Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[Bull Matrix]

5 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

The one element of power the B12 has is stability. None are going to go to the B10 unless they want to go to 20 teams. For sure Stanford, Wash, and Oregon are gone…regardless of ND (who will stay Indy and take more $ from NBC for 7 years).  

Big 12 is the lowest on the p5 pecking order. Basically the P4 are calling the shots. UCiF, cincy, Houston, TCU, wvu were pulled in from g5 to help them survive. Once OU & Texas leave i don’t see anyone in that conference worth paying attention to. It is only a matter of time before Ok st & Kansas get the call up to the P4. Big 12 Is like a hodgepodge of nonethingness…

Edited August 24, 2022 by Bull Daly

[Jim Johnson]

1 hour ago, Bull Daly said:

Big 12 is the lowest on the p5 pecking order. Basically the P4 are calling the shots. UCiF, cincy, Houston, TCU, wvu were pulled in from g5 to help them survive. Once OU & Texas leave i don’t see anyone in that conference worth paying attention to. It is only a matter of time before Ok st & Kansas get the call up to the P4. Big 12 Is like a hodgepodge of nonethingness…

I don't think that is true at all.  Only two conferences are calling the shots, and the Big 12 is really 4th out of the "P5".

The ACC is adrift... they aren't making any calls on anything.  Their Grant of Rights is the only think holding them together at this point, and once that expires a bunch of teams WILL jump ship.  The SEC will eventually move to 20 or more teams, and they will look to the ACC for the teams that matter.  The ACC will back fill, and it might look at some Big 12 schools (WVU?) but more likely it will take some eastern AAC team.

The remaining PAC 10 are inherently unstable, because it's not a question of "IF" anyone is leaving, but when.  The Big Ten is not done expanding, and USC/UCLA need travel partners for their Olympic Sports.  Expect two to four of the west coast schools to depart at some point.  It may be that the PAC 10 signs a six year TV deal with a Grant of Rights, which delays the inevitable until the Big Ten's contract is up.

The Big 12, however, as @NewEnglandBull said is stable at this point.  Chances are incredibly slim that any of the 12 schools that will be a part after OU and UT leave will move to the Big Ten or SEC.  That doesn't mean the Big 12 will poach PAC 10 teams now.  However, the stability of the conference -- and the ability to play in the Eastern time zone -- gives it an edge over the PAC.

-----

What I see happening in the early 2030s - the Big Ten and SEC will add more schools... and form an upper tier.  The Pac 12/Big12/ACC will adjust and form a second tier.  Together this will be 100-120 schools.  Some 15-20 current FBS schools will likely drop back down to the FCS, and there won't be a "G5" any more.

[GoBulls84]

13 hours ago, Bull Daly said:

Rose Bowl & Big Ten long relationships the PAC 12 has!!! - Yoda voice 

The Pac 12 had those long relationships with the B1G before the B1G stole USC and UCLA away. That relationship is likely gone now. They have the Rose Bowl, but if the B1G decides to take any of Oregon, Washington, or Stanford, you'd be hard pressed to find anybody in the Big 12 that would want to join up with that conference for the Rose Bowl.

[NewEnglandBull]

4 hours ago, Bull Daly said:

Big 12 is the lowest on the p5 pecking order. Basically the P4 are calling the shots. UCiF, cincy, Houston, TCU, wvu were pulled in from g5 to help them survive. Once OU & Texas leave i don’t see anyone in that conference worth paying attention to. It is only a matter of time before Ok st & Kansas get the call up to the P4. Big 12 Is like a hodgepodge of nonethingness…

That is some great fiction you have going. You are making wishes in the hopes that it impacts USF and are not looking at this logically. The PAC will be sawdust in 3 years. KU will not touch a conference that has teams wanting to leave and a commissioner who is weak and ineffective.

Edited August 24, 2022 by NewEnglandBull

[Cubanbull]

9 hours ago, NewEnglandBull said:

The one element of power the B12 has is stability. None are going to go to the B10 unless they want to go to 20 teams. For sure Stanford, Wash, and Oregon are gone…regardless of ND (who will stay Indy and take more $ from NBC for 7 years).  

I think those three you mentioned will eventually move. But the problem is that the money increase to add them, isn’t there without ND. If those three increased the individual team take for the BigTen they would be in already.

Now for board talking BS let’s say the BT stays put for now as I say, for the reason above. And they add SDSU and SMU. And later on the BT takes the three you mentioned. The PAC would still have:

Oregon State, Washington State, California, SDSU, SMU, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado 

Who in the Big12 would be the big attraction to go there? The Big12 is stable because it has teams that aren’t attractive. Is TCU more attractive overall than SMU?

Are Kansas State and Iowa State more attractive than Oregon State and Washington State.

Is going to Texas Tech and Baylor better than going to SDSU?

