Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Realignment thread

Collapse

First Unread Thread Button

Collapse

X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JRsec*
    replied
    Originally posted by FoCoSooner View Post
    Now all you have to do is watch the insecure cowards run and squirm as none will answer the questions.

    Psychology is amazing.
    You asked me what I thought, and I've told you, numerous times I've told you. When you list 4 choices and none of those are what realistically will happen, don't expect me, or anyone to be trapped by picking one of your crappy options.

    Now that the 12-school playoff is in the works expect more realignment (consolidation). MIchigan and Ohio State, having weak OOC games (Michigan played Connecticut, Hawai'i, and Colorado State) and being considered for 2 of the 4 slots in the CFP because of a flashy record against what was this year a 3-team conference (Penn State), is going to motivate the SEC to make some market additions which improve hoops, and which help pad the football record. Some of those are top ACC programs. Perhaps we add Florida State? A second Florida school is needed for filling requests that member schools have for games in Florida.

    As to your idiotic assertion that Notre Dame wouldn't add much value, they are 7th nationally in value and with the SEC having half of the top 10 already, Notre Dame would still decidedly add as they are well above the MEAN, and they are the only addition the Big 10 can make to stay within 2 billion of the SEC's total market value, according to the WSJ. If the SEC added Notre Dame the Big 10, no matter who they add from the PAC 12 or even the other ACC schools, could not catch the SEC total value. Now I doubt the SEC adds the Irish, but they absolutely still add to the bottom line and raise the MEAN. Florida State most years is also top 10 in revenue (not during COVID). If the SEC added Florida State and Notre Dame that duo would cripple the ability of the Big 10 to play catch up.

    They also would enable the SEC to control 70% of the nation's top 10 programs. And well over half of the top 20. But is that what we really need? Duke, North Carolina, Kansas and Florida State would give us everything we need, not necessarily everything we want.

    Your financial numbers are light. The SEC and Big 10 will both be making more than 75 million in media revenue by 2025. Look at what the PAC 12, new Big 12, and ACC will be making and tell me with a straight face there won't be any more consolidation.

    The playoff money will cover the moves and the perceived need to be able to have some control over the post season decisions will lead the Big 10 and SEC to grow to at least 20 if not 24 schools. FOX and ESPN will have interest in this as well.

    I definitely see Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal joining USC and UCLA in the Big 10. The question is will they also take Utah, Colorado and Arizona. and make a play for N.D. too?

    You are going to see unequal revenue sharing in the Big 10 as they acquire and integrate the AAU programs of the PAC 12. Even if they make just 40 million a year in the Big 10 with playoff money that will be minimally 60 million and easily double what they get now.

    If the SEC utilizes this as well, you'll have ample motivation for market reach, regional reach, and branding to take anyone whether they meet your MEAN revenue or not. They'll make more than where they are, and so will the conference from the expanded markets. Here's the ACC's motivation.

    This gives both the SEC and Big 10 a major stake in the future of college athletics and it enables them to separate their brands even more from the field of schools in the FBS at a time when enrollment will be taking a major downturn nationally.

    Where there is ample impetus, there is ample interest. And the schools in the PAC 12 and ACC aren't going to sit idly by and watch the world zip to a new future without them. They'll move.
    Last edited by JRsec*; 12-03-2022, 11:18 PM. Reason: Clarity and readability.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dawgpile
    replied
    Originally posted by Jett View Post

    Thornton Melon?
    More like Montgomery Burns in hindsight.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dawgpile
    replied
    Originally posted by FoCoSooner View Post

    Lets see if you can discuss, or if you are just the usual upset fan who is scared to be wrong but loves to talk shit like a female dog.

    I predict you don't answer.,

    Do you think it makes business sense for ESPN to pay the SEC to kill the ACC/ACCN right now? How would that make them more $?


    My thought.
    The reality is the value of the SEC is maximized. There is nothing else to do to boost ratings. No need for more FB programs. ESPN has little incentive to do more with the SEC and certainly not if it comes at the expense of killing ACC/ACCN income as they just got Comcast on board so now it's time to stack cash. It's cheaper for ESPN to just pay those programs ACC $ and keep ACCN income even if they have to pay a bit more to keep everyone happy. There is no financial upside for the SEC to add anyone at this point, even ND won't do much.

    So here, I lowered myself to wallow in the mud to respond to your obnoxious ass. You lose, prediction wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Now all you have to do is watch the insecure cowards run and squirm as none will answer the questions.

