Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[SolterraCyclone]

Whoever the arsehole was who said the PAC was a $50 million a team league and talked the other presidents into holding firm needs a kick in the nuts.

SMU nothing up to 9 years?? CalStan to the A ******* CC for a song and possibly neutral site games in Dallas?

Killed the PAC for no goddam good reason

Based on what teams are getting now, the P12 after USCLA left was worth about $232M
- 4 corners = $31.7M each
- OU/WA = $35M each
- Stanford/Cal = $11M each (30% of ACC deal for 7 years)
- OSU/WSU = $6M each ( MWC per team payout

That’s approximately $23M per team which is what Apple offered them. So that looks to me like a fair valuation (when the talking heads start asking why the P12 couldn’t get a deal).

 

[isucy86]

Great point. What gets overlooked in a lot of this is that the networks have a finite number of windows for their games. Adding members to conferences they have deals with means more competition for those windows. Would ESPN prefer NC State-Stanford for a late window on ESPN2, relegating Iowa State-Arizona or Baylor-Colorado to ESPN+?
move
There‘s only so much airtime to go around, and with ESPN/Fox adding more ACC/B1G ”after dark” content to their plates, that’s not necessarily good for the B12.

I will be curious how much this was an ESPN late window move. I can't believe that ACC schools are going to be excited about 10:30pm ET starts. Your average team fan isn't staying up until 1:30am to watch Miami, UVA, UNC, etc. football game

 

[HouClone]

Kliavkoff said last September that UCLA travel expenses would raise from $8 million to $23 million in the Big 10. UCLA now has Big 10 money though. Good luck to Stanford and Cal.

 

[CascadeClone]

Kliavkoff said last September that UCLA travel expenses would raise from $8 million to $23 million in the Big 10. UCLA now has Big 10 money though. Good luck to Stanford and Cal.

I'd bet that is an exaggerated number to make his crap deal look better to the left behinds.

Speaking of Kliavkoff... what's he doing now? Is he fired already? Is he packing his desk and spending the day not returning calls to Oregon St? At some point, does he just turn off the lights, and walk out the door and it's over?

 

[isucy86]

Kliavkoff said last September that UCLA travel expenses would raise from $8 million to $23 million in the Big 10. UCLA now has Big 10 money though. Good luck to Stanford and Cal.

I wouldn't believe anything GK says. Especially in that situation as he was pandering to California politicians.

But I would agree that only having 2 schools traveling cross country makes little sense.

Will be curious if ACC stays with an 8 game conference schedule.

Also will ND vs. Stanford continue to play each other non-con games or will they be ACC games.

 

[LLCoolCY]

(Mike drop)

 

[cyatheart]

This Acc move cements them as the next to crumble. Unequal rev share, large teams unhappy, geography makes no sense, it’s over for them.

Only way it works is if the big 12 contract comes up, and we can’t get a deal worth what they have now. And as a result, teams bolt to the acc then.

 

[2speedy1]

Based on what teams are getting now, the P12 after USCLA left was worth about $232M
- 4 corners = $31.7M each
- OU/WA = $35M each
- Stanford/Cal = $11M each (30% of ACC deal for 7 years)
- OSU/WSU = $6M each ( MWC per team payout

That’s approximately $23M per team which is what Apple offered them. So that looks to me like a fair valuation (when the talking heads start asking why the P12 couldn’t get a deal).

I have not see yet though if ESPN is paying a pro rata for Stan, Cal, and SMU.

If they are paying a full share and those teams are just taking a percentage or none, then the rest are getting an increase. If there is no pro Rata increase for those 3 teams, it just divides their pot more ways and reduces everyones share.

What someone mentioned, that SMU will still get the rest of the distribution, from NCAA tourney, Bowls, marketing etc. And that will basically equal what they are getting now from the AAC.

Can a team like SMU, or even Cal and Stan keep up in athletics with so much lower pay than everyone else?
Seems to me those teams will just slide farther behind their peers, with that much of reduction, it seems like a pretty large handicap. Its going to be hard for the B12 and ACC to keep up with the B1G and SEC as it is. Then these 3 will barely get G5 level payouts.

 

[Clonehomer]

(Mike drop)

I love Yormark, but this may be a step too far. Yes, we’re cemented at #3. But to imply we’re moving up, as in #2? That’s a bold statement. Maybe unless he can succeed at getting basketball to latter financially.

