(04-15-2022 08:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 03:19 PM)Statefan Wrote:  All this talk about UVa, walking away, hand in hand with UNC and Duke is predicated on the idea that the SEC or Big 10 actually want them despite their negatives. These are not football first schools. UVa never was. Duke has not been football first since 1962. And UNC stopped most recently when Butch Davis and assistant blew up in their face. Every time UNC goes "all in" on football it lasts 3-5 then there is a scandal or a failure to perform. These aren't schools built for football. Now if they were already members of the SEC or Big 10 they would not be kicked out, they would be treated no worse than Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Tennessee, South Carolina, etc., etc. A nice pat on the head and a "bless your heart" regarding football.

Even the "control" that Disney wants is predicated on having something worth controlling.

Here's a football conference for you made up of P-5's:

BC, Indiana, Minn, Purdue, Rutgers, MD, South Carolina, Vandy, MSU, Kansas, Mizzou, UVa, Kentucky, and GT. These are all P-5's - some located in major metros - but how many of their current conferences would add them now for football purposes? How many years would it take for 2-3 rise above the rest and establish anything like dominance and a national reputation? Of these who would you gamble on to establish football if you were the conference desiring to make a football oriented addition?

Keep in mind something JR has repeated often - UNC touched base with the SEC when MD **** on the ACC's PSU expansion plan causing FSU to balk in public. UNC's due diligence is not the same thing as the SEC coming to Grady White Boat in Greenville NC to strike a deal. Remember what happened to Syracuse in the 2003 ACC expansion, you could get the same thing from the SEC from Kentucky, South Carolina, Auburn, and Tennessee. Just how easily do you think UK, SC, Auburn, and Tenn. would acquiesce to Duke and UNC in their basketball conference? They would have to be paid at what point does it become not worth the effort? I'm just saying.

The cheapest thing was already explored - VT and NC State to the SEC. UNC and probably Duke nixed that. Why would that have been the cheapest thing? Because first and foremost VT and NC State are the easiest to move without changing the fundamental nature of the ACC. VT and NC State can provide adequate football without an unsustainable Herculean lift. If it was the cheapest thing in the early 2010's, it's still the cheapest thing now.

Virginia Tech and N.C. State would still be suitable to the SEC in a world where the ACC remained intact. And in that world I would agree with your assessment. But that world no longer exists with the disparity in revenue being so great. ESPN wants a league of premier brands. They have it in football. Adding Duke & UNC more so than Virginia takes much of the incentive of a B1G move away. Adding Virginia completes it. Then added to Kentucky they add major content value for basketball, a sport where a breakaway will add ~2.25 x their present value.

In moving to a league of 20 or more adding hoops brands which in a conference which may well play 12 P games easily replace G5's in difficulty. Auburn, Tennessee, & Kentucky would not object. Kentucky would welcome it and the rest are still football first.

It would be the first step to achieve a defense of core identity issue the SEC first discussed in 1990. If taking those 3 halts a B1G advance South it would absolutely be an SEC move, and one which has been planned for 30 years plus. If necessary 4 more would be taken: N.C. State, Virginia Tech, F.S.U. and possibly Georgia Tech.

Wait and see.

ESPN doesn't want to lose it's ad monopoly in the SE. They will be complicit. And frankly that 24 would add tremendous balance for both money sports. 7 ACC schools and Kansas, which ESPN has held special as well.

The moves you suggest would take the SEC to 24 teams. It would also likely stop any further expansion of the B1G, and possibly lead to an 18 team Big 12 by absorbing all the ACC remnants. That would provide a P4 home to everyone in the current P5 except Notre Dame, which would continue to play as as independent.

The SEC could be organized in four 6 team divisions that might look like this:

Georgia, Florida State, Florida, Georgia Tech and Vanderbilt
South Carolina, Virginia Tech, UNC, NC State, Duke and Virginia
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Tennessee
Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas and Kansas

A reduction to four power conferences facilitates an 8 team playoff with four conference champions and four at large teams (which provides a path for Notre Dame). With or without a breakaway from the NCAA it would not be necessary to guarantee a G5 champion an autobid to the playoff (they could be invited at large if they are ranked high enough, which would be rare).

Where's Elmo (Kentucky)?

I think the SEC would likely organize it more this way:

Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Kansas would be out if Ga Tech and N.C. State are in.

Agree with the rest.

