A thought about conference, ACC realignment
- Thread starter HailToPitt725
- Start date
You can't fold it into anything. The entire point of having a conference/school network is that you get revenue generated by the network itself. If it gets folded into ESPN+, then all Texas gets is broadcast fees, which is just like any normal TV contract.
if it was just about on field success in football and hoops, we'd be in the AAC right nowYup, because it has nothing to do with being good at an actual sport.
I wouldn't mind it if we where winning 10 games a year to be honest. But knowing Pitt, they'd be 6-6 in the AAC too.
being in the AAC means we'd be making about 3-4 million a year vs. 25M. everything would be watered down, from our facility upgrades to our new BBall coach to the ability to compete with P5 teams for coaches and recruits.
We'd be talking about sharing a stadium for football not with the steelers but with Robert Morris.
I'm weird, I enjoy minor league sports, I'd rather go watch lots of WINS than be big time. Being Vanderbilt is very unappealing to me. Being a bottom feeder at the highest level to me, is less fun than being a top dog at a lower level.
there was a conversation on one of those college football channels on Sirius and it was about the Idea of having D1, non P5 football season in spring. It was a fascinating conversation, unlikely has heck with a ton of logistical issues but entertaining nonetheless.
Now this show's hosts were a bunch of SEC rednecks so they focused on UAB so that level of football. Basically they don't stand a chance going against Alabama so they should move all non P5 football to a separate league, have P5 do their own thing and this new league would play in spring, to get better TV money, exposure, and avoid going against and losing to P5 football.
Yup, because it has nothing to do with being good at an actual sport.
I'm not sure how good Boise State would be if they were playing 9 to 10 P5 games a year, rather than Wyoming.
But no, college football is not about burning money for the sake of Boise State. Kind of like how a movie studio doesn't care about how good the movie if is if it loses 50 million dollars. People with operating costs are weird that way.
There are too many similar posts to quote so I'm just summarizing:
- Texas will be an independent long before they pick a conference. At least in their mind. Maybe that helps the ACC if you think the ND deal is good.
- OU has enough votes to block expansion so they have enough votes to throw some weight around in GOR extension talks.
- A school with a lot to lose, like WVU, is more likely to start the dominoes falling than anyone else but the financial cost would be a factor.
- The PAC 12 is "dead man walking" right now. Nobody of value is going west. Way more likely they'd lose members.
- The networks have to be looking at where TV is heading and the LHN is actually a better product, in that respect.
- An NCAA breakaway scheme is "fan fiction" and very unlikely.
- MD didn't leave the ACC because of resentment. They left because of money.
Where does the idea of four "mega" conferences come from?
Where is the extra money coming from to compensate the conferences for adding teams?
The only reason conferences expanded to 12 teams is because it was ruled at the time that a conference championship could only take place once 12 teams were established. The Big Xll fought hard to be able to have a championship game with 10 teams, and won. I don't see any incentive for expansion at this point.
There would need to be enough extra money available to distribute more per team to 16 teams than is currently being split between 12.
Where would that money come from?
As a side note, any conference would take Notre Dame, regardless of the current number of schools, because they would bring more money than they would take as an equal split. And, the reason Notre Dame wants to remain independent.
Where is the extra money coming from to compensate the conferences for adding teams?
The only reason conferences expanded to 12 teams is because it was ruled at the time that a conference championship could only take place once 12 teams were established. The Big Xll fought hard to be able to have a championship game with 10 teams, and won. I don't see any incentive for expansion at this point.
There would need to be enough extra money available to distribute more per team to 16 teams than is currently being split between 12.
Where would that money come from?
As a side note, any conference would take Notre Dame, regardless of the current number of schools, because they would bring more money than they would take as an equal split. And, the reason Notre Dame wants to remain independent.
Teams expanded for the money. College football went on just fine with the SEC being the only conference with a championship game, and then the Big XII and SEC being the only ones.
And then the money went crazy, and everybody then had to have a conference championship game so they could cash in on it. Which is why the teams they looked for expansion, were all about markets. $$$$.
They already did. That's why there wasn't going to be a GOR extension even with the Big XII expanding. OU has no desire in hooking their wagons to the Big XII beyond the current GoR.
I'm not sure about that. OU is going to do what's best for OU. If they get a bigger cut, they'll stay.