    Psychology is amazing.
    Last edited by FoCoSooner; 12-03-2022, 03:12 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    But you are just making that up. The ACC gets dominated by the new Big 12 in ratings. Keep wishing and not posting these mystical ACC power ratings you pretend to have.
    Where do you think the new PAC deal will be in relation to the B12 deal?

    Do you think the B12 has signed a GOR?

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by JRsec* View Post

    I have no agenda other than to state what is likely to happen whether popular or not. You have an agenda as well. It's called TROLLING!
    Everyone here knows you agenda. Yo literally give it away with your username and it's easy to see when you post. You hate the ACC and want the SEC to kill it. So you write thousands of posts about how the SEC will kill the ACC this cycle.

    But when pressed to take a position you run like an old insecure coward who is afraid of being wrong because deep down you know it does not makes sense for ESPN to pay the SEC to kill the ACC.

    I call you out on it so you get mad and then claim I am trolling.


    Someone thinking the ACC is going to end up with a better TV deal based on comments from UNC brass, a comcast deal that was widely publicized, and TV ratings that indicate they are quite valuable is not trolling. It's someone who has an opinion different than yours and you can't handle it, so you scream "trolling" like a female dog.

    You all may think this makes you sound tough, but in reality you are showing off your shortcomings.

    You, Jett, and Hip are complete insecure emotional cowards with agendas. That's why none of you will take a position, because you talk big games but when it's time to pick you run like female dogs.

    You all do it over and over, which makes it more funnyl

    So here you go. make a choice or run, it's up to you. Everyone is watching.

    1. ESPN and the ACC work things out so the ACC schools are happy. more $. PAC agreement, ACCN, etc..
    2. ESPN pays the SEC to kill the ACC investment and ACCN, teams breaking GOR.
    3. FOX/Amazon get involved. Possible dissolving of conference to get around GOR. ACCN is dead.
    4. Nothing happens and the ACC makes mid 20's for the next 10 years.​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • JRsec*
    replied
    Originally posted by FoCoSooner View Post
    The psychology of the insecure emotional fan is so interesting.

    Jett, Hip, and JR all have an agenda, an outcome they want. and they are all afraid to take that position when asked. It's comical how deep the cowardly insecure feelings go. They want so badly for that outcome to happen, but deep down they doubt it.

    When you see folks who show up to tell others they are wrong, but when asked for their prediction they run it's obvious you are dealing with an emotional fan. Good stuff. They are quite entertaining.


    When people won't answer a question, it means they don't like the answer. Most secure people will just admit it, but insecure people will avoid answering at all costs. Squirming is the game. lol
    I have no agenda other than to state what is likely to happen whether popular or not. You have an agenda as well. It's called TROLLING!

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    The psychology of the insecure emotional fan is so interesting.

    Jett, Hip, and JR all have an agenda, an outcome they want. and they are all afraid to take that position when asked. It's comical how deep the cowardly insecure feelings go. They want so badly for that outcome to happen, but deep down they doubt it.

    When you see folks who show up to tell others they are wrong, but when asked for their prediction they run it's obvious you are dealing with an emotional fan. Good stuff. They are quite entertaining.


    When people won't answer a question, it means they don't like the answer. Most secure people will just admit it, but insecure people will avoid answering at all costs. Squirming is the game. lol

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by Jett View Post
    WT, T -28 and counting.

    Tick Tock! Tick Tock!
    Nope, May 2023.

    And you don't get to talk shit unless you take a position. Only a insecure coward would question someone elses opinion while being too afraid to choose an outcome as well. You keep proving that you are that kind of person as you run.

    So what will be? Your usual cowardly running and then showing up to troll?

    1. ESPN and the ACC work things out so the ACC schools are happy. more $. PAC agreement, ACCN, etc..
    2. ESPN pays the SEC to kill the ACC investment and ACCN, teams breaking GOR.
    3. FOX/Amazon get involved. Possible dissolving of conference to get around GOR. ACCN is dead.
    4. Nothing happens and the ACC makes mid 20's for the next 10 years.​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • XLance
    replied
    Originally posted by Jett View Post
    WT, T -28 and counting.

    Tick Tock! Tick Tock!
    Do you think you could rig up a countdown clock, it would be a lot more dramatic than tick, tock, tick tock.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jett
    replied
    Originally posted by Dawgpile View Post

    Gentlemen, welcome Elon Musk to the chat....
    Thornton Melon?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jett
    replied
    WT, T -28 and counting.

