Both the Big 12 and ACC have an issue...they're top heavy. The Big 12 has this issue more so than the ACC, but there's an awful lot of lower tier Power programs in both conferences.

There are several ways for the networks to approach this issue and try to retain the value of both leagues, but I think there's really only one path that doesn't require a massive amount of shoehorning as far as geography and structure goes.

I think that is to take the foundation of Texas and Oklahoma and build a new league from scratch.

Now, what could make this possible is that once the Big 12 GOR is up then you have the freedom to drop a few underperforming programs from the Big 12. The core can remain the same, but you don't have to attempt to divide 8-10 schools up among 2-4 leagues.

But wait, doesn't the ACC also have a GOR? Doesn't it expire around 2034? Yes, but the key factor is that it's all owned by ESPN. I think they definitely want the content of the ACC schools, but the ACC structure has not been up to par financially. You could send a few ACC schools to the SEC and most of them to a brand new conference and get everything in a more efficient alignment.

Why not use a few ACC schools to attract the Big Ten? Because attracting the B1G could very well end up as a short term gain. There would be no guarantee they would continue to sign broad and long contracts with Disney/ESPN. I think it's highly unlikely they would not split their rights down the middle anyway and if Amazon becomes a player then it's possible ESPN could end up with a much smaller slice of the current ACC properties than when they started. In short, the B1G has not been in a cooperative mood in recent years and I don't expect that to change.

When streaming really hits its stride then it's going to behoove ESPN to have as much content under one roof as they can. Wholly owning 2 large leagues across a litany of markets will provide good return for them.

You've also got the reality that the SEC's 1st Tier rights will be up for grabs around the same time the Big 12 GOR is ending. The SEC will look to add some punch in order to get a better payout. So the easiest way to keep everyone in the fold, make UT and OU happy, and reward the SEC is to start from scratch.

The SEC adds North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and TCU

They access NC and VA. They also get direct access to DFW.

These Big 12 schools remain: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and West Virginia

These ACC schools join them: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami

Each league rests at 18 and is strategically positioned across multiple regions.

The ACC Network and Longhorn Network could be rolled into one. The ACCN will have far better distribution by that time, but you can take advantage of the studios built in Texas for the network rather than housing everything in Bristol. The SEC Network can remain housed in Charlotte which would become more of an epicenter for the conference anyway.

(06-11-2018 02:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Both the Big 12 and ACC have an issue...they're top heavy. The Big 12 has this issue more so than the ACC, but there's an awful lot of lower tier Power programs in both conferences.

There are several ways for the networks to approach this issue and try to retain the value of both leagues, but I think there's really only one path that doesn't require a massive amount of shoehorning as far as geography and structure goes.

I think that is to take the foundation of Texas and Oklahoma and build a new league from scratch.

Now, what could make this possible is that once the Big 12 GOR is up then you have the freedom to drop a few underperforming programs from the Big 12. The core can remain the same, but you don't have to attempt to divide 8-10 schools up among 2-4 leagues.

But wait, doesn't the ACC also have a GOR? Doesn't it expire around 2034? Yes, but the key factor is that it's all owned by ESPN. I think they definitely want the content of the ACC schools, but the ACC structure has not been up to par financially. You could send a few ACC schools to the SEC and most of them to a brand new conference and get everything in a more efficient alignment.

Why not use a few ACC schools to attract the Big Ten? Because attracting the B1G could very well end up as a short term gain. There would be no guarantee they would continue to sign broad and long contracts with Disney/ESPN. I think it's highly unlikely they would not split their rights down the middle anyway and if Amazon becomes a player then it's possible ESPN could end up with a much smaller slice of the current ACC properties than when they started. In short, the B1G has not been in a cooperative mood in recent years and I don't expect that to change.

When streaming really hits its stride then it's going to behoove ESPN to have as much content under one roof as they can. Wholly owning 2 large leagues across a litany of markets will provide good return for them.

