Realignment thread

[WoadBlue]

Agree on the CWS and WCWS as sources of revenue which would be increased. As to the Tourney you only need the P5, the Big East and perhaps a West Coast mid major. The Cinderella scenario is miniscule if you actually check ratings. The Big East and whatever their West Coast counterpart would be need only expand appropriately. The AAC will likely have the best absorbed by the NB12.

Another viable strategy would be to have all but football members in the P5.

Even your minimal number is much larger than 40-48 schools.

A mid-major basketball conference and those beneath that are two very different birds. The AAC, for example, will still have Memphis and Temple and Wichita St. The MWV has New Mexico, which hosted the 1983 Final Four and has a sizable and passionate basketball fan base. The MWC also has San Diego St and UNLV. Even CUSA has Western Kentucky. MAC basketball usually has a top half that is more than decent even though the league does not feature any 'names' such as Memphis or Temple. Dayton, in the A-10, has a 75 year history of a basketball fan base that shames almost all SEC programs. MVC member Loyola, not DePaul, once again is the best program located in Chicago, and the MVC history is storied. The WCC is much more than Gonzaga.

A basketball tournament requires 'underdog league' members. The sport just works much better that way. The NCAA currently sanctions 32 conferences. Dropping that number to 14 (P5+G5+BE+A10+MVC+WCC) eliminates the NCAA problem of far too many very small time leagues while keeping enough 'underdogs' to make the tournament resonate much the way it has.

Baseball would need the same rough number of leagues as basketball.

[FtwTxSooner]

I don’t buy we’re getting the full picture there.

The BIG may not get another (short) deal equal to the SEC, but they should be close, and there are reasons why they should get equal or more in the near term

So either Barta’s definition of “nowhere near” is different than everyone else, or something is up.

We do have to factor in Fox increasing ownership of BTN, but there still should not be a huge disparity on a 6 year deal. Eventually networks will be leery on going long at record rates, as football (and all sports) decline in popularity. But it should not show up on the BIG. They also have to put in money somewhere, there are few less risk options right now Imo. Sitting on cash not ideal

If it’s truly closer to a few million more than it is double, is there some curveball?

Could be simply tapping the brakes a bit on the expectations if it falls just a bit short on the very lofty predictions. Or trying to keep as many bidders engaged as long as possible. Acknowledging this will be a blowout deal could have some bail out early rather staying in and get caught up in the bidding at a level you wouldn’t have considered from the start.

Though, all in all, I think it’s more gamesmanship and blowing smoke than anything else. The B1G is going to get paid quite well.

[kopp0e]

The MWV has New Mexico, which hosted the 1983 Final Four and has a sizable and passionate basketball fan base.

I don't get why XII didn't add UNM Lobos from the start, the league should have disbanded Big 8 along with SWC, then expanded farther out...


Big8:
Iowa State
Nebraska
Colorado
Kansas
Missouri
Oklahoma

SWC:
Arkansas
Texas
Texas A&M

Add:



BYU



New Mexico



Tulane


Looking back at keeping Kansas State/ Oklahoma State & adding Baylor, may have not been the smartest moves to compete vs B1G & SEC...

[hiphopfroggy]

I don't get why XII didn't add UNM Lobos from the start, the league should have disbanded Big 8 along with SWC, then expanded farther out...


Big8:
Iowa State
Nebraska
Colorado
Kansas
Missouri
Oklahoma

SWC:
Arkansas
Texas
Texas A&M

Add:



BYU



New Mexico



Tulane


Looking back at keeping Kansas State/ Oklahoma State & adding Baylor, may have not been the smartest moves to compete vs B1G & SEC...

Should have just merged the two and accepted the ESPN offer of a conference network. ESPN offered the Big 12 a conference network first and everyone is going to 16 teams anyway.

Oh well that is for the multiverse.

[kopp0e]

Should have just merged the two and accepted the ESPN offer of a conference network. ESPN offered the Big 12 a conference network first and everyone is going to 16 teams anyway.

Oh well that is for the multiverse.

On flip side of that thought 'Froggy is the (slight..? *but very palpable*) chance that PAC may indeed need to expand, as there may be an idea for 9 game conference slate..?

---

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1526937666029121536?s=20&t=CfbgKbwtwqvsBaKV5h9LJA

— The future of divisions

If the Division I Council removes the division requirement for establishing the championship game matchup, the structure itself carries far less value.

