A thought about conference, ACC realignment

[HailToPitt725]

I hope yins are all having a good Memorial Day. Just a warning up-front, this has a lot of hypothetical talk that some of you may not find interesting.

The thought of conference realignment entered my mind today. As things stand today, I see the Big XII being no more when the dust is settled next time. One way I could see it playing out is Oklahoma State and Oklahoma moving to the SEC, Texas and Kansas moving to the B1G, and TCU, Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Baylor going to the PAC. This leaves WVU and Iowa State. I think the ACC will acquire WVU and Iowa State gets abandoned, being rescued by the AAC. At the same time, I think Notre Dame will join full time around then. This will create four 16-team super conferences, for better or for worse.

With this, I also think you’ll see a move to an eight team playoff after the current deal expires. It’ll consist of the four conference champions, the best G5 team, and three other at-larges.

At this point they’ll need to do some realignment within the ACC to accommodate the new schools. How cool would it be if they group the old Big East together in one division and the “original” ACC in another? It’d go something like this:

Coastal Division: Pitt, WVU, ND, Cuse, BC, Va Tech, L’Ville, Miami

Atlantic Division: UVA, Duke, UNC, WF, NC State, GT, FSU, Clemson

I think this would go a long way towards regaining some of our old identity while still competing in a major conference. It’d also be cool to resume some dormant rivalries long-term. We’ll see what happens down the line. H2P.

 

[cashisking884]

There's no chance the PAC 12 takes those schools. They aren't going to take poor academic institutions. And there is absolutely NO WAY they take religious schools.

OU will be able to pick their conference.
Texas, depending on what they are willing to do with their network, will be able to pick any conference except the SEC (A&M won't allow it).
WVU might have the SEC as an option, but the ACC will almost def. want them. Especially after Lville ended the academic argument.
TCU would never be allowed in the PAC 12 for the reasons above.. Probably doesn't have the academics for the Big Ten. And wouldn't be allowed in the SEC for the same reason as Texas. So they would have to hope for an ACC invite, which I could see happening.
Kansas is a wildcard. I could see several conferences wanting them, or nobody wanting them.

Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Baylor, and Texas Tech would all be unwanted.
But the states of Oklahoma and Texas know this, and so there has been talk of legally attaching OKState to OU and Tech to Texas. Meaning if you want one, you have to take both. That would change things.

 

[BFo8]

Not sure if it still applies but Larry Scott PAC commissioner is on record as saying that the only schools they are interested in are Oklahoma and Texas, along with their tagalongs in Okla St and Texas Tech.

The Iowa St, Kansas St, and Baylor’s of the world are going to really have to scramble as no major conference is really going to want them.

 

[happjack]

The PAC12 only wants Texas and would stomach Texas Tech tagging along but there’s no way in hell they’d take Baylor.

 

[HailToPitt725]

There's no chance the PAC 12 takes those schools. They aren't going to take poor academic institutions. And there is absolutely NO WAY they take religious schools.

OU will be able to pick their conference.
Texas, depending on what they are willing to do with their network, will be able to pick any conference except the SEC (A&M won't allow it).
WVU might have the SEC as an option, but the ACC will almost def. want them. Especially after Lville ended the academic argument.
TCU would never be allowed in the PAC 12 for the reasons above.. Probably doesn't have the academics for the Big Ten. And wouldn't be allowed in the SEC for the same reason as Texas. So they would have to hope for an ACC invite, which I could see happening.
Kansas is a wildcard. I could see several conferences wanting them, or nobody wanting them.

Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Baylor, and Texas Tech would all be unwanted.
But the states of Oklahoma and Texas know this, and so there has been talk of legally attaching OKState to OU and Tech to Texas. Meaning if you want one, you have to take both. That would change things.

So if they don’t take TCU, they’re not taking BYU either, correct? And if they’re not taking schools with poor academic reputations as well, that has to rule out Boise State.

I just don’t see Texas or Oklahoma joining the PAC 12, which I guess means Texas Tech and OK State isn’t joining, too. I think it’d be between the B1G and SEC for them. At that point, who would the PAC take? If the rest of the power football world is cold-worlding it to 16 teams, would they be allowed to stick with 12? I think it’d be frowned upon if they expand with schools like Colorado State and San Diego State. Also, I think OK State will tag along with OU if the Sooners join the SEC. What’s the chances of that happening?

If that’s the case, that leaves TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Iowa State without a home. Where do they go? The AAC or the MWC?

 

[cashisking884]

So if they don’t take TCU, they’re not taking BYU either, correct? And if they’re not taking schools with poor academic reputations as well, that has to rule out Boise State.

