…lol. And if given the choice, I’d take the Ocho Network with no subtitles over Mowins every day of the week.
B1G, Pac12, ACC in Discussions about Forming Alliance
- Thread starter gregkoko
- Start date
…lol. And if given the choice, I’d take the Ocho Network with no subtitles over Mowins every day of the week.
That's the biggest problem. They demonstrated that with the canceled (then uncanceled) covid season.
I don’t think the ACC is working at the behest of ESPN here. They are trying to survive too, so they are working in their interests. They just don’t have any power so their options are limited.
My point is that the best thing for the ACC right now is NOT the best thing for the B1G and what the ACC wants helps ESPN in the long run. An “alliance” just keeps the status quo and the SEC superconference can continue to be built over time.
The best thing for the B1G is to add PAC12 teams so that the chance of building an SEC superconference that dominates football (and downgrades everyone else) is killed once and for all.
Given PAC-12 contract is up in 2025, there is room for creativity and higher revenue and profits. Wish Delaney was at the helm for B1G to navigate through this. Warren appears in way over his head despite NFL experience.
They are if TV revenues are going to exceed $100 Mil as some are predicting now.
Didn't ESPN cause Texas and Oklahoma to move to the SEC in the first place? If so, then you have to ask what their end game is. If it's a 25 team major conference then everyone else, then the other P5 conferences would want to do everything they can to stop this because it would mean the end for them. An alliance would stop that if you can get it to stick. I like the idea, but how do you get everyone to honor it indefinitely?
If a 25 team major conference is formed, that would leave out Rutgers. The lanscape would be totally different. You basically would have division 1A, 2A, 3A, and FCS. Rutgers would end up in 2A.
If a 25 team major conference is formed, that would leave out Rutgers. The lanscape would be totally different. You basically would have division 1A, 2A, 3A, and FCS. Rutgers would end up in 2A.
The New Jersey-Philadelphia-New York City-Long Island area has what, 27 million people ? Why on Earth would a superconference not select the school from that area, in one of the two richest states in the country, a state overflowing with athletic talent, and a state with a zillion regional, national, and corporate headquarters ?
Yeah, it would seem dumb not too, but I think they just go how big the fan base is. If most of those 27 million like watching football, but only the pros, then they don't count as much. Even the idea of a super-conference of 25 seems dumb to me and I don't get how they think they can make more money by limiting the number of teams. I think that the more teams you have and the more even they play would create more fan bases, more college football viewership, more demand for games on TV and more money to be made.
Maybe for the same reasons Temple and the University of Houston are not in Power Conferences.
I'm not sold on the concept of Super Conferences.
Most likely 4 Power Conferences (16 teams) 64 total and Notre Dame will have to decide where they want to be.
Have to wait to see how it all plays out.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Last edited:
Both of those programs compete with flagship teams in their own states that kids grow up rooting for without direct ties. Hard to compete with that. Temple also refused to invest and we all know where that gets you in building out a program.
Just my opinion, but I don’t think the math on a 25 team SEC super league is likely to work out. OSU and Michigan are really unlikely to leave the BIG to proactively become 17 and 18 in the SEC. Why would they? As long as OSU and Michigan are still in the BIG, the PAC12 teams won’t go to the SEC either. If they were going to move it would be to the BIG. So who is filling out slots 17-25 and in what domino order?
The B1G should be in no hurry, but should be planning to makes moves when it’s prudent. Alvarez is on this and Delany is consulting. I’m not worried.
It seems to me that things will be quiet for a few years. Just alliances and such. Then as the ACC GOR gets closer to its end things may get very interesting again.
It seems to me that things will be quiet for a few years. Just alliances and such. Then as the ACC GOR gets closer to its end things may get very interesting again.
Don’t be sure on schools like USC and Oregon not going to the SEC if nothing is done to stop ESPN’s plan.
They are already unhappy with what has happened to the PAC12 over the least decade. They will always have a geographic disadvantage playing a PAC12 schedule. They will be making much less money than the SEC teams.
