NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards

Discussions by Conference:
 
NCAA Map
  It is currently Mon Feb 08, 2016 11:32 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1166 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 74, 75, 76, 77, 78
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:54 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 489
Five super conferences? How about a more tidy 4 @ 16 each? Nope, not when it comes to money.

There are two real super conferences, and three slightly less than super. That's implied by Stewart Mandel in Fox Sports mailbag when asked the question "does the Big 12 finally end its dysfunctional behavior and expand to make a title game meaningful, ending the European caste system imposed on that league by Texas and its Longhorn Network?":

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... day-012016"


"There may be five major conferences as determined on the football field, but in the larger industry of college athletics, we will soon have the Power Two and the Slightly-Less-Powerful Three. Simply put, the SEC and Big Ten are distancing themselves from everybody else. According to USA Today, the SEC earned a staggering $527.4 million in the 2015 fiscal year, its first with both SEC Network and College Football Playoff revenue. That's up 60 percent from just a year earlier. The Big Ten distributed $448 million last school year, and that number should rise considerably with its upcoming TV contract. The Big 12, by contrast, earned less than half that SEC number, though on par with the ACC and Pac-12."


So in answering the question in the mailbag; if the B12 expands, that does not get them in the economic elite among power conferences.

What about the ACC? The ACC has the numbers, are in the heavily populated east coast, and cannot launch a network of their own. What's the hold-back? Wrong combination of schools? Not being proactive early enough with negotiations? Bad time to negotiate with ESPN or anyone else?

According to Mandel's views, the PAC12 could get there if they expanded with Oklahoma and Texas, which would demand a more lucrative network and revenue output close to matching the B1G and SEC or at least distancing themselves from the B12 and ACC, comparatively.

Obviously, being in the B1G or the SEC is the place to be. They are out-pacing the other three. It is super two.
And if either or both go to 16, they will have their way in picks when, not if options open. That may bode well for schools such as North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame (if go FT conference fb), maybe Clemson, maybe FSU. Ouch to the ACC! Location matters.

Maybe Muskie's theme has merit. The finances shall make it happen. How many years is any GoR going to hold together or be extended when the divide between lesser three and the super two grows more profound? The ACC will get extracted by four. Then the PAC12 makes their picks from the B12 brood. So, then three super conferences.

And the chosen remnant schools combine to create an assembled fourth, still somewhat less financially viable than the top three, but enough to claim separation above any G5.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2016 1:47 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1183
Location: Columbus, OH
louisvillecard01 wrote:
Five super conferences? How about a more tidy 4 @ 16 each? Nope, not when it comes to money.

There are two real super conferences, and three slightly less than super. That's implied by Stewart Mandel in Fox Sports mailbag when asked the question "does the Big 12 finally end its dysfunctional behavior and expand to make a title game meaningful, ending the European caste system imposed on that league by Texas and its Longhorn Network?":

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... day-012016" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"


"There may be five major conferences as determined on the football field, but in the larger industry of college athletics, we will soon have the Power Two and the Slightly-Less-Powerful Three. Simply put, the SEC and Big Ten are distancing themselves from everybody else. According to USA Today, the SEC earned a staggering $527.4 million in the 2015 fiscal year, its first with both SEC Network and College Football Playoff revenue. That's up 60 percent from just a year earlier. The Big Ten distributed $448 million last school year, and that number should rise considerably with its upcoming TV contract. The Big 12, by contrast, earned less than half that SEC number, though on par with the ACC and Pac-12."


So in answering the question in the mailbag; if the B12 expands, that does not get them in the economic elite among power conferences.

What about the ACC? The ACC has the numbers, are in the heavily populated east coast, and cannot launch a network of their own. What's the hold-back? Wrong combination of schools? Not being proactive early enough with negotiations? Bad time to negotiate with ESPN or anyone else?

According to Mandel's views, the PAC12 could get there if they expanded with Oklahoma and Texas, which would demand a more lucrative network and revenue output close to matching the B1G and SEC or at least distancing themselves from the B12 and ACC, comparatively.

