OT: Realignment?

[phillionaire]

Or even B1G teams. What's their record against Ohio St or Penn St these days? Seems like they are on the losing end of those games most of the time.

You can’t walk into Bloomington and expect to come out with an easy dub.

 

[CTFIRERETIRED]

West Virginia back to the Big East? How bout Kansas?

WVA, maybe.................Kansas? I don't think so. Think on this, could you see some ACC teams bolt? I could see Fl St., Miami, Clemson. Forming a 2 or 3, or 4 division conference. Now bear with me. A giant SEC mega-conference.
SEC-1: Clemson, Miami, Florida, Florida ST. South Carolina
SEC-2: Tennessee, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Miss St. Vanderbilt
SEC-3: Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Auburn
SEC-4 Texas, OK. ,Texas A&M, and either/or Baylor, Texas Tech, or OK St.
3 of the divisions have 5 teams, with only 1 with 6. Un-Wielding YES. a possibility? Why not. With the collegiete map the way it is now, anything is possible. The NCAA is no longer the ruling party. It's the mega conferences that are holding sway, and NO, I have not been smoking any weird herbs. Just look at the idea. I mean it makes a lot more sense than that abomination of the American Conference, UCONN spent those years in. It has some rivalry possibilies with the SC/Fl teams, the central area of TN, GA, MS, KY, then AL, AR, MO, LA, and the TX/OK teams.
What say many of you?

 

[djct1999]

More than for Houston, Memphis, Tulsa, et al.

Who do you think moves tbe needle?

Thats the problem. No one the ACC can realistically grab. Are you sure the ACC wants to renegotiate? Don't they run the risk of actually earning less per year? Sorry, but if ESPN goes all in on super charged SEC, the demand for the ACC drops significantly at even the current negotiated rate.

 

[Eavesdrop]

I would tend to agree...under the old system of "markets"...but with the emphasis on creating matches for viewing...I don't know....WVU is a middle weight football brand...and with BC, Cuse, Wake, Duke on board...the ACC needs watchable match partners

The Backyard Brawl with Pitt and the VT match were rivalries....and...fer gawd's sake...with WVU maybe the ACC could realign and FSU wouldn't play BC and Cuse every year.

Adding West Virginia to the ACC makes sense so long as the addition results in a lot more money for existing members. I just remain very skeptical the Mountaineers add value.

As to realignment within the conference, the PAC 12 recently joined the ACC in signaling a willingness/desire to strike the division-play rule. I suspect the SEC now might like that too. Hope it happens. It would allow for a lot more interesting/compelling games to be played.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Anyone that is not factoring in the Alston case in realignment is looking at this the wrong way.

 

[Eavesdrop]

The ACC has made many mistakes in conference realignment as they should have offered Rutgers and UConn and created the ACC Network earlier which may have kept Maryland in the fold as the ACCN would have had NY/NJ/CT/MD/DC and been making money close to the Big 10 Network. Instead, the primary cable provider in the Boston area doesn't even carry the ACCN. That doesn't bode well for the value of BC in a streaming world. And, locking in a LT media contract when the viewing market was changing is looking like a colossal mistake.

I firmly believe if ACC leaders could open a portal and travel back through time, they'd add Florida State, Miami, Penn State and Pitt in circa 1988. That would've denied Penn State to the Big 10 and allowed the conference to start playing conference championship games in the early 1990s.

With that done, they'd travel to circa 2009 and invite Rutgers and UConn to bolster the number of cable boxes in the northeast as they prepared to launch a new conference network.

Then in circa 2012, they'd add Notre Dame as a partial and VPI&SU as a full member. And Maryland never leaves.

 

[CTFIRERETIRED]

I firmly believe if ACC leaders could open a portal and travel back through time, they'd add Florida State, Miami, Penn State and Pitt in circa 1988. That would've denied Penn State to the Big 10 and allowed the conference to start playing conference championship games in the early 1990s.

With that done, they'd travel to circa 2009 and invite Rutgers and UConn to bolster the number of cable boxes in the northeast as they prepared to launch a new conference network.

Then in circa 2012, they'd add Notre Dame as a partial and VPI&SU as a full member. And Maryland never leaves.

I firmly believe if ACC leaders could open a portal and travel back through time, they'd add Florida State, Miami, Penn State and Pitt in circa 1988. That would've denied Penn State to the Big 10 and allowed the conference to start playing conference championship games in the early 1990s.

With that done, they'd travel to circa 2009 and invite Rutgers and UConn to bolster the number of cable boxes in the northeast as they prepared to launch a new conference network.

Then in circa 2012, they'd add Notre Dame as a partial and VPI&SU as a full member. And Maryland never leaves.

We all know why UC never got the invite to the ACC. BC put the squash on it. NOW BC is looking like the dumb ones. I had said ages ago, that BC sports was low in the Metropolitian Boston area. Red Sox, Pats, Bruins, Celts, THEN BC sports. The fact that the ACCN is not on cable providers in Boston, and many other New England markets does show that NO ONE CARES about BC sports, except maybe BC Hockey.