Then, if the SEC gets coast to coast with about a dozen elite football brands, a school like OSU has to decide if B1G membership is worth playoff football irrelevance.
And taking this further, I wouldn't trust the ACC at all to be part of this arrangement. They are an ESPN "property" and might just want to be at the table to serve as a pipeline for information flow to the Evil Empire. Kind of like how TX and OU continued to be at B12 meetings while secretly negotiating with the other ESPN property and, going back further, how BC continued to be at BE meetings until it bolted to the ACC.
An alliance would be taking the high road to not destroy other conferences but may not be the BIG's best financial interest. We could offer two B12 teams and encourage PAC and ACC to offer others, and then assist the leftovers with placement and maybe commit to each of the three alliance leagues to offer 1 for 1 with B12's that get dropped down. We would then work with lower level conferences to arrange scheduling and offer reasonable compensation when they come to play. Basically creating goodwill with the rest of CFB outside the SEC. Finally with the power in numbers push for a four team championship, one from each league, let the SEC go bonkers.
As to who do we take, I like flagships so Kansas and WVU. I know WVU has brutal academics but very good athletics and their offer could come with conditions beyond the buy-in, like committing $X million per year of academic scholarships and development. Alabama has been moving up academic rankings by offering academic scholarships. If you cant handle WVU I have an even wilder card - UMASS, again with academic conditions and also building a new domed stadium on campus that is bigger and better than the Carrier dome, advertising and maybe having OSU and Mich play them at Foxboro. Try to control Boston and the NE, a nice market if it can be had.
Financially it would be best to offer at least four PAC10 schools but will Oregon leave OSU behind, same deal in Washington. Maybe we offer Wash, Ore, UCLA and USC and they say we will come but we also want Ariz, Utah and Col to come, so dump some teams in the B10 that have two teams in the same state. They may look for more of a merger than being acquired. The deer in headlights look of Warren would be something.
One problem with super conferences, who supplies the losses when you have so many teams that expect to win 10 games a year?
As to who do we take, I like flagships so Kansas and WVU. I know WVU has brutal academics but very good athletics and their offer could come with conditions beyond the buy-in, like committing $X million per year of academic scholarships and development. Alabama has been moving up academic rankings by offering academic scholarships. If you cant handle WVU I have an even wilder card - UMASS, again with academic conditions and also building a new domed stadium on campus that is bigger and better than the Carrier dome, advertising and maybe having OSU and Mich play them at Foxboro. Try to control Boston and the NE, a nice market if it can be had.
Financially it would be best to offer at least four PAC10 schools but will Oregon leave OSU behind, same deal in Washington. Maybe we offer Wash, Ore, UCLA and USC and they say we will come but we also want Ariz, Utah and Col to come, so dump some teams in the B10 that have two teams in the same state. They may look for more of a merger than being acquired. The deer in headlights look of Warren would be something.
One problem with super conferences, who supplies the losses when you have so many teams that expect to win 10 games a year?
There are no B12 teams worth taking.
Here’s the ideal way to go:
- You add 6 PAC12 schools (USC, UCLA, Oregon,Wash and either Stanford/Cal or Colorado/Utah). Work with input from your potential TV partners on who 5 and 6 should be.
- You solve the “leave behind” problem with the following move. You pledge that the 20 B1G member schools will vote to support the “power conference” status of a new conference formed out of the 8 B12 and 6 PAC12 remaining schools plus up to 2 additions if they want it. This new conference would still get an automatic bid if the new playoff format moves to that and, more importantly, would get a share of the guaranteed playoff money (which is 67 million per conference now but would skyrocket with expansion). The new conference would obviously have a much less lucrative TV deal than the SEC, B1G and even ACC, but that playoff money and access makes them MUCH more valuable than G5 schools and would undercut any attempts by politicians to get involved.