The same place when the ACC, SEC, and BIG expanded past 12. If the networks feel that certain team increase the overall package, they will pay it.
Now, do teams want to move, or what is available out there add value? Probably not right now.
I personally think OU prefers the Big XII constructed as of right now, but also wanted to keep their options open as well. I think at the end of the day, the Big XII will be fine. But that is just my opinion.
the pantherlair has been predicting the Big 12's impending demise almost as long as they've predicted Notre Dame being forced to join a conference.
I'm sure they would. The problem is:
1. Right now the networks are paying the Big XII more than what they are suppose to be paying them, as a buy off for the Big XII not expanding. When that contract ends and it's time to renegotiate, you think the networks are going to pay them the 12 team rate or a true reflection of the 10 team rate?
2. Do you take the Big XII pay cut along with the loss of not joining the Big Ten or another conference? That's asking a TON.
Or does OU would I think one poster implied, and just demand a greater share for staying with these little dwarfs and keeping them in a P5 conference? I suppose that's possible, but then what happens when the Big Ten approaches Kansas or the ACC WVU and presents those dwarves with the same situation? Take the loss or come join us?
That's the issue the Big XII has. They will have all of these free agents that other conferences will want. And you can make scenarios where it makes sense for Texas or OU to throw their weight around and stay. But then it makes even less sense for one of the desired free agents (Kansas, WVU, maybe one of the other Texas schools). If you structure the league to satisfy those schools, it no longer makes sense for one or both of the powers. What's the number it's going to take to prevent OU from joining the SEC, and how do you keep WVU from joining the SEC once you've given OU that number?
To be fair, they were a news conference away from being correct. CBS reported it was a difference of 30 minutes. That's how close the announcement was before OU pulled out.
Wasn’t sure how that’d work. That’s why I used the question mark. Thanks for the clarification.
They won't get BIG or SEC money, but I think they will get a competitive deal. Again, we'll find out in a few years.
The LHN is not a better product, as evidenced by its financial failure.
To answer your questions, the idea came from fans because 4 leagues of 16 each looks neat on paper. No other reason.
The money wouldn't really be there, which is why you haven't seen it happen. Only TV money increases. Bowl, tournament, CFP, Olympic money (40% of the payout) doesn't increase.
Five major conferences has already diluted the regional significance of conference play. Attempting to put Big Xll teams on the west coast, or east coast would be a disaster, imho. WVU in the Big Xll comes to mind. If there were four conferences, there would be a lot of "WVU's" who don't fit at all.
IMO as the NFL continues shoot off more feet than they have in the handling of the "kneeling cluster fu-k" more football fans are watching college games as they move away from watching NFL games.
Millions want to watch football so if it isn't the NFL, college games are the answer for many.
This is a huge opportunity for college football if its handled properly.
NFL management proved they couldn't be a hall monitor in a one room schoolhouse!
Let's see what college football does.
"it's five o'clock somewhere"
SIgned: Mr Buffett
Go PITT & CSU Rams!
Millions want to watch football so if it isn't the NFL, college games are the answer for many.
This is a huge opportunity for college football if its handled properly.
NFL management proved they couldn't be a hall monitor in a one room schoolhouse!
Let's see what college football does.
"it's five o'clock somewhere"
SIgned: Mr Buffett
Go PITT & CSU Rams!
Failures? Texas is doing just fine. If you mean ESPN, that's their problem but they keep cutting checks.
Personally? I think the concept (not necessarily the dollars involved) is where all of this is heading on the TV side. That's why I say it's a better product. I think most of us would pay a small premium to watch Pitt centric programming.
This makes sense. Like I mentioned earlier, I think it’s trending towards a la carte-style programming where you pay for what you want to watch, rather than being bundled together.
The Big 12 renegotiation will center on value. They either add real meat or suffer a cut.
The assumption is that OU has somewhere to land. Even if they do, they'd have to weigh the value of leaving, with or without a cut, versus the revenue ramp-up most conferences force on new members. I also don't have a problem with OU going to the SEC but I think they'd dump Vandy or Mizzou before they'd add WVU. And that's only based on the history of WVU trying to get into the SEC. Things change, though.
I personally think WVU would offer the ACC a ton of value and would help their football program out dramatically.
Sheer nonsense.
Yinzer nation is not going to walk away from the NFL. And even if there is a decline in interest, these people will not be going to heinz field on Saturdays .
