Scheduling alliance and also forming a voting block to check any power the SEC has.
B1G, Pac12, ACC in Discussions about Forming Alliance
- Thread starter gregkoko
- Start date
Scheduling alliance and also forming a voting block to check any power the SEC has.
We need something like this. Things trending towards two super leagues; the sec snd the whatever rest comes together here
Is rutgers committed to playing at a high stakes level? I think we aren’t and only conveniently committed. Sadly
Is rutgers committed to playing at a high stakes level? I think we aren’t and only conveniently committed. Sadly
Last edited:
This would make a lot more sense than adding new schools.
douche post but not unexpected from you. If you don't understand we are committed now you just don't want to realize it.
They don't need an alliance. Big Ten has shown bigger doesn't mean better. Some of you in panic mode is disturbing. Name the first school to add TV $. That's easy. You can't name a 2nd team!
How can you not objectively think we are only conveniently committed based on our history ? Sure , we made huge strides with schiano ! But it was just a few years ago our president was bragging about giving our football coach a raise to be on par with the lowest in the league .
This school has a long history of trying to downplay big time athletics. Sad, but true . I am usually right here and got the board Cred
I agree with your statement but I think that things are trending in the right direction. Being in the B1G 10 means that there's no turning back now.
Looks to me the ACC not feeling so confident. They should be careful what cards they show ESPN before they help the SEC pick off Clem and FSU and leave the rest of conference in a lurch.
GO RU
GO RU
I look forward - you look back. Always has been with you.
Disagree. Nonsense alliance. ACC is tied to the hip with SEC as well as via ESPN. I can see Big 10 alliance with Pac 12 but best thing for Big 10 to do is poach Pac 12 - a la USC / UCLA / Oregon / Colorado
Rutgers is not leaving the BIG. It would be just about impossible to recover from the damage it would cause. And getting kicked out of the BIG research alliance would be a major academic setback.
These three conferences can talk about an alliance all they want ... it's completely meaningless because all it will take is the SEC to invite another two or four teams and the "alliance" will immediately crumble as rats flee the sinking ship and struggle to be the schools who aren't left out of the re-organization. The Big10 participating in any such alliance is foolish because right now they are in the power position and best equipped to poach the cream of the crop from the other two conferences. The Big10's position can only get worse, it's never going to get better than it is right now.
Yeah, I don’t love this alliance idea because if schools aren’t actually moving it is just treading water.
ESPN/SEC need things to stay status quo for a while with the B1G/PAC12 as they incorporate Texas and OU, then they can try additional raids later.
Since (unlike the B1G adding a bunch of PAC12 schools) this alliance doesn’t result in one wide ranging strong conference with other than full ESPN media rights that makes the SEC superconference idea not viable, I wouldn’t be surprised if this whole alliance idea is being orchestrated by ESPN through the ACC.
The most important issue for the Big Ten is not expansion. It's the upcoming media negotiations as the current TV contracts are coming to an end. In order for Big Ten revenue to stay close to the SEC, they're needs to be a competitive landscape. This is where an Alliance will help to support the negotiations and no, ESPN is not a Friend of the Big Ten Conference:
It should be reasonably easy for the other conferences to force an open market bidding process. The “alliance” could simply be a pact that if this doesn’t happen, all 3 conferences agree to boycott the playoffs.
Let the 16 teams form a 12 team play off among the same 16 teams that already settled things in the conference standings and see how much interest that generates. My guess is there’d be more interest in traditional bowl tie ins among the other conference top teams.
Let the 16 teams form a 12 team play off among the same 16 teams that already settled things in the conference standings and see how much interest that generates. My guess is there’d be more interest in traditional bowl tie ins among the other conference top teams.
There is always a point to turn back . This thing looks like it’s headed to two super leagues with “schools” that have football factory mindsets.
You are completely right. BIG needs to raid these other conferences and make a conference that is the clear cut number 2.
this is is heading the way of super leagues. Alliance is crap.
I agree with you nearly 100%. The B1G is the 2nd best football conference. Aligning with the 3rd and 4th best, just pulls it down. If somehow FSU and Clemson wiggle out of the GOR and into the SEC, or worse yet, Ohio State, Penn State or Michigan join them. it becomes the SEC and then everyone else.
I do think the B1G can strengthen themselves if they can get USC and a couple others to join but I don’t think that happens and I believe the league lacks leadership right now.
There’s no turning back. ESPN has been working since the Big East days to reduce the number of schools at the highest level of football.
Their solution, which is what will happen if the B1G doesn’t act, would have one 25 or so team superconference of mostly football factories that completely controls the playoff.
The best solution at this point is for the B1G to add PAC 12 schools. We end up with a 50-55 school top level with three conferences, none of which has power over everything.
Yeah, it sucks for the B12 and P12 schools that get left behind, but you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.
I don't think ACC is doing any sort of alliance thing for ESPN. I tend to think Jim Phillips isn't as naive as Swofford was judging from things you read about him. Also working with Delany in the B10, he saw what coming out from under ESPN and not kowtowing did for the conference (BTN). Swofford put the ACC under ESPN's thumb and what has that done for them but leave them behind financially.
