(05-24-2018 01:23 AM)murrdcu Wrote: (05-23-2018 10:57 PM)JRsec Wrote: (05-23-2018 09:58 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote: (05-23-2018 07:53 PM)JRsec Wrote: (05-23-2018 07:05 PM)murrdcu Wrote: Well dangit. Was so happy to see an expansion article tweted that I didn’t even both to look are those details.
It’s been quite this summer.
That's okay. I have to think a lid has been clamped on talk because things are going on behind the scenes. But it is why I started the thread about "Why we won't hear anything about Realignment this next time".
Early, but there will be the "run this up the flagpole" guy. Didn't Barry Alvarez sort of did this some years back in the Big 10?
The BIG could do this stuff because they acted together with a Commissioner that had it under control. The SEC was straight-up with expansion prospects when dialogue go serious.
The Big 12 has been an odd duck in this. Bowlsy talks unity; but it is apparent several of their schools are anticipating departures around 23/24. Exploring expansion and holding a conference together while a few having wandering eyes will be a challenge.
Barry did talk about expansion being possible but didn't really talk specifics. Clay Travis was used to float some trial balloons for the SEC as was Mr. SEC back in 2010-2.
I don't think you will hear much at all this time. First, I think the networks don't want any leaks because things aren't just between ESPN & FOX and the conferences anymore. I think ESPN will try to work out a way to hold onto Texas first. They'll have to make guarantees about possible travel companions and try to work that out. It is the only option where I see the ACC having a shot at Texas.
I think Oklahoma will be dealt with privately as well. If they insist on a travel mate and that mate is OSU then I think the SEC will be the likely landing spot.
I doubt Bowlsby is even brought into the loop. For one thing the terms of the GOR with regards to holding discussions about movement incurring a penalty will negate his knowing. And the wiggle room there is that Texas isn't forbidden (or OU for that matter) from talking to a network about their valuation. There's your loophole. What they are forbidden to do is to talk to another conference about joining.
So ESPN or FOX can work out any number of scenarios while maintaining confidential updates with the Big 10 or SEC. Right now neither really represents the PAC since both only lease rights there.
If Texas talks to Scott then they are in violation of their own GOR.
So having absolutely no talk at all permits ESPN or FOX to float concepts until a potential winner is agreed upon. And since it is in the interest of either/or both networks to keep that strictly off the record there will be no trial balloons and no Barry to alert the fan base with cryptic leaks.
If 18 is not a problem I could see the ACC offering Texas and all three of the other Texas P5 schools. I could see the SEC offering the pair of Oklahoma's and possibly even Kansas and West Virginia. Nothing would be said until the move hit the crawler.
The thing to look for there is a called meeting of the Big 12 where 8 votes of existing members prior to the announcement of moves could dissolve the Big 12, end the GOR, and be followed shortly thereafter by the announced moves.
If 16 is some hard and fast number after all then it would be possible to revisit the rumored plan of 2010. Texas, and two mates head to the ACC with N.D. committing totally. Virginia Tech and another ACC school are given permission by the ACC to move without penalty to the SEC. That could be a second Florida school (Miami) perhaps and Oklahoma and Kansas head to the Big 10.
All three conferences are pleased.
Texas and two buddies gives the ACC the branding and football gravitas they need to secure a larger payout and with N.D. all in they get it.
The SEC with another true AAU candidate in Miami gets a second Florida school and one actually located in South Florida. Virginia Tech strengthens the SEC North and adds a large market. The ACC doesn't break up the Research Triangle (a supposed sticking point in 2010), doesn't give up anything but market duplicates. And the Big 10 gets a big football boost from the Sooners. If Miami balks I don't think F.S.U. would this time around, although ESPN would probably prefer the Noles stay to assist that content value of the ACC and to enhance the value of games with Notre Dame and Texas.
The easier plan to pull off would be the expansion to 18 by both the ACC and SEC. ESPN would essentially have all it wanted out of the Big 12 and it can all be done in house without horse trading. And all that would need transpire to make it work would be money from ESPN.