I just don’t see Texas or Oklahoma joining the PAC 12, which I guess means Texas Tech and OK State isn’t joining, too. I think it’d be between the B1G and SEC for them. At that point, who would the PAC take? If the rest of the power football world is cold-worlding it to 16 teams, would they be allowed to stick with 12? I think it’d be frowned upon if they expand with schools like Colorado State and San Diego State. Also, I think OK State will tag along with OU if the Sooners join the SEC. What’s the chances of that happening?

If that’s the case, that leaves TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Iowa State without a home. Where do they go? The AAC or the MWC?

Yeah, Boise State has absolutely no chance to get into a P5 conference. They literally bring nothing that conferences care about.
BYU has no chance outside of the Big XII or maybe ACC. Although I doubt the ACC, and the Big XII folding in this scenario all but ends that.
I'm not sure why you don't see Texas or OU going to the PAC 12? PAC 12 could also look to G5 Texas teams. Houston was a bad fit for the Big XII because they just added another Texas team to an already too Texas heavy conference. They wouldn't be a horrible fit for the PAC 12. But again, I'm not sure I'm following your UT-OU logic?
And yeah, some of those teams would be left out on the Island of Misfit Toys. There is nothing fair about expansion.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Yeah, Boise State has absolutely no chance to get into a P5 conference. They literally bring nothing that conferences care about.
BYU has no chance outside of the Big XII or maybe ACC. Although I doubt the ACC, and the Big XII folding in this scenario all but ends that.
I'm not sure why you don't see Texas or OU going to the PAC 12? PAC 12 could also look to G5 Texas teams. Houston was a bad fit for the Big XII because they just added another Texas team to an already too Texas heavy conference. They wouldn't be a horrible fit for the PAC 12. But again, I'm not sure I'm following your UT-OU logic?
And yeah, some of those teams would be left out on the Island of Misfit Toys. There is nothing fair about expansion.

It’s not that I don’t see them going to the PAC 12, it’s probably quite likely when you add TTU and oSu, but I just see them as better fits for, say, the B1G and the SEC. Texas makes sense for the B1G when you add their AAU status into it. OU doesn’t have that, and at that point I see them going to whichever football conference is best. Add the fact that there’s no SEC team currently in Oklahoma, and that’s why I put them there. OK State is good enough that the SEC would let them tag along and for the 16th B1G team, I’d see them adding Kansas because of the KC market, their AAU status, and their great basketball team. Only problem I’d see with Texas-to-B1G is that they’d probably have to drop the Longhorn Network, which at that point may make the PAC a likely landing spot. I’m with you in that Texas ain’t joining the SEC.

I also didn’t mean to add that those teams not having “wasn’t fair,” just trying to find a likely landing spot. Honestly, if the MWC added those teams plus maybe BYU or Houston, they’d be pushing power status. They’d never be considered a “P5” conference, but their champion would have a good chance of being the shoe-in for the G5 rep every year.

 

[Swervin27]

When will these schools learn their lesson and leave “well enough” alone? It’s a pretty nice set up now, tv money is flowin. Why screw this up?

 

[WCSordill]

It’s not that I don’t see them going to the PAC 12, it’s probably quite likely when you add TTU and oSu, but I just see them as better fits for, say, the B1G and the SEC. Texas makes sense for the B1G when you add their AAU status into it. OU doesn’t have that, and at that point I see them going to whichever football conference is best. Add the fact that there’s no SEC team currently in Oklahoma, and that’s why I put them there. OK State is good enough that the SEC would let them tag along and for the 16th B1G team, I’d see them adding Kansas because of the KC market, their AAU status, and their great basketball team. Only problem I’d see with Texas-to-B1G is that they’d probably have to drop the Longhorn Network, which at that point may make the PAC a likely landing spot. I’m with you in that Texas ain’t joining the SEC.

I also didn’t mean to add that those teams not having “wasn’t fair,” just trying to find a likely landing spot. Honestly, if the MWC added those teams plus maybe BYU or Houston, they’d be pushing power status. They’d never be considered a “P5” conference, but their champion would have a good chance of being the shoe-in for the G5 rep every year.

Resurrect the old Southwest Conference.

 

[steel_curtain]

Yeah, Boise State has absolutely no chance to get into a P5 conference. They literally bring nothing that conferences care about.
BYU has no chance outside of the Big XII or maybe ACC. Although I doubt the ACC, and the Big XII folding in this scenario all but ends that.
I'm not sure why you don't see Texas or OU going to the PAC 12? PAC 12 could also look to G5 Texas teams. Houston was a bad fit for the Big XII because they just added another Texas team to an already too Texas heavy conference. They wouldn't be a horrible fit for the PAC 12. But again, I'm not sure I'm following your UT-OU logic?
And yeah, some of those teams would be left out on the Island of Misfit Toys. There is nothing fair about expansion.

