If they don't want to pay for the extra content, what say would they have?
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
I don't think the lesser teams will be kicked out unless they just quit trying. If they're reinvesting their TV money to upgrade facilities, hire good coaches, etc., they will be allowed to stay. And they have a realistic chance to get a little better over time. As to chronic losing, some NFL teams have had long losing streaks and maintained fan support. "Hope springs eternal in the human breast: Man never is, but always to be blest."
Arkansas and South Carolina are already at that point. Their average wins the last decade is around 5. Sparty is a little better but I took the under at 5.5 wins this year due to the schedule and horrific in game coaching. Most sparty fans would rather just skip football this year and go right to basketball lol. Also as I have to remind people that cfb is cyclical.
I think it’s interesting hearing the reports of the PAC Thursday night mtg from different sources:
Canzano: I’m told by a source who participated that “it was positive and constructive.”
Scheer: Kliavkoff held a meeting with Pac-12 Presidents and Athletic Directors on Thursday and sources indicate to WildcatAuthority that it could not have gone worse.
247sports.com
www.johncanzano.com
Canzano: I’m told by a source who participated that “it was positive and constructive.”
Scheer: Kliavkoff held a meeting with Pac-12 Presidents and Athletic Directors on Thursday and sources indicate to WildcatAuthority that it could not have gone worse.
Arizona's next step in realignment should be obvious
Arizona's future has become obvious. Read on to see why that is and more.
247sports.com
Canzano: A peek inside the Pac-12 meeting
One hour... nine schools... what's the plan?
www.johncanzano.com
Best case for ISU and CFB is 3 or 4 comparable conferences with some degree of parity in pay and performance. This ideal is conceivable if B12 gets AZ, OR, WA, and keeps them. Need to offset the monopoly of SEC/B1G. Otherwise, it is inevitable that there will be one megaconference of 24 teams (NFL minor league with playoff) and 100 other cinderella teams. The cast-offs would re-set regional groupings, rivalries, bowl games, and end realignment once and for all. At that point, it wouldn't matter that ISU gets 1/2 the money of Georgia, because they would compete independently in a separate amateur athletic association. Maybe streaming will change the doomsday scenario? Maybe Congress does something?
Well, considering they own the media contract, I'd say 100%. Also, what financial positive for them would be if Apple and Amazon paid in? I suppose you could negotiate partial revenue back to FOX/CBS/NBC, but there'd have to be a no compete clause with west coast UCLA/USC timeslots. While possible, it's not something I'd bet on.
In 5 years we will see the same thing on the Oklahoma board!
Before that happens, there'd be an astronomical number of changes that would have to coincide without contention from 'the 100'. Not to mention the 'segregation' of BBall from Football. I think those numbers will be very enlightening and prevent any super league. Again, can't say it couldn't happen, but I wouldn't bet on it.
I suppose it depends on the contract, but if they add content and those media folks don't want the content, do they have the right to keep it off the air completely? Granted, those would be the lowest of the low games and I am sure those networks have the first claim to the new content, but I doubt they just get rights to the new content for nothing.
These post sun up entirely why the presidents and fans would be more than happy to see Nebraska leave. They have no idea how irrelevant they are but their delusions are pretty funny to read.
I think we have enough ammo to defend ourselves if OU/WA were to come to the Big 12. they haven’t been talking any **** from what I’ve seen. Every PAC University that fancies themselves a sports school should be extremely humbled at this point.
Aren't those individual contracts between FOX/B1G, NBC/B1G, CBS/B1G? Or is it one comprehensive contract that includes all three? I have no idea.
Ahh. I see what you're saying. But, the 'content' is, at this time, owned by their media contract. If A/A wants to pay to televise a game for of these two non-competing entities, F/C/N would have to have that option in the contract to do so. And, even then I don't see enough $$$ for A/A (after slipping $$$ to F/C/N) to even consider it.
Great question. I'd think (but could be wrong) one big contract. Otherwise, there'd be growing contention for certain games as the season wears on without it being in writing ahead of time.