Now the key for the PAC is to not waste time and add at least SDSU and SMU now.

[michibull]

1 hour ago, GoBulls84 said:

The Pac 12 had those long relationships with the B1G before the B1G stole USC and UCLA away. That relationship is likely gone now. They have the Rose Bowl, but if the B1G decides to take any of Oregon, Washington, or Stanford, you'd be hard pressed to find anybody in the Big 12 that would want to join up with that conference for the Rose Bowl.

Not to mention that the CFP has already downgraded the Rose Bowl status; they used to have the champions of the B1G and Pac10 now it it usually one or two runners up from the conferences, it’s lost it’s shine. 

[NewEnglandBull]

3 minutes ago, Cubanbull said:

I think those three you mentioned will eventually move. But the problem is that the money increase to add them, isn’t there without ND. If those three increased the individual team take for the BigTen they would be in already.

Now for board talking BS let’s say the BT stays put for now as I say, for the reason above. And they add SDSU and SMU. And later on the BT takes the three you mentioned. The PAC would still have:

Oregon State, Washington State, California, SDSU, SMU, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado 

Who in the Big12 would be the big attraction to go there? The Big12 is stable because it has teams that aren’t attractive. Is TCU more attractive overall than SMU?

Are Kansas State and Iowa State more attractive than Oregon State and Washington State.

Is going to Texas Tech and Baylor better than going to SDSU?

Now the key for the PAC is to not waste time and add at least SDSU and SMU now.

This was really hard to follow. In your hypothetical you were talking about the Big Ten taking some G5 schools? I do agree that the big 12 does not have a notable institution relative to football. However, Oklahoma State was one win away from the playoffs last year.Further Baylor is very good. I think both of those teams could beat Oregon and Washington on any year. I certainly see your Notre Dame point however I do think the Big Ten is still not going to wait on Notre Dame and hope they can get them later. The Big Ten very unlikely allow 2 schools on an island when this is a national conference now.

[Cubanbull]

15 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

This was really hard to follow. In your hypothetical you were talking about the Big Ten taking some G5 schools? I do agree that the big 12 does not have a notable institution relative to football. However, Oklahoma State was one win away from the playoffs last year.Further Baylor is very good. I think both of those teams could beat Oregon and Washington on any year. I certainly see your Notre Dame point however I do think the Big Ten is still not going to wait on Notre Dame and hope they can get them later. The Big Ten very unlikely allow 2 schools on an island when this is a national conference now.

What? Where do I mention BigTen taking G5 schools?

Ill make what I think clearer.

#1 The BigTen will not add Oregon,Washington and Stanford without Notre Dame. The money isn’t there without ND

#2 The PAC will probably add two, SDSU and if I was them reach out to Houston and if they pass go after SMU.

#3 PAC would sign a 7 year deal with ESPN that would last until same time as BigTen contract. 
#4 TheBig12 advantage is their stability which is also their weakness, they have no attractive schools.

#5 you mention Baylor and OSU on field success and say they are better than UW and UO. You forget the value isn’t for on field success. If that was the case the BigTen would be going after Baylor and OSU over Oregon and Washington.

 

 

[Cubanbull]

25 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

This was really hard to follow. In your hypothetical you were talking about the Big Ten taking some G5 schools? I do agree that the big 12 does not have a notable institution relative to football. However, Oklahoma State was one win away from the playoffs last year.Further Baylor is very good. I think both of those teams could beat Oregon and Washington on any year. I certainly see your Notre Dame point however I do think the Big Ten is still not going to wait on Notre Dame and hope they can get them later. The Big Ten very unlikely allow 2 schools on an island when this is a national conference now.

I see now where you where confused. I meant the PAC adding SMU and SDSU. I corrected the post

[NewEnglandBull]

4 hours ago, Cubanbull said:

What? Where do I mention BigTen taking G5 schools?

Ill make what I think clearer.

#1 The BigTen will not add Oregon,Washington and Stanford without Notre Dame. The money isn’t there without ND

#2 The PAC will probably add two, SDSU and if I was them reach out to Houston and if they pass go after SMU.

#3 PAC would sign a 7 year deal with ESPN that would last until same time as BigTen contract. 
#4 TheBig12 advantage is their stability which is also their weakness, they have no attractive schools.

#5 you mention Baylor and OSU on field success and say they are better than UW and UO. You forget the value isn’t for on field success. If that was the case the BigTen would be going after Baylor and OSU over Oregon and Washington.

 

 

Ok that makes sense. From what I have heard, Oregon does not get many eyeballs watching them so their attractiveness is a bit questionable. I would like to see the tv numbers of Oregon vs. Oaky State. Same with Wash vs Baylor. Regardless, I still disagree with your first point, I think the two PAC schools get plucked regardless of ND. Yes, value my be lost but a case can be made that it’s only temporary until a new deal is signed in seven years.