But it would never happen that way because in terms of sequence of events - it’s 100% the case that a stable BIG with OSU and Michigan would be much more appealing to USC, Oregon and company than the SEC. In practice, it’s highly likely that if those schools were to entertainin a move they would talk to the BIG first and exhaust that possibility before agreeing to move to the SEC.
Nope. Take all the CA schools to block out the CA market altogether. Cannot give SEC/ESPN any openings to get under the tent. Same may apply to both AZ schools.
I think the ACC is feeling very threatened by ESPN. They are trapped in a long term below market contract until 2035 in the GOR and none of them are happy about it. If it wasn't for the threat of realignment making the GOR a good thing for them, the ACC would agitating to renegotiate. And ESPN is happy to keep the ACC as a stocking stuffer while the SEC teams go under the Christmas tree with a big sparkly ribbon. I think the ACC would be foolish to not be thinking about their future well being as not being intrinsically linked to ESPN.
Notre Dame called, they wanted to know if there was a conference that would like to join them. They would let the conference know their terms of the contract.
Agreed - especially if your BC, Syracuse, WF or NC State. Those teams will not find other homes.
Either the SEC or the BIG would possibly want most of the others. In a super conference world with the BIG marketed as the academics oriented conference I think Pitt might make the cut for the BIG east division. No shot for the other BE residuals.
This makes a ton of sense. At first I didn't get it. How is a scheduling alliance and a few more cross conference games going to make much difference? But I totally get the impact of a voting block that shapes the playoff. The current ESPN-backed proposal is for no limit to at-large bids from a conference to a 12 team playoff. That could mean 4-5 SEC teams getting bids every year. That's crucial to the calculus for Texas and OU moving to the SEC. If the ACC, Pac-10 and B1G all vote to limit it to 2 bids per conference, that screws OU and Texas in the SEC. That would be delicious. And in general, that would create a new dynamic that limits the desire of power schools to all congregate in one or two conferences because if there are too many contenders in the conference then quite a few top teams get shut out.
Also the idea of the B1G, ACC, and Pac-10 completely freezing out the SEC in scheduling is also pretty delicious. I kind of doubt that they have the guts and unity to pull it off. But how cool would it be if the SEC had schedule a bunch of Big-12 games because those are the only good teams that will play them? The ACC would be the weak link in this chain because so many ACC schools have SEC local rivalries. But if the B1G and Pac-10 flexed on the ACC, the ACC might go along.
Anyway, in general I like where this is heading.
Last edited:
Exactly. This is why I don't get at all those who argue how the B1G doesn't need to do anything. They do. There are only so many prime properties out there. The longer the B1G waits, the more opportunity it provides to the other conferences to scoop them up from under us (or lock them up long term thru another GOR). IMO, being proactive is usually better than being reactive, especially when dealing with a finite supply that everyone is picking from.
Last edited:
2 teams per conference for a 12 team field? That’s not happening. Would be more like 4.
Just pAny alliance at Brisbane
big ten needs to hire you !
Nothing is a guarantee but I think the PAC12 schools would reach out to the BIG before doing this.
And you just gave the SEC an opening to take UCLA (LA market), Stanford and Cal (SF Bay Area), U Wash (Seattle), Zona and ASU (Phoenix) and Colorado ( Denver).
This ultimately is about big market media even with a shift to cord cutting. The providers are getting better and better at regionalizing cord cutters. They have to in order to keep raising fees.
Agree that the alliance does 1 thing. I creates a voting block. Expand to 8 or 12 teams and put a cap of 2 teams per league. At that point your 2 best teams are in the playoffs, what more do you want.
The other thing this does is that it gives Oregon St, Utah, Wake Forrest, Syracuse a chance to survive. While the ACC and Pac12 will not have the same payouts as the BIG 10 and SEC, at least they get something that keeps them in the conversation.
The Key here is will Florida State, Clemson, Oregon, USC, UCLA, etc. be ok with making significantly less than South Carolina, Miss St, Purdue, Northwestern indefinitely. If they can agree to it, then the Power 4 will continue with no significant expansion.