A college football super league would need some system to distribute talent. For example, the NFL has a salary cap, a draft system, and a fairly limited roster cap. In theory, everyone has similar access to acquiring talent and resources to keep that talent in their roster. Successful teams evaluate talent well for the draft, free agents and their own roster, and manage their salary cap well.
Without some sort of similar system, a college football super league would more closely resemble the MLB where it’s the same handful of teams at the top year after year after year and everyone else cycles through brief windows of competitiveness or just languishes in mediocrity for decades.
You mean the current system?
My two cents.....
With respect to the BIG adding Oregon and Washington now, in the BIG deal there are linear time slots where OTA slots are exclusive. Fox, CBS, then at night NBC, the rest is on F/S1, BTN, and Peacock streaming.
If you are any BIG school other than OSU, Michigan, USC, or PSU your shot at OTA games is going to go down a lot if you add two brands like Oregon and Washington. If I am the AD at Iowa or any of the other schools not in the top 4, I would be shouting from the roof tops about adding OU and UW. Like the PAC teams, the lower BIG teams need to view exposure as much as the $ (which are already set).
With respect to the BIG adding Oregon and Washington now, in the BIG deal there are linear time slots where OTA slots are exclusive. Fox, CBS, then at night NBC, the rest is on F/S1, BTN, and Peacock streaming.
If you are any BIG school other than OSU, Michigan, USC, or PSU your shot at OTA games is going to go down a lot if you add two brands like Oregon and Washington. If I am the AD at Iowa or any of the other schools not in the top 4, I would be shouting from the roof tops about adding OU and UW. Like the PAC teams, the lower BIG teams need to view exposure as much as the $ (which are already set).
Good point, might be part of the reason rumors are that many B1G ADs/presidents are in no rush to add more schools.
ORWA trying to bully the league like Texas is overblown.
Assuming you get #14–be it UA, UConn, whoever—if ORWA want in, you have three alternatives:
1.) You can let ORWA in.
2.) You can let two others in, probably ASU and UU.
3.) You can stand pat.
ORWA can only bully the league if the schools decide that Option 1 is so much better than Options 2 and 3 that it is worth being bullied. If that is the cost benefit, so be it. But I doubt it will be.
If ORWA joins and finds that the rest of the league won’t do their bidding, they can leave.
Then the league is back at Option 2 and Option 3. If they don’t leave, then the league wins straight up.
You’re not out much by taking Option 1 because Options 2 and 3 will always be there. Sure, you might take a PR hit if they left, but ORWA aren’t guaranteed a viable place elsewhere, and you’d also get their exit fees. The other risk is that maybe UU and ASU aren’t as desirable of backfill after a few years in the wilderness. They’d have hurt for visibility, but no doubt they would have dominated the MW-Pac in the meantime.
The risk is minimal and the reward is worthwhile.
Assuming you get #14–be it UA, UConn, whoever—if ORWA want in, you have three alternatives:
1.) You can let ORWA in.
2.) You can let two others in, probably ASU and UU.
3.) You can stand pat.
ORWA can only bully the league if the schools decide that Option 1 is so much better than Options 2 and 3 that it is worth being bullied. If that is the cost benefit, so be it. But I doubt it will be.
If ORWA joins and finds that the rest of the league won’t do their bidding, they can leave.
Then the league is back at Option 2 and Option 3. If they don’t leave, then the league wins straight up.
You’re not out much by taking Option 1 because Options 2 and 3 will always be there. Sure, you might take a PR hit if they left, but ORWA aren’t guaranteed a viable place elsewhere, and you’d also get their exit fees. The other risk is that maybe UU and ASU aren’t as desirable of backfill after a few years in the wilderness. They’d have hurt for visibility, but no doubt they would have dominated the MW-Pac in the meantime.
The risk is minimal and the reward is worthwhile.
At 18 teams in a conference it seems like the complications start escalating rapidly. Adding a conference game, skipping out on marquee pre-con games, having enough bandwidth to get games where you want when you want, etc