2010 there were senators looking into things, surprised more national level politicians haven’t weighed in with threats from constituent pressure.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Feel like most national level politicians either come from ivys/small private schools that didn’t care or come from the major universities that are already in power conferences. Could be wrong about that though.
The BIG didn't poach USC/UCLA because the Big 10 is out to make as much as absolutely possible. Technically, it's the schools asking the conferences because they want to stay equal in revenue with schools they consider peers.
It is a different round of realignment- and the BIG will be top (or right near) making much more than before, even if they add Stanford and Cal. There is a big difference between schools being an opportunity cost (adding a different combo makes them even more), than actually making schools go backwards in revenue. Right now, this round the BIG can easily justify slipping in two ELTIE academic brands when adding a P12 pod because their new deal is going to be a step-change increase either way.
If ND says Stanford rather than Oregon or UW, the BIG will agree, even though a different combo makes them more money. That same principle gets extended when filling out the Big 10 to get to 20 or 24.
Imo, the BIG did it because the end game of the alternative worse for all involved. Listen to all these ADs and presidents, the P2 is obvious and inevitable. Adding a P12 pod or division is the best way for the BIG to preserve the Pac12/Rose Bowl/tradition. I still expect at least 6 Pac12 schools in the BIG
Not having 14 teams like the B1G and SEC have hurt all the other conferences. If they go to 16, you try to go to 16. Obviously there will be a point where you have to stop before making a major reach, but Colorado and Utah are not reaches like Washington State or most of the leftover G5.
When they start raiding the ACC, you grab those schools with some value left over.
Rumor that Iowa, Rutgers and Maryland to the AAC to make room for Iowa State, Kansas and Oklahoma State.
There is a huge difference between finding teams that don't cost you money on your current deal, and an opportunity cost from not having the optimal mix of additions included in your new deal. The BIG presidents would be willing to give up some amount increase on the new deal if it gets them those academic brands along with preserving some tradition. The BIG will be at the top, or right there, regardless.
They already are giving up some opportunity cost in taking UCLA with USC, if they stop there. And most acknowledge they'd take Stanford if it got them ND, even though ND plus UW or Oregon would be more of a revenue increase.
How is it possible that this piece of **** isn’t banned yet?
For what it's worth here's a quote from a source which had decades inside the P12 office...
"Longest conference road trip for LA schools was to Seattle, Pullman and Boulder. Each at 1,100 miles. Shortest trip in the Big Ten will be to Lincoln at 1,500 miles. Those schools will eat up that 100 million distribution in no time with charters and extended road trips. Ucla softball won't go to Maryland for a 3-game series and fly home. They'll be like a professional baseball team and hit Maryland, Rutgers and Penn State of a 10-day trip. Not easy on the STUDENT-Athlete, to be gone from campus for extended periods of time."
ALLIANCE- A REAL one, not a bs one - between ACC, big12 and pac12. Make a league.
Clemson, do you want to be the big dog in a 30+ team league, or the 10th team in SEC? We can call it the Knight League sponsored by Nike.
Right, it just makes too much sense in many aspects to not add more P12 schools imo.
USC for awhile was believed to be the first move to get things going- the weak point. Not only private with a good national brand to leverage, if needed, but they had been emitting a strong OU/Boren vibe.
I'll be shocked if it stops with these two, or even just 4. But there must be some trepidation on 18+, otherwise, I don't see why they need to wait on ND's answer. Adding more top P12 brands is a better lure for getting ND (Stanford), but there is likely some disagreement on which schools, whereas ND (+ Stanford) is an easy yes.
If they add 6-8, they're basically bundling the conferences, but doing so in a manner that cuts the Pac 12 fat, which means better integration into the BIG markets. Unequal revenue sharing is always an option to keep numbers up for the BIG, which is looking at an opportunity cost on more than 4. But the top 6-8 are all worth more if in the BIG, so it is likely not as bad as it seems when using their Pac12 valuations.
Yeah these cheap energy prices can’t last forever either.
Clemson would pick the SEC everytime.
I am guessing any leftover conference GORs will have provisions that allow for leaving for a P2
I hope ESPN’s obsession with turning college football into a feeder minor league system for the NFL backfires spectacularly. Maybe if the two leagues condense to just 44-48 teams or so the remaining D-1 schools collectively sue ESPN/Fox/TV networks for monopolizing and ultimately destroying what had been a great, profitable product for a lot of schools. There are people out there that dont give two ***** about the NFL but love(d) everything about college football.
What made college football better is access to everyone, basically the NFL with 90 more teams. Not everyone could win a title. Im not that naive. But the games still mattered in the old system. Now weve been told by CFB media numerous times that only the playoff matters and only the teams in large markets are going to be able to access it. It’s such a stupid way of doing things. Imagine the NBA saying it was contracting the league to just New York, Brooklyn, Boston, the LA teams, Dallas, Chicago and Miami, and the other ones can still play but the other 3/4 of the league wont be considered for the playoffs.
The biggest is title 19 equality if Iowa State doesn't land in the Big 10 and it is a carrot for Iowa to push membership. People argue that puts Iowa at a disadvantage. Nonsense. Barta already puts Iowa at a disadvantage much worse than this.
Yes the more I think about it, the more I think that's probably the next move.
They will have the ability to take their future out of UW & Oregon's hands. Will also force other Pac teams to probably apply for the Big 12 as well.
Can someone explain to me why we need Utah so bad when we already have BYU?
To kill the PAC 12. This move would be more to make sure we survive as the #3 conference than anything else.
I'd probably rather have Utah and Colorado than Stanford and Cal, personally.
Not that either scenario is a package deal but I look at Utah/BYU about the same as Arizona/ASU.
