Conference Realignment

Richard7125

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
466
I think we're talking past each other. No one's talking about adding weak teams.
Kind of sort of. The remaining teams in the Pac12 and Big12 are very mediocre compared to Alabama, UGA, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Auburn, Texas AM, LSU. The SEC doesn't want to add more kentuckys and South Carolinas and definitely not more Vandys. The Big10 is in the same boat but perhaps not quite as top heavy as the SEC. There's a reason USC/UCLA left the Pac12 and Texas/Oklahoma left the Big12. The rest of the teams in those conferences were mediocre and diminished their value.

I agree Oregon is not mediocre, but there really isn't anyone else in the Big12 or Pac12 that compares to the top programs in either the SEC or Big10. Clemson and FSU would be comparable (maybe Miami), but they won't be available for another decade.

For the same reasons above, i don't think the ACC should add any (except ND). There just aren't any that ring a bell. I also don't think it makes sense to add Oregon as the only West Coast team and Oregon simply isn't strong enough to package with several other mediocre west coast teams. Just my two-bits.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,198
Kind of sort of. The remaining teams in the Pac12 and Big12 are very mediocre compared to Alabama, UGA, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Auburn, Texas AM, LSU. The SEC doesn't want to add more kentuckys and South Carolinas and definitely not more Vandys. The Big10 is in the same boat but perhaps not quite as top heavy as the SEC. There's a reason USC/UCLA left the Pac12 and Texas/Oklahoma left the Big12. The rest of the teams in those conferences were mediocre and diminished their value.

I agree Oregon is not mediocre, but there really isn't anyone else in the Big12 or Pac12 that compares to the top programs in either the SEC or Big10. Clemson and FSU would be comparable (maybe Miami), but they won't be available for another decade.

For the same reasons above, i don't think the ACC should add any (except ND). There just aren't any that ring a bell. I also don't think it makes sense to add Oregon as the only West Coast team and Oregon simply isn't strong enough to package with several other mediocre west coast teams. Just my two-bits.
I think you undersell Washington a good bit. A few years ago Forbes had them ranked as the 19th most valuable program in college football. One behind USC and 6 ahead of Clemson. They would be a major addition to any conference.
 

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
9,095
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Kind of sort of. The remaining teams in the Pac12 and Big12 are very mediocre compared to Alabama, UGA, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Auburn, Texas AM, LSU. The SEC doesn't want to add more kentuckys and South Carolinas and definitely not more Vandys. The Big10 is in the same boat but perhaps not quite as top heavy as the SEC. There's a reason USC/UCLA left the Pac12 and Texas/Oklahoma left the Big12. The rest of the teams in those conferences were mediocre and diminished their value.

I agree Oregon is not mediocre, but there really isn't anyone else in the Big12 or Pac12 that compares to the top programs in either the SEC or Big10. Clemson and FSU would be comparable (maybe Miami), but they won't be available for another decade.

For the same reasons above, i don't think the ACC should add any (except ND). There just aren't any that ring a bell. I also don't think it makes sense to add Oregon as the only West Coast team and Oregon simply isn't strong enough to package with several other mediocre west coast teams. Just my two-bits.
Nothing you've said am I in disagreement with (except maybe Washington. They have been a dominant team in the not-to-distant past. At least as much as UCLA). My point is that there are strategic adds that may not be about money-right-now that the leagues could potentially be looking at. It's not all about increasing the pay-out to each member team. That is the entirety of what I was saying.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,397
I think you undersell Washington a good bit. A few years ago Forbes had them ranked as the 19th most valuable program in college football. One behind USC and 6 ahead of Clemson. They would be a major addition to any conference.

B1G wants to go national. All the tea leaves are there. USC/UCLA have blue blood brand clout, but Oregon and Washington are two of the most watched schools on the West Coast. You pair them with USC/UCLA and Stanford/Cal and you have all major brands and media markets on the West Coast. Those markets also represent some the heaviest B1G alumni bases across the country (LA and San Fran being a top 5 B1G alumni base). It also gives B1G "West" natural compelling rivals.