In fact, divisions would have no value except for providing an underlying model for the schedule.

Additional important point: The conference is expected to preserve its nine-game rotation, largely because of supply-chain issues.

With the Big Ten opting to maintain its nine-game model, Pac-12 teams would lack a quality opponent to fill the fourth non-conference spot. They cannot replace a conference opponent with a cupcake without expecting their media partners, Fox and ESPN, to ask for their money back.

— The conference schedule

The most interesting, complex issue facing the conference, in our opinion.

Even if the Pac-12 eliminates divisions, it could keep the current schedule rotation, which runs through the 2026 season.

That is not our expectation, however. Multiple sources have indicated support exists for overhauling the schedule model in a division-less future.

With 12 teams and nine games, everyone must miss two teams per season. But before identifying the annual misses, the conference must determine the number of permanent opponents for each team.

It could use the natural rivals as the only fixed opponent, except:

— As a condition for joining the conference in 2011, Colorado was guaranteed one game in Los Angeles each year.

— The California schools presumably want to continue playing each other every season.

— Washington vs. Oregon.

The Buffaloes don’t have the political clout to fend off a restructuring, but the California schools surely do if their presidents and chancellors are unified on the matter.

Meanwhile, the Oregon-Washington rivalry is one of the most valuable matchups in the Pac-12 inventory. If support for that annual showdown isn’t unanimous, somebody needs their head checked.

In our estimation, a pod system with three permanent opponents would best serve the conference competitively and receive the broadest support from the presidents and chancellors.

Pod A: The Northwest schools

Pod B: The California schools

Pod C: The Mountain/Desert schools

---

It seems rational is 1 Northwest/ 1 Golden State/ 1 Rockies that would work well with 1 Red River, with Houston-TCU-Texas Tech and 1 of (either) Oklahoma State or Rice..?

[JRsec*]

Even your minimal number is much larger than 40-48 schools.

A mid-major basketball conference and those beneath that are two very different birds. The AAC, for example, will still have Memphis and Temple and Wichita St. The MWV has New Mexico, which hosted the 1983 Final Four and has a sizable and passionate basketball fan base. The MWC also has San Diego St and UNLV. Even CUSA has Western Kentucky. MAC basketball usually has a top half that is more than decent even though the league does not feature any 'names' such as Memphis or Temple. Dayton, in the A-10, has a 75 year history of a basketball fan base that shames almost all SEC programs. MVC member Loyola, not DePaul, once again is the best program located in Chicago, and the MVC history is storied. The WCC is much more than Gonzaga.

A basketball tournament requires 'underdog league' members. The sport just works much better that way. The NCAA currently sanctions 32 conferences. Dropping that number to 14 (P5+G5+BE+A10+MVC+WCC) eliminates the NCAA problem of far too many very small time leagues while keeping enough 'underdogs' to make the tournament resonate much the way it has.

Baseball would need the same rough number of leagues as basketball.

My minimal number has been 72 for football. A 24 member Big Ten, a 24 member SEC, and a 24 member B12/ACC. The first 2 consolidate national brands and the third consolidates remaining regional brands of value into a national conference. That way the networks involved cover all significant markets and any backdoors into their regions which could cheapen ad rates.

The mid major hoops schools would not be included in football. So for hoops you would have more, just not those in conferences existing for a guaranteed bid.

[hiphopfroggy]

On flip side of that thought 'Froggy is the (slight..? *but very palpable*) chance that PAC may indeed need to expand, as there may be an idea for 9 game conference slate..?

---

https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1526937666029121536?s=20&t=CfbgKbwtwqvsBaKV5h9LJA

— The future of divisions

If the Division I Council removes the division requirement for establishing the championship game matchup, the structure itself carries far less value.

In fact, divisions would have no value except for providing an underlying model for the schedule.

Additional important point: The conference is expected to preserve its nine-game rotation, largely because of supply-chain issues.

With the Big Ten opting to maintain its nine-game model, Pac-12 teams would lack a quality opponent to fill the fourth non-conference spot. They cannot replace a conference opponent with a cupcake without expecting their media partners, Fox and ESPN, to ask for their money back.

— The conference schedule

The most interesting, complex issue facing the conference, in our opinion.