 

[billybud]

We all know why UC never got the invite to the ACC. BC put the squash on it. NOW BC is looking like the dumb ones. I had said ages ago, that BC sports was low in the Metropolitian Boston area. Red Sox, Pats, Bruins, Celts, THEN BC sports. The fact that the ACCN is not on cable providers in Boston, and many other New England markets does show that NO ONE CARES about BC sports, except maybe BC Hockey.

It was a huge mistake...the ACC moving towards the Northeast....they were thinking "markets" in a linear channel world....as college sports watching value was moving towards actual viewers in a cord cutting world who care enough to tune in

 

[djct1999]

Anyone that is not factoring in the Alston case in realignment is looking at this the wrong way.

I think the Alston case scared Disney/espn more than it did any school in the SEC. Texas and Ou are the scapegoats, but this recent move in my mind is spearheaded by the world wide leader. They need a super conference more than anything. This is the first in a multiple of steps that will help them assure that long term.
With a level playing field, Espn will be forced to pay far more and the viewer acquisition cost would be through the roof. It’s far more beneficial to consolidate the brand names under 1 roof and let the rest to die on the vine.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think the Alston case scared Disney/espn more than it did any school in the SEC. Texas and Ou are the scapegoats, but this recent move in my mind is spearheaded by the world wide leader. They need a super conference more than anything. This is the first in a multiple of steps that will help them assure that long term.
With a level playing field, Espn will be forced to pay far more and the viewer acquisition cost would be through the roof. It’s far more beneficial to consolidate the brand names under 1 roof and let the rest to die on the vine.

Unless the leadership at ESPN are complete idiots, a superconference is a terrible outcome for them. Do I have to explain why ESPN buying from a monopoly is bad for ESPN?

 

[upstater]

Michigan already can't compete against SEC teams

My point is that it's going to get exponentially worse and it'll hurt the B1G teams in recruiting even more.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

My point is that it's going to get exponentially worse and it'll hurt the B1G teams in recruiting even more.

Why will it get worse?

 

[djct1999]

Unless the leadership at ESPN are complete idiots, a superconference is a terrible outcome for them. Do I have to explain why ESPN buying from a monopoly is bad for ESPN?

is it? in this scenario, espn is the monopoly. nfl saturday as some other poster suggested sounds like a better outcome for espn. do you really think they care about 65k subs for espn+ in lawrence kansas while paying kansas 35mil for content? this whole idea seems to me that espn wants to get out from under a lot of bad contracts.

you are making it seem that espn is the puppet here and not the puppeteer. i see it as the opposite.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

is it? nfl saturday as some other poster suggested sounds like a better outcome for espn. do you really think they care about 65k subs for espn+ in lawrence kansas while paying kansas 35mil for content? this whole idea seems to me that espn wants to get out from under a lot of bad contracts.

Why does a superconference need ESPN at all?

 

[djct1999]

Why does a superconference need ESPN at all?

because at 75 mil per school per year, espn has the platform, distrubtion, and technology to make this much easier on the participants. the schools are content providers. why does george lucas need netflix?

 

[Eavesdrop]

Texas and Ou are the scapegoats, but this recent move in my mind is spearheaded by the world wide leader.

Texas and Oklahoma leaving (or at least threatening to leave) the Big 12 at the end of the conference's media deal has long seemed likely. It's also been obvious that the ESPN owned Longhorn Network would complicate a conference change for Texas, perhaps giving the SEC and ACC a potential advantage in recruiting the 'Horns. I just figured any drama was still a year or so away.

You may recall that ESPN and Fox actually helped save the Big 12 a decade ago. The networks chose to let the conference keep the same contract it received before Colorado, Nebraska, Texas A&M and Missouri left. The networks chose to overpay.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

because at 75 mil per school per year, espn has the platform, distrubtion, and technology to make this much easier on the participants. the schools are content providers. why does george lucas need netflix?

There are other platforms that can do exactly what ESPN can do. There are other great streaming platforms like MLB Network, HBO, Amazon Prime, Netflix, Hulu etc etc. The ones with financial resources will want to hoard all the premium content.

I suspect future will be teams going for their own streaming media deals while leaving all other sports in regional conferences. The incentive to do this is if their own media deal is bigger than what they can get from the conferences they are in. This way, big schools can schedule made for streaming matchups with whoever they like vs. stuck playing teams like Vandy no one cares about. This is kind of what UCONN is doing now, and it might be the future for many teams.

Looking at my own monthly subscriptions, I just realized I am paying for the following every month:

• Xfinity Stream
• Netflix
• MLB App
• ESPN+/Disney
• Sling TV (just to get one foreign channel)
• Another movie/drama paid channel
• Amazon Prime
• Just added Peacock just to get some on-demand Olympics content

I also realized I don't watch half of this but I am paying for them for one reason or another due to kid or wife. It won't be an issue to add an UCONN subscription to all of this. It is just another app. I suspect many folks are and will be in the similar boat.