You've also got the reality that the SEC's 1st Tier rights will be up for grabs around the same time the Big 12 GOR is ending. The SEC will look to add some punch in order to get a better payout. So the easiest way to keep everyone in the fold, make UT and OU happy, and reward the SEC is to start from scratch.

The SEC adds North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and TCU

They access NC and VA. They also get direct access to DFW.

These Big 12 schools remain: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and West Virginia

These ACC schools join them: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami

Each league rests at 18 and is strategically positioned across multiple regions.

The ACC Network and Longhorn Network could be rolled into one. The ACCN will have far better distribution by that time, but you can take advantage of the studios built in Texas for the network rather than housing everything in Bristol. The SEC Network can remain housed in Charlotte which would become more of an epicenter for the conference anyway.

So we are dropping Baylor and Wake Forest and Kansas State.

The SEC is adding a trio of holier than thou basketball schools and the Frogs.

And the ACC/B12 gets more of the football first schools.

Why? Texas needs some snooty friends to be a rival with.

How about the SEC adds Virginia Tech, N.C. State, T.C.U. and Miami and the ACC gives up Boston College and Syracuse to the Big 10. And we wind up with something like this:

SEC:

Florida, Georgia, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

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

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

B1G:

Boston College, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue

Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

ACC/B12

Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Wake Forest

Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, West Virginia

Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

VT to the SEC would never work... Tennessee refuses to play in Blacksburg.

(06-11-2018 07:55 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  VT to the SEC would never work... Tennessee refuses to play in Blacksburg.

If you were in the conference it would be mandatory unless you both wanted a neutral site like Georgia/Florida in Jacksonville.

(06-11-2018 08:02 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 07:55 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  VT to the SEC would never work... Tennessee refuses to play in Blacksburg.

If you were in the conference it would be mandatory unless you both wanted a neutral site like Georgia/Florida in Jacksonville.

I have never heard of TN having an issue with VT, but even if a neutral site game was required, 160,000 fans in Bristol makes me think they'd be ok.

I know that was a larger crowd because of the novelty, but a permanent game at Bristol should easily attract 110,000.

(06-11-2018 05:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 02:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Both the Big 12 and ACC have an issue...they're top heavy. The Big 12 has this issue more so than the ACC, but there's an awful lot of lower tier Power programs in both conferences.

There are several ways for the networks to approach this issue and try to retain the value of both leagues, but I think there's really only one path that doesn't require a massive amount of shoehorning as far as geography and structure goes.

I think that is to take the foundation of Texas and Oklahoma and build a new league from scratch.

Now, what could make this possible is that once the Big 12 GOR is up then you have the freedom to drop a few underperforming programs from the Big 12. The core can remain the same, but you don't have to attempt to divide 8-10 schools up among 2-4 leagues.

But wait, doesn't the ACC also have a GOR? Doesn't it expire around 2034? Yes, but the key factor is that it's all owned by ESPN. I think they definitely want the content of the ACC schools, but the ACC structure has not been up to par financially. You could send a few ACC schools to the SEC and most of them to a brand new conference and get everything in a more efficient alignment.

Why not use a few ACC schools to attract the Big Ten? Because attracting the B1G could very well end up as a short term gain. There would be no guarantee they would continue to sign broad and long contracts with Disney/ESPN. I think it's highly unlikely they would not split their rights down the middle anyway and if Amazon becomes a player then it's possible ESPN could end up with a much smaller slice of the current ACC properties than when they started. In short, the B1G has not been in a cooperative mood in recent years and I don't expect that to change.

When streaming really hits its stride then it's going to behoove ESPN to have as much content under one roof as they can. Wholly owning 2 large leagues across a litany of markets will provide good return for them.

You've also got the reality that the SEC's 1st Tier rights will be up for grabs around the same time the Big 12 GOR is ending. The SEC will look to add some punch in order to get a better payout. So the easiest way to keep everyone in the fold, make UT and OU happy, and reward the SEC is to start from scratch.