    Tick Tock! Tick Tock!

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by Dawgpile View Post

    Gentlemen, welcome Elon Musk to the chat....
    Lets see if you can discuss, or if you are just the usual upset fan who is scared to be wrong but loves to talk shit like a female dog.

    I predict you don't answer.,

    Do you think it makes business sense for ESPN to pay the SEC to kill the ACC/ACCN right now? How would that make them more $?


    My thought.
    The reality is the value of the SEC is maximized. There is nothing else to do to boost ratings. No need for more FB programs. ESPN has little incentive to do more with the SEC and certainly not if it comes at the expense of killing ACC/ACCN income as they just got Comcast on board so now it's time to stack cash. It's cheaper for ESPN to just pay those programs ACC $ and keep ACCN income even if they have to pay a bit more to keep everyone happy. There is no financial upside for the SEC to add anyone at this point, even ND won't do much.


    Leave a comment:


  • JRsec*
    replied
    Originally posted by slice1900 View Post


    A lot of contracts didn't anticipate covid, but weren't able to be broken just because circumstances changed. The idea that NIL or P2 will allow breaking a GOR is ludicrous. If they wanted conditions under which they could get out, they could have insisted on a clause to e.g. let them out if another conference is paying double what they are.

    You keep holding out hope that a judge somewhere is going to rule the GOR unenforceable due to changing circumstances, but a precedent like that would have repercussions far beyond college sports. Even if a maverick district judge ruled that, it would be shot down on appeal in two seconds.
    "Holding out hope"? I know this country has gotten pretty damned stupid due to public education, but my point is there would be impetus with the vast majority of ACC schools. No court can stop consensus. And believing in the Un breakability of contracts is the laughable notion employed by many. It's always cost benefit.in the end. And as to precedent, it exists, in spades, when a court ruling, think NIL, changes the nature and equity of an existing contract. And since sports clubs, such as college football teams, started using GOR's, the only precedent remains in the entertainment industry's use of them, as no college sports team has challenged one to date. I would even argue that a breakaway, due to NIL changes, would pose a credible challenge to "Amateur sports endeavors" under the NCAA.

    The jerseys may be the same, but the game has fundamentally changed to the nature of a professional one with NIL and transfer portals and pay to play to follow. And most importantly a Supreme Court ruling ushered in that change and in doing so changed the overhead for one party (the schools) and not the other (the networks).

    Leave a comment:


  • XLance
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post
    Let's take a look at last weeks tv ratings for perspective and insight.



    Florida Florida State seems like a game ESPN would be willing to pay for as an SEC conference game.

    USC ND seems like a game B1G would love to have under their umbrella.

    Cincinnati Tulane could bring a lot of value to the ACC.
    Notre Dame is bound by the ACC's GOR and also is obligated to join the ACC if they join any conference for football before 2036.
    The Irish could buy their way out of those contracts if the ACC were willing but is not obligated to sell at any price..

    Leave a comment:


  • slice1900
    replied
    Originally posted by JRsec* View Post

    And that contract did not envision the NIL ruling, possible pay for play, or an expansion of the CFP and consolidation to a P2 or P3. If the need for ACC schools to play catch up economically becomes a critical issue, and it will, then I wouldn't be so quick to shout GOR and Contract.

    The trick has always been finding win/win solutions for the 15 schools of the ACC. And that means finding acceptable slots for inclusion and revenue for Boston College, Wake Forest, and possibly Syracuse.

    A lot of contracts didn't anticipate covid, but weren't able to be broken just because circumstances changed. The idea that NIL or P2 will allow breaking a GOR is ludicrous. If they wanted conditions under which they could get out, they could have insisted on a clause to e.g. let them out if another conference is paying double what they are.

    You keep holding out hope that a judge somewhere is going to rule the GOR unenforceable due to changing circumstances, but a precedent like that would have repercussions far beyond college sports. Even if a maverick district judge ruled that, it would be shot down on appeal in two seconds.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dawgpile
    replied
    Originally posted by FoCoSooner View Post

    You lack the business sense to understand son.
    Gentlemen, welcome Elon Musk to the chat....

    Leave a comment:


  • FtwTxSooner
    replied
    ESPN needs to milk the ACC for all its worth through the duration of the contract.

    Leave a comment:


  • hank970
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    No doubt....Cincy would have joined the PAC if asked.
    ???

