Conference Realignment

[Old.Edgy]

Fun prompt.

In the broad sweep of history so long as the framework was conferences negotiating individual TV deals, consolidation was inevitable. The timeline might change, which schools in which conferences might change, but competing for those TV dollars meant destruction of the system eventually. The only way to prevent us getting here was collectivization in some form, which would have had the added advantage of leveraging quasi-monopoly power against the broadcasters. That's the happy version of the story and at every step since the Supreme Court handed schools and conferences TV rights, that SHOULD have been the decision.

As to what could have really changed the way it all went down, I think there are better moments to point at.

The first I said above, if CBS extends with the SEC for their first-tier games in 2019, that drastically reduces the incentive for ESPN and the SEC to coax Texas and Oklahoma, and also probably ensures ESPN's participation in the next Big Ten deal. That kicks the Power Five system to 2030 at least, into a new media paradigm we can't yet see. Who knows what comes out the other side of that hypothetical.

And then the second one is Nebraska, a move the Big Ten made in order to get to 12, which the NCAA mandated to allow for a football championship game, a rule they have since loosened. If we'd been allowed to hold a title game under current rules, we don't make that move, and without destabilization of the Big XII, the five conferences stay on much more equal power footing through the 2010's, a more durable equilibrium (as unhappy of a family as the Big 12 always was notwithstanding.)

(We also have to assume that the Pac 16 doesn't happen, which was a whisker away, only prevented by a financially senseless last-minute ESPN bribe of Texas. If the Pac 16 happens in June 2010, we have a 4X16 conference system by July 2010. That's the biggest contingency in the bunch.)

But what really should have happened, from a Big Ten perspective? When the BTN launch was so successful, and suddenly gave the league this huge platform in the homes of everyone in the Midwest, the league should have taken a long term view, invested, and tried to fill that platform, make it valuable. Most obvious there would have been pushing to make new revenue sports of properties that are known winners on TV, baseball and hockey. It needn't have necessarily been strictly sports though, something like the Big 10K in Chicago, not a TV property, but it showed the path of the Big Ten as a Midwestern lifestyle brand, something that could engage people in a deeper and more sustained way. It might not have worked, it might not have aged all that well in the era of media fragmentation (to say nothing of political culture war), but in 2007 that path was there and part of the discussion.

That was pursued barely at all, no sincere investment along those lines was ever done. The BTN has been a theft of $1 per month from it's inception, always with terrible ratings, the cheapest possible programming, and not the slightest attempt to make it worth more to the consumer than the old ESPN+ syndication system was. Just a cynical ploy for dollars, and a wildly successful one, the story of Jim Delany's career.

It's possible that the college sports world could have shaken out where something like "Ohio State and Penn State to the SEC" could have entered the conversation. Never likely, but if we'd stood pat at 11 (or 10) while others started eating each other, that's a possible future. But if the conference had attacked the opportunity to make Big Ten membership something deeper and more comprehensive (making it among other things more lucrative with diversified revenue streams), that could have made leaving unthinkable in a way more meaningful than just "no better TV deal from now to 2031 is available".

I have followed your dissertation with high interest, as I do agree with many of your tenants... But this one is baffling to me: 'Most obvious there would have been pushing to make new revenue sports of properties that are known winners on TV, baseball and hockey.' . . . Baseball is 'boring' when watched on TV, and I gave that up 40+ years ago, and hockey is the same as the old 'Friday Night Fights'. Organized mayhem and legalized violence while skating, which is why it was banned for national TV years ago... Other than these two things, how else could the BTN have 'filled that platform' and made it 'more valuable' ? ?

 

[WeWillWhen]

Bottom line is that the Big-12 was in way worse shape than the Pac-12 when Klivakoff started, he had a year to take advantage, and did not.

Remember, with the departure of Texas and Okla, the Big-12 was down to just Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa St., Okla St., WVU, Baylor, Texas Tech and TCU. Zero traditional football powers, and no large media markets outside of Texas. And yet, they managed to outmaneuver the Pac-12 and survived. Huge hubris and miscalculations by Klivakoff and the Pac-12 Presidents.

 

[Calvin]

I agree. 12 guarantees a spot for Alabama, OSU, Georgia, Clemson, and probably ND every year. If Oklahoma had stayed in the Big 12, they would be guaranteed, too. Michigan, PSU, Florida, Tennessee, USC, Miami, FSU and whoever wins the Big 12 will be frequent flyers, as well.

I think you will still see only one or two non traditional powers in the 12 any given year.

