Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[AuH2O]

I don't think it's a spin off plan. Disney buys quality content that they know is popular (Marvel, Star Wars, Muppets). ESPN has bought the "quality" content which to them is the SEC. The other piece they want is the CFP. Everything they do now is geared towards influencing whatever conferences or powers that are left will agree to a big CFP with as many open spots for their SEC products as possible. And saving cash to make sure they get the CFP rights.

Along the same lines, I do not think ESPN is motivated to kill off the other conferences and make it a P2. I see very little motivation for that, certainly not at the cost it would take. Most agree they would want the content that an expanded Big 12 would provide, and at a discount. But people that think relegating the Big 12 to a level locked out of the playoff is good because it can be "bargain" content are missing a pretty major point. At that point it would be cheap content, not bargain content, because it would be damn near worthless. Viewership will tank over what it is now.

It seems for ESPN, the ultimate would be keep it at a P3, or P4 while ACC is around while getting rights to the Big 12 at something like $30M per team. Having teams that get watched pretty well that are part of the top tier for $30M a team might actually be considered a bargain. Then you have the SEC, Big 12 and ACC, and Fox has Big 10. Then they can basically run the CFP show, which is really the big fish here. When the ACC eventually implodes, the better teams get divvied up, and you are at a P3.

It was one thing when ESPN wanted OU and UT. The AAC thing was a stupid idea that I can't believe anyone at ESPN thought would work, but it looked like the quickest, most cost effective way to get OU and UT.

Where things stand now, the top priority by a mile, and nothing is close, for ESPN is to maximize the value of the CFP. They have cranked up the value of their regular season product. Fracturing college football and dumping a bunch of teams out doesn't boost CFP value. I would argue it loses fans and devalues it, but the extent of that (if at all) can be argued.

As much as I hate to say it, I think it makes the most sense for the Big 12 to get in bed with ESPN. My opinion is that playoff access (and particularly an autobid in and expanded playoff) is a necessity for the league to retain value. There's probably not an amount an Amazon or Apple are going to pay you per team that would offset the loss in value in the long-run if your league is relegated out of playoff access.

I think the "out of the box" thinking from Yormark is not going to be what people think. It's not going to be deviating from traditional networks to squeeze out a few more millions per team. It might be as simple as securing markets (Four corners additions), then leveraging the position as a nice value product for ESPN with growth potential if they have an autobid to an 8 or 12 team playoff.

 

[WhoISthis]

Ol' Stewie pumping the Pac 10 tires once again:

Stew is such an embarrassment.

Let's ignore the errors in his methodology- M&A activity is not always governed by who sells the most products.

He wrote about the reasons why consolidation are occurring, yet fails to see the benefits to combination of the Big 12 and PAC. And for multiple reasons, that is better with top-6 PAC going to Big 12, and due to risk and exit fees, the cheaper transaction.

It is too bad CW is such as shill, as Stew would be destroyed by anyone with knowledge on realignment

 

[JM4CY]

Here are the numbers he came up with.

"Below is a chart of the remaining Pac-12 and Big 12 schools’ average TV ratings, from 2015-19 and 2021. (Games against Oklahoma/Texas and USC/UCLA are excluded.)"

Oregon	1.96 million
Stanford	1.83 million
Washington	1.73 million
Washington State	1.59 million
Colorado	1.49 million
Utah	1.44 million
Oklahoma State	1.28 million
California	1.27 million
TCU	1.22 million
Arizona State	1.19 million
West Virginia	1.10 million
Baylor	1.07 million
Iowa State	1.04 million
Texas Tech	866,000
Arizona	815,000
Kansas State	748,000
Oregon State	723,000
Kansas	409,000

Yeah… that’s kinda jaded. There’s other stuff that factors in here. Those PAC12 numbers or better than I thought though.

 

[CycloneDaddy]

I’m sorry but taking away the prime time games Iowa state played against OU and Texas is dumb. And also taking away 2020 is dumb. I understand attendance would be unfair to look at but that just means more people would watch on TV I’d assume.

Why would he exclude 2020. Pac12 teams mostly only played conference games that year. Their tv #s should have been good that year.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

I don’t think it’s apples to apples to remove OU/UT and USC/UCLA. It feels like OU and UT always got the main channels and time slots. So the remainders would have worse TV numbers if you dropped those games. Without OU and UT, if we have a comparable TV deal, the rest of the B12 will get better numbers simply based on getting to play in better slots more often.

Doesn’t seem like USC or (especially) UCLA would have had the same treatment.

 

[WhoISthis]

Yeah… that’s kinda jaded. There’s other stuff that factors in here. Those PAC12 numbers or better than I thought though.

Did he stop to ask why UCLA skipped all those schools, even though USC gets the BIG the LAC in-market carriage?

