Conference Realignment

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1      

Dan

Dan
Admin
Dan
Welcome to the conference realignment/media rights thread.

2024
USC, UCLA, Oregon & Washington to the Big Ten.
Texas & Oklahoma to the SEC.
Colorado, Utah, Arizona & Arizona State to the Big 12.
Stanford, Cal & SMU to the ACC.

2023
BYU, Cincinnati, Houston & UCF joined the Big 12.
 
Last edited:
#2      

Kramerica Industries

Kramerica Industries
Greenville, SC
Kramerica Industries
silly breaking bad GIF
 
#4      

Shief

Shief
Champaign Area
Shief
redwingillini11 said:
Well, the next 36 hours should be somewhat interesting.
Click to expand...
Do tell? I am sure that Oregon St., Wash. St., Cal, and Stanford are trying to figure out where they will be in 2024 and beyond.
 
#8      

spotter

S
spotter
Kramerica Industries said:
View attachment 27728
Click to expand...
If FSU wants to win, they stay put. Why go through the meat grinder that is Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee every year, or the Michigan, MSU and PSU meat grinder each year?

Now, if they want to simply make money, then go to the SEC or B1G, pocket $50 - $90 million and know there are huge roadblocks to the CFP or NY6 bowls.
 
#10      

Mr. Tibbs

Mr. Tibbs
southeast DuPage
Mr. Tibbs
can someone take a short trip into the wayback time machine and explain why exactly the ACC schools ever agreed to the 15-16 year GOR contract ?
didnt they ever think that maybe a 6-8 year deal made more sense ?

I recall there being some moving pieces to this puzzle, and the ACC was afraid of some schools leaving,
but why did Clemson and FSU, in particular, both agree to this ?
 
#11      

mattcoldagelli

mattcoldagelli
The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
mattcoldagelli
Mr. Tibbs said:
can someone take a short trip into the wayback time machine and explain why exactly the ACC schools ever agreed to the 15-16 year GOR contract ?
didnt they ever think that maybe a 6-8 year deal made more sense ?

I recall there being some moving pieces to this puzzle, and the ACC was afraid of some schools leaving,
but why did Clemson and FSU, in particular, both agree to this ?
Click to expand...
Panic?

At the time, it seemed that the safest way to stay afloat was to lash everyone to the mast of a rights agreement, and if 5 years is strong, 15 years is even stronger. They had a relationship with ESPN and a spot in the playoff secured, how bad could things *really* get?
 
#13      

ChiefGritty

ChiefGritty
Chicago, IL
ChiefGritty
Mr. Tibbs said:
can someone take a short trip into the wayback time machine and explain why exactly the ACC schools ever agreed to the 15-16 year GOR contract ?
didnt they ever think that maybe a 6-8 year deal made more sense ?

I recall there being some moving pieces to this puzzle, and the ACC was afraid of some schools leaving,
but why did Clemson and FSU, in particular, both agree to this ?
Click to expand...
ESPN demanded that long of a term, and the GOR security of what teams they'd be broadcasting, to give the conference what was at the time a competitive annual TV rights payment. It was the cost of getting that number, the long-term price certainty was a win for ESPN amid rapidly inflating prices at the time.

And honestly, given the trends in the industry, there is a degree of security they achieved there. The Big 12 and Pac 12 got obliterated, in different ways, by failing to make that kind of deal, and all of those remaining schools will now be at a lower per team figure.

It was a fantastic deal for the likes of Wake Forest and Boston College. Or really probably about 10-11 at least of the 14.

I do remember at the time a quote that said, if I recall correctly "I can't believe Florida State and Miami signed this"

mattcoldagelli said:
how bad could things *really* get?
Click to expand...
Frankly, even for Clemson and Florida State, how bad have they REALLY gotten? It's really kind of a pittance in the grand scheme of thing these schools are burning the sport down over.

How much happier is Maryland than North Carolina right now REALLY?
 
