Rumor du Jour

[Jericho]

But that's just it; this isn't about being good enough. Do you think that Maryland is good enough to be in the B1G??? It's about markets, and more importantly, it's about money. All of these expansion moves have had that one defining factor; that it was done in order to try to make more money...

The Big 10 wants markets to sell their network too. But the Big 12 has no network. So exposure to the Florida, Georgia, and/or South Carolina markets would only be worth what the teams can bring to the table in a contract renegotiation.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

People have been talking about FSU to the Big 12 for what seems like a year. It took Maryland all of one weekend to make a move. It seemed to take Pitt and Syracuse even less time to leave the Big East. The point being, if this was going to happen. Then it probably would have happened already. Nothing's radically changed in the last year. This past summer, FSU had a deadline to withdraw from the ACC to start play in another conference in 2013. It did not happen. And everyone knew what the Big 12 and ACC deals were at that point.

Couldn't the same thing have been said before Rutgers and Maryland were added to the Big 10? If it was going to happen, it would have happened before the Big 10 added that dead weight. Except then something new happened.

 

[tzznandrew]

People have been talking about FSU to the Big 12 for what seems like a year. It took Maryland all of one weekend to make a move. It seemed to take Pitt and Syracuse even less time to leave the Big East. The point being, if this was going to happen. Then it probably would have happened already. Nothing's radically changed in the last year. This past summer, FSU had a deadline to withdraw from the ACC to start play in another conference in 2013. It did not happen. And everyone knew what the Big 12 and ACC deals were at that point.

While I agree with some of your points, I think Maryland leaving the ACC is something that has "radically changed in the last year." I'm skeptical of this rumor because the radio show we were directed to talked mostly about Bon Jovi, but I don't think it's any more unreasonable than Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G. In fact, FSU and Clemson actually improve the B12 product on the field, unlike Maryland and Rutgers. And aside, I can't imagine that P12, SEC, and B1G like the idea of the B12 champion not having to win a title game. Without a title game, the SEC would have had #2, 3, 4 in the BCS.

 

[UConnDan97]

The Big 10 wants markets to sell their network too. But the Big 12 has no network. So exposure to the Florida, Georgia, and/or South Carolina markets would only be worth what the teams can bring to the table in a contract renegotiation.

So....the networks in contract renegotiation won't care about markets??? Of course they will! That's the point. Follow the money...

 

[RealCT12]

While I agree with some of your points, I think Maryland leaving the ACC is something that has "radically changed in the last year." I'm skeptical of this rumor because the radio show we were directed to talked mostly about Bon Jovi, but I don't think it's any more unreasonable than Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G. In fact, FSU and Clemson actually improve the B12 product on the field, unlike Maryland and Rutgers. And aside, I can't imagine that P12, SEC, and B1G like the idea of the B12 champion not having to win a title game. Without a title game, the SEC would have had #2, 3, 4 in the BCS.

The B12 just realized that if the playoff were this year, their conference champion KState would not have made the 4 team playoff under their current round robin schedule. You can expect the SEC to get at least 2 out of 4 playoff teams each year. That means the B12 has to compete with the PAC and B1G for the last 2 spots. Both those leagues are in a better position having a conference championship.

 

[Dove]

Can I ask this...why does there have to be 4 super conferences? What is wrong with 5? I imagine it's easier to fill bowls with 4 conferences?

 

[buckley503]

I do appreciate all the scenarios that people post but in the end UConn will be a filler after all the good choices have been made. Not that it is a bad thing, I would just like once for us to be a targeted school.

 

[Drumguy]

Any conference will take Duke if Duke asks.

Not sure I agree. This is about football and Duke is not a state school like the others. Football is king and potential is king. UVA and UNC have tons more potential in football imho.

 

[Oxford Bob]

Can I ask this...why does there have to be 4 super conferences? What is wrong with 5? I imagine it's easier to fill bowls with 4 conferences?

You have 3 very solid conf. (B1G, PAC, SEC) and a fourth that is a notch below (Big 12), then 2 others that are clearly behind the rest. Once the Alphas are done picking there aren't enough scraps to leave the 5th with the quality of the other 4.

Swofford tried to stay with the big boys, but he couldn't land a game changer (Nebraska, Tex A&M etc.). He could never put the dagger into the heart of the Big East and kill it off. If he did I think there would have been a top 5.

 

[freescooter]

I actually think 2 things changed this year, jericho. The Big 10 taking Rutgers and Maryland changed the game. the Maryland change in particular demonstrates that the ACC isn't as stable as folks once thought. The second change was that Fox and the other major confereneces are pushing the B-12 to go to a conference game, something they weren't doing previously. By most reports, the B-12 actually liked the round robin approach, but the other conferences didn't. The thinking goes, why should Alabama be at risk when the B-12 champ is not? So those two factors are pushing Floida State to look in a new direction and the B-12 to look for members.

 

[sportsart]

Who would have ever guessed UH, SMU and Tulane would have ever been ACC schools.

Just wow.....

