(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:21 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Soobahk is correct in noting that conference expansion have not been cataclysmic events and there is more of a gradual dimension to it. Even the WAC and BE transformations were void of a sensational climax. This was due, in part, to anticipation and timing of departures.

I am doubtful these P5 schools will get together and figure out, collectively, how to eleminate and/or re-assign one of their own. If they do, it defies the norm on expansion. I can't believe ESPN is going to be the grand mediator that will have everyone on the same page. Now as an enticer, for certain schools, and single conferences, that makes sense.

In 5 to 7 years, the next round, among the elite, will start with one, probably two, schools, accepting an offer to one P5 conference. That will trigger, one to three other P5 conferences, to extend one to maximum four offers each; most of it being the result of prior courting and anticipation. Whatever the B12 loses, they backload from the G-5 possibilities. Maybe they'll rename themselves; and certainly the ripple effect impacts all G-5 conferences.
I am doubtful about consolidations on the P5 level. These schools are naturally guarded in their decision-making and not prone to radical change. Interests can conflict, and even fans are suspicious of anything that appears risky or unsettling for their favored schools.
The PAC12 is making comparatively less, but are not vulnerable. They could land up to four B12 schools, but it may not be the four they most desire. I don't see both UT and OU cooperating on the same PAC12 move, if extended again.

Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

That could work too.

(05-27-2018 10:05 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Well, this was a bit unexpected.

Gordon Gee expects realignment in 6-7 years.

Quote:“I don’t know how to explain it other than to say I just feel it,” he said. “I’ve been in this business for so long I can sometimes just get a sense about its changing nature.”

WVU followers might see that as cause for concern. The Mountaineers, after all, are serious geographic outliers from other Big 12 schools. Yet Gee said he believes West Virginia is in good shape.

“Oh yeah,” he said. “We’ve become very competitive. People need to look around. The ACC is a great conference but it’s been struggling in a number of areas. The Pac-12 has been having terrible struggles.

“With us, I think we’ve brought a great deal to the Big 12. Being in the Eastern time zone we’ve brought the league exposure. We have one of the most recognizable logos in the country, if not the world. We have some of the most passionate fans.

The important part of Gee’s comments that are getting overlooked as this thread goes on. They are the PAC-12 schools are ripe for the taking due to falling behind financially and the ACC schools could fall behind if ACCN payouts don’t close the gap.

Now we keep discussing the Big 12 adding some PAC schools, but it makes a lot more sense if the Big Ten were to raid the PAC of some of its schools.

Now, for the ACC schools to be available at the end of this 6-7 timeframe, the ACCN will have to be a complete flop, thus making challenging it in court worth the hassle.

(05-29-2018 07:06 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-27-2018 10:05 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Well, this was a bit unexpected.

Gordon Gee expects realignment in 6-7 years.

Quote:“I don’t know how to explain it other than to say I just feel it,” he said. “I’ve been in this business for so long I can sometimes just get a sense about its changing nature.”

WVU followers might see that as cause for concern. The Mountaineers, after all, are serious geographic outliers from other Big 12 schools. Yet Gee said he believes West Virginia is in good shape.

“Oh yeah,” he said. “We’ve become very competitive. People need to look around. The ACC is a great conference but it’s been struggling in a number of areas. The Pac-12 has been having terrible struggles.

“With us, I think we’ve brought a great deal to the Big 12. Being in the Eastern time zone we’ve brought the league exposure. We have one of the most recognizable logos in the country, if not the world. We have some of the most passionate fans.

The important part of Gee’s comments that are getting overlooked as this thread goes on. They are the PAC-12 schools are ripe for the taking due to falling behind financially and the ACC schools could fall behind if ACCN payouts don’t close the gap.

Now we keep discussing the Big 12 adding some PAC schools, but it makes a lot more sense if the Big Ten were to raid the PAC of some of its schools.

Now, for the ACC schools to be available at the end of this 6-7 timeframe, the ACCN will have to be a complete flop, thus making challenging it in court worth the hassle.

Uh, if it only makes them what it projected to make by it's first full year after overhead is cleared (roughly 7 million) by the end of FY'21, then it won't be enough to keep pace with the negotiations in 2023-4 that will be going on. What's more is the regular T1 & T2 contract won't be up for rebid until 2036. In other words midway through the Boomer die off and not a great time to be cashing in on the Golden years of college football love.

