RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
If you looked at one of Frank the Tank's old articles from before the time that Nebraska joined the Big 10 you would find that he put together a list of targets that were given him by a TV guy who had listed the value of each to the Big 10. #1 was Texas. That's not going to happen. #2, 3, & 4 were Nebraska, Rutgers and Maryland.
By that list of the available remaining targets the next two up are Kansas and Connecticut. Oklahoma was not on the list. Certainly they may be looked at now, but they weren't on the list back then and I imagine it was because they didn't add enough value market wise.
I really do love all of the Risk board "take over the world" scenarios whether they have Big 10 origins, or SEC origins, or every now and then ACC origins. The only conference that doesn't seem to have one of these theories is the PAC (other than Texahoma).
The Big 10 isn't going to raid the SEC and the SEC isn't going to raid the Big 10. Those two conferences have much more to gain by working together than they do by pissing each other off. The time will come when both of them can work together more profitably than they can over the Big 12. There are 3 targets worth the effort in the Big 12 and perhaps only two worth it for the Big 10. If there is a parsing of the Big 12 it will be agreed upon tacitly by the SEC and Big 10 before it ever happens. Likely the PAC will be included as well and perhaps the ACC if they have any interest beyond Texas and West Virginia.
There are only two reasons to parse the Big 12: 1. The elimination of the 5th wheel so that a more streamlined playoff structure can emerge (one with guaranteed participation and equal payouts). 2. The absorption of the 5th share of the playoff revenue pile plus the addition of new markets.
The Big 12 GOR simply means that nothing can happen unless at least 8 teams find new homes, but more likely all 10. Since no 1 conference can guarantee 8 spots (except the PAC) cooperation will have to be utilized for this feat to be accomplished. The ACC can't land Texas without the SEC's & Big 10's assistance. The SEC can't land Oklahoma with the ACC's & Big 10's assistance. The Big 10 can't land Kansas or anybody else without the SEC's & ACC's assistance.
The best move on the board would be for the PAC to simply take the 8 they wanted as long as that 8 included Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.
If that move ever occurs all the heat will be back on the ACC, GOR or not. If their network becomes a reality then the issue dies. If it doesn't the financial disparity that will develop between the ACC and the SEC & Big 10 will ratchet up the heat.
Really the best targets for the PAC are in the Big 12. The best future targets for the Big 10 and SEC are in the ACC. It takes 12 teams to dissolve the GOR in the ACC. If the SEC and Big 10 take any teams from the Big 12 then that possibility dies. If they take no teams from the Big 12 and the PAC expands to 20 then the SEC will need 6 and the Big 10 will need 6 to do the same. That is the only way the ACC is vulnerable and then only if they can't add the revenue that they would derive from a network.
Now having said all of this the best outcome, for the best structure, for the new upper tier, would be a 4 x 16 model. For the sake of teams on the bubble even a 4 x 18 model could work. But the parsing of the Big 12 seems to be the only way for us to get there and until there is enough cooperation from the Big 10, PAC, SEC, and ACC to a lesser extent to get there we will remain stalemated. And when I say cooperation between the conferences what I really mean is the cooperation between the networks (ESPN & FOX) that pay them.
Until the networks know where the Big 12 teams go and who gets which school nothing happens. Delany and Slive and Scott and Swafford don't move without guaranteed funding. Right now ESPN has more of an interest in Texas and Kansas and FOX has more of an interest in Oklahoma. Once the details are worked out the GOR won't be an issue at all. Why? Because if the networks pay each school an amount equal to, or greater than, they would have gotten in the Big 12 there are no damages. And if all 10 schools are placed then there are no damages arising from being left behind.
So until FOX and ESPN agree upon a structure, the total number of properties they desire within that structure, and how the rights to those properties will be divided, don't expect anything to happen. It's really not about Risk board domination. It's more about overhead, maximizing advertising dollars, and the engagement of all sectors of the country's interest. So I'd say look for selected market overlap (blurring of some boundaries to create dual region interest), and the use of the remaining schools to create a little more balance between the regions. This means that the SEC and Big 10 will likely settle for some market additions within their parameters rather than home run additions. Texas may have more say so in where they go, but everyone else will just be happy to be included.
If we go to 72 look for some uncharacteristic additions that will represent developmental projects for the respective conferences (e.g. Buffalo to the Big 10 or Nevada to the PAC type of additions). Such additions would be for markets and for schools with a demonstrated growth for both athletics and academics as well as growth in their student body.
I don't think there is much left to realignment for the next 5 decades than this. And, if we don't keep the plastic out of the oceans (and find a way to filter out what is already sublimated in the Oceans) and get a handle on the global population growth (now +7 million per month) nobody will be left who gives a damn about football in a 100 years anyway.
(This post was last modified: 10-22-2013 11:43 PM by JRsec.)
|
/
Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spot"
