Article on SEC Network/future of realignment

[East Coast Mustang]

RodRod5 you make the most cogent description of the pros and cons of conference realignment that I have ever read.

Well done!

You are on the mark - the NCAA needs to maintain the "academic" fig leaf in the form of the elite private schools to show that the NCAA is based on the university not the semi pro model.

Plus, as you point out, can you imagine the discussion an AD has with his head coach when he tells him private school, patsy U is no longer on the schedule. Not happening.

Bottom line is that fans come to see their team win and teams can't have a situation where 6-6 is the best case scenario.

I agree - when big state U understands the win / loss math they will cut the small schools in tp the bigger pie.

Agreed- that was an insightful post, RodRod. I didn't agree with all of it but you made some good points. I for one wonder how much longer the NCAA has- do the big college football conferences eventually just break away?

[leopold]

Academics aren't going to mean squat. The SEC would add a junior college - and already did in Arkansas - if it would help them get better on the field and with ratings. The Big 10 chose a less academically thought of university in Nebraska over a flat-out better school in Missouri, and now Nebraska has lost their AAU membership, taking away the Big10's pride in all schools being members. The ACC took Louisville, so there goes their argument, and the PAC 12 was ready to accept Texas Tech if it meant bringing Texas with them.

IN EVERY SINGLE CASE THE FOOTBALL COACHES WON OUT OVER THE SCHOLARS, THE BASKETBALL COACHES, AND IN SOME CASES EVEN TV SETS. If they ever did happen to find common cause, well, it was a happy accident. Even Maryland and Rutgers are telling the Big10 that long term they are better situated for football than an Iowa State, Kansas, or Kansas State when Snyder retires.

The two thinigs that could set realigment off again are 1) Texas's desire to stretch their influence and 2) the possible rift between the football schools in the ACC and the current distribution of money that favors the basketball schools. But as Stallion has pointed out, it's on hold for now with the media rights deal. But FSU and Clemson have made very clear that they feel as though they are getting hosed and want to be in a football conference. If the Big XII gets another chance at the East Coast and can stand being in a conference with those two schools, that may be the new merger that starts it up again.

[East Coast Mustang]

Academics aren't going to mean squat. The SEC would add a junior college - and already did in Arkansas - if it would help them get better on the field and with ratings. The Big 10 chose a less academically thought of university in Nebraska over a flat-out better school in Missouri, and now Nebraska has lost their AAU membership, taking away the Big10's pride in all schools being members. The ACC took Louisville, so there goes their argument, and the PAC 12 was ready to accept Texas Tech if it meant bringing Texas with them.

IN EVERY SINGLE CASE THE FOOTBALL COACHES WON OUT OVER THE SCHOLARS, THE BASKETBALL COACHES, AND IN SOME CASES EVEN TV SETS. If they ever did happen to find common cause, well, it was a happy accident. Even Maryland and Rutgers are telling the Big10 that long term they are better situated for football than an Iowa State, Kansas, or Kansas State when Snyder retires.

The two thinigs that could set realigment off again are 1) Texas's desire to stretch their influence and 2) the possible rift between the football schools in the ACC and the current distribution of money that favors the basketball schools. But as Stallion has pointed out, it's on hold for now with the media rights deal. But FSU and Clemson have made very clear that they feel as though they are getting hosed and want to be in a football conference. If the Big XII gets another chance at the East Coast and can stand being in a conference with those two schools, that may be the new merger that starts it up again.

The Nebraska/Mizzou Big Ten deal is interesting- I'm surprised the Big Ten wasn't more interested in Mizzou and the STL and KC media markets they bring with them. I realize Nebraska is the more established national football brand, but how much does that even matter in these things? Perhaps more than I think....

As far as the ACC goes, I'm surprised FSU and Clemson agreed to that Grant of Rights...they have been getting hosed but I wonder if Texas would allow them in the Big 12...Texas doesn't want to cede power to anyone, and FSU and Clemson could whip them on the football field and aren't going to give a rip about what Steve Patterson (DeLoss Jr.) says. I've always maintained that Texas will eventually go to the Pac-12, bringing Tech, OU, and Okie State along with them- it would make a Pac-12 broadcast package very valuable with huge media markets and give all four schools much greater nationwide exposure.

