Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[JP4CY]

I was gonna post, why doesn't the PAC just ask Hawaii to join and they can do away Sat/Thursday games like twice, tell them to dump bball and Gonzaga will be that placeholder.

Then I looked at Hawaii's stadium. That's small.

 

[2speedy1]

I was gonna post, why doesn't the PAC just ask Hawaii to join and they can do away Sat/Thursday games like twice, tell them to dump bball and Gonzaga will be that placeholder.

Then I looked at Hawaii's stadium. That's small.

They are playing at their practice facility with temp bleachers, since Aloha Stadium got condemned for safety.
They have had a new Aloha stadium in the works for a few years, but it has been a really slow process, between all the politics of the state and city and university all trying to come together and get something done and funded.

The New Aloha Stadium is a proposed 35,000-seat multi-purpose stadium to be built in Halawa, Hawaii, for the Hawaii Rainbow Warriors football program, with demolition of the old stadium to begin in 2025.[36] The area around the stadium will also include entertainment venues, retail stores, restaurants, housing, hotels, recreational sites, cultural amenities, and green space. It will replace, and be constructed on the site of, the current Aloha Stadium.

Aloha Stadium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[isucy86]

We’re not far away from one super conference. The B1G and SEC are even in discussions of a scheduling partnership at this time.

The Big10/SEC scheduling partnership is a pragmatic mechanism to control the vast majority of CFP bids. If they play each other and not Big12 or ACC during the non-con schedule it's a way to control the media narrative those 2 conferences are light years above Big12 or ACC.

The last thing they want is to play non-con games against Big12 or ACC and lose. Would put a dent in their demands of 8+ bids out of 12.

Don't see the need for a Super Conference if the Big10 & SEC are set up to dominate CFP bids even before a game is played. Having 2 "elite" conferences is just another media narrative to promote a rivalry and drive ratings. It's just a matter of how many teams from Big12/ACC get invited to be part of the P2 over the next 6 years. IMO we are talking 40-48 teams between the 2 conferences.

 

[HFCS]

I'm surprised this Pac/MWC split isn't a bigger story.

Am I missing something that new Pac still at 7 football programs?

Remaining MWC is at 8 because they added UTEP and held onto 7? They asked Texas State but got turned down?

It just seems odd to me that new Pac can't seem to announce an 8th fb team. Who are they possibly going to add now?

 

[1UNI2ISU]

The networks need inventory. That's why splitting the top 20 is a non-starter.

ESPN/FOX need

I'm surprised this Pac/MWC split isn't a bigger story.

Am I missing something that new Pac still at 7 football programs?

Remaining MWC is at 8 because they added UTEP and held onto 7? They asked Texas State but got turned down?

It just seems odd to me that new Pac can't seem to announce an 8th fb team. Who are they possibly going to add now?

Memphis and Tulane asked them to have a media rights evaluation done. I'll bet it those two in the end plus Sacramento State. They'll also add Grand Canyon as a non-football member.

10 football. 12 all sports. About perfect.

 

[Die4Cy]

They would make even more money in payouts with P4 inventory aggregation and bidding it out NFL style plus there would be rational geographic realignment. That is why Tennessee AD, Danny White, is a CST Ambassador.

Would they though?

The reason we are where we are is the TV networks aren't profitable enough any more to bid carelessly on TV sports inventory. Everything that's happened since 2005 has been about consolidating "eyeball" brands where they can pay them more, so that the remaining inventory can be valued less. Doing so gets them closer to a model where a team or conference's value is directly tied to how many people watch when they play. So maybe a model that pays that way but allows for more regional rivalries and scheduling flexibility that would actually be good for the game is the one they should look at. Let's get to the end game already.

 

[MountainManHawk]

We’re not far away from one super conference. The B1G and SEC are even in discussions of a scheduling partnership at this time.

I opened this thread to post this same thing. If you think about it, they can accomplish almost the same thing by just scheduling more and more games against each other and then selling that package of games to the TV networks. I’m sure it’s going to be like the basketball conference challenges where they try to match up the biggest brands in each conference against each other.

It’s not completely the same thing as starting a new conference of only blue bloods but it’s fairly close and doesn’t have nearly the same messiness or downside risk.

And everyone keeps bringing up the obvious point that mathematically these blue bloods are going to end up with more losses from scheduling these games, but that’s why they are trying to guarantee 8 playoff spots so that they still get the same access even if they take some losses.

 

[Die4Cy]

I wouldnt be so sure about that. Theire will come a time when the big players dont want to support the lower teams. Not saying its soon but it will happen.

It's going to happen, because in the very near future, outside of a collective bargaining and antitrust agreement, the cost to secure the best players for the best teams is going to skyrocket.

