(02-06-2018 06:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ESPN doesn't need to think like that at all, unless a serious second bidder emerges for the most expensive college sports properties. There is little or no possibility that Fox will be that serious bidder as long as the Murdochs both control Fox and own the largest stake in Disney.

That's true, as long as there is no second formidable bidder. But there is a rumor that Amazon might be interested in acquiring FOX Sports, FS1, and FS2. I'd call that a game changer. Especially since ESPN's buyout walked the line with the government on how much of FOX they could buy and still gain government approval for the deal to go through. They really couldn't make an offer for those 3. And Amazon is sufficiently capitalized to pose a serious threat should they decide to go for that market.

Comcast seems to be the leader in the clubhouse.

(02-06-2018 06:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ESPN doesn't need to think like that at all, unless a serious second bidder emerges for the most expensive college sports properties. There is little or no possibility that Fox will be that serious bidder as long as the Murdochs both control Fox and own the largest stake in Disney.

That's true, as long as there is no second formidable bidder. But there is a rumor that Amazon might be interested in acquiring FOX Sports, FS1, and FS2. I'd call that a game changer. Especially since ESPN's buyout walked the line with the government on how much of FOX they could buy and still gain government approval for the deal to go through. They really couldn't make an offer for those 3. And :Amazon is sufficiently capitalized to pose a serious threat should they decide to go for that market.

That is an understatement.

Based on current stock prices, Amazon is worth 4 times as much as Disney.

(02-06-2018 06:06 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  Independence in football, all other sports in the Big West for a small travel subsidy. Whatcha say, Wedge? :lmfao:
Those Long Beach and Fullerton vs Texas baseball series will be epic.

Ha. They'd sell a lot of baseball tickets... I've been in that ballpark in Long Beach, it can probably hold 5000. Big for college baseball.

(02-06-2018 07:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 06:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  ESPN doesn't need to think like that at all, unless a serious second bidder emerges for the most expensive college sports properties. There is little or no possibility that Fox will be that serious bidder as long as the Murdochs both control Fox and own the largest stake in Disney.

That's true, as long as there is no second formidable bidder. But there is a rumor that Amazon might be interested in acquiring FOX Sports, FS1, and FS2. I'd call that a game changer. Especially since ESPN's buyout walked the line with the government on how much of FOX they could buy and still gain government approval for the deal to go through. They really couldn't make an offer for those 3. And :Amazon is sufficiently capitalized to pose a serious threat should they decide to go for that market.

That is an understatement.

Based on current stock prices, Amazon is worth 4 times as much as Disney.

Litotes is my speciality.

(02-06-2018 05:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 04:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  At the end of the day, the one who is paying the bills gets the biggest say. What does ESPN want?

Priority #1 for ESPN would be to have arguably the top economic impact school not yet lassoed clearly in one of their holding pens.

Once they are assured that they have the Texas product then their ancillary concerns might be addressed.

Where does Texas do the most good? ACC

Where does Texas make the most money for them? SEC

Would the SEC be well satisfied with Oklahoma? Yes

Would Oklahoma in the SEC destabilize the ACC by increasing the revenue gap? Yes

Would Texas in the ACC offset and compliment Oklahoma's addition to the SEC? Yes

How do we get them there? You are going to have to allow Texas essentially to anchor a new division of the ACC.

Is that doable? Yes. Baylor, Houston/Rice, T.C.U. and one other in a 20 team ACC gives Texas their own division with at least 3 other Texas schools.

Will that fly with the ACC? It has been rumored not to have flown with North Carolina in 2010-1 when Deloss was looking because UNC apparently didn't want to lose voting control over "their" conference.

I strongly suggest that the biggest thing that has stood in the way of the ACCN having been reality two years ago and the ACC having closed the revenue gap was North Carolina's inability to grow the conference dynamically out of fear of losing control.

There are two ways to get Texas to consider the ACC. One was the oft rumored swap of Virginia Tech and N.C. State to the SEC in 2010-1 to make room for Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Notre Dame way back then. That one is probably dead and buried.