-I can see the Pac-12 taking Texas and Boise St, easily. I can also see them looking at San Diego State and BYU. Texas almost joined the Pac-12. That is the best fit for Texas easily. Texas and USC in football in the future, basketball is improving, but Texas is a baseball power and the Pac-12 is the baseball king. By far the best fit for Texas.

 

[cashisking884]

When will these schools learn their lesson and leave “well enough” alone? It’s a pretty nice set up now, tv money is flowin. Why screw this up?

Because the schools that haven't left well enough alone, and left for other conferences, are all in a better financial situation than they would have been in. Or at least a more stable.
It's difficult to argue that OU is in a better situation right now than they would be in the Big Ten or SEC. So why should they leave well enough alone?

 

[cashisking884]

-I can see the Pac-12 taking Texas and Boise St, easily. I can also see them looking at San Diego State and BYU. Texas almost joined the Pac-12. That is the best fit for Texas easily. Texas and USC in football in the future, basketball is improving, but Texas is a baseball power and the Pac-12 is the baseball king. By far the best fit for Texas.

Boise State couldn't even make the cut for the Big XII, you think the PAC 12 takes them, "easily"?
Right now Washington State is the black sheep of the PAC 12 due to their academics. Go compare Washington State v. Boise State in terms of being a research university. Boise State isn't even in the same hemisphere as the worst research university in the PAC 12. They have absolutely no hope.
Not to mention Boise doesn't bring you anything. Boise's entire argument is they are good at football on the field. Nothing else. But does anybody think that's why the Big Ten took Rutgers or MD? Or why the ACC went with all those "powerhouse" NE teams? Boise has no market. They bring you zero academic money. They don't bring you anything else in sports. They don't bring you a recruiting base. Even the David v. Goliath narrative that drives much of their national ratings, goes away once they join a P5 conference. You are no longer "David" when you are in one of the 4 Super Conferences. You are now "Super."

 

[happjack]

-I can see the Pac-12 taking Texas and Boise St, easily. I can also see them looking at San Diego State and BYU. Texas almost joined the Pac-12. That is the best fit for Texas easily. Texas and USC in football in the future, basketball is improving, but Texas is a baseball power and the Pac-12 is the baseball king. By far the best fit for Texas.

The PAC-12 will never add Boise State, BYU or San Diego State, if they can’t get Texas they’ll stay at 12.

Boise State is a community college in the middle of nowhere with a good football team.

BYU has a following but all of their other issues out weigh that.

San Diego State never gets far in the discussion since the current PAC-12 schools don’t want a fifth California team.

 

[steel_curtain]

Boise State couldn't even make the cut for the Big XII, you think the PAC 12 takes them, "easily"?
Right now Washington State is the black sheep of the PAC 12 due to their academics. Go compare Washington State v. Boise State in terms of being a research university. Boise State isn't even in the same hemisphere as the worst research university in the PAC 12. They have absolutely no hope.
Not to mention Boise doesn't bring you anything. Boise's entire argument is they are good at football on the field. Nothing else. But does anybody think that's why the Big Ten took Rutgers or MD? Or why the ACC went with all those "powerhouse" NE teams? Boise has no market. They bring you zero academic money. They don't bring you anything else in sports. They don't bring you a recruiting base. Even the David v. Goliath narrative that drives much of their national ratings, goes away once they join a P5 conference. You are no longer "David" when you are in one of the 4 Super Conferences. You are now "Super."

-Because the Big 12 is on life support. The Pac doesnt have to make fast changes, neither does Boise. What Boise does have, which if you have ever been there, its the fastest growing city in the United States with rapidly rising home prices with the fastest growing state in population in the United States.

 

[BFo8]

The PAC-12 will never add Boise State, BYU or San Diego State, if they can’t get Texas they’ll stay at 12.

Boise State is a community college in the middle of nowhere with a good football team.

BYU has a following but all of their other issues out weigh that.

San Diego State never gets far in the discussion since the current PAC-12 schools don’t want a fifth California team.

Pretty sure BYU would’ve been added already if it wasn’t the no games on Sunday thing, which is a staple of PAC-12 basketball. BYU kind of an outlier in any realignment talk, they are a P5 type school with an international following that seems destined to be on the outside looking in due to religion.

 

[HailToPitt725]

So let’s say the PAC 12 goes ahead and adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, & OK State (which is starting to look a little more likely now; Thanks @cashisking884 ) Where does that leave the rest? I think the ACC still tries to grab WVU and get ND to join full-time. Does the SEC make a play on WVU? Does the B1G still try to add Kansas? Most importantly as Pitt/ACC fans, does the B1G/SEC try to poach the ACC, such as BC/NC State/GT?

