Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Bull Matrix]

12 minutes ago, bulloni said:

There's no way the BIG12 loses 2 top 7 brands in college football and replaces them with BYU and 3 G5's and their valuation goes up. The networks will be negotiating with the remaining 8's TV numbers in games that didn't include Texas/OU. 

https://www.blackandgoldbanneret.com/knight-insight/2021/7/26/22594438/big-12-without-texas-oklahoma-worth-the-same-on-tv-as-the-american-ratings-viewers-media-ucf-aac

In 2019 Big 12 games without Texas/Oklahoma averaged 0.708 million, that same year AAC games averaged 1.022 million. Granted those 3 G5's are a big part of why the Americans numbers we're higher. But it won't be enough to increase the payout.

Everything you read now has been posturing by conferences. 

 

Agreed. big 12 is the lowest on the pecking order in P5. They had to replace Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Texas A&M, Mizzou, Nebraska with G5 schools. Big Ten & PAC12 will eventually raid them once again. 

[UCF_rustbucket]

3 minutes ago, Bull Daly said:

Agreed. big 12 is the lowest on the pecking order in P5. They had to replace Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Texas A&M, Mizzou, Nebraska with G5 schools. Big Ten & PAC12 will eventually raid them once again. 

Per Navigates estimates, the PAC 12 is in trouble. The PAC was barely going to be ahead of the Big 12. At the time they did their estimate it was with OU and UT in the SEC and not the Big 12, but the PAC still having the LA schools. You take out those schools and that guarantees that the PAC goes from being slightly ahead of the Big 12 to being behind. How much behind is TBD. 

 

Power 5 Conference Payout Estimates | Navigate

---

Our team estimated the rise in average Power 5 conference...

 

[hm101]

Colorado had another BOR meeting yesterday or Friday. Pac 12 legal opinion was on the agenda.

[Jim Johnson]

8 hours ago, UCF_rustbucket said:

Being first in contract negotiations is only an advantage if the existing core of the PAC gets a higher valuation than the new Big 12. Not just higher, but higher to a point worth paying out the conference exit fee and forfeiting NCAA credits for. I'm sure each conference is having their conversations with networks and analysts to see where they stand. 

Being first in contract negotiations is also an advantage as being first in signing a new Grant of Rights.

[NewEnglandBull]

7 hours ago, Cubanbull said:

Unless ND is moving, there won’t be any other PAC schools moving. The PAC and Big12 will get similar contracts 

I’lI disagree on that. The PAC will be less money. It is already less due to being on the west coast. The inventory of the B12 does not include a marquee team, but it’s time distribution and inventory is greater (and I’ll argue it has better quality). Long term, the PAC will not survive unless they expand with a few G5 schools but I’ll be surprised if they do it due to their cultural positions. 

Edited July 19, 2022 by NewEnglandBull

[NewEnglandBull]

2 hours ago, Bull Daly said:

Honestly how can anyone justify Big 12 being better than PAC12 tv contract when the Big 12 is currently locked in and the PAC10 is opening up tv negotiations? They still have Oregon and the Rose Bowl tie in. All they have to do is invite what is left of the watered down Big12

The B12 tv contract opens in two years. You really think that the value will be lower than the PAC? Hell in two years the likihood is that the PAC will be gone. That conference has ZERO stability. Everyone is looking to bounce. Oregon is making calls everyday. No way Phil Knight stays in a doomed league for long. Why in the hell would a B12 school want to go into that instability and take less/similar money in the process? You are trying to create a mental path for USF to get to the B12 and it simply is not there. 

Edited July 19, 2022 by NewEnglandBull

[UCF_rustbucket]

27 minutes ago, Jim Johnson said:

Being first in contract negotiations is also an advantage as being first in signing a new Grant of Rights.

Is it though? What's the actual advantage? It's not like the Big 12 won't extend their GOR once they sign their next deal. There's no tangible advantage (or disadvantage) to going first by a year. The only thing that matters is the media deal value. If the PACs media deal isn't significantly higher than what the Big 12 will get, no Big 12 team is leaving and paying $80M for that. 

[NewEnglandBull]

1 minute ago, UCF_rustbucket said:

Is it though? What's the actual advantage? It's not like the Big 12 won't extend their GOR once they sign their next deal. There's no tangible advantage (or disadvantage) to going first by a year. The only thing that matters is the media deal value. If the PACs media deal isn't significantly higher than what the Big 12 will get, no Big 12 team is leaving and paying $80M for that. 

I’ll add the the PAC must have seen the writing on the wall for their contract or they would have not attempted some kind of merger with the B12. 

[UCF_rustbucket]

1 minute ago, NewEnglandBull said:

I’ll add the the PAC must have seen the writing on the wall for their contract or they would have not attempted some kind of merger with the B12. 

I think so too. Since all indications before show that they preferred doing this with the ACC because they're an academic peer while the Big 12 isn't. For academics to suddenly be less important must mean they're in survival mode and haven't liked what they've heard back so far for their media valuation.

[Jim Johnson]

1 hour ago, NewEnglandBull said:

I’lI disagree on that. The PAC will be less money. It is already less due to being on the west coast. The inventory of the B12 does not include a marquee team, but it’s time distribution and inventory is greater (and I’ll argue it has better quality). Long term, the PAC will not survive unless they expand with a few G5 schools but I’ll be surprised if they do it due to their cultural positions.