But if ESPN truly wanted to nail down the product of the Big 12 prior to the end of the GOR when other interested parties could bid up the buying price they could simply expand the ACC and SEC to 20 schools each absorb the Big 12 between the two of them and pay them both amounts that secured the product against Big 10 revenue growth and then the Mouse would own 8 of the top 10 revenue producers and 15 of the top 25 between the two conferences. And with that boost in revenue some of the ACC and SEC schools would be filling some of those 10 spots in the top 25 that they currently don't occupy.

What I don't see happening is Texas taking an independent deal because it hurts their minor sports with insane travel expenses. Create a division for them and it becomes doable.

Otherwise the cheapest and most efficient play for ESPN is to take Texa-homa to the SEC. The minor sports play near home, play old rivals and current ones too, and the investment in securing that property is much less.

However if it is content they want, why not take all 10 and arrange them in a reasonable fashion between the two conferences.

In another thread I suggested: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas Tech, Iowa State and West Virginia to the SEC. If we get paid to take them nobody would gripe much, especially since 5 of them would be in their own division.

I suggested that the ACC take Texas, Baylor, Houston, and T.C.U. along with Kansas State and N.D. all in (which for 50 million in TV revenue seems reasonable). That puts the ACCN in all of the top cities in Texas picks up the Kansas market and gives Texas their home division to play.

Nothing solves the voting issue in the ACC however. U.N.C. can count on the three other Carolina schools, Virginia and probably Virginia Tech. They once counted on Clemson but the Tigers might vote with the football first schools if Texas and Notre Dame were all in. N.D. would have some support from the Old Big East schools. Texas could count on the 4 buddies they would bring. Then in a 20 school conference 6 votes doesn't block something U.N.C. disagrees with and 6 votes doesn't pass what they want. So there would be 4 factions:

Notre Dame: Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

Texas: Baylor, T.C.U., Houston/Rice, and another, perhaps Kansas State

Core: Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech

Football First: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami

Floater: Louisville

So the very parts of the assembled Frankenstein have to work in concert if they are going to grow and thrive. But between U.N.C., Texas, Notre Dame and the growing swagger of the Clemson/F.S.U. faction there is way too much ego to control long enough to grow what is needed.

This ultimately will be ESPN's mess to handle. It is why I suggested paying the ACC slightly above their product value if they grew to 20. 50 million per school would probably be enough to pacify all parties and have a truce of greed long enough to pull it off.

Otherwise Occam's Razor says Texa-homa gives ESPN 80% of the total value of the Big 12 with a lot less headache and that the SEC would be the best possible place to capitalize off of that investment and the most likely ESPN held property strong enough to endure it.

When Texas joins the ACC, JR, it will be with Baylor only.
Notre Dame will remain a partial.

(02-06-2018 09:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 04:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  At the end of the day, the one who is paying the bills gets the biggest say. What does ESPN want?

Priority #1 for ESPN would be to have arguably the top economic impact school not yet lassoed clearly in one of their holding pens.

Once they are assured that they have the Texas product then their ancillary concerns might be addressed.

Where does Texas do the most good? ACC

Where does Texas make the most money for them? SEC

Would the SEC be well satisfied with Oklahoma? Yes

Would Oklahoma in the SEC destabilize the ACC by increasing the revenue gap? Yes

Would Texas in the ACC offset and compliment Oklahoma's addition to the SEC? Yes

How do we get them there? You are going to have to allow Texas essentially to anchor a new division of the ACC.

Is that doable? Yes. Baylor, Houston/Rice, T.C.U. and one other in a 20 team ACC gives Texas their own division with at least 3 other Texas schools.

Will that fly with the ACC? It has been rumored not to have flown with North Carolina in 2010-1 when Deloss was looking because UNC apparently didn't want to lose voting control over "their" conference.

I strongly suggest that the biggest thing that has stood in the way of the ACCN having been reality two years ago and the ACC having closed the revenue gap was North Carolina's inability to grow the conference dynamically out of fear of losing control.

There are two ways to get Texas to consider the ACC. One was the oft rumored swap of Virginia Tech and N.C. State to the SEC in 2010-1 to make room for Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Notre Dame way back then. That one is probably dead and buried.

But if ESPN truly wanted to nail down the product of the Big 12 prior to the end of the GOR when other interested parties could bid up the buying price they could simply expand the ACC and SEC to 20 schools each absorb the Big 12 between the two of them and pay them both amounts that secured the product against Big 10 revenue growth and then the Mouse would own 8 of the top 10 revenue producers and 15 of the top 25 between the two conferences. And with that boost in revenue some of the ACC and SEC schools would be filling some of those 10 spots in the top 25 that they currently don't occupy.

