[LUconn]

I don't really understand the Big12 ultimatum to Mizzou and Nebraska. Are they gonna kick them out if they don't affirm their commitment? Yeah, that'll really strengthen the conference. I bet Texas will really be enticed to stick around.

[Sly Fox]

It is possible, but the Big Ten threw down the gauntlet and now the rest of the world is reacting in its own interests. 16-team super leagues are inevitable at this point IMHO and the Big Ten is to blame.

[Sly Fox]

I don't really understand the Big12 ultimatum to Mizzou and Nebraska. Are they gonna kick them out if they don't affirm their commitment? Yeah, that'll really strengthen the conference. I bet Texas will really be enticed to stick around.

UT is the one forcing the issue in regard to the Huskers & Tigers. No one wants to waste the energy to save the league if those two schools are bolting. If they choose to join the Big Ten then it sets in motion all of the other scenarios. IF they decide to stick it out in Big XII, then the league begins its other options for survival including the possible television partnership with Pac-10. The ultimatum also forces the Big Ten to put up or shut up in regard to Nebraska & Mizzou.

[LUconn]

Wow, that makes the b12 commish look like a figurehead with UT pretty much running their own conference. If the conference does survive, it's sort of embarrassing that "the conference" said, either commit to me or I'll end myself.

[flamesfilmguy]

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/n ... sion060610

Great article on this whole thing. kind of gets to the root of all thats happening IMHO.

[Sly Fox]

That is basically where the Big XII is today. And yes, at the moment Texas has by far the most clout in this whole deal. Nebraska & Oklahoma may have great programs & fanbases but they don't deliver anywhere near as many TV viewers as the Horns. And television is driving this whole deal.

This reminds me a great deal of the old Southwest Conference circa 1994 when Arkansas bolted and the Horns & Ags didn't want to get left holding the bag. But unlike the Big 8/SWC Big 4 merger, there are not Baylor grads sitting in Austin as Governor (yes, Anne Richards was a Baylor alum believe it or not) and Lt. Governor (which is the most powerful office in the State of Texas). Baylor alumni in the Legislature are trying to throw their weight around like they did before to push TCU & Houston out of the way to be a part of the merger. This time around it doesn't look like they have the firepower to force the Pac-10 to drop Colorado for Baylor.

Interestingly enough, Baylor would likely be reunited with their longest standing rival if they are left out of the Pac-10 deal. The MWC is expected to invite the Big XII leftovers (i.e. Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas & Kansas State) into their fold possibly along with Boise State. Baylor & TCU were rival campuses in Waco for years until the Frogs moved north to Fort Worth. Despite younger Bear fans who believe Texas and Texas A&M are their rivals, neither of those school pay any attention to them. TCU would be a great natural partner.

You have to feel for Kansas who is a great university with an incredible basketball program. Unfortunately they don't deliver many TV households (KC is primarily a Mizzou stronghold already) and except for a few stray runs they typically play awful football. So they may get lost in the shuffle to a certain degree.

The ripple effect beyond these initial moves is where most of you East Coasters will start getting intrigued. What happens with the Big East, ACC, SEC and even C-USA? And if those ripples are significant enough they could be felt all the way to Lynchburg. But I'll save that discussion for its own thread.

[JK37]

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/n ... sion060610

Great article on this whole thing. kind of gets to the root of all thats happening IMHO.

It doesn't so much approach what is happening as as it delineates how we reached this point, which in turn shows the path toward solving it before things go spiraling out of control. Here's the best quote from the article:

Delany couldn’t assure that the Big Ten would’ve done well in a football playoff. Maybe the league would’ve succeeded, maybe not. With 26 percent of the nation’s population, tradition rich clubs and its own cable network though, the Big Ten will always dominate if everything boils down to TV revenue.

It was a genius, cut-throat play. He set the terms of the game so he’d win.

To me, the Big XII, Big East and every other conference have one more at-bat so to speak, or they lose this ballgame. Get together and get behind a playoff. If everyone stands to earn greater profits (except maybe the bowls, which have little clout anyway since the NCAA has been buoying them for some time now), then far more will be in favor of it than against it. The only play the Big 10 has at that point is to claim they can guarantee TV money AND playoff money. Which might still be enough...


Even so, if everything happens as it appears to be heading now, the Big 10 and Pac-10 make the initial moves. At that point, I don't see the ACC folding as the above article suggests. IMO, the next ripple is that the ACC and SEC pillage what's left in the East, and the MWC gobbles up the remaining scraps in the West. We're left with five superconferences, not too unlike where we stand now. Subsequently, ripples follow through into each lower level, maybe causing C-USA and the MAC to grow. Honestly, I could see this not reaching the FCS level, because so many FBS schools will be out in the cold that C-USA and the MAC may not have to look far for expansion.

