Conference Expansion

Travel costs will be crazy, especially with the minor sports. Imagine how much to fly our women’s soccer team for a midweek match @ Arizona then back to Gainesville for a weekend match against Auburn.

 

I’m not sure I agree with this. I like watching all college football. Each region has its own culture, and it’s fun to watch. Watching on traditional TV is easy because I just flip the channels. On streaming platforms, it’s a huge pain in the tush, so much so that unless it’s THE game, I don’t watch streaming games.

 

B1G going for the National stage. SEC needs to pick up UNC/NC State and UVA/VA Tech…maybe even a Kansas/K State to grow our footprint. It’s an arms race and you want to be at the front of it.

 

The two, 24-team super conferences would be for football only. Even if the conference wanted to stay together for other sports, travel could be mitigated. Think divisions. For football, there would be 4, 6-team divisions per conference, made up of schools geographically close by. For the SEC, that would be adding 2 teams near the footprint, and 6 teams out west so the conference is coast-to-coast. Think UNC and Virginia, plus 6 former PAC teams, or 5 PAC teams plus San Diego State.

In football, you'd play your divisional rivals every year, plus 1 game from one team in each of the other divisions. That's 8 games. The other 4 games could be 1 game from 1 school in each of the B1G divisions, for 12 total games. Gone would be the fluff, warm-up games and every week would matter, with big match-ups. This would be a boon for the TV networks, who control the purse strings.

For all other sports, you could have a similar set-up. For basketball, play each divisional rival twice, (10 games), and 4 teams from each of the other divisions once (12 games). Travel can be mitigated by having travel partners when Florida goes out west. For example, Florida would play at Arizona on a Thursday, then at SDSU on a Saturday. "Travel partners" is how the PAC has been operating for sports like basketball for decades.

The super conference is not without its issues. And the SEC will likely push back, because I believe Sankey prefers to remain a regional power, and not have to deal with having schools coast-to-coast. But for the TV networks, the super conference is likely the most profitable in the future. And considering the changing landscape of network TV, it's what ESPN and its cohorts will be pushing for.

 

Exactly. The ACC has ZERO incentive to negotiate anything with FSU or Clemson! Without FSU and Clemson, the ACC is no longer any sort of power conference and probably loses their TV deal. I'd be shocked if the ACC negotiated anything with them.

 

The problem with this argument is that I don't know if the Big-10 is ready to take UW and Oregon on their own right now, But they absolutely knew taking USC and UW effectively killed the Pac-12. The Pac-12 couldn't get even regional carriage of their TV network, even with USC and UCLA. The Big-10 killed the Pac-12 then and there and they knew it!

I believe the issue for the Big-10 is that they already have a TV deal. Adding USC and UCLA doesn't add much TV revenue directly. They likely add a late night west coast TV game and more west coast interest in 2 big schools with large fan interest, so the finances probably work out for the existing members.

But adding UW and Oregon probably doesn't add a whole lot financially and the existing Big-10 schools are unlikely to take a pay cut. I think they may be stuck without a landing spot.

I don't blame Utah, Oregon and Washington for holding out. They all deserve a better fate. Clemson, UNC and FSU deserve a better fate than what likely happens to them. You and I have debated this for a while. I think it's very possible that the SEC and Big-10 are done adding teams for some time. I still think the only thing that will trigger either of them may be if Notre Dame comes to them asking to join and I'm not sure I see that happening for a while.

I agree UW and Oregon would be making a huge mistake joining the Big-12. I agree it would be a big step down. And I think the ACC would be a mistake giving up their media rights. Personally, I think how this round of evolution ends might be Arizona and ASU go to the Big-12 ... probably Utah too but they'll resist. The rest of the Pac-12 may well be offered to merge with the Big-12. Hard to say what they do. I see Washington State and Oregon State probably ending up in MWC. And I wouldn't be surprised to see Cal, Stanford, UW and Oregon all become independents.

I have heard a rumor that both the Big-10 and SEC are now discussing only adding additional members at a reduced payout. Lets say they decide to add UW and Oregon, they may only get half the payout of the existing schools. If that ever happens, I could see both conferences grabbing up a handful of schools. But who knows.

 

Timing is an issue. The B1G and SEC both have lucrative contracts. The NCAA has a playoff contract for the next three years as well. Would the B1G and SEC add programs now for the next few years under the current contract structure in prep for the super conference? Maybe.