Even if the Pac-12 eliminates divisions, it could keep the current schedule rotation, which runs through the 2026 season.

That is not our expectation, however. Multiple sources have indicated support exists for overhauling the schedule model in a division-less future.

With 12 teams and nine games, everyone must miss two teams per season. But before identifying the annual misses, the conference must determine the number of permanent opponents for each team.

It could use the natural rivals as the only fixed opponent, except:

— As a condition for joining the conference in 2011, Colorado was guaranteed one game in Los Angeles each year.

— The California schools presumably want to continue playing each other every season.

— Washington vs. Oregon.

The Buffaloes don’t have the political clout to fend off a restructuring, but the California schools surely do if their presidents and chancellors are unified on the matter.

Meanwhile, the Oregon-Washington rivalry is one of the most valuable matchups in the Pac-12 inventory. If support for that annual showdown isn’t unanimous, somebody needs their head checked.

In our estimation, a pod system with three permanent opponents would best serve the conference competitively and receive the broadest support from the presidents and chancellors.

Pod A: The Northwest schools

Pod B: The California schools

Pod C: The Mountain/Desert schools

---

It seems rational is 1 Northwest/ 1 Golden State/ 1 Rockies that would work well with 1 Red River, with Houston-TCU-Texas Tech and 1 of (either) Oklahoma State or Rice..?

The PAC really is leaving a lot of $$$ on the table the way they currently schedule. They need USC v UO annually and right now I believe it only happens every4 years or so.USC v UW annually would also give them a monetary bump. Getting the original Pac 8 in a division seems like the ideal scenario for them. Obviously I would love for TCU/TT/OSU/BU to join the Pac in a division w/ASU/UA/UU/CU and believe it would be mutually beneficial but the landscape is crazy right now so who knows.

Still not sure that KU/ISU don't bring more value to the B1G than UNC/UVA and WVU/ND couldn't shore up the ACC.

[RealignmentFan]

Could be simply tapping the brakes a bit on the expectations if it falls just a bit short on the very lofty predictions. Or trying to keep as many bidders engaged as long as possible. Acknowledging this will be a blowout deal could have some bail out early rather staying in and get caught up in the bidding at a level you wouldn’t have considered from the start.

Though, all in all, I think it’s more gamesmanship and blowing smoke than anything else. The B1G is going to get paid quite well.

I agree.

Remember, the BIG likes to see themselves as the “collegial” model. Talking up your TV deal, which is already large, wouldn’t fit while resisting paying players.

It could be more modest than expected even months ago, but also maybe they sold more BTN, or some other curveball

[XLance]

The PAC really is leaving a lot of $$$ on the table the way they currently schedule. They need USC v UO annually and right now I believe it only happens every4 years or so.USC v UW annually would also give them a monetary bump. Getting the original Pac 8 in a division seems like the ideal scenario for them. Obviously I would love for TCU/TT/OSU/BU to join the Pac in a division w/ASU/UA/UU/CU and believe it would be mutually beneficial but the landscape is crazy right now so who knows.

Still not sure that KU/ISU don't bring more value to the B1G than UNC/UVA and WVU/ND couldn't shore up the ACC.

Perhaps, but North Carolina is the ninth most populous state and the Tar Heels are the most popular team in the state. UVa is the most popular school in the 11th most populous state. It would seem that sheer numbers would offer more value.
It's probably something we'll never know, but it's fun to speculate.

[hank970]

The PAC really is leaving a lot of $$$ on the table the way they currently schedule. They need USC v UO annually and right now I believe it only happens every4 years or so.USC v UW annually would also give them a monetary bump. Getting the original Pac 8 in a division seems like the ideal scenario for them. Obviously I would love for TCU/TT/OSU/BU to join the Pac in a division w/ASU/UA/UU/CU and believe it would be mutually beneficial but the landscape is crazy right now so who knows.

Still not sure that KU/ISU don't bring more value to the B1G than UNC/UVA and WVU/ND couldn't shore up the ACC.

Just what the B1G needs: the added value of two more Nebraskas.

[hiphopfroggy]

Just what the B1G needs: the added value of two more Nebraskas.

Are you suggesting that the B1G is regretting adding Nebraska?

Because I would counter that if the B1G is regretting any of their most recent additions it is Rutgers.

Nebraska more valuable than New Jersey despite the population advantage and proximity to NYC, imagine that.