I have no idea how likely it is the ACC would get poached since the pact keeps the schools locked in for a while, but that’s why I want the B1G/SEC to get Texas/Oklahoma. Makes it much less likely we lose anyone.

 

[cashisking884]

-Because the Big 12 is on life support. The Pac doesnt have to make fast changes, neither does Boise. What Boise does have, which if you have ever been there, its the fastest growing city in the United States with rapidly rising home prices with the fastest growing state in population in the United States.

You think they are going to add Boise State in anticipation of the day when Idaho actually has a population and Boise State isn't a poor man's Strayer University?
And the Big XII didn't add those teams because FOX and ESPN told them, "If you make us pay for these schools, we will remember that in 2025." And why did FOX and ESPN tell them that? Because those schools gave ZERO return. It just increased the price, without increasing the revenue.

 

[cashisking884]

The PAC-12 will never add Boise State, BYU or San Diego State, if they can’t get Texas they’ll stay at 12.

Boise State is a community college in the middle of nowhere with a good football team.

BYU has a following but all of their other issues out weigh that.

San Diego State never gets far in the discussion since the current PAC-12 schools don’t want a fifth California team.

Yep. San Diego State makes a lot more sense for the Big XII, much like Houston makes a lot more sense for the PAC 12. They both are just more of the same, and so don't move the needle, for the other conference though.
Networks don't want conferences adding to the pie, without growing the pie. The problem with the Big XII contract is it actually doesn't decrease the split, it increases the payout. So the loss comes on the network's end. They have to make up for it with a major market. Those G5 programs didn't do that, so the Big XII passed.

 

[cbpitt2]

Doesn't sound like the Big-12 is hurting though.

The per-school payouts to roughly $34.3 million for all except Baylor, whose share is being 25% withheld pending the results of an independent review into structural changes as a result of the sexual assault scandal at the school. Conference spokesman Bob Burda said Wednesday that the conference has not yet released those funds to Baylor.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...enues-2017-up-more-than-18-percent/426331002/

 

[h2p_5150]

There's no chance the PAC 12 takes those schools. They aren't going to take poor academic institutions. And there is absolutely NO WAY they take religious schools.

OU will be able to pick their conference.
Texas, depending on what they are willing to do with their network, will be able to pick any conference except the SEC (A&M won't allow it).
WVU might have the SEC as an option, but the ACC will almost def. want them. Especially after Lville ended the academic argument.
TCU would never be allowed in the PAC 12 for the reasons above.. Probably doesn't have the academics for the Big Ten. And wouldn't be allowed in the SEC for the same reason as Texas. So they would have to hope for an ACC invite, which I could see happening.
Kansas is a wildcard. I could see several conferences wanting them, or nobody wanting them.

Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Baylor, and Texas Tech would all be unwanted.
But the states of Oklahoma and Texas know this, and so there has been talk of legally attaching OKState to OU and Tech to Texas. Meaning if you want one, you have to take both. That would change things.

The Big 10 would add Kansas I think. The football is brutal, but that's a valuable basketball program and is close to the geographic footprint now that Nebraska is a member.

I think Oklahoma might be required to be in a conference with Ok State by Oklahoma law (I could be confusing that with Kansas and KSU though) and I think the SEC would add Ok State if it meant getting Oklahoma.

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

There's no chance the PAC 12 takes those schools. They aren't going to take poor academic institutions. And there is absolutely NO WAY they take religious schools.

OU will be able to pick their conference.
Texas, depending on what they are willing to do with their network, will be able to pick any conference except the SEC (A&M won't allow it).
WVU might have the SEC as an option, but the ACC will almost def. want them. Especially after Lville ended the academic argument.
TCU would never be allowed in the PAC 12 for the reasons above.. Probably doesn't have the academics for the Big Ten. And wouldn't be allowed in the SEC for the same reason as Texas. So they would have to hope for an ACC invite, which I could see happening.
Kansas is a wildcard. I could see several conferences wanting them, or nobody wanting them.

Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Baylor, and Texas Tech would all be unwanted.
But the states of Oklahoma and Texas know this, and so there has been talk of legally attaching OKState to OU and Tech to Texas. Meaning if you want one, you have to take both. That would change things.

Yeah, after the PAC 12 took Colorado and Utah in expansion, a move that absolutely did nothing, they are not going to take the throwaways of Big 12.

I just think right now, there is going to be a lull as our viewing habits are changing, alot of the conventional models these expansions were based on are changing, so I don't see much movement right now.

 

[cashisking884]

Doesn't sound like the Big-12 is hurting though.

