Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[HouClone]

I should feel bad for SDSU but their fans have been trashing the Big 12 and went all in with the Pac so not really.

 

[FerShizzle]

I wonder if they could have Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday games? The Big 12 could get creative with how they schedule the bye weeks and have a conference game on one of those days every week of conference play.

 

[HouClone]

I wonder if they could have Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday games? ThE Big 12 could get creative with how they schedule the bye weeks and have a conference game on one of those days every week of conference play.

Hope not. NFL is Monday. Tuesday and Wednesday are beyond awful.

 

[KnappShack]

Well this is just neighborly

 

[NWICY]

Finally some actual realignment news.

That sounds like it sucks. Glad it is them.

 

[NWICY]

It's like my general framework to hook up with Jessica Alba. It just requires a bit of blind faith and magical wizardry to be fulfilled.

At least you still have the dream.

 

[NWICY]

I think this was largely already known/assumed. If it allows for more time slots so there is less overlap of conference games, it’s great.

I'll disagree that it is great. Friday nights have been for HS FB. I'll watch if it's ISU or a team I follow but it won't be must see TV for me.

 

[NWICY]

Totally agree!

Friday nights are for high school football, Saturdays for college, and Sunday for the pros.

I feel for high school kids that play football, but now can't go watch ISU play, or even see them on TV because they are playing on Friday night. So stupid.

A weekday night other than Friday isn't as bad, but still makes it impossible for some season ticket holders to attend. So you won't see a full stadium most likely on weekday nights.

And don't get me started on playing games in Mexico, or something completely idiotic like that. It's like the goal is to destroy the game completely.

The common in person fan doesn't matter. TV viewings and TV fans do. I'm not going to burn up a Friday for FB. If kickoff is at 7 or later I'll probably show, because I don't have kids playing HS FB.

 

[NWICY]

GK and WSU/OSU know this too and so they are good letting this drag on but at some point this all has to unravel. Comet he 2024-25 season, the Pac isn't getting paid as it currently stands.

No contract for next yr? Hmm, that's cutting it fine.

 

[CrossCyed]

That sounds like it sucks. Glad it is them.

Whether or not that ends up being true, that account simply makes stuff up.

 

[KidSilverhair]

Hope not. NFL is Monday. Tuesday and Wednesday are for MACtion

Fixed that for you

 

[HouClone]

Pac fans putting a positive spin on this that they didn't rush into a deal. Rush? It's been a year.

 

[t-noah]

Somehow they got an uptick in recruiting under Riley, then a big uptick early in Frost's tenure. The recruiting ground argument has never held up at all to fact or scrutiny. As you say, it took years of failure before their recruiting finally took a hit.

Maybe people forget that Nebraska, who went 3-6 in their league, hosted Oklahoma, who went 3-6 in their league and was completely embarrassed and didn't belong on the same field. But sure, they would've been better off in the Big 12.

When people push the "Big 10 has been bad for Nebraska" narrative, they are essentially saying Riley and Frost would've left the Big 10 west for the Big 12 and won more games. Which of course is completely idiotic.

They had a mediocre coach in the Big 12 in Callahan, and, wait for it, they weren't very good. They had a good coach in Pelini in the Big 10 and, wait for it, they were pretty good.

Pelini's winning% in his three full years as the Big 12 coach was just under 71%. His winning percentage as coach in the big 10 was just over...71%. Bill Callahan was a head coach in the Super Bowl and went 15-17 while in the freaking Big 12 North.

What was it about Pelini, honest question, that made him a good coach (at Neb)? I never liked him, or at least he never came across a very likeable. But I never paid too much attention, other than very superficial.

 

[t-noah]

Go back and look at those Nebraska rosters when they were winning championships and about 25% to 35% were kids out of Texas, throw in the prop 48 kids that ISU could not take, and they were bringing in a lot of talent, that once the league outlawed the taking of prop 48 kids, the losing started once they had cycled out of the program, then leaving the B12, took them out of their natural recruiting territory of Texas, where they had made inroads for a couple of decades. Throw in a couple of horrible coaching hires and you end up with the present Nebraska football program.

Could you refresh my memory on Prop 48, I guess it was 1986? And so why was ISU not able to take kids/recruits who didn't have the grades (prop 48) but Nebraska could? I don't understand the history there.

So I think I will try to answer my own question. Before Prop 48, ISU had stricter admission standards than Neb. After Prop 48, in 1986, Neb had to also fall in line, and not allow those kids. That about it?