[hank970]

Are you suggesting that the B1G is regretting adding Nebraska?

Because I would counter that if the B1G is regretting any of their most recent additions it is Rutgers.

Nebraska more valuable than New Jersey despite the population advantage and proximity to NYC, imagine that.

I wouldn't presume to know if the B1G has any regrets about its recent additions. What I do know is that Nebraska was a something of a departure from the conference's traditional geographic/demographic norms. I also know that Nebraska, once a football blue-blood, hasn't fared very well in the B1G. Like Nebraska, Iowa and (in particular) Kansas are low population states. Further, both ISU and KU already have in-state competition from other P5 programs, so loyalties are divided. Half of an already small market is an even smaller market. If contiguity is important to the B1G, and assuming that the B1G may have had eyes on Texas, Kansas also lost a lot of its luster as a potential bridge south from Nebraska when OU and UT flew the coop. Accordingly, if the B1G expands, I believe it'll go for academic powerhouses in larger, new-to-it markets closer to the center of the existing conference footprint. UVa and UNC fit that bill. But those two schools might also appeal to the SEC if for no other reason than to deny the B1G a toehold in the south. Both NC and Va would also represent new markets for the SEC.

Rutgers vs. Nebraska? Neither is now an athletic powerhouse, but other metrics matter. Rutgers has superior academics (USN&WR vs. #136), manages a larger research portfolio, and is the sole P5 representative in its state. As for market size and affluence, there's no comparison. Advantage: Rutgers. Imagine that.

[RealignmentFan]

Rutgers vs. Nebraska? Neither is now an athletic powerhouse, but other metrics matter. Rutgers has superior academics (USN&WR vs. #136), manages a larger research portfolio, and is the sole P5 representative in its state. As for market size and affluence, there's no comparison. Advantage: Rutgers. Imagine that.

The difference between Nebraska athletics and Rutgers is as big as the difference on the academic side.

With brand mattering more, advantage is to Nebraska

[hank970]

The difference between Nebraska athletics and Rutgers is as big as the difference on the academic side.

With brand mattering more, advantage is to Nebraska

Nebraska was a brand, just like Sears. Perceptions change after prolonged mediocrity.

[JRsec*]

Nebraska was a brand, just like Sears. Perceptions change after prolonged mediocrity.

Kind of like the whole Big Ten when you think about it, huh?

[hank970]

Kind of like the whole Big Ten when you think about it, huh?

Are you suggesting that everything will boil down to a P1, with just the SEC commanding everyone's attention? The B1G is far from irrelevant.

[slice1900]

Are you suggesting that everything will boil down to a P1, with just the SEC commanding everyone's attention? The B1G is far from irrelevant.

I think he's referring to the lopsided difference in championships won over the past couple decades. I think he's well aware that the SEC needs football fans in all regions of the country, because if college football became a mostly regional thing like NASCAR it would hurt the SEC as much as anyone.

[JRsec*]

Are you suggesting that everything will boil down to a P1, with just the SEC commanding everyone's attention? The B1G is far from irrelevant.

Cincinnati fans shouldn't talk smack against Nebraska, and Slice nailed my nuance. Ohio State is still your daddy! Nebraska got hit by the 3 sisters and a rogue wave. They lost connection to Texas and some of Cali in recruiting and were locked out of the South in coaching changes. The haven't recovered from the loss of a HOF coach who is still in the shadows. And they lost partial qualifiers and in state subsidies for walk-ons. In other words everything which had been going for them was swept away boom, boom, boom. Now as a small state with really one economic giant ,Berkshire Hathaway, NIL is prepared to sink them. It's just the times, but the transition is killing them.

[John Swofford]

I think he's referring to the lopsided difference in championships won over the past couple decades. I think he's well aware that the SEC needs football fans in all regions of the country, because if college football became a mostly regional thing like NASCAR it would hurt the SEC as much as anyone.

Nascar stopped being worth a crap when it stopped being regional.

[hank970]

Cincinnati fans shouldn't talk smack against Nebraska, and Slice nailed my nuance. Ohio State is still your daddy! Nebraska got hit by the 3 sisters and a rogue wave. They lost connection to Texas and some of Cali in recruiting and were locked out of the South in coaching changes. The haven't recovered from the loss of a HOF coach who is still in the shadows. And they lost partial qualifiers and in state subsidies for walk-ons. In other words everything which had been going for them was swept away boom, boom, boom. Now as a small state with really one economic giant ,Berkshire Hathaway, NIL is prepared to sink them. It's just the times, but the transition is killing them.