The per-school payouts to roughly $34.3 million for all except Baylor, whose share is being 25% withheld pending the results of an independent review into structural changes as a result of the sexual assault scandal at the school. Conference spokesman Bob Burda said Wednesday that the conference has not yet released those funds to Baylor.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...enues-2017-up-more-than-18-percent/426331002/

Yeah, the Big XII, if not put in context, is fine.
The problem will be once the ACC network kicks in, how far behind does that put the Big XII?
And what about a team like OU? Kansas State is looking at that payout and saying, "I love the Big XII." But OU is looking at that figure, seeing the 50+ million payout the Big Ten will be getting this year, and saying, "I hate the Big XII."
Somehow the Big XII has to convince OU to leave that money on the table.

 

[cashisking884]

Yeah, after the PAC 12 took Colorado and Utah in expansion, a move that absolutely did nothing, they are not going to take the throwaways of Big 12.

I just think right now, there is going to be a lull as our viewing habits are changing, alot of the conventional models these expansions were based on are changing, so I don't see much movement right now.

It doesn't matter what model we adopt tomorrow, Texas and OU and ND are going to be Crown Jewels in your package for that model. Nobody is really holding off on going after them due to the uncertainty of the future viewing model. Netflix is going to want to put Texas on as much as Fox or ESPN or Comcast or Verizon does today.
The issue is you can't acquire them until the Big XII GoR runs out in 2025.

 

[Pizzaboy1]

84 I don't know the answer to this so I'll ask you,how much is the ACC network going to help the ACC?From my not very informed knowledge I though the really big money already sailed on these TV deals.How much money is this deal going to be for the ACC?

 

[pittdan77]

The Big 12 GOR's is expiring soon. They probably won't see the money they are getting right now unless they expand and make it meaningful. It's way more likely that the Big 12 poaches the PAC 12 than vice-versa. Don't see the Big 12 going west and spreading out further. Not helping east coast TV's either.

There's nobody the B1G is interested in that's not named Texas or Oklahoma and who could blame them. Nobody else adds enough TV's. Texas has no reason to be nervous. They have their own network and could go independent or cobble together another "conference" if they need to. Oklahoma doesn't get along with Texas and probably helped scuttle expansion the last time. They're a wild card so if they jump, who else would the B1G want? Maybe ACC? Missouri? Beats me.

I think WVU has a lot to lose if the GOR doesn't renew favorably. If they're not trying to get a feel for interest, I think it's a mistake.

 

[ThePanthers]

84 I don't know the answer to this so I'll ask you,how much is the ACC network going to help the ACC?From my not very informed knowledge I though the really big money already sailed on these TV deals.How much money is this deal going to be for the ACC?

Based on what some ACC ADs have publically said recently, said next year should bring about an additional $3M based on the new contract, and then once the linear network kicks in in 2019, around $8-10M for the first year and then $15M after that with continued growth. So if projections are correct, and this was only a year ago, and ADs have recently said after the winter meetings they haven't changed, then the ACC should be making around $42-45M a year in 3 years.

http://awfulannouncing.com/league-n...ng-additional-15-million-revenue-schools.html

 

[ThePanthers]

In my opinion, the Big XII is fine. They still have value, and have fewer mouths to feed.

The SEC and BIG will always be the biggest ones, with the Pac 12, ACC and Big XII in the next tier, but those two tiers should be relatively close and WAY ahead of the 3rd tier of AAC, MWC, etc.

 

[cashisking884]

84 I don't know the answer to this so I'll ask you,how much is the ACC network going to help the ACC?From my not very informed knowledge I though the really big money already sailed on these TV deals.How much money is this deal going to be for the ACC?

I really don't know. I'm not expecting a ton. Our fate is tied into the NY, Boston, Philly college football fan. And that's not a good segment to bank on. If we do better there than I'm expecting, all bets are off.
But at the same time we aren't like the PAC 12 where we have all this money tied into the network because it's ours. As far as I'm aware it's basically all profit.
I'm expecting another 6 million-ish pay out to each team. But I know I read the FSU AD is expecting like 10 million the first year, and then pushing 15 the next. But that seems like a pipe dream to me.

 

[cashisking884]

There's nobody the B1G is interested in that's not named Texas or Oklahoma and who could blame them. Nobody else adds enough TV's. Texas has no reason to be nervous. They have their own network and could go independent or cobble together another "conference" if they need to. Oklahoma doesn't get along with Texas and probably helped scuttle expansion the last time.

This to me is the understated point in a lot of this when people say "The Big XII is fine."
The conference does not like each other. That's why you saw teams flee. Texas and OU hate each other. And all the rest of the teams hate Texas and OU. It's like MD with the old Tobacco Road schools. The hatred from dealing with each other goes back decades.
How do you convince OU to leave 15 to 20 million a year behind, to stay in a conference with programs that hate it?
Those schools wanted to at least take a vote on the expansion schools. And OU and Texas refused to even allow it. That's where that conference is at right now. You have to actually want the thing to work, for it to work.