When the ACC GOR gets worked out, B1G will apply the same methodology to ACC targets.
 

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,902
I think you undersell Washington a good bit. A few years ago Forbes had them ranked as the 19th most valuable program in college football. One behind USC and 6 ahead of Clemson. They would be a major addition to any conference.
And the fact B10 didn't have interest in them now when they could have them basically for free, when in another year or two there will be a new deal and new media rights, says alot about how big of brand you have to be to get an invite right now.

I still don't think the big 2 will ultimately add many more schools - 2-4 each at most, and it may occur in the next 3 years or it might occur over the next decade.
FSU is not in a particularly strong spot right now. They don't bring any major markets, they have a fanbase issue (they have one of the lower % of scanned to announced attendance among P5 schools at 57%) and their FB program is not strong right now. Clemson is clearly the stronger brand right now. If FSU doesn't start to improve quickly and get its fanbase back on board then it will have issues trying to move up.

If I was ranking programs right now for potential movement it would probably be
ND (eyeballs - 7th largest average viewership in college football, - both of the Big 2 would bend over backwards to add them to their conference, but ND has made it clear it isn't interested at this time, we'll see if that changes in a couple of years)


Clemson (eyeballs though smaller and more regionalized than ND)

Oregon (large state school, Nike money)

UNC (large state school, neither of the Big 2 have presence in the state that is one of the 10 largest and growing), Washington (large state school, big market), Miami (because they are showing they have alums who will spend money like crazy)
FSU (mostly based on past success, if the program doesn't get better than it falls back to the everybody else category)
everybody else.

SEC largely prizes Sunbelt schools with large fanbases over all else.
B10 is a little more complicated. They tend to favor large schools (preferably 'the school' in the state), preferably in a larger market and with a good academic research University that it can add to its consortium.


I don't think there are alot of attractive options for the Big 2.
ND is obvious.
In the PAC10 both Oregon and Washington have some value, but not enough to be automatic invites.
Stanford has value to the B10 if it could guarantee getting ND with them, but unless it was a guarantee than the value isn't there.
There are no schools left in the B12 that really move the needle imo.
In the ACC, Clemson is probably the most attractive but you can make a strong case that UNC might be more attractive overall (though UNC would never ever leave the ACC)
FSU and Miami have some value but below the 2 other ACC schools
GT could have a little value for the B10, but not if they have to deal with any legal and/or financial issues. GT has no value for SEC and doesn't fit what the SEC looks for at all.

I also find it funny that fans are like 'we should offer ourselves to the highest bidder'. You have to have bidders first. I'm sure both conferences have had schools reach out to them, but right now all they are doing is basically creating a waiting list and probably prioritizing and at some point in the future when it makes sense they may start moving on their waiting list. But just like college admissions, the majority of entities on that waiting list will never hear their name called.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,397
... Cannon fodder...

That's the other thing people keep leaving out. You can't have a conference of 20 teams, and 20 teams thinking they're all the captain. USC and UCLA will not want to travel 2000 miles to get beat up by Ohio State/Michigan/Mich State/Penn State/Minnesotta then head back that same day...only to cross the country again the following week to get another pummeling. That's why it makes no sense that they're on an island on the West Coast. Other West Coast teams will be added eventually, and I think the data suggests we know who those teams will be.

The SEC will be fascinating to watch with the additions of Texas and OU. Especially Texas who has had almost no recent success, but walks into a room thinking they own it. You can credit them for single handedly bullying everyone in the Big 12 (which caused TX A&M to go to the SEC), then basically destroying the Big 12 last week. What's going to happen when they try that same schtick with 'Bama/UGA/LSU/Florida/Tenn/Ole Miss in the same room? Fireworks.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,397
Some chatter of the ACC and PAC10 looking at a partnership.


There was also a report today that Colorado has come out and said they do not have an interest in joining the B12.

FWIW, folks have been predicting the demise of the ACC for 20 years, it hasn't happened yet. It may, but I don't think it is imminent.
In the short term I don't think either the SEC or the B10 are very interested in adding ACC teams. That could change in the future, but not at the moment.