 

[Clonehomer]

I have not see yet though if ESPN is paying a pro rata for Stan, Cal, and SMU.

If they are paying a full share and those teams are just taking a percentage or none, then the rest are getting an increase. If there is no pro Rata increase for those 3 teams, it just divides their pot more ways and reduces everyones share.

What someone mentioned, that SMU will still get the rest of the distribution, from NCAA tourney, Bowls, marketing etc. And that will basically equal what they are getting now from the AAC.

Can a team like SMU, or even Cal and Stan keep up in athletics with so much lower pay than everyone else?
Seems to me those teams will just slide farther behind their peers, with that much of reduction, it seems like a pretty large handicap. Its going to be hard for the B12 and ACC to keep up with the B1G and SEC as it is. Then these 3 will barely get G5 level payouts.

It was my understanding that the conference got a full pro-rata, at least for Stanford and Cal. But they’re using that money to make the existing schools happy rather than doling that all to the new schools.

 

[SCNCY]

I love Yormark, but this may be a step too far. Yes, we’re cemented at #3. But to imply we’re moving up, as in #2? That’s a bold statement. Maybe unless he can succeed at getting basketball to latter financially.

We need someone to continue pushing how good we are. The last decade + we’ve only heard from the media how undesirable and in disarray we are. That needs to change. We need to continue to push that we belong and are are a strong conference.

As someone said a couple pages back, NC state flipped their vote to approve, presumably because they didn’t like their prospective landing spots. Of course this is just message board speculation. But let’s say it is true, that would probably mean that they don’t have a spot in the SEC and Big10; but I’m sure they do in the Big12. Following this logic, that would mean it’s Big10/SEC or bust.

We need to push the narrative that we belong and are not week, no matter how silly it may be. We haven’t had a strong charismatic commissioner to do this yet until Yormark.

 

[RustShack]

I love Yormark, but this may be a step too far. Yes, we’re cemented at #3. But to imply we’re moving up, as in #2? That’s a bold statement. Maybe unless he can succeed at getting basketball to latter financially.

Yep, how dare he work to better the Big12 for the future. Stay in your lane #3.

 

[RustShack]

It will be interesting to see where SMU is in 10 or so years. They have the money to be huge NIL players and now are in a P4 conference. Similar to Houston and UCF, they have potential from location and will start to add more and more fans over the years now that they are P4. Most of their alumni probably also had a P5 school they followed more. Just like UNI being mostly Iowa fans too. Kids in those areas can grow up following them more, especially if they start winning.

 

[FerShizzle]

I am still not sure these adds hold the conference together once the big 10 and SEC have their way.

 

[HFCS]

(Mike drop)

Big Ten has to show me something beyond Ohio State and Michigan to just crown them the #2 conference through realignment.

It's been a loooooong time since Sagarin ranked the Big Ten higher than the Big 12 in football top to bottom. They have a ton of dead weight.

 

[HFCS]

I am still not sure these adds hold the conference together once the big 10 and SEC have their way.

It gives BC, Syracuse and Wake Forest slightly more control of their landing spot than WSU and Oregon State had. I think it's probably a net loss in terms of per team media money.

 

[HFCS]

It will be interesting to see where SMU is in 10 or so years. They have the money to be huge NIL players and now are in a P4 conference. Similar to Houston and UCF, they have potential from location and will start to add more and more fans over the years now that they are P4. Most of their alumni probably also had a P5 school they followed more. Just like UNI being mostly Iowa fans too. Kids in those areas can grow up following them more, especially if they start winning.

SEC and Big Ten would have to add the entire old SWC except for maybe Rice to guarantee no teams in Texas are better than the average Big Ten and maybe average SEC team.

It's not some difficult puzzle to figure out how TCU and Baylor have risen up. There's more talent than A&M and the Longhorns can possibly absorb.

 

[wenkeej]

You better be coming with hands, bro...

 

[cycloneML]

What’s the attraction to SMU? Academics? Texas recruiting?

 

[HFCS]

Kliavkoff said last September that UCLA travel expenses would raise from $8 million to $23 million in the Big 10. UCLA now has Big 10 money though. Good luck to Stanford and Cal.

They should both join WCC and see if MWC wants football only members.