done. No ifs or buts.

The Pac10 can't afford to lose teams that bring more money to the table than their projected $30M/school average payout under a new contract.

Plus, the Big12 survived for 10 years with 10 teams. That might be the best path for the Pac12 to maximize TV payouts per school. Obviously, any potential TV Partner is the ultimate decider if they are willing to pay $30M each for SDSU or BSU or SMU.

The decision point for the likes of Utah, ASU, UofA and CU is not going to be primarily revenue based, it will be (or should be) based on GOR length. If Oregon, Washington and Stanford will sign on a GOR that is at least 8 years, then those 4 corner schools may stay put whether it is 10 PAC schools or more. If it is 5 years or less, they need to bolt.

That said, if Oregon, Washington and Stanford will agree to an 8-10 year GOR, then the PAC and B12 are both best served to aggregate inventory for open bidding in some fashion whether it be PAC16/PAC18 (expand with 6 or 8 B12 schools), "Rebranded New Conference" 16/18/20/22 or B16/B18/B20/B22.

 

[WhoISthis]

The B10 will take UNC and UVA for sure, I could easily see them going to the B10 along with ND and Stanford, may also take Oregon and Washington.

The Big 10 would want UNC and UVa, whether that would happen, I am not sure.

ESPN has some ability to obstruct. In response, the BIG could try to take 4-5, which could force ESPN to settle, but the leftovers would also have a say- which is where the ACC-Big 12 blend comes into play. I don't think it is for sure we don't have Big 12 schools that are okay with dropping KSU, ISU, and BYU in favor of BC, Wake, Cuse etc.

And there are some that say UNC rather have close to P2 money from ESPN and most of the ACC remain intact. In essence, using the BIG as a means to shake down ESPN for more money. I think that would look something like what I posted.

I'd have no issue dropping KSU and BYU for that conference, but I don't know if we'd make the cut.

 

[WhoISthis]

Plus, the Big12 survived for 10 years with 10 teams. That might be the best path for the Pac12 to maximize TV payouts per school. Obviously, any potential TV Partner is the ultimate decider if they are willing to pay $30M each for SDSU or BSU or SMU.

Why would the PAC pay SDSU equal revenue if they don't have to? Which, without Big 12 helping set the market, they wouldn't. And with the MWC the only other offer, you could include Oregon St and WSU in that. Same with any other G5 they'd add.

Those schools getting something closer to MWC pay, as distasteful as it may seem, is protecting the top, as you say. If they cut out $40 million across 4 schools, giving that to Oregon, UW, Utah, and ASU- that is not insignificant. Would AZ and CU jump because of not getting some of that? Well, they are the bottom, so...

 

[Gonzo]

I mean this sincerely I think this weird online market of young women making a living off sticking their butt out on instagram is honestly just gross. I guess I've become a prude in my old age.

Agree. I'm not a golfer, but all I know of this woman is she golfs and splashes pics of her butt and boobs everywhere for middle-aged men to ogle. Maybe it's because I have daughters who are 21 and 17, but the fact that this is what she wants to be known for is weird and kind of gross.

 

[HoopsTournament]

If there are 15 teams in a conference, are you saying it is impossible to have a 9 game schedule, while not playing 5 teams?

Yes. It is impossible.

 

[AuH2O]

You can? You think the PAC views adding BSU the same as adding SDSU? No.

You think AZ thinks the same about coupling with BSU as they do SDSU? no.

If the Big 12 causes those schools to get added to the PAC because SDSU thinks it can go to Big 12, job well done.

If nothing else, this is about driving up the cost of adding to the PAC. If there is a market for SDSU, the PAC can't revenue rape them as badly.

Being the same (BSU or SMU vs. SDSU) is a completely different thing than being enough of a difference that it matters on a per team revenue basis.

SDSU is the best of those. But the Big 12 taking out SDSU so the PAC has to add SMU instead isn't going to make a bit of difference in saving or killing the conference. In a ~$25M per team media contract what is the per team difference adding SDSU vs. BSU or SMU going to make? Not enough to tip the 4 corners from staying or going to the Big 12.

For there to be a material difference, SDSU would have to be close to the PAC12 average (they aren't) and BSU/SMU would have to be worth about zero. Let's say the PAC is at $25M per team, and SDSU is an average PAC value team at $25M (again, they aren't) and SMU is worth $0. That's adding about $2M per school in a 12 team league by adding SDSU instead of SMU. Do you think being at $25M vs. $23M is going to be what tips the 4 corners from jumping to the Big 12?