 

[CyCrazy]

I opened this thread to post this same thing. If you think about it, they can accomplish almost the same thing by just scheduling more and more games against each other and then selling that package of games to the TV networks. I’m sure it’s going to be like the basketball conference challenges where they try to match up the biggest brands in each conference against each other.

It’s not completely the same thing as starting a new conference of only blue bloods but it’s fairly close and doesn’t have nearly the same messiness or downside risk.

And everyone keeps bringing up the obvious point that mathematically these blue bloods are going to end up with more losses from scheduling these games, but that’s why they are trying to guarantee 8 playoff spots so that they still get the same access even if they take some losses.

This would hurt Iowa but go for it.

 

[MountainManHawk]

That's a reasonable assumption, but I disagree. I don't think ANY of those schools will:
a) turn down the big money to win more games in the B-league
b) believe that they will be the ones losing all the time

Guess we will see who is right at some point. I just feel like all the pressure (i.e. money) is pushing for those big brands to go out on their own.

I certainly agree with your broader point that schools will do some surprising things chasing more money.

But I do feel like we saw with the breakup of the Pac12 that some schools value things like culture and academics as long as the money is close. From what I’ve read, Arizona State and Utah were pretty willing to take a bit less if it would have let them stay with the schools they wanted to stay with. Obviously other schools like Arizona didn’t seem to care much at all about the academics and in the end the money ended up being so bad in the Pac12 that it all fell apart.

Applying all of that to the Big10, I don’t think it guarantees anything but it does make me think it’s less likely we see the blue bloods from each conference break away and join up because the culture and academics of some of these schools are quite a bit different and I doubt the president of Michigan is itching to team up with Alabama, no matter how good their football is.

 

[MountainManHawk]

This would hurt Iowa but go for it.

I suspect you are right. I go back and forth on it but I definitely have times where I think it might just be better for everyone if the blue bloods in the Big10 and SEC leave and form their own conference and Iowa can just be in a conference with their remaining regional rivals where it’s a level playing field. We haven’t won in Columbus since something like 1991 so I might not be missing out on that much if they just leave, lol.

 

[Die4Cy]

It's kind of a moot point, B1G and SEC bottom feeders are unlikely to get get demoted by their conference's big swinging dicks because they ultimately know their place, and will stay with them for less, perhaps MUCH less, when the time comes and they are told they need to do so.

The issue isn't the difference between the money and exposure that will exist between the top and bottom teams in those leagues, but between the bottom feeders of those leagues and the conferences frozen out like the Big 12 and ACC. At least if you are in the P2 you can pretend you are competing while cashing fat checks.

And why would those bottom end B1G and SEC teams need good players and coaches anyway, when their purpose is to be paid to be the Washington Generals of their respective leagues? They already chant S-E-C or roam about on other conference message boards extolling the virtues of Big Ten unity.

 

[Gonzo]

If they really believe that, then why arent these conferences adding one "cannon fodder" team for every blue blood? Why did the SEC just add OuT and not pick up said additional cannon fodder teams.

If any of them really believed they need their lesser teams to stay relevant and that they would not be the top of a league full of blue bloods, basically none of the last many realignments would never have happened.

TV people pull the strings and they want as many marque games as possible and will push to make them all that way if possible.

You really think Ohio state believes they need Indiana or Texas believes they need Vandy to win the conference? I guarantee most people in those type of schools believe they will be among the top dogs no matter who is in their conference.

Because the fodder is already baked into the conference. If what you're saying were true then why haven't they already given Indiana/NW/Vandy/etc. the boot? The B1G just signed the biggest media deal in history with equal revenue sharing through 2030. Their pieces of the pie would've been a lot bigger if they'd just booted the bottomdwellers. They didn't. Not only didn't they kick them all out, they kept them in with an equal share, through the rest of this decade.

And if you don't believe tOSU or Texas believe they need Indiana or Vandy and are only interested in marquis opponents, why do they all pad their OOC schedules with cupcakes? Why aren't we seeing tOSU v. Georgia, Alabama v. Michigan, Texas v. Oregon up and down all of their OOC schedules?

Sorry, I just think this is something that you hope will happen. But there's zero indication that it will.

 

[Jkclone15]

I'm surprised this Pac/MWC split isn't a bigger story.

Am I missing something that new Pac still at 7 football programs?

Remaining MWC is at 8 because they added UTEP and held onto 7? They asked Texas State but got turned down?

It just seems odd to me that new Pac can't seem to announce an 8th fb team. Who are they possibly going to add now?

 

[2speedy1]

Because the fodder is already baked into the conference. If what you're saying were true then why haven't they already given Indiana/NW/Vandy/etc. the boot? The B1G just signed the biggest media deal in history with equal revenue sharing through 2030. Their pieces of the pie would've been a lot bigger if they'd just booted the bottomdwellers. They didn't. Not only didn't they kick them all out, they kept them in with an equal share, through the rest of this decade.