What this setup gives this conference is 3 solid division champs in football and gives Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, and both Virginias a solid motivation to make the conference football semis. It also gives the SEC 8 divisional national quality hoops games without locking the rest out of nice runs. And this 24 provides half a dozen weaker football programs, half a dozen annual contenders and about a dozen capable of making solid runs. It's almost an ideal bell curve.

Actually, I only had Kansas in there because your post suggested 7 ACC schools and Kansas. Clemson makes more sense, and with that change I would agree with your divisions 100%.

Where I struggle is with the finances. Why would ESPN agree to take 8 ACC brands they already own for much less money to move them to the SEC? Or would that move be predicated on a legacy rate for the 16 SEC teams and a lower one (albeit more than they get now) for the 8 new schools from the ACC? But that doesn't strike me as being in character for the SEC. Maybe the ACC teams could take a reduction equal to the ACC exit fees, but spread out over a long time (like 10 years at $10 million a year paid to ESPN).

I could see ESPN going for 100% of the expanded B12, and then if the 12 current B12 members and the 6 ACC teams that are part of that are kept whole at their current rate, maybe - just maybe - that could be part of a brokered deal in which nobody pays exit fees or penalties for breaking the GoR. That might be the best long term deal those 18 schools could hope for when they consider what the alternative could be.

(04-15-2022 10:43 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 08:10 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 04:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-15-2022 03:19 PM)Statefan Wrote:  All this talk about UVa, walking away, hand in hand with UNC and Duke is predicated on the idea that the SEC or Big 10 actually want them despite their negatives. These are not football first schools. UVa never was. Duke has not been football first since 1962. And UNC stopped most recently when Butch Davis and assistant blew up in their face. Every time UNC goes "all in" on football it lasts 3-5 then there is a scandal or a failure to perform. These aren't schools built for football. Now if they were already members of the SEC or Big 10 they would not be kicked out, they would be treated no worse than Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Tennessee, South Carolina, etc., etc. A nice pat on the head and a "bless your heart" regarding football.

Even the "control" that Disney wants is predicated on having something worth controlling.

Here's a football conference for you made up of P-5's:

BC, Indiana, Minn, Purdue, Rutgers, MD, South Carolina, Vandy, MSU, Kansas, Mizzou, UVa, Kentucky, and GT. These are all P-5's - some located in major metros - but how many of their current conferences would add them now for football purposes? How many years would it take for 2-3 rise above the rest and establish anything like dominance and a national reputation? Of these who would you gamble on to establish football if you were the conference desiring to make a football oriented addition?

Keep in mind something JR has repeated often - UNC touched base with the SEC when MD **** on the ACC's PSU expansion plan causing FSU to balk in public. UNC's due diligence is not the same thing as the SEC coming to Grady White Boat in Greenville NC to strike a deal. Remember what happened to Syracuse in the 2003 ACC expansion, you could get the same thing from the SEC from Kentucky, South Carolina, Auburn, and Tennessee. Just how easily do you think UK, SC, Auburn, and Tenn. would acquiesce to Duke and UNC in their basketball conference? They would have to be paid at what point does it become not worth the effort? I'm just saying.

The cheapest thing was already explored - VT and NC State to the SEC. UNC and probably Duke nixed that. Why would that have been the cheapest thing? Because first and foremost VT and NC State are the easiest to move without changing the fundamental nature of the ACC. VT and NC State can provide adequate football without an unsustainable Herculean lift. If it was the cheapest thing in the early 2010's, it's still the cheapest thing now.

Virginia Tech and N.C. State would still be suitable to the SEC in a world where the ACC remained intact. And in that world I would agree with your assessment. But that world no longer exists with the disparity in revenue being so great. ESPN wants a league of premier brands. They have it in football. Adding Duke & UNC more so than Virginia takes much of the incentive of a B1G move away. Adding Virginia completes it. Then added to Kentucky they add major content value for basketball, a sport where a breakaway will add ~2.25 x their present value.

In moving to a league of 20 or more adding hoops brands which in a conference which may well play 12 P games easily replace G5's in difficulty. Auburn, Tennessee, & Kentucky would not object. Kentucky would welcome it and the rest are still football first.

It would be the first step to achieve a defense of core identity issue the SEC first discussed in 1990. If taking those 3 halts a B1G advance South it would absolutely be an SEC move, and one which has been planned for 30 years plus. If necessary 4 more would be taken: N.C. State, Virginia Tech, F.S.U. and possibly Georgia Tech.

