Yet somehow the BIG, ACC, SEC all managed to survive without ND being a full time member. I sincerely hope nobody invites them in because of this kind of pompous jackass attitude. Enjoy the MAC conference with Pitt. You both deserve it.
Report: B2G has vetted Oregon and Washington
- Thread starter heckmans
- Start date
The B1G will definitely try to get one or the other in order to make inroads into Florida. Getting either, plus ND, would be a big accomplishment. The interesting thing is neither is in the AAU, which I haven't heard much chatter about of late. I guess the B1G will be less concerned about that "requirement" going forward. Historically the only school that was expected to be a possible exception was ND.
I think AAU does still matter. Could it POSSIBLY be waived? I think YES, in FSU's case. https://news.fsu.edu/news/universit...dent-mccullough-optimistic-about-fsus-future/ Desire isn't the same as achievement...but...hey...
UNC and UVA are the two that the Big Ten would most covet. FSU would be the third. And then...with those three on board, geographically, Atlanta is the bridge and so AAU Georgia Tech would be the 4th.
VaTech and NCState are redundant, if you have UVA and UNC. Clemson is historically not an elite football school and its market is miniscule. And you don't need Miami if you have FSU.
So...if we're going to 20 with Pac-12 schools...we take UW, UO, Cal, and Stanford.
If we're going to 24 with ACC schools...we add UNC, UVA, FSU, and GaTech.
And that's where we'd stay, if you ask me.
UNC and UVA are the two that the Big Ten would most covet. FSU would be the third. And then...with those three on board, geographically, Atlanta is the bridge and so AAU Georgia Tech would be the 4th.
VaTech and NCState are redundant, if you have UVA and UNC. Clemson is historically not an elite football school and its market is miniscule. And you don't need Miami if you have FSU.
So...if we're going to 20 with Pac-12 schools...we take UW, UO, Cal, and Stanford.
If we're going to 24 with ACC schools...we add UNC, UVA, FSU, and GaTech.
And that's where we'd stay, if you ask me.
Last edited:
That is one awesome conference. Nobody gets through that level of schedule undefeated.
I think Arizona, Colorado, Utah are in a phase at some point as well, and Clemson to bridge to GA/FL from NC. That's 28.
That would be exciting, but it would also be somewhat difficult to maintain a conference identity with scheduling consistency over 24. At 20 and above you really must have 10 conference games in football, and maintain 1 - 3 consistent rivals while rotating the rest of the teams every 2 - 3 years depending on how the math works out with the breakdown of rivals and others. I think 24 is the sweet spot.
I see the geographical and AAU fit, Ned, but there's a significant football dropoff with those 3.
Are they better than Rutgers and Maryland? Yeah. Probably.
But Rutgers and Maryland were added during a different era of realignment. Rutgers was a market (TV) and recruiting territory grab. Maryland--I'm convinced--was an attempt to crack open the ACC (specifically UNC and UVA). Yes, they added eyeballs and recruiting territory too (DMV)...but there was a bigger plan behind it. (ESPN bested Delany though, by offering the "ACC Network" and then a ridiculous 20 year cable deal which is now the albatross--nay NOOSE--around those 14 schools' necks.)
Are they better than Rutgers and Maryland? Yeah. Probably.
But Rutgers and Maryland were added during a different era of realignment. Rutgers was a market (TV) and recruiting territory grab. Maryland--I'm convinced--was an attempt to crack open the ACC (specifically UNC and UVA). Yes, they added eyeballs and recruiting territory too (DMV)...but there was a bigger plan behind it. (ESPN bested Delany though, by offering the "ACC Network" and then a ridiculous 20 year cable deal which is now the albatross--nay NOOSE--around those 14 schools' necks.)
Phoenix, Denver, Salt Lake. We'll see, it's wild. I really just want UVA and UNC at least, for Penn State in the east.
Set it up like the NFL. BIG and SEC are AFC amd NFC. Pods are divisions. Pods champs go in first round. Winners for conference title. Conference champs square off for the national championship.
Best part is they'll likely leave the NCAA.
