ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment | Page 214 | Syracusefan.com

ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment

Well, all of this is about football, and there is a large amount of football talent in the San Diego TV market, which does not have an NFL team. And both ASU and UAZ have a huge number of alums living in southern CA, and both recruit there as much as they recruit AZ. SDSU is the school the Big 12 now needs.
I'm just repeating what Yormark has said. I would have to point out that Connecticut's eastern third is in the Boston metro media market and it's western third is in the NYC metro media market. Just because BC can't carry the water in New England doesn't mean there isn't any water there.
 
Fsu is saber rattling and looking dumber in the process They overvalue themselves and think everyone wants them, which is not the case.
Even the big 2 might be rethinking things after seeing their latest temper tantrum, especially considering they'd be an also-ran in either conference should they ever get in. Who needs another diva biotching and moaning about everything?

They are a big fish in the ACC but would be a bottom half fish in the SEC. Even if they sold out every game, their 4 year avg would have been 10th in the SEC. A few years ago they would have been 13th.

I don’t see why the SEC would even want FSU.

The B18 I get as they need more brands and would like to get into Florida. But then again FSU is more like being in Alabama than Florida. Miami seems like the better choice.

At the end of the day FSU is full of FSU fans. Who the heck wants to deal with that? The school really isn’t a fit.

On top of that they don’t have the tradition that both the B18 and SEC like so much, as FSU was nothing before the 80s.

I am not sure they would even find a home if the GOR was gone. But I bet they think that they are good enough to go Indy and bring in kook gazillions.
 
They are a big fish in the ACC but would be a bottom half fish in the SEC. Even if they sold out every game, their 4 year avg would have been 10th in the SEC. A few years ago they would have been 13th.

I don’t see why the SEC would even want FSU.

The B18 I get as they need more brands and would like to get into Florida. But then again FSU is more like being in Alabama than Florida. Miami seems like the better choice.

At the end of the day FSU is full of FSU fans. Who the heck wants to deal with that? The school really isn’t a fit.

On top of that they don’t have the tradition that both the B18 and SEC like so much, as FSU was nothing before the 80s.

I am not sure they would even find a home if the GOR was gone. But I bet they think that they are good enough to go Indy and bring in kook gazillions.
"Bobby Bowden is not walking through that door"!
 
I think at best in the SEC FSU is another Auburn, and at worst another Miss State.

In the B18 at best another Michigan State and at worst another Nebraska.

In either case no one is going to be crawling over each other to add that.

In the ACC they can be the alpha and make the playoffs most years. Isn’t that easier to recruit to even making only a measly $40M a year? What good is $100M if you go 8-5 and never sniff the playoffs?
 
I'm just repeating what Yormark has said. I would have to point out that Connecticut's eastern third is in the Boston metro media market and it's western third is in the NYC metro media market. Just because BC can't carry the water in New England doesn't mean there isn't any water there.
There never has been. UConn is not going to ever matter in either TV market because it is not Boston, not even MA, and it is not NY. And if somehow it could be both, neither place has cared much about CFB since the 1960s.

Then reality is that there never could have been a BE football without having multiple teams from either south of the Mason-Dixon Line and/or west of the true northeast. Even Pittsburgh is just 30 miles from the OH border and not much farther above the Mason-Dixon Line. JoePa figured that out while he was furious with the BE and wrongly blaming Syracuse for what the little BE schools did. So Joe knew PSU had to either go west to BT or south to ACCm, and at that point, all that ACC basketball remind him far too much of the BE. So he was Hellbent on BT or bust.

I still have some hope that the ACC can be saved as Major/Power conference, which means the ACC keeping its football status, which it can't do if it loses both FSU and Clemson. But if the worst case comes, and those left in the ACC wish too keep the AXCC clearly among there Tier 2 group of leagues, then the ACC must act to replace members with schools that are much more likely to help football. That means doing whatever to takes it get WVU, CIncy, and UCF from the Big 12. Adding USF with that trio. Appalachian St, ECU, James Madison, and Georgia Southern would all be better bets for adding long term football strength than UConn or even Temple.
 
I think at best in the SEC FSU is another Auburn, and at worst another Miss State.

In the B18 at best another Michigan State and at worst another Nebraska.

In either case no one is going to be crawling over each other to add that.