(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:21 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Soobahk is correct in noting that conference expansion have not been cataclysmic events and there is more of a gradual dimension to it. Even the WAC and BE transformations were void of a sensational climax. This was due, in part, to anticipation and timing of departures.

I am doubtful these P5 schools will get together and figure out, collectively, how to eleminate and/or re-assign one of their own. If they do, it defies the norm on expansion. I can't believe ESPN is going to be the grand mediator that will have everyone on the same page. Now as an enticer, for certain schools, and single conferences, that makes sense.

In 5 to 7 years, the next round, among the elite, will start with one, probably two, schools, accepting an offer to one P5 conference. That will trigger, one to three other P5 conferences, to extend one to maximum four offers each; most of it being the result of prior courting and anticipation. Whatever the B12 loses, they backload from the G-5 possibilities. Maybe they'll rename themselves; and certainly the ripple effect impacts all G-5 conferences.
I am doubtful about consolidations on the P5 level. These schools are naturally guarded in their decision-making and not prone to radical change. Interests can conflict, and even fans are suspicious of anything that appears risky or unsettling for their favored schools.
The PAC12 is making comparatively less, but are not vulnerable. They could land up to four B12 schools, but it may not be the four they most desire. I don't see both UT and OU cooperating on the same PAC12 move, if extended again.

Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

If ND decides the ACC is not its final destination. I think the B1G would actually work better if the B1G & B12 carved up the PAC. Which ND whispering in USC & Stanford's ear could encourage that. A conference that would have USC, Stanford, Mich., MSU & Purdue would give ND a lot of traditional rivals on their schedule.

I've thought before that the Big Ten could theoretically get Colorado, but I just don't see any feasibility in grabbing the schools on the West Coast.

Denver is not that far from the Western division schools of the B1G and the state is a strong and growing market despite CU's somewhat dispassionate fan base. They are also an AAU school so I think it makes sense in the event the PAC's fortunes take a dire turn.

With that said, the travel distances between the rest of the PAC and B1G wouldn't be bad...they'd be horrendous.

The problem wouldn't be an occasional football trip across all those timezones. The problem is those trips would be a every single season. Remember, we're talking about 2 leagues here that couldn't make a scheduling arrangement work under far more ideal conditions with regard to frequency. Even if the B1G took enough PAC schools so that they essentially had their own division on the Coast, it wouldn't alter this formula to any significant degree. If you're going to play 8, 9, or possibly 10 conference games then that's a lot of transcontinental trips.

But the biggest problem would be all the other sports making those trips even more frequently. I can't see anyone going that.

College conferences don't get paid like pro sports leagues. So tossing in some horrendous travel arrangements is a far dicier picture. Not to mention, you have to concern yourself with class and academic calendars.

I think all in all, we've seen the B1G make a push for East Coast schools and Texas because the PAC schools are simply not an option. The PAC schools are by far the most compatible additions the B1G could make and theoretically far more available if the B1G wanted to take the entire core of them. Nonetheless, the concept has been limited to message board fodder only because it's just not feasible. The PAC schools might as well be in China.

(05-29-2018 02:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:21 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Soobahk is correct in noting that conference expansion have not been cataclysmic events and there is more of a gradual dimension to it. Even the WAC and BE transformations were void of a sensational climax. This was due, in part, to anticipation and timing of departures.

I am doubtful these P5 schools will get together and figure out, collectively, how to eleminate and/or re-assign one of their own. If they do, it defies the norm on expansion. I can't believe ESPN is going to be the grand mediator that will have everyone on the same page. Now as an enticer, for certain schools, and single conferences, that makes sense.

In 5 to 7 years, the next round, among the elite, will start with one, probably two, schools, accepting an offer to one P5 conference. That will trigger, one to three other P5 conferences, to extend one to maximum four offers each; most of it being the result of prior courting and anticipation. Whatever the B12 loses, they backload from the G-5 possibilities. Maybe they'll rename themselves; and certainly the ripple effect impacts all G-5 conferences.
I am doubtful about consolidations on the P5 level. These schools are naturally guarded in their decision-making and not prone to radical change. Interests can conflict, and even fans are suspicious of anything that appears risky or unsettling for their favored schools.
The PAC12 is making comparatively less, but are not vulnerable. They could land up to four B12 schools, but it may not be the four they most desire. I don't see both UT and OU cooperating on the same PAC12 move, if extended again.

Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

That could work too.

One of the reasons why ND football does not like to do conferences, besides alumni donations, is that there are schools in every major conference that they feel way too above over.