What I don't see happening is Texas taking an independent deal because it hurts their minor sports with insane travel expenses. Create a division for them and it becomes doable.

Otherwise the cheapest and most efficient play for ESPN is to take Texa-homa to the SEC. The minor sports play near home, play old rivals and current ones too, and the investment in securing that property is much less.

However if it is content they want, why not take all 10 and arrange them in a reasonable fashion between the two conferences.

In another thread I suggested: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas Tech, Iowa State and West Virginia to the SEC. If we get paid to take them nobody would gripe much, especially since 5 of them would be in their own division.

I suggested that the ACC take Texas, Baylor, Houston, and T.C.U. along with Kansas State and N.D. all in (which for 50 million in TV revenue seems reasonable). That puts the ACCN in all of the top cities in Texas picks up the Kansas market and gives Texas their home division to play.

Nothing solves the voting issue in the ACC however. U.N.C. can count on the three other Carolina schools, Virginia and probably Virginia Tech. They once counted on Clemson but the Tigers might vote with the football first schools if Texas and Notre Dame were all in. N.D. would have some support from the Old Big East schools. Texas could count on the 4 buddies they would bring. Then in a 20 school conference 6 votes doesn't block something U.N.C. disagrees with and 6 votes doesn't pass what they want. So there would be 4 factions:

Notre Dame: Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

Texas: Baylor, T.C.U., Houston/Rice, and another, perhaps Kansas State

Core: Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest, Virginia, Va Tech

Football First: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami

Floater: Louisville

So the very parts of the assembled Frankenstein have to work in concert if they are going to grow and thrive. But between U.N.C., Texas, Notre Dame and the growing swagger of the Clemson/F.S.U. faction there is way too much ego to control long enough to grow what is needed.

This ultimately will be ESPN's mess to handle. It is why I suggested paying the ACC slightly above their product value if they grew to 20. 50 million per school would probably be enough to pacify all parties and have a truce of greed long enough to pull it off.

Otherwise Occam's Razor says Texa-homa gives ESPN 80% of the total value of the Big 12 with a lot less headache and that the SEC would be the best possible place to capitalize off of that investment and the most likely ESPN held property strong enough to endure it.

When Texas joins the ACC, JR, it will be with Baylor only.
Notre Dame will remain a partial.

If that happens Oklahoma will likely be joining the SEC with O.S.U..

But that's not ESPN's M.O. They own the rights to every school of note in every state South of Virginia and Kentucky except those in the Big 12. I think they'll go for those as well.

My money is on Oklahoma and Oklahoma to the SEC. Texas and ESPN then have a long talk about the future of the Longhorns. Texas may very well want to be king of a tiny kingdom and if ESPN is willing to continue to bankroll it separate from their big SEC deal the Big 12 soldiers on. If ESPN is unwilling to keep funding the Big 12 then Texas and Texas Tech will be SEC members.

Perhaps the next development we see is a push for conference semi-finals: The SEC with 3 divisions of 6, the Big Ten tries to grab ND but settles for Kansas has 3 divisions of 5, the ACC adds WVU and follows the same pattern. Each conference admits a wild card as their 4th playoff team. It way more wieldly than big divisions and it means more conference controlled revenue through the semi-final games.

Texas Tech and Okie State will never be in the SEC

NEVER

Heard it here first!

(02-06-2018 10:18 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Texas Tech and Okie State will never be in the SEC

NEVER

Heard it here first!

I can't think of a reason the SEC would turn down Oklahoma State as long as Oklahoma is coming along. The market being small is fairly irrelevant as quality of content will matter long term and really always has been the biggest driver of revenue. The day is coming when market-based cable subs won't be that significant.

If the market size were of particular concern then I doubt even OU would pay for itself. There are more people in DFW than in the entire state of OK and the SECN already has good penetration in the state of TX.

As far as Texas Tech goes, I'm a little more sympathetic to that argument and I am not one to be terribly confident Texas will end up in the SEC even though it makes the most sense for them. Still, if Texas is on the table and the price is Texas Tech then we'd take that deal.