Kansas State and Iowa State would be looking for a new home. But with Texas and Oklahoma satisfied and Kansas and West Virginia on board there wouldn't be much the other two could do about it. If something like that is worked out the announcement of it could come as early as the end of this next football season with play in the new Conference home to start in September of 2019 or 20 at the latest. Or in other words in plenty of time to help the ACCN's opening and to spruce up the SEC's contract too. New payouts would be set and contracts extended.
Anyway that's the opportunity before ESPN if they wish to avoid open bidding on the Big 12 and an enhanced Big 10 in 2024.
OU, OSU, KU and WVU to the SEC would be a good realistic haul. Moving the four Texas schools to the ACC would probably be the most profitable move for that group if OU does leave the Big 12.
The B1G could still go shopping out west and snag some financially strapped PAC-12 schools like they did when they took Maryland who were terminating athletic sports just to keep the athletic budget somewhat manageable in the red.
Obviously and argument could be made to allow a champions only playoff model with these larger conference sizes. Give the 18 member ACC, Big Ten and SEC automatic bids into the 4 team CFP. To determine that fourth spot, let the remaining PAC members, MWC and AAC play their championship games; The committee decides Which two winners will face off against one another to play for that last playoff spot.
So three conferences get four team playoff conference tournaments while the other P5 and G5 schools get an honest shot at a national title.
I think those 4 would be pretty solid for us.
Something in the back of my mind tells me that people are batting around the number 20 though.
Let me theorize on this...
If ESPN wants to finish off the Big 12 in one fell swoop then they're obviously going to be spending some money doing it. They might even overpay for it a little...
They just spent $1.5 billion over 5 years on the UFC with a significant portion of that content going directly to ESPN+. I think we can see what ESPN's strategy is there. ESPN is going to want some strong college content on ESPN+ in the long run. Some of these Big 12 teams provide the perfect fodder for that even with the creation of an ACC Network to take up more content for the linear networks.
It's sort of the same theory on why you create a conference network in the first place. You want a large number of markets interested in a product so you take a little bit from here and a little bit from there to make it work. Not everyone in your given footprint is going to watch any and every game, but they'll make sure they purchase the product so they can have access to their favorite teams. As it stands today, ESPN+ lacks games from major conferences in the major sports. The easiest way to fix that without taking away vital content from the linear networks is to expand the major conferences with more watchable but not necessarily 'can't miss' content.
Most of your 'can't miss' content is best utilized on linear networks where distribution is highest and costs are greater to maintain. With the advent of ESPN+ though, you can supplement your bottom line by mixing and matching content in a manner similar to how you'd sell a conference network. So it actually is an overall benefit for ESPN to pay for conference expansion as long as they get a good portion of the new content on ESPN+.
I think streaming isn't so much about getting the biggest and best brands on your platform as much as it is about touching all your bases. You're going to want a big game on there every now and then to boost sales, but a lot of what's going to be on ESPN+ is the far less valuable games from minor conferences.
So all ESPN really has to do is create enough content with the SEC or ACC brand attached to it and you start to cover your bases more effectively even if all the biggest games aren't on there. Add enough teams to either league so that you've got a couple of SEC or ACC games of the week and it's a much easier sell to fans of either league. This way, you don't have to remove content from your linear networks to make the sale. You could keep a revolving door on which teams are the ones featured so that each team in either league gets at least one appearance on the platform...boom, you've just created a host of new subscriptions.
I think 20 works for both leagues for a lot of reasons. Giving Notre Dame the space to go all in is one of them...
For the ACC, I would add Texas, Baylor, TCU, Houston, West Virginia, and Notre Dame.
For the SEC, I would add Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and South Florida
Kansas State would be left out in this scenario, but ESPN probably gets the rights to the American which is where they'd end up most likely.
For the ACC, they would get Texas and an accompanying division that would not be too unreadable as far as travel goes. Notre Dame goes full and West Virginia helps to multiply interest within their region.
For the SEC, they get some solid brands, a little more penetration in TX and a little more penetration in FL without the ACC having to give up anything in that regard. Long term, I think USF is more valuable than most of those Big 12 schools anyway so why not...