What do you think the TV people are going to do when the B1G grabs whatever ACC schools they want? Punish them? They are over at Fox. The ACC is at ESPN. The B1G grabs those schools and ends up stealing prime real estate from under the SECs nose. You think the SEC hasn't thought of this?^^^^The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.
The TV people have at least 51% of all of these decisions because no one wants to take a haircut revenue wise. You have to get the yea votes from the Northwesterns, the Vanderbilts, etc as much as you do from the Ohio States and the Alabamas. The only way to avoid the haircut is to bring in schools that the tv people value. Period.
Of course there will be more than 2, but I'm talking about a big 2. No more Power 5. No more Power 4. When the SEC and B1G swallow up the ACC, the other conferences really won't matter (for football).None of that is true. There won’t be two conferences. It will be 3-4. It may go to 2, but to do that they’d need to kick Vandy, Miss State, Northwestern, Rutgers, Maryland to the curb. That doesn’t happen until the break from the NCAA. The two conference model has to be just the elite.
If you looked inside the numbers, you'd see that the audience fell off when UConn got a 20 point lead. Then there's the other half of the equation. You have to play an opponent people want to see. This game was as big a foregone conclusion as 2004. No one gave SDSU a chance.Love my Huskies (class of ‘74) but let’s not ignore that this year’s basketball championship final was the lowest rated, and least watched, on record.
UConn doesn’t move the needle like UNC, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana. We may be a “Blue Blood” program now, but we are not national TV must-see.
THAT is what the networks pay for.
So, you're saying that realignment is driven by the conferences acting on their own wishes with no input from tv partners?What do you think the TV people are going to do when the B1G grabs whatever ACC schools they want? Punish them? They are over at Fox. The ACC is at ESPN. The B1G grabs those schools and ends up stealing prime real estate from under the SECs nose. You think the SEC hasn't thought of this?
The TV people will do nothing but watch because this is a fight to the death.
Fight the good fight upstater. I'm with you.You're missing the forest for the trees.
There will be 2 national conferences.
The B1G wants a presence in the southeast. It should be beyond obvious by now that they want to be everywhere.
The SEC and the B1G are literally competing to take the prime real estate of the ACC. If one doesn't want to do that out of deference to Mickey Mouse, the other one will.
The TV people have almost zilch to do with this. It's about the 2 goliaths of college sports.
The idea that the states of Virginia and North Carolina would be considered a dilution to the states of Iowa and Nebraska? That's too much.
This is prime real estate. We're talking about 2 national conferences with 40 total members.
ExactlyFight the good fight upstater. I'm with you.
The ACC was always doomed in terms of CR. It has 4 count 'em 4 programs in a single market - Raleigh-Durham. Two of which are basketball privates. That kills your conference right there. Then it goes and invites a mish-mash of catholics/privates/commuter schools. That's called a double-tap. People argue against adding a 2nd program from states like Ohio and Florida because it's all about adding additional markets yet the ACC is stockpiled in North Carolina. Of course those programs water down the take. It's a complete cluster F and has no basis for building a surviving conference. The GOR is imprisoning FSU and Clemson with Wake, Duke, L-Ville, BCU, Cuse.
The B1G and SEC can manage with Norhwestern and Vandy just fine until those universities decide they don't want to be part of the NFL farm system.
At this point, yes. Not earlier. This is game theory at this point. Can the SEC lock the B1G out of the Atlantic coast? That's the only thing that matters. TV will not determine this incredibly crucial game for the B1G, and even if it could, the B1G is at Fox. Fox would be thrilled to see it grab ACC/ESPN teamsSo, you're saying that realignment is driven by the conferences acting on their own wishes with no input from tv partners?
I don't see it that way and I don't think college presidents do either. College presidents are driving through the conference commissioners who are driven by tv executives and media consultants to grow revenues for their athletic departments. College presidents are leaders that have to balance issues across their entire enterprise, including academics and research endeavors. Do not underestimate that the presidents are somewhat collegial within their peer groups - they collaborate on education and research issues while competing against each other on the playing fields. College presidents play nice because these academics don't want to burn a bridge to their potential next employer as the presidents move within the world of academia. Conferences (i.e. a collective of college presidents) typically have gone out of their way to not pillage other conferences, except for the ACC doing so with regards to the BE football schools. And the BE's original composition of the C7 and larger football playing schools were ripe for the picking because it had two factions within it. No other major conference had such disfunction as the BE did and that was the reason for its demise.At this point, yes. Not earlier. This is game theory at this point. Can the SEC lock the B1G out of the Atlantic coast? That's the only thing that matters. TV will not determine this incredibly crucial game for the B1G, and even if it could, the B1G is at Fox. Fox would be thrilled to see it grab ACC/ESPN teams
Saw a recent report (this week) in the Chronicle of High Ed about the job of College President. The vast majority of them now expect to be at only one school for 5 years max. When discussing the job, athletics rated as among the least of their concerns, it was right above "student life" at the very bottom.I don't see it that way and I don't think college presidents do either. College presidents are driving through the conference commissioners who are driven by tv executives and media consultants to grow revenues for their athletic departments. College presidents are leaders that have to balance issues across their entire enterprise, including academics and research endeavors. Do not underestimate that the presidents are somewhat collegial within their peer groups - they collaborate on education and research issues while competing against each other on the playing fields. College presidents play nice because these academics don't want to burn a bridge to their potential next employer as the presidents move within the world of academia. Conferences (i.e. a collective of college presidents) typically have gone out of their way to not pillage other conferences, except for the ACC doing so with regards to the BE football schools. And the BE's original composition of the C7 and larger football playing schools were ripe for the picking because it had two factions within it. No other major conference had such disfunction as the BE did and that was the reason for its demise.