I don't know if that's how it will eventually play out but it seems to be leaning that way. There's an awful lot of teams trying to join the 2 conferences.
It could all blow up. But I doubt it. For all the super conference speculation, no one has EVER gone past 16.
Even if the Big Ten (or SEC) would blow up to 24, there are still plenty of good teams that would still be in the conversation. Oklahoma State...Pitt...Arizona State...no, they aren't elite...they're not Alabama or Georgia...but they aren't Akron or New Mexico State either.
I think the "Big 12" might survive this thing as the best of the non-Big Ten-or-SEC teams. (And remember, there will be PLENTY of teams in that leftover conference who STILL are much better than Vanderbilt and Indiana and Mississippi State and Minnesota...)
If all of these PAC 10 and ACC schools make sense in adding to the Big 10, why are their payouts so much less in their current conferences?
Exactly. When people suggest these massive expansion I don’t understand what exactly is in it for the Big Ten or SEC? Right now I see only two schools that are significant enough for the Big Ten to expand: Notre Dame or FSU. maybe UNC. But that’s about it. The Big Ten isn’t going to expand just because teams are available, it has to make sense for the conference
Last edited:
Washington + Oregon would give Big 10 the west coast in conjunction with USC and UCLA.
UNC, UVA or Va tech, FSU, Clemson would be crazy haul from ACC to get into 4 new growing states and fight SEC on their own turf.
Then ND as a national draw and historical opponent for many Big 10 teams.
I would then throw in Ga Tech as that then gives Big 10 something in Georgia such that you have now have continuity down the entire East Coast and something in the huge Atlanta market.
I still think ND is target #1, after them there's a sizeable gap, then either FSU/Miami is next in line. A big gap after that, then you get into the UNC/NCST, UVA/VT, GT tier. As always, the financials will be the primary consideration and ND is by far the most profitable name within an attainable grasp of the Big 10 and might be the only one who's addition would be significant enough to result in a higher net payout for every existing Big 10 school.
I think Oregon & Washington make sense to solidify the western portion of the B1G and ease some of the travel for USC and UCLA.
Okay, but why would the other 14 schools want them? And make their own travel worse? And it’s not like Oregon or Washington are actually close to LA; time zone is better but it’s still a decent plane ride.
And how would that any of this be any different that last summer? It’s not like USC/UCLA didn’t know the travel involved when they joined - they could have insisted on more west coast schools at that time if they felt it was important. If more PAC-12 schools made sense, they could have been added last summer before the Big Ten TV deal and nothings really changed since then to make them any more valuable to the Big Ten.
Well, here is one way to evaluate a school's impact on tv revenue -
Streaming numbers are included when available. Games that do not have available data are counted as zero.
Ranking the most-watched college football programs in 2022
The numbers next to each school indicate the average number of viewers per week for a 12-week season.Streaming numbers are included when available. Games that do not have available data are counted as zero.
- Ohio State — 5.80M
- Alabama — 5.11M
- Michigan — 4.37M
- Tennessee — 4.13M
- Georgia — 3.50M
- Notre Dame — 3.30M
- LSU — 3.22M
- Texas — 3.06M
- Penn State — 3.05M
- Clemson — 2.59M
- Florida — 2.57M
- Oregon — 2.21M
- TCU — 2.20M
- Southern Cal — 2.07M
- Florida State — 2.03M
- Nebraska — 1.98M
- Michigan State — 1.91M
- Texas A&M — 1.87M
- Maryland — 1.864M
- Auburn — 1.863M
- Arkansas — 1.80M
- Mississippi — 1.753M
- Oklahoma — 1.748M
- Oklahoma State — 1.68M
- UCLA — 1.591M
- Wisconsin — 1.587M
- Iowa — 1.50M
- Kentucky — 1.35M
- Baylor — 1.32M
- Kansas State — 1.23M
- Indiana — 1.19M
- Illinois — 1.17M
- Utah — 1.16M
- Washington — 1.15M
- Northwestern — 1.13M
- Mississippi State — 1.10M
- Minnesota — 1.05M
- BYU — 997K
- South Carolina — 990K
- Navy — 976K
- Washington State — 907K
- Iowa State — 882K