 

[tzznandrew]

Can I ask this...why does there have to be 4 super conferences? What is wrong with 5? I imagine it's easier to fill bowls with 4 conferences?

I don't think there's anything wrong with it, per se. But, if you have a television network and need to fill airtime, more teams allow you to do that effectively than fewer teams. B1G already has a network, SEC is launching one, P12 I think is as well (may be wrong). You need content to justify its existence.

 

[Chuck]

It makes sense that the B12 would go for the kill on the ACC. Everyone says the B1G, SEC, and PAC are set as top 3. If there is going to be a big 4 why give the ACC a chance to reel in ND (I don't think that's happening, but it's possible) and potentially stepping into a tie for the 4 spot.

Unfortunately, I'm now in revenge mode. I want the ACC to implode because they killed the conference I loved. I'd feel this way even if UConn got the Maryland spot (about still hating the ACC, although I probably wouldn't be hoping for it's death). I still think the ACC is UConn's only possible landing spot. If FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT, UNC, UVA, etc. leave UConn is still on the outside looking in and the teams that kept us out are in a safe new home.

I guess at least Swofford's would be out of a job and some of our ex-Big East brethren that got a bit too cocky about their escape would get a "ha ha" moment (said in a Nelson voice (the Nelson from the Simpsons, not from this board)).

 

[RealCT12]

It makes sense that the B12 would go for the kill on the ACC. Everyone says the B1G, SEC, and PAC are set as top 3. If there is going to be a big 4 why give the ACC a chance to reel in ND (I don't think that's happening, but it's possible) and potentially stepping into a tie for the 4 spot.

Unfortunately, I'm now in revenge mode. I want the ACC to implode because they killed the conference I loved. I'd feel this way even if UConn got the Maryland spot (about still hating the ACC, although I probably wouldn't be hoping for it's death). I still think the ACC is UConn's only possible landing spot. If FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT, UNC, UVA, etc. leave UConn is still on the outside looking in and the teams that kept us out are in a safe new home.

I guess at least Swofford's would be out of a job and some of our ex-Big East brethren that got a bit too cocky about their escape would get a "ha ha" moment (said in a Nelson voice (the Nelson from the Simpsons, not from this board)).

The ACC is UConn's only landing spot if the 4 big conferences decide to stop at 16 teams. If any go above that number then UConn's not necessarily KO'd.

 

[Jericho]

Couldn't the same thing have been said before Rutgers and Maryland were added to the Big 10? If it was going to happen, it would have happened before the Big 10 added that dead weight. Except then something new happened.

Something new did happen. The Big 10 wanted Rutgers and Maryland. They did not before. Rutgers and Maryland always wanted the Big 10 (or at least were open to it). The problem was that is was not reciprocal. It appears from the media that the triggering event for th eBig 10 was Notre Dame to the ACC. The Big 10 decided to give up the ghost on adding the Golden Domers and made a decision to move on with others. It probably took a little time to do their studies and get everyone on board. But once the Big 10 was willing to send the invites, it all happened real quick.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I don't buy Duke to the B1G at all, but the other two...

Agree, but the other two would go to the SEC, not the B1G. UNC and UVA are staying in the south.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I like this rumor. It doesn't make a ton of sense, but at least it's different. Why would FSU want to tie themselves to Miami when it's pretty clear that conferences are more interested in adding different states than colleges. Now Clemson, FSU and GTech to the B12 would make some sense if the B12 really wants to make a kill shot to the ACC

FSU and Miami have very different markets. State doesn't really matter.

 

[Jericho]

So....the networks in contract renegotiation won't care about markets??? Of course they will! That's the point. Follow the money...

Yes and No. Markets are not completely irrelevant. But they're not everything either. You have to actually deliever a market for it to really work. The idea of adding a Georgia Tech to deliever Atlanta or the U to deliever Miami is a fallacy. It just won't happen. When ESPN or Fox is paying money for broadcast rights, they do so in order to get programming people want to watch. They want ratings. If Georgia Tech really got everyone in Atlanta to tune in to their games, GT games would be rated high. But they're not.

As proven by the Big East, having schools in large markets does not mean huge money. Houston, Tulane, Memphis, Temple, SMU, Central Florida. These schools are all in large cities. Yet, when most of the schools were in C-USA, no one gave a crap. It's for those same reasons that conferences weren't falling over themselves to add Rutgers. Rutgers does not deliever a huge market share, despite being located in a very populous area.

The Big 10 model helps change that. They want cable providers like Verizon and Comcast to bundle their network to basic subscribers for high carriage fees. You get a big enough market and even if only some of them actually get the network, it's still a good chunk of change. And even if only a portion of the people that get the channel actually watch it, it does not matter (unless the carriage fees get to high and providers drop the network since not enough people care). You are collecting money from everyone that has the channel on their cable package.

This model only works with a Network. If a network is put on a majority of cable packages in a populous area, then the network and hence the conference make good money. But selling the individual rights to those schools may be problematic. It only works if people care about the teams. The Big 10 operates on the former. The Big 12 on the latter. For the Big 12, it only makes sense to add schools that people want to watch. Hence FSU and Clemson often get mentioned.

