(03-15-2022 05:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-15-2022 05:45 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(03-15-2022 02:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-15-2022 02:07 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(03-15-2022 01:13 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  Yep, and I believe the Big 12 may be a tad high..

They don’t provide a lot of insight on the assumptions made in these forecasts. The ACC and SEC estimates should be more grounded…as contracts are already in place and there have been some public statements.

Maybe there are educated guesses for the B1G and PAC. IMO, it would be surprising if the B1G’s disbursements aren’t higher than the SEC. The B1G has much better and forward thinking media rights deals.

The B12 is a huge unknown. For now, it’s just speculation. They’re likely assuming that the B12 will be trailing, but in the same neighborhood as the ACC and PAC.

The B1G 10 has less content value and less inventory, and less viewership overall. But, they have a larger market with more affluence. Let the B1G expand with ND and anyone else and their pay day will equal or exceed the SEC's by a couple of million. The SEC is about to have 23 more games to sell and 15 of them, possibly 17 of them as conference games. And Texas and Oklahoma drive T1 content. That is the difference in these estimates. You'll note the jump in 2026 the year the payouts happen for the 2025-6 season when OU and UT finish their first season.

At the risk of revealing my History major ignorance, can you tell me what the formula/calculation for coming up with the total SEC games will be? I’m assuming you are considering the current 14 teams adding 1 more conference game to get to 9 per school, plus 9 conference games each for Texas and Oklahoma. I can’t remember how you come up with the total number of games, accounting for the fact that OU will play Texas etc. Thanks!

Whatever the new contract called for is moot as those have been paid for, or will be. The addition of Texas and Oklahoma means with an 8 game conference schedule we get 15 more conference games as they will be playing each other so that's 15. If we are under contractual obligation for 9 conference games that means 17 more conference games, all of which are additional to the contract. And that's not ignorance due to history, but a break in logic. They each add 7 new games in a conference schedule and play each other or 8 and play each other. That's part of the 20 million bump you see in 2026, the other 20 million is the raise in the T1 contract signed last year, and the incremental increases are escalators used to backload the contract.

Thanks, I was thinking the total number of conference games would be (16*9)/2, or 72 total league games with 16 teams at 9 games a piece, which would be an increase of 16 total league games over (14*8)/2, or 56 total games, as is, but I’m not a math guy.

I reached out to Navigate about this, and hope to have a follow up conversation later this week. I have uh, lots of questions about the math, but I think the general trend lines here are pretty accurate

(03-15-2022 07:22 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  I reached out to Navigate about this, and hope to have a follow up conversation later this week. I have uh, lots of questions about the math, but I think the general trend lines here are pretty accurate

As always, thanks for your insight Matt.

Okay, finally talked to the guys who made the study, which will (for free) be on our Going For Two podcast tomorrow AM.

I'm not sure I agree with all of their baked in assumptions (from the other folks I've talked to, the idea that Big 12 rights wont drop, at least in the near term, seems very unlikely), but a world in 2028 where Big Ten and SEC distributions are 30+ more than the other power leagues really does feel quite possible.

(03-22-2022 09:16 PM)MattBrownEP Wrote:  Okay, finally talked to the guys who made the study, which will (for free) be on our Going For Two podcast tomorrow AM.

I'm not sure I agree with all of their baked in assumptions (from the other folks I've talked to, the idea that Big 12 rights wont drop, at least in the near term, seems very unlikely), but a world in 2028 where Big Ten and SEC distributions are 30+ more than the other power leagues really does feel quite possible.

Thanks for the podcast!

In the 12 team CFP projections, what are the inflections to the increase between 2025 to 2026 attributed to? CFP, I assume? SEC has more teams in CFP forecasted, followed by BIG. I would have thought Pac12, ACC, and Big12 would get similar % increases from CFP given only they get 1.6, 1.4, and 1.5 teams in CFP respectively. Is the Pac12’s bump in 2026 due to their TV deal that starts in fall 2024? The Big 10’s bump from its new deal occurs all in the 2023 to 2024 year. The SEC jump from their new deal occurs in what looks to be one year, with the jump the following year due to having 3.8 CFP teams, plus performance estimations imo

(03-15-2022 12:36 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

If this is accurate, couldn't the B1G schools agree to allocate a portion of the $40.1m per school they will be getting annually to fund a buyout of the GOR for Duke, UNC, Virginia, and GT before 2036?