ND has always sort of been its own beast. It has routinely left money on the table in order to stay independent and play a national schedule. Heck, I believe if you took the money it gets from NBC and added what it gets from the ACC for its non-FB sports I think that is actually less than it would make if it just joined the ACC in all sports.
The biggest thing for ND has always been playing on both coasts on having alot of eyeballs (it is currently 7th in avg viewership - behind 6 teams from the SEC and B10).

Always fun to go back in time and see what aged well and what didn't. I wrote this almost exactly a year ago:


Crazy idea time: PAC 12 and ACC combine to form a "national" conference. Both have elite schools in their respective conference, and have blue blood programs in football and basketball. Both conferences have similar mission statements and academic values. Plus, East Coast versus West Coast would angle would be interesting. PAC12 is going through some issues right now, and a "reset" like this for ACC and PAC12 could be a game changer.

...and here we are a year later.
 

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,727
Mentioned before but…B1G has a lot of alumni in SoCal. They have a share of their network, which is cable-based. They do care about cable providers adding their network to certain markets. USC and UCLA send them over the top to make money in SoCal.
It’s not just the schools, it’s the schools in a large B1G market.
USC and UCLA add a critical mass of eyeballs in the right place.
Atlanta is also an important market for them, but we don’t add enough eyeballs at the current state of the program (and the media rights issue is there even if we did)
 

stinger 1957

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,530
I suggest folks watch the press conference that the Pres and AD of Ohio State had with the media RE: the new membership of USC and UCLA, listen what the Pres said about AAU and "BIG" and maybe even more importantly the AD's comments about what the "BIG" gained from this expansion and that they now had the top three media markets in the country. Other things I have seen mentioned indicate the number one driving force behind their invites to join the "BIG" has always been media market size, not the only thing but it has always appeared to be at the top of the list. When they get through they will have big advertisers who want to pay the price to advertise coast to coast, they win the $ battle IMO.
Other than Green Bay how many NFL teams do we see in small media mkts, look at some that have moved out of smaller media mkts over time as well as medium sized media mkts I believe this tells the story where it really is folks, media $$$. GT sits in the 10th largest media mkt. It is GT's only chance to stay in bigtime CFB over the long run IMO. If we were sitting in say Knoxville, TN I don't think the BIG gives a rats *** about GT. I'm not sure the SEC needs GT for ATL media mkt., only helps "BIG" $$ IMO.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,931
That's the other thing people keep leaving out. You can't have a conference of 20 teams, and 20 teams thinking they're all the captain. USC and UCLA will not want to travel 2000 miles to get beat up by Ohio State/Michigan/Mich State/Penn State/Minnesotta then head back that same day...only to cross the country again the following week to get another pummeling. That's why it makes no sense that they're on an island on the West Coast. Other West Coast teams will be added eventually, and I think the data suggests we know who those teams will be.

