If the SEC/ESPN strategy is to block Big Ten expansion into the South while maintaining as much value in the ACC and Big XII as possible, what are the MINIMUM teams the SEC would have to absorb? In other words, teams which are clearly B1G targets (no tag-alongs or nice-to-have teams).

My thoughts:
UVA - contiguous and AAU
UNC - AAU and coveted by some B1G folks
Miami - Florida and AAU
FSU - not AAU, but Florida and football though

I think the SEC could take a chance on leaving behind:
VT - not AAU, not big enough to guarantee Big Ten interest
Clemson - same as VT, despite national championships
GT - AAU, but doesn't even carry its own city, much less state
NC State - see GT, but not AAU.

What do you guys think?

The best way to block the B1G from the South is UVA/UNC/Miami/FSU. It's hard to imagine the SEC/networks passing on Clemson, so it's either swap out Miami for Clemson or move to 21/22.

(06-12-2023 08:13 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If the SEC/ESPN strategy is to block Big Ten expansion into the South while maintaining as much value in the ACC and Big XII as possible, what are the MINIMUM teams the SEC would have to absorb? In other words, teams which are clearly B1G targets (no tag-alongs or nice-to-have teams).

My thoughts:
UVA - contiguous and AAU
UNC - AAU and coveted by some B1G folks
Miami - Florida and AAU
FSU - not AAU, but Florida and football though

I think the SEC could take a chance on leaving behind:
VT - not AAU, not big enough to guarantee Big Ten interest
Clemson - same as VT, despite national championships
GT - AAU, but doesn't even carry its own city, much less state
NC State - see GT, but not AAU.

What do you guys think?

If FSU moved to the B1G, it would probably get an AAU invite within a week. "Oh sorry we meant to include you!" I jest, but only slightly. With that being said...UNC and FSU will be in the SEC someday. If I had to bet anyway.

The only other school that stands out off the top of my head would be Duke with their AAU status & basketball history.

IMO if the B1G ever goes south they will try to get Virginia and North Carolina. There's some people out there that would try to argue that the B1G already has a southern school (Maryland).

https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/m...lege-poll/

My guess is that if the four suggested (VT, NCSU, Clemson and GT) were left behind, the Big Ten would consider that adding OU, UW, Cal and Stanford to take USCLA off their island would be a better option than looking east. IOW, your strategy would work to keep the B1G out of the south.

Looking further, that would make the Big 12 adding the Four Corners a near certainty, killing the PAC and relegating Wazzou and Oregon State. Those two would be perennial contenders for a G5 access slot into the CFP, along with Boise and SDSU in the clear #1 G5 conference.

Would the ACC and ESPN be content to leave the ACC at 10 members in that scenario?

The only real programs of value remaining in the South are FSU, Clemson, and Miami. UNC and UVA obviously expand the SEC's footprint further in the south but neither is really a defensive move. UNC obviously adds value, but I'm not sure that UVA has enough brand cache to warrant the addition. UVA demographically is also much more similar to a northern school. Most of its students are from the DC area of Virginia, and the out-of-state kids come nationally but primarily from New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Connecticut.

If I were the SEC I would be fine letting UVA go to the B1G, UVA is essentially another Vanderbilt in the SEC. If you REALLY want to pick up carriage fees in Virginia, VTech also delivers that while also bringing a stronger football brand.

If you're looking to optimize the dollar, the SEC should add FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Miami to get to 20 schools and stop there. If the SEC ever ended up kicking out schools one day like Vanderbilt and Miss St. (this won't happen anytime soon BTW), schools like VTech, Kansas, Cincinnati, or West Virginia would be good replacements candidates to expand the footprint.

At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

(06-12-2023 08:55 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

I don't even know if it's about the money anymore. For the foreseeable future, the SEC's member schools will have at least as much as their peers across the nation. More money is obviously better, but how much value does a program have to have to make a substantial difference to the annual SEC payouts? If a school has a value of $80 million, that would only raise the average payout by 2%. At that point, why bother? Texas and Oklahoma made a significant impact, but there just aren't any more schools out there with that kind of clout.

(06-12-2023 08:22 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  The best way to block the B1G from the South is UVA/UNC/Miami/FSU. It's hard to imagine the SEC/networks passing on Clemson, so it's either swap out Miami for Clemson or move to 21/22.

Yeah, it's probably grab UVA, UNC, Clem, Miami, FSU, and then taking Kansas or Duke for 22 teams. Football can still play everyone once every 3 years for football with a 9 game conference schedule. B1G would probably settle on Oregon, Washington, Stanford, and make a play on ND.

