Conference Realignment

Status
Not open for further replies.
#826      
The biggest problem with big conferences is how do you decide who is best. If you are going to have a conference championship game you need a balanced schedule so you can actually evaluate teams. You don’t want to give an easy path to OSU scUM USC PSU or you will develop resentment with the rest of the conference

However you want to create a balance approach for football and basketball. However that gets done pods that rotate or divisions I am good. Right now the teams in the east complain because they have scUM and OSU. Basketball is luck of the draw on who you play twice, home/away only
 
#828      

ChiefGritty

Chicago, IL
WSJ today
Pac12 Mistake #1July 2021- not expanding
Then, three weeks after officially taking over on July 1, 2021, the college sports landscape began to change when Texas and Oklahoma announced they would leave the Big 12 for the SEC. According to people familiar with the matter, former Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby approached Kliavkoff about combining his eight remaining schools with the Pac-12 to form a 20-team super conference. Kliavkoff was on board, according to a person familiar with his thinking, but the merger failed to clear a subcommittee where Southern California president Carol Folt opposed it, according to people familiar with the matter.
8 of the 12 teams ended up with a better deal than that, USC dramatically so. Not sure what the Pac 12 was supposed to do there, that was not the best deal for their membership then or now. Doesn't sound like they would ever have been close to getting the votes.

The thing that's clear in retrospect: when Texas and Oklahoma bailed, the 8 remaining Big XII teams, basically all grizzled veterans of the conference merry-go-round in one form or another, knew, understood, and accepted their day at the top table was over and stayed united and laser focused on survival in the second tier. The best strategy available, executed in the best way available.

The ACC and Pac 12 had and have schools that don't have to settle for less, so could never have been unified in the same way.

Pac12 Mistake #2 July 2023 - not taking $30M offer
Kliavkoff eventually delivered two options. One was a traditional five-year deal involving traditional networks, with three cable partners and one digital bidder splitting the Pac-12 rights. It would have eventually given schools a disbursement of about $30 million a year—far less than the Big Ten and SEC, but in line with the new Big 12 deal. .....But just days before the July 31 deadline, the ground shifted under Kliavkoff’s feet when Colorado announced it was leaving the Pac-12 for the Big 12. The defection caused the more traditional television deal to fall through.....
That explains a lot. Still a slightly smaller deal than the Big 12, and there was no way Colorado was going to stay for less money it appears.

To translate: the plan was 6 auto bids, for the Power Five and one little guy. There will not be two auto bids for little guys.

12 teams, "wild card" round on campus sites in late December, Round of 8 as Bowl Games, probably a New Year's Day quadruple header, then the CFP final four as we know it now thereafter. A 50/50 split between ESPN and Fox I would all but guarantee.

The thing with the Mountain West is there's a $30M exit fee, and the players at the table no longer have the cash flying around to write that off.

It could be Stanford/Cal to the ACC, OSU/WSU to the MWC.

An interesting article from 2019. A lot of hubris from the Pac 12 killed them as well. "the Pac-12 is hopeful that within the next five years, digital outlets will join traditional TV networks and create a bidding war for their next rights deal."

While the execution of the Pac 12 Networks was undeniably poor, the deal they're criticizing Scott for not taking there is exactly the same as what the ACC did, locking together the conference for a longish term, but signing their eventual death warrant at the same time and leaving their biggest schools clawing at the exit door.

Scott was the visionary he billed himself as, but he was a day late and a dollar short actually turning his vision into reality.

there are still a significant amount of college football fans that want to turn to channel x or channel y and see the game

we are probably 15 years away from digital TV being the main way people watch stuff
I'm starting to think there's a chance cable subscriber decline has sort of plateaued, as opposed to an inevitable march to zeroing out like home phone service.

Low confidence prediction. Everything remains very up in the air in the industry. It can't be what it was, but how bloody is the sports haircut going to have to be?
 
Last edited:
#829      

TentakilRex

Land O Insects between Quincy-Macomb-Jacksonville
#831      
The biggest problem with big conferences is how do you decide who is best. If you are going to have a conference championship game you need a balanced schedule so you can actually evaluate teams. You don’t want to give an easy path to OSU scUM USC PSU or you will develop resentment with the rest of the conference

However you want to create a balance approach for football and basketball. However that gets done pods that rotate or divisions I am good. Right now the teams in the east complain because they have scUM and OSU. Basketball is luck of the draw on who you play twice, home/away only
With an expanded playoff imminent, conference championship games are going to be rendered more or less meaningless. The end game of the Big 2 conferences is to get the majority, if not all of the bids and the TV money that comes with it. At that point it doesn’t really matter to them who gets in.
 
