Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[zarnozdabull]

Just win and everything else will take care of itself. 

See: UCiF

[Peatearpan]

16 minutes ago, Eric Ruby said:

The SEC taking ACC schools before the contract is up would be a big disservice to ESPN who just put a boatload of cash up front to launch the ACCN. The ESPN programming president said yesterday it’ll take 20 years to see return on that investment. ESPN would lose a ton of money if that happened. The SEC are partners with ESPN. SEC isn’t gonna screw over their only TV partner. ESPN wouldn’t pay more to the SEC for FSU and Clemson or others, while also taking a financial hit.

Too add, ESPN still has exclusive rights to FSU/UF, Ga/GT, S car/Clemson, Clemson/FSU, UL/KY and the ACC vs SEC neutral site kickoff games.

Could it be more likely that the SEC or ACC pull from the B12? What team really adds value at that point. I feel like the SEC pulling from the B12 would devalue them, and the ACC would be breaking even as well.

[Triple B]

15 minutes ago, zarnozdabull said:

Just win and everything else will take care of itself. 

See: UCiF

That's certainly what drove the most recent promotions and certainly couldn't hurt any future chances ......

[Jim Johnson]

Notre Dame, UNC, Oregon, FSU, and Washington make the most sense according the their analysis...

• Notre Dame, Ok State, UNC, and Oregon are the best "athletic excellence" -- "according to weighted averages of football and men’s basketball success and total team NCAA titles"
• Cal, Washington, UNC, and UVA are the best "fit" -- "according to weighted averages of various academic ratings, total enrollment and rivalry history with current Big Ten schools"
• Notre Dame, Florida State, Oregon, and Clemson are the best "market" -- "according to weighted averages of total revenue, TV ratings, popularity and media footprint"

Where Should The Big Ten Expand Next? We Crunched The Numbers. | FiveThirtyEight

---

Which schools should the Big Ten poach next?

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2022 by Jim Johnson

[Eric Ruby]

28 minutes ago, Peatearpan said:

Could it be more likely that the SEC or ACC pull from the B12? What team really adds value at that point. I feel like the SEC pulling from the B12 would devalue them, and the ACC would be breaking even as well.

Nah. They took the only ones they wanted from the B12 with Tx/Ok. 

[Rocky Style]

1 hour ago, Triple B said:

That's certainly what drove the most recent promotions and certainly couldn't hurt any future chances ......

We would be an undisputed total package at that point and better than the citronauts.

[Triple B]

1 minute ago, Rocky Style said:

We would be an undisputed total package at that point and better than the citronauts.

As long as the ocs bumps up that donor base column more than MK already has ....

[GoBulls84]

4 hours ago, Eric Ruby said:

Burke Magnus,  the ESPN President of Programming and Content, told the Sports Business Journal talked about the ACC deal, yesterday. He said in 2016 they put down a ton of $$ up front to launch the ACCN. The deal is so long because it takes about 20 years to see any return on it. So basically the ACCN has to succeed and needs the conference in tact, as is to do so. So the SEC is a full partner of ESPN, as well. The GoR put in place was for a reason. Without it, they’d have never launched the ACC network. ESPN and the SEC have a great relationship and are extending their deal through 2034. Basically SEC raiding the ACC would be doing ESPN a massive disservice before 2036. They’d lose a lot $$$. This also means ESPN wouldn’t increase the SEC deal with any new ACC teams until their next go around in 2034. It was a great interview. I mean look at the SEC. They don’t need FSU or Clemson to be relevant. He talked a lot about expansion and how it works. He was professional, so he didn’t give any ideas of who goes where or not. He did say he believed the Big12 was very stable and looked to continue that partnership. Said the same about the PAC, but said they’re working on their stability. He also mentioned rivalries being more important than markets. 
https://twitter.com/andrewmarchand/status/1562394305049903104?s=21&t=w_CplnRAUM4ebwcrOfYTpA

To be fair, the SEC didn't need Texas or Oklahoma to be relevant either. The SEC has been doing pretty well for themselves as it is.

I don't disagree with you on the rest though. The TV networks have driven a lot of the realignment going at least as far back as the ACC taking Pitt and Syracuse, when the Boston College AD slipped up and said the quiet part out loud "We were just doing what ESPN told us to". And I just don't see them pushing the SEC to tank the ACC value by grabbing Clemson and FSU. Having both conferences essentially means they own the south for programming.

[USFBULL_08]

TIL Clemson has a market.

[NewEnglandBull]

I still think a winning program is most important than almost anything else. Once the playoffs are expanded to 12 (and then 16) the name of the game is for each conference to get as many teams in as possible as that is incredibly significant money.