If this was a game of conquering territory as you say, why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? They hold the most power/resources yet have only added 2 schools (Maryland/Rutgers) in 2014 and one in 2011 (Nebraska). Now, their next two adds are LA schools - driven by Fox's desires to get the LA market. Fox is market-driven, as opposed to ESPN which is brand-driven.
I just don't see the game theory. I see it as money and stability driven not a game of war.
They aren’t in the NW …. YetSaw a recent report (this week) in the Chronicle of High Ed about the job of College President. The vast majority of them now expect to be at only one school for 5 years max. When discussing the job, athletics rated as among the least of their concerns, it was right above "student life" at the very bottom.
Their biggest concern is putting together a budget (i.e. feeling as though they can't do it well) and fund raising. About 20 things below that before they come to athletics. The job has changed.
Why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? I'm kind of stunned that you asked that. It's not enough that they took schools out the BE, B12, ACC and Pac10? They are in all corners of the country except for the southeast. That's their next destination.
I think you just made my point for me in that college presidents are prioritizing many other aspects of their jobs over athletics and therefore aren't playing a war game of territory- taking. And, by the B1G bringing in 3 schools over a 12 year period to date, that's one every four years. That doesn't feel like territory taking to me. That feels like thoughtful/selective additions guided by tv revenue growth strategy. What else could you explain it to be?Saw a recent report (this week) in the Chronicle of High Ed about the job of College President. The vast majority of them now expect to be at only one school for 5 years max. When discussing the job, athletics rated as among the least of their concerns, it was right above "student life" at the very bottom.
Their biggest concern is putting together a budget (i.e. feeling as though they can't do it well) and fund raising. About 20 things below that before they come to athletics. The job has changed.
Why hasn't the B1G done more pillaging? I'm kind of stunned that you asked that. It's not enough that they took schools out the BE, B12, ACC and Pac10? They are in all corners of the country except for the southeast. That's their next destination.
What teams from the ACC would go to the B1G?Of course there will be more than 2, but I'm talking about a big 2. No more Power 5. No more Power 4. When the SEC and B1G swallow up the ACC, the other conferences really won't matter (for football).
Just wondering if you know the B1G well.I think you just made my point for me in that college presidents are prioritizing many other aspects of their jobs over athletics and therefore aren't playing a war game of territory- taking. And, by the B1G bringing in 3 schools over a 12 year period to date, that's one every four years. That doesn't feel like territory taking to me. That feels like thoughtful/selective additions guided by tv revenue growth strategy. What else could you explain it to be?
They definitely want to get stronger ties into the best recruiting areas; they always have and always will. All these programs in every sport can and do find talent outside of their regions. Hell, even RE 1.0 /his staff had a decent pipeline to south Florida.Just wondering if you know the B1G well.
Because the refrain from all the football coaches and ADs over many, many years has been the talent deficit because the vast majority of good football players are from the SE. They've been eyeing Florida, Georgia, the Carolinas and even the DC area + Virginia for generations. This is crucial for them. I can't emphasize enough how much they want ACC territory.
After the ACC,GOR lapses, or at least when it’s getting close, we will see if this is correct. I believe it is.Just wondering if you know the B1G well.
Because the refrain from all the football coaches and ADs over many, many years has been the talent deficit because the vast majority of good football players are from the SE. They've been eyeing Florida, Georgia, the Carolinas and even the DC area + Virginia for generations. This is crucial for them. I can't emphasize enough how much they want ACC territory.
Agree. The other thing the southern and western state presence does for the B1G schools is provide more local ties to their alumns that live in or snow bird to warmer climes. It's just another way to monetize their fanbase and donors.After the ACC,GOR lapses, or at least when it’s getting close, we will see if this is correct. I believe it is.
What teams from the ACC would go to the B1G?All of them would but
All of them, if they don’t want to be penalized by the GOR.All of them would but some I'm sure prefer the SEC
Name a team that would rather stay in the ACC
None of them is my answer. They'd all refer the other leagues and what they bring. Maryland already made that decision.All of them, if they don’t want to be penalized by the GOR.
What about Notre Dame and the ACC? Do you really think they just give up those big tv contracts just to get an invite to the B1G?
The flow of events I do see coming down the pike, will make for a very favorable position for UConn in all sports. Right now, looks like three possible scenarios.
And those 4 schools are the reason the ACC is in trouble.Fight the good fight upstater. I'm with you.
The ACC was always doomed in terms of CR. It has 4 count 'em 4 programs in a single market - Raleigh-Durham. Two of which are basketball privates. That kills your conference right there. Then it goes and invites a mish-mash of catholics/privates/commuter schools. That's called a double-tap. People argue against adding a 2nd program from states like Ohio and Florida because it's all about adding additional markets yet the ACC is stockpiled in North Carolina. Of course those programs water down the take. It's a complete cluster F and has no basis for building a surviving conference. The GOR is imprisoning FSU and Clemson with Wake, Duke, L-Ville, BCU, Cuse.
The B1G and SEC can manage with Norhwestern and Vandy just fine until those universities decide they don't want to be part of the NFL farm system.