Big 12 Conference Realignment

t-noah

Well-Known Member
Feb 2, 2007
19,780
13,417
113
The terrible ACC TV deal is reason #1 why the Big 12 needs to cherry pick the PAC. The SEC and B1G will eventually get the ACC teams they want and several others will be Big 12 bound. This solidifies the Big 12 as the #3 conference.
Seems to be the consensus?
 

Die4Cy

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2010
14,972
15,857
113
The PAC network loses money. ESPN+ brings money in. How does going from 12 mouths to feed to 24 mouths to feed suddenly make it profitable? And not only profitable, but twice as profitable as what the conference gets from ESPN+.

Conference channels that don't have the leverage to force distribution will not succeed. Quite frankly, as more and more people go to streaming, I'm not sure the BTN model will hold up as well as it has thus far. Once people have options, Rutgers isn't going to pull in nearly the revenue from NYC as it did in linear cable networks. Same with Minnesota, and Indiana, and Maryland.

The B1G isn't stupid. They talk up their network while negotiating a TV deal across three linear networks to include their most coveted time slots. Big Ten Network will exist for the conference's "day old bread" type of content and teams. And they are fine with it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RezClone

IsUaClone2

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
May 12, 2006
2,808
1,756
113
81
Northville, MI
How do bowl/conference tie-ups impact conference restructuring? Do expanded play-off schemes do away with bowl/conference tie-ups? If not, I can't even imagine what the SEC would do to take the PAC12's slot in the Rose Bowl and I don't think we would ever see a "badder" junkyard dog than the B1G protecting theirs. Would it be worth picking up the best of the rest of PAC12 schools if the Rose Bowl slot came with them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr.G.Spot

JCity

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 9, 2009
502
539
93
How do bowl/conference tie-ups impact conference restructuring? Do expanded play-off schemes do away with bowl/conference tie-ups? If not, I can't even imagine what the SEC would do to take the PAC12's slot in the Rose Bowl and I don't think we would ever see a "badder" junkyard dog than the B1G protecting theirs. Would it be worth picking up the best of the rest of PAC12 schools if the Rose Bowl slot came with them?
I dont think bowl tie ins move the needle at all when it comes to conference realignment. With the expanded playoff they will even be less important.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Gorm

Die4Cy

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2010
14,972
15,857
113
How do bowl/conference tie-ups impact conference restructuring? Do expanded play-off schemes do away with bowl/conference tie-ups? If not, I can't even imagine what the SEC would do to take the PAC12's slot in the Rose Bowl and I don't think we would ever see a "badder" junkyard dog than the B1G protecting theirs. Would it be worth picking up the best of the rest of PAC12 schools if the Rose Bowl slot came with them?

The only thing that moves the needle in conference alignment is media dollars. Literally the only reason any of this happened in the first place.
 

exCyDing

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2017
5,650
10,170
113
How do bowl/conference tie-ups impact conference restructuring? Do expanded play-off schemes do away with bowl/conference tie-ups? If not, I can't even imagine what the SEC would do to take the PAC12's slot in the Rose Bowl and I don't think we would ever see a "badder" junkyard dog than the B1G protecting theirs. Would it be worth picking up the best of the rest of PAC12 schools if the Rose Bowl slot came with them?
I believe the conference’s deals and bowl affiliations stay intact as long as the conference exists. That’s why if the PAC gets raided by the B12, the remaining schools are far more likely to backfill and continue on as the PAC than disband the conference and join the MWC.

The old Big East stumbled along as a BCS conference for a few years after the ACC gutted it. Eventually their deals were up and weren’t renewed. That’s likely what would happen with the PAC.

The only way to assume the PAC’s Bowl agreements would be to join the PAC. Eventually the deal will be up, and that’s when the SEC or whomever else can make a push to get that spot.
 

KnappShack

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2008
23,915
32,282
113
Parts Unknown
Keep seeing rumors about Cal, Stanford, WU, Oregon to the ACC?

How in the holy hell does that make any sense? Washington to Florida State is one mother ****** of a road trip
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
26,893
25,031
113
Keep seeing rumors about Cal, Stanford, WU, Oregon to the ACC?