Obviously, being in the B1G or the SEC is the place to be. They are out-pacing the other three. It is super two.
And if either or both go to 16, they will have their way in picks when, not if options open. That may bode well for schools such as North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame (if go FT conference fb), maybe Clemson, maybe FSU. Ouch to the ACC! Location matters.

Maybe Muskie's theme has merit. The finances shall make it happen. How many years is any GoR going to hold together or be extended when the divide between lesser three and the super two grows more profound? The ACC will get extracted by four. Then the PAC12 makes their picks from the B12 brood. So, then three super conferences.

And the chosen remnant schools combine to create an assembled fourth, still somewhat less financially viable than the top three, but enough to claim separation above any G5.


louisvillecard--

It always feels good to get a shout out on this board. The power structure is clearly such that the SEC and Big Ten are on top and the other 3 are trailing behind. The Pac 12 has the easiest path to getting on par or close to the Power 2 and that's by adding Texas, Oklahoma, and a friend for each of them. Aside from renegade components of both the Big 12 and ACC teaming up to join the top programs of both leagues into one umbrella those two leagues will forever be in the shadows of the Power 2. My guess is that if the Pac 12 ever becomes the Pac 16 then the Big Ten and SEC will take advantage of the chaos to each snag a pair of ACC schools.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:23 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7817
SportsPolitico blog article discussing "possible" reasons why the ACC sponsored FB Champ game deregulation proposal was recently defeated.Link at http://sportspolitico.com/2016/01/20/is ... he-big-ten


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 3:04 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:04 pm
Posts: 489
freaked4collegefb wrote:
SportsPolitico blog article discussing "possible" reasons why the ACC sponsored FB Champ game deregulation proposal was recently defeated.Link at http://sportspolitico.com/2016/01/20/is ... he-big-ten"


Freaked, good job in posting the above. It certainly pulls together much of what has already been said.

When that NCAA ruling came out, it surprised many. Folks forgot or did not know it was the ACC that presented the original proposal to deregulate CCGs' and divisional requirements. The B12 piggybacked on this due to their own issues with getting positioned better following the first 4-team playoff selection process, and do so without expanding membership if they so choose.

The feud between the B1G and the ACC has roots beyond the focus on competition for the northeast corridor. The B1G hated that the ACC gave membership to Notre Dame, particularly without being a full football member. It considerably shifted the blame for the move from Notre Dame to the ACC. The ACC giving Maryland such difficulty in negotiating the financial terms for leaving was another sore point. The ACC's opposition to B1G-favored satellite camps for recruiting was not appreciated.

The SEC collaborating with the B12 concerning the creation of the Champion's Bowl was a big slight to the ACC. Both the B1G and the SEC don't want divisions deregulated. But they made the exception for the B12 to play round-robin with ten members.

Maybe the B1G and SEC were showing the B12 some kindness after the 2010-13 period extractions. I believe it is more about TV executives also being involved, and the B12 is not a particular target for further expansion by the SEC and B1G. Beyond the GoR, the remaining few attractive schools in the B12 are complicated given certain associations/sister schools in the conference, plus matters such as the LHN. It's the PAC12 (who abstained on the vote) that may have the greater interest in the future of the B12.

The ACC's leadership has not cultivated broader allies. Will Swofford be able to fix this? Their negotiations for an ACC network have gone poorly, so far, with ESPN.

I still believe the SEC and the B1G are each aiming for 16 eventually. The B1G wants Notre Dame for #15 or #16. That is still their goal. The SEC wants UNC (maybe NCSU as a fallback) with another from the UVA, Duke, or VPI mix. I would not be surprised if the B1G and the SEC are found to be secretly collaborating about this.

It'll take awhile, but financial disparity can force movement quicker than anticipated.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:02 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2954
Location: Phoenix Arizona
louisvillecard01 wrote:
freaked4collegefb wrote:
SportsPolitico blog article discussing "possible" reasons why the ACC sponsored FB Champ game deregulation proposal was recently defeated.Link at http://sportspolitico.com/2016/01/20/is ... he-big-ten" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;"


Freaked, good job in posting the above. It certainly pulls together much of what has already been said.

