Totally OK with losing a Big West game for something along the eastern seaboard (or regularly vs. the Orange or BC).
I'd prefer to head to the West coast every other year or so.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Totally OK with losing a Big West game for something along the eastern seaboard (or regularly vs. the Orange or BC).
This is basically comical and shows how stupid this really is. There is zero to hold this alliance together. As an initial step, it is fine. But if this is all the B1G has, we are in trouble.
That, too, but I'm anticipating more ACC matchups for us and the Terps than PAC12 ones.I'd prefer to head to the West coast every other year or so.
Good, time to feast on some ACC cupcakes.
You know how far in advance schedule contracts are signed. If the ACC, B1G and PAC12 decide you need to schedule one from each conference, each year, that'll be all the contract you'll need between the three.This is basically comical and shows how stupid this really is. There is zero to hold this alliance together. As an initial step, it is fine. But if this is all the B1G has, we are in trouble.
Wrong. This alliance keeps 8 SEC teams in a 12 playoff system. Its about playoff $. No change until contract ends. Limits to teams in the playoffs per conference.This is basically comical and shows how stupid this really is. There is zero to hold this alliance together. As an initial step, it is fine. But if this is all the B1G has, we are in trouble.
Cherry pick who?Hang on a second. There are only 4 powere conferences left. Of the four, only one can add schools in the near future and the individual schools are able to talk to other conferences through intermediaries. Can we possibly make this any easier for the SEC to cherry pick schools?
That’s not realistic that’s the thing. No one is leaving the B10. Only a formation of super league would be a “threat” and that requires everyone jettisoning the excess baggage including the SEC and I’m not sure that day will ever come for the reasons I stated. Couldn’t say that 100% sure it wouldn’t happen but again that’s not a SEC threat but a just an existential change to college football.What’s to stop the SEC from adding Ohio State, Penn State, and even USC and destroying the B1G and PAC12. This “alliance” seems pretty silly. Warren has effectively taken the 2nd best conference in the country and elevated the 3rd and 4th to be on or with the B1G.
Except that we’re supposed to be leading this clusterf of an alliance. The B1G just took themselves out of the running. If USC, UCLA, Cal, or Oregon get cold feet and want a bigger conference payout, they have one option—the SEC.Any PAC12 team would probably come to the B10 first
Where do you get that idea? If any school in the PAC12 wants to leave, the B10 will likely be their first call and then it also depends on the tv networks. If the money isn't there for the B10, it won't be there for the SEC either.Except that we’re supposed to be leading this clusterf of an alliance. The B1G just took themselves out of the running. If USC, UCLA, Cal, or Oregon get cold feet and want a bigger conference payout, they have one option—the SEC.
Lots of us alums out here that have represented RU when they've ventured West at Cal, Fresno St., Washington and Washington St. Would welcome seeing the team out hear if not every year, every other year or every two years.I'd prefer to head to the West coast every other year or so.
Exactly the point I made about the number 16 for conferences. There’s nothing mythical or magical about these numbers. It’s who is inside the numbers that matters and what the networks will pay for who is in them that matters. The number itself is irrelevant.Lots of somewhat negative articles out there from today's events. not surprised as anything vague without details never plays well with the media. Did find Thamel's writeup interesting as he brings up the Big Ten's expansion plans (not happening) and the Big 12's plight.
6 takeaways on the 'alliance' that could shake up college football
There's still plenty to be skeptical about when it comes to the alliance between the ACC, Big Ten and Pac-12. Here are the six biggest takeaways.sports.yahoo.com
That’s not realistic that’s the thing. No one is leaving the B10. Only a formation of super league would be a “threat” and that requires everyone jettisoning the excess baggage and I’m not sure that day will ever come for the reasons I stated. Couldn’t say that 100% sure it wouldn’t happen but again that’s not a SEC threat but a just an existential change college
We have a winner.WTF is the B1G doing?? We’re still one of the big boys on the block and should be the aggressor here. Alliances are for those who strive to be one of the big boys. This is ridiculous. Amateur hour.
Yep will gladly trade Illinois for Oregon or UCLA, or Cuse or UNCI'd prefer to head to the West coast every other year or so.
I think the B1G presidents are the ones leading this alliance formation actually. The Big Ten is the big boy with the SEC, but there is still a Power 5 and a deal in college football amongst the conferences of such. and now the SEC has decided to backstab one of those and make a side deal with ESPN with future plans that could destroy college football. The Big Ten presidents absolutely do not want that, and so they are fighting fire with fire by basically rounding up the troops that are left and going to war with ESECPN to save college sportsWTF is the B1G doing?? We’re still one of the big boys on the block and should be the aggressor here. Alliances are for those who strive to be one of the big boys. This is ridiculous. Amateur hour.
Nothing changes with this alliance whether it works or not…the B10 is still one of the big boys on the block and will still be making lots of money either way.We have a winner.