In the ACC they can be the alpha and make the playoffs most years. Isn’t that easier to recruit to even making only a measly $40M a year? What good is $100M if you go 8-5 and never sniff the playoffs?
Your problem is you need to stop thinking intelligently and start thinking like a moron university president
 
Again it will be really interesting to see how the renewal for B12 goes in what 2031? If ESPN and Fox say sorry B12 but SEC and B18 are looking for increases and we need to divert funds, that could result in some favorable poaching for the ACC. I believe our contract steadily climbs. We could easily snap up some of the better B12 remnants at that time. Edit: Then again that may not happen in which case so what? We are all nothing but water anyways. :)
 
Again it will be really interesting to see how the renewal for B12 goes in what 2031? If ESPN and Fox say sorry B12 but SEC and B18 are looking for increases and we need to divert funds, that could result in some favorable poaching for the ACC. I believe our contract steadily climbs. We could easily snap up some of the better B12 remnants at that time. Edit: Then again that may not happen in which case so what? We are all nothing but water anyways. :)
Despite what the FSU paper tigers think the ACC is good for another 7-10 years. And the landscape will be vastly different by then. Sit tight & wait it out...there's really no other choice
 
Again it will be really interesting to see how the renewal for B12 goes in what 2031? If ESPN and Fox say sorry B12 but SEC and B18 are looking for increases and we need to divert funds, that could result in some favorable poaching for the ACC. I believe our contract steadily climbs. We could easily snap up some of the better B12 remnants at that time. Edit: Then again that may not happen in which case so what? We are all nothing but water anyways. :)
Agree with this.

Everyone assumes the rights for new contracts will continue to rise at the remarkable rates we have seen for the last 15 years or so.

I think it is reasonable to think cord cutting is here to stay.

I think it is reasonable to say a lot of ESPN's revenue before cord cutting was from customers who were not interested in ESPN and will not pay for it ala carte (same goes for Fox).

I think it is reasonable to say that NIL, pay for play, insta-transfer and conference realignment are all things that will alienate some college sports fans, to the point that they stop caring.

If you accept this, I think you have to accept that there is a very real possibility that the revenue generated by ESPN and Fox is not going to return to the levels they were at a couple of years ago.

They might never get that high again.

Conferences might be lucky to keep the revenues they have in the contracts they have now the next go around. Some conferences could see decreases in revenue.

Hard to know what the world will look like in 2031 but right now, I expect that the B12 is getting less money than they are getting now. If the conference does well and has much better ratings than they have historically gotten, maybe they can hold the line at the same revenue they are getting now. Texas and Oklahoma are gone and they aren't coming back any time soon.
 
It’s better for the ACC to have FSU it really is but I wish they would have a actually tried it and got screwed over, now we have to hear all this nonsense for another 365 days…… “next year we are out of here” I can hear it now.
It could be that nobody wants them. Being in same state, Gators can veto any SEC opportunity. Not sure if BIg 10 has any interest in southern US. UCF might have veto power in Big 12 as well but don’t know for sure.
 
How will that work when so many football programs rely on taxpayer or student support? No way Rutgers could break away. Too much debt and they still don't make a profit.
It won’t work. I think it is just internet folklore.

If we are looking at brands and markets, it is hard to justify in most cases more than one school from the same area. But that means leaving out teams like Auburn, Michigan State, UCLA, etc. Those fans aren’t going to all of a sudden start rooting for another team. They will watch CFB less.

CFB isn’t the NFL where a team has most of the fans in a single market. Also parity will tarnish brands where in the NFL it keeps more people interested.

Also in the NFL the players are also brands. QBs will last a dozen or so years. In CFB that same QB is there only 2, maybe 3 years. The player turnover in CFB will hurt fans that don’t have their school in a Super League.

Also who in their right mind is subscribing to an app to watch CFB if their school gets left out? You don’t keep those fans.
 
First, decouple the sports. Let each team representing a university seek out the most logical conference for it to be in. If football wishes to attach itself to a conference through thousands of miles away for the big money, let them to it. The schools other teams shouldn't be dragged along with that.

NCAA Division 1 has 133 football playing schools.
NCAA Division 2 has 163 football playing schools.
NCAA Division 3 has 240 football playing schools.
The NAIA, has no discernable reason for its existence, (it was created for the small colleges before the NCAA went to divisions), has 96 football playing schools. They used to have more but many of them have joined the NCAA in D2 or D3.
That's 632 four-year colleges with football teams.

We're almost a quarter of the way through this century. Used a mathematical formula to rank all 632 football programs 1-632 based on their results in this century.

Take the top 72 programs and organize them into eight 9 team conferences that make sense geographically. You play the other 8 conference teams plus four non-conference games, two of which must be from the top 72.

Conference championships are determined by conference records plus tiebreakers, if needed, the first of which is head-to-head. The second could be point differential in conference games.

The eight conference champions play in four New Year's Day Bowl games which will be the quarterfinals of the national championship tournament. The semi-finals would come a week later, hosted by bowl committees, then the title game a week later, also hosted by a bowl committee.

Now you've incorporated the conference schedules into the national playoff. You've kept the bowls alive. And you have a comprehensive playoff with everything being decided on the field, which should eliminate any controversies about who gets to play for the title.