 

[Clonehomer]

For all the complaints about Friday being for HS football, I welcome the weeknight games. Saturdays have become youth soccer days at our house. So I'll be able to get to a Friday evening game a lot easier than a Saturday game. So I expect to see a lot of reasonably priced tickets on here when those game agent announced, right?

 

[Mr.G.Spot]

Could you refresh my memory on Prop 48, I guess it was 1986? And so why was ISU not able to take kids/recruits who didn't have the grades (prop 48) but Nebraska could? I don't understand the history there.

So I think I will try to answer my own question. Before Prop 48, ISU had stricter admission standards than Neb. After Prop 48, in 1986, Neb had to also fall in line, and not allow those kids. That about it?

Texas drove the change of prop 48. They would not come to a conference that allowed individual schools to choose the number of athletes that were prop 48. Iowa State allowed two per year for all sports. Nebby and ksu had unlimited numbers. The big 12 decided to change to get UT. That is the core and the start of knowledge u's hatred for UT. Circa 1996??

 

[Gunnerclone]

For all the complaints about Friday being for HS football, I welcome the weeknight games. Saturdays have become youth soccer days at our house. So I'll be able to get to a Friday evening game a lot easier than a Saturday game. So I expect to see a lot of reasonably priced tickets on here when those game agent announced, right?

Ya. It’s 2023. People have **** going on every day.

 

[BCClone]

I'm sure this will be followed by plenty of "MHver doesn't actually know anything" posts, but the in house production cost point is very important. I've seen people talk about how that isn't going to be reported by GK and the PAC as a way to make the media deal seem better. I'm sure that's true, and Canzano and the likes will do the same.

But the schools are going to obviously understand this, so I will not be surprised at all to see the number pre-in-house production costs reported showing similar $ to the Big 12, yet AZ and CU still leaving. Followed by Canzano saying they were a bad fit anyway and the PAC is way better with SDSU and SMU anyway.

The streaming to $ tradeoff is going to be interesting by school.

-Oregon and UW are far less reliant on media dollars, so they will probably be willing to trade dollars for a higher percentage of linear.
- OSU and WSU are going to probably be stuck as the streaming option all the time anyway, so they are probably all in for maximizing dollars and would be fine with no linear if it meant getting a few more bucks.
- CU and Utah are interesting cases. Utah needs media dollars, and probably is in position to get a decent chunk of the linear slots, though Oregon is always going to get a good share, and at least early on CU with Deion is going to get some slots. So I think Utah would be a hardliner on getting closer to 50% linear, as they know this is a make or break period for them, and the window to build into a prominent program is the next few years for them
- Stanford and Cal are probably fine with more streaming if it means a few more dollars. Hell, they probably are in favor of something that gets their non-revenue sports a high quality streaming platform as part of the deal.
-AZ and ASU are a little tougher to figure. I would say AZ is mostly worried about getting good linear basketball slots.

Utah also wants to stay in the PAC because their road to the CFP just got easier now that USC is gone. They have a chance to be the big dog in the conference.

 

[Gunnerclone]

Utah also wants to stay in the PAC because their road to the CFP just got easier now that USC is gone. They have a chance to be the big dog in the conference.

Utah is a classic “one coach away” program. Just like the rest of us. Whitingham is 20 years older than CMC. I think the Clownzano/Wilner camp pumping the “easier route to the playoff” narrative is ******** cope. The lack of funds is going to catch up to sooner rather than later. You can’t stake a financial future on that play for Utah. Really only applies to Oregon imo.

Washington gets thrown around a lot as a “big dog national program” but I disagree. They are a big dog regional team in a region with generally ****** football. Two steps below the tOSU/Michigan/USC/ND/SEC gang imo. One step below OU/FSU/PSU/Oregon. On par with the Iowa/Miami/Texas brigade.

This is purely from a footballing results/results that can potentially be obtained.

First group is making the playoff quite often, chance to win it.

Second group great chance to make the playoff, unlikely to win it.

Third group hoping to pop up and make the playoff once every so often.

 

[HFCS]

Utah also wants to stay in the PAC because their road to the CFP just got easier now that USC is gone. They have a chance to be the big dog in the conference.

It’s possible some higher ups feel this way, but cruising the web I’m 100% sure the UU fans are committed to Pac and trashing Big 12 because of total obsession with BYU. It’s to the point of becoming a sunk cost fallacy.