 

[don356]

Will adding WVU make current ACC members more money? I doubt it.

I actually don't believe the ACC, PAC 12 or Big 10 will expand anytime soon (next couple years). Just don't believe there are realistic wealth enhancing options currently available to any of them. But who knows?

Yea, it's all about what tv money would want to do. I would move Cincy ahead of WV at this point as it's a much easier access location and they're football has made such big strides the ACC schools would much rather be in that market than WV which is a bad recruiting state. Let's face it WV was left out numerous times and hasn't really shown that well in the B12 even with the mixed opinion of their fan base and location/state. I read somewhere where the southern ohio tv market is bigger than all of WV. I'm not sure WV really brings anything to the table.

 

[djct1999]

There are other platforms that can do exactly what ESPN can do. There are other great streaming platforms like MLB Network, HBO, Amazon Prime, Netflix, Hulu etc etc. The ones with financial resources will want to hoard all the premium content.

I suspect future will be teams going for their own streaming media deals while leaving all other sports in a regional conference. The incentive to do this is if their own media deal is bigger than what they can get from the conference they are in. This way, big schools can schedule made for streaming matchups with whoever they like vs. stuck playing teams like Vandy no one cares about. This is kind of what UCONN is doing now, and it might be the future for many teams.

Looking at my own monthly subscriptions, I just realized I am paying for the following every month:

• Xfinity Stream
• Netflix
• MLB App
• ESPN+/Disney
• Sling TV (just to get one foreign channel)
• Another movie/drama paid channel
• Amazon Prime
• Just added Peacock just to get some on-demand Olympics content

I just realized I don't watch half of this but I am paying for them for one reason or another due to kid or wife. It won't be an issue to add an UCONN subscription to all of this. It is just another app. I suspect many folks are in similar boat.

I agree, but for now ESPN owns most of the parts and its their desire to consolidate whats worth it to them. 15-20 years from now, ESPN can be toast. This is also why they led with UT and OU and Ohio State is not being mentioned.

My guess is around the time UT and OU join the SEC and you will start hearing overtures that Ohio State is next.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

I agree, but for now ESPN owns most of the parts and its their desire to consolidate whats worth it to them. 15-20 years from now, ESPN can be toast. This is also why they led with UT and OU and Ohio State is not being mentioned.

This is true. ESPN also does not want to pay the same amount to Vandy what they are paying for Alabama. At some point, ESPN of the world will be pushing teams like Bama to go indy so they can pay Bama huge money while leaving teams like Vandy in the dust. If the total amount they pay for individual teams is less than what they are paying for a conference media deal, it is a net saving for ESPN or other media companies. It is just business, and college football is turning into NFL lite.

 

[djct1999]

This is true. ESPN also does not want to pay the same amount to Vandy what they are paying for Alabama. At some point, ESPN of the world will be pushing teams like Bama to go indy so they can pay Bama huge money while leaving teams like Vandy in the dust. If the total amount they pay for individual teams is less than what they are paying for a conference media deal, it is a net saving for ESPN or other media companies. It is just business, and college football is turning into NFL lite.

I understand how this destroys the traditional model of college athletics and how for most of us, this sucks. But if we have seen anything over the years, the NFL model works. My guess is ESPN figures,especially now with kids being compensated and fantasy sports being played everywhere and gambling soon to be legal in all 50 states, why not replicate that exact model on Saturdays with the 20+ biggest football schools played by 18-22 year olds. While the super league kills everything we grew up with, I think it would work for ESPN and the schools involved.

 

[CL82]

• Xfinity Stream
• Netflix
• MLB App
• ESPN+/Disney
• Sling TV (just to get one foreign channel)
• Another movie/drama paid channel
• Amazon Prime
• Just added Peacock just to get some on-demand Olympics content

Hmm named them all but this one? I'm guessing .

 

[CL82]

This is true. ESPN also does not want to pay the same amount to Vandy what they are paying for Alabama

ESPN pays for conference broadcast rights. It doesn't give a rat's ass whether Vandy gets a piece of it or not.

 

[Eavesdrop]

It was a huge mistake...the ACC moving towards the Northeast....they were thinking "markets" in a linear channel world....as college sports watching value was moving towards actual viewers in a cord cutting world who care enough to tune in

I agree. The transition to streaming has radically changed the math. The emphasis clearly seems to be on adding brands and/or content people want to watch (not adding cable subscribers who may or may not watch).

I will add the caveat that this transition isn't complete. Millions of people remain attached to their cable boxes. And the ACCN will receive a financial boost when Disney completes its next contract with Comcast later this year. How much? No idea. But its definitely going to help.

 

[djct1999]

ESPN pays for conference broadcast rights. It doesn't give a rat's ass whether Vandy gets a piece of it or not.

The paradigm is changing. They would much prefer to pay Alabama double if it means paying wvu, bc and Syracuse 0.