Realignment is seemingly too complicated for Stew. Consolidation of leftovers helps all leftovers that make it to the P3. And that movement will not occur with schools spending exit fees to go to a now LA-less PAC in which 3-4 schools are P2 targets, just to flood a time zone that can't support the PAC when it wasn't off-brand.

The PAC has always been more horizontal in value than Big 12 with OUT. And we could assume now that was not necessarily by accident on the latter part, given ESPN's desire to move OUT didn't just happen in 2021.

 

[cyfan92]

USC just went thru their worst 6-year stretch in program history. UCLA football likely hasn't been ranked more than 3-5 times in the CFP poll era. OU has been to multiple CFP's and UT is the biggest brand in football.

Stew is either a master troll or the DUMBEST person on planet earth

 

[CloniesForLife]

Here are the numbers he came up with.

"Below is a chart of the remaining Pac-12 and Big 12 schools’ average TV ratings, from 2015-19 and 2021. (Games against Oklahoma/Texas and USC/UCLA are excluded.)"

Oregon	1.96 million
Stanford	1.83 million
Washington	1.73 million
Washington State	1.59 million
Colorado	1.49 million
Utah	1.44 million
Oklahoma State	1.28 million
California	1.27 million
TCU	1.22 million
Arizona State	1.19 million
West Virginia	1.10 million
Baylor	1.07 million
Iowa State	1.04 million
Texas Tech	866,000
Arizona	815,000
Kansas State	748,000
Oregon State	723,000
Kansas	409,000

I mean pulling out USC and UCLA (especially UCLA) probably barely effects the PAC teams vs pulling out our top schools dings us more. Also why pull out 2020? I would also be interested in seeing it plotted out year by year instead of an avg over several years.

 

[Big_Sill]

Why would he exclude 2020. Pac12 teams mostly only played conference games that year. Their tv #s should have been good that year.

Not supporting all or any of Stew's analysis, but I think excluding 2020 is the right move. Viewing habits were extremely altered for many reasons, and that data could easily present as an outlier.

 

[heitclone]

Yeah… that’s kinda jaded. There’s other stuff that factors in here. Those PAC12 numbers or better than I thought though.

They support his claim about the 1030pm games, those teams get a bump because there just isn't competition. They rarely go head to head with the other p5 for TV slots. Banging the drum about it will probably hurt in the long run though, the big 12 can easily counter that with the addition of the mountain teams or adding later starts. I doubt we see 930cst starts but even kicking things back to 8-830 cst gets the jump on the later starts and eats up enough of the east coast window.

At this point though, winning in timeslots where the MWC is the only competition seems to be the pacs biggest flex.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Not supporting all or any of Stew's analysis, but I think excluding 2020 is the right move. Viewing habits were extremely altered for many reasons, and that data could easily present as an outlier.

While I agree, it is annoying that our best team just happened to coincide with the year everyone throws out of the analysis.

It also does us no favors to start with 2015 data. “2015-2019 + 2021” which Stew uses is surely worse for us by a lot than “2017-2021” would be. Both are equally arbitrary time frames.

 

[Gunnerclone]

Why would he exclude 2020. Pac12 teams mostly only played conference games that year. Their tv #s should have been good that year.

I think we all know why he excluded what he excluded.

 

[cyfan92]

Here are the numbers he came up with.

"Below is a chart of the remaining Pac-12 and Big 12 schools’ average TV ratings, from 2015-19 and 2021. (Games against Oklahoma/Texas and USC/UCLA are excluded.)"

Oregon	1.96 million
Stanford	1.83 million
Washington	1.73 million
Washington State	1.59 million
Colorado	1.49 million
Utah	1.44 million
Oklahoma State	1.28 million
California	1.27 million
TCU	1.22 million
Arizona State	1.19 million
West Virginia	1.10 million
Baylor	1.07 million
Iowa State	1.04 million
Texas Tech	866,000
Arizona	815,000
Kansas State	748,000
Oregon State	723,000
Kansas	409,000

All that matters is FB and MBB. The Big 12 is SO FAR ahead of any conference in MBB that it's wild.

The Pac-10 has Oregon and Utah with a whole lot of average to bad after that.

Remember when 2023 Big 12 team, BYU ran train on the Pac-12 last season? Did Stewie mention that in his write-up?

 

[cyfan92]

Can someone with more time pull the remaining 8 versus the Pac 10 since 2018. Please include 2020.

Would also be neat to overlay MBB success into the fight.

 

[JHUNSY]

I’d be curious to see what a true trailing 5 year average would look like when you compare the numbers (2017-2021), instead of the arbitrary selection. Inclusive of all games as well instead of excluding prime time games just because OU/UT vs USC/UCLA.