I don’t think they will do this. It was previously mentioned somewhere that they will drop divisions and keep 3 rivalry games. That makes more sense and get the two top rated teams in the championship game.Totally OK with losing a Big West game for something along the eastern seaboard (or regularly vs. the Orange or BC).
Cherry pick who?
People get too worried about the SEC when really there likely aren't many moves left for them to make. Think about the same way you see the PAC12/ACC now but from a higher position. We all agree that there really aren't any substantial moves the PAC12/ACC can make right? They're boxed in. No one they can add that can move the needle. Well after Texas/OU it's about the same for the SEC. BTW I don't think the B10, or anyone else for that matter, lost them. The SEC for them is a natural fit both geographically and football mentality wise.
Play it out...who can the SEC add realistically that will really make a big deal to the B10. FSU/Clemson are always the names bandied about...well at least Clemson is not in the equation for the B10 and I'm not sure if FSU would be either (they might be). But like I said in another post, from a podcast from these sports reporters...not so sure there as big for tv guys as fans think if they're not winning big and playing for national championships. And after that who else? VT, again not sure that would be the team the B10 would want. Anyone else? Not really IMO. Any PAC12 team would probably come to the B10 first and so would UNC/UVA and GT if you want to include them (SEC already has UGA anyhow). IMO the B10 will likely always have right of first refusal for any PAC12 team and UNC/UVA, possibly VT too if they decided on them instead of UVA...much in the same manner I think the SEC had right of first refusal for Texas/Oklahoma. Those schools are more natural fits for the B10 than they are for the SEC, just like Texas/Oklahoma are more natural fits for the SEC.
I don't think the SEC is really a threat for any addition the B10 would realistically want and the SEC is "boxed in" so to speak now similar to the way the ACC/PAC12 are but obviously on a much higher level. The B1O has options if they choose to exercise them.
The only threat so to speak and it's not a threat to brand programs (they will always have a seat) is not from the SEC but just a whole shifting of the landscape of college athletics and if everyone including the SEC jettisoned the extra baggage and made a league of say 32 teams. I don't even know if that will ever happen even though some think it will. I don't think a lot of school admins want something like that and to be associated with some SEC schools frankly. If they can get a lot of money by being part of the B10 and/or having college packages spread out among various networks they don't need to give up their academic elitism/snobbery or whatever you want to call it. They can have their cake and eat it too. Not saying it won't happen but not a slam dunk IMO but that's not a SEC threat just an existential change to the college landscape.
Probably just a chance for the ACC and PAC12 to get a reading on Warren so they can fleece him in the near future. The B1G will probably be the corn schools, Rutgers, and remnants of the B12/AAC soon.41 schools with disparate interests, all aligned under the umbrella of an alliance with absolutely zero paperwork behind it. But thankfully they all looked each other in the eyes, so we're good. What could possibly go wrong here?
No, really you can’t. Additionally, remember I said after Texass and Oklahoma announced their move to the SEC that the Big 12(little 8) will be extinct by July 1sr, 2022.Hang on a second. There are only 4 powere conferences left. Of the four, only one can add schools in the near future and the individual schools are able to talk to other conferences through intermediaries. Can we possibly make this any easier for the SEC to cherry pick schools?
just as Disney, Fox, CBS, were never actually confronted with deciding how much they would bid for B10 rights had RU, Neb, and UMd, never been added, thus neither the network heads nor Delany will ever know the answer to an only hypothetical question, that can never be anything other than hypothetical...
thus being that it is difficult, if not impossible, for most schools to ever add what an additional slice of an already national revenue pie would take, the money imo was always in eliminating competing conferences, not in adding schools, thus also further dividing the pie.
Saw a comment by Mandel in an Athletic article regarding expansion of the playoff who would be able to bid on extra playoff games and the mixed messages given by Andy Staples and him and others. He says Andy Staples mentioning that extra playoff games (first round and quarters) being awarded to other networks besides ESPN is a theory floated out there but hasn't been tested. He says most believe ESPN would say adding extra rounds materially changed the product they're paying for so they would have right of first refusal.I think that's still kind of murky with regards to expansion and I actually would change my tune depending on what's actually fact.
I posted this in the other thread. Andy Staples last night tweeted that any extra playoff games outside the semi finals/finals could be awarded to any network not specifically ESPN. That's contrary to impression I always got from things I've read including the Athletic where he works. Made it sound like ESPN has an exclusive negotiating window for the playoffs...assumed it meant everything but maybe it's just semifinals/finals.
So if he's right I'd say expand and award those early round games to other networks on a short term basis and then get all the playoff inventory lined up for after 2025 to go out to bid to all the networks and make sure to split at that time too. Getting the other networks involved soon in the playoffs can only help the B10/PAC12 with their soon to be upcoming tv deals.
If he's wrong well then yes I'd wait until after 2025 for playoff expansion.
So it depends on what's true or not.