    Leave a comment:


  • hank970
    replied
    [QUOTE=John Swofford;n1125198]

    If Cincy and Tulane brought in ANY value whatsoever....why aren't they already in a P5 conference? Care to explain that?

    How many rounds of realignment have we experienced to FINALLY get Cincy a seat at the table? It took the XII being gutted 2-3x to get them in.....and that means they all of a sudden hold value? It's 2am and Cincy is one of two girls left at the bar. Doesn't mean she's hot.

    LMAO


    That's easy to explain. Cincy will be in a Big 12 as of July 1, 2023. It doesn't matter the circumstances leading to that status or the number of rounds of realignment it took for them to get there. What matters is the status itself. Network and conference executives with the power to make things happen obviously disagreed with your point of view as regards Cincy's value.

    What lacks ANY value is the tired and lazy assumption that, if something hasn't already happened, it doesn't deserve to happen and thus never will. By that logic, Texas and Oklahoma wouldn't be headed to the SEC because, until a year or so ago, they weren't already there. There will be further realignment in the years to come, including moves that nobody now envisions. Stuff happens. Things change.

    I'd have much preferred that Cincy be invited to the ACC, but that didn't happen. The ACC opted for Louisville, instead. Yep, Louisville. Smaller market and inferior performance on the field and academically.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    But you are just making that up. The ACC gets dominated by the new Big 12 in ratings. Keep wishing and not posting these mystical ACC power ratings you pretend to have.
    It's clear who is making things up boy. You are also running like a female dog.

    The ACC is ahead of the Big 12 with OU and UT. ACC is about double the TV audience of the B12 3.0 and P12 2.0.

    2022
    AVERAGE PER GAME
    3.92 - SEC
    3 - B1G without BTN games
    2.21 - ACC
    2.05 - Big Ten -Skewed by BTN
    1.84 - Big 12
    1.84 - Pac 12
    1.2 - PAC 12 minus USC/UCLA, drops to 1 if they add SDSU and SMU.
    1.00 - B12 minus OU/UT plus UCF, Cinci, H-Town, and BYU (No GOR
    )
    0.74 - AAC
    0.56 - MWC
    0.56 - Sun Belt
    0.46 - MAC
    0.45 - CUSA​

    2021
    AVERAGE PER GAME
    3.589 - SEC
    3.581 - Big Ten
    1.875 - Big 12
    1.701 - ACC
    1.514 - Pac 12
    1.005 - AAC
    0.678 - Sun Belt
    0.573 - CUSA
    0.503 - MAC
    0.499 - MWC​

    2020
    PER GAME AVERAGE
    3.60 - SEC
    3.12 - ACC
    2.61 - Big Ten
    1.59 - Big 12
    1.29 - Pac 12
    0.85 - AAC
    0.61 - Sun Belt
    0.56 - MAC
    0.46 - CUSA
    0.39 - MWC​

    2019
    PER GAME AVERAGE
    3.61 - SEC
    2.56 - Big Ten
    2.02 - ACC
    1.78 - Big 12
    1.62 - Pac 12
    1.00 - AAC
    0.92 - CUSA
    0.69 - MWC
    0.63 - MAC
    0.59 - Sun Belt​

    2018
    AVERAGE PER GAME
    4.040 - SEC
    3.226 - Big Ten
    2.328 - Big 12
    2.179 - ACC
    1.976 - Pac 12​
    Last edited by FoCoSooner; 12-02-2022, 05:07 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    The XII and PAC have shitty ratings and either no network or one on life support. The ACC outperforms both AND has a very profitable conference network half owned by ESPN.

    If you can't see the difference in those situations you never will.
    But you are just making that up. The ACC gets dominated by the new Big 12 in ratings. Keep wishing and not posting these mystical ACC power ratings you pretend to have.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    The XII and PAC have shitty ratings and either no network or one on life support. The ACC outperforms both AND has a very profitable conference network half owned by ESPN.

    If you can't see the difference in those situations you never will.
    Emotional fans with agendas are entertaining but always seem to leave out important parts.

    When the dust settles
    SEC Around 4 million per game making 60-70
    B1G around 3 million per game making 60-70
    ACC around 2 million per game making 35-45
    B12 and PAC around 1 million making around 25-35


    It would be hard to come up with a scenario where ESPN makes more $ by paying the SEC to kill the ACC/ACCN investment. That's not how business works. ESPN literally put a ND game on ACCN last year to get Comcasat to buy ACCN. There was some serious effort over 2-3 years to make that happen. Hard to see why just a year later ESPN would kill ACCN. If the schools are making 6+ million in profit after expenses and they own half we can assume ESPN makes another 100+ Million for it's half.