So basically in the most extreme valuation cases (best for SDSU and worst for SMU/BSU) you can realistically make in the alternatives of elevating G5s, it's not going to make enough of a difference to change the fate of the conference.

 

[Boxerdaddy]

ACC's contract:

I keep hearing how the ACC is going to blow up, but have yet to see any rational explanation of how this will happen.

ESPN controls their media rights AND the SEC's media rights.

Because of this, I don't see where the ESPN would want to blow up the ACC.

The B1G isn't taking enough teams to cause dissolution.

The only way I see this happening is if the B1G and B12 team up to blow it up, but that would take a separate media partner with a large per school guarantee to lure away the other team to the B12.

If so, that's great news (for ISU), but from what I've read it takes 8 schools to vote to dissolve. Does that count ND? Would they even want the ACC to dissolve?

Would the B1G take 4 and the B12 take 4? I guess maybe it wouldn't be that they take that many schools given that in this scenario, Miami and FSU et al vote to dissolve, hoping for an SEC invite, but what would ESPN have to say about that? Could ESPN be somehow blocking schools to preserve their ACC contract? Any contract with the leftovers would be much smaller, but they wouldn't be guaranteed those contracts?

B1G (No votes): NC, UVA, BC?, GT?
B12 (No votes):????
SEC (No votes): FSU, Miami?, VTech? NC State?

I see how it works for the B1G and SEC to carve up the ACC, but I guess I'm not sure if ESPN is going to be on board with that and how would that affect things?

 

[drmwevr08]

Agree. I'm not a golfer, but all I know of this woman is she golfs and splashes pics of her butt and boobs everywhere for middle-aged men to ogle. Maybe it's because I have daughters who are 21 and 17, but the fact that this is what she wants to be known for is weird and kind of gross.

Straight cash, homie.

Girls know guys are stupid suckers.

 

[CoKane]

The Pac10's sustainability is not based on adding to the bottom, but protecting the top. If any single team among Oregon, Washington, Utah or Arizona State leave the Pac10- they are done. No ifs or buts.

The Pac10 can't afford to lose teams that bring more money to the table than their projected $30M/school average payout under a new contract.

Plus, the Big12 survived for 10 years with 10 teams. That might be the best path for the Pac12 to maximize TV payouts per school. Obviously, any potential TV Partner is the ultimate decider if they are willing to pay $30M each for SDSU or BSU or SMU.

I disagree. If their payout stays above the MWs, which is at 4 million, the Pac survives. What that looks like if Oregon and Washington leave is probably above that but not by much. The number to get SMU from the American is likely 6 or 7 mil which is the ballpark of the Americans ESPN deal.

If whoever is left does have a higher earning potential than 4 mil then they can get someone to jump from the Mountain West. Theres no reason for the conference to fold if its still more profitable than the one it would raid

 

[alarson]

Agree. I'm not a golfer, but all I know of this woman is she golfs and splashes pics of her butt and boobs everywhere for middle-aged men to ogle. Maybe it's because I have daughters who are 21 and 17, but the fact that this is what she wants to be known for is weird and kind of gross.

I mean, men are going to do that to them anyway, may as well cash in on it.

 

[WhoISthis]

Being the same (BSU or SMU vs. SDSU) is a completely different thing than being enough of a difference that it matters on a per team revenue basis.

SDSU is the best of those. But the Big 12 taking out SDSU so the PAC has to add SMU instead isn't going to make a bit of difference in saving or killing the conference. In a ~$25M per team media contract what is the per team difference adding SDSU vs. BSU or SMU going to make? Not enough to tip the 4 corners from staying or going to the Big 12.

The difference isn't about revenue. It is about LA, academics, and fit. SDSU is the most palatable by far. Getting the PAC to spend up on them (not unequal revenue sharing) or even taking them if AZ wanted them in order to retain a presence in southern CA, is plausible, although not probable.



I am not for it, but I don't agree we can unequivocally say that a G5 that part of the Big 12 wanted over Houston last year, is unequivocally not a factor in this. Communicating we are open to adding SDSU with AZ, if AZ is favorable to it, makes sense.