Pick any conference. The PAC has schools like Washington State that are very rural and hard to get to. The Big 12 has schools like Kansas State and West Virginia that they don't feel any affinity to. The SEC has the likes of Mississippi State and Kentucky. And the Big Ten has the likes of Iowa, Rutgers, Indiana that they don't care about and schools they flat out hate like Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. Only the ACC comes closest to what they can tolerate and, even with that, not wanting to make a full commitment to.

Hockey is a completely different animal, though. It's a full-time job trying to figure out the Domers but the only certain thing with them is football independence.

(05-30-2018 10:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've thought before that the Big Ten could theoretically get Colorado, but I just don't see any feasibility in grabbing the schools on the West Coast.

Denver is not that far from the Western division schools of the B1G and the state is a strong and growing market despite CU's somewhat dispassionate fan base. They are also an AAU school so I think it makes sense in the event the PAC's fortunes take a dire turn.

With that said, the travel distances between the rest of the PAC and B1G wouldn't be bad...they'd be horrendous.

The problem wouldn't be an occasional football trip across all those timezones. The problem is those trips would be a every single season. Remember, we're talking about 2 leagues here that couldn't make a scheduling arrangement work under far more ideal conditions with regard to frequency. Even if the B1G took enough PAC schools so that they essentially had their own division on the Coast, it wouldn't alter this formula to any significant degree. If you're going to play 8, 9, or possibly 10 conference games then that's a lot of transcontinental trips.

But the biggest problem would be all the other sports making those trips even more frequently. I can't see anyone going that.

College conferences don't get paid like pro sports leagues. So tossing in some horrendous travel arrangements is a far dicier picture. Not to mention, you have to concern yourself with class and academic calendars.

I think all in all, we've seen the B1G make a push for East Coast schools and Texas because the PAC schools are simply not an option. The PAC schools are by far the most compatible additions the B1G could make and theoretically far more available if the B1G wanted to take the entire core of them. Nonetheless, the concept has been limited to message board fodder only because it's just not feasible. The PAC schools might as well be in China.

From the Big Ten's perspective, Colorado may well be Florida and Texas: schools that would fit the criteria but geographically very problematic and culturally awkward with the latter two.

(05-30-2018 01:00 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:21 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Soobahk is correct in noting that conference expansion have not been cataclysmic events and there is more of a gradual dimension to it. Even the WAC and BE transformations were void of a sensational climax. This was due, in part, to anticipation and timing of departures.

I am doubtful these P5 schools will get together and figure out, collectively, how to eleminate and/or re-assign one of their own. If they do, it defies the norm on expansion. I can't believe ESPN is going to be the grand mediator that will have everyone on the same page. Now as an enticer, for certain schools, and single conferences, that makes sense.

In 5 to 7 years, the next round, among the elite, will start with one, probably two, schools, accepting an offer to one P5 conference. That will trigger, one to three other P5 conferences, to extend one to maximum four offers each; most of it being the result of prior courting and anticipation. Whatever the B12 loses, they backload from the G-5 possibilities. Maybe they'll rename themselves; and certainly the ripple effect impacts all G-5 conferences.
I am doubtful about consolidations on the P5 level. These schools are naturally guarded in their decision-making and not prone to radical change. Interests can conflict, and even fans are suspicious of anything that appears risky or unsettling for their favored schools.
The PAC12 is making comparatively less, but are not vulnerable. They could land up to four B12 schools, but it may not be the four they most desire. I don't see both UT and OU cooperating on the same PAC12 move, if extended again.

Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

That could work too.

One of the reasons why ND football does not like to do conferences, besides alumni donations, is that there are schools in every major conference that they feel way too above over.

Pick any conference. The PAC has schools like Washington State that are very rural and hard to get to. The Big 12 has schools like Kansas State and West Virginia that they don't feel any affinity to. The SEC has the likes of Mississippi State and Kentucky. And the Big Ten has the likes of Iowa, Rutgers, Indiana that they don't care about and schools they flat out hate like Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. Only the ACC comes closest to what they can tolerate and, even with that, not wanting to make a full commitment to.

Hockey is a completely different animal, though. It's a full-time job trying to figure out the Domers but the only certain thing with them is football independence.

(05-30-2018 10:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've thought before that the Big Ten could theoretically get Colorado, but I just don't see any feasibility in grabbing the schools on the West Coast.