The idea that markets equal money is a huge over-simplification.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

(said in a Nelson voice (the Nelson from the Simpsons, not from this board)).

We sound remarkably alike.

 

[Jericho]

I actually think 2 things changed this year, jericho. The Big 10 taking Rutgers and Maryland changed the game. the Maryland change in particular demonstrates that the ACC isn't as stable as folks once thought. The second change was that Fox and the other major confereneces are pushing the B-12 to go to a conference game, something they weren't doing previously. By most reports, the B-12 actually liked the round robin approach, but the other conferences didn't. The thinking goes, why should Alabama be at risk when the B-12 champ is not? So those two factors are pushing Floida State to look in a new direction and the B-12 to look for members.

Still not sure how that affects FSU. Maryland did leave the ACC, but 4 schools left the Big 12. And people still feel the Big 12 will be fine. Obviously, Texas has a huge role in that, but its still just one school. A conference is not super stable if it hinges all on one school. The bigger issue is that Maryland was replaced by Louisville. That's not a huge step up or down. It pretty much keeps the ACC where it was quality wise. If I'm FSU, the conference has not really changed at all. Unless someone else leaves, the ACC is basically where it's always been.

As to the Big 12 title game, right now that's pure rumors and conjecture. So nothing's changed there either. The only possible way anything has changed is if FSU was willing to leave in the past but the Big 12 did not want them. And now the Big 12 does want them. It's hard for me to believe that's FSU wanted out in the past and the Big 12 said no. I'd always figure it was the other way around. FSU saying no. That's the logical conclusion I'd reach from the facts. And I still don't know why FSU says yes now. They need a triggering event.

 

[UConnDan97]

Yes and No. Markets are not completely irrelevant. But they're not everything either. You have to actually deliever a market for it to really work. The idea of adding a Georgia Tech to deliever Atlanta or the U to deliever Miami is a fallacy. It just won't happen. When ESPN or Fox is paying money for broadcast rights, they do so in order to get programming people want to watch. They want ratings. If Georgia Tech really got everyone in Atlanta to tune in to their games, GT games would be rated high. But they're not.

As proven by the Big East, having schools in large markets does not mean huge money. Houston, Tulane, Memphis, Temple, SMU, Central Florida. These schools are all in large cities. Yet, when most of the schools were in C-USA, no one gave a crap. It's for those same reasons that conferences weren't falling over themselves to add Rutgers. Rutgers does not deliever a huge market share, despite being located in a very populous area.

The Big 10 model helps change that. They want cable providers like Verizon and Comcast to bundle their network to basic subscribers for high carriage fees. You get a big enough market and even if only some of them actually get the network, it's still a good chunk of change. And even if only a portion of the people that get the channel actually watch it, it does not matter (unless the carriage fees get to high and providers drop the network since not enough people care). You are collecting money from everyone that has the channel on their cable package.

This model only works with a Network. If a network is put on a majority of cable packages in a populous area, then the network and hence the conference make good money. But selling the individual rights to those schools may be problematic. It only works if people care about the teams. The Big 10 operates on the former. The Big 12 on the latter. For the Big 12, it only makes sense to add schools that people want to watch. Hence FSU and Clemson often get mentioned.

The idea that markets equal money is a huge over-simplification.

Then you are missing my ultimate point, which was tv money. Whether or not either of those aforementioned teams delivers a certain city or a portion of a certain state is only part of the equation. The fact of the matter is that all of those teams have significant fanbases (someone had posted a listing on another thread, but I'm not sure where). So that, coupled with the fact that the networks supporting the Big12 would love to have further penetration into Florida, Georgia, etc., and it's easy to see what the driver of this is. Again, in case anyone has missed it; it's money!

(the original discussion was improved football product versus tv money being the driver for acquisition, if indeed this move came to pass)

 

[Adios]

Can I ask this...why does there have to be 4 super conferences? What is wrong with 5? I imagine it's easier to fill bowls with 4 conferences?

It makes a four team playoff much easier to accomplish. Just take the champion of each conference and no one can complain. Besides the schools left out of the cartel. I definitely think 20 school conferences are a possibility. Who knows, maybe even 26 team conferences are possible. 13 team divisions. Play all 12 games within the division. 4 x 26 = 106. That'll cover all the schools that are worthy.

 

[Marty Jackson]

if fsu and miami leave, hello usf and ucf

 

[upstater]

The GOR is too hard to beat. The conference that added Kansas would not have the rights to Kansas' TV content, making Kansas' basically worthless to the Big 10.

It's Kansas! They may be OK with that!

 

[upstater]

How come no one ever talks about the Pac-12? All the focus is east. For this 16 team superconference thing to come into being the Pac-10 has to take 4 from the Big12, and then that leaves 6 teams in the 12. It's likelier at that point that you'd have a merger between the B(12)6 and the 6 from the ACC which = 12. ND? Who knows. UConn and Cincy would bring that league to 14. If ND joins one of the leagues, there's only a spot for one more.