But as you say, no program out there save Notre Dame moves the needle in the right direction for the SEC and B1G under the current, respective contract. And it's not like ESPN is looking at a promising future. YOY, their profits are down significantly. Under a super-conference plan, ESPN is likely only paying for the SEC. But remember, they are still on the hook to pay the BIG12 through 2030. Which is why I believe the super conference won't come to pass, if ever, until 2030 at the earliest.

Speaking of the BIG12, ESPN would love Arizona, ASU, and Utah to follow Colorado. Along with BYU, gives ESPN five schools for the 4th window (games that start after 10:00 PM Eastern) content, which aren't huge money makers, but are profitable. And ESPN is currently paying BIG12 schools only $20 million a year, versus what they pay for SEC. Fox is paying BIG12 schools about $11 million a year for tier 2 content.

A lot of Arizona fans are ready to follow Colorado yesterday. But the BIG12 isn't a great, long-term solution, especially if in 2030, the age of the super conference falls upon us. The BIG12 would then be in the exact position the PAC is in. Outside looking in. Plus, Arizona would be trading a virtual home for the PAC-12 basketball tournament in Vegas, for a flight to KC, and trading great spots with a ton of UA alumni like Seattle, for places like Lubbock, TX and Manhattan, KS.

 

I don't think your super conference idea will ever happen. A few years back I thought something similar was a possibility, but I don't any longer.

What we're seeing now is what I believe will be the framework for the future of college football. The Big-10 and SEC will likely leave the NCAA for football and form their own governing entity. They may or may not take a few more schools. I personally hope a handful of schools (UW, Oregon, FSU, Clemson and UNC in particular ... and Notre Dame) get pulled in. That's why Clemson and FSU are fighting so hard to get out of the ACC immediately.

The Big-12 is clearly evolving into a second tier. I think they've been very smart. They're arguably more stable than the ACC now. The ACC is holding onto FSU and Clemson as hard a possible because they know they're done as a power conference without those 2 schools.

Agree on the ESPN and other network financial issues. There is no more money for college football TV deals. That's part of the reason I don't see SEC or Big-10 wanting to add anybody. The networks aren't going to give them any more money that they already are. If anything, they'd want to give less.

The deals networks gave out for these sports leagues a few years back are going to be a major problem. They may end up defaulting on them down the road.

As to what I said above, even if the Big-12 adds the four corners or others, I don't think ESPN can offer the Big-12 more money. I just think they're completely strapped by the deals they've already done. The Big-12 may be able to show more games, but I think the per school payout is likely to drop, which might keep the Big-12 from adding many.

But adding those schools, even if it reduces the per school payout would be good for the Big-12 because adding land grant state universities will add even more credibility to the conference and increase national interest in the conference.

As much as I hate it for schools like ASU and Arizona, if the go to the Big-12, they will definitely be second tier schools. All the Big-12 schools will probably be considered that permanently. Unfortunately, they probably don't have any alternatives. I go back to my statement of why Clemson and FSU are fighting so hard to get out the the ACC immediately. If they don't do something now, no matter how desperate, they may soon find themselves as permanent second tier programs. The ACC, Big-12 and Pac-12 are all effectively second tier right now. In my opinion, UNC, FSU, Clemson, UW and Oregon are the only schools (outside of Notre Dame), that have any realistic chance of not being relegated to second tier.

FSU and Clemson are kicking themselves for signing that damned GOR, but they really didn't have any alternative. But the SEC and Big-10 never had any intention of taking them and I don't think that's changed.

None of the existing Big-10 or SEC schools is going to vote for an addition that's going to reduce their payout. The one thing that might change that is if the Big-10 and SEC set up the reduced payouts for new members. UW, Oregon, FSU and Clemson would all make a whole lot more sense at a 50% share than a full share, but I'm not sure they'd agree to that, especially if they have to pay a buyout. I think all those programs are in a very tough spot.

The misperception that FSU and Clemson seem to have is that it's the GOR that's keeping them out of the SEC and Big-10. The reality is that even if they were available, I'm not sure the SEC or Big-10 would take them, just like the Big-10 didn't take UW and Oregon when they could have had them. In my opinion, regardless of which school we're talking about, the Big-10 and SEC aren't going to add a program that doesn't at least generate the additional revenue to pay for themselves.

Would UW, Oregon, FSU or Clemson generate $50-70 million in additional revenue for the SEC or Big-12? Especially in a time where the TV networks are highly unlikely to be able to give out more TV money? I don't know the answer, but I suspect the answer is no. A year ago maybe, but not now.