Wait and see.

ESPN doesn't want to lose it's ad monopoly in the SE. They will be complicit. And frankly that 24 would add tremendous balance for both money sports. 7 ACC schools and Kansas, which ESPN has held special as well.

The moves you suggest would take the SEC to 24 teams. It would also likely stop any further expansion of the B1G, and possibly lead to an 18 team Big 12 by absorbing all the ACC remnants. That would provide a P4 home to everyone in the current P5 except Notre Dame, which would continue to play as as independent.

The SEC could be organized in four 6 team divisions that might look like this:

Georgia, Florida State, Florida, Georgia Tech and Vanderbilt
South Carolina, Virginia Tech, UNC, NC State, Duke and Virginia
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Tennessee
Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas and Kansas

A reduction to four power conferences facilitates an 8 team playoff with four conference champions and four at large teams (which provides a path for Notre Dame). With or without a breakaway from the NCAA it would not be necessary to guarantee a G5 champion an autobid to the playoff (they could be invited at large if they are ranked high enough, which would be rare).

Where's Elmo (Kentucky)?

I think the SEC would likely organize it more this way:

Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Kansas would be out if Ga Tech and N.C. State are in.

Agree with the rest.

What this setup gives this conference is 3 solid division champs in football and gives Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, and both Virginias a solid motivation to make the conference football semis. It also gives the SEC 8 divisional national quality hoops games without locking the rest out of nice runs. And this 24 provides half a dozen weaker football programs, half a dozen annual contenders and about a dozen capable of making solid runs. It's almost an ideal bell curve.

Actually, I only had Kansas in there because your post suggested 7 ACC schools and Kansas. Clemson makes more sense, and with that change I would agree with your divisions 100%.

Where I struggle is with the finances. Why would ESPN agree to take 8 ACC brands they already own for much less money to move them to the SEC? Or would that move be predicated on a legacy rate for the 16 SEC teams and a lower one (albeit more than they get now) for the 8 new schools from the ACC? But that doesn't strike me as being in character for the SEC. Maybe the ACC teams could take a reduction equal to the ACC exit fees, but spread out over a long time (like 10 years at $10 million a year paid to ESPN).

I could see ESPN going for 100% of the expanded B12, and then if the 12 current B12 members and the 6 ACC teams that are part of that are kept whole at their current rate, maybe - just maybe - that could be part of a brokered deal in which nobody pays exit fees or penalties for breaking the GoR. That might be the best long term deal those 18 schools could hope for when they consider what the alternative could be.

It's true it is more profitable at 20. Why would ESPN pay for 24?

1. They still hold a monopoly on the product in the SE and SW and with many more games between dominant brands for each state, each region, and nationally.

2. They really beef up content nationally with the hoops arrangement. Outside the NCAA this is 2.25 x as profitable. They essentially increase their overhead by 360 million, but keep all of their brands essentially paying no more for the other 6 and merging them with the NB12 gives them solid games for odd time slots, streaming, and games to lease to other smaller regional nets.

3. The moves segregate product by value and keeps premium rates which is why thy won't want FOX splitting North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, Georgia, or any other state with them, or T3 subscriptions with the BTN. Herein resides the bargaining ability of the ACC's brand schools. As the larger SEC moves to 13 of the top 20 revenue producers and the top football product ESPN's leverage grows with ND and Louisville giving ESPN 15 of the top 20. In hoops should ESPN retain Kansas the would hold the all time top 4 basketball wins leaders (Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina). There is much post NCAA leverage there as well. And should USC sign an indepedent contract with ESPN it leaves FOX and the PAC and B1G very little to work with. That too can be leveraged.

Regardless of whether the SEC expands or not, it is incumbent on the B1G to at least get to 16 before their contract is re-bid. This symmetry would allow talks to proceed and get some solution to the playoff format.

(04-16-2022 11:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  Regardless of whether the SEC expands or not, it is incumbent on the B1G to at least get to 16 before their contract is re-bid. This symmetry would allow talks to proceed and get some solution to the playoff format.

FOX is wilting away from college sports. ESPN need only wait. Especially if they could assist USC's independence then they will have won the leverage they need to control the future CFP and Tourney. Do that and the rest will come to them.

(04-16-2022 11:34 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  Regardless of whether the SEC expands or not, it is incumbent on the B1G to at least get to 16 before their contract is re-bid. This symmetry would allow talks to proceed and get some solution to the playoff format.