The SEC adds North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and TCU

They access NC and VA. They also get direct access to DFW.

These Big 12 schools remain: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and West Virginia

These ACC schools join them: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami

Each league rests at 18 and is strategically positioned across multiple regions.

The ACC Network and Longhorn Network could be rolled into one. The ACCN will have far better distribution by that time, but you can take advantage of the studios built in Texas for the network rather than housing everything in Bristol. The SEC Network can remain housed in Charlotte which would become more of an epicenter for the conference anyway.

So we are dropping Baylor and Wake Forest and Kansas State.

The SEC is adding a trio of holier than thou basketball schools and the Frogs.

And the ACC/B12 gets more of the football first schools.

Why? Texas needs some snooty friends to be a rival with.

How about the SEC adds Virginia Tech, N.C. State, T.C.U. and Miami and the ACC gives up Boston College and Syracuse to the Big 10. And we wind up with something like this:

SEC:

Florida, Georgia, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

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

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

B1G:

Boston College, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue

Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

ACC/B12

Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Wake Forest

Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, West Virginia

Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

Are you going to leave the PAC at 12? They are the hard league in this.
Your idea is interesting and a version of what the B12 had hoped for pre ACC network announcement by getting FSU, Clemson, Ga. Tech and another 1-3 southern schools while the B1G & SEC took 2 each from NC, ND, Va. Va. Tech, Duke.

If you were going to do this and give the ACC & B12 the best properties, IMO you are close enough to the concept of just forming 4 leagues that are close to equal. CFB could create 4 or 5 equal leagues and negotiate as one for everything. From an SEC perspective do you really want to have to potentially go through Florida, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Tn.( if they ever get good again) and then add OU & Tx or FSU & Clemson just to win a conference? Its too many powerhouse programs in one league. Its ironic that all of these universities that tend to promote the idea of left wing socialist policies are sure cut throat when it comes to revenues on an individual basis, lol. I don't think the sport negotiating as one is socialist either because if CFB at the highest level had a defined division unlike it is now with all kinds of levels of teams it is furthering the product of CFB.

I prefer 4 but 5 could work if you gave an equal number of playoff spots for 15 and filled the 16th spot on a equal rotating basis. You could also do the seeding on a rotating equal basis SEC 1, SEC 2, SEC 3, B1G 1, B1G 2, B1G 3, etc. etc.

While at one time everyone would have said the PAC was safe but with viewership of college sports is figured in it becomes more and more evident the PAC is the weak link. The PAC schools themselves want more exposure and there is just no way to give it to the existing PAC league. So if the PAC was split between two leagues that had higher viewership their teams would get more viewers even in the later games because fans tend to watch games of other teams in their league. Because I think its clear Texas & OU are never going to the PAC with just 4 teams and the loonier the west coast gets politically it makes it an even harder fit.

I'm an inclusion guy myself and think CFB needs to look at a final number of 72 not less. If you cut out too many areas it loses itself as a national sport.

(06-12-2018 02:13 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 05:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 02:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Both the Big 12 and ACC have an issue...they're top heavy. The Big 12 has this issue more so than the ACC, but there's an awful lot of lower tier Power programs in both conferences.

There are several ways for the networks to approach this issue and try to retain the value of both leagues, but I think there's really only one path that doesn't require a massive amount of shoehorning as far as geography and structure goes.

I think that is to take the foundation of Texas and Oklahoma and build a new league from scratch.

Now, what could make this possible is that once the Big 12 GOR is up then you have the freedom to drop a few underperforming programs from the Big 12. The core can remain the same, but you don't have to attempt to divide 8-10 schools up among 2-4 leagues.

But wait, doesn't the ACC also have a GOR? Doesn't it expire around 2034? Yes, but the key factor is that it's all owned by ESPN. I think they definitely want the content of the ACC schools, but the ACC structure has not been up to par financially. You could send a few ACC schools to the SEC and most of them to a brand new conference and get everything in a more efficient alignment.