Hmmm...I don't recall mentioning Cincinnati. We were discussing the relative merits of Rutgers and Nebraska, both current bottom dwellers in the B1G. And before that, the discussion was about the relative value of KU/ISU and UVa/UNC being added to the B1G. I mentioned Nebraska to the B1G as a failed experiment and stand by my assessment. No mention of Cincinnati there, either. Or of Ohio State, for that matter. But yes, Ohio State is dominant in Ohio, just like the Crimson Tide is dominant in Alabama. Both have resources that in-state competitors can't hope to match.

Cincy plays Nebraska in the next year or so. If Cincy beats Nebraska, can I talk smack then?

[JRsec*]

Hmmm...I don't recall mentioning Cincinnati. We were discussing the relative merits of Rutgers and Nebraska, both current bottom dwellers in the B1G. And before that, the discussion was about the relative value of KU/ISU and UVa/UNC being added to the B1G. I mentioned Nebraska to the B1G as a failed experiment and stand by my assessment. No mention of Cincinnati there, either. Or of Ohio State, for that matter. But yes, Ohio State is dominant in Ohio, just like the Crimson Tide is dominant in Alabama. Both have resources that in-state competitors can't hope to match.

Cincy plays Nebraska in the next year or so. If Cincy beats Nebraska, can I talk smack then?

Absolutely! As for the 4 mentioned: In actual estimated athletic value the order would be Kansas, North Carolina, Virginia and then Iowa State. Remembering, the Big Ten is the destination. In terms of market size it would be North Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, and way down the list Iowa State. So if you average sports value and markets the best pick up would be North Carolina and Kansas.

[XLance]

Official revenue data from 2020-21.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/33952911/conference-revenues-2020-21-seasons-vary-greatly-amid-covid-19-pandemic

"While the ACC 990 form shows total revenue was more than $578.3 million, the highest gross revenue in league history, the Pac-12 reported total revenues of $344 million -- down 36% over the previous year.
The ACC saw a 16.4% increase in revenues compared to 2019-20, the largest growth with the current membership, and distributed an average of $36.1 million per school. The Pac-12 reported an average distribution of $19.8 million per school, a decrease of 41% over the previous year. In a statement, the Pac-12 attributed those numbers primarily to decreased media rights and postseason bowl revenues, game cancellations, lower event revenue due to no fans, and higher costs associated with COVID-19 health and safety protocols and testing."

'USA Today obtained the tax returns for the Big Ten and Big 12. Both conferences saw a decrease in their revenues over the previous season as well. The Big Ten reported nearly $680 million in revenue for 2021, down $89 million, while the Big 12 reported $53 million less in revenue."

[JRsec*]

Official revenue data from 2020-21.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/33952911/conference-revenues-2020-21-seasons-vary-greatly-amid-covid-19-pandemic

"While the ACC 990 form shows total revenue was more than $578.3 million, the highest gross revenue in league history, the Pac-12 reported total revenues of $344 million -- down 36% over the previous year.
The ACC saw a 16.4% increase in revenues compared to 2019-20, the largest growth with the current membership, and distributed an average of $36.1 million per school. The Pac-12 reported an average distribution of $19.8 million per school, a decrease of 41% over the previous year. In a statement, the Pac-12 attributed those numbers primarily to decreased media rights and postseason bowl revenues, game cancellations, lower event revenue due to no fans, and higher costs associated with COVID-19 health and safety protocols and testing."

'USA Today obtained the tax returns for the Big Ten and Big 12. Both conferences saw a decrease in their revenues over the previous season as well. The Big Ten reported nearly $680 million in revenue for 2021, down $89 million, while the Big 12 reported $53 million less in revenue."

Here's what that boils down to X:

SEC: 54.6 million per school

B1G: 45.3 million per school

ACC: 36.1 million per school

B12: 32-35 million per school depending on post season money

PAC: 19.8 million per school

[XLance]

Here's what that boils down to X:

SEC: 54.6 million per school

B1G: 45.3 million per school

ACC: 36.1 million per school

B12: 32-35 million per school depending on post season money

PAC: 19.8 million per school

Yep and 2022 will be the first year that the ACCN will have full coverage on Comcast.
Not perfect, but our sky is not falling JR.