I’m guessing those numbers would tell a very different story.

I wonder what their 10:30 pm slot brings for viewership vs an 11:00 am from our end as well- you would expect a drastic difference given no competition of other games on their end but is it really as material as these pundits suggest?

 

[Statefan10]

While I agree, it is annoying that our best team just happened to coincide with the year everyone throws out of the analysis.

It also does us no favors to start with 2015 data. “2015-2019 + 2021” which Stew uses is surely worse for us by a lot than “2017-2021” would be. Both are equally arbitrary time frames.

While true, 2020 was a peak for Iowa State and we had a lot of viewers watching the two games vs. OU, the @ Texas game that clinched our birth in the CCG, and then the bowl game vs. Oregon.

If there’s much of an outlier it’s the fact that we were really good and more people tuned in to watch us.

 

[CascadeClone]

Here are the numbers he came up with.

"Below is a chart of the remaining Pac-12 and Big 12 schools’ average TV ratings, from 2015-19 and 2021. (Games against Oklahoma/Texas and USC/UCLA are excluded.)"

Oregon	1.96 million
Stanford	1.83 million
Washington	1.73 million
Washington State	1.59 million
Colorado	1.49 million
Utah	1.44 million
Oklahoma State	1.28 million
California	1.27 million
TCU	1.22 million
Arizona State	1.19 million
West Virginia	1.10 million
Baylor	1.07 million
Iowa State	1.04 million
Texas Tech	866,000
Arizona	815,000
Kansas State	748,000
Oregon State	723,000
Kansas	409,000

So why does the Big12 make significantly more? Is ESPN super dumb? Do they not have spreadsheets in Bristol?

Something smells funny with the above. I don't think its the 2020 exclusion. But there's definitely something odd there. It just doesn't jibe with the moneys. What's his data source?

 

[CascadeClone]

Where things stand now, the top priority by a mile, and nothing is close, for ESPN is to maximize the value of the CFP. They have cranked up the value of their regular season product. Fracturing college football and dumping a bunch of teams out doesn't boost CFP value. I would argue it loses fans and devalues it, but the extent of that (if at all) can be argued.

Completely agree. Maximize the value, and make sure to get the rights (or as much rights as they can get - B1G arguing for Fox saying split rights like NFL is best) and that as much of their "owned" content (ie SEC) get in as possible, to maximize the value of THAT content as well.

 

[BMWallace]

Here are the numbers he came up with.

"Below is a chart of the remaining Pac-12 and Big 12 schools’ average TV ratings, from 2015-19 and 2021. (Games against Oklahoma/Texas and USC/UCLA are excluded.)"

Oregon	1.96 million
Stanford	1.83 million
Washington	1.73 million
Washington State	1.59 million
Colorado	1.49 million
Utah	1.44 million
Oklahoma State	1.28 million
California	1.27 million
TCU	1.22 million
Arizona State	1.19 million
West Virginia	1.10 million
Baylor	1.07 million
Iowa State	1.04 million
Texas Tech	866,000
Arizona	815,000
Kansas State	748,000
Oregon State	723,000
Kansas	409,000

One of the things that Wilner has been highlighting and that Stew noted this column, is that Pac-12 After Dark has been a benefit to viewer numbers for the Pac-12. This is primarily because Pac-12 teams playing in the late window are the only options for ESPN in the late programming window, and get featured on the flagship channel.

Whereas the Big 12 is competing with all of the other conferences to have teams features on FOX/ABC/ESPN and we typically end up with 4-8 teams winding up on FS1. By default, any game on ESPN will have higher numbers than FS1. If every current Big 12 team was scheduled for one late window game that got broadcast on ESPN, they would all have higher average viewership.

This isn't as much about the brands of any given school, so much as it is about competition in broadcasting windows.

 

[WhoISthis]

While I agree, it is annoying that our best team just happened to coincide with the year everyone throws out of the analysis.

It also does us no favors to start with 2015 data. “2015-2019 + 2021” which Stew uses is surely worse for us by a lot than “2017-2021” would be. Both are equally arbitrary time frames.

We still did get a bump last year because of the perception we'd run it back.

Last year was big for the Big 12 in changing the outlook. ISU, Baylor, Ok St all did okay in ratings. The 4 additions all did well, on the field and mostly in ratings.

Outside of the top-20 brands, ratings are mostly contextual. I don't think ISU has much of a brand, but we did well last year. WSU with Leach has done well. Last year was one of the few years in which the Big 12 had context similar to PAC. Previously, any good non-OUT team would be matched up with OUT in the best matchups. Not often did OUT games get bumped from a good spot for a ISU-Baylor matchup, as OUT are elite pulls. USC/UCLA were not.