    ACCN is the perfect compliment to SECN and I would not at al be surprised of ESPN took over PACN and rolled that into what is now LHN and package with ACCN/SECN. ESPN still seems to be focused on that business model. Seems like the Big 12 is the P-5 conference to get stuck on ESPN+ but in 5 years that may be a good thing as ESPN + will likely have 50+ million subs by then and cable will have about the same.

    ESPN+ has gotten 25 million subs in a couple of years which is pretty impressive.
    Last edited by FoCoSooner; 12-02-2022, 04:39 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Swofford
    replied
    Originally posted by ElectricSooner View Post

    she may not be hot, but boy I bet she puts out ROFL
    No doubt....Cincy would have joined the PAC if asked.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Swofford
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    Well she may not be attractive now but when it is 2am and the 4 hot girls you thought you had a chance with are gone then yea, they are going to seem pretty great then. Just wait.

    As for FSU Florida yes but when it comes time to pay up for FSU, what is the easiest way for ESPN to do so? You think it will be by paying all 14 members of the ACC the FSU rate? LMAO we have seen the TV Networks business model for this scenario with the poaching of OUT and UCLA/USC. The blueprint is right in front of your eyes.
    The XII and PAC have shitty ratings and either no network or one on life support. The ACC outperforms both AND has a very profitable conference network half owned by ESPN.

    If you can't see the difference in those situations you never will.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Swofford
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    The situation has changed drastically. You are just sticking your head in the sand and pretending USC/UCLA aren't joining the B1G and that the CFP didn't just announce yesterday an expansion to 12 with byes for the 4 highest ranked conference champions. It is going to be much more difficult to win a championship without a bye than with one. Also like JR said, it is going to be near impossible for ND to continue to schedule USC and Stanford late in the year outside of the B1G, which is now a coast to coast conference.
    Swarbrick came out and said the reason why they dont view this bye stuff as a big deal is because they will get a bye on championship weekend. He may change his mind one day but let's deal with facts not speculation.

    If it's going to be so difficult, it would seem the ACC is an easier path than the B1G...right?

    As for scheduling...teams are still going to play non-conf games and still play 8 or 9 conf games. ND can still play coast to coast now. East/South via the ACC....Midwest via home games....and USC/Stanford OOC.


    Leave a comment:


  • JRsec*
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    ESPN is not going to let ND walk out the door and join a competitor's network. ND is contractually obligated to join the ACC should it want to join a conference. If ND wants out of that deal, ESPN would then pay whatever ND wanted to keep them in the ACC as that would be a mutually beneficial agreement.

    The idea that ND is just going to announce to the world they are going to the B!G without any negotiation from ESPN is just plain stupid. That is why the part about them joining the ACC , if/when ready to join a conference, is in the contract.

    ND isn't a member of the ACC because of money....it's because they want to be independent, associated with like minded schools and for exposure up and down the Atlantic Coast..

    If it was about money, they wouldn't have signed on with the ACC from the start.

    Seriously....you are lost on this topic.
    And that contract did not envision the NIL ruling, possible pay for play, or an expansion of the CFP and consolidation to a P2 or P3. If the need for ACC schools to play catch up economically becomes a critical issue, and it will, then I wouldn't be so quick to shout GOR and Contract.

    The trick has always been finding win/win solutions for the 15 schools of the ACC. And that means finding acceptable slots for inclusion and revenue for Boston College, Wake Forest, and possibly Syracuse.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by ElectricSooner View Post

    she may not be hot, but boy I bet she puts out ROFL
    It is a bit surprising Cinci didn't get out sooner as they are a well rounded AD and school.

    Had the Big 12 added Louisville and Cinci back in 2010 it would have been a good move.

    They really belong in the ACC with WVU though.


    Until the Big 12 signs a GOR anything can happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • ElectricSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    If Cincy and Tulane brought in ANY value whatsoever....why aren't they already in a P5 conference? Care to explain that?

    How many rounds of realignment have we experienced to FINALLY get Cincy a seat at the table? It took the XII being gutted 2-3x to get them in.....and that means they all of a sudden hold value? It's 2am and Cincy is one of two girls left at the bar. Doesn't mean she's hot.