When that NCAA ruling came out, it surprised many. Folks forgot or did not know it was the ACC that presented the original proposal to deregulate CCGs' and divisional requirements. The B12 piggybacked on this due to their own issues with getting positioned better following the first 4-team playoff selection process, and do so without expanding membership if they so choose.

The feud between the B1G and the ACC has roots beyond the focus on competition for the northeast corridor. The B1G hated that the ACC gave membership to Notre Dame, particularly without being a full football member. It considerably shifted the blame for the move from Notre Dame to the ACC. The ACC giving Maryland such difficulty in negotiating the financial terms for leaving was another sore point. The ACC's opposition to B1G-favored satellite camps for recruiting was not appreciated.

The SEC collaborating with the B12 concerning the creation of the Champion's Bowl was a big slight to the ACC. Both the B1G and the SEC don't want divisions deregulated. But they made the exception for the B12 to play round-robin with ten members.

Maybe the B1G and SEC were showing the B12 some kindness after the 2010-13 period extractions. I believe it is more about TV executives also being involved, and the B12 is not a particular target for further expansion by the SEC and B1G. Beyond the GoR, the remaining few attractive schools in the B12 are complicated given certain associations/sister schools in the conference, plus matters such as the LHN. It's the PAC12 (who abstained on the vote) that may have the greater interest in the future of the B12.

The ACC's leadership has not cultivated broader allies. Will Swofford be able to fix this? Their negotiations for an ACC network have gone poorly, so far, with ESPN.

I still believe the SEC and the B1G are each aiming for 16 eventually. The B1G wants Notre Dame for #15 or #16. That is still their goal. The SEC wants UNC (maybe NCSU as a fallback) with another from the UVA, Duke, or VPI mix. I would not be surprised if the B1G and the SEC are found to be secretly collaborating about this.

It'll take awhile, but financial disparity can force movement quicker than anticipated.

I agree with you LouisvilleCard01.

It is hard to fill sorry for the ACC which basically started the modern raiding wars taking out the former BCS Big East league.

Power conference are only looking out for themselves and will only help another league if there are benefits.

The Pac 12 most likely did not vote for the deregulation of the CCG since there were no benefits to that league.

The ACC issues are factored into basketball orientation when football has been driving the financial train for the last 20 plus years.

It did not help the ACC perception for what ever political reasoning to avoid taking West Virginia which arguably had the most recent football or BCS success in the last decade over the more basketball traditional schools such as Syracuse.

You can forgive the first ACC raid of mistakenly taking Boston College which is located in a pro NFL market. This first raid appeared at the time to be good for TV rights and payouts when Miami was good in football.

The perception would have been worse if the state of Virginia had not forced football orientated school of Virginia Tech over Syracuse.

When the Pac 12 was trying to become the Pac 16, the ACC once again panicked and expanded with Syracuse and Pitt over better football schools taking the old Big East approach to expansion.

Once the Pac 16 plan failed, the SEC backed off on taking Clemson and Florida State for 16, the ACC was stuck with two more basketball type schools.

Before anyone objects, ESPN reported at the time of the Pac 16 plan, the SEC was ready to expand with Missouri, Florida State, Clemson, and Texas A&M if A&M would join the SEC over the Pac 16.

Adding Notre Dame as a partial member was so old Big Eastishes, it just had perception issues written all over it as a power league for football.

Less recap, the ACC potential conference network which has to be started by ESPN would overlap Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Kentucky markets of the SEC network leaving only North Carolina and Virginia as the only true southern football markets not covered by the SEC network.

Maryland is long gone to the Big Ten and Pitt is overshadowed by Penn State of the BTN.

This leaves Syracuse and Boston College as the other markets that really do not care much about college football.

Replays of college football games are a good souce of filler for these conference networks during the off season.