P5 Payouts Article

HT to Matt Brown, whose Twitter I saw this on.

I know this model is based on many assumptions and guesses but it’s still good to see an actual model.

* the SEC’s revenue really jumps from 2024-2026. This is credible as UT and OU are very valuable.

* I am not sure what would cause a modest bump from 2025 to 2026 for the ACC. Is this because of the college football playoff expansion?

* the Big 12 forecast seems a little optimistic but given the inflation (and playoff expansion) the new B12 may not end up losing money

* To the OP’s question, is this increasing money gap between the ACC and the BIG too much for the ACC’s survival? I don’t know. The gap in terms of the dollar term will surely increase. But in terms of %, the model says no. In 2022, the BIG makes 85 percent more than the ACC on average. In 2029, the BIG would make only 70 percent more. On the hand, the SEC would make 90 percent more than the ACC in 2029.

Updated P5 Payout Estimates – Assuming a 12-Team CFP Expansion

https://nvgt.com/blog/p5-payout-estimate...expansion/





The other chart is assuming an 8-team CFP expansion

(03-31-2022 03:22 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Updated P5 Payout Estimates – Assuming a 12-Team CFP Expansion

https://nvgt.com/blog/p5-payout-estimate...expansion/





The other chart is assuming an 8-team CFP expansion

Good thing the ACC schools like one another so much because that revenue deficit vs. the SEC and B1G is massive

(03-31-2022 02:58 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  * To the OP’s question, is this increasing money gap between the ACC and the BIG too much for the ACC’s survival?

ACC's survival?

No

ACC's survival with the current 14.5 members?

IMO, yes

(03-31-2022 06:10 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 02:58 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  * To the OP’s question, is this increasing money gap between the ACC and the BIG too much for the ACC’s survival?

ACC's survival?

No

ACC's survival with the current 14.5 members?

IMO, yes

We will see. Nobody knows the future but I am pretty confident that Miami is staying.

(03-31-2022 03:22 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Updated P5 Payout Estimates – Assuming a 12-Team CFP Expansion

https://nvgt.com/blog/p5-payout-estimate...expansion/





The other chart is assuming an 8-team CFP expansion

I have to say this.

The model clearly shows that the SEC would really benefits from the 12 team playoff. Under the 8 team model, the SEC would make 11 percent more than the BIG. Under the 12 team model, the SEC would make 16 percent more. And the gap between the SEC and the ACC, the Pac, and the NB12 would become really wide.

No surprise the Alliance vetoed the proposed 12 team playoff. Don’t you think?

(03-31-2022 10:37 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 03:22 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Updated P5 Payout Estimates – Assuming a 12-Team CFP Expansion

https://nvgt.com/blog/p5-payout-estimate...expansion/





The other chart is assuming an 8-team CFP expansion

I have to say this.

The model clearly shows that the SEC would really benefits from the 12 team playoff. Under the 8 team model, the SEC would make 11 percent more than the BIG. Under the 12 team model, the SEC would make 16 percent more. And the gap between the SEC and the ACC, the Pac, and the NB12 would become really wide.

No surprise the Alliance vetoed the proposed 12 team playoff. Don’t you think?

Either way the SEC comes out on top. The issue with your analysis is that it presupposes that no one will defect for SEC or Big 10 money. They will, and that will skew the SEC and B1G trajectory even higher essentially relegating those who don't jump to a permanent subordinate position, and resulting ultimately in a 2 league system.

It will essentially cull the upper tier down to 48, maybe 56 schools. If ESPN assists the SEC in this matter not only will the SEC gain the better product, but any advantage the alliance thought they had would be obliterated. I would think that the playoff money, even if the B1G and SEC had 4 entrants each, would still be more because fewer schools would divide it.

GOR's will likely be ineffectual in the wake of Pay for play and even if they aren't many would leave 36 million behind for 75 knowing escalation to 105 million would happen over the years ahead. 100 million in exit fees would be recouped in a shade over 2 years.

And, for that kind of money state AG's would handle the cases and states would assume the costs.

(03-31-2022 06:31 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 06:10 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 02:58 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  * To the OP’s question, is this increasing money gap between the ACC and the BIG too much for the ACC’s survival?

ACC's survival?

No

ACC's survival with the current 14.5 members?

IMO, yes

We will see. Nobody knows the future but I am pretty confident that Miami is staying.