I’ll always say Texas/Oklahoma should stay where they are. They have it made. Easier to run through a 10 team league than a 16 team behemoth with 5-6 bluebloods. Regional league with a (double) round robin where you’re calling the shots is the cherry on top.

(02-06-2018 10:44 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  I’ll always say Texas/Oklahoma should stay where they are. They have it made. Easier to run through a 10 team league than a 16 team behemoth with 5-6 bluebloods. Regional league with a (double) round robin where you’re calling the shots is the cherry on top.

That worked beautifully for them 30 years ago when the national championship was a beauty pageant played out in the AP poll and setting up 8 patsies and two tough games was a recipe for getting the votes.

But then came Conference Championship games and suddenly the anti was raised so getting a tough OOC game was in vogue. The Longhorns had that already with OU. So they were still fine.

Then came the cable footprint subscription payout method and there was trouble in paradise. The population of the Big 8 and SWC was too few and the markets outside of Texas weren't that great. So with the SMU scandal and changes afoot in pay models Texas and Oklahoma started looking around. They decided along with Nebraska and Kansas and Colorado to merge. But strife soon followed with the divisions and the Big 12 in its infancy had already shown signs of a terminal illness. Arkansas fearful of being left behind in the soon to be defunct SWC came to the SEC and the quality started draining away. Nebraska would bolt for greater security as well. Then Colorado, then Texas A&M and Missouri would all depart.

But the cable model is changing again, and in the world of streaming content will be king and games that actually draw audiences will be rewarded.

Now there are no new tricks to save Bevo. Bevo needs to play other big name programs to hold his value and the Sooners do too.

The payouts of the future will reward conferences that have 5 or 6 blue bloods and punish those who have a king, an overlord and 10 serfs working the fields.

So the days of Texas being the the loveliest face among the homely have come to an end. But don't cry for them or pity them. The Sooners realize that they need compelling games just to keep the stadium filled and to regain national attention. So the two will be handsomely rewarded for joining up with other brands. And the homely serfs will be fortunate to get their golden ticket to leave with them.

This time a sweetheart network deal can't stop the fate of Texas. They will either join with other brands or fade. The competition for the eyes of the nation is too strong and with future pay models based upon those results not even Texas can afford to surround themselves lesser competition.

The Big 10 and SEC are where they are because we have greater internal competition and large loyal fan bases. The PAC has a large middle but no dominant brands. The Big 12 is Oklahoma and not much else. The ACC has been Clemson or F.S.U. but their middle is growing.

When you understand that and look at the ratings you'll see brand on brand and great ratings go hand in hand and along with it the pay scale already rewards this even with the subscription fee model. It will only be more of a stark difference when content and actual eyeballs on an event determines the payout.

This time Texas and Oklahoma know that hanging onto the the 1980's game plan will no longer suffice.

There is one alternative that hasn't been discussed here. Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC, either alone or with two little brothers, is destabilizing on several fronts.

The first, and most obvious, is that it essentially relegates the Big 12 to G6 status. Second, it creates a huge, powerful conference in an SEC in which several heavyweights are likely to knock each other out of championship contention. Maybe that means either Oklahoma or Alabama to the CFP instead of potentially both.

How about this alternative? What if OU and UT both go indy in football, provided that the Big 12 will give them both a Notre Dame type deal in which they each play five B12 opponents a year and leave all their other sports in the B12? The B12 could add a ninth team, say Houston, to give them a balanced 4/4 football schedule and a 20 game double round robin in basketball.

OU plays Oklahoma State every year, plus four other B12 opponents, 2 home/2 away. Texas plays Texas Tech every year, plus the other four B12 opponents. Every B12 team thus gets both OU and UT home and away once every four years. Maybe these 10 OOC games are enough for the B12 to keep its P5 status (albeit with a financial haircut that would be less than the buzz cut they would get if they lost them both to the SEC).

Here's the cherry on top. Both OU and UT join ND with indy contracts with NBC, and the three of them play each other every year. UT steals a page from ND's book, and schedules both UCLA and Cal every year, putting them in that talent rich state every year. OU similarly schedules Arkansas and LSU. Now, all of them have a CFP worthy schedule, and all get the same deal from the CFP and NY6. If NBC were to also bring BYU under their umbrella, they could potentially fill a 3PM and 7PM time slot every week of the season with games of national interest. And they don't have to pay any deadwood to get it.