FOX is wilting away from college sports. ESPN need only wait. Especially if they could assist USC's independence then they will have won the leverage they need to control the future CFP and Tourney. Do that and the rest will come to them.

That leads us to the biggest un-discussed problem facing ESPN.

TOO MUCH INVENTORY.

The Mouse only has so many windows in which to broadcast a football game on a Saturday.
ESPN has been selling off excess to Bally, but now they already have acquired more inventory than they had (finding a unique time for the former CBS game will be a challenge), where will they find air time to satisfy the contracts that exist.

Even if ESPN loses the B1G broadcasts, but maintains what they have with the Big 12, it's already too much to put on "mouse air".
When Texas and Oklahoma join the number of SEC games jumps from 168 to 192. The ACC if it does not expand remains at 168, then there are AAC broadcasts and some PAC contests to air.
No school will join a conference to lessen exposure even if they can make more money.

(04-16-2022 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:34 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  Regardless of whether the SEC expands or not, it is incumbent on the B1G to at least get to 16 before their contract is re-bid. This symmetry would allow talks to proceed and get some solution to the playoff format.

FOX is wilting away from college sports. ESPN need only wait. Especially if they could assist USC's independence then they will have won the leverage they need to control the future CFP and Tourney. Do that and the rest will come to them.

That leads us to the biggest un-discussed problem facing ESPN.

TOO MUCH INVENTORY.

The Mouse only has so many windows in which to broadcast a football game on a Saturday.
ESPN has been selling off excess to Bally, but now they already have acquired more inventory than they had (finding a unique time for the former CBS game will be a challenge), where will they find air time to satisfy the contracts that exist.

Even if ESPN loses the B1G broadcasts, but maintains what they have with the Big 12, it's already too much to put on "mouse air".
When Texas and Oklahoma join the number of SEC games jumps from 168 to 192. The ACC if it does not expand remains at 168, then there are AAC broadcasts and some PAC contests to air.
No school will join a conference to lessen exposure even if they can make more money.

No such thing for a corporation setting itself up to become a broker of college sports content.

(04-16-2022 01:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:34 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  Regardless of whether the SEC expands or not, it is incumbent on the B1G to at least get to 16 before their contract is re-bid. This symmetry would allow talks to proceed and get some solution to the playoff format.

FOX is wilting away from college sports. ESPN need only wait. Especially if they could assist USC's independence then they will have won the leverage they need to control the future CFP and Tourney. Do that and the rest will come to them.

That leads us to the biggest un-discussed problem facing ESPN.

TOO MUCH INVENTORY.

The Mouse only has so many windows in which to broadcast a football game on a Saturday.
ESPN has been selling off excess to Bally, but now they already have acquired more inventory than they had (finding a unique time for the former CBS game will be a challenge), where will they find air time to satisfy the contracts that exist.

Even if ESPN loses the B1G broadcasts, but maintains what they have with the Big 12, it's already too much to put on "mouse air".
When Texas and Oklahoma join the number of SEC games jumps from 168 to 192. The ACC if it does not expand remains at 168, then there are AAC broadcasts and some PAC contests to air.
No school will join a conference to lessen exposure even if they can make more money.

No suchgos thing for a corporation setting itself up to become a broker of college sports content.

If a studio has a large stable of stars, but can't find enough rolls so that those with big egos can see themselves on the silver screen, you will eventually have a revolt and the biggest names will be looking to move elsewhere.

(04-16-2022 01:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:34 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:25 AM)XLance Wrote:  Regardless of whether the SEC expands or not, it is incumbent on the B1G to at least get to 16 before their contract is re-bid. This symmetry would allow talks to proceed and get some solution to the playoff format.

FOX is wilting away from college sports. ESPN need only wait. Especially if they could assist USC's independence then they will have won the leverage they need to control the future CFP and Tourney. Do that and the rest will come to them.

That leads us to the biggest un-discussed problem facing ESPN.

TOO MUCH INVENTORY.

The Mouse only has so many windows in which to broadcast a football game on a Saturday.
ESPN has been selling off excess to Bally, but now they already have acquired more inventory than they had (finding a unique time for the former CBS game will be a challenge), where will they find air time to satisfy the contracts that exist.

Even if ESPN loses the B1G broadcasts, but maintains what they have with the Big 12, it's already too much to put on "mouse air".
When Texas and Oklahoma join the number of SEC games jumps from 168 to 192. The ACC if it does not expand remains at 168, then there are AAC broadcasts and some PAC contests to air.
No school will join a conference to lessen exposure even if they can make more money.