It's possible Miami could stay in the ACC, but in a pay for play world, it doesn't take much for me to see Miami in the B1G. I keep coming back to that new indoor practice facility that they built--that building is extremely nice and innovative!! And, if Miami can get a smaller football stadium closer to campus, that will really boost Miami's stock, IMO.

In the current system, it's a lot harder for private colleges and universities to compete with public schools unless they are ND, BYU, Stanford (as much as I personally can't stand them) or USC. Not sure if Liberty belongs on that list , but they could be a possibility.

Now in pay for play, you can take the current system, and toss it in the trash because it's no longer applicable, IMO. This was what I was arguing with Frank the Tank about. He firmly believes that the current system will continue, but I am saying that things are about to really change again.

(03-31-2022 11:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 10:37 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 03:22 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Updated P5 Payout Estimates – Assuming a 12-Team CFP Expansion

https://nvgt.com/blog/p5-payout-estimate...expansion/





The other chart is assuming an 8-team CFP expansion

I have to say this.

The model clearly shows that the SEC would really benefits from the 12 team playoff. Under the 8 team model, the SEC would make 11 percent more than the BIG. Under the 12 team model, the SEC would make 16 percent more. And the gap between the SEC and the ACC, the Pac, and the NB12 would become really wide.

No surprise the Alliance vetoed the proposed 12 team playoff. Don’t you think?

Either way the SEC comes out on top. The issue with your analysis is that it presupposes that no one will defect for SEC or Big 10 money. They will, and that will skew the SEC and B1G trajectory even higher essentially relegating those who don't jump to a permanent subordinate position, and resulting ultimately in a 2 league system.

It will essentially cull the upper tier down to 48, maybe 56 schools. If ESPN assists the SEC in this matter not only will the SEC gain the better product, but any advantage the alliance thought they had would be obliterated. I would think that the playoff money, even if the B1G and SEC had 4 entrants each, would still be more because fewer schools would divide it.

GOR's will likely be ineffectual in the wake of Pay for play and even if they aren't many would leave 36 million behind for 75 knowing escalation to 105 million would happen over the years ahead. 100 million in exit fees would be recouped in a shade over 2 years.

And, for that kind of money state AG's would handle the cases and states would assume the costs.

Well yes I agree there are some ACC schools that would defect for the SEC and the BIG. But no, I don’t think any ACC schools that the BIG or the SEC actually want will leave.

I have said this before. But I firmly believe we reached to an equilibrium point for the four conferences that have the dedicated TV networks (I use this term because some people don’t like the term “P4”) and there will no poaching among these four conferences until 2035 (and probably beyond 2035) with a possible exception of ND.

(04-01-2022 12:09 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 11:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 10:37 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 03:22 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Updated P5 Payout Estimates – Assuming a 12-Team CFP Expansion

https://nvgt.com/blog/p5-payout-estimate...expansion/





The other chart is assuming an 8-team CFP expansion

I have to say this.

The model clearly shows that the SEC would really benefits from the 12 team playoff. Under the 8 team model, the SEC would make 11 percent more than the BIG. Under the 12 team model, the SEC would make 16 percent more. And the gap between the SEC and the ACC, the Pac, and the NB12 would become really wide.

No surprise the Alliance vetoed the proposed 12 team playoff. Don’t you think?

Either way the SEC comes out on top. The issue with your analysis is that it presupposes that no one will defect for SEC or Big 10 money. They will, and that will skew the SEC and B1G trajectory even higher essentially relegating those who don't jump to a permanent subordinate position, and resulting ultimately in a 2 league system.

It will essentially cull the upper tier down to 48, maybe 56 schools. If ESPN assists the SEC in this matter not only will the SEC gain the better product, but any advantage the alliance thought they had would be obliterated. I would think that the playoff money, even if the B1G and SEC had 4 entrants each, would still be more because fewer schools would divide it.

GOR's will likely be ineffectual in the wake of Pay for play and even if they aren't many would leave 36 million behind for 75 knowing escalation to 105 million would happen over the years ahead. 100 million in exit fees would be recouped in a shade over 2 years.

And, for that kind of money state AG's would handle the cases and states would assume the costs.

Well yes I agree there are some ACC schools that would defect for the SEC and the BIG. But no, I don’t think any ACC schools that the BIG or the SEC actually want will leave.

I have said this before. But I firmly believe we reached to an equilibrium point for the four conferences that have the dedicated TV networks (I use this term because some people don’t like the term “P4”) and there will no poaching among these four conferences until 2035 (and probably beyond 2035) with a possible exception of ND.