BTW, this arrangement also has room for UT and OU to renew their rivalries with Texas A&M and Nebraska. If I'm NBC, I'm encouraging the hell out of that.

As long as we are speculating.... With OU and UT off the table and the B12 locked into a long term deal, does that put an end to P5 realignment?

BYU would schedule a 2-for-1 deal with all three of Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma right now, if it delivered one of these three in Provo in November each year and an OTA TV deal with NBC.

(02-07-2018 12:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  BYU would schedule a 2-for-1 deal with all three of Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma right now, if it delivered one of these three in Provo in November each year and an OTA TV deal with NBC.

Every non-power school and some power schools would take that in a heartbeat. However, signing 2-for-1 deals has the appearance that the school who gets the 1 is not a power school.

(02-07-2018 08:30 AM)ken d Wrote:  There is one alternative that hasn't been discussed here. Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC, either alone or with two little brothers, is destabilizing on several fronts.

The first, and most obvious, is that it essentially relegates the Big 12 to G6 status. Second, it creates a huge, powerful conference in an SEC in which several heavyweights are likely to knock each other out of championship contention. Maybe that means either Oklahoma or Alabama to the CFP instead of potentially both.

How about this alternative? What if OU and UT both go indy in football, provided that the Big 12 will give them both a Notre Dame type deal in which they each play five B12 opponents a year and leave all their other sports in the B12? The B12 could add a ninth team, say Houston, to give them a balanced 4/4 football schedule and a 20 game double round robin in basketball.

OU plays Oklahoma State every year, plus four other B12 opponents, 2 home/2 away. Texas plays Texas Tech every year, plus the other four B12 opponents. Every B12 team thus gets both OU and UT home and away once every four years. Maybe these 10 OOC games are enough for the B12 to keep its P5 status (albeit with a financial haircut that would be less than the buzz cut they would get if they lost them both to the SEC).

Here's the cherry on top. Both OU and UT join ND with indy contracts with NBC, and the three of them play each other every year. UT steals a page from ND's book, and schedules both UCLA and Cal every year, putting them in that talent rich state every year. OU similarly schedules Arkansas and LSU. Now, all of them have a CFP worthy schedule, and all get the same deal from the CFP and NY6. If NBC were to also bring BYU under their umbrella, they could potentially fill a 3PM and 7PM time slot every week of the season with games of national interest. And they don't have to pay any deadwood to get it.

BTW, this arrangement also has room for UT and OU to renew their rivalries with Texas A&M and Nebraska. If I'm NBC, I'm encouraging the hell out of that.

As long as we are speculating.... With OU and UT off the table and the B12 locked into a long term deal, does that put an end to P5 realignment?

Absolutely not.

First of all I don't think ESPN cares about balance as much as they care about holding the rights to OU and UT.

If both went independent what they would have is a deuce difficult time of scheduling late in the season. The SEC would simply turn it's eyes toward the East again whether that came in 2033 for 2035, or when they decided in 2034 to put their whole package up to the highest bidder. If we are out from under the ESPN umbrella then offering ACC schools won't be an issue any longer. If it's brands we need we will go after Clemson and Florida State. If it should be markets we want we would go after the states of North Carolina and Virginia.

If OKlahoma and Texas go indy then look for ESPN to push hard for the Big 10 contract rights. If they landed them the smartest play they would have is to permit the Big 10 and SEC to both grow out of the ACC. The rivalry between the Big 10 and SEC is an untapped bonanza except for post season play. IF you have the two giants of the P5 in your pocket you increase the value of the ACC holdings by putting them under the better brand names.

If balance was the issue then ESPN should buy the PACN and move 7 Big 12 schools West and encourage the PAC to make peace with B.Y.U..

Then if the SEC really wants a second Texas school they would be forced to look at T.C.U. and if the Frogs had to have a travel partner then West Virginia would still be there. So if the networks paid us for those two it would be possible.

Otherwise what we would have is a PAC 20, SEC 14, Big 10 14, and ACC at 14.5.

What that move would accomplish is keeping the SEC or Big 10 from really outpacing everyone else and would bring the PAC closer in line with the top 2. But, what else it would do is perpetually confine the ACC to last place, and by a fairly wide margin. I can't imagine that would be very stable past the GOR.