    LMAO


    As for FSU and Florida......you may not know this......but FSU and Florida ALREADY play every year And get this....it will always be a game ESPN owns! And you think it would hold more value as a conference game?
    she may not be hot, but boy I bet she puts out ROFL

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    If Cincy and Tulane brought in ANY value whatsoever....why aren't they already in a P5 conference? Care to explain that?

    How many rounds of realignment have we experienced to FINALLY get Cincy a seat at the table? It took the XII being gutted 2-3x to get them in.....and that means they all of a sudden hold value? It's 2am and Cincy is one of two girls left at the bar. Doesn't mean she's hot.

    LMAO


    As for FSU and Florida......you may not know this......but FSU and Florida ALREADY play every year And get this....it will always be a game ESPN owns! And you think it would hold more value as a conference game?
    Well she may not be attractive now but when it is 2am and the 4 hot girls you thought you had a chance with are gone then yea, they are going to seem pretty great then. Just wait.

    As for FSU Florida yes but when it comes time to pay up for FSU, what is the easiest way for ESPN to do so? You think it will be by paying all 14 members of the ACC the FSU rate? LMAO we have seen the TV Networks business model for this scenario with the poaching of OUT and UCLA/USC. The blueprint is right in front of your eyes.

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    ESPN is not going to let ND walk out the door and join a competitor's network. ND is contractually obligated to join the ACC should it want to join a conference. If ND wants out of that deal, ESPN would then pay whatever ND wanted to keep them in the ACC as that would be a mutually beneficial agreement.

    The idea that ND is just going to announce to the world they are going to the B!G without any negotiation from ESPN is just plain stupid. That is why the part about them joining the ACC , if/when ready to join a conference, is in the contract.

    ND isn't a member of the ACC because of money....it's because they want to be independent. If it was about money, they wouldn't have signed on with the ACC from the start.

    Seriously....you are lost on this topic.
    The situation has changed drastically. You are just sticking your head in the sand and pretending USC/UCLA aren't joining the B1G and that the CFP didn't just announce yesterday an expansion to 12 with byes for the 4 highest ranked conference champions. It is going to be much more difficult to win a championship without a bye than with one. Also like JR said, it is going to be near impossible for ND to continue to schedule USC and Stanford late in the year outside of the B1G, which is now a coast to coast conference.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Swofford
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post
    The new 12 team playoff announcement which includes the top 4 ranked conference champions getting a 1st rd bye provides a tremendous amount of incentive for ND to join a conference. That coupled with the insane amount of $$$ the B1G will be able to offer ND and adding USC and Stanford to the list of ND rivals already in the B1G make it an offer they truly will not be able to refuse.
    ESPN is not going to let ND walk out the door and join a competitor's network. ND is contractually obligated to join the ACC should it want to join a conference. If ND wants out of that deal, ESPN would then pay whatever ND wanted to keep them in the ACC as that would be a mutually beneficial agreement.

    The idea that ND is just going to announce to the world they are going to the B!G without any negotiation from ESPN is just plain stupid. That is why the part about them joining the ACC , if/when ready to join a conference, is in the contract.

    ND isn't a member of the ACC because of money....it's because they want to be independent, associated with like minded schools and for exposure up and down the Atlantic Coast..

    If it was about money, they wouldn't have signed on with the ACC from the start.

    Seriously....you are lost on this topic.
    Last edited by John Swofford; 12-02-2022, 03:04 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Swofford
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post
    Let's take a look at last weeks tv ratings for perspective and insight.



    Florida Florida State seems like a game ESPN would be willing to pay for as an SEC conference game.

    USC ND seems like a game B1G would love to have under their umbrella.

    Cincinnati Tulane could bring a lot of value to the ACC.
    If Cincy and Tulane brought in ANY value whatsoever....why aren't they already in a P5 conference? Care to explain that?

    How many rounds of realignment have we experienced to FINALLY get Cincy a seat at the table? It took the XII being gutted 2-3x to get them in.....and that means they all of a sudden hold value? It's 2am and Cincy is one of two girls left at the bar. Doesn't mean she's hot.

    LMAO


    As for FSU and Florida......you may not know this......but FSU and Florida ALREADY play every year And get this....it will always be a game ESPN owns! And you think it would hold more value as a conference game?
    Last edited by John Swofford; 12-02-2022, 03:07 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Swofford
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    huh? TCU just pulled 4.5m against BU and ISU. TCU outdrew OU on the season.

    What you are not going to want to see are the ACC #'s not involving Florida St or Clemson, Umpf.
    Florida State and Clemson aren't leaving the conference. And don't forget about ND....when they play an ACC school on the road, it helps the ACC's viewership. Hence their partnership.