[ATrain]

This is getting interesting. A lot of noise is being made, but ultimately is anything drastic going to happen?

[JK37]

This is getting interesting. A lot of noise is being made, but ultimately is anything drastic going to happen?

As with any domino effect, it all depends on the first move.

[olldflame]

I am convinced that all the Big 10 really wants is Notre Dame. Their whole strategy seems to be to create a scenario where if the Irish do not join them, they will essentially decimate the Big East, leaving all of the other (non-football) Irish teams without a viable conference. I'm not sure the Irish are buying it, and I really don't know how far the Big 10 will go in other directions if ND holds their Independent ground.

[Sly Fox]

Let's keep this thread focused on the broad topic of realignment and let's talk about its impact on LU in this thread over in the General Sports forum.

[ATrain]

Article on the Florida schools in all this mess:
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports ... ights.html

And this is an article about the MWC/WAC/Big Sky:
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/articl ... ze+Big+Sky

[LUconn]

I posted some of this in the LU relevant thread Sly started but most of it goes here too.

Well, let's make a huge assumption that the Pac 10, Big 10, SEC, and ACC all go to 16 teams. That's 64 teams almost all of which have all of the major market and resources tied up across the country (there's bound to be 1 or 2 parasitic teams that are included via politics). There's a lot of problems for everybody else. It would be very difficult to get on TV or get local support since every area "has" one of the Big 64. Our current system is set up to make it as difficult as possible for "outsiders" to be in on the national discussion, and I would see that getting even worse. Maybe even to the point where the Big 64 could force the NCAA to put them in some superior subdivision so even by rule no other team has a shot. Heck they could even form something outside of the NCAA itself.

I don't really like where this is headed.

[JK37]

For me, it's pointless to even discuss until the first domino falls.

That's how I feel now .. I'm very interested, but what's there to say until the first domino falls? The Big 10 or the Pac-10 have to make a move, but them being the first isn't even guaranteed.

All of this is fueled by greed .. but to me, if university presidents would wake up and realize the BCS and the whole idea of bowls is a sham that keeps them from making even more money, the talk of expansion would become second fiddle to the talk of scrapping that system for a 16-team playoff.

[ALUmnus]

Some people REALLY want to get their posts read.

[LUconn]

Well, I can see why we have 2 different threads but some stuff is applicable to both.

[JK37]

This is a fantastic, two-part article on where we stand now, and how we got here. It includes the winners & losers in all this, the potential effect on a playoff system, the virtual lock of Nebraska & Mizzou having already received offers, the potential for egg on the face of the Big Ten, and Texas politics (for you, Sly). It also echoes what Manson said yesterday: talk is futile until the first domino falls, and it could all start by early July.

Also, if you've been trying to play catch-up on this topic, this article summarizes everything very nicely.

http://cfn.scout.com/2/975971.html
(Be sure to scroll to bottom for link to Part 2.)

From the most dialed-in insiders to the heads of the college conferences, no one, absolutely no one, has a rock-solid handle on what’s exactly about to happen with the realignment changes expected to shake the college sports world to its core. On nothing but rumors, speculation, a whole bunch of posturing, and very, very quiet negotiations, the conferences have gone into crisis, red-alert, doomsday scenario mode as collegiate athletics creeps closer and closer to the most radical and important realignment in American sports since the NFL and AFL merged in 1970.

[JK37]

Further details of the Big 12's ultimatum given to Nebraska and Missouri:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5265631

In my opinion, this wasn't a great idea. Forcing someone to decide early only puts a bad taste of you in their mouth. So even if they do stay, the relationship is soured.

But they're not staying, so moot point.

[ALUmnus]

Darren Rovell doesn't think expansion to the extent of 16 teams makes sense financially. He has a point, but the one thing he's leaving out is the addition of conference tournaments to the two expanding conferences. But I would agree with him that it really only makes sense to add one or two teams. For the Big 10, it really only makes sense to add Notre Dame. They only have to split the shares with one more school, they add a ton of new markets, and they'll get the conference tournament. Personally, I think that's what they really want.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37558483

[olldflame]

Notre Dame should have been in the Big 10 years ago. They need to get off their "we're the only ones with an exclusive TV contract" high horse and realize they can still make tons of money on football, and it will be exponentially better for almost all of their other sports as well as making more sense geographically for everyone.

