The Bishin Cutter wrote:
sec03: a lot of good information in that. So, you don't think WVU stands a chance getting an invitation ever? The strikes against them, deserved or not, are what they are, but are they so out of the race that you think the book's closed?
If the ACC cannot be broken, from UVA on down through Miami, and the SEC was expanding to 16 or so, I could see a scenario whereby WVU may be the last one in due to less desirable alternatives. That means movement in the B12 is open and options for the SEC are tight. I don't think the SEC has an attitude about WVU on the same level as the ACC and B1G have shown, though some similar perceptions may exist. For the SEC, from 1990 on, they simply have had more preferred candidates to accept. Will Alabama, Missouri, or Florida want to fly into Morgantown fairly regularly? WVU's task would be to convince the SEC they can make them a nice profit.
[/quote]I think the whole footprint-driven expansion model will quiet down as cable braces for more consumer-friendly options and packaging/bundling.[/quote]
With trends per streaming and catering to consumer interests to have avenues for independent selections for access to programming, the traditional concept for marketing telecasts shall change/evolve. While conferences may modify or adjust their perceptions about marketing, there's still the competition for in-footprint recruits and keeping an appreciable level of attention from regional and local media.
Frankly, I think, conferences and networks have paid too much attention to major population centers regarding expansion. Look at these efforts by the B1G and the ACC to claim the NYC metro region. On the other hand, look what the media has done to promote U.S. soccer and the World Cup this summer? On this matter, Ann Coulter may have a real point. But still, teams in college sports have largely retained their identities based on localized appeal. Even Notre Dame and the service academies each have somewhat select demographics.
I recently read, but don't recall the article, that the SEC Commissioner Slive and Notre Dame AD Swarbrick worked closely together to advance the playoff format and got their way. Neimus/Bowlsby from the B12 were in tandem--but assuring there were no rules to penalize on not having a CCG . Slive wanted the overall "4 best"--implying potential multiple placements from a given conference. And of course, Swarbrick wanted to make certain the composition was not limited to four separate conference champions. Delany had been favoring the assured top conference placement concept, and looked to the PAC12 as being their ally.
Got to hand it to Notre Dame, they are brilliant operatives. For any given situation or issue, they know how to cultivate allies and IOUs'.
The value of the Rose Bowl for the B1G has been immense through the years. However, the B1G may want to diversity their high level strategic engagements beyond the PAC12. The newer B1G-BE bb challenge is one thing, but do more with those guys down south, particularly for fb. Notre Dame figured that out.