And if you don't believe tOSU or Texas believe they need Indiana or Vandy and are only interested in marquis opponents, why do they all pad their OOC schedules with cupcakes? Why aren't we seeing tOSU v. Georgia, Alabama v. Michigan, Texas v. Oregon up and down all of their OOC schedules?

Sorry, I just think this is something that you hope will happen. But there's zero indication that it will.

Why didnt they... because the pot got a lot bigger, and they all could take a huge raise as it was.

Notice they also killed off the Pac to get 4 schools 2 of which at a lower share for at least this contract.

What happens if the pot doesnt get bigger next time and the big boys decide they want a raise not take the same.

What happens if the media companies say they want only the top 50% of the B1G and SEC and will only pay and will increase pay for those teams? What if those media members say they will take they will only take the top 36 valued teams? or 40, 48 etc.? Will it create a break away or super conference? Will those leagues stay together but force out the low value teams? Its easy to sit in your comfy spot and say these things will never happen. But that comfy spot might get lumpy and bumpy at some point, just as we in the B12 have experienced over the years.

Do any of us know this will happen, no. But, most of us know that it very well could happen. And most of us know that saying the system as we know it today will 'never' change is unrealistic.

 

[Jkclone15]

I'm curious why there haven't been more serious discussions of breaking football off and allowing schools to form conferences for all other sports. The next thing people say is "but then basketball will cause the same thing", but the money is so much less I wonder if it will. And if that is also a problem, why not go all the way and allow schools to put any program in any conference?

 

[Gonzo]

Why didnt they... because the pot got a lot bigger, and they all could take a huge raise as it was.

Notice they also killed off the Pac to get 4 schools 2 of which at a lower share for at least this contract.

What happens if the pot doesnt get bigger next time and the big boys decide they want a raise not take the same.

What happens if the media companies say they want only the top 50% of the B1G and SEC and will only pay and will increase pay for those teams? What if those media members say they will take they will only take the top 36 valued teams? or 40, 48 etc.? Will it create a break away or super conference? Will those leagues stay together but force out the low value teams? Its easy to sit in your comfy spot and say these things will never happen. But that comfy spot might get lumpy and bumpy at some point, just as we in the B12 have experienced over the years.

Do any of us know this will happen, no. But, most of us know that it very well could happen. And most of us know that saying the system as we know it today will 'never' change is unrealistic.

I never said the system as we know it today will never change. I just don't think it's going to change the way you want it to, with the SEC/B1G 'have nots' being kicked to the curb or relegated or forced to take a lower cut. Agree that nobody knows for sure what will happen. But what we do know for sure is that for the rest of this decade all full-share B1G members will get an equal cut of the CFP and media revenue. If, in 2031, the SEC/B1G sh*tcan half their member schools and form a superleague, I'll be the first one to say congrats for being right.

 

[2speedy1]

I never said the system as we know it today will never change. I just don't think it's going to change the way you want it to, with the SEC/B1G 'have nots' being kicked to the curb or relegated or forced to take a lower cut. Agree that nobody knows for sure what will happen. But what we do know for sure is that for the rest of this decade all full-share B1G members will get an equal cut of the CFP and media revenue. If, in 2031, the SEC/B1G sh*tcan half their member schools and form a superleague, I'll be the first one to say congrats for being right.

I have to say, I am not saying it will happen or happen a certain way, only that it is a possibility.

I am one to believe the system as a whole is like Iowa weather, wait a minute/day and it will change.

And that in all reality the conferences are handcuffed, whatever those paying the money say goes for the most part is what goes. The conferences can resist to a limited point, but in the end they will have to do what those paying them wants. And in the ever changing market and media world, I dont think I would ever try to guess what TV viewership and companies will look like in a decade plus, let alone what those companies will want from the conferences etc.

 

[tman24]

I'm curious why there haven't been more serious discussions of breaking football off and allowing schools to form conferences for all other sports. The next thing people say is "but then basketball will cause the same thing", but the money is so much less I wonder if it will. And if that is also a problem, why not go all the way and allow schools to put any program in any conference?

I still havent figured out why the olympic sports havent broken off and just have regional conferences. they dont make money so why fly form ucla for a cross country meet in rutgers.

 

[MountainManHawk]

I still havent figured out why the olympic sports havent broken off and just have regional conferences. they dont make money so why fly form ucla for a cross country meet in rutgers.

I bet some of the schools would be open to it but not enough to make it happen. If USC reached out to its former Pac12 colleagues and asked them to form a new league just for Olympic sports, how many of them would be interested and how many would immediately hang up the phone?