To achieve balance we need to move to a P3. If the PAC absorbs the Big 12 then the Big 10 and SEC will eventually absorb most of the ACC.

If the ACC and SEC both grow to 20 out of the Big 12 that means that eventually the PAC/B1G grow to 24 either outright or in essence with a cooperative agreement.

If FOX sells the BTN to Amazon, or another competitor, then look for that company to go hard after the PACN. And look for ESPN to push early to acquire the whole Big 12 and the best way to do it would be to absorb all 10 into the SEC and ACC. There are some major advantages for ESPN by doing this.

IF ESPN pushes in 2024 for a majority stake in the Big 10 then look for the Big 12 to the PAC to become more viable, but that would ultimately be bad news for a Skipperless ESPN who would now have its bread buttered in the SEC and its biscuits sopped in the Big 10.

Folks tend to forget that there are corporate objectives here as well as conference ones and that the corporate objectives tend to trump some of the conference objectives.

But the imbalance between the SEC/B1G and the PAC/ACC is too large there to ever be a relative balance between a P4. If balance is what we want a P3 would be essential to obtain as close of an approximation to balance as we could hope to have.

As things stand now the Big 10 and SEC will earn in the 40 million range in TV Revenue with the Big 10 hitting 50 soon. But the Big 12 is in the mid 30's and the PAC and ACC haven't hit 30 yet. The relative difference there is immense.

The SEC has an estimated economic impact (WSJ numbers) of over 7 billion. The Big 10 has an impact of over 5 billion, the Big 12 one of over 3 billion, the PAC over 2 billion and the ACC under 2 billion. You can't balance those numbers by sticking with 4 conferences.

Venue size and attendance has the SEC in the lead by 11,500 people per event over the Big 10 who averages 66,000 per game. The drop off then goes to 57,000 for the Big 12, to 50,100 for the PAC to 49,900 for the ACC. Without attendance going significantly up for the lower 3 there can never be balance. Most programs earn more off of attendance, donations for tickets, and concessions and merchandise than they ever do from TV revenue.

So simply saying that by letting OU and UT have independent status we could have more balance actually changes none of the current inequity which has only been safeguarded by the G.O.R.'s.

With the Big 10 earning 51.1 at the same time the SEC is expected to be at 46 when the GOR's run out first in the Big 12, and then in 2033 the buyout is low enough for ACC schools to give notice, I would hardly call these circumstances stable.

If I'm the ACC commissioner I would be pushing ESPN hard to help us land some of the Big 12 ahead of the ACC GOR expiration. If I'm the commissioner of the SEC I would be pushing ESPN hard for Oklahoma because with the Sooners you get an anchor for the Western division that enables Auburn and Alabama to shift East. If Texas came along with them fine, but they aren't needed. With L.S.U. and A&M still in the West there is plenty of branding to support that division even if we took only the Oklahoma pair.

Adding OU increases the SEC economic impact within its region to 9 billion and makes us uncatchable in regards to that kind of clout. It also gives us major penetration into DFW and Texas as a whole when coupled with A&M.

This notion that you can have too many brands is a canard. All indications are that eventually advertising rates will be based on actual viewers and not just potential ones. Brand on brand competition will command higher rates and with it higher pay. If we move to a P4 world the chances of Oklahoma making a playoff are no worse than they are now.

If they win the 10 team Big 12 they still have to face a Florida State/Clemson, an Alabama, or an Ohio State to make the finals. In the SEC they would be facing a school of that caliber in the CCG anyway. But in the SEC they would be connected to better recruiting grounds and make a helluva lot more money in the process. The same is true for the Big 10.
The ACC and PAC are too remote for the Sooner's fans and they can't pay enough to land them.

So Ken D the whole notion of balance is a specious concept to begin with. We are far from balance now. But having the top 2 conferences take the best of the 3rd place conference isn't going to give you more balance, but rather it will increase the divide. Having UT and OU go independent doesn't change the playing field an iota's worth other than to decrease the leverage of OU and UT and make the other 8 schools in the Big 12 poorer, and all while not appreciably helping OU and UT who will likely earn less. Notre Dame right now isn't making what the ACC pays out for media rights but at least it's very close for them.