Denver is not that far from the Western division schools of the B1G and the state is a strong and growing market despite CU's somewhat dispassionate fan base. They are also an AAU school so I think it makes sense in the event the PAC's fortunes take a dire turn.

With that said, the travel distances between the rest of the PAC and B1G wouldn't be bad...they'd be horrendous.

The problem wouldn't be an occasional football trip across all those timezones. The problem is those trips would be a every single season. Remember, we're talking about 2 leagues here that couldn't make a scheduling arrangement work under far more ideal conditions with regard to frequency. Even if the B1G took enough PAC schools so that they essentially had their own division on the Coast, it wouldn't alter this formula to any significant degree. If you're going to play 8, 9, or possibly 10 conference games then that's a lot of transcontinental trips.

But the biggest problem would be all the other sports making those trips even more frequently. I can't see anyone going that.

College conferences don't get paid like pro sports leagues. So tossing in some horrendous travel arrangements is a far dicier picture. Not to mention, you have to concern yourself with class and academic calendars.

I think all in all, we've seen the B1G make a push for East Coast schools and Texas because the PAC schools are simply not an option. The PAC schools are by far the most compatible additions the B1G could make and theoretically far more available if the B1G wanted to take the entire core of them. Nonetheless, the concept has been limited to message board fodder only because it's just not feasible. The PAC schools might as well be in China.

From the Big Ten's perspective, Colorado may well be Florida and Texas: schools that would fit the criteria but geographically very problematic and culturally awkward with the latter two.

Transyc N.D. has to choose a conference when we move to a champs only format.

(05-29-2018 08:32 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:21 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Soobahk is correct in noting that conference expansion have not been cataclysmic events and there is more of a gradual dimension to it. Even the WAC and BE transformations were void of a sensational climax. This was due, in part, to anticipation and timing of departures.

I am doubtful these P5 schools will get together and figure out, collectively, how to eleminate and/or re-assign one of their own. If they do, it defies the norm on expansion. I can't believe ESPN is going to be the grand mediator that will have everyone on the same page. Now as an enticer, for certain schools, and single conferences, that makes sense.

In 5 to 7 years, the next round, among the elite, will start with one, probably two, schools, accepting an offer to one P5 conference. That will trigger, one to three other P5 conferences, to extend one to maximum four offers each; most of it being the result of prior courting and anticipation. Whatever the B12 loses, they backload from the G-5 possibilities. Maybe they'll rename themselves; and certainly the ripple effect impacts all G-5 conferences.
I am doubtful about consolidations on the P5 level. These schools are naturally guarded in their decision-making and not prone to radical change. Interests can conflict, and even fans are suspicious of anything that appears risky or unsettling for their favored schools.
The PAC12 is making comparatively less, but are not vulnerable. They could land up to four B12 schools, but it may not be the four they most desire. I don't see both UT and OU cooperating on the same PAC12 move, if extended again.

Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

If ND decides the ACC is not its final destination. I think the B1G would actually work better if the B1G & B12 carved up the PAC. Which ND whispering in USC & Stanford's ear could encourage that. A conference that would have USC, Stanford, Mich., MSU & Purdue would give ND a lot of traditional rivals on their schedule.

That's possible, but I really don't think with the cost of minor sports travel to the PAC, or to the Big 12 that either of those would be a choice ultimately. It is after all a business decision. Without the ACC, and with hockey already parked in the B1G I think in a move that eliminated the ACC and brought in a champs only model they would have to join the Big 10.

(05-30-2018 01:00 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 10:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've thought before that the Big Ten could theoretically get Colorado, but I just don't see any feasibility in grabbing the schools on the West Coast.

Denver is not that far from the Western division schools of the B1G and the state is a strong and growing market despite CU's somewhat dispassionate fan base. They are also an AAU school so I think it makes sense in the event the PAC's fortunes take a dire turn.

With that said, the travel distances between the rest of the PAC and B1G wouldn't be bad...they'd be horrendous.

The problem wouldn't be an occasional football trip across all those timezones. The problem is those trips would be a every single season. Remember, we're talking about 2 leagues here that couldn't make a scheduling arrangement work under far more ideal conditions with regard to frequency. Even if the B1G took enough PAC schools so that they essentially had their own division on the Coast, it wouldn't alter this formula to any significant degree. If you're going to play 8, 9, or possibly 10 conference games then that's a lot of transcontinental trips.

But the biggest problem would be all the other sports making those trips even more frequently. I can't see anyone going that.