[JRsec*]

Yep and 2022 will be the first year that the ACCN will have full coverage on Comcast.
Not perfect, but our sky is not falling JR.

Not for 2 more years!

[Deadeye]

Not perfect, but our sky is not falling JR.

UNC's sky is not falling because the Heels are arguably the most coveted university in the ACC. They have the easiest path into the B1G10/SEC revenue bracket.

[John Swofford]

Not for 2 more years!

Lmao

[FtwTxSooner]

Yep and 2022 will be the first year that the ACCN will have full coverage on Comcast.
Not perfect, but our sky is not falling JR.

Comcast lost $1.3 million subscribers in 2021 and looking to lose much more in 2022. So yep, clearly not perfect.

[XLance]

Comcast lost $1.3 million subscribers in 2021 and looking to lose much more in 2022. So yep, clearly not perfect.

You are absolutely correct, in fact it only leaves 33.1 million additional subscribers to the ACCN.
Even if the rate only averaged 25 cents per month per subscriber that's an additional $6.62 million dollars income per team per year from Comcast subscribers alone.

[JRsec*]

You are absolutely correct, in fact it only leaves 33.1 million additional subscribers to the ACCN.
Even if the rate only averaged 25 cents per month per subscriber that's an additional $6.62 million dollars income per team per year from Comcast subscribers alone.

You made more money because you had access to Notre Dame viewers for 10 games. You made more money because more people watched you because they didn't have Big Ten and PAC 12 football as alternative viewing options for the first nearly half of the season. You will get a bump from a full season of the ACCN. It just won't make up for ND impacting 2 or 3 games (depending on the rotation. of your normal schedule). And, the SEC wasn't paid for Texas and Oklahoma yet. When they are those two in the SEC are only going to turn a wide gap into a canyon.

[hiphopfroggy]

Absolutely! As for the 4 mentioned: In actual estimated athletic value the order would be Kansas, North Carolina, Virginia and then Iowa State. Remembering, the Big Ten is the destination. In terms of market size it would be North Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, and way down the list Iowa State. So if you average sports value and markets the best pick up would be North Carolina and Kansas.

What makes you think UVA has more value than ISU?

Where does UVA's value come from? I'm not seeing it.

[FtwTxSooner]

You are absolutely correct, in fact it only leaves 33.1 million additional subscribers to the ACCN.
Even if the rate only averaged 25 cents per month per subscriber that's an additional $6.62 million dollars income per team per year from Comcast subscribers alone.

Actual number of video subscribers is around 18 million and only a fraction of those would subscribe to a package that has the channel. Those internet only cord cutters don’t get the conference anything.

[XLance]

You made more money because you had access to Notre Dame viewers for 10 games. You made more money because more people watched you because they didn't have Big Ten and PAC 12 football as alternative viewing options for the first nearly half of the season. You will get a bump from a full season of the ACCN. It just won't make up for ND impacting 2 or 3 games (depending on the rotation. of your normal schedule). And, the SEC wasn't paid for Texas and Oklahoma yet. When they are those two in the SEC are only going to turn a wide gap into a canyon.

That has absolutely nothing to do with getting over 30 million new subscribers to the ACCN. The ACC collects the money whether people watch or not.

We'll see if the SEC gets more subscribers for the SECN after Oklahoma and Texas, but the timing of the SECN corresponded with full coverage on all ESPN platforms whereas the ACCN is getting to full coverage piecemeal.

[XLance]

Actual number of video subscribers is around 18 million and only a fraction of those would subscribe to a package that has the channel. Those internet only cord cutters don’t get the conference anything.

How many subscribers does Comcast have 2021?
How many Comcast subscribers: 2021: 34.2 million subscribers. 2020: 33.1 million.Mar 27, 2022

[JRsec*]

That has absolutely nothing to do with getting over 30 million new subscribers to the ACCN. The ACC collects the money whether people watch or not.

We'll see if the SEC gets more subscribers for the SECN after Oklahoma and Texas, but the timing of the SECN corresponded with full coverage on all ESPN platforms whereas the ACCN is getting to full coverage piecemeal.

As usual X you whiffed on the point. No conference's bread and butter comes from T3 subscriptions. The ACC was pulled up by more ND games and no PAC and B1G games for ~ half the season.