So the Big 12 will need assistance in a move to the PAC if we want to keep the Big 10 and SEC from growing stronger by 2024. That move at leasts holds the SEC and Big 10 at status quo until 2033 when the ACC will be on the menu.

Or, ESPN can become proactive and absorb the Big 12 into the SEC and ACC and pay the ACC a rate that will close the gap. They looked at doing that in 2010-1. They should look at it again. They should strongly consider giving Texas its own division and adding them to the ACC and should take a look at doing the same for Oklahoma in the SEC. By moving both conferences to 20 they can dissolve the Big 12 early, before the entrance of a well funded competitor into the college sports market (and they can do that now since they hold the T3 rights to the Big 12 by virtue of the FOX purchase and since they own the LHN) and then renegotiate the SEC and ACC contracts and extend their expiration dates.

By absorbing the Big 12 they will own the rights to every school of note from Virginia over to Missouri and Kansas and down to the Rio Grande and as far west as Lubbock. All of those states would be an advertising monopoly for college sports. That kind of leverage means better ad rates. There would be between the SEC and ACC 8 games of interest in Texas every week where 28 million viewers reside. I count Oklahoma and Oklahoma State in that 8 school total because of their draw in DFW. So when they are involved the market potential balloons to 32 million between the two states depending upon which Texas school they are playing.

By having Iowa State, and Kansas to go along with Kentucky and Louisville, Syracuse, Pittsburgh and West Virginia all added to Notre Dame then ESPN has a back door into all of the major Big 10 cities save for Minneapolis/St.Paul and Madison.

If they didn't hold the rights to anyone but those 40 schools they will have the 1st and 3rd highest drawing collection of schools now playing in the largest footprint (the ACC) and they still have games of interest playing in most Big 10 cities.

The play for ESPN should be to absorb the Big 12 so that they own the rights to 8 of the top 10 grossing schools, 15 of the top 25, and have hands down the best lineup of Spring & Summer sports. Baseball, Softball, Basketball, Gymnastics and Olympic and Country Club sports are all either extremely competitive nationally or dominate their respective sports. And demographically speaking the largest number of recruits hands down comes from the region comprised by the ACC/SEC/B12 right now. And as sports popularity dwindles on the West Coast that gives ESPN the hammer on these live events for the foreseeable future.

They shouldn't be worried about balance. They should be worried about securing the best draws and the most competitive product.

(02-07-2018 02:32 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 12:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  BYU would schedule a 2-for-1 deal with all three of Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma right now, if it delivered one of these three in Provo in November each year and an OTA TV deal with NBC.

Every non-power school and some power schools would take that in a heartbeat. However, signing 2-for-1 deals has the appearance that the school who gets the 1 is not a power school.

Sure. But, to have a 64k-seat stadium at full capacity and playing on NBC is better than what a large number of "power" schools can say.

(02-07-2018 03:08 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:32 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 12:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  BYU would schedule a 2-for-1 deal with all three of Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma right now, if it delivered one of these three in Provo in November each year and an OTA TV deal with NBC.

Every non-power school and some power schools would take that in a heartbeat. However, signing 2-for-1 deals has the appearance that the school who gets the 1 is not a power school.

Sure. But, to have a 64k-seat stadium at full capacity and playing on NBC is better than what a large number of "power" schools can say.

What do these comments have to do with where Texas goes? Getting big brand schools even as independents to come to the Brigham Young to play is ancillary to the thread.

Ken D asked the question could OU and UT go independent? I raised the issue of late season scheduling difficulties. While these schools might be able to play B.Y.U. late season that is still only 1 game when all of November needs to be booked and the last weekend's game needs to be marquee to grab the attention of the press when everyone else is headed into the CCG's. The simple truth is these two schools can't afford to go independent because they have no place to park their minor sports and no way to guarantee great games late in November.

(02-07-2018 03:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 03:08 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:32 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 12:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  BYU would schedule a 2-for-1 deal with all three of Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma right now, if it delivered one of these three in Provo in November each year and an OTA TV deal with NBC.

Every non-power school and some power schools would take that in a heartbeat. However, signing 2-for-1 deals has the appearance that the school who gets the 1 is not a power school.