[JK37]

Darren Rovell doesn't think expansion to the extent of 16 teams makes sense financially. He has a point, but the one thing he's leaving out is the addition of conference tournaments to the two expanding conferences. But I would agree with him that it really only makes sense to add one or two teams. For the Big 10, it really only makes sense to add Notre Dame. They only have to split the shares with one more school, they add a ton of new markets, and they'll get the conference tournament. Personally, I think that's what they really want.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37558483

Yes, they all want the conference championship game. But in both cases, expanding into TV markets brings more viability to a conference TV network (Big Ten has one, Pac 10 will probably follow.) Then, put your new championship game on that channel. As fans demand that channel, the proverbial stock goes up.

All that aside, yes, Notre Dame to the Big Ten would likely halt everything else for them. (The Pac 10 may still expand.) But if they can have Notre Dame AND a couple other good TV markets, why not? So, get to 14 teams now, leaving the door open for ND within the next 5 years.

[JK37]

Notre Dame should have been in the Big 10 years ago. They need to get off their "we're the only ones with an exclusive TV contract" high horse and realize they can still make tons of money on football, and it will be exponentially better for almost all of their other sports as well as making more sense geographically for everyone.

When considering the events of the day, one can either remain in a dream world ("ND should get off its high horse!"), or one can choose to approach the events from reality (ND likes its position on a high horse, and it isn't changing anytime soon.).

I'll choose reality. Its far more relevant.

[ALUmnus]

Darren Rovell doesn't think expansion to the extent of 16 teams makes sense financially. He has a point, but the one thing he's leaving out is the addition of conference tournaments to the two expanding conferences. But I would agree with him that it really only makes sense to add one or two teams. For the Big 10, it really only makes sense to add Notre Dame. They only have to split the shares with one more school, they add a ton of new markets, and they'll get the conference tournament. Personally, I think that's what they really want.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37558483

Yes, they all want the conference championship game. But in both cases, expanding into TV markets brings more viability to a conference TV network (Big Ten has one, Pac 10 will probably follow.) Then, put your new championship game on that channel. As fans demand that channel, the proverbial stock goes up.

All that aside, yes, Notre Dame to the Big Ten would likely halt everything else for them. (The Pac 10 may still expand.) But if they can have Notre Dame AND a couple other good TV markets, why not? So, get to 14 teams now, leaving the door open for ND within the next 5 years.

The point is, there is a set amount of money being made from the TV deals. The more schools you add to the conference, the more schools there are to split that set amount. What teams can you add that will actually increase that amount enough that every school will end up making more money, and not less? I think the only answers are Notre Dame and Texas.

Adding schools just to add schools is not exaclty beneficial. Will Nebraska and Missouri actually get into enough of a market that the Big 10 Network will make more money for every school in the conference? Probably not.

[JK37]

Adding schools just to add schools is indeed stupid. But it's not just the TV markets. It's also the championship game.

All that combines to force ND's hand a little more. Plus, NBC's contract with ND is up again in a couple years, and ratings have been dropping in recent years. If the Big 10 moves to 14 teams now and establishes a championship game on its own network, thereby increasing the annual payout to its members to much more than NBC is willing to offer annually to ND in its new contract proposal, then ND finally joins the Big 10 in a few years from now. After shunning them twice in the last decade, the Big 10 redeems itself by ND asking into the conference.

Of course, if I'm ND, I wait anyway. I'm okay with NBC's current deal. And when it comes time to renegotiate in a couple of years, I pit NBC and the Big 10 in a bidding war against one another (A war presumably the Big Ten would win, but its anyone's guess what that could look like in 2-5 years from now). So, either way, ND wins. (And to say so makes me want to puke!)

[From the class of 09]

There are so many things that go into trying to predict the revenue of future teams/conferences that it becomes a rather long equation. It is easy to figure the population of any given area. But when you compare a school like Nebraska with a small state population to a school like Rutgers situated between NYC and Philly who is the bigger draw? I mean who would you watch Ohio State v Nebraska or Ohio State v Rutgers? The problem here is you have to factor in quality of opponents too. Obviously Texas is king as they have both population and a good program (but at what point is Texas not worth it when the talk is they bring along A&M, TT, and possibly Baylor?)

Another thing you have to consider when trying to estimate future revenue is streaming games over the internet. We’ve already all seen how nice ESPN3 is. What’s to stop a conference from selling each game individually to people who might not be willing to fill a subscription to the whole network? Basically Pay-per-view without the cost of running it through the cable companies. In the next 5 years every TV made will be hooked up to the internet.