The SEC will be fascinating to watch with the additions of Texas and OU. Especially Texas who has had almost no recent success, but walks into a room thinking they own it. You can credit them for single handedly bullying everyone in the Big 12 (which caused TX A&M to go to the SEC), then basically destroying the Big 12 last week. What's going to happen when they try that same schtick with 'Bama/UGA/LSU/Florida/Tenn/Ole Miss in the same room? Fireworks.
I think the end game for the mega conferences will be to end up with geographical divisions like the pros. That will mitigate the travel issues to a degree. It also will help deal with the scheduling challenges when you have 24 teams in a conference.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,931
I suggest folks watch the press conference that the Pres and AD of Ohio State had with the media RE: the new membership of USC and UCLA, listen what the Pres said about AAU and "BIG" and maybe even more importantly the AD's comments about what the "BIG" gained from this expansion and that they now had the top three media markets in the country. Other things I have seen mentioned indicate the number one driving force behind their invites to join the "BIG" has always been media market size, not the only thing but it has always appeared to be at the top of the list. When they get through they will have big advertisers who want to pay the price to advertise coast to coast, they win the $ battle IMO.
Other than Green Bay how many NFL teams do we see in small media mkts, look at some that have moved out of smaller media mkts over time as well as medium sized media mkts I believe this tells the story where it really is folks, media $$$. GT sits in the 10th largest media mkt. It is GT's only chance to stay in bigtime CFB over the long run IMO. If we were sitting in say Knoxville, TN I don't think the BIG gives a rats *** about GT. I'm not sure the SEC needs GT for ATL media mkt., only helps "BIG" $$ IMO.
I don't disagree that being in Atlanta is an advantage for GT, but like others have said, it's really more about eyeballs - the size of the team's audience determines the value of the product.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,397
I suggest folks watch the press conference that the Pres and AD of Ohio State had with the media RE: the new membership of USC and UCLA, listen what the Pres said about AAU and "BIG" and maybe even more importantly the AD's comments about what the "BIG" gained from this expansion and that they now had the top three media markets in the country. Other things I have seen mentioned indicate the number one driving force behind their invites to join the "BIG" has always been media market size, not the only thing but it has always appeared to be at the top of the list. When they get through they will have big advertisers who want to pay the price to advertise coast to coast, they win the $ battle IMO.
Other than Green Bay how many NFL teams do we see in small media mkts, look at some that have moved out of smaller media mkts over time as well as medium sized media mkts I believe this tells the story where it really is folks, media $$$. GT sits in the 10th largest media mkt. It is GT's only chance to stay in bigtime CFB over the long run IMO. If we were sitting in say Knoxville, TN I don't think the BIG gives a rats *** about GT. I'm not sure the SEC needs GT for ATL media mkt., only helps "BIG" $$ IMO.

This is why I wrote about Washington and Stanford/Cal. Those schools are in large B1G alumni bases (San Fran/Oakland/San Jose is a top 5 B1G alumni base, Seattle has a alumni concentration almost as large as Atlanta), and both of those markets are top media markets (Bay Area #6, Seattle #12). All of those teams are AAU schools as well.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,397
I think the end game for the mega conferences will be to end up with geographical divisions like the pros. That will mitigate the travel issues to a degree. It also will help deal with the scheduling challenges when you have 24 teams in a conference.

100%. At least that's what the B1G is looking like. I don't think the SEC cares as much about being "national" like the B1G does. Afterall, they've turned themselves into a monster sports entity with just Southern schools and now adding blue blood Southwest schools.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,397
This is why I wrote about Washington and Stanford/Cal. Those schools are in large B1G alumni bases (San Fran/Oakland/San Jose is a top 5 B1G alumni base, Seattle has a alumni concentration almost as large as Atlanta), and both of those markets are top media markets (Bay Area #6, Seattle #12). All of those teams are AAU schools as well.

Let me also add, when looking at rumors, we need to analyze who has the most to lose and the most to gain. Obviously Oregon and Washington want to be in the B1G with USC/UCLA. All the Oregon + Washington to the Big 12 could be to put pressure on the B1G to make a move with Oregon and Washington sooner than later. I think the B1G eventually does that, but they're doing it on their timetable.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,048
I don't disagree that being in Atlanta is an advantage for GT, but like others have said, it's really more about eyeballs - the size of the team's audience determines the value of the product.
It isn't yet. Having a team in the media market still gets more money whether they watch it or not. Getting a Big 10 team in Atlanta could automatically mean to an additional $2 million per month for the Big 10 under the existing contracts just for the Big 10 network.

I don't remember where it was I read this, but someone said that you can build a brand, but you can't build location. Clemson went from a mid tier team to a national powerhouse in 8-10 years. They were not a top ten value team in 2007. It can go the other way also. FSU went from a nobody to a powerhouse to whatever they are now.

Alabama is a powerhouse now. Between Bryant and Saban they weren't. It wasn't that long ago that all of the power teams in the SEC were in the East. Don't fall into the trap of believing that the only thing that determines a team's future value is the recent rankings.
 
Top