We'll see. It stands to reason that the bar is a heck of a lot lower at 12 than it would be at 4. I think if you go back and look at the standings since they started the BCS matching top teams, you'd see some names down the list that would have gotten in a 12 team format that would have been called Cinderella.

I've always enjoyed discussing the B1G with my neighbors at various events.

To each his own. I hate the idea of the new B1G.

Fair enough. And I would agree that having a physical connection if you've traveled to a rival's town adds something. But maybe this will open your circles to more folks you can share your interests with. My experience is that college football fans from all over have a lot in common.

 

[ChiefGritty]

Huge hubris and miscalculations by Klivakoff and the Pac-12 Presidents.

If 8 of the 12 schools are better off now financially than they would have been sticking with the Pac 12, and that's the only thing they care about, who miscalculated exactly?

The conference commissioner Mean Girls stuff remains extremely foggy-brained. It's college football reporters who don't have the knowledge or experience of the media space grasping to make sense of what their sources are telling them.

 

[Ramrod2010]

Viva Las Vegas

Report: Future Big Ten Football Championships Heading to Las Vegas.

Iowa radio show says Indianapolis may lose the league title game for a couple years

Seems like an isolated report, but still...

 

[ChiefGritty]

Other than these two things, how else could the BTN have 'filled that platform' and made it 'more valuable' ? ?

I mean, those two are big, and are huge TV properties. It would have taken investment and creativity to make those products worthy of the attention of fans more accustomed to only seeing football and men's basketball as sports that "count". NIL wasn't on the horizon at that time, but imagine a world in which the cashflow runoff from the BTN is cornering the (much cheaper) market on college baseball and hockey talent, making the Big Ten an ever more prominent and attention-grabbing pathway to the pros in those sports. A virtuous cycle.

In 2006 it wasn't obvious that soccer would have had potential in that regard, but that's another one. Certain women's sports are emergent in that regard. The Caitlin Clark thing has happened by happy accident. The BTN could have intentionally engineered it 10 years ago.

Outside of college sports, broadcasting Midwestern high school sports always seemed like a sensible thing to break into.

Something like ESPN's 30 for 30 would have cost money, but then that's true of all of this.

Everything with the BTN besides the visual production values of the broadcasts of revenue sport games has always been done on the cheapest of the cheap. Even the classic game stuff, literal free programming, has never been presented with the thought or variety that would engage anyone for long. No one in the conference ever believed in making a basic cable TV station they had region-wide carriage for worth anything at all.

The whole theory depends on tightening and deepening the uniqueness and localism of the Big Ten brand though. We are THESE institutions in THIS place. That was never how Delany saw the entity he ran, alas.

 

[spotter]

Viva Las Vegas



Seems like an isolated report, but still...

Nothing screams B1G tradition like playing for the conference championship in Las Vegas.

 

[spotter]

We'll see. It stands to reason that the bar is a heck of a lot lower at 12 than it would be at 4. I think if you go back and look at the standings since they started the BCS matching top teams, you'd see some names down the list that would have gotten in a 12 team format that would have been called Cinderella.

TV executives are physically aroused at the prospect of an 11-1 or 10-2 group of five getting to the National Championship. They will try their best to wedge the Mountain West, C-USA, or Sun Belt champion into the 12-team playoff at the expense of leaving out an ACC, B1G or Big 12 at-large.

 

[Joel Goodson]

I have followed your dissertation with high interest, as I do agree with many of your tenants... But this one is baffling to me: 'Most obvious there would have been pushing to make new revenue sports of properties that are known winners on TV, baseball and hockey.' . . . Baseball is 'boring' when watched on TV, and I gave that up 40+ years ago, and hockey is the same as the old 'Friday Night Fights'. Organized mayhem and legalized violence while skating, which is why it was banned for national TV years ago... Other than these two things, how else could the BTN have 'filled that platform' and made it 'more valuable' ? ?

tenants? what about home owners?

BTW, hockey has massively changed since the goon squad days. Speed, speed and skill rule the day now.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

Viva Las Vegas



Seems like an isolated report, but still...

Vegas makes way more sense than Sofi or the Rose Bowl or Indy .

If & when the new Bears stadium is built - then that would be a natural to alternate with Vegas

Vegas would be a natural for the BTT also , but something tells me there are already other tourneys there the same time

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

tenants? what about home owners?

