NCAA Conference Realignment

so lets talk seriously, what do texas and ou get out of this ? more money obviously ?
but to think they would compete for a championship in the sec? please.
they were better off in big 12.
big12 should of expanded years ago.

 

I have been trying to figure that out for a week. Texas and OU ran the Big 12, to the point they are why Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri, and Texas A&M all left the conference. But moving to the SEC where all the money is split evenly is a step back for them, I think.

I wanted to say it was about recruiting - A&M was getting some big name recruits and Missouri was starting to get their feet back in the state after a few dry years - but Texas has always been all over the place in their recruiting classes. They have been as high as #3 and as low as #25 in the past 6 years so that doesn't seem to be it. And Oklahoma is typically in the top in recruiting classes every year.

As far as Texas goes, I am not sure if they think playing in the SEC will be easier for them than the Big 12. If you can't regularly beat WVU or OU, you are not going to beat LSU, Alabama, or Georgia.

I have a friend who is a tin foil hat guy who thinks Texas is the one that wants to move, and who the SEC wants because of the TV markets, and OU is afraid to be left behind in a crappy, Texas-less conference so they are going along as well.

 

Expanded college football playoff. Likely at least three (if not more) SEC teams, so Texas has a shot, rather than losing to OU every year and the B12 only getting one now, and even after CFP expansion, very likely only getting one to two teams in.

12 teams takes the post season (CFP / NY6) to $1BB to $2BB, depending on whose numbers you believe. It's $550MM right now. It will be at least $7MM additional for each CFP team (in a conference that makes the CFP or NY6) after expansion, and all conferences teams whether they make the CFP, or not. Conference payouts for CFP going forward. I'm backing into the numbers quickly, and it's a net number. So Rose has it's own deal, and the rest (NY6) have a conference payout, and conference expense figure reimbursed.

A couple of moving pieces. Not all conferences distribute the funds the same way. The NY6 probably disappears. Third tier rights. Intellectual property. Etc., ad infinitium..

With respect to Texas, there are also economies of scale for Disney / ESPN. They own the LHN. They hold FTR for the B12 and AAC. FTR is GOR in the one obvious situation, and it exists, less obviously in the other two.

This is why I've speculated Fox and the B1G are the next significant move. The NCAA has already pretty much said they are decentralizing.

I'm prevented form getting into some specifics. Anyone can connect the dots, but this post should point towards the correct dots to connect.

The great big variable. University Presidents and research funds. That is huge to the B1G, and to some, at all, P12 teams. Fewer B12 teams, maybe only one per my previous post.

.

 

i get it big10 will "Cherry pick" teams but have to have AAU and world class research .

but Texas just jumping ship to get their teeth knocked in 4/5 times a year?
OU goes wherever texas goes its a tradition that IF texas has the starter then you go to OU and prove them wrong and vice versa.

what I want to know is who decided hey we can go 10-1 11-0 in our conference or go to SEC and come in third or fourth and hope for a playoff invite??

 

I don't think the other conferences are gonna vote for an expansion at this point. Not with the SEC negotiating in bad faith when they knew Texas and OU were coming. Only way I see it now is a limit on number of teams per conference along with some autobid scenario.

 

The Pac 12 and Big 12 are meeting to discuss possible merger or a scheduling alliance.

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/Article/Conference-realignment-Big-12-Bob-Bowlsby-Pac-12-George-Kliavkoff-meeting-about-possible-merger-scheduling-agreement-168659731/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm

 

The remnants of the never-12 Big 12 need the Pac more than the Pac needs them.

 

Depending on how quickly Oklahoma and Texas depart, there are some scheduling holes for the Big 12 to fill, possibly as early as 2022. I also can see the Pac 12 playing the B12 against the B1G which has started discussing scheduling some non conferences games against the Pac 12.

This said, the PAC 12 desperately needs to get some tv time in the CST, and hopefully, but less likely, EST. From a football revenue perspective, they have always been in a race for last against the B12. That all changes in 2025, and maybe as early as 2022.

It's a shame really. There are some very traditional and classic west coast college football teams, and all the pageantry that goes along with it. I guess that's my fear about this entire debacle so far. Innovation in college football (usually to neutralize talent), largely always began with underdog programs. That, and it is said the NFL is a made of tv event, and the college game is an event one should attend in person. I've found that to be true in my travels attending a lot of games. It bleeds into academics as well. The positive societal impact of getting kids who would have never had the opportunity to go to college, a college education, has a trickle down positive impact on entire communities. I've seen it first hand. It is really remarkable what giving a hand up instead of a hand out can do.

It's such a different deal now. I remember all college games in the Midwest starting at 1PM. When a team got on a run, the ABC semi tractor and trailer would park at that teams stadium for the season. They only had so much broadcast capability back then, and it was fun when your team finally got in the national conversation. Now games start at different times for tv, and in many ways, it's easier for me to travel and attend away games than it is home games. The expense for fans is enormous. It's $10k for me before I even get to pick seats. Maybe that isn't a lot of money based on the trip reports I read on here form time to time (if they are to be believed), but that's still a lot of money for me.