#833      
There's a "pretending this isn't happening" current to the discourse around this that really gets under my skin, I'm not going to lie to you.

As funny as the suggestion is, no, we're not kicking Iowa out of the conference with a Greyhound ticket to LA. The Big Ten we grew up with is dead, over, never coming back, Illinois will never again play something anyone would have recognized as a Big Ten schedule ten years ago, ever, period. It has been comprehensively destroyed because a few dollars tomorrow means more to the people running things than preserving anything we love about the sport.
This comment is pointing at no one in particular. Everyone, with the possible exception of Mother Teresa and maybe a few others, pursues the almighty dollar and wants to accumulate as much as possible. It has it's occasional negative effect but enables a standard of living in this country that is the envy of the world. As a fan, one can adjust as I intend to do or discontinue following the sport.
 
#834      
had to chuckle at this one . . . someone is pretty creative . . .


IMG_0840.jpeg
 
#837      

Illini92and96

Austin, TX
The biggest problem with big conferences is how do you decide who is best. If you are going to have a conference championship game you need a balanced schedule so you can actually evaluate teams. You don’t want to give an easy path to OSU scUM USC PSU or you will develop resentment with the rest of the conference

However you want to create a balance approach for football and basketball. However that gets done pods that rotate or divisions I am good. Right now the teams in the east complain because they have scUM and OSU. Basketball is luck of the draw on who you play twice, home/away only
It could actually help the Illinois, Iowa, and MSUs of the world. Have a better than typical team, get an easier unbalanced schedule, get an upset or two, and you’re in the playoff.
 
#838      

riffraff

Peoria
Illinois is very good in many of the non-revenue sports and may benefit from taking those teams to California for conference competition. It might elevate those sports across the conference too. Football and Basketball (mostly football) are the drivers of realignment because of revenue, but there may be a silver lining for us in this.
 
#840      

ChiefGritty

Chicago, IL
Then you're gonna need a time machine my guy. Power Five football is no longer a thing, permanently.

(Don't put it past the Stanford engineering department I guess)
 
#842      

altgeld88

Arlington, Virginia
Then you're gonna need a time machine my guy. Power Five football is no longer a thing, permanently.

(Don't put it past the Stanford engineering department I guess)
You'd need a particle accelerator for that (which is located nearby in the hills near Stanford's campus). I find it ironic that the original one was built beneath the University of Chicago football field, after it departed the Big Ten conference, its president, Robert Maynard Hutchins, having become disgusted at the corrupting influence of the conference (and football) on the institution.
 
Last edited:
#843      
I'm starting to think there's a chance cable subscriber decline has sort of plateaued, as opposed to an inevitable march to zeroing out like home phone service.

Low confidence prediction. Everything remains very up in the air in the industry. It can't be what it was, but how bloody is the sports haircut going to have to be?

I think it will be interesting to watch this trend in general, but also to watch what the traditional networks do. It's pretty clear that the networks have been bolstering their streaming infrastructure over the past several years, so I think they are well positioned for the future. The traditional nets are not gonna do down without a fight. My bet is that it's highly unlikely that Apple, Amazon, or any other streaming network to be named later will achieve supreme dominance of the market, and it will continue to be fragmented.
 
#844      

ChiefGritty

Chicago, IL
I think it will be interesting to watch this trend in general, but also to watch what the traditional networks do. It's pretty clear that the networks have been bolstering their streaming infrastructure over the past several years, so I think they are well positioned for the future. The traditional nets are not gonna do down without a fight. My bet is that it's highly unlikely that Apple, Amazon, or any other streaming network to be named later will achieve supreme dominance of the market, and it will continue to be fragmented.
The big thing the networks have going for them is that because they're free, they can easily ride shotgun wherever the technology goes.

A million other problems in the Big Ten, but for that Saturday tripleheader in the fall, no one will have greater penetration into the nation's homes. Three weekly exclusive network broadcast windows essentially matches the NFL.

CBS walking away from the negotiating table to extend their SEC deal in December 2019 is under-the-radar one of the lynchpin moments that sparked this new era of college sports. And, random contingencies of history, that was just a mistake by CBS, they would absolutely do it differently if they'd known how things would shake out.
 
