What if AD's value regional rivalires this time around...

[cymonw1980]

Obviously, like most ISU fans I have been thinking a lot about conf realignment...

Many changes to conference structure over the years have not really created better match-ups... examples:

No tamu vs. tex (or tt, bay)
No Mizz vs. Kan/KSU/ISU/Neb
No OU vs. Neb
No WVU vs. Pitt/VT/Miami
No MD vs. UVA, UNC, Duke (bb)

Now... tamu vs. tex comes back, but bay/tcu/tt will be on the outside looking in, and ou vs. osu is at risk. The value of college football is in the rivalries that create fan interest, excitement.

I really do wonder if we start to see decision makers look at this more closely during this next round of realignment and if so, what could happen.

I go back and forth on positive/negative cases for ISU... But here is a positive take....

What if decision makers realize (finally) that regional rivalries MATTER A LOT? I don't think husker fans envisioned a matchup with rutgers at 2 pm on a fri afternoon of b10 "champions week" when they jumped conferences. No doubt, biggest issue for neb is, they have not been relevant since joining the b10... but even though rutgers has done what they were brought in to do (deliver ny/nj cable boxes) that value proposition is diminishing quickly... IF (big if) this round of realignment focuses on restoring rivalries and looking at the value regional match ups bring (vs. simply consolidating national brands) then here is an interesting scenario.

Also, let's assume espn wants the B12 to go away ASAP and they now realize that to do this, they need to find landing spots for the rest of the teams. Landing spots that are better than just forcing ou/tx to play for the next 4 yrs in the conf (for example, the "Big 8" schools are better off holding the B12 together than leaving for the american). In this case, I believe ESPN needs to find spots for at least 4 of the 8 (not really sure if just a simple majority are needed to disolve the conf or if a single member could keep the conf together... but let's assume if they get to a simple majority of 6 out of 10, they could then have those members vote to dissolve the conf - not sure if that is true).

So, you are ESPN and the other Power 4 conf... how do you divide up the 8 to make this happen?

1) First, WVU to the ACC... many have said "why would the ACC add them"? Let's look at the case "for" the add. First, WVU, Pitt, VT, even UVA offer natural rivals for WVU. Looking beyond these schools, WVU was a member of the big east, most of which have been consumed by the acc. This reunites wvu with former conf rivals... makes sense. The value of WVU vs. Pitt is much higher than WVU vs. any B12 opponent. It has nothing to do with the pitt brand vs. the ksu/isu/kan/bay/etc. brand. It is a regional rivalry that should be played every year period. The fact it is not played annually is part of what is wrong with realignment and what AD's around the country should look to change this time around...

(3 of 10 accounted for)

2) Second, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, KSU to the B10. I don't know if the B10 would go to 18... but if you can put 5 of the old "Big 8" back together this could be a nice add for the b10 from a "former rivalry" perspective. Plus the sell to the b10, you get four more regional schools in your foot print that add nice (actual & potential) rivalries with schools like neb, iowa, wis, min, ill, nw and vs. each other. Again, the assumption here is AD's are starting to understand/appreciate the value of playing more games against regional rivals AND (maybe the hardest part of this) the B10 is willing to add ksu who is not an AAU member - the other 3 are.

(6/10 accounted for)

3) Third, the SEC now needs to add to replace Missouri, they add OSU to go along with the tx, ou adds.

(7 of 10 accounted for)

this would leave tt, bay, tcu without a home. I don't know if they could hold the rest of the teams together or if a majority of the conference could vote to end the conference and all of the exit fees, gor deals would be void once the conference was dissolved... so that is key to this.

Alternative Option:
Another option (only slightly less "crazy") is for B10 to add ISU/Kan only (which would create nice regional match ups with neb, iowa, min, etc.) and PAC to add TT/KSU/OSU and ACC to add WVU. In this scenario you could get 6 of the 8 into "P4" homes. You could make a case for tcu to go to the PAC (but not sure if they would take them. I just don't see a great "P4" fit for baylor... i could be wrong, but if we need all 8 to be in P4 future homes or we all are sticking together until the end of the GoR, then the options may be less attractive if tv partners do not help pull strings and push this to a conclusion faster.