Sure. But, to have a 64k-seat stadium at full capacity and playing on NBC is better than what a large number of "power" schools can say.

What do these comments have to do with where Texas goes? Getting big brand schools even as independents to come to the Brigham Young to play is ancillary to the thread.

Ken D asked the question could OU and UT go independent? I raised the issue of late season scheduling difficulties. While these schools might be able to play B.Y.U. late season that is still only 1 game when all of November needs to be booked and the last weekend's game needs to be marquee to grab the attention of the press when everyone else is headed into the CCG's. The simple truth is these two schools can't afford to go independent because they have no place to park their minor sports and no way to guarantee great games late in November.

The initial comment highlights that the Texas and Oklahoma independent move is feasible and that BYU would be glad to help out. Likely Notre Dame, too. Play one in October and one in November - on NBC.

As for the rest of November? Move the Red River rivalry to Thanksgiving. Perfect to grab attention and press.

That leaves two spots to fill.

Ken D proposed a continued Olympic sports affiliation with the Big 12. Keep Bedlam and Chancellor's Spurs in November. OSU and Texas Tech will still want good games on their schedules too.

I'm certain the ACC and SEC could be convinced to provide a spot for one October or November game against either Texas or Oklahoma. Likely helps to fill some of the conference scheduling holes created by the Notre Dame-ACC and SEC-ACC matchups and early season conference games.

If needed (which I doubt it would be if Texas and Oklahoma continue to affiliate with the Big 12), host an FCS payday game like the SEC or play Army. Liberty, NMSU, or UMass will be readily available in a scheduling pinch.

I'm not saying this is the best move or a likely move. But, it could be among the better options for Texas and Oklahoma. Compare to all sports affiliations with the PAC or B1G - where the likely conference football schedules would provide little interest to Texas and Oklahoma season ticket holders.

If Texas and Oklahoma could get Florida St and Clemson to declare independence and the California Pac 12 schools to break away then maybe we could talk about an alliance of Independents.

(02-07-2018 04:58 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 03:38 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 03:08 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:32 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 12:52 PM)YNot Wrote:  BYU would schedule a 2-for-1 deal with all three of Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma right now, if it delivered one of these three in Provo in November each year and an OTA TV deal with NBC.

Every non-power school and some power schools would take that in a heartbeat. However, signing 2-for-1 deals has the appearance that the school who gets the 1 is not a power school.

Sure. But, to have a 64k-seat stadium at full capacity and playing on NBC is better than what a large number of "power" schools can say.

What do these comments have to do with where Texas goes? Getting big brand schools even as independents to come to the Brigham Young to play is ancillary to the thread.

Ken D asked the question could OU and UT go independent? I raised the issue of late season scheduling difficulties. While these schools might be able to play B.Y.U. late season that is still only 1 game when all of November needs to be booked and the last weekend's game needs to be marquee to grab the attention of the press when everyone else is headed into the CCG's. The simple truth is these two schools can't afford to go independent because they have no place to park their minor sports and no way to guarantee great games late in November.

The initial comment highlights that the Texas and Oklahoma independent move is feasible and that BYU would be glad to help out. Likely Notre Dame, too. Play one in October and one in November - on NBC.

As for the rest of November? Move the Red River rivalry to Thanksgiving. Perfect to grab attention and press.

That leaves two spots to fill.

Ken D proposed a continued Olympic sports affiliation with the Big 12. Keep Bedlam and Chancellor's Spurs in November. OSU and Texas Tech will still want good games on their schedules too.

I'm certain the ACC and SEC could be convinced to provide a spot for one October or November game against either Texas or Oklahoma. Likely helps to fill some of the conference scheduling holes created by the Notre Dame-ACC and SEC-ACC matchups and early season conference games.

If needed (which I doubt it would be if Texas and Oklahoma continue to affiliate with the Big 12), host an FCS payday game like the SEC or play Army. Liberty, NMSU, or UMass will be readily available in a scheduling pinch.

I'm not saying this is the best move or a likely move. But, it could be among the better options for Texas and Oklahoma. Compare to all sports affiliations with the PAC or B1G - where the likely conference football schedules would provide little interest to Texas and Oklahoma season ticket holders.

I don't think the SEC would prop their independence. It was a favor to ESPN that we counted B.Y.U. as a P game.