Last edited:
#14      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
Semi-random thought on this subject, but color me skeptical that the "big-time programs" or whatever will ever want a league made up solely of ... programs who view themselves just as highly as they do. Does Ohio State really want a league of 15 other Ohio States? These programs probably have to have some inferior teams in the league ... there is a huge difference between Florida State wanting out of the ACC because it believes it is setting itself behind the curve and Michigan raking in the dough in a "big-time conference" and being favored in nearly all of its games; I maintain only one of those programs would want to shake things up, and I definitely don't think there will ever be a day that our Big Ten membership is in jeopardy.

Yes, I know that it's not like "Michigan" is sitting in some room deciding this and that TV executives are running this show. However, last year the Illinois/Michigan game drew 5.47 million viewers - over 40% more than Nebraska drew on the exact same channel vs. Michigan the week before. Michigan is going to be favored when playing Illinois 8 times out of 10 ... why the hell wouldn't they want an 8-4 type Illini program that will more than hold its own as far as "value added" goes and that they can expect to beat most times in the conference? Hell, we are like the perfect in-conference neighbor. :ROFLMAO:
 
#16      

bluemountain

B
bluemountain
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Semi-random thought on this subject, but color me skeptical that the "big-time programs" or whatever will ever want a league made up solely of ... programs who view themselves just as highly as they do. Does Ohio State really want a league of 15 other Ohio States? These programs probably have to have some inferior teams in the league ... there is a huge difference between Florida State wanting out of the ACC because it believes it is setting itself behind the curve and Michigan raking in the dough in a "big-time conference" and being favored in nearly all of its games; I maintain only one of those programs would want to shake things up, and I definitely don't think there will ever be a day that our Big Ten membership is in jeopardy.

Yes, I know that it's not like "Michigan" is sitting in some room deciding this and that TV executives are running this show. However, last year the Illinois/Michigan game drew 5.47 million viewers - over 40% more than Nebraska drew on the exact same channel vs. Michigan the week before. Michigan is going to be favored when playing Illinois 8 times out of 10 ... why the hell wouldn't they want an 8-4 type Illini program that will more than hold its own as far as "value added" goes and that they can expect to beat most times in the conference? Hell, we are like the perfect in-conference neighbor. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
This. No way OSU wants to be in a conference that only contains bluebloods. That's why the alignment from 30 years ago was ideal - the OSU's and UM's got to dominate, the Illinois' and Iowa's could expect to contend for a conference title a few times a decade, the IU's and NW's could occasionally make a bowl game and earned enough $ to fund their athletic departments.

In the current environment, it's almost impossible to envision Illinois ever winning another conference championship in football. Which kind of sucks
 
#17      

ptgrd23

ptgrd23
ptgrd23
2007 nobody thought we could go into Columbus and beat #1 undefeated OSU.

1692117048051.png

www.espn.com

Illinois 28-21 Ohio State (Nov 10, 2007) Game Recap - ESPN

Expert recap and game analysis of the Illinois Fighting Illini vs. Ohio State Buckeyes NCAAF game from November 10, 2007 on ESPN.
www.espn.com www.espn.com


It will be very hard to win the B10 with 3 super programs - OSU/Michigan/USC and two top 20 programs PSU and OR. However with 18 members we may only need to beat two of them in a given year. Last year all we had to do was beat Michigan to get to title game.
 
Last edited:
#18      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
bluemountain said:
This. No way OSU wants to be in a conference that only contains bluebloods. That's why the alignment from 30 years ago was ideal - the OSU's and UM's got to dominate, the Illinois' and Iowa's could expect to contend for a conference title a few times a decade, the IU's and NW's could occasionally make a bowl game and earned enough $ to fund their athletic departments.

In the current environment, it's almost impossible to envision Illinois ever winning another conference championship in football. Which kind of sucks
Click to expand...
I actually think we would stand a decent chance if we return to the divisions, but I agree otherwise. Even if you add USC, UCLA, Washington and Oregon to a new West Division and shift some teams east (just not us!), it's not impossible to imagine a year where we win some tiebreakers and finish in first among that group ... then you go to Indy or wherever, and anything can happen. We did, let's remember, nearly knock off a dominant Michigan team at the Big House last year.