The northeast is where the TV sets are. This theory would suggest that BC, rutgers, temple and Pitt are going to make a resurgence . Never happen.
NFL fans are like Trump supporters. They will stay until the bitter end of the NFL....though the league's demise is unlikely.
Many in this thread are mapping out what might happen in 6 years using the today's model. We really have no idea what the TV/media landscape will look like in 6 years and what will be the driver behind those dollars.
Yes, when a product doesn't produce a profit, it's a failure. The only reason Texas is doing just fine is because they have someone else to sustain the loss. That's not a viable long term budiness model.
There are some who would pay a small premium to watch Pitt (or other) centric programming, but it won't come close to matching the current revenue.
I'm not sure where you heading with this post.
I wasn't addressing just Yinzer nation?
Overall the NFL had significant attendance declines across the league, shop the NFL purchases were down significantly, NFL Sunday Ticket took a big hit, and advertisers have this potential big storm on their radar.
Obviously there are teams who will fill up their stadiums in the middle of a nuclear war, the Steelers are one of them along with a handfull of other teams. The liberal elite coastal cities will do fine, but alot of teams in middle America won't.
NFL attendance is down big time. Attendance and support for the NFL from the nations heartland is on the decline.The league will survive but it won't be what it once was!
The NFL will continue f up the kneeling issue, it will take some time but fans will continueto move away form the NFL. It's a movement in progress!
If advertisers which drives these franchises decide to scale back the NFL will change.It won't go away but it will change.
I'd love to see the NFL take a big hit and see how alot of these players " feed their families."
Most haven't thought about a plan B.
"it's five o'clock somewhere"
Signed: Mr Buffett
Go PITT & CSU Rams!
Last edited:
i do agree that the NFL is taking a hit and it likely will continue to do so.
The politics, the CTE, the saturation on TV and the ease of staying home are all working against the league.
I just dont see however, NFL fans who have had enough....linking up with college teams. Who by the way, have their own issues with retaining attendance and CTE.
I think the sport quite frankly, has crested in America. It wont go away to be sure and wont suffer financially.....
But the NFL has OWNED Sundays in America and that is waning in my view.
No way. None, Zero chance the PAC takes BYU. Do you really think the Libtards in California are going to admit a 100% Mormon University? Never. No way.
The PAC NEEDS Texas and Oklahoma MUCH, MUCH MORE than Texas and Oklahoma need them.
Last edited:
The decline in NFL attendance started before any protests, it's why teams started ripping out seats for "party decks" and whatnot 5ish years ago. The pro leagues have been pricing most people out over past decade, its cheaper and easier to sit at home and watch on TV while screwing around with fantasy stuff on your phone or laptop.
Sunday Ticket is useless when there's games on broadcast networks or basic cable Thursday Night, Sunday morning, Sunday at 1pm, Sunday at 4pm, Sunday at 4:25pm, Sunday at 8pm and Monday night.
TV Ratings are down for everything so it's not just an NFL problem, there's a major shift in viewing platforms and habits which is the main culprit.
I’ve gotten to the point where I almost question nfl fans who’d rather go to a game then watch it on tv. I kind of feel the same with pitt games. If it weren’t for the tailgating, watching it on tv is twice the experience vs going to cookie cutter stadium on north side to watch pitt play.
Great point. Shift started long before this past year, games are too long with too many commercials. I bought redzone the past 2 years haven't considered watching a CBS or FOX broadcast on Sundays with it now.
Well, that's the million dollar question, so to speak, but it's what the future looks like. There's a reason the ACC network will be rooted pretty deeply in internet only programming.
It never affected the NBA when there were anthem protests in the '90's so I doubt that's what is going on now. It's probable that there are a ton of other factors but the anthem is just an easy excuse for both sides, to be honest.
I'm more willing to bet that it's more likely that the NFL product is watered down because they can't keep the stars on the field or it's just gotten too expensive to risk a beating if some jerk gets blitzed and wants to start trouble. You sure can't take a kid and hope to enjoy yourself.
The ACC network is going to have the same amount of internet only programming as the other networks have now. The reason is because college baseball, soccer, lacrosse, etc. don't draw enough viewers to get on broadcast TV on a regular basis.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Heather wasn’t canned soon enough. Extending this clown…
- Latest: burgherwithcheese
