https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pac-12-gut-punch-comes-with

Quoting:

The events of the last few days left the Pac-12’s future in doubt. I can’t
help but wonder about the conference’s woeful decision under former
commissioner Larry Scott in late 2018 to reject ESPN’s offer to extend
their current media rights deal and take over management and distribution
of the Pac-12 Networks. That deal would have extended into the 2030s and
locked USC and UCLA into the conference.

At the time Scott said he thought it was best to wait to the end of the
current deal. He didn’t want the conference to miss out on what might be a
much larger windfall in the next round of media rights negotiations. Now,
the Pac-12 finds itself in a scramble.

——

I guess Larry Scott thought the line only goes up? That’s too bad because
at the beginning of all this like 20+ years ago it seemed to me the PAC-10
was one of the more strategic conferences and seemed ahead of the super
conference/TV deal game. Of course the initial pioneers often get run over
in the end…

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
liberal personality.” — Altie

hate to bring it up xy, but your conference(and school....Vatech isn't guaranteed a safe landing spot here at all lol) isn't exactly
on stable ground.

They aren't getting ND football(no way.....not even a chance) and it wouldn't shock anyone to wake up one morning soon and read that Clemson and FSU are bolting, perhaps to the SEC. That happens and the ACC is basically breaking apart as well......

they(both the ACC and vatech) certainly aren't in a strong position. The bigten wouldn't piss on Vatech if they were on fire, and the sec
has a bunch of other schools they are looking at if they keep expanding before Vatech. So it's not looking good for the
conference of Vatech.

michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com> wrote:
> hate to bring it up xy, but your conference(and school....Vatech isn't
> guaranteed a safe landing spot here at all lol) isn't exactly
> on stable ground.
>
> They aren't getting ND football(no way.....not even a chance) and it
> wouldn't shock anyone to wake up one morning soon and read that Clemson
> and FSU are bolting, perhaps to the SEC. That happens and the ACC is
> basically breaking apart as well......
>
> they(both the ACC and vatech) certainly aren't in a strong position. The
> bigten wouldn't piss on Vatech if they were on fire, and the sec
> has a bunch of other schools they are looking at if they keep expanding
> before Vatech. So it's not looking good for the
> conference of Vatech.
>

You aren’t telling me anything I don’t already know, dude.

College football has changed enough that it’s pretty much beyond my caring.
If the ACC and the Hokies get screwed it’ll be a shame but that’s about all
I’ll think about it. The ACC I yearned to belong to and was so happy to
finally “come home to” no longer exists anyway, quite frankly.

I’m 35 years and three head coaches and two conferences (four in sports
other than football) beyond my college years, and what happens there moves
farther down my list of concerns with every passing year. I don’t even
have cable TV any more.

I’m the type of fan who’s probably exhibit A of why the ACC will not be in
the top tier when the dust settles. If it all goes back to local teams
playing on regional TV networks for stakes no bigger than Tobacco Road
bragging rights, I’ll be fine with it. That would still be 100% better
than the state of the program when I graduated, thinking beating NC State
in the Peach Bowl was the pinnacle of my team’s history.

Get off my damb lawn with that super conference money grubbing bullshit.
There’s gonna be a lot of unhappy people when that bubble pops, I won’t be
one of them.

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
liberal personality.” — Altie

On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 7:59:50 PM UTC-4, xyzzy wrote:
> https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pac-12-gut-punch-comes-with
>
> Quoting:
>
> The events of the last few days left the Pac-12’s future in doubt.. I can’t
> help but wonder about the conference’s woeful decision under former
> commissioner Larry Scott in late 2018 to reject ESPN’s offer to extend
> their current media rights deal and take over management and distribution
> of the Pac-12 Networks. That deal would have extended into the 2030s and
> locked USC and UCLA into the conference.
>
> At the time Scott said he thought it was best to wait to the end of the
> current deal. He didn’t want the conference to miss out on what might be a
> much larger windfall in the next round of media rights negotiations. Now,
> the Pac-12 finds itself in a scramble.
>
> ——
>
> I guess Larry Scott thought the line only goes up? That’s too bad because
> at the beginning of all this like 20+ years ago it seemed to me the PAC-10
> was one of the more strategic conferences and seemed ahead of the super
> conference/TV deal game. Of course the initial pioneers often get run over
> in the end…
>

The Pac-10 was strategic when they tried to bring in Colorado, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech to make the Pac-16. The problem was that it was never the done deal that they thought it was mostly due to Texas. And after that fell through, all they got was Colorado and Utah.

https://longhornswire.usatoday.com/2020/06/14/a-decade-later-how-texas-squashed-the-pac-16-conference/

On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 8:53:42 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
> michael anderson <miande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > hate to bring it up xy, but your conference(and school....Vatech isn't
> > guaranteed a safe landing spot here at all lol) isn't exactly
> > on stable ground.
> >
> > They aren't getting ND football(no way.....not even a chance) and it
> > wouldn't shock anyone to wake up one morning soon and read that Clemson
> > and FSU are bolting, perhaps to the SEC. That happens and the ACC is
> > basically breaking apart as well......
> >
> > they(both the ACC and vatech) certainly aren't in a strong position. The
> > bigten wouldn't piss on Vatech if they were on fire, and the sec
> > has a bunch of other schools they are looking at if they keep expanding
> > before Vatech. So it's not looking good for the
> > conference of Vatech.
> >
> You aren’t telling me anything I don’t already know, dude..
>
> College football has changed enough that it’s pretty much beyond my caring.
> If the ACC and the Hokies get screwed it’ll be a shame but that’s about all
> I’ll think about it. The ACC I yearned to belong to and was so happy to
> finally “come home to” no longer exists anyway, quite frankly.
>
> I’m 35 years and three head coaches and two conferences (four in sports
> other than football) beyond my college years, and what happens there moves
> farther down my list of concerns with every passing year. I don’t even
> have cable TV any more.
>
> I’m the type of fan who’s probably exhibit A of why the ACC will not be in
> the top tier when the dust settles. If it all goes back to local teams
> playing on regional TV networks for stakes no bigger than Tobacco Road
> bragging rights, I’ll be fine with it. That would still be 100% better
> than the state of the program when I graduated, thinking beating NC State
> in the Peach Bowl was the pinnacle of my team’s history.
>
> Get off my damb lawn with that super conference money grubbing bullshit.
> There’s gonna be a lot of unhappy people when that bubble pops