[JRsec*]

What makes you think UVA has more value than ISU?

Where does UVA's value come from? I'm not seeing it.

Market size and Beltway interest. And we aren't talking a from in a Corn Belt state of 3 plus million.

[hiphopfroggy]

Market size and Beltway interest. And we aren't talking a from in a Corn Belt state of 3 plus million.

I'm just talking about from a B1G perspective. ISU seems like a better ratings matchup against B1G schools than UVA.

[FtwTxSooner]

How many subscribers does Comcast have 2021?
How many Comcast subscribers: 2021: 34.2 million subscribers. 2020: 33.1 million.Mar 27, 2022

Comcast Cable Jan. 27 reported a loss of 1.49 million pay-TV subscribers in the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2021. That compared with a subscriber loss of 1.29 million in 2020. The cabler lost 349,000 subs in the fourth quarter, up 53% from a sub loss of 227,000 in the previous-year period. Comcast ended 2021 with 17.5 million pay-TV subs, down from 18.9 million in 2020.

Again, this is TV subscribers, under 18 million and far less with the package that has the ACCN. The ACC missed the boat in terms of peak cable /sat revenue.

[uberism]

You can tell when ACC fans know they are going to be a in a world of hurt financially in the coming years when they try using covid year finances to try and talk smack. Pure stupidity. The Pac 12 played football for like half of a season, same with the Big Ten. No fans, etc.

[slice1900]

How many subscribers does Comcast have 2021?
How many Comcast subscribers: 2021: 34.2 million subscribers. 2020: 33.1 million.Mar 27, 2022

You're looking at the wrong numbers, they have 17.7 million video subscribers as of the end of the last quarter: https://nscreenmedia.com/comcast/

Conferences also only get paid for subscribers who actually get ACCN. That's subscribers in the ACC footprint, plus subscribers out of the ACC footprint who get a sports add on. For instance while my cable company (Mediacom) carries ACCN and SECN, they are both in the add on "sports pack" which I don't subscribe to, so neither makes any money from me.

So anyone who believes the ACC will be paid for an additional 33.1 million additional subscribers, or even 17.7 million subscribers is for a rude awakening.

[JRsec*]

I'm just talking about from a B1G perspective. ISU seems like a better ratings matchup against B1G schools than UVA.

New Market of some size > any average size duplicated market. ISU is a fine school, which also just surrendered AAU status which was its only appeal to the B1G. UVa has triple the market of Iowa, is accretive and is an elite academic state flagship. It is contiguous and in B1G standards that's rock solid. They were also rumored to be in talks with the B1G when Maryland departed.

[Notre Dame Joe]

I'm just talking about from a B1G perspective. ISU seems like a better ratings matchup against B1G schools than UVA.

Outside of Model UN, many agricultural colleges are a better ratings matchup then UVA.

[ElectricSooner]

I don't get why XII didn't add UNM Lobos from the start, the league should have disbanded Big 8 along with SWC, then expanded farther out...


Big8:
Iowa State
Nebraska
Colorado
Kansas
Missouri
Oklahoma

SWC:
Arkansas
Texas
Texas A&M

Add:



BYU



New Mexico



Tulane


Looking back at keeping Kansas State/ Oklahoma State & adding Baylor, may have not been the smartest moves to compete vs B1G & SEC...

yeah, i kind of agree about dumping some of the light weights out of the Big 8 and then doing a merger. I would have gone with Iowa State over little brother though since over all athletic department wise Aggie was much more rounded and at the time ISU and KSU were pillow fight schools though K-State was starting to emerge out of their shell due to Snyder and Kansas was generally a 4-6 school in the old Big 8.

I think I would have done something like take 6 from the Big 8, 4 from the SWC with BYU and Louisville which was an up and comer at the time and form the Big 12. it is still a regional league but with greater breadth and allows for more expansion opportunities down the road

North
BYU
Colorado
Kansas
Louisville
Missouri
Nebraska


South
Oklahoma
Okie State
Arkansas
texas
A&M
TCU/Tech leaning TCU since it's not in the middle of no where

only issues with this would be that the Big 12 South at this time would be pretty bad since OU, State, texas, Aggie and TCU were all on probation or coming off of it. Arkansas might have been the leader for a few years going up against Nebraska and Colorado in the CCG. Add in the Switzer is being run off and Oklahoma might have had a tougher time pulling out.