College conferences don't get paid like pro sports leagues. So tossing in some horrendous travel arrangements is a far dicier picture. Not to mention, you have to concern yourself with class and academic calendars.

I think all in all, we've seen the B1G make a push for East Coast schools and Texas because the PAC schools are simply not an option. The PAC schools are by far the most compatible additions the B1G could make and theoretically far more available if the B1G wanted to take the entire core of them. Nonetheless, the concept has been limited to message board fodder only because it's just not feasible. The PAC schools might as well be in China.

From the Big Ten's perspective, Colorado may well be Florida and Texas: schools that would fit the criteria but geographically very problematic and culturally awkward with the latter two.

I could see the B1G pulling the trigger on that depending on who exactly they could pry out of the ACC or depending on whether or not they could get Texas.

But other than that, I would agree that CU is probably not among the B1G's top targets.

(05-30-2018 01:00 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:21 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Soobahk is correct in noting that conference expansion have not been cataclysmic events and there is more of a gradual dimension to it. Even the WAC and BE transformations were void of a sensational climax. This was due, in part, to anticipation and timing of departures.

I am doubtful these P5 schools will get together and figure out, collectively, how to eleminate and/or re-assign one of their own. If they do, it defies the norm on expansion. I can't believe ESPN is going to be the grand mediator that will have everyone on the same page. Now as an enticer, for certain schools, and single conferences, that makes sense.

In 5 to 7 years, the next round, among the elite, will start with one, probably two, schools, accepting an offer to one P5 conference. That will trigger, one to three other P5 conferences, to extend one to maximum four offers each; most of it being the result of prior courting and anticipation. Whatever the B12 loses, they backload from the G-5 possibilities. Maybe they'll rename themselves; and certainly the ripple effect impacts all G-5 conferences.
I am doubtful about consolidations on the P5 level. These schools are naturally guarded in their decision-making and not prone to radical change. Interests can conflict, and even fans are suspicious of anything that appears risky or unsettling for their favored schools.
The PAC12 is making comparatively less, but are not vulnerable. They could land up to four B12 schools, but it may not be the four they most desire. I don't see both UT and OU cooperating on the same PAC12 move, if extended again.

Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

That could work too.

One of the reasons why ND football does not like to do conferences, besides alumni donations, is that there are schools in every major conference that they feel way too above over.

Pick any conference. The PAC has schools like Washington State that are very rural and hard to get to. The Big 12 has schools like Kansas State and West Virginia that they don't feel any affinity to. The SEC has the likes of Mississippi State and Kentucky. And the Big Ten has the likes of Iowa, Rutgers, Indiana that they don't care about and schools they flat out hate like Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. Only the ACC comes closest to what they can tolerate and, even with that, not wanting to make a full commitment to.

Hockey is a completely different animal, though. It's a full-time job trying to figure out the Domers but the only certain thing with them is football independence.

(05-30-2018 10:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've thought before that the Big Ten could theoretically get Colorado, but I just don't see any feasibility in grabbing the schools on the West Coast.

Denver is not that far from the Western division schools of the B1G and the state is a strong and growing market despite CU's somewhat dispassionate fan base. They are also an AAU school so I think it makes sense in the event the PAC's fortunes take a dire turn.

With that said, the travel distances between the rest of the PAC and B1G wouldn't be bad...they'd be horrendous.

The problem wouldn't be an occasional football trip across all those timezones. The problem is those trips would be a every single season. Remember, we're talking about 2 leagues here that couldn't make a scheduling arrangement work under far more ideal conditions with regard to frequency. Even if the B1G took enough PAC schools so that they essentially had their own division on the Coast, it wouldn't alter this formula to any significant degree. If you're going to play 8, 9, or possibly 10 conference games then that's a lot of transcontinental trips.

But the biggest problem would be all the other sports making those trips even more frequently. I can't see anyone going that.

College conferences don't get paid like pro sports leagues. So tossing in some horrendous travel arrangements is a far dicier picture. Not to mention, you have to concern yourself with class and academic calendars.

I think all in all, we've seen the B1G make a push for East Coast schools and Texas because the PAC schools are simply not an option. The PAC schools are by far the most compatible additions the B1G could make and theoretically far more available if the B1G wanted to take the entire core of them. Nonetheless, the concept has been limited to message board fodder only because it's just not feasible. The PAC schools might as well be in China.

From the Big Ten's perspective, Colorado may well be Florida and Texas: schools that would fit the criteria but geographically very problematic and culturally awkward with the latter two.