Why not use a few ACC schools to attract the Big Ten? Because attracting the B1G could very well end up as a short term gain. There would be no guarantee they would continue to sign broad and long contracts with Disney/ESPN. I think it's highly unlikely they would not split their rights down the middle anyway and if Amazon becomes a player then it's possible ESPN could end up with a much smaller slice of the current ACC properties than when they started. In short, the B1G has not been in a cooperative mood in recent years and I don't expect that to change.

When streaming really hits its stride then it's going to behoove ESPN to have as much content under one roof as they can. Wholly owning 2 large leagues across a litany of markets will provide good return for them.

You've also got the reality that the SEC's 1st Tier rights will be up for grabs around the same time the Big 12 GOR is ending. The SEC will look to add some punch in order to get a better payout. So the easiest way to keep everyone in the fold, make UT and OU happy, and reward the SEC is to start from scratch.

The SEC adds North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and TCU

They access NC and VA. They also get direct access to DFW.

These Big 12 schools remain: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and West Virginia

These ACC schools join them: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami

Each league rests at 18 and is strategically positioned across multiple regions.

The ACC Network and Longhorn Network could be rolled into one. The ACCN will have far better distribution by that time, but you can take advantage of the studios built in Texas for the network rather than housing everything in Bristol. The SEC Network can remain housed in Charlotte which would become more of an epicenter for the conference anyway.

So we are dropping Baylor and Wake Forest and Kansas State.

The SEC is adding a trio of holier than thou basketball schools and the Frogs.

And the ACC/B12 gets more of the football first schools.

Why? Texas needs some snooty friends to be a rival with.

How about the SEC adds Virginia Tech, N.C. State, T.C.U. and Miami and the ACC gives up Boston College and Syracuse to the Big 10. And we wind up with something like this:

SEC:

Florida, Georgia, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

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

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

B1G:

Boston College, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue

Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

ACC/B12

Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Wake Forest

Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, West Virginia

Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

Are you going to leave the PAC at 12? They are the hard league in this.
Your idea is interesting and a version of what the B12 had hoped for pre ACC network announcement by getting FSU, Clemson, Ga. Tech and another 1-3 southern schools while the B1G & SEC took 2 each from NC, ND, Va. Va. Tech, Duke.

If you were going to do this and give the ACC & B12 the best properties, IMO you are close enough to the concept of just forming 4 leagues that are close to equal. CFB could create 4 or 5 equal leagues and negotiate as one for everything. From an SEC perspective do you really want to have to potentially go through Florida, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Tn.( if they ever get good again) and then add OU & Tx or FSU & Clemson just to win a conference? Its too many powerhouse programs in one league. Its ironic that all of these universities that tend to promote the idea of left wing socialist policies are sure cut throat when it comes to revenues on an individual basis, lol. I don't think the sport negotiating as one is socialist either because if CFB at the highest level had a defined division unlike it is now with all kinds of levels of teams it is furthering the product of CFB.

I prefer 4 but 5 could work if you gave an equal number of playoff spots for 15 and filled the 16th spot on a equal rotating basis. You could also do the seeding on a rotating equal basis SEC 1, SEC 2, SEC 3, B1G 1, B1G 2, B1G 3, etc. etc.

While at one time everyone would have said the PAC was safe but with viewership of college sports is figured in it becomes more and more evident the PAC is the weak link. The PAC schools themselves want more exposure and there is just no way to give it to the existing PAC league. So if the PAC was split between two leagues that had higher viewership their teams would get more viewers even in the later games because fans tend to watch games of other teams in their league. Because I think its clear Texas & OU are never going to the PAC with just 4 teams and the loonier the west coast gets politically it makes it an even harder fit.

I'm an inclusion guy myself and think CFB needs to look at a final number of 72 not less. If you cut out too many areas it loses itself as a national sport.