Any wonder ESPN has not helped the ACC lauch a network. It is not personal and just business or more likely college football business.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:40 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1183
Location: Columbus, OH
I Tend to look at the ACC from the stand point of how much tv value each individual school brings to the league. Florida St and Clemson are some of the biggest money makers so to cripple them you need to take out those two. Here is a novel idea:

in order to to get into North Carolina and Virginia grab Florida St and Clemson too. I think the goal should be to grab Virginia Tech, Virginia, Duke, UNC, Florida St, and Clemson. Take Georgia Tech too if you can deal Missouri to the Big Ten. The end result is a 20 team SEC that completely owns the South.

That means two groups of two with full round robin if we are sticking with the current rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 30, 2016 11:21 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1726
I am not necessary disagreeing in concept what some of the above posts, in part, convey. Certain aspects could unfold in that direction. I just don't expect new expansion activity to unfold in a tidy manner and yielding anything near equity.

Realistically, it is difficult to envision there will be 4 super conferences at 16 apiece. I do expect conferences such as the SEC and B1G shall reach 16 someday. Conferences any larger than that shall have a very difficult time with their scheduling models in football and problems determining conference champions based on quantity of members. If conference play remains 8 or 9 games, or even if it goes to 10 games, 16 is about the maximum for reasonable compatibility. It's more than enough for basketball, and all other collegiate sports offered by a conference.

I don't see a consolidation of the important remnants of the B12 and the ACC after additional BIG, SEC, and PAC12 expansion activity. I doubt also, that B12 and ACC vulnerabilities to the point of new extractions would coincide at a precise moment.

Suppose the ACC did lose 2 to 4 schools to the SEC and/or the B1G. The ACC could replace, and in some instances, depending on which schools were extracted, possibly end up being not so diminished in overall value. Schools such as Cincinnati, UConn, Temple, UCF, ECU, etc. are already in the ACC footprint; or they could broaden the footprint with types such as Tulane, Rice, and Memphis. OK, such schools do not have the overall dynamics of schools such as UNC, FSU, and UVA, but they would be enough to maintain P5 status as it is defined today.

If the ACC somehow received a full time commitment from Notre Dame in football, plus were able to add a strong fb school such as West Virginia, I believe the ACC could get on par with the PAC12 in power perception. Part of the foundation for that formula got shot down with the recent NCAA vote. It was not that the other P5 conferences viewed the ACC, necessarily, as the weakest link, rather it was viewed as an attempted move by the ACC to have the option to negate divisions, which could have broad implications inside and outside the ACC.

The one B12 school that really belongs in the ACC is West Virginia. For schools such as FSU, Clemson, GT, VPI, and Miami, to head for the B12, it would require a monumental financial deal which the B12 and their TV providers cannot or would not offer.
There are only three or so B12 schools, including Texas, OU, and maybe oSu, that would make any formal association look relatively feasible, and the geography is a wide divide, even if distinct east-west divisions could be structured. Kansas, KSU, and ISU are respectable schools, but don't offer enough for members of another P5 conference in a different part of the country, to gravitate in mass to them. And how could these ACC schools be sure Texas and OU shall remain permanent to the B12? Whose going to can their G0R first, or who is more likely to renew their GoR when the time comes?

I believe the whole format will be a pecking order. Some P5 conferences are going to be even stronger compared to others. Rather than a move toward equity in value, separation shall grow.

* B1G and the SEC outdistance the rest, financially and viewership power.

*The PAC12 could get closer and consistent with the above, but only if they expanded with 2 to 4 marquee schools.

*The B12 and the ACC will remain in the P5 ballpark, but distinctly less than the top two in marketing value.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 12:21 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1566
Honestly, if the ACC lost UNC and Duke to the SEC, it may work out for the best.

Get NDfb, add WVU, UConn, and Cincy and the ACC would be pretty stacked.

Losing UNC will hurt fb a little bit but adding ND more than offsets that. WVU is an improvement on Duke fb. So at the end of the day their football gets a big boost.

Losing UNC and Duke will hurt their bball rep some, but UConn help alleviate some of that but not all. Though to be fair their bball was pretty intense to begin with (they just recently added Syracuse and ND) but losing two bluebloods will always sting.