And given the carnivorous nature of realignment in which the apex predators have always feasted on the weakest and where money has always been the motive for movement, what exactly do you base this fantasy upon besides your own desire for it to be true? You do know there is no evidence in the history of college athletics upon which to support this assertion?

(03-15-2022 01:07 PM)Gemofthehills Wrote:  Looks like a P2 and G8 coming our way.

Non Sequitur.

Might be true in a world in which 2+2=9, but not in this world.

Vandy about to get $105 million per year. WKU gonna be lucky to get $105,000 under the next C-USA deal...

(04-01-2022 12:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-01-2022 12:09 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 11:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 10:37 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 03:22 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Updated P5 Payout Estimates – Assuming a 12-Team CFP Expansion

https://nvgt.com/blog/p5-payout-estimate...expansion/





The other chart is assuming an 8-team CFP expansion

I have to say this.

The model clearly shows that the SEC would really benefits from the 12 team playoff. Under the 8 team model, the SEC would make 11 percent more than the BIG. Under the 12 team model, the SEC would make 16 percent more. And the gap between the SEC and the ACC, the Pac, and the NB12 would become really wide.

No surprise the Alliance vetoed the proposed 12 team playoff. Don’t you think?

Either way the SEC comes out on top. The issue with your analysis is that it presupposes that no one will defect for SEC or Big 10 money. They will, and that will skew the SEC and B1G trajectory even higher essentially relegating those who don't jump to a permanent subordinate position, and resulting ultimately in a 2 league system.

It will essentially cull the upper tier down to 48, maybe 56 schools. If ESPN assists the SEC in this matter not only will the SEC gain the better product, but any advantage the alliance thought they had would be obliterated. I would think that the playoff money, even if the B1G and SEC had 4 entrants each, would still be more because fewer schools would divide it.

GOR's will likely be ineffectual in the wake of Pay for play and even if they aren't many would leave 36 million behind for 75 knowing escalation to 105 million would happen over the years ahead. 100 million in exit fees would be recouped in a shade over 2 years.

And, for that kind of money state AG's would handle the cases and states would assume the costs.

Well yes I agree there are some ACC schools that would defect for the SEC and the BIG. But no, I don’t think any ACC schools that the BIG or the SEC actually want will leave.

I have said this before. But I firmly believe we reached to an equilibrium point for the four conferences that have the dedicated TV networks (I use this term because some people don’t like the term “P4”) and there will no poaching among these four conferences until 2035 (and probably beyond 2035) with a possible exception of ND.

And given the carnivorous nature of realignment in which the apex predators have always feasted on the weakest and where money has always been the motive for movement, what exactly do you base this fantasy upon besides your own desire for it to be true? You do know there is no evidence in the history of college athletics upon which to support this assertion?

So do tell me how many times the ivy league went through the membership change.

I don’t deny the money is a primary driver. Money is important. But so is the power. And also don’t underestimate the snob factor. You know how Duke/UNC/UVa views themselves and how they consider the SEC, right?

I am not saying Duke/UNC/UVa are the ivy leagues (no matter what they think of themselves...). But no, it’s hard for me to believe that they will give up the control of the ACC and drop their ego for the pursuit of money, which they don’t really need to complete in the Basketball, the sports they care about.

And the nature of realignment shows that you expand only if it’s financially beneficial. So tell me which schools the BIG and the SEC can realistically add and make substantially more money? I can only think of ND.

(04-01-2022 12:59 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(04-01-2022 12:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-01-2022 12:09 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 11:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 10:37 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  I have to say this.

The model clearly shows that the SEC would really benefits from the 12 team playoff. Under the 8 team model, the SEC would make 11 percent more than the BIG. Under the 12 team model, the SEC would make 16 percent more. And the gap between the SEC and the ACC, the Pac, and the NB12 would become really wide.

No surprise the Alliance vetoed the proposed 12 team playoff. Don’t you think?

Either way the SEC comes out on top. The issue with your analysis is that it presupposes that no one will defect for SEC or Big 10 money. They will, and that will skew the SEC and B1G trajectory even higher essentially relegating those who don't jump to a permanent subordinate position, and resulting ultimately in a 2 league system.

It will essentially cull the upper tier down to 48, maybe 56 schools. If ESPN assists the SEC in this matter not only will the SEC gain the better product, but any advantage the alliance thought they had would be obliterated. I would think that the playoff money, even if the B1G and SEC had 4 entrants each, would still be more because fewer schools would divide it.