What is so hard to figure out?

You just hit the nail on the head.

For ND, football independence is the primary goal regarding conference realignment.

Everything else is secondary to that.

Every move ND has made is all about that, the NBC deal in 1991, the Big East move in 1995 and the ACC deal in 2012.

All of them have one thing in common: Keep ND football indy.

ND thinks this is the best way to market the school, with more available games for rivals and a more national schedule.

The ACC is the best fit for ND's other sports. It gives ND East Coast exposure for fans and alumni and recruiting exposure in Virginia, the Carolinas and Florida.

It also is the best fit with more private, like minded schools.

If the ACC had hockey, ND hockey would be right there.

It tried Hockey East, which meshed pretty well with the ACC.

However, bus travel to out of the way places in New Hampshire, etc... made it undesirable.

Lo and behold, the Big Ten suddenly dropped its decades old "All or nothing" stance and ND hockey now has less travel and local rivals.

I personally detest the Big Ten and dislike the hockey move, but I ain't Jack Swarbrick.

So, it is easy to figure out ND. Figure out the best move at the time to keep football out of the clutches of any conference, especially the Big Ten, and you can figure out ND's moves since 1991.

Getting back to the subject at hand...

We could go on about reporting methods and comparing year-end to year-end but I think it's safe to say that the Big 12 is no longer in any danger from being attacked from the Pac-12. The Pac-12 may have lost its chance to be the first mover, barring a ridiculous financial backing from a tech company. The Big Ten and SEC may look to only a few schools and programs, two or three at most, and these types of moves may complicate matters throughout the whole of college sports, too disrupting for the tastes of college presidents.

Going by the topic thread I could see three potential outcomes:

- All P5 stay put by 2025. No moves between them, although rumors and almost big moves may be leaked. G5 programs might reorganize in an attempt to catch up

- A partial merger between the P12 and B12, thereby creating the first major superconference. Large enough for financial benefit but not enough to threaten the stability of Big Ten and SEC

- Movement of G5 programs to the P5. Not likely today but may become financially feasible years from now

(06-01-2018 06:33 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Getting back to the subject at hand...

We could go on about reporting methods and comparing year-end to year-end but I think it's safe to say that the Big 12 is no longer in any danger from being attacked from the Pac-12. The Pac-12 may have lost its chance to be the first mover, barring a ridiculous financial backing from a tech company. The Big Ten and SEC may look to only a few schools and programs, two or three at most, and these types of moves may complicate matters throughout the whole of college sports, too disrupting for the tastes of college presidents.

Going by the topic thread I could see three potential outcomes:

- All P5 stay put by 2025. No moves between them, although rumors and almost big moves may be leaked. G5 programs might reorganize in an attempt to catch up

- A partial merger between the P12 and B12, thereby creating the first major superconference. Large enough for financial benefit but not enough to threaten the stability of Big Ten and SEC

- Movement of G5 programs to the P5. Not likely today but may become financially feasible years from now

I'm all about the best 8 of the Big 12 merging with the PAC, and the Big 10 and SEC taking 6 each from the ACC. I've said for 6 years our best additions for either of our conferences would come from the East.

(05-30-2018 01:00 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 09:21 AM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Soobahk is correct in noting that conference expansion have not been cataclysmic events and there is more of a gradual dimension to it. Even the WAC and BE transformations were void of a sensational climax. This was due, in part, to anticipation and timing of departures.

I am doubtful these P5 schools will get together and figure out, collectively, how to eleminate and/or re-assign one of their own. If they do, it defies the norm on expansion. I can't believe ESPN is going to be the grand mediator that will have everyone on the same page. Now as an enticer, for certain schools, and single conferences, that makes sense.

In 5 to 7 years, the next round, among the elite, will start with one, probably two, schools, accepting an offer to one P5 conference. That will trigger, one to three other P5 conferences, to extend one to maximum four offers each; most of it being the result of prior courting and anticipation. Whatever the B12 loses, they backload from the G-5 possibilities. Maybe they'll rename themselves; and certainly the ripple effect impacts all G-5 conferences.
I am doubtful about consolidations on the P5 level. These schools are naturally guarded in their decision-making and not prone to radical change. Interests can conflict, and even fans are suspicious of anything that appears risky or unsettling for their favored schools.
The PAC12 is making comparatively less, but are not vulnerable. They could land up to four B12 schools, but it may not be the four they most desire. I don't see both UT and OU cooperating on the same PAC12 move, if extended again.

Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

That could work too.

One of the reasons why ND football does not like to do conferences, besides alumni donations, is that there are schools in every major conference that they feel way too above over.

Pick any conference. The PAC has schools like Washington State that are very rural and hard to get to. The Big 12 has schools like Kansas State and West Virginia that they don't feel any affinity to. The SEC has the likes of Mississippi State and Kentucky. And the Big Ten has the likes of Iowa, Rutgers, Indiana that they don't care about and schools they flat out hate like Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. Only the ACC comes closest to what they can tolerate and, even with that, not wanting to make a full commitment to.

Hockey is a completely different animal, though. It's a full-time job trying to figure out the Domers but the only certain thing with them is football independence.

(05-30-2018 10:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've thought before that the Big Ten could theoretically get Colorado, but I just don't see any feasibility in grabbing the schools on the West Coast.

Denver is not that far from the Western division schools of the B1G and the state is a strong and growing market despite CU's somewhat dispassionate fan base. They are also an AAU school so I think it makes sense in the event the PAC's fortunes take a dire turn.

With that said, the travel distances between the rest of the PAC and B1G wouldn't be bad...they'd be horrendous.

The problem wouldn't be an occasional football trip across all those timezones. The problem is those trips would be a every single season. Remember, we're talking about 2 leagues here that couldn't make a scheduling arrangement work under far more ideal conditions with regard to frequency. Even if the B1G took enough PAC schools so that they essentially had their own division on the Coast, it wouldn't alter this formula to any significant degree. If you're going to play 8, 9, or possibly 10 conference games then that's a lot of transcontinental trips.

But the biggest problem would be all the other sports making those trips even more frequently. I can't see anyone going that.

College conferences don't get paid like pro sports leagues. So tossing in some horrendous travel arrangements is a far dicier picture. Not to mention, you have to concern yourself with class and academic calendars.

I think all in all, we've seen the B1G make a push for East Coast schools and Texas because the PAC schools are simply not an option. The PAC schools are by far the most compatible additions the B1G could make and theoretically far more available if the B1G wanted to take the entire core of them. Nonetheless, the concept has been limited to message board fodder only because it's just not feasible. The PAC schools might as well be in China.

From the Big Ten's perspective, Colorado may well be Florida and Texas: schools that would fit the criteria but geographically very problematic and culturally awkward with the latter two.

(05-30-2018 01:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-30-2018 01:00 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 02:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-29-2018 01:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Institutionally I don't see the PAC as being vulnerable either. But, while California is the 5th largest global economy passing the UK, they are also living atop yet another debt souffle'. If anything ever happens in the PAC it will be because that souffle' falls. Until then they are a gestalt.

What I don't see as a gestalt is the ACC. There simply aren't enough programs in the Big 12 to satisfy the desires of the SEC and Big 10. The markets that make the most sense for the Big 10 are to the East, not down the Chisholm Trail. The markets that the SEC craves the most are to the East with the lone exception of DFW.

Heretofore in the realignment game the SEC and Big 10, whether by plan or accident, have avoided going head to head on expansion targets.

Texas and Oklahoma are two giant anchors around which a much more viable conference can be built. Notre Dame as a partial and F.S.U. as a giant with little voice in the ACC are not two pillars with which to hold up the ACC house. In fact the only thing holding up the ACC house is their GOR.

So the most likely thing to happen around 2023-4 will be the signing of a 10 year extension on the Big 12 GOR. Why? Because Texas and Oklahoma will both likely see their long term self interest to be best advantaged by waiting for time, pressure, and monetary disparity to do their work on the ACC. What's more they may not even have to wait that long. The ACCN's first full distribution will likely be in 2022. If the money then doesn't look like it is going to help them significantly close the revenue gap, with Skipper gone at ESPN, with the pressure on subscription models mounting, it may be more profitable for the ACC schools, and ESPN, and the Big 10, SEC, and Big 12, to parse those properties. No elaborate negotiations needed at all.

Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and possibly Notre Dame accept the Big 10. Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson and Florida State accept the SEC. The Big 12 cherry picks schools it can access. Georgia Tech and Miami put them in high recruiting areas and are both transportation hubs. Maybe they look at Pitt, Syracuse, B.C. and Louisville to go with West Virginia.

But the point is that it takes 12 ACC schools to dissolve the conference. If the decision to leave comes from the unthinkable, the old core, there are enough schools on the periphery that could find other homes that it could happen. And it could happen easily if the Big 12 took Pitt, Syracuse, B.C., Louisville and either Cincinnati or Connecticut to help them move to 18 as well.