 

[ThePanthers]

I really don't know. I'm not expecting a ton. Our fate is tied into the NY, Boston, Philly college football fan. And that's not a good segment to bank on. If we do better there than I'm expecting, all bets are off.
But at the same time we aren't like the PAC 12 where we have all this money tied into the network because it's ours. As far as I'm aware it's basically all profit.
I'm expecting another 6 million-ish pay out to each team. But I know I read the FSU AD is expecting like 10 million the first year, and then pushing 15 the next. But that seems like a pipe dream to me.

Difference is, just like the SEC Network, the ACC network is going to be bundled in with ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, SEC Network, and Disney Channel. If you don't want the ACC Network, you won't get any of these. Especially in ACC footprint areas.

I don't think it's going to be some crazy unbelievable amount, but I think it should be in the ballpark of their expectations and will definitely help the ACC overall.

As for the setup, ESPN owns the channel, just like the SEC Network. And just like the SEC Network, profits will be split 50/50.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

I hope yins are all having a good Memorial Day. Just a warning up-front, this has a lot of hypothetical talk that some of you may not find interesting.

The thought of conference realignment entered my mind today. As things stand today, I see the Big XII being no more when the dust is settled next time. One way I could see it playing out is Oklahoma State and Oklahoma moving to the SEC, Texas and Kansas moving to the B1G, and TCU, Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Baylor going to the PAC. This leaves WVU and Iowa State. I think the ACC will acquire WVU and Iowa State gets abandoned, being rescued by the AAC. At the same time, I think Notre Dame will join full time around then. This will create four 16-team super conferences, for better or for worse.

With this, I also think you’ll see a move to an eight team playoff after the current deal expires. It’ll consist of the four conference champions, the best G5 team, and three other at-larges.

At this point they’ll need to do some realignment within the ACC to accommodate the new schools. How cool would it be if they group the old Big East together in one division and the “original” ACC in another? It’d go something like this:

Coastal Division: Pitt, WVU, ND, Cuse, BC, Va Tech, L’Ville, Miami

Atlantic Division: UVA, Duke, UNC, WF, NC State, GT, FSU, Clemson

I think this would go a long way towards regaining some of our old identity while still competing in a major conference. It’d also be cool to resume some dormant rivalries long-term. We’ll see what happens down the line. H2P.

Eventually I think Texas will be in the ACC, either as a full member (meaning we may have to drag in Texas Tech) or a non-football member with an ND-type deal.

Eventually I see OU/KU going to the Big Ten. OKST, KST, TCU, and Baylor to the Pac 12.

WVU either to ACC, SEC, or American. ISU to American.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Yeah, Boise State has absolutely no chance to get into a P5 conference. They literally bring nothing that conferences care about.
BYU has no chance outside of the Big XII or maybe ACC. Although I doubt the ACC, and the Big XII folding in this scenario all but ends that.
I'm not sure why you don't see Texas or OU going to the PAC 12? PAC 12 could also look to G5 Texas teams. Houston was a bad fit for the Big XII because they just added another Texas team to an already too Texas heavy conference. They wouldn't be a horrible fit for the PAC 12. But again, I'm not sure I'm following your UT-OU logic?
And yeah, some of those teams would be left out on the Island of Misfit Toys. There is nothing fair about expansion.

-I can see the Pac-12 taking Texas and Boise St, easily. I can also see them looking at San Diego State and BYU. Texas almost joined the Pac-12. That is the best fit for Texas easily. Texas and USC in football in the future, basketball is improving, but Texas is a baseball power and the Pac-12 is the baseball king. By far the best fit for Texas.

Texas is never going to the Pac 12. The ACC is a billion times more likely for them

 

[HailToPitt725]

A few thoughts I have on the most recent posts:

- Would the B1G accept Oklahoma? I know that sounds silly, but they seem to be locked on accepting AAU members only and OU isn’t one of them. Maybe if they really wanted to join they could apply for membership and that’d change.
- Why wouldn’t Texas join the PAC? It might be appealing if you get TTU and the Oklahoma schools to join, along with keeping the LHN, although they’d have to give up the Tier 3 rights. That’s probably the only scenario they get to keep it, other than the Big XII staying afloat or them joining the ACC
- What happened to the rumors of Texas/KU/Notre Dame joining the ACC? Texas could get a ND-type deal?