I have an inside perspective on a lot of this, but first and foremost, I'm a college football fan, and while I embrace change, I have concerns that some of the things that made college football special might be going away, and not coming back. Some of this will benefit my teams recruiting, but still, most of the schools that are going to be thrown under the bus don't deserve this. And some schools are going to get thrown under the bus.

 

I agree west coast teams need to have games in CST slots , pac12 should of did deals with big ten and big 12 years ago.
have late afternoon specialty games like usc/texas at 4pm to 7pm slot the vince young vs the"greatest team ever" rematches

or ucla/oklahoma the old we had aikman broke his leg and he became a star there. glitz of la as the sooners invade.

then you have all those great rose bowl matchups !
why not have had michigan/ohio state/michigan state etc.. come down to cali

or cali teams go up in the snow late in the season ? that is made for tv must see!

imagine oregon/ou ? so many things easily done.

5/6 years ago.

 

It is amazing how many SEC teams have refused to do a home/home with Oregon.

I'm a homer, I admit it, but the Pac will stay P/M time zones. I've been wrong often in the past, too, however. Using the current TV deal to say what should come next is a lazy pretext to exclaim the Pac's gotta go to/bring in (some of) the Midwest. Scott was so far in over his head and now we have MGM Resorts in our camp, so to say.

 

If MLB set its playoffs like CFB the NL East would not have a seat at the table.

 

The NL east is so bad the Cardinals would only be 3 games out if there were not in the Central.

 

Ken, you have said many true things, but this is quite possibly the truest.

 

Report: Big Ten, ACC, Pac-12 in 'high-level' discussions about forming official alliance.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-big-ten-acc-pac-12-in-high-level-discussions-about-forming-alliance-sec-texas-oklahoma-big12-014814192.html

 

made more sense with texas and oklahoma in it.

Is there even a BIG 12 after texas and ou leave?

 

Just not sure who would be an equal to Texas and OU?
Is the Mountain West even a conference still?

 

Notre Dame and USC. Some others. Boston College presents a challenge, as do the religious Texas schools. They shouldn't, but they do. Especially with the Pac 12. The travel presents another couple of challenges logistically and politically. If you think through this, a lot of this was an incredibly shrewd business move by the SEC, as was their lobbying for an expanded playoff and behind the scenes support of NIL. There are several layers in the strategy, some not immediately recognizable.

Again, I don't think the B1G needs to make an immediate move. It's been previously hinted at that a scheduling alliance has been in the works. It really benefits the PAC 12 the most as there is no reasonable argument that they remain financially viable (long term) in athletics given their TV times. Scott increased their revenue, but that's a drop in the bucket of what is going to happen.

It's pretty easy to blame the PAC 12's last Commissioner, and it's also pretty popular. That misses the larger underlying structural changes that occurred, driven by large turnover in Chancellors, Presidents and Athletic Directors. So the popular sentiment is to blame Scott for a long term TV contract, when the leadership at that time supported this. But the goal posts got moved, and that was that. The ACC did something similar, but with different results (for lots of reasons, some not within the PAC12's control). None of this is any different than what other conferences are now facing due to recent developments. Life doesn't seem very fair, but it is what it is, not what we want it to be.

I was involved in the B1G's last alignment, and also their (evolving) position on Covid last season. I can tell you the Athletic Directors have an incredibly difficult job, and have to give acceptable answers to many interests, not all of whom agree or have the same agendas. Much like an offensive coordinator, they get unfairly crapped on a lot by people who have never been in charge of anything, and frankly, have no clue. By necessity, due to what I do, I sat in a lot of meetings with attorneys. I can tell you that this is a very complicated thing, and TV is but one small part of this.

Back to the broader point about the future of college football for college football purists. I read through this thread briefly. it looks like we have fans of several different schools. Iowa, Marshall and Oregon are three I recall. Think about this. These three schools today are either on the inside, some more precariously than others, or have a shot through a G5 arrangement. If this thing plays out like it could, all three of those schools could end up in the same place the leftovers of the B12 are right now. And that's the tip of the iceberg.

 

Your first thought goes to football in this subject of realignment. It pays the bills. Travel is one other consideration.
College teams play 11-12-or13 game seasons. Other sports play many more per year. Geography and some sense of time has to be considered at some point or at least a team package on frequent flier miles.
(imagine flying to a distant campus for a volleyball or basketball game and back to campus multiple times). Distances should be a major factor between conference foes.

 

Geography, logistics, Title IX, non-revenue sports and California's state funded travel ban are all very real.

Football (and sometimes basketball) pays the bills. Football is a large part of Title IX's and non-revenue sports feasibility. A crap ton of political and Constitutional issues.

As I mentioned, it isn't just about media revenue, it's an incredibly complicated issue. And most of us (presumably) just want college football.