BTW, hockey has massively changed since the goon squad days. Speed, speed and skill rule the day now.

yup
olympic hockey and college hockey doesn’t allow that crap .

and I still enjoy the occasional fight , but not the 3 times a game Hanson Bros thing

 

[mattcoldagelli]

Outside of college sports, broadcasting Midwestern high school sports always seemed like a sensible thing to break into.

I've wondered about this. Why doesn't BTN air things like Illinois state b-ball championship, Ohio state football championship, etc.? That's a layup.

 

[ChiefGritty]

I've wondered about this. Why doesn't BTN air things like Illinois state b-ball championship, Ohio state football championship, etc.? That's a layup.

The NCAA took an understandably dim view of the Longhorn Network becoming the official broadcaster of UT commits back in the pre-NIL days, but this would be different in a variety of ways.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

TV executives are physically aroused at the prospect of an 11-1 or 10-2 group of five getting to the National Championship. They will try their best to wedge the Mountain West, C-USA, or Sun Belt champion into the 12-team playoff at the expense of leaving out an ACC, B1G or Big 12 at-large.

there is NO WAY a 10-2 team from G5 ever sniffs the playoffs
I doubt a 11-1 team does as well

the only chance they have is to basically be 12-0

 

[ChiefGritty]

there is NO WAY a 10-2 team from G5 ever sniffs the playoffs
I doubt a 11-1 team does as well

the only chance they have is to basically be 12-0

The plan is to give the highest ranked G5 champion an auto-bid.

In a 12-team arrangement, that's a pretty cheap and easy way to ward off antitrust/cranky congressional scrutiny. The CFP-era elite bowl framework has been careful about that stuff in a way the BCS defiantly was not.

 

[ptgrd23]

Bottom line is that the Big-12 was in way worse shape than the Pac-12 when Klivakoff started, he had a year to take advantage, and did not.

Remember, with the departure of Texas and Okla, the Big-12 was down to just Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa St., Okla St., WVU, Baylor, Texas Tech and TCU. Zero traditional football powers, and no large media markets outside of Texas. And yet, they managed to outmaneuver the Pac-12 and survived. Huge hubris and miscalculations by Klivakoff and the Pac-12 Presidents.

Downside of hiring streaming TV exec instead of experienced college athletics AD/commissioner. Did not understand institutional history and how universities make decisions. He did not get clear direction from University Presidents / athletic directors and was unable to drive consensus. Colorado did not have faith in him and by jumping to B12 restarted to carousel. B10 was very lucky to have Jim Delaney.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

so a 10-2 MAC or 11-1 Mountain West team ranked 21 sneaks in over a 10-2 Illinois team ranked 12th ?

 

[DeonThomas]

Viva Las Vegas



Seems like an isolated report, but still...

The so-called "Championship Game" is essentially worthless starting in 2024.

-- 18 teams (at least) will be in the Big Ten conference
-- It's possible that we'll have as many as five teams at 12-0 / 11-1 /10-2 in the regular season
-- In fact, it's feasible that four teams could finish at 8-1 or 9-1 in the league; how do you really break that tie?
-- We'll probably have 3, 4 or even 5 Big 10 teams in contention for the 12-team national playoff
-- The loser of the Big Ten Championship game could (potentially) lower its stock by playing in, and losing, the title game

Yes, that 13th game will certainly draw viewership and $$$$ for the league/teams, but perhaps at the expense of costing the regular season runner-up a spot in the 12-team national playoff. I can foresee a 10-3 Illini squad just missing the CFP playoff, whereas that same team at 10-2 team might have received an invitation:

* 2-1 non-conference record (with an OT loss at unranked Duke)
* 8-1 record in the Big Ten, but winning the tiebreaker to finish #2 in the conference (with a home loss to unranked Michigan State as the only regular season blemish), followed by a 52-16 blow-out loss to Oregon in the Big Ten championship

Instead of a championship game, I'd rather just accept my invitation to the playoff!!!

 

[ChiefGritty]

so a 10-2 MAC or 11-1 Mountain West team ranked 21 sneaks in over a 10-2 Illinois team ranked 12th ?

Correct.

Though to be clear, the plan was for it to be the 6 highest ranked champions, so if Illinois is the B1G champion we would also get an auto-bid.

The Power Five is dead now, so it will have to shake out a bit, but the principle of one auto bid for a little guy will be part of it.

 

[Ander1345]

The so-called "Championship Game" is essentially worthless starting in 2024.