However, finishing in the top two of all 18 teams and then beating the other championship game participant is indeed a very tall order. :(
 
#19      

wettsten

wettsten
Chicago
wettsten
Fighter of the Nightman said:
I actually think we would stand a decent chance if we return to the divisions, but I agree otherwise. Even if you add USC, UCLA, Washington and Oregon to a new West Division and shift some teams east (just not us!), it's not impossible to imagine a year where we win some tiebreakers and finish in first among that group ... then you go to Indy or wherever, and anything can happen. We did, let's remember, nearly knock off a dominant Michigan team at the Big House last year.

However, finishing in the top two of all 18 teams and then beating the other championship game participant is indeed a very tall order. :(
Click to expand...
1692117681263.png
 
#20      

Ander1345

A
Ander1345
I think the only way divisions would work is if we picked up some teams between Nebraska and the Pacific coast... and the Big 12 seems to have shored up their conference a lot in those places.

I trust that the conference will make a fair and good rotation of schedules... but I still think we aren't done adding.
 
#21      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
Ander1345 said:
I think the only way divisions would work is if we picked up some teams between Nebraska and the Pacific coast... and the Big 12 seems to have shored up their conference a lot in those places.

I trust that the conference will make a fair and good rotation of schedules... but I still think we aren't done adding.
Click to expand...
You're probably correct. However, it would be cool to imagine a hypothetical future Big Ten (with probably more conference games) that has a West and East divisions but with "pods" or whatever within them that played each other more regularly. Not sure who we would add to even out these pods, but it would be a nice way to still have divisions? Something like a "Pacific Pod" and a "Midwest Pod" making up the West, and a "Great Lakes" and "East Coast" pod making up the East. However, you would still be fitting some teams in where it is kind of awkward.
 
#23      

Mr. Tibbs

Mr. Tibbs
southeast DuPage
Mr. Tibbs
Jeff Johnson’s blog claims he hears the B1G AD’s are considering divisions based on performance ala english soccer

9 of the “best” teams in one division and the other 9 in the other . no word on how that would be split or how movement up or down would be determined .

regardless , money distributed is the same . it only effects schedules and probably gets reconfigured every two years
 
#24      

Fighter of the Nightman

Fighter of the Nightman
Chicago, IL
Fighter of the Nightman
Mr. Tibbs said:
Jeff Johnson’s blog claims he hears the B1G AD’s are considering divisions based on performance ala english soccer

9 of the “best” teams in one division and the other 9 in the other . no word on how that would be split or how movement up or down would be determined .

regardless , money distributed is the same . it only effects schedules and probably gets reconfigured every two years
Click to expand...
Again, going back to my earlier post ... why would Ohio State want to play Michigan, PSU, USC, Oregon, etc. every year, possibly wrack up 2-3 more losses than usual and split that money equally with Northwestern in the "B Division"? I think the "big time schools" see the value in getting to play "second tier" programs that still draw good ratings like Wisconsin, Illinois, Nebraska, Iowa, MSU, etc. and yet are programs they should beat over 75% of the time.
 
#25      

Ander1345

A
Ander1345
Fighter of the Nightman said:
Again, going back to my earlier post ... why would Ohio State want to play Michigan, PSU, USC, Oregon, etc. every year, possibly wrack up 2-3 more losses than usual and split that money equally with Northwestern in the "B Division"? I think the "big time schools" see the value in getting to play "second tier" programs that still draw good ratings like Wisconsin, Illinois, Nebraska, Iowa, MSU, etc. and yet are programs they should beat over 75% of the time.
Click to expand...

Depends on how playoffs will work, or if they even continue as we know them. The B1G will have as many teams as some pro leagues. They may not need to be as reliant on the BCS going forward.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.