Now take the next 72 programs and do the same thing with them but I'd have their semi-and quarterfinals in December in the home stadiums of the highest ranked teams. Their championships could be in the lesser bowls - but not on New Year's Day, which would be reserved for D1.

Do it again with the next 72, then the next 72 and on down. Each school plays 8 conference games, 2 non-conference games in the same division and two in other divisions - but not above or below the divisions adjacent to theirs. (D4 could play D3 and D5).

632/8 = 8 divisions plus 56 schools for Division 9, which would have 7 conferences. At last, we'd need one wild card - the highest rated non-conference champion.

You'd have (8x7 - 8 =) 48 playoff games taking place in December, followed by 8 championship games and 4 D1 quarterfinals in and around New Year's Day, the D1 semis and the title game. That should be plenty of meaningful action for football fans.

At the end of each decade, I'd have them redo the overall rankings and adjust the divisions so that teams that are dominate on one level have to move up and teams that have had trouble competing on one level have to move down, much like in English soccer. No more North Dakota State winning 9 national championships in 11 years or Mount Union and Whitewater playing for 7 consecutive championships. No more MacAlister losing 50 games in a row or Prairie View losing 80.

Don't worry - nothing ever happens the way I'd want it to happen. ;)
 
Agree with this.

Everyone assumes the rights for new contracts will continue to rise at the remarkable rates we have seen for the last 15 years or so.

I think it is reasonable to think cord cutting is here to stay.

I think it is reasonable to say a lot of ESPN's revenue before cord cutting was from customers who were not interested in ESPN and will not pay for it ala carte (same goes for Fox).

I think it is reasonable to say that NIL, pay for play, insta-transfer and conference realignment are all things that will alienate some college sports fans, to the point that they stop caring.

If you accept this, I think you have to accept that there is a very real possibility that the revenue generated by ESPN and Fox is not going to return to the levels they were at a couple of years ago.

They might never get that high again.

Conferences might be lucky to keep the revenues they have in the contracts they have now the next go around. Some conferences could see decreases in revenue.

Hard to know what the world will look like in 2031 but right now, I expect that the B12 is getting less money than they are getting now. If the conference does well and has much better ratings than they have historically gotten, maybe they can hold the line at the same revenue they are getting now. Texas and Oklahoma are gone and they aren't coming back any time soon.
Quantitative evidence that the trend in linear viewership, and thus future contract raises, is unfavorable.

 
This is not about markets anymore. It’s about how many subscriptions your fan base will buy to see your team on a streaming service. Large state schools are gonna be the winners eventually.
To your point, it’s all about the brands now. But, I believe this makes basketball almost just as important as football. Those individuals would still have to subscribe to the app to watch football or basketball. And Basketball season is 2 months longer than football.
 
To your point, it’s all about the brands now. But, I believe this makes basketball almost just as important as football. Those individuals would still have to subscribe to the app to watch football or basketball. And Basketball season is 2 months longer than football.
I believe that is true as well. But we’re still a small private school….but we do have a very loyal hoops fan base. We probably could sell a separate lax package.
 
I believe that is true as well. But we’re still a small private school….but we do have a very loyal hoops fan base. We probably could sell a separate lax package.
Id hope this is something some highly paid people in the AD and University are already looking to do, by utilizing their programs, talents, and alum contacts throughout the industry
 
It’s better for the ACC to have FSU it really is but I wish they would have a actually tried it and got screwed over, now we have to hear all this nonsense for another 365 days…… “next year we are out of here” I can hear it now.
For 10+ more years... <ugh>
 
Agree with this.

Everyone assumes the rights for new contracts will continue to rise at the remarkable rates we have seen for the last 15 years or so.

I think it is reasonable to think cord cutting is here to stay.

I think it is reasonable to say a lot of ESPN's revenue before cord cutting was from customers who were not interested in ESPN and will not pay for it ala carte (same goes for Fox).

I think it is reasonable to say that NIL, pay for play, insta-transfer and conference realignment are all things that will alienate some college sports fans, to the point that they stop caring.

If you accept this, I think you have to accept that there is a very real possibility that the revenue generated by ESPN and Fox is not going to return to the levels they were at a couple of years ago.

They might never get that high again.

Conferences might be lucky to keep the revenues they have in the contracts they have now the next go around. Some conferences could see decreases in revenue.

Hard to know what the world will look like in 2031 but right now, I expect that the B12 is getting less money than they are getting now. If the conference does well and has much better ratings than they have historically gotten, maybe they can hold the line at the same revenue they are getting now. Texas and Oklahoma are gone and they aren't coming back any time soon.
Cable just dropped below 50%. Streaming now is about 52%. Cable is dead. Its the equivalent of a land line in your home.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,813
Messages
4,729,755
Members
5,925
Latest member
granthath9

Online statistics

Members online
293
Guests online
2,226
Total visitors
2,519


Top Bottom