Why 18? Basically for 1 reason. The Big 10 wants North Carolina and Virginia. North Carolina won't leave without Duke and preferably Virginia in tow. If this move should happen Notre Dame has nowhere else to go. Those 4 do more to complete the Big 10 efficiently than any others. They are more compact as a footprint than extending South into Oklahoma and Texas and they fit more culturally.

If the Big 10 goes to 18 the SEC will match their expansion into Virginia and North Carolina by taking Tech and State. The SEC will then get defensive in Florida by taking F.S.U. (which UF will insist upon) and Clemson is just too much like an SEC school to pass on during a content driven pay era.

So if the Big 12 with a network of their own wants markets then adding on in the Old Big East to build a division for West Virginia provides a nice market for them. Picking up a Florida connection and the Atlanta market is just a nice way to finish it out. The only question then is who else to get to 18? Colorado State, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Brigham Young, Memphis?

If Oklahoma and Texas hold the rope then it could all work out for the Big 12.

Might I suggest this:

Notre Dame, recalcitrant in the face of a Big Ten invite, decides to lead a group into the Big 12.

Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Miami move with them. Throw in Cincinnati and the Big 12 is at 16 and getting an awful lot of bang for the buck. ESPN probably owns the conference network(some amalgamation of the LHN and ACCN) and ND has a lot of flexibility to play a more national schedule in their non-conference as the league can function well with 8 league games. That's 4 to play USC, Stanford, Navy, and either a Big Ten or SEC school in a given season. Within the conference, ND maintains a regular presence in the Northeast and South. That and they get regular tilts with Oklahoma and Texas.

The SEC is the biggest winner with Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

The Big Ten gets what they really need though with North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and Syracuse.

At that point, only Boston College and Wake Forest are left out. They could move to the American and perhaps schools like BYU and Boise State would join them to form some sort of transcontinental "best of the rest" conference.

That could work too.

One of the reasons why ND football does not like to do conferences, besides alumni donations, is that there are schools in every major conference that they feel way too above over.

Pick any conference. The PAC has schools like Washington State that are very rural and hard to get to. The Big 12 has schools like Kansas State and West Virginia that they don't feel any affinity to. The SEC has the likes of Mississippi State and Kentucky. And the Big Ten has the likes of Iowa, Rutgers, Indiana that they don't care about and schools they flat out hate like Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. Only the ACC comes closest to what they can tolerate and, even with that, not wanting to make a full commitment to.

Hockey is a completely different animal, though. It's a full-time job trying to figure out the Domers but the only certain thing with them is football independence.

(05-30-2018 10:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I've thought before that the Big Ten could theoretically get Colorado, but I just don't see any feasibility in grabbing the schools on the West Coast.

Denver is not that far from the Western division schools of the B1G and the state is a strong and growing market despite CU's somewhat dispassionate fan base. They are also an AAU school so I think it makes sense in the event the PAC's fortunes take a dire turn.

With that said, the travel distances between the rest of the PAC and B1G wouldn't be bad...they'd be horrendous.

The problem wouldn't be an occasional football trip across all those timezones. The problem is those trips would be a every single season. Remember, we're talking about 2 leagues here that couldn't make a scheduling arrangement work under far more ideal conditions with regard to frequency. Even if the B1G took enough PAC schools so that they essentially had their own division on the Coast, it wouldn't alter this formula to any significant degree. If you're going to play 8, 9, or possibly 10 conference games then that's a lot of transcontinental trips.

But the biggest problem would be all the other sports making those trips even more frequently. I can't see anyone going that.

College conferences don't get paid like pro sports leagues. So tossing in some horrendous travel arrangements is a far dicier picture. Not to mention, you have to concern yourself with class and academic calendars.

I think all in all, we've seen the B1G make a push for East Coast schools and Texas because the PAC schools are simply not an option. The PAC schools are by far the most compatible additions the B1G could make and theoretically far more available if the B1G wanted to take the entire core of them. Nonetheless, the concept has been limited to message board fodder only because it's just not feasible. The PAC schools might as well be in China.

From the Big Ten's perspective, Colorado may well be Florida and Texas: schools that would fit the criteria but geographically very problematic and culturally awkward with the latter two.

Transyc N.D. has to choose a conference when we move to a champs only format.

When is that going to happen, for sure, if ever?