I can see the SEC take Clemson and leave Miami out since they would be a private city school with their stadium 20 miles away from their campus, but maybe the B1G takes a shot at GT if they get Miami.

(06-12-2023 08:55 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

Exactly. Conference realignment is not the board game Risk! The SEC will add the southern ACC schools if they add value. If they don't add value, the SEC doesn't care if the B1G takes them, unless the B1G taking them would somehow lower the SEC's total value.

Take it for what it's worth.

The sec shouldn’t want these schools in the Big 10:

UVA, Virginia tech, UNC, NC state, Duke, Clemson, Georgia tech, Florida state

I don’t believe Miami in the big 10 is that big of a deal for the sec. Yet, you probably could say that about the 8 I listed with the exception of Florida state. I think the biggest issue for the sec and big 10 is not maxing the money but getting the ecosystem correct and not ruining college athletics in certain regions.

(06-12-2023 09:23 AM)cubucks Wrote:  Take it for what it's worth.

According to my contacts, we'll need to revisit this in a decade.

(06-12-2023 09:21 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:55 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

Exactly. Conference realignment is not the board game Risk! The SEC will add the southern ACC schools if they add value. If they don't add value, the SEC doesn't care if the B1G takes them, unless the B1G taking them would somehow lower the SEC's total value.

Try telling that to the PAC, B12, Big East, etc. Revenue growth and bigger payouts are a primary motive, but longer term interests also come into play.

(06-12-2023 09:39 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:21 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:55 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

Exactly. Conference realignment is not the board game Risk! The SEC will add the southern ACC schools if they add value. If they don't add value, the SEC doesn't care if the B1G takes them, unless the B1G taking them would somehow lower the SEC's total value.

I couldn't disagree more. Try telling that to the PAC, B12, Big East, etc.

Hard to respond without knowing exactly what you're referring to. But the Pac is a great example. The B1G took USC and UCLA because they add value, not as a beachhead for taking over the Pac in a quest to get "more territory."

(06-12-2023 09:39 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:21 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:55 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

Exactly. Conference realignment is not the board game Risk! The SEC will add the southern ACC schools if they add value. If they don't add value, the SEC doesn't care if the B1G takes them, unless the B1G taking them would somehow lower the SEC's total value.

Try telling that to the PAC, B12, Big East, etc. Sure immediate revenue growth is a primary motive, but longer term interests also come into play.

Even the longer term interests are $$. Having a large disjointed conference with mouths to feed that don't add value & add expenses is not.

(06-12-2023 09:48 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:39 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:21 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:55 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

Exactly. Conference realignment is not the board game Risk! The SEC will add the southern ACC schools if they add value. If they don't add value, the SEC doesn't care if the B1G takes them, unless the B1G taking them would somehow lower the SEC's total value.

Try telling that to the PAC, B12, Big East, etc. Sure immediate revenue growth is a primary motive, but longer term interests also come into play.

Even the longer term interests are $$. Having a large disjointed conference with mouths to feed that don't add value & add expenses is not.

You can put $ on just about anything. Security...sustainability...survivability.

Seems to me like people are missing a big part of this.

If you're the B1G or SEC, you want to be THE premier conference in college sports, not 1A or 1B.

You want the other league to be the clear #2 that keeps interest in college sports strong, but is ultimately second fiddle.

Right now, neither of these leagues are a 'can't miss' property because the other one is a viable alternative.

But the potential is there for one of these leagues to add enough valuable schools they become like the NFL where ESPN, FOX, CBS, and NBC are all willing to work together to get a piece. Because not doing so guarantees you have a second-tier or worse product.

(06-12-2023 09:44 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:39 AM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 09:21 AM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  

(06-12-2023 08:55 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  At this point with either the B1G or the SEC, the only motivation to add schools is $$. If ESPN in the case of the SEC or the consortium that has contracted the B1G media says it will pay your conference a significant pro-rata per school increase then the SEC or the B1G will add schools. They won't add schools simply to block another conference unless by doing so each school within that conference makes more money. It's only the fans who like to say mine is bigger than yours that have other motivations.

Exactly. Conference realignment is not the board game Risk! The SEC will add the southern ACC schools if they add value. If they don't add value, the SEC doesn't care if the B1G takes them, unless the B1G taking them would somehow lower the SEC's total value.

I couldn't disagree more. Try telling that to the PAC, B12, Big East, etc.

Hard to respond without knowing exactly what you're referring to. But the Pac is a great example. The B1G took USC and UCLA because they add value, not as a beachhead for taking over the Pac in a quest to get "more territory."

Wouldn't the Pac-12 adding SDSU be an example of the board game Risk!? They're not being added to increase the AAV.