#845      
I saw this on another site, but the new world is going to be brutal for non-revenue sports. Football is driving the bus, so why not let the football programs do their thing and let the other sports stay in their old historical conferences - maintain the same rivalries, maintain a sane travel schedule, etc?

before anyone says it can't be done, it's already been done by Notre Dame and has been done by other schools in hockey I believe
 
#846      
I don't think Rutgers was a bad addition, personally. Even if you take the attitude that they served their initial purpose and now are "dead weight," I still think it was worth it (as others have said). However, I really think they represent a lot of potential. I simply don't think you can judge a school by their current performance ... there is literally no way that Mississippi State has a higher ceiling than Rutgers in my view just because they have usually been better. Pick a random "good-ish" coach like Lane Kiffin and put him at Rutgers ... can he keep more NJ talent home? Can he get sports-loving New Jersey residents who might currently casually follow Notre Dame or Penn State or Alabama to tune into a Rutgers game if they are 6-0 and hosting a ranked Michigan team? We say "people in NJ don't care about Rutgers," but they literally delivered one of the best TV ratings in college football back in 2006 (and, IIRC, the best college football TV rating ever for the NYC market) when they were rolling and properly hyped. I think the "right coach" can win just about anywhere, and I do believe that it's even easier for this mythical figure to win at Rutgers than many other places ... I would never use the term "sleeping giant" for Rutgers, but they are at the very least a "sleeping average height person" who has been conked out for way too long.

None of that even speaks to what other conferences have gained from playing Rutgers every year. I haven't looked up the changes in recruits and I do not have access to viewer numbers by market obviously, but I do think there is inherent value in Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, etc. getting semi-annual trips to the East Coast to play Rutgers and provide a close-by viewing experience for many of their fans out there. There is a similar concept/appeal for UCLA ... who cares if they're filling the Rose Bowl if it's filled with visiting Big Ten fans and providing a spotlight with local talent for the Big Ten? I admit I do not fully know how to quantify a school's value (people say "money" or "football," but those things are more complicated than a clumsily compiled list of the most watched teams over a TWO year period.....), but I do not think Rutgers is a drag on this conference like that article does.
 
#847      

ChiefGritty

Chicago, IL
I saw this on another site, but the new world is going to be brutal for non-revenue sports. Football is driving the bus, so why not let the football programs do their thing and let the other sports stay in their old historical conferences - maintain the same rivalries, maintain a sane travel schedule, etc?

before anyone says it can't be done, it's already been done by Notre Dame and has been done by other schools in hockey I believe
The ACC, Big 12, and whatever becomes of the rump Pac 12 can and should do this.

The Big Ten ought to be ashamed of themselves for putting their non-revenue athletes in this position, and any attempt by the conference to work with the conferences they've destroyed in order to solve this problem for them is going to result in a very clear, 100% justified response from the ACC/B12/P12: only if you pay us.
 
#849      
The ACC, Big 12, and whatever becomes of the rump Pac 12 can and should do this.

The Big Ten ought to be ashamed of themselves for putting their non-revenue athletes in this position, and any attempt by the conference to work with the conferences they've destroyed in order to solve this problem for them is going to result in a very clear, 100% justified response from the ACC/B12/P12: only if you pay us.
You could also say the same for the Big Ten and SEC to the other three conferences. Who really benefits more from playing each other now? The Big Ten and SEC playing the other three conferences or vice versa? I think most people will be more interested in the 34 schools in the "Power 2" conferences than the other 35 in schools in the other three conferences.

As for being ashamed for doing this, we were approached by Oregon and Washington. If we had not taken UCLA and USC we could have started the fall into being a second rate conference to the SEC. As for our non-revenue athletes, baseball and softball already goes to Florida, South Carolina and such for a week at a time and additionally early season goes for 3-4 days at a time. Both men's and women's golf goes for several days, track and cross country go for the weekend.

I do not think the travel is ideal, however with the university getting this much extra money, we are able to provide better facilities and more perks than most other places. I wish we could be back to the original Big Ten, (however I have always liked having Penn St. in the conference).

I think scheduling could make things easier such as why not have both the men's and women's basketball teams play the same schedule in conference play to only have only plane traveling to Los Angeles or Seattle or Washington. The same could be for some other teams.
 
#850      
Let's do some fun hypotheticalizing.

Let's go back to 2013. The B1G is sitting at 12 teams and plunking right along. The conference decided to stand pat and not add Rutgers and Maryland. Would conference realignment mayhem be happening today? If yes, would the B1G be fighting for survival like the PAC, ACC and B12?

Let's go back to February of this year. The B1G is sitting at 14 teams and plunking right along. The conference decides to stand pat and not expand west. Would conference realignment mayhem be happening today? If yes, would be the B1G be fighting for survival like the PAC, ACC and B12?

In other words, would the B1G be a healthy conference today with 12 teams while the other conferences devour each other? Or, would the ACC or SEC dare be trying to poach Michigan, Penn State or Ohio State?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.