Otherwise, 2-6 Pac12 and ACC Teams will look elsewhere.
ESPN might own the ACC, but they had no incentive to paying Boston College and NC State when they bring nothing especially when they are forced to pay the ACC more money in the future.
20 years from now, if this voting block alliance is successful, you will see little movement. If not you will see a Stong SEC, a Stong BIG10 (depending on whether they went for the PAC12 schools) and a 3rd/4th conferences that make less than half what the HAVES make.
And most of the Big8 never made it back to a power conference.
The other thing this does is that it gives Oregon St, Utah, Wake Forrest, Syracuse a chance to survive. While the ACC and Pac12 will not have the same payouts as the BIG 10 and SEC, at least they get something that keeps them in the conversation.
The Key here is will Florida State, Clemson, Oregon, USC, UCLA, etc. be ok with making significantly less than South Carolina, Miss St, Purdue, Northwestern indefinitely. If they can agree to it, then the Power 4 will continue with no significant expansion.
Otherwise, 2-6 Pac12 and ACC Teams will look elsewhere.
ESPN might own the ACC, but they had no incentive to paying Boston College and NC State when they bring nothing especially when they are forced to pay the ACC more money in the future.
20 years from now, if this voting block alliance is successful, you will see little movement. If not you will see a Stong SEC, a Stong BIG10 (depending on whether they went for the PAC12 schools) and a 3rd/4th conferences that make less than half what the HAVES make.
And most of the Big8 never made it back to a power conference.
Or in 20 years we may have a separate league that broke off, consisting of 41 schools previously of the B1G/Pac-12/ACC. A league that would govern itself, play sports on its own, share revenue equally and have more schools than not that have similar values as educational institutions.
If the goal is solely to form an Alliance for voting purposes, I keep on coming back to why the 3 Conferences are not including the Big 12 Conference to the party. Regardless of what anyone says, the Big 12 Conference still has an opportunity to survive as an A5 Conference and may have opportunities to expand by raiding the AAC. I highly doubt the other Conferences have an interest in expanding with any of the remaining 8 members of the Big 12. In addition, the Big 12 Conference would clearly vote against the SEC on most governance issues due to the SEC's raid on Oklahoma/Texas. I believe the objectives of this Alliance, if it comes into being, is much more than voting together on governance issues to counteract the SEC.
100%. Whatever competitive advantage ESPN can get over FOX it will take. These are the two biggest players in college football production. ESPN will overpay if it has to keep its inventory of properties and if it can’t maintain a stranglehold on the ACC it will no doubt look to devalue it by brokering schools like FSU and Clemson to the SEC.
Bottom line: don’t trust the ACC.
GO RU
Last edited:
Don't trust ESPN! ACC is powerless and is just doing what ESPN tells them to do. They are not going to screw over their overlords to help the Big Ten and Pac-12.
So yeah do not trust the ACC.
So yeah do not trust the ACC.
It would likely be an 8 team field. Or I wonder if it could be that the top two from each of the power 4 or 5 conferences get in, and then have 4 at-large, but max of 3 total per conference.
Anyway, point is, it can be worked to screw conferences that have too many top teams in one power conference.
How are ESPN their overlords? ESPN has them in a contract that I think they already want to get out of. I don't see any other influence ESPN has over them.
Right now the B1G has a ton of power because we are making new TV deals that are completely on the open market and can incorporate any additions the B1G makes easily, while the SEC (if they make any additions) can only work with ESPN on revising their deal mid-contract in return for an extension.
It is completely foolish to waste that power, because you are confident we can fight off a PAC12 move from the SEC at a time it is more advantageous to them.
That’s the attitude that led to the B1G being caught sleeping when the SEC grabbed OU and Texas.
I would lean towards taking the four CA schools as well, but at would want feedback from the bidders on the TV deals to make the final decision.
Alliances only work when the parties trust each other not to undermine each other or the alliance.