There is just no way in hell that the third and fourth teams available to the Big 12 right now would turn an unviable 12 team network into a viable 14 team network.
14 works but 12 doesn't. Sure thing.
Unless they are talking about other P5 teams. In that case just LOL at the whole concept.
I think a case could be made that there are several G5 schools that are more valuable than several of the Big 12 schools if the Big 12 was to start a conference from scratch. Or, a case could be made that, based on the addition of Rutgers, the Big 10 schools are the only schools that TV wants to pay for at all, and the rest of college athletics will have to play for free eventually.
Given the relative value of TV rights agreements, I think conference realignment has moved well past logic or financial analysis, and is just making it up as it goes along.
You are applying pieces of the puzzle that don't have anything to do with the actual value of the schools.
For example, part of the reason that Fox spent so much on half the Big 10 T1 rights is they are trying to save their network and they smell some blood in the water with ESPN. Things aren't happening in a vaccum. The timing and length of the contract have a lot to do with the dollar amount.
I really think Fox is being really smart here and their people deserve a lot of credit. ESPN was charging cable providers an insane amount for their channels cord cutting has to be hurting them more than anyone else at the moment because of the right fees they're on the hook for. They knew if they waited it out some of the marquee content would come to them. They get a lot of sheet for copying ESPN, but this seems to be one thing they had their finger on way ahead of time. And the short term (relatively) deals they are signing are not back breakers.You are applying pieces of the puzzle that don't have anything to do with the actual value of the schools.
For example, part of the reason that Fox spent so much on half the Big 10 T1 rights is they are trying to save their network and they smell some blood in the water with ESPN. Things aren't happening in a vaccum. The timing and length of the contract have a lot to do with the dollar amount.
If I'm honest with myself and I'm the B12, I ask if FSU is willing to jump. If yes then I invite either Clemson or Miami to get to 12 or both plus Louisville to get to 14.
I don't think the B12 power brokers GAF about NYC or the northeast market.
The ACC should then invite UCONN and Cinci to get back to 12. USF and UCF have no real value to the ACC, but I'm sure someone will convince them that they do for recruiting purposes.
The only problem would be does the rest of the ACC core head for the B1G and SEC.
Or is the market telling us that the NYC DMA > AAC + CUSA + MWC + Sun Belt? That seems to be a more logical conclusion, and if correct, bodes very well for UConn.The market is telling us that:
Rutgers athletics > AAC + CUSA + MWC + Sun Belt
If you want to read some logic into that, go right ahead.
The problem here is that while the ACC has a lot of private school and small podunk town dead weight, they do actually occupy a lot of prime territory (eyeballs and recruiting) in the southeast. Virginia and the Carolinas is nothing to sneeze at. Florida too.
I question their reach in Georgia however, and DC. They completely blew it in the northeast in a way that I can't understand. I suppose it is possible that FSU would throw in with Texas, knowing it is really only losing the market strength of the Carolinas and Virginia.
Holy cow, as I'm writing this, I managed to convince myself that the B12 is actually in a much better position than the ACC, and I started with the opposite intention.
You are right SubbaBub. FSU would be smart to throw in with the B12 and Texas.
Or is the market telling us that the NYC DMA > AAC + CUSA + MWC + Sun Belt? That seems to be a more logical conclusion, and if correct, bodes very well for UConn.
A month or two ago someone drew up a map of ACC DMA's. Take home message was that while ACC schools have presence in a lot of East Coast States, they don't dominate those states outside of the Carolinas and Va (see: Pitt, Cuse, Clemson, BCU, FSU, UL).The problem here is that while the ACC has a lot of private school and small podunk town dead weight, they do actually occupy a lot of prime territory (eyeballs and recruiting) in the southeast. Virginia and the Carolinas is nothing to sneeze at. Florida too.
I question their reach in Georgia however, and DC. They completely blew it in the northeast in a way that I can't understand. I suppose it is possible that FSU would throw in with Texas, knowing it is really only losing the market strength of the Carolinas and Virginia.
Holy cow, as I'm writing this, I managed to convince myself that the B12 is actually in a much better position than the ACC, and I started with the opposite intention.
You are right SubbaBub. FSU would be smart to throw in with the B12 and Texas.
If I'm honest with myself and I'm the B12, I ask if FSU is willing to jump. If yes then I invite either Clemson or Miami to get to 12 or both plus Louisville to get to 14.
I don't think the B12 power brokers GAF about NYC or the northeast market.
The ACC should then invite UCONN and Cinci to get back to 12. USF and UCF have no real value to the ACC, but I'm sure someone will convince them that they do for recruiting purposes.
The only problem would be does the rest of the ACC core head for the B1G and SEC.
Pitt and Cuse only get another life raft if the B12 is heavily into the WV moonshine. They've added nothing to the ACC. The B12 will look at Southern FB schools first because that's what they are. I think they would take Miami to squeeze the SEC along with FSU. Clemson would get the next bid. UL would complete the B12 east.
UT and OU could remain in the same division and they'd be reasonably balanced. Throw Baylor, ISU, and KSU in the East.
Pitt and Cuse only get another life raft if the B12 is heavily into the WV moonshine. They've added nothing to the ACC. The B12 will look at Southern FB schools first because that's what they are. I think they would take Miami to squeeze the SEC along with FSU. Clemson would get the next bid. UL would complete the B12 east.
UT and OU could remain in the same division and they'd be reasonably balanced. Throw Baylor, ISU, and KSU in the East.
The market is telling us that:
Rutgers athletics > AAC + CUSA + MWC + Sun Belt
If you want to read some logic into that, go right ahead.
Pitt was probably at the top of Boren's list back before the ACC birthed a smoke monster with Swofford's face that killed the Big East. If Boren had had his way, he'd probably have swooped up Pitt, WVU and possibly a couple more out of UConn, Cincinatti, Louisville, USF, Rutgers before the ACC acted. But there was no interest from other B12 schools at the time, primarily because of UT's regime at the time.Pitt and Cuse only get another life raft if the B12 is heavily into the WV moonshine. They've added nothing to the ACC. The B12 will look at Southern FB schools first because that's what they are. I think they would take Miami to squeeze the SEC along with FSU. Clemson would get the next bid. UL would complete the B12 east.
UT and OU could remain in the same division and they'd be reasonably balanced. Throw Baylor, ISU, and KSU in the East.
I will play this game.....I think it would be in the best interest of the conference to split the two anchor-schools into separate divisions and make them permanent cross-divisional rivals.
I also think it's in the best interest of the conference to spread the travel. You can't have the teams in one division flying from Oklahoma to Connecticut to Florida, while all of the teams in the other division get to play most of their games in Texas.
I don't want to get into sorting, but maybe you could pair the teams by historical rivalries and/or geographic proximity, designate each of those pairs as permanent cross-divisional rivals and then drop them into two divisions that both cut across the entire geographic footprint.
That isn't how it's negotiated so you can't make that statement.