- NC State — 881K
- Purdue -870K
- California — 857K
- North Carolina — 849K
- Stanford — 846K
- Syracuse — 841K
- Georgia Tech — 837K
- Missouri — 793K
- West Virginia — 774K
- Kansas — 732K
- Army — 681K
- Texas Tech — 680K
- Cincinnati — 653K
- Pittsburgh — 650K
- Oregon State — 625K
- Rutgers — 618K
- Miami FL— 608K
- Wake Forest — 523K
- UCF — 510K
- Arizona — 506K
- Louisville — 496K
- Colorado State — 386K
- Tulane — 354K
- Boise State — 353K
- Colorado — 352.9K
- Air Force — 326K
- Utah State — 324K
- Boston College — 322K
- Arizona State — 314K
- SMU — 312K
- Toledo — 306K
- East Carolina — 305K
- Appalachian State — 298K
- Virginia Tech — 264K
- Marshall — 262K
- Houston — 242K
- Virginia — 237K
- Fresno State — 220K
- Ohio — 214K
- Connecticut — 212K
- San Diego State — 198K
- Western Michigan — 174K
- Memphis — 165K
- Tulsa — 162K
- Wyoming — 154K
- Central Michigan — 130K
- Georgia Southern — 125K
- Nevada — 116.4K
- Duke — 115.7K
- UTEP — 102K
- Temple — 92K
- New Mexico State — 86K
- South Florida — 80.8K
- Coastal Carolina — 80.6K
- Louisiana — 78K
- UAB — 71K
- Arkansas State — 69K
- Buffalo — 67K
You could have USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois & Northwestern in the West. The other nine in the East.
Crossover games between East & West wouldn't need to be as plentiful each year.
Some good points but I think the B1G's strategy is TV markets over the quality of a team's athletic programs. If it was the other way around, Rutgers would never have been invited to join the conference.
All indication is that divisions are going away after this upcoming season and they will be going to a model where each team has some (1-3) locked rivals and rotate through the other teams in the conference.
As other have posted over the previous years, this situation is much bigger. I don't mean this in a pejorative way, but your analysis is "checkers" while the power brokers are playing "chess."
You are correct that the PAC-12 schools don't bring enough to up the revenue share (but you could also say that Oregon is worth more than the entire B2G West, and most of the east, so they are pushing up the average).
But, IMHO, here is what you are missing. CFB is changing, but your assessment is based on the status quo. The B2G and SEC are playing the long game here and looking to be in the best position AFTER the turmoil settles from NIL, collective bargaining, realignment, etc.
If you assume that the NCAA will fall away. If you accept that NIL, player comp, etc will change everything, and "Vanderbilt" will not be able compete financially with "Alabama," then you accept that we are probably headed toward some sort of consolidation to mega power conference(s), some stratification (ie "Vandy" drops to a lower tier/lower conference) and the complete remaking of college football. The B2G/SEC must first bring in the teams that up the average (ie Oregon/Wash are more valuable than Purdue/Illinois) and then, after the dust settles, you'll probably see moves to separate teams by value. (ie The B2G/SEC create a 2nd tier - with some sort of promotion/relegation system, or the lower value teams are kicked out)
Big Changes are coming and all historical assumptions must be thrown out the window
I think it is clear that other than the obvious of ND, Oregon is our top target and bringing them with Washington increases the value of our conference longterm. I think that it is also clear that based on markets and tv ratings we should consider getting into Texas as well to take TCU and Baylor. Perhaps Ok St. should be considered as well.
That will be the tough part in my opinion. Maybe near impossible. You have to have some floor.
Don't disagree. I think it's more likely that a 2nd tier is created, but I'm not arrogant enough to suggest that I understand the end game of this Chess match.
Then maybe Nebraska could start getting big time recruits form the west coast again.
You are closer to the end game than most. Now double the teams and see what you get.
We went for Texas in 2010 after we poached Nebraska from the Big 12. But they didn't want to follow the Huskers...and they didn't want to pair with TAMU. And to make sure the Big Ten/FOX didn't get too powerful...ESPN offered a ridiculous Longhorn Network to UT.