Net, there is a path here for the "majority" of the B12's remaining schools to find homes that can make sense from a historic rivalry perspective as well as a regional matchup perspective. So, if this is of more interest to AD's in this round of realignment, we could be in a good position. But we may need to see a few rules bent (no AAU to B10 for example). Also, would require the majority of the B12 to be able to vote to dissolve the conference without 100% of the votes (not sure if that is possible).

 

[Sigmapolis]

They would if they were smart, but they don't.

It's like we have multiple NFLs trying to build a brand and national footprint for TV deals.

Not, you know, actual college conferences.

 

[Cyballz]

definitely needed a new thread to say the same thing every other realignment thread says. So what are we doing with these? Spiderman? JLH?

 

[surly]

I believe the B10 talk is pretty much nonsense. Either the B12 goes into a P12 arrangement of some sort, expands with BYU and others, or it craters completely. The B10 has absolutely no financial benefit in adding B12 teams, regardless of which one that may be.

Milking OU and Texas for every last penny will be a high priority for most of the remaining members. That means sticking together in some form.

 

[JM4CY]

definitely needed a new thread to say the same thing every other realignment thread says. So what are we doing with these? Spiderman? JLH?

 

[Die4Cy]

definitely needed a new thread to say the same thing every other realignment thread says. So what are we doing with these? Spiderman? JLH?

Yes.

 

[Dandy]

They won't.

 

[cymonw1980]

I believe the B10 talk is pretty much nonsense. Either the B12 goes into a P12 arrangement of some sort, expands with BYU and others, or it craters completely. The B10 has absolutely no financial benefit in adding B12 teams, regardless of which one that may be.

Milking OU and Texas for every last penny will be a high priority for most of the remaining members. That means sticking together in some form.

Yes.... this has been my view as well.

However, I do wonder if the b10 is looking back at the rutgers, md adds and thinking about the value of rivalries and quality games vs. cable boxes.

I really do think that conferences will look at the value of the games more this time around given the changing media market. We see final decisions based solely on current media revenues and assume that ADs and decision makers are stupid and don't understand how future revenue streams will be driven - quality of content.

Again, this all starts with the assumption that AD's / Conf leaders see value of the content as key for future revenue and adding teams that complement current members a key part of this.

If they don't, then you are right, based on current structure there may be limits to the value of the media content in the short term. But if we give them some credit then maybe they will see long term rivals as a benefit to their conference in the near future as streaming starts to become more dominant.

 

[madguy30]

They would if they were smart, but they don't.

It's like we have multiple NFLs trying to build a brand and national footprint for TV deals.

Not, you know, actual college conferences.

But ultimately all with different rules for how they'll decide who gets to go to the CFP etc.

The NFL has its issues but at least the general 'you lost, so...that's it' still applies.

 

[Die4Cy]

Yes.... this has been my view as well.

However, I do wonder if the b10 is looking back at the rutgers, md adds and thinking about the value of rivalries and quality games vs. cable boxes.

I really do think that conferences will look at the value of the games more this time around given the changing media market. We see final decisions based solely on current media revenues and assume that ADs and decision makers are stupid and don't understand how future revenue streams will be driven - quality of content.

Again, this all starts with the assumption that AD's / Conf leaders see value of the content as key for future revenue and adding teams that complement current members a key part of this.

If they don't, then you are right, based on current structure there may be limits to the value of the media content in the short term. But if we give them some credit then maybe they will see long term rivals as a benefit to their conference in the near future as streaming starts to become more dominant.

The Rutgers and Maryland moves happened only because TV needed it to happen to force a broader, more profitable distribution of the Big 10 network at the time. It simply does not happen under any other scenario. Important to remember that as we look to the future. For some time now when it comes to college football, what TV wants, TV gets. The OU-Bevo jump has not convinced me anything different is at play.

 

[drmwevr08]

The only value there is, is CASH.

 

[dualthreat]

This has never been about football, rivalries, fans, tradition, etc.

It's only about money and a short-sighted cash grab.

The people in charge of these things don't care about you and the sooner we all realize that the quicker you can accept all of this.

 

[Neptune78]

I believe the B10 talk is pretty much nonsense. Either the B12 goes into a P12 arrangement of some sort, expands with BYU and others, or it craters completely. The B10 has absolutely no financial benefit in adding B12 teams, regardless of which one that may be.

Milking OU and Texas for every last penny will be a high priority for most of the remaining members. That means sticking together in some form.

Not saying it will/should happen, but there is no financial benifit to the B10 to add a Texas school?