I think that more than likely, those schools are already probably relegated to second tier, unless they agree to a significantly lower share. UW and Oregon may be in a position to do that since there's nothing tying them back. A half share Big-10 payment ($30 mil) while being in a first tier conference is more than they'd make in Big-12, so there's still a glimmer of hope for them. But there's no way I see FSU and Clemson ever being able to pay off the GOR (even in 10 installments) and take a lower payout. I think they're both probably screwed.

 

UVA is not option for the SEC.

 

It's the dilemma for the SEC and B1G right now. Adding schools other then Notre Dame dilutes payments. But not adding schools now might mean top available schools might end up in another conference and could make that conference stronger in the long term.

I think ESPN and FOX would like the super conference idea. Pay just one conference and have plenty of content coast-to-coast. I also agree the BIG12 is now a 2nd rate conference, and one reason I'm not excited about Arizona likely landing there. Who chants, "We're a distant 3rd! We're a distant 3rd!?!"

From ESPN's view, if the super conference isn't happening because the SEC isn't having it, then having more west coast teams in the BIG12 is a solid second choice. The BIG12 has a pro-rata deal that 4 P5 teams entering will get full shares, which is about $20 million a year from ESPN, which has T1 rights, and $10 million from Fox, with T2 rights. Colorado already took one of the pro-rata spots, leaving 3 more. The SEC and B1G have no pro-rata written into their contracts, so they could add anyone and force them to take partial payments. Similarly, the BIG12 could add G5 schools at partial payments.

If ORWA (Oregon and Washington) go to the B1G, it likely won't be for full payments to start. But even at half payment, it's close to what ORWA would be getting in the BIG12, and with a much brighter future. Fox would then have the top 4 schools for 4th window content, but would still be paying a premium for it. BIG12 adds the 3 remaining 4-corner schools, and ESPN has solid 4th window content, and would be paying significantly less for it.

If the PAC dissolves, then the BIG12 also becomes a potential landing spot for SDSU. The BIG12 could also add Fresno State to get a presence in both Southern and Northern CAL, and ESPN/FOX wouldn't have to pay these schools full share. Again, it's not the super-conference, but would still make 4th window content profitable for ESPN, considering the cost.

 

I could see a future for Oregon outside of the SEC/Big 10. If they are the only bigtime player left standing on the west coast (and Nike can make sure they remain a big time player), I could see them like Miami or Penn State used to be when those schools were independent; full of talented players and capable of beating anyone, but not having to be tested week in and week out. They would keep their players healthy and get ready for the playoffs all year.

 

Speculation F$U, Clemson, Washington & Oregon to the Big 10?
Wild rumor suggests Big Ten could add Clemson, Oregon, others by end of this week

 

CBS reporting UW, UO, Cal, Stanford to Big10.

 

The west coast branch of the B1G. The Pac-12 looks to go belly up. Does the SEC now consider adding more schools?

Big Ten examining potential additions of Oregon, Washington, California and Stanford to conference

 

We should, but given the B1G didn’t take the Holes and went for academic entities (all AAU members), there is no need for the SEC to add the Holes as a chess move to keep the B1G from grabbing them.

Get new schools in new states to add footprint and cable networks/streaming viewers. UNC, NCSU will give us the entire state of NC. Add UVA and WVU and you get the Pittsburgh, DC, Richmond, VA Beach markets.

At 20 schools and no UVA it’s a telling sign to the Cavaliers that the B1G doesn’t want them. They can have a new home in the SEC.


The remaining members of the ACC will merge with the Big12 to form the third super conference.

Only reason for SEC to add the Holes was to prevent B1G from having the state of FL. No reason now.

 

Why should the SEC expand now? With the LA schools and presumable ORWA going to the B1G, there aren't any schools out west worth expanding. And why would ESPN pay a SEC premium for Arizona and Utah when they can likely have them at BIG12 prices?

If ESPN and FOX really want to follow the AFC/NFC model like the NFL, then the SEC might relent and expand. But at this point, that's not in the SEC's or ESPN's best interest. Maybe in 2030?

 

I may as well just stick to professional sports at this rate this is going.

I'm bummed, but the writing has been on the wall for years. As Wu-Tang said, C.R.E.A.M.

 

The want a new league, any takers?

Florida State officials contemplate break from ACC: 'Not a matter of if ... but how and when,' trustee says