GOR's will likely be ineffectual in the wake of Pay for play and even if they aren't many would leave 36 million behind for 75 knowing escalation to 105 million would happen over the years ahead. 100 million in exit fees would be recouped in a shade over 2 years.

And, for that kind of money state AG's would handle the cases and states would assume the costs.

Well yes I agree there are some ACC schools that would defect for the SEC and the BIG. But no, I don’t think any ACC schools that the BIG or the SEC actually want will leave.

I have said this before. But I firmly believe we reached to an equilibrium point for the four conferences that have the dedicated TV networks (I use this term because some people don’t like the term “P4”) and there will no poaching among these four conferences until 2035 (and probably beyond 2035) with a possible exception of ND.

And given the carnivorous nature of realignment in which the apex predators have always feasted on the weakest and where money has always been the motive for movement, what exactly do you base this fantasy upon besides your own desire for it to be true? You do know there is no evidence in the history of college athletics upon which to support this assertion?

So do tell me how many times the ivy league went through the membership change.

I don’t deny the money is a primary driver. Money is important. But so is the power. And also don’t underestimate the snob factor. You know how Duke/UNC/UVa views themselves and how they consider the SEC, right?

I am not saying Duke/UNC/UVa are the ivy leagues (no matter what they think of themselves...). But no, it’s hard for me to believe that they will give up the control of the ACC and drop their ego for the pursuit of money, which they don’t really need to complete in the Basketball, the sports they care about.

And the nature of realignment shows that you expand only if it’s financially beneficial. So tell me which schools the BIG and the SEC can realistically add and make substantially more money? I can only think of ND.

SEC adds Clemson and Florida St and that would really increase the money easily. Big Ten might have a bit more of a problem

(04-01-2022 01:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-01-2022 12:59 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(04-01-2022 12:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-01-2022 12:09 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(03-31-2022 11:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Either way the SEC comes out on top. The issue with your analysis is that it presupposes that no one will defect for SEC or Big 10 money. They will, and that will skew the SEC and B1G trajectory even higher essentially relegating those who don't jump to a permanent subordinate position, and resulting ultimately in a 2 league system.

It will essentially cull the upper tier down to 48, maybe 56 schools. If ESPN assists the SEC in this matter not only will the SEC gain the better product, but any advantage the alliance thought they had would be obliterated. I would think that the playoff money, even if the B1G and SEC had 4 entrants each, would still be more because fewer schools would divide it.

GOR's will likely be ineffectual in the wake of Pay for play and even if they aren't many would leave 36 million behind for 75 knowing escalation to 105 million would happen over the years ahead. 100 million in exit fees would be recouped in a shade over 2 years.

And, for that kind of money state AG's would handle the cases and states would assume the costs.

Well yes I agree there are some ACC schools that would defect for the SEC and the BIG. But no, I don’t think any ACC schools that the BIG or the SEC actually want will leave.

I have said this before. But I firmly believe we reached to an equilibrium point for the four conferences that have the dedicated TV networks (I use this term because some people don’t like the term “P4”) and there will no poaching among these four conferences until 2035 (and probably beyond 2035) with a possible exception of ND.

And given the carnivorous nature of realignment in which the apex predators have always feasted on the weakest and where money has always been the motive for movement, what exactly do you base this fantasy upon besides your own desire for it to be true? You do know there is no evidence in the history of college athletics upon which to support this assertion?

So do tell me how many times the ivy league went through the membership change.

I don’t deny the money is a primary driver. Money is important. But so is the power. And also don’t underestimate the snob factor. You know how Duke/UNC/UVa views themselves and how they consider the SEC, right?

I am not saying Duke/UNC/UVa are the ivy leagues (no matter what they think of themselves...). But no, it’s hard for me to believe that they will give up the control of the ACC and drop their ego for the pursuit of money, which they don’t really need to complete in the Basketball, the sports they care about.

And the nature of realignment shows that you expand only if it’s financially beneficial. So tell me which schools the BIG and the SEC can realistically add and make substantially more money? I can only think of ND.

SEC adds Clemson and Florida St and that would really increase the money easily. Big Ten might have a bit more of a problem

JRSEC had already said that FSU and Clemson are hard sell for the SEC. They would be average in the SEC in terms of fan base and stadium size and add no new market. How would they increase the money easily for the SEC?