Anyways, take the remnants of the Big 8 and SWC minus SMU which was practically dead, with a few others and form a new league that can be a sort of baitfish league for the Big 12 non-conference schedule and i think you have got something

Baitfish league

Colorado State
Kansas State
Iowa State
Tulsa
Tulane
Wyoming

Baylor
Houston
New Mexico
New Mexico State
Rice
Tech



would allow some of the old rivalries to stay around with maybe 2 non-con games scheduled between the 2 leagues every year.
that would give 8 conference games and 2 relatively easy non-cons every year for 10 games allowing a big time match up with 1 P5/6 school of the networks choice every year. when the 12 game schedule becomes permanent then you have more potential to change the conference schedule up or add another P5/6 school and call it good.

right now in hindsight, anything would have been better than how things went down. and odds are we would still be where we are at today

[EatLeadCommie]

Market size and Beltway interest. And we aren't talking a from in a Corn Belt state of 3 plus million.

I question whether the "TV market" is much of a factor in the age of cord cutting. Besides, the Big 10 thought Rutgers would bring the NYC market...but nobody cares about Rutgers. Similarly, the "Beltway interest" would be much more Univ of Maryland, if anything, than UVA. Except that the DC market is full of federal employees who come from everywhere so neither Maryland nor UVA can really lay any sort of claim to that market. UVA alumni base is also smaller and considerably more intellectually gifted, and tend to spread out in the USA.

[slice1900]

I question whether the "TV market" is much of a factor in the age of cord cutting. Besides, the Big 10 thought Rutgers would bring the NYC market...but nobody cares about Rutgers. Similarly, the "Beltway interest" would be much more Univ of Maryland, if anything, than UVA. Except that the DC market is full of federal employees who come from everywhere so neither Maryland nor UVA can really lay any sort of claim to that market. UVA alumni base is also smaller and considerably more intellectually gifted, and tend to spread out in the USA.

Rutgers did bring part of the NYC market. It doesn't how many people in NYC are Rutgers fans, it matters if you can get cable/satellite companies to consider NYC "in state" for BTN carriage. Some do and some don't, but adding that partial win alongside adding the state of New Jersey seems to have made it worth it financially even though it added a football doormat. AFAIK all cable/satellite companies consider DC "in state" for both Maryland and UVA, but DC is less than a million people so it isn't worth all that much.

Obviously this all matters less every year as cord cutting reduces the number of cable/satellite households, but expanding east may yet pay dividends for the Big Ten if they end up landing UNC someday. UVA would presumably be along for the ride in such a scenario, but whether the Big Ten would have any interest in them in their own right is unknown. They certainly qualify from an academic and institutional standpoint, but I don't see how they would raise the average per school value in the Big Ten.

[JRsec*]

I just finished compiling the latest revenue data from Equity in Athletics for the P5. FY2020-2021:

https://csnbbs.com/thread-947889.html

As you can see it was brutal.

[hiphopfroggy]

New Market of some size > any average size duplicated market. ISU is a fine school, which also just surrendered AAU status which was its only appeal to the B1G. UVa has triple the market of Iowa, is accretive and is an elite academic state flagship. It is contiguous and in B1G standards that's rock solid. They were also rumored to be in talks with the B1G when Maryland departed.

I was not aware ISU just lost its AAU status, bummer.

They are still awesome though.

[kopp0e]

News from B1G side of the field as in twitterverse, says league is scrapping 2023 slate...

Current hope SEC may do same with Oklahoma & Texas for 2023 as well #CleanSlate..?

[Julius]

Why would Big 12 want to expand by two more schools once Oklahoma and Texas leave? Let’s just stick to 12. Why would Gee want two help feed two more mouths? It doesn’t make any sense from Morgantown’s point of view. I would hope WVU doesn’t support expansion beyond what has already happened.

[uberism]

Why would Big 12 want to expand by two more schools once Oklahoma and Texas leave? Let’s just stick to 12. Why would Gee want two help feed two more mouths? It doesn’t make any sense from Morgantown’s point of view. I would hope WVU doesn’t support expansion beyond what has already happened.

julius = flugempire

Becasue they can and want to. I guess they should have to ask for your permission to do things for their own conference.