-- 18 teams (at least) will be in the Big Ten conference
-- It's possible that we'll have as many as five teams at 12-0 / 11-1 /10-2 in the regular season
-- In fact, it's feasible that four teams could finish at 8-1 or 9-1 in the league; how do you really break that tie?
-- We'll probably have 3, 4 or even 5 Big 10 teams in contention for the 12-team national playoff
-- The loser of the Big Ten Championship game could (potentially) lower its stock by playing in, and losing, the title game

Yes, that 13th game will certainly draw viewership and $$$$ for the league/teams, but perhaps at the expense of costing the regular season runner-up a spot in the 12-team national playoff. I can foresee a 10-3 Illini squad just missing the CFP playoff, whereas that same team at 10-2 team might have received an invitation:

* 2-1 non-conference record (with an OT loss at unranked Duke)
* 8-1 record in the Big Ten, but winning the tiebreaker to finish #2 in the conference (with a home loss to unranked Michigan State as the only regular season blemish), followed by a 52-16 blow-out loss to Oregon in the Big Ten championship

Instead of a championship game, I'd rather just accept my invitation to the playoff!!!

Solution is just a 4 team play off until we finally do away with meaningless post season and the B1G just has its own playoffs.

 

[redwingillini11]

The so-called "Championship Game" is essentially worthless starting in 2024.

-- 18 teams (at least) will be in the Big Ten conference
-- It's possible that we'll have as many as five teams at 12-0 / 11-1 /10-2 in the regular season
-- In fact, it's feasible that four teams could finish at 8-1 or 9-1 in the league; how do you really break that tie?
-- We'll probably have 3, 4 or even 5 Big 10 teams in contention for the 12-team national playoff
-- The loser of the Big Ten Championship game could (potentially) lower its stock by playing in, and losing, the title game

Yes, that 13th game will certainly draw viewership and $$$$ for the league/teams, but perhaps at the expense of costing the regular season runner-up a spot in the 12-team national playoff. I can foresee a 10-3 Illini squad just missing the CFP playoff, whereas that same team at 10-2 team might have received an invitation:

* 2-1 non-conference record (with an OT loss at unranked Duke)
* 8-1 record in the Big Ten, but winning the tiebreaker to finish #2 in the conference (with a home loss to unranked Michigan State as the only regular season blemish), followed by a 52-16 blow-out loss to Oregon in the Big Ten championship

Instead of a championship game, I'd rather just accept my invitation to the playoff!!!

I agree, this is my greatest problem with where college football is going. The conference championship just seems entirely irrelevant. Even if you expand it to a four team conference playoff for the championship, what is the point? How do you benefit compared to staying at home and resting up?

 

[Bucktown]

I've always enjoyed discussing the B1G with my neighbors at various events. I live in the western suburbs, and there are plenty of alumni from across the traditional base. I literally don't know a single person who went to Maryland, Rutgers, PSU, UCLA, USC, Washington, or Oregon. My neighbor's kid is going to Nebraska this year. The traditional foes matter much more to me because I'm watching and talking with others who care about them. "It's going to be a real battle when we play you guys in 2025" just doesn't have the same ring to it.

To each his own. I hate the idea of the new B1G.

Washington UCLA and USC are quite popular as possible college choices at least among the private and selective enrollment high schools in the City.

 

[ptgrd23]

This is the football coach talking. Let’s ask the track and field or rowing or water polo or field hockey staff how they feel about the logistics required of a schedule that has them alternatively going from California to North Carolina back to California to Massachusetts to California to Kentucky and so on. I don’t know exactly, but a college softball team must take about 12-15 road trips per season or something like that? Crossing three times zones even three or four times a year is pretty brutal.

No reason why non revenue sports can't play most games in regional pods with maybe 1 west coast trip and 1 east coast trip a year then meet up for B10 championship tournament at end of season. The big travellers are going to be the 4 west coast schools. Nobody forced them to join the B10. They could have kept Pac12 together .

 

[Bucktown]

Everything with the BTN besides the visual production values of the broadcasts of revenue sport games has always been done on the cheapest of the cheap. Even the classic game stuff, literal free programming, has never been presented with the thought or variety that would engage anyone for long. No one in the conference ever believed in making a basic cable TV station they had region-wide carriage for worth anything at all.

So true. Even though it the most widely distributed of all of the other conference networks and many other individual sport focused channels, it is an still an underutilized asset.

 

[dbeverly26]

BTW, hockey has massively changed since the goon squad days. Speed, speed and skill rule the day now.

HDTV has arguably helped hockey more than any other televised sport, too. Watch a broadcast from the 80s and you can't even follow the puck. (Remember when Fox had the NHL for a while?)