Of course, the only caveat here that isn't really talked about is the future of television distribution. If we're headed to a system where cable and satellite companies are phased out and programming is primarily a la carte, is adding so-so teams in big media markets (Rutgers, Maryland, arguably Mizzou long term) really in a conference's best interest? All of this expansion is predicating on expanding your subscriber base and charging more cable companies more money per subscriber, but if that system begins to deteriorate, then what?

[leopold]

The Big10 flat out messed up - I've told that to a number of people, even up here in Wisconsin. They should have taken Mizzou.

Texas wants California, but it will think long and hard about being let into the East Coast, especially Florida and the Carolinas. If somehow they manage to get a few teams from the ACC, then that provides the opportunity to SEC to go after schools in in NC and VA.

[WordUpBU]

Iowa's population is 3 million. Texas is 26 million and it's one of the fastest growing states in the nation.

Re-shun.

And Baylor/TCU have a combined 80,000 fans out of those 26 Million Texans.

Iowa State brings 60k to their games and have tons of alumni fans as well as half the state!



State Schools > Private schools in terms of fan base.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ISU does well in attendance but when 71k combined undergrads and nearby alumni are at worst one county away it really inflates their appeal to TV's if you are using attendance as any indicator. Selling out 55k is pretty meh when 71k likely to be interested people are on your own doorstep. When 1/3-1/4 of their alumni base is that local and they lack any national appeal from lack of hardware it's hard to see them bring much to a national broadcast of a home game.

For comparison:
TCU- 25k alumni in DFW and 8,500 undergrads = 33,500 likely interested locals (45k capacity stadium)
SMU- 39k alumni in DFW and 7,000 undergrads = 46,000 likely interested locals (32k capacity stadium)
BU- 26k alumni in McClennan and adjacent counties and 12,500 undergrads = 38,500 likely interested locals (50k capacity stadium)
KSU- 20.5k alumni in and around home county + 19k undergrads = 39.5k likely interested locals


ISU does a good job getting their group out but the local concentration of alumni and lack of other appealing sports makes it much less impressive when you compare demographics with other schools.

I would assume that BU and TCU bring more tv value to a national broadcast right now due to the Rose Bowl, RG3's heisman, upsets of UT, OU, KSU, and a Big 12 title than ISU does. People recognize the teams more because they've seen them more.

[dr rc]

Academics aren't going to mean squat.(1) The SEC would add a junior college - and already did in Arkansas - if it would help them get better on the field and with ratings. The Big 10 chose a less academically thought of university in Nebraska over a flat-out better school in Missouri, and now Nebraska has lost their AAU membership, taking away the Big10's pride in all schools being members. The ACC took Louisville, so there goes their argument, and the PAC 12 was ready to accept Texas Tech if it meant bringing Texas with them.

IN EVERY SINGLE CASE THE FOOTBALL COACHES WON OUT OVER THE SCHOLARS, THE BASKETBALL COACHES, AND IN SOME CASES EVEN TV SETS. If they ever did happen to find common cause, well, it was a happy accident. Even Maryland and Rutgers are telling the Big10 that long term they are better situated for football than an Iowa State, Kansas, or Kansas State when Snyder retires.

The two thinigs that could set realigment off again are 1) Texas's desire to stretch their influence and 2) the possible rift between the football schools in the ACC and the current distribution of money that favors the basketball schools. But as Stallion has pointed out, it's on hold for now with the media rights deal. But FSU and Clemson have made very clear that they feel as though they are getting hosed and want to be in a football conference. If the Big XII gets another chance at the East Coast and can stand being in a conference with those two schools, that may be the new merger that starts it up again.

The Nebraska/Mizzou Big Ten deal is interesting- I'm surprised the Big Ten wasn't more interested in Mizzou and the STL and KC media markets they bring with them. I realize Nebraska is the more established national football brand, but how much does that even matter in these things? Perhaps more than I think....