I feel similarly if they lose UVA to the B1G too. Basically while these schools are good all around athletically and especially academically, their not top tier fb powerhouses, and that's what the ACC is considered a weaker conference.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 10:00 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1183
Location: Columbus, OH
TKthunder wrote:
Honestly, if the ACC lost UNC and Duke to the SEC, it may work out for the best.

Get NDfb, add WVU, UConn, and Cincy and the ACC would be pretty stacked.

Losing UNC will hurt fb a little bit but adding ND more than offsets that. WVU is an improvement on Duke fb. So at the end of the day their football gets a big boost.

Losing UNC and Duke will hurt their bball rep some, but UConn help alleviate some of that but not all. Though to be fair their bball was pretty intense to begin with (they just recently added Syracuse and ND) but losing two bluebloods will always sting.

I feel similarly if they lose UVA to the B1G too. Basically while these schools are good all around athletically and especially academically, their not top tier fb powerhouses, and that's what the ACC is considered a weaker conference.


I don't see Notre Dame bringing their football into a conference that just lost two key members. From a perception standpoint it would look terrible. If two schools leave the ACC for the SEC they are likely to lose two more to the Big Ten as "open season" would be declared on the ACC and schools will be anxious to get out to avoid being left behind.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:39 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1726
The SEC is in a very good situation at 14. There appears near zero pressure to expand. The SEC is making really good money right now, and that's unlikely to change. However, depending what may happen in other conferences, mainly the B1G, could prompt the SEC to expand with high value schools that would be available.

One factor about the Virginia schools: UVA and VPI. The Virginia government, via its governor at the time, used considerable political influence to get VPI in the ACC over a decade ago. When questions arose several years back, during the brief expansion craze, about VPI possibly going to the SEC, and the rumored courtship of UVA by the B1G, there were expectations and pressure for both to remain together in the ACC. I don't think either wanted to leave at the time. If one of them tried to leave for another conference, while leaving the sister school in a diminished situation, that would not go over well in Virginia governance.

The SEC, allegedly, did make a pitch for UNC-Duke several years back when it looked like the ACC was getting shaky. That noted, those two would probably be the last ones to be willing to leave the ACC. I just think schools such as Pitt, FSU, Miami, Syracuse, BC, and maybe GT and Louisville, would comparatively, be open to entertaining offers from one or the other of two conferences, the SEC or the B1G. Unless the SEC changed their position on market footprints, states whereby the SEC already covers would not be in play. NCSU may be willing to hear SEC offers on the basis of more promised revenue, along with having a desire not to be so overshadowed with the political dominance of nearby UNC (w/ Duke). NCSU is under the same governing board as UNC, so there would be added hurdles if they sought to leave.

GoR's put a huge damper on speculation for anything happening anytime soon with a host of quality schools, including OU, whatever they eventually do or not do.
-------------------

Related article to SEC expansion:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2610 ... h-14-teams"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:42 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:47 am
Posts: 1183
Location: Columbus, OH
The state legislatures in Virginia and North Carolina have a vested interest in keeping their state supported schools in the most profitable and highest levels of competition. The Big Ten and SEC meanwhile want to be in as many markets as possible to grow their cable subscription revenue and conventional wisdom says that each really only has comfortable room for two more members. To me the smartest thing for those legislatures to do is to lobby to put their academic flagships into the Big Ten and their land grant schools in the SEC and pass laws in each state requiring them to play annually in every sport. At this point, its in their best interest to split up their top two state schools.

Meanwhile, if I am a legislator in South Carolina, Georgia, or Florida I would be fighting to get both of the two biggest athletic programs in the state in the more lucrative SEC.

Personally, I think the SEC should create an 18-24 member mega conference similar to the original Southern Conference that most of those schools were in, who at it's largest boasted 23 members. Grabbing the best brands and markets from the Big 12 and ACC would effectively give them over half of the college football market and dramatically increase they payouts they could demand from the networks.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1166 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 74, 75, 76, 77, 78

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group