The Big Ten sees nothing of value in Texas besides TAMU and UT. "Market access" doesn't make Baylor or TTech move the needle.
(And in case you wonder how much this is about ESPN's pocketbooks...when we got Maryland in 2013ish, ESPN ponied up money for an ACC Network to appease any other ACC schools with a wandering eye from leaving ACC and ESPN.)
The only way anyone gets kicked out is if they play a game of "52 card pickup" with the whole NCAA. You can't "just" kick out Vandy and Mississippi State. Or Minnesota and Rutgers. You just can't.
You'd need to have some entity with the moxy to draw at least 60% of the top schools from elite conferences. Why 60%? To dissuade lawsuits from the existing TV deals or the 40% schools that are shut out.
Call it the CAL (College Athletic League)
Everybody in the SEC welcome except Vandy, South Carolina, and Mississippi State
Everybody in the BIg Ten welcome except Purdue, Rutgers, Northwestern.
Everybody in the PAC-12 except Washington State and Oregon State and Cal.
Big 12. Invite Kansas.
That's 34 teams. And only the Big 12 would have grounds to "sue" anyone for breach of contract.
But I can't imagine ANYONE getting kicked out of a P5 conference.
I am curious why you do not feel a TCU/Baylor combo is worth it. They both are solid in tv ratings currently and sit in a growing state. I would prefer an expansion into ACC territory to have a larger east coast presence, but looking at the entire picture there may be more worth in an expansion down the center of the country from Kansas (for bball!), OK St, down to TCU and Baylor.
Texas and TAMU .... or Texas and Oklahoma are the only islands that the Big Ten would have really stretched for. You just don't compromise the overall academic and sports prestige of your league for a geographical outlier like this. Maryland and Rutgers are better academically and geographically fit... and when it comes to national viewership, only a smidge behind TCU/Baylor.
We stretched for USC/UCLA despite them being islands...because their market, academics, athletics were all A+. TCU and Baylor are a B (or maybe C) in the big picture of those factors.
We stretched for USC/UCLA despite them being islands...because their market, academics, athletics were all A+. TCU and Baylor are a B (or maybe C) in the big picture of those factors.
The Pac-12 might be screwed after ESPN drops out of TV deal
Does anyone want the Pac-12?
www.sbnation.com
Well, the music is stopping and there are only so many chairsThe Pac-12 might be screwed after ESPN drops out of TV deal
Does anyone want the Pac-12?
The Pac-12 falling apart still wouldn't give a reason for the Big Ten to take Washington/Oregon at the current time (it only changes the situation from those schools' side). The economics don't make any more sense now for the Big Ten than they did last summer. The only difference would be if they are willing to come on board to the conference for a massively discounted deal for many many years - which I suppose is possible if they are desperate enough but we'll see.
The Pac-12 might be screwed after ESPN drops out of TV deal
Does anyone want the Pac-12?
Comcast bidding for the rights to put onto USA network seems like a decent option, actually. Not sure why that is painted as a negative - especially compared to ESPN potentially only wanting the Pac-12 rights to use for "after dark" programming 10PM ET or later.
What they need is a normal network to broadcast their games in the afternoon or primetime on the east coast. They are better off going to USA (or CW, etc) if they can get that over going to ESPN in the middle of the night or a streamer that has far fewer subscribers.
Edit: USA Network already carries English Premier League, NASCAR, Golf, WWE, Atlantic 10 basketball, etc. And it's one of the widest distributed cable networks. Again, not sure why that is viewed as a significant negative.
Last edited:
The economics are certainly there for Oregon and Washington. Oregon would be #4 in tv ratings in the B1G in 2022 and higher than USC. Washington sits in a great market. As a pair they are just about at the same tv viewership as USC/UCLA.
Desperate enough...? I mean, what are their choices?
Stay in the Pac-12 for 20mil
Go to the Big 12 for 30mil
Take--let's just say--50% what the other Big Ten schools make for the duration of the 6 year TV contract...which ends up being 50mil
How is a "massively discounted deal" from the Big Ten not the BEST choice?
Similar threads
