Let's wait and see how the 12 team playoff works. If the P2 are only getting 5-6 in per year combined, then other leagues might look more appealing.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Let's wait and see how the 12 team playoff works. If the P2 are only getting 5-6 in per year combined, then other leagues might look more appealing.
I think most of the schools and media partners probably have a better business sense, but we'll see. The idea that you carve out 24-32 teams and the total pie remains the same doesn't seem to hold up to basic business model analysis. If the schools and media people are dumb enough to strip out the major product differentiation that makes CFB succeed and the various versions of pro football fail, then they sure as hell aren't going to be making more money in the long run.
Think we may actually getting close to seeing the PAC deal if the C4 schools are looking for assurances from the Big12 they won't be put on the streamer to the level we assume the PAC12 media deal will be.
One would assume that the Big 12 could easily guarantee that the platforms would be equitable between programs.
One of the comments mentioned the 4 corners using their 'leverage' to force the B12 to more air time than the new additions. From the little I know, I can't determine what, if any, 'leverage' they have for this. Maybe I missed something.
I think this dude is just another Swaim or MHver.
That seems to me that this administrator is setting up the stage for leaving the PAC 12, and the reason why they would. It's possible that PAC12 administrators have seen packages in the past, and have rejected them due to less linear media and too much streaming. Given that this admin knows of conversations with the Big12 regarding linear vs streaming games, they probably have a good idea of what to expect.
Of course, this is all based on unnamed sources, so who knows if the quote is accurate.
Agreed, it'd be wrong for the conference to force the favor of one school over another when it comes to what channel your game is played on. The Big12 could show these schools that the opportunity for them to be on a linear channel is greater than the PAC12, but I don't think the Big12 could guarantee the number of games each school ends up on a linear channel; since that is selected by the media partner.
The SEC will get at least 4 in every year by themselves.
Personally, I find it silly that a team can get in without even playing in the conference championship game. It could actually be an advantage for the 3rd and 4th school to not have to play an additional game in the conference championship.
If the PAC schools need more prime slots, could mean that they should build up their brands so the media wish to select them. Already looking down their noses at at least 4 of the schools. Hate to tell them but the four schools have more Big 12 history than they do. Just wait until we add some mouthy eastern schools. This is going to get more fun than the Big or SEC.
Yet the Big12 has allowed that for a while with the LHN. So don't get too excited that this would never be agreed to.
I agree that it is unlikely the power CFB programs ever form say a 20+ team super league, for the reasons you stated. But there is another reason that I think is more important. Those power schools only want to play a few games against each other in the regular season. For the rest of their games they want to play weaker teams. I think tOSU and Michigan are content to let the weaker teams get their cut for showing up, trying hard and losing. This is why the SEC only played 6 then 7 and now 8 conference games.
This is the type of perspective that the Big10 and SEC want Big12 & ACC fans to fall into. That more money automatically means better teams. Sure money helps, but it isn't the end all. Look at Iowa State and how our expenses compare to schools we've played over the last few years in football or hoops:
Annual Expenses 2017 & 2022 fiscal years
Big 12
Texas: $217-$227M
Oklahoma: $138-$182M
Iowa State: $83-$111M
Kansas: $95-$109M
Texas Tech: $87-$105M
Okie State: $90-$103M
West Virginia: $89-$97M
K-State: $74-$82M
Other
Auburn: $133M-$152M
Iowa: $131-$151M
Oregon: $120M-$141M
Mizzou: $102-$126M
North Carolina: $97M-$120M
Iowa State: $83-$111M
Mississippi State: $88-$108M
Washington State: $72M-$84M
If they keep the 2024-25 format (6 champs + 6 at-large) going forward into the new deal, it'll look pretty much the same as before in regard to participation per conference (CFP+NY6).
Previous years, using the new format (numbers in parentheses are actual participation that season):
| Year | SEC | B1G | Big 12 | Pac-12 | ACC | G5 | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | |
| 2021 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ND |
| 2019 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 (1) | 1 (2) | 1 | |
| 2018 | 4 | 3 (2) | 1 (2) | 1 | 1 | 1 | ND |
| 2017 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
In 2019, #11 Utah would have gotten in over #24 Virginia (ACC's secondary deal with Orange).
In 2018, #12 Penn State would have gotten in over #15 Texas (Big 12's secondary deal with Sugar).
Not automatic, but it will matter a lot more when players start getting formally paid. It's already mattering more now with NIL. MLB 2022 there was a 72% correlation between payroll and win %. It will be critical for competitive balance to have some kinds of restrictions on NIL, paying players, transfers, etc.
Seems a just a weeeee bit more qualified to comment on realignment than Mhver3 and Swaim.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
I suspect there will be a large enough gap in resources between the Big 2 and the Big 12 at that point that it really is a P2 super league. Teams from the Big 12 and whatever else might exist will just be leftovers that didn't make the cut.
Don't do that to Jim.
He's seriously one of the few genuinely nice guys on twitter.
He's not always spot on, but he does have real world contacts, and I think he does genuinely believe everything he puts out.