 

[CrazyPaco]

A few thoughts I have on the most recent posts:

- Would the B1G accept Oklahoma? I know that sounds silly, but they seem to be locked on accepting AAU members only and OU isn’t one of them. Maybe if they really wanted to join they could apply for membership and that’d change.
- Why wouldn’t Texas join the PAC? It might be appealing if you get TTU and the Oklahoma schools to join, along with keeping the LHN, although they’d have to give up the Tier 3 rights. That’s probably the only scenario they get to keep it, other than the Big XII staying afloat or them joining the ACC
- What happened to the rumors of Texas/KU/Notre Dame joining the ACC? Texas could get a ND-type deal?

The Big Ten knew Nebraska was getting kicked out of the AAU before they invited them. In fact, that move to kick them out was spearheaded by some Big Ten schools like Michigan. The Big Ten also has spent decades trying to get Notre Dame which isn't an AAU school and has no chance to be.

The Big Ten's AAU requirement is a myth. All things being equal, sure, conferences like good schools that are similar to their existing membership. But athletic conferences are about athletics and making $ for athletics. AAU membership of an invitee doesn't bring a single school in the Big Ten an extra dime, athletically or academically. OU has an nearly identical profile to Nebraska. Yes, the Big Ten would be interested in OU if it made sense to add them from a financial perspective.

BTW, you can't apply for membership to the AAU. It is invite only, and it is based only on the overall research profile of the school fitting in with the other member universities. The entire point of it is for like institutions to share and compare data on their academic and research programs. Outliers don't help, which is why Nebraska and Syracuse were booted. Neither OU or Nebraska are in any current danger of receiving an invite and the AAU isn't looking to expand.

I presume by "Tier 3" rights, you mean those that the B12 retains and conferences with their own networks don't which includes one FCS football game, about 8 December non-conference basketball cupcakes, and other Olympic sports. These are worth very little. Every school has Tier 3 rights to monitize, including Pitt. "Tier 3" actually also includes corporate sponsorships, radio, stadium and arena signage, shoulder programing, etc, and these are typically bundled together and contracted out to entities like IMG Sports or Learfield. "Tier 3" is a term that is notoriously abused in B12 circles.

UT isn't joining the Pac because they don't want to give up the LHN which would be a requirement for them to join...and it was when the Pac tried to get them years back. UT also has indicated previously that it was weary of being the eastern most outpost of that conference, since it would result in murderous travel considering the timezone changes (losing hours flying back after games). WVU suffers similar issues in the B12.

As long as UT wants the B12 to exist, it will. And UT will want the B12 to exist as long as it has the LHN.

 

[cashisking884]

As long as UT wants the B12 to exist, it will. And UT will want the B12 to exist as long as it has the LHN.

I don't think the conference exists without OU, and OU doesn't really need UT.
If OU jumps to the Big Ten for the money, I think that's the end of the conference right there. Texas isn't making the college football playoffs with that conference. And the networks are going to significantly decrease their offer for a non-OU Big XII.
If OU jumps, Texas isn't going to be able to hold the rest of the members. WVU would jump at the first offer that comes along (I think they do that anyway, without OU jumping).
I agree that the Big XII probably goes on existing. But they don't go on existing as a "P5" member without OU. And OU isn't in the kind of parasitic relationship with UT as the rest of the conference.

 

[HailToPitt725]

The Big Ten knew Nebraska was getting kicked out of the AAU before they invited them. In fact, that move to kick them out was spearheaded by some Big Ten schools like Michigan. The Big Ten also has spent decades trying to get Notre Dame which isn't an AAU school and has no chance to be.

The Big Ten's AAU requirement is a myth. All things being equal, sure, conferences like good schools that are similar to their existing membership. But athletic conferences are about athletics and making $ for athletics. AAU membership of an invitee doesn't bring a single school in the Big Ten an extra dime, athletically or academically. OU has an nearly identical profile to Nebraska. Yes, the Big Ten would be interested in OU if it made sense to add them from a financial perspective.

BTW, you can't apply for membership to the AAU. It is invite only, and it is based only on the overall research profile of the school fitting in with the other member universities. The entire point of it is for like institutions to share and compare data on their academic and research programs. Outliers don't help, which is why Nebraska and Syracuse were booted. Neither OU or Nebraska are in any current danger of receiving an invite and the AAU isn't looking to expand.

I presume by "Tier 3" rights, you mean those that the B12 retains and conferences with their own networks don't which includes one FCS football game, about 8 December non-conference basketball cupcakes, and other Olympic sports. These are worth very little. Every school has Tier 3 rights to monitize, including Pitt. "Tier 3" actually also includes corporate sponsorships, radio, stadium and arena signage, shoulder programing, etc, and these are typically bundled together and contracted out to entities like IMG Sports or Learfield. "Tier 3" is a term that is notoriously abused in B12 circles.