As far as the ACC goes, I'm surprised FSU and Clemson agreed to that Grant of Rights...they have been getting hosed but I wonder if Texas would allow them in the Big 12...Texas doesn't want to cede power to anyone, and FSU and Clemson could whip them on the football field and aren't going to give a rip about what Steve Patterson (DeLoss Jr.) says. I've always maintained that Texas will eventually go to the Pac-12, bringing Tech, OU, and Okie State along with them- it would make a Pac-12 broadcast package very valuable with huge media markets and give all four schools much greater nationwide exposure.

Of course, the only caveat here that isn't really talked about is the future of television distribution. If we're headed to a system where cable and satellite companies are phased out and programming is primarily a la carte, is adding so-so teams in big media markets (Rutgers, Maryland, arguably Mizzou long term) really in a conference's best interest? (2) All of this expansion is predicating on expanding your subscriber base and charging more cable companies more money per subscriber, but if that system begins to deteriorate, then what?

on #1 - Actually, academics DO matter to a degree. There is a reason the Big 10 wanted Maryland and Rutgers, the SEC wanted A&M and Mizzou, while neither wanted schools like East Carolina and West Virginia. All four that got to move up are AAU state flagship universities. That means big time research $$$. The Big 10 is especially concerned with adding schools that can add to their research money influence. The SEC to a degree also wants to add schools with big time money in research b/c they want to emulate the system the Big 10 has set up. So while being a big school with a large fan following is important, the academic stuff is too when it comes to the research end. BTW Nebraska would have NEVER been taken into the Big 10 had they lost their AAU status while still a member of the Big 12.

and #2 - If it goes a la carte with cable then it most certainly benefits both the Big 10 and the SEC to have large flagship state schools in their conference. They are going to want as many potential customers to purchase the networks regardless of how cable is sold.

Also, I really think a la carte wont be all that great for the consumer b/c channels are not going to magically be cheaper when you break apart bundling. They will INCREASE in price b/c they will no longer all be subsidizing each other. Good luck getting ESPN basic for less than $100 a month. ESPN2? That's another $50. Oh, you want ALL ESPN networks so you can make sure you see your team each weekend? Ok, well you will need ESPNU for another $50 and ESPNews for $20. BTW, ESPN sold a ton of games to CBS Sports Net so you will have to buy that too for another minimum of $20.

[SMU2007]

If there were an increase in price as you suggest, companies and consumers would just go back to the bundled system. No one is paying $220/month just for espn networks. There's no way.

[leopold]

Nope.

Two Big10 schools voted against Nebraska's membership in the AAU, Michigan and Wisconsin:

http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blog ... rc=desktop

This was before they had officially joined.

Did you hear any protest coming from ANY school administrator within the league? Anyone lobby either way to either get them the in AAU or keep them out if the Big10? No. Of course not, because it didn't matter. Football is what drove that decision from the get go and coaches don't give a damn about research.

And if you think for a second that AAU membership is what separates East Carolina and WV from Rutgers and Maryland your blind.

Arkansas had a 10% grad rate over a four year period amongst its STUDENTS when they joined - that's why I said it was a junior college. Nobody in the conference said a word because the ADs and the coaches ran the show.

People have to wake up to the fact that the chemistry department doesn't speak for the football team, who doesn't speak for the business school, who doesn't represent the tennis team. Either you choose to compete or you don't.

[dickey1331]

No one in the Big 5 conferences are gonna get kicked out.

[East Coast Mustang]

No one in the Big 5 conferences are gonna get kicked out.

You're probably right.

But... 14 (SEC) + 14 (ACC) + 14 (Big Ten) + 10 (Big 12) + 12 (Pac-12) + ND = 65 if my math is right, which makes it tough to do the 4x16 model which many have speculated. Unless its 5 x 16 with 15 others from outside the current P5 getting a bump to the big time. Who would the contenders be?

Almost assuredly in
BYU
UCF
USF
Cincinnati
UConn

Others in contention
SMU
Houston
Memphis
Colorado State
Fresno State
San Diego State
Boise State
Navy
Air Force
Army
Hawaii
SJSU
Temple
Tulsa
Tulane
New Mexico
Nevada
Utah State
Everyone else

I don't know if 5x16 is the future, but I think there will be some kind of downsizing of the FBS subdivision in the future and it would obviously greatly behoove us to continue to be a part of that. The reason I'm skeptical of 5x16 is that I don't know why the current power brokers would want to let 15 more schools in on the big pie. It may be more like a 4x16 model with a fifth conference that has some type of access to a new 8 team playoff and big money bowls, but isn't on the same footing as the other major conferences in terms of bowl payouts, TV contracts, etc..so basically not much different than what we're working with now.