No suchgos thing for a corporation setting itself up to become a broker of college sports content.

If a studio has a large stable of stars, but can't find enough rolls so that those with big egos can see themselves on the silver screen, you will eventually have a revolt and the biggest names will be looking to move elsewhere.

That's an absurd response. Brokering keeps all stars in the spotlight. That's the profit in it and the appeal.

(04-16-2022 01:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:34 AM)JRsec Wrote:  FOX is wilting away from college sports. ESPN need only wait. Especially if they could assist USC's independence then they will have won the leverage they need to control the future CFP and Tourney. Do that and the rest will come to them.

That leads us to the biggest un-discussed problem facing ESPN.

TOO MUCH INVENTORY.

The Mouse only has so many windows in which to broadcast a football game on a Saturday.
ESPN has been selling off excess to Bally, but now they already have acquired more inventory than they had (finding a unique time for the former CBS game will be a challenge), where will they find air time to satisfy the contracts that exist.

Even if ESPN loses the B1G broadcasts, but maintains what they have with the Big 12, it's already too much to put on "mouse air".
When Texas and Oklahoma join the number of SEC games jumps from 168 to 192. The ACC if it does not expand remains at 168, then there are AAC broadcasts and some PAC contests to air.
No school will join a conference to lessen exposure even if they can make more money.

No suchgos thing for a corporation setting itself up to become a broker of college sports content.

If a studio has a large stable of stars, but can't find enough rolls so that those with big egos can see themselves on the silver screen, you will eventually have a revolt and the biggest names will be looking to move elsewhere.

That's an absurd response. Brokering keeps all stars in the spotlight. That's the profit in it and the appeal.

Thinking about it from a risk standpoint, isn't one of the greater risks to ESPN losing a cohesive ACC that keeps all the football schools locked down?

ESPN is not going to want to lose any of Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, VT, NC State, UVa, GT, and Pitt to the Big 10 are they? If you move just two, the only two you can move without huge repercussions are VT and NC State. If you move FSU and Clemson you run the risk of losing some to the Big 10 do you not? If you take 4 from the ACC you are assured of losing 3 or 4 to the Big 10 are you not? If you are going to go through the headache of a 20 school conference, why not shoot the juice to it and go to 24? Then the issue becomes who can you leave that profits the Big 10 the least does it not?

The ACC GOR doesn’t expire until 2036. The BIG media deal is not finalized but it looks like the ESPN is going to invest LESS in the BIG. I don’t see any ACC team moving to the BIG before 2036.

Kansas and Colorado will be available much sooner but I don’t know if FOX will pay for them.

(04-16-2022 01:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 11:34 AM)JRsec Wrote:  FOX is wilting away from college sports. ESPN need only wait. Especially if they could assist USC's independence then they will have won the leverage they need to control the future CFP and Tourney. Do that and the rest will come to them.

That leads us to the biggest un-discussed problem facing ESPN.

TOO MUCH INVENTORY.

The Mouse only has so many windows in which to broadcast a football game on a Saturday.
ESPN has been selling off excess to Bally, but now they already have acquired more inventory than they had (finding a unique time for the former CBS game will be a challenge), where will they find air time to satisfy the contracts that exist.

Even if ESPN loses the B1G broadcasts, but maintains what they have with the Big 12, it's already too much to put on "mouse air".
When Texas and Oklahoma join the number of SEC games jumps from 168 to 192. The ACC if it does not expand remains at 168, then there are AAC broadcasts and some PAC contests to air.
No school will join a conference to lessen exposure even if they can make more money.

No suchgos thing for a corporation setting itself up to become a broker of college sports content.

If a studio has a large stable of stars, but can't find enough rolls so that those with big egos can see themselves on the silver screen, you will eventually have a revolt and the biggest names will be looking to move elsewhere.

That's an absurd response. Brokering keeps all stars in the spotlight. That's the profit in it and the appeal.

Not for UT and A&M. Those two would sink the ship than lose spotlight to the other. Past is prologue, troubled times for the SEC ahead. A&M will jump ship regardless of the money.

(04-17-2022 04:56 PM)Acres Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 01:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-16-2022 12:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  That leads us to the biggest un-discussed problem facing ESPN.

TOO MUCH INVENTORY.