UT isn't joining the Pac because they don't want to give up the LHN which would be a requirement for them to join...and it was when the Pac tried to get them years back. UT also has indicated previously that it was weary of being the eastern most outpost of that conference, since it would result in murderous travel considering the timezone changes (losing hours flying back after games). WVU suffers similar issues in the B12.

As long as UT wants the B12 to exist, it will. And UT will want the B12 to exist as long as it has the LHN.

That’s interesting about the AAU. Thanks for clarifying. As for the Tier 3 rights, I only brought them up because without them, the LHN loses some of its value. Not much, but some.

I was thinking the other way around about the LHN/PAC, but if that’s the case that doesn’t seem like a likely landing spot, then. I assume the B1G would reject the LHN, too? That leaves the Big XII (which I agree with you; they’re the top dog and would probably want it to stay alive as long as they’re benefitting) or the ACC in some Notre Dame-like move. Any chance of that?

As always, thanks for the clarification. I appreciate your knowledge toward these subjects.

 

[CrazyPaco]

That’s interesting about the AAU. Thanks for clarifying. As for the Tier 3 rights, I only brought them up because without them, the LHN loses some of its value. Not much, but some.

I was thinking the other way around about the LHN/PAC, but if that’s the case that doesn’t seem like a likely landing spot, then. I assume the B1G would reject the LHN, too? That leaves the Big XII (which I agree with you; they’re the top dog and would probably want it to stay alive as long as they’re benefitting) or the ACC in some Notre Dame-like move. Any chance of that?

As always, thanks for the clarification. I appreciate your knowledge toward these subjects.

Agree. No conference is taking UT if they keep the LHN. I could only see them getting a special deal with the ACC. But even that is questionable now that the ACC has their own network, although ESPN will own both the ACC and LHN so it could be essentially folded into it.

The bigger question is what will ESPN do when the contract for the LHN is up. It hasn't exactly been a raging success.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Agree. No conference is taking UT if they keep the LHN. I could only see them getting a special deal with the ACC. But even that is questionable now that the ACC has their own network, although ESPN will own both the ACC and LHN so it could be essentially folded into it.

The bigger question is what will ESPN do when the contract for the LHN is up. It hasn't exactly been a raging success.

With the ESPN+ service they have now, they might push it into there?

How about this crazy idea: TV markets and cable sets will be much less valuable when the next round of realignment comes with more and more people “cutting the cord.” At that point, it’ll be quality over quantity. With a la carte services, people will only pay for the best product. What if the biggest brands in college football recognize this and form together to create some sort of super conference that features 24 of the biggest brands? Who knows how that’ll work, but for some reason I just wouldn’t be surprised if it trends this way. Who knows.

 

[Las Panteras]

With the ESPN+ service they have now, they might push it into there?

How about this crazy idea: TV markets and cable sets will be much less valuable when the next round of realignment comes with more and more people “cutting the cord.” At that point, it’ll be quality over quantity. With a la carte services, people will only pay for the best product. What if the biggest brands in college football recognize this and form together to create some sort of super conference that features 24 of the biggest brands? Who knows how that’ll work, but for some reason I just wouldn’t be surprised if it trends this way. Who knows.

THIS

the next wave of major realignment will be just this: the top 48 schools forming their own league with 4 divisions. The current conferences MAY exist for all other sports....but football will become this very select behemoth.

And I highly doubt Pitt would be in if 48 is the number.

 

[HailToPitt725]

THIS

the next wave of major realignment will be just this: the top 48 schools forming their own league with 4 divisions. The current conferences MAY exist for all other sports....but football will become this very select behemoth.

And I highly doubt Pitt would be in if 48 is the number.

It might be higher than you think. Let’s do the math:

- 65 P5 schools for 48 slots in this proposed scenario
- If it’s just for football, there’s schools we easily beat schools we can easily beat or have a good shot at beating for a spot: Iowa State, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Rutgers, Washington State, Oregon State, Illinois, Purdue, Syracuse, Boston College, Indiana, Cal, Virginia, Kansas, and one of the Arizona schools.
- Not counting us, there’s 49 teams remaining for 48 slots. You also have to think that, if there’s any sort or regional divisions or alignment to this, they’re not keeping all the Big XII/SEC schools that I didn’t mention, which frees up more spots for us.

This is why I think the next 10 years are going to be the most important for our program and our athletics department. If we have keep this momentum going and turn it into results, we stand a good chance at making some type of jump.

I think it’s also important why we’re going back to the old colors with the Pitt Script. The script is a national brand to a certain extent and the upcoming realignment is going to be all about brands and marketability/visibility. The bigger brand, the better.