[feelthehorsepower]

No one in the Big 5 conferences are gonna get kicked out.

You're probably right.

But... 14 (SEC) + 14 (ACC) + 14 (Big Ten) + 10 (Big 12) + 12 (Pac-12) + ND = 65 if my math is right, which makes it tough to do the 4x16 model which many have speculated. Unless its 5 x 16 with 15 others from outside the current P5 getting a bump to the big time. Who would the contenders be?

Almost assuredly in
BYU
UCF
USF
Cincinnati
UConn

Others in contention
SMU
Houston
Memphis
Colorado State
Fresno State
San Diego State
Boise State
Navy
Air Force
Army
Hawaii
SJSU
Temple
Tulsa
Tulane
New Mexico
Nevada
Utah State
Everyone else

I don't know if 5x16 is the future, but I think there will be some kind of downsizing of the FBS subdivision in the future and it would obviously greatly behoove us to continue to be a part of that. The reason I'm skeptical of 5x16 is that I don't know why the current power brokers would want to let 15 more schools in on the big pie. It may be more like a 4x16 model with a fifth conference that has some type of access to a new 8 team playoff and big money bowls, but isn't on the same footing as the other major conferences in terms of bowl payouts, TV contracts, etc..so basically not much different than what we're working with now.

The pie keeps getting bigger so I don't believe the fearmongers at all. Win the conference at least 7 times in the next 10 years and pack Ford Stadium/get plans ready for a new 50k fan house and you will see that nice Big 12 invite delivered by Bowlsby himself.

[WordUpBU]

But... 14 (SEC) + 14 (ACC) + 14 (Big Ten) + 10 (Big 12) + 12 (Pac-12) + ND = 65 if my math is right, which makes it tough to do the 4x16 model which many have speculated. Unless its 5 x 16 with 15 others from outside the current P5 getting a bump to the big time.

The trend has been that the postseason molds to whatever form the conferences take, a 4x16 or 5x16 model is the opposite. Did a 6x12 model happen? Nope.

If a 4x16 or 5x16 model occurs it will be because each league WANTED that themselves, not decreed to fit a nice neat playoff structure.

[Dukie]

http://outkickthecoverage.com/sec-network-aims-for-500-million-a-year-launch.php

Clay Travis is a [deleted], but he's also been pretty spot-on on predicting conference realignment trends and the "business" of college football. He predicts (as I have before, prematurely) that because of the absolute boatload of money SEC schools are going to make from the SEC Network (estimated at around $28.5M per year per school- that's just for SEC Network, doesnt include their CBS deal) that more schools will eventually join the SEC to get it to 16 teams, likely from VA and NC, and likely Virginia Tech and NC State.

FWIW, he actually says the SEC would want UNC and Duke and he thinks Duke won't go, and then it turns to VT and NCSU. I think he's wrong about Duke, particularly if they and UNC got an inkling that State was going to be invited instead. Anyway, all of this presumes that the NC and VA legislatures would let any of UNC, NCSU, VT, or UVa be left behind while the other state school goes on. Very unlikely.

[Prairiepony]

To quote Jim Delany the Big Ten Commissioner: " It's not about butts in the seats anymore.....it's about eyes on the screen." Or something very close to that.........which explains Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten.

[EastStang]

Academics will be important, certainly for the PAC 12 academics will matter when they expand. USC, Stanford, Cal all are going to insist on schools that have a solid academic reputation. They don't want Okie State or the Sand Aggies. Dexter Manley stayed eligible for 4 years at OSU and was illiterate. So, as weird as it sounds, a deal may be brokered to get OU/UT, they may insist upon SMU and either TCU/Baylor. Baylor may give the Pac 12 Presidents the same gas that BYU does, a religiously conservative school, I think TCU may have the same problem to a lesser degree. SMU does not. So, it may very well be a school that gets a hard look from the PAC 12. I don't see us as a candidate anywhere else.