 

[Sigmapolis]

But ultimately all with different rules for how they'll decide who gets to go to the CFP etc.

The NFL has its issues but at least the general 'you lost, so...that's it' still applies.

Yeah. I have my problems with the NFL, but at least the various criteria for making the playoffs are without human inference (unless you count a coin flip/RNG in the very rare instances where their tiebreaking procedures exhaust themselves). The league also has features to ensure a modicum of fair competition amid the different franchises, like the salary cap, reverse draft, compensatory picks, and free agency. Everybody receives the same TV money, too, even if some teams do draw more eyeballs. This can be elastic, however, over time. I doubt KC was much of a draw for many years, but now they are a leader for media draw thanks to Mahomes.

What we are seeing develop in college is like if the NFL let the different divisions fight for membership and sign their own independent TV deals, there's no draft or salary cap but you can essentially lure players with facilities and (soon/already/increasingly) with NIL money, and who makes the playoffs is determined by a committee that has demonstrated it favors the franchises with the largest brands (Cowboys, Packers, Steelers, Patriots, Seahawks, etc.) over, say, the Jacksonville Jaguars or Buffalo Bills having a banner season.

It's ridiculous, and nobody would ever run a business like this. Yet here we are.

 

[harimad]

They would if they were smart, but they don't.

It's like we have multiple NFLs trying to build a brand and national footprint for TV deals.

Not, you know, actual college conferences.

How does ESPN do anything with the Big Ten? That’s a FOX property.

 

[2122]

Regionality matters. Getting rid of it is a mistake.

 

[Cloneon]

Yeah. I have my problems with the NFL, but at least the various criteria for making the playoffs are without human inference (unless you count a coin flip/RNG in the very rare instances where their tiebreaking procedures exhaust themselves). The league also has features to ensure a modicum of fair competition amid the different franchises, like the salary cap, reverse draft, compensatory picks, and free agency. Everybody receives the same TV money, too, even if some teams do draw more eyeballs. This can be elastic, however, over time. I doubt KC was much of a draw for many years, but now they are a leader for media draw thanks to Mahomes.

What we are seeing develop in college is like if the NFL let the different divisions fight for membership and sign their own independent TV deals, there's no draft or salary cap but you can essentially lure players with facilities and (soon/already/increasingly) with NIL money, and who makes the playoffs is determined by a committee that has demonstrated it favors the franchises with the largest brands (Cowboys, Packers, Steelers, Patriots, Seahawks, etc.) over, say, the Jacksonville Jaguars or Buffalo Bills having a banner season.

It's ridiculous, and nobody would ever run a business like this. Yet here we are.

Which is exactly why this business venture will eventually fail. I give them 5 years before revenue can not match what has been promised.

 

[twojman]

Please stop these. They will only care about money. I think I just saved 4 new threads from starting.

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

Yeah. I have my problems with the NFL, but at least the various criteria for making the playoffs are without human inference (unless you count a coin flip/RNG in the very rare instances where their tiebreaking procedures exhaust themselves). The league also has features to ensure a modicum of fair competition amid the different franchises, like the salary cap, reverse draft, compensatory picks, and free agency. Everybody receives the same TV money, too, even if some teams do draw more eyeballs. This can be elastic, however, over time. I doubt KC was much of a draw for many years, but now they are a leader for media draw thanks to Mahomes.

What we are seeing develop in college is like if the NFL let the different divisions fight for membership and sign their own independent TV deals, there's no draft or salary cap but you can essentially lure players with facilities and (soon/already/increasingly) with NIL money, and who makes the playoffs is determined by a committee that has demonstrated it favors the franchises with the largest brands (Cowboys, Packers, Steelers, Patriots, Seahawks, etc.) over, say, the Jacksonville Jaguars or Buffalo Bills having a banner season.

It's ridiculous, and nobody would ever run a business like this. Yet here we are.

The NFL has become a TV ratings league, throw any game on, any night of the week and its going to draw fans because its the NFL. Attendence at the game has become secondary to the TV audience, that is why they started Flexing games a few years ago, College football is much more regionalized than that, which is why the Pac 12 does so poorly in TV ratings. It has a much smaller audience that really care about it, and are willing to watch it on TV.

 

[Cloneon]

Kind of a sidebar. These Olympics had a terrible showing. 'jade' an audience and expect consequences. ESPN/SEC: I'm talking to you.