    You can spin this however you want....once Tex and OU are moved out.....the XII's numbers will not be good. TCU is having a good year. Good for them. Hell I've watched them a lot this year because of it.

    Leave a comment:


  • JRsec*
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post
    The new 12 team playoff announcement which includes the top 4 ranked conference champions getting a 1st rd bye provides a tremendous amount of incentive for ND to join a conference. That coupled with the insane amount of $$$ the B1G will be able to offer ND and adding USC and Stanford to the list of ND rivals already in the B1G make it an offer they truly will not be able to refuse.
    That, and the handwriting is on the proverbial wall that the OOC non-P games will go away with each pay bump. Therefore, scheduling during the conference portion of each conference's schedule will become really difficult to synchronize for an independent Notre Dame. Scheduling / bowl access were the reasons they signed the first partial membership with the Big East. These complexities will only be exacerbated by continued consolidation. And when the P conferences finally breakaway to start their own basketball tournament and establish their own tier Notre Dame knows that their hand will be forced. So, do you wait and let circumstances dictate your choices, or do you negotiate to your own best advantage while you have leverage? I think it definitely will be to their advantage to do so now.

    Interestingly, the decision as to which conference may not be as clear to Notre Dame as it is to the public at large. They do want their rivals. But they also want key games in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas which they see as crucial to their recruiting. It is why Swarbrick approached Mike Slive and now Sankey about keeping certain schools on Notre Dame's schedule.

    This is why independence has been so important to them. It's the only way they have room on a schedule to keep USC, Navy, and play games in key recruiting states. When Swarbrick first approached Slive it was because he wanted to know should Notre Dame ever disassociate from the ACC, or just not agree to the association as this was at a time prior to their becoming a partial member, would Slive encourage games with Georgia, Florida and LSU?

    Add Texas and 3 of those 4 states are also growing significantly in people of the Catholic faith.

    Notre Dame isn't comfortable with making the choice between tradition and recruiting and demographic shifts. This is why they want to remain independent. But if pushed at some point the decision will be between Big 10 academics and SEC recruiting ties, and between a conference they can compete in and a meat grinder against schools they have recently been trounced by. I do think they will pick the Big 10. I just wanted to highlight why the decision is an arduous one for them and not quite as obvious as many might think. Notre Dame's decision will be a tradeoff. And if the Big 10 is going to make their offer the obvious one then they are going to have to work with the SEC in deliberately making those games in Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Louisiana possible. This will mean some cooperation, behind the scenes of course, over some other realignment issues.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Swofford
    replied
    Originally posted by JRsec* View Post

    Was this before or after he snorted his 3 good morning lines of cocaine?
    Skipper on cocaine still has a better understanding of these topics than several on here.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post
    New Big 12 gets 30% better ratings than new PAC 10, ouchie.

    If you actually believed that you would not be afraid to say you think the Big 12 deal will be bigger than the PAC.

    Psychology is amazing for you emotional fans with an agenda

    I predict you run.


    So do you think the big 12 deal will be bigger than the PAC if you believe their TV ratings' are 30% higher?

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    New Big 12 gets 30% better ratings than new PAC 10, ouchie.


    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Another thing to keep in mind on the Big 12 deal is Fox has little football content, so most games will be on ESPN. That means going from good time slots on FOX and occasionally ABC to a lot more FS1 and ESPN2 time slots. The PAC will still get more OTA slots than the Big 12 will.

    Right now the Big 12 gets more of those OTA slots but as ESPN focuses more on the SEC/ACC and FOX focuses more on B1G content those OTA slots are going to be few and far between.

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    The new 12 team playoff announcement which includes the top 4 ranked conference champions getting a 1st rd bye provides a tremendous amount of incentive for ND to join a conference. That coupled with the insane amount of $$$ the B1G will be able to offer ND and adding USC and Stanford to the list of ND rivals already in the B1G make it an offer they truly will not be able to refuse.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by slice1900 View Post


    You're forgetting the Pac 12, which even with the loss of USC & UCLA will have Oregon and Washington as contenders. And Notre Dame will take one of the at large spots every other year or so.
    Yep.

    These emotional fans who come here with a clear agenda are easy to see through.

    Oregon has more talent than any B12 3.0 team, but he will pretend the PAC won't get any spots in the playoff. Funny stuff.