Some ACC fans think ESPN is out to help the ACC because they own it fully. I don't think so. ESPN is out to help ESPN (mind you I don't blame them, that's the motivation for any company). If their interests align with the ACC well then great but if they don't well then too bad for the ACC. Just look at the SEC and CBS. CBS has been underpaying the SEC GOTW for 55M and now ESPN is going to be paying them 300M in a couple years. Did CBS say well we got the best SEC game lets up them beforehand with their expansion of A&M/Mizzou or hypothetically if Texas/OU got out a little early?(don't think that will happen but just as a hypothetical) Nope they said we've got a steal here and we're going to keep it as long as we can and that was what CBS felt was in their best interest. Same for ESPN and the ACC. They're paying less for the ACC then maybe what the market demands and just like CBS you think they have any incentive to spend extra money in this time of cord cutting? Nope and the ACC is stuck for quite awhile because Swofford naively put them under ESPN's thumb for a long time because he was only looking in front of his nose instead of the long term picture
If Phillips is smart he won't do that. He probably can't do anything about the ESPN deal but he can get his schools more money if the CFP comes out to bid in 5 years. Mind you it's relative because everyone will get a bump but if the B12 is gone and maybe the PAC12 well then at least a much bigger cut over the leftover P5schools and G5 types. The other thing is like what has been mentioned. If Fox/NBC/CBS/Amazon or whomever get their hands on a part of the playoff well then they may be more inclined to bid on conference's T1/T2 rights as well. And of course that it turns means more bidders for the ACC (and everyone else) to increase their tv money. Now the ACC can't do much about that until 2036 but like I said look beyond the tip of your nose and realize it's better for them to get out from being under ESPN's thumb completely as opposed to thinking they have your best interests in mind. It doesn't mean you can't work with ESPN, just like the B10 now, but it's not necessarily good to be completely under their thumb.
Last edited:
From Matt Fortuna at the Athletic, didn't mention who the PAC12/B10 reps are.
An implementation committee has been formed among the three conferences to further study such an alliance, a source tells The Athletic. The ACC representatives on the committee are Clemson AD Dan Radakovich, North Carolina AD Bubba Cunningham and Virginia AD Carla Williams.
An implementation committee has been formed among the three conferences to further study such an alliance, a source tells The Athletic. The ACC representatives on the committee are Clemson AD Dan Radakovich, North Carolina AD Bubba Cunningham and Virginia AD Carla Williams.
Agree.
I also believe a Scheduling component to this Alliance would have benefits for all the parties. For example, why not have weeks of Big Ten - ACC, Big Ten - Pac 12 and ACC - Pac 12 matchups where the good teams play the good teams and the not so good teams play each other. Yes this would take up 2 out of the 3 OOC games, however, so be it. For the ACC, Clemson now has a reputation of playing a soft schedule. With Clemson playing OSU and Oregon as an example during the regular season, this perception now changes and they become even more appealing if they don't win the ACC bid for a Playoffs. In addition, the newly formed SEC will not be able to claim Strength of Schedule advantages over the other Conferences for ranking and jockeying for Playoff spots.
Also believe fans would enjoy weeks dedicated to these Conference matchups with media promoting the hell out of it. Although our Washington series was not timed well and it was a mis-match, I really enjoyed our Series against Washington State. Both our Washington State games came down to the final possession and were extremely entertaining. Media will find Big Ten - Pac 12 Week intriguing and possibly pay up for the games.
It does add marquee matchups to the inventory but wonder how much money that brings and also in the ACC's case what does it actually do for them financially. ESPN will love extra marquee matchups because they own all of the ACC but that doesn't mean they will have to pay the ACC any more money. The PAC12/B10 would probably get some financial benefit from extra marquee games with their contracts coming up but even then I wonder just how much....maybe along the fringes? I don't know. Politically I can see the benefits of an alliance, financially a little more murky.
It may not bring additional financial value for the ACC other than increased exposure for the better teams, Fox game scheduling when on the road, and better SOS for ranking and Playoff purposes. For some schools, attendance for the game may also increase depending on the matchup.
Although for example when Rutgers and UCLA signed an Agreement to play a Home and Home (Rutgers subsequently exited for $500K fee) didn't the parties negotiate payouts directly? Not sure how that works.
Edit:
I'm assuming that if the Big Ten and Pac-12 media contracts increase due to a scheduling component, direct payments to ACC schools for home and home series may also increase due to ACC road games on another Network/Service. Believe that ESPN GOR covers all home games played by the ACC?
Last edited:
Best solution is for the BIG ten to form or merge with the SEC . If I was Warren, I would go bend the knee right now and make it work
Alliances are not the same as memberships in a conference. Of course it is great to play good teams in other conferences.
But, conference realignment momentum has started. It might take a year or three, but teams are on the move to greener pastures.
But, conference realignment momentum has started. It might take a year or three, but teams are on the move to greener pastures.
Is the B1G and PAC foolish enough to trust the ACC? Swofford played his hand on how much that league can be trusted. Better to see the ACC destroyed.
Disagree. Depends what the contracts say and how the money flows. In some ways they can be stronger.
Yes Texas and Oklahoma are on the move to greener pasture. However, nobody else is on the move and it's all speculation and fantasy at this time. If this Alliance takes place, clearly the 3 P5 Conferences have no interest in the remainder of the Big 12 and they're working to protect the 41 schools from any further SEC grabs.
First step is to put a dent in the ESPN - SEC monopoly by killing ESPN's grab for the CFP without winning the bid(s) and creating a fair playing field, Fox included. They'll be other governance issues where the SEC will be rendered a non-factor by such Alliance.
For now, the focus is on the media contract negotiations for the Big Ten and they need support from the ACC to kill the Playoffs being handed over to ESPN without competition. Commish Phillips being advised by Delany is a different animal than Swofford. ACC destroyed maybe at a later date. The most important issue here is to ensure Fox doesn't take their ball and go home prior to paying the Big Ten for a new TV deal. If ESPN gets that Playoff without competition, Fox may walk away and then the Big Ten is screwed big time and Rutgers may be playing on your local ESPN Ocho Network with Beth Mowins doing the play by play.