How in the holy hell does that make any sense? Washington to Florida State is one mother ****** of a road trip

The only sense it makes is that it would potentially reopen negotiations for a TV contract for the ACC. But, that may also give Clemson and FSU an opportunity to bolt if they won't sign the deal. It's a big risk fro the ACC and for the PAC schools that would presumably need to blow up the PAC before setting up the TV contracts with the ACC.
 

NWICY

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2012
35,646
31,781
113
It's complicated. But one idea would be to merge the P12N into ESPN's properties as they are with the Longhorn Network. The B12 is now pretty much on ESPN's platform. The network has obvious interest in the P12 as well.

Spreading the network to the plains increases viewership perhaps exponentially. Games like Oregon at ISU or oSu at Washington would be hugely interesting to a national audience as well, to say nothing for Arizona/Ku hoops.

My sense is that the P12 has problems associated mostly with fans out there not caring. Merging that inventory with the Midwest would be a fix of sorts. The alliance would also be much more competitive with the SEC and B10 on multiple levels.

I don't like the idea of destroying one conference to benefit another and leaving out many schools as a result like Stanford, WSU and the like. Seems unethical and unwise.

Surly, the P12 would screw us over in a heartbeat. That is the main thing to remember.
 

Gonzo

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2009
26,808
31,201
113
Behind you
Keep seeing rumors about Cal, Stanford, WU, Oregon to the ACC?

How in the holy hell does that make any sense? Washington to Florida State is one mother ****** of a road trip
I actually think it makes plenty of sense and is pretty much the only hope for either conference and/or its members to survive all this. An "American Coastal Conference" adding those schools to the current ACC would be a decent cultural fit as many share the same academic snobbery. And a conference with the likes of Oregon, Clemson, Washington, FSU, UNC, Miami, Stanford, Duke, GT, etc. wouldn't be a horrible lineup. Obviously ND would be the golden goose but I don't ever see that happening, and they'd still likely get raided once the GoR is up, but I think it'd be a pretty good hail mary.
 

PickSix

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2013
866
1,372
93
Keep seeing rumors about Cal, Stanford, WU, Oregon to the ACC?

How in the holy hell does that make any sense? Washington to Florida State is one mother ****** of a road trip

It's amazing to me the lengths that the snobby elitists out west will go to to avoid having to play an away game in gasp... middle America.

The Big 12 is clearly the best play. Everyone can see it. They just need to get over themselves already.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flander1649

exCyDing

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2017
5,650
10,170
113
The only sense it makes is that it would potentially reopen negotiations for a TV contract for the ACC. But, that may also give Clemson and FSU an opportunity to bolt if they won't sign the deal. It's a big risk fro the ACC and for the PAC schools that would presumably need to blow up the PAC before setting up the TV contracts with the ACC.
I think the GOR would be a roadblock. If it opens up the GOR, I could see 8-10 ACC schools being firmly against it. If the GOR remains in place, I can't see WAOR signing on to a deal that runs almost through the B10/B12's next (not the ones they signed last year) deals.

There's another theory out there that there might not be all that much more network money available right now at the SEC/B10 level. That could explain why the B10 hasn't finished off the PAC by taking WAOR. The networks might be more agreeable to paying certain schools in the B12/ACC for the next 7-12 years.
 

KnappShack

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2008
23,915
32,282
113
Parts Unknown
I think the GOR would be a roadblock. If it opens up the GOR, I could see 8-10 ACC schools being firmly against it. If the GOR remains in place, I can't see WAOR signing on to a deal that runs almost through the B10/B12's next (not the ones they signed last year) deals.

There's another theory out there that there might not be all that much more network money available right now at the SEC/B10 level. That could explain why the B10 hasn't finished off the PAC by taking WAOR. The networks might be more agreeable to paying certain schools in the B12/ACC for the next 7-12 years.

The RSNs are at the brink of BK.

ESPN is talking about "must haves" vs "nice to haves"

The streamers may be the future, but they don't seem like the present

This seems plausible.
 

Clonehomer

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
26,893
25,031
113
The RSNs are at the brink of BK.

ESPN is talking about "must haves" vs "nice to haves"

The streamers may be the future, but they don't seem like the present

This seems plausible.

I think many are looking at what has happened with MLB and their regional networks and realized that it may not be the wisest thing in the world to continue these ridiculous contracts.