    The reality is most years only the Big 12 champ will get in, few at large spots.

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    Let's take a look at last weeks tv ratings for perspective and insight.



    Florida Florida State seems like a game ESPN would be willing to pay for as an SEC conference game.

    USC ND seems like a game B1G would love to have under their umbrella.

    Cincinnati Tulane could bring a lot of value to the ACC.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by JRsec* View Post

    And the SEC will be around 75 million in 2025 and therein resides the rub.
    I have yet to see actual #'s I trust for the B1G or SEC payouts. But 60-70 range seems about right.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    huh? TCU just pulled 4.5m against BU and ISU. TCU outdrew OU on the season.

    What you are not going to want to see are the ACC #'s not involving Florida St or Clemson, Umpf.
    But FSU and Clemson are part of the ACC, OU and UT are not part of the future Big 12

    The last 3 years TCU has averaged about 900k per game once you take out OU and UT.

    IT's cute that you have your chest out this year but TCU is not great on TV, the data is clear.

    This is the high water mark for TCU, don't get cocky or I will post the data going back to 2018, and you won't like it.


    It's comical how scared you are that the PAC will make more than the Big 12. Until the Big 12 signs a GOR there is nothing holding anyone from leaving.

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    TCU numbers when OU and Tex are backed out are ....you might not want to see them.

    You need to do more research. You are wrong on almost everything
    huh? TCU just pulled 4.5m against BU and ISU. TCU outdrew OU on the season.

    What you are not going to want to see are the ACC #'s not involving Florida St or Clemson, Umpf.

    Leave a comment:


  • hiphopfroggy
    replied
    Originally posted by slice1900 View Post


    You're forgetting the Pac 12, which even with the loss of USC & UCLA will have Oregon and Washington as contenders. And Notre Dame will take one of the at large spots every other year or so.
    Yea for a few more years. But long term it seems like ND will join the B1G and the PAC will be divvied up between the B1G and Big 12.

    Leave a comment:


  • JRsec*
    replied
    Originally posted by FoCoSooner View Post

    The ACC is already making more than the new Big 12 will in 2025.

    ACC makes low 20's plus ACCN $ so they are already in the 27+ range for the next disbursement.

    Big 12 will be around 26 in 2025.

    ACC has double the TV audience of the new Big 12, and will make more $.
    And the SEC will be around 75 million in 2025 and therein resides the rub.

    Leave a comment:


  • JRsec*
    replied
    Originally posted by John Swofford View Post

    Skippers comments I just referenced were post OU/TX to the SEC. He followed that up with the idea of the ACC getting into Texas. He followed that up with Rice being a good choice so I'll have to forgive him for that......but......the strategy of getting into Texas is likely very real.
    Was this before or after he snorted his 3 good morning lines of cocaine?

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    Here's what I'm thinking bro.

    Why would the Big 12 choose a 5th Texas school when they are already adding a 4th in Houston, and getting into Florida and Ohio, and getting a big brand in BYU? The Big 12 was making adds to secure revenue for the next TV deal, which they did. Which of the new adds do you think SMU would have generated more TV revenue for the Big 12 than?

    What makes you think the ACC would be a more significant pay bump than the Big 12? The current ACC with Florida St Clemson UNV UVA is getting paid less than the new Big 12 so this doesn't make any sense. Then consider the average value of ACC teams once those 4 leave and it makes a great deal of sense for the ACC to add SMU and Tulane and pay them the conference average.

    So bro, what are you thinking? Other than desperate now that UT didn't come to save the ACC like you let WinTok fool you into believing.
    The ACC is already making more than the new Big 12 will in 2025.

    ACC makes low 20's plus ACCN $ so they are already in the 27+ range for the next disbursement.

    Big 12 will be around 26 in 2025.

    ACC has double the TV audience of the new Big 12, and will make more $.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoCoSooner
    replied
    Originally posted by hiphopfroggy View Post

    You don't seem to understand how ESPN keeping all their properties and giving a pay raise to the 4 who deserve it as opposed to 14 teams, ten of which don't come close to meeting that value is a win for ESPN.

    What part of this do think is a loss for ESPN?
    You lack the business sense to understand son.

    Losing 4 teams means ACCN is compromised and that is where ESPN would lose it's ass in sub fees.

    ESPN is not going to pay the SEC to kill the ACC/ACCN. Fox or Amazon might kill the ACC, but not ESPN.

    Leave a comment:

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Go To Top

Collapse

Working...
X
UA-124223861-1