The Mouse only has so many windows in which to broadcast a football game on a Saturday.
ESPN has been selling off excess to Bally, but now they already have acquired more inventory than they had (finding a unique time for the former CBS game will be a challenge), where will they find air time to satisfy the contracts that exist.

Even if ESPN loses the B1G broadcasts, but maintains what they have with the Big 12, it's already too much to put on "mouse air".
When Texas and Oklahoma join the number of SEC games jumps from 168 to 192. The ACC if it does not expand remains at 168, then there are AAC broadcasts and some PAC contests to air.
No school will join a conference to lessen exposure even if they can make more money.

No suchgos thing for a corporation setting itself up to become a broker of college sports content.

If a studio has a large stable of stars, but can't find enough rolls so that those with big egos can see themselves on the silver screen, you will eventually have a revolt and the biggest names will be looking to move elsewhere.

That's an absurd response. Brokering keeps all stars in the spotlight. That's the profit in it and the appeal.

Not for UT and A&M. Those two would sink the ship than lose spotlight to the other. Past is prologue, troubled times for the SEC ahead. A&M will jump ship regardless of the money.

Where are they jumping?

The SEC is the premier brand. It’s been the equalizer for A&M. UT and OU would love nothing more than for A&M to self-destruct by leaving.

Good luck to A&M competing with UT, OU, and LSU in the BIG.

FOX getting the BIG without USC Is a Pyrrhic victory. It will expedite the P2 world and separation. Getting just USC not any different, but at least keeps the most important P12 brand. Buying 6-9 Pac12 and rolling them into BIG is ESPN bleeding out FOX while still getting the P2 setup desired.

If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

The Pac12 bylaws ( chapter 2 paragraph 3) prevents notification of departure prior to August 1 2024. It does not require a notification period. Essential, USC can keep their silence until August 1, provide notice and join the BIG the same day.

3. Withdrawal.
No member shall deliver a notice of withdrawal to the Conference in the period beginning on July 24, 2011, and ending on August 1, 2024;

https://pac-12compliance.org/wp-content/...V3.C19.pdf

The 4 basketball oriented adds JR through out, plus another 4 football schools for good measure, would crest a true collegiate sports bohemoth.

(04-18-2022 01:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 01:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 12:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2022 04:59 AM)XLance Wrote:  If the stories are true that FOX and the B1G have wrapped up their negotiations and plan to make the terms public around Memorial Day, it would only make sense that if the B1G were going to expand, the new school(s) would be included.
It's interesting that the USC talk has surfaced, now.
The PAC without USC may be on par with the Big 12 losing Texas and Oklahoma.

In terms of % of value the PAC 12 would need to lose their top 5 value of schools to equal the % of loss suffered by the Big 12. In order of value: Washington, Oregon, U.S.C., U.C.L.A., and Arizona State would do it. Add Colorado as a bridge and you have a very nice addition. Only U.C.L.A. would likely not get approval. Sub Utah and you now have contiguity all the way to the B1G, and another state.

JR, there is no combination anywhere that could match Texas and Oklahoma in terms of value for any conference.
But the B1G needs to start somewhere and USC is probably at the top of the list in terms of value that is contract available within the next few years. I would probably pair with Arizona (large, 50K, AAU, no California, Oregon or Washington political impediments).
If the SEC chose to get larger, the B1G could counter with Stanford/Notre Dame (if contract available).

X, the SEC can gain all of the balance, academics, and value it wants by having a solid, but expanded South.

We are extremely pigskin strong. We are headed for 12 P games and more than a doubling of hoops values. The SEC wants to keep the B1G out of the South and has no interest West of Oklahoma and Texas.

Duke, Kansas, North Carolina and Virginia accomplish many objectives for the SEC.
All enhance academics. Kansas sets the NW corner. Viginia sets the NE corner. Duke and UNC and Kansas when added to Kentucky gives the SEC the 4 winningest basketball programs of all time and when added to SEC hoops makes it #1 in hoops. None of those 4 are football giants so when added to Vanderbilt and Kentucky (usually) they balance the SEC's football strength when 12 P games will be the norm. And defensively they essentially lock the B1G out of our region.

It would be the best offensive and defensive move that the SEC and ESPN could make.

I am not disagreeing with your assessment, I'm just trying to explore a path to get the B1G to 20 also.
Take your SEC blinders off for a minute, nobody is trying to horn on the SEC's solid south.