The PAC is protected by the 4 California schools who like things the way the are academically and don't put as high of a priority on sports as most conferences to the East. As long as UW and Oregon stand by the Cali 4 nothing will happen. Oregon State and WASU don't want to risk going against them and the two Arizona's are more dependent upon Southern California for students that elsewhere so they aren't leaving either. Colorado and Utah are the two who could leave if anyone wanted them. So as lousy as the PAC's athletic revenue is nobody is leaving.

So if you want to move to a P4 and possibly set up a champs only, try to keep most minor sports play regional for the sake of overhead, and want to multiply your commercial value by beefing up content then something like this is the way to go.

The problem for the Big 10 is diamond sports. The old SWC loves its diamond sports and Oklahoma can be added to that. It's the minor sports fit that will give the SEC an edge if things break loose.

And if we move to a champs only format it will level the playing field for access. Winning your division then becomes you access to conference playoffs and winning the conference becomes your ticket to the CFP. So in that setup UT, OU, AL, F.S.U., Clemson, Auburn, etc. all need to do what they have to do now which is win their division. Then they will have 2 key games in the conference (only 1 more than they presently play) before the compete for it all where they have to play two more anyway. So it doesn't significantly hurt any of the kings of the sport provided there aren't two kings in a division.

(06-12-2018 03:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-12-2018 02:13 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 05:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 02:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Both the Big 12 and ACC have an issue...they're top heavy. The Big 12 has this issue more so than the ACC, but there's an awful lot of lower tier Power programs in both conferences.

There are several ways for the networks to approach this issue and try to retain the value of both leagues, but I think there's really only one path that doesn't require a massive amount of shoehorning as far as geography and structure goes.

I think that is to take the foundation of Texas and Oklahoma and build a new league from scratch.

Now, what could make this possible is that once the Big 12 GOR is up then you have the freedom to drop a few underperforming programs from the Big 12. The core can remain the same, but you don't have to attempt to divide 8-10 schools up among 2-4 leagues.

But wait, doesn't the ACC also have a GOR? Doesn't it expire around 2034? Yes, but the key factor is that it's all owned by ESPN. I think they definitely want the content of the ACC schools, but the ACC structure has not been up to par financially. You could send a few ACC schools to the SEC and most of them to a brand new conference and get everything in a more efficient alignment.

Why not use a few ACC schools to attract the Big Ten? Because attracting the B1G could very well end up as a short term gain. There would be no guarantee they would continue to sign broad and long contracts with Disney/ESPN. I think it's highly unlikely they would not split their rights down the middle anyway and if Amazon becomes a player then it's possible ESPN could end up with a much smaller slice of the current ACC properties than when they started. In short, the B1G has not been in a cooperative mood in recent years and I don't expect that to change.

When streaming really hits its stride then it's going to behoove ESPN to have as much content under one roof as they can. Wholly owning 2 large leagues across a litany of markets will provide good return for them.

You've also got the reality that the SEC's 1st Tier rights will be up for grabs around the same time the Big 12 GOR is ending. The SEC will look to add some punch in order to get a better payout. So the easiest way to keep everyone in the fold, make UT and OU happy, and reward the SEC is to start from scratch.

The SEC adds North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and TCU

They access NC and VA. They also get direct access to DFW.

These Big 12 schools remain: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and West Virginia

These ACC schools join them: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami

Each league rests at 18 and is strategically positioned across multiple regions.

The ACC Network and Longhorn Network could be rolled into one. The ACCN will have far better distribution by that time, but you can take advantage of the studios built in Texas for the network rather than housing everything in Bristol. The SEC Network can remain housed in Charlotte which would become more of an epicenter for the conference anyway.

So we are dropping Baylor and Wake Forest and Kansas State.

The SEC is adding a trio of holier than thou basketball schools and the Frogs.

And the ACC/B12 gets more of the football first schools.

Why? Texas needs some snooty friends to be a rival with.

How about the SEC adds Virginia Tech, N.C. State, T.C.U. and Miami and the ACC gives up Boston College and Syracuse to the Big 10. And we wind up with something like this:

SEC:

Florida, Georgia, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

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

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

B1G:

Boston College, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue

Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

ACC/B12

Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Wake Forest

Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, West Virginia

Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

Are you going to leave the PAC at 12? They are the hard league in this.
Your idea is interesting and a version of what the B12 had hoped for pre ACC network announcement by getting FSU, Clemson, Ga. Tech and another 1-3 southern schools while the B1G & SEC took 2 each from NC, ND, Va. Va. Tech, Duke.

If you were going to do this and give the ACC & B12 the best properties, IMO you are close enough to the concept of just forming 4 leagues that are close to equal. CFB could create 4 or 5 equal leagues and negotiate as one for everything. From an SEC perspective do you really want to have to potentially go through Florida, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Tn.( if they ever get good again) and then add OU & Tx or FSU & Clemson just to win a conference? Its too many powerhouse programs in one league. Its ironic that all of these universities that tend to promote the idea of left wing socialist policies are sure cut throat when it comes to revenues on an individual basis, lol. I don't think the sport negotiating as one is socialist either because if CFB at the highest level had a defined division unlike it is now with all kinds of levels of teams it is furthering the product of CFB.

I prefer 4 but 5 could work if you gave an equal number of playoff spots for 15 and filled the 16th spot on a equal rotating basis. You could also do the seeding on a rotating equal basis SEC 1, SEC 2, SEC 3, B1G 1, B1G 2, B1G 3, etc. etc.

While at one time everyone would have said the PAC was safe but with viewership of college sports is figured in it becomes more and more evident the PAC is the weak link. The PAC schools themselves want more exposure and there is just no way to give it to the existing PAC league. So if the PAC was split between two leagues that had higher viewership their teams would get more viewers even in the later games because fans tend to watch games of other teams in their league. Because I think its clear Texas & OU are never going to the PAC with just 4 teams and the loonier the west coast gets politically it makes it an even harder fit.

I'm an inclusion guy myself and think CFB needs to look at a final number of 72 not less. If you cut out too many areas it loses itself as a national sport.

The PAC is protected by the 4 California schools who like things the way the are academically and don't put as high of a priority on sports as most conferences to the East. As long as UW and Oregon stand by the Cali 4 nothing will happen. Oregon State and WASU don't want to risk going against them and the two Arizona's are more dependent upon Southern California for students that elsewhere so they aren't leaving either. Colorado and Utah are the two who could leave if anyone wanted them. So as lousy as the PAC's athletic revenue is nobody is leaving.

So if you want to move to a P4 and possibly set up a champs only, try to keep most minor sports play regional for the sake of overhead, and want to multiply your commercial value by beefing up content then something like this is the way to go.

The problem for the Big 10 is diamond sports. The old SWC loves its diamond sports and Oklahoma can be added to that. It's the minor sports fit that will give the SEC an edge if things break loose.

And if we move to a champs only format it will level the playing field for access. Winning your division then becomes you access to conference playoffs and winning the conference becomes your ticket to the CFP. So in that setup UT, OU, AL, F.S.U., Clemson, Auburn, etc. all need to do what they have to do now which is win their division. Then they will have 2 key games in the conference (only 1 more than they presently play) before the compete for it all where they have to play two more anyway. So it doesn't significantly hurt any of the kings of the sport provided there aren't two kings in a division.

I think your right about the preferences of the California schools but if the difference gets too great, they may even have to change their tune. If I remember right Cal was having serious financial issues. The PAC also wants more exposure, and they simply are not going to get it staying in their current league format.

But I get the political power aspect. That's what keeps NC/Duke interested in the ACC, UT/OU in the B12. Political power of the schools at the top are really what keep 3 leagues together, with the PAC also having geography as a factor.

Who knows maybe we stay at 5 leagues forever.

(06-11-2018 05:45 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 02:42 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Both the Big 12 and ACC have an issue...they're top heavy. The Big 12 has this issue more so than the ACC, but there's an awful lot of lower tier Power programs in both conferences.

There are several ways for the networks to approach this issue and try to retain the value of both leagues, but I think there's really only one path that doesn't require a massive amount of shoehorning as far as geography and structure goes.

I think that is to take the foundation of Texas and Oklahoma and build a new league from scratch.

Now, what could make this possible is that once the Big 12 GOR is up then you have the freedom to drop a few underperforming programs from the Big 12. The core can remain the same, but you don't have to attempt to divide 8-10 schools up among 2-4 leagues.

But wait, doesn't the ACC also have a GOR? Doesn't it expire around 2034? Yes, but the key factor is that it's all owned by ESPN. I think they definitely want the content of the ACC schools, but the ACC structure has not been up to par financially. You could send a few ACC schools to the SEC and most of them to a brand new conference and get everything in a more efficient alignment.

Why not use a few ACC schools to attract the Big Ten? Because attracting the B1G could very well end up as a short term gain. There would be no guarantee they would continue to sign broad and long contracts with Disney/ESPN. I think it's highly unlikely they would not split their rights down the middle anyway and if Amazon becomes a player then it's possible ESPN could end up with a much smaller slice of the current ACC properties than when they started. In short, the B1G has not been in a cooperative mood in recent years and I don't expect that to change.

When streaming really hits its stride then it's going to behoove ESPN to have as much content under one roof as they can. Wholly owning 2 large leagues across a litany of markets will provide good return for them.

You've also got the reality that the SEC's 1st Tier rights will be up for grabs around the same time the Big 12 GOR is ending. The SEC will look to add some punch in order to get a better payout. So the easiest way to keep everyone in the fold, make UT and OU happy, and reward the SEC is to start from scratch.

The SEC adds North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, and TCU

They access NC and VA. They also get direct access to DFW.

These Big 12 schools remain: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and West Virginia

These ACC schools join them: Notre Dame, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami

Each league rests at 18 and is strategically positioned across multiple regions.

The ACC Network and Longhorn Network could be rolled into one. The ACCN will have far better distribution by that time, but you can take advantage of the studios built in Texas for the network rather than housing everything in Bristol. The SEC Network can remain housed in Charlotte which would become more of an epicenter for the conference anyway.

So we are dropping Baylor and Wake Forest and Kansas State.

The SEC is adding a trio of holier than thou basketball schools and the Frogs.

And the ACC/B12 gets more of the football first schools.

Why? Texas needs some snooty friends to be a rival with.

How about the SEC adds Virginia Tech, N.C. State, T.C.U. and Miami and the ACC gives up Boston College and Syracuse to the Big 10. And we wind up with something like this:

SEC:

Florida, Georgia, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

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

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

B1G:

Boston College, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue

Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

ACC/B12

Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Wake Forest

Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, West Virginia

Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

This was my ESPN-centric view.

That and the snooty ones are probably scared to death of being overrun by Texas and friends especially if the football first schools move to the same league. In the SEC, they would at least be equal and more regional in their travel.

But if I could design a league that fit every interest of the SEC then I would do this...

Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, and Miami from the East...

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas from the West...

A 28 team conference divided up into 4 regional divisions of 7 each.

West: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Missouri
South: Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Florida State
North: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech
East: Florida, Miami, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

If you could somehow secretly shuffle the teams in both the ACC and the Big XII to create one football conference and one basketball conference, it might look something like this:

FOOTBALL
Texas, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Iowa State (or Louisville), WVU, Pitt, VT, BC, NC State, Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami

BASKETBALL
Syracuse, UVA, UNC, Duke, Wake Forest, Kansas, Louisville (or Iowa State), Baylor (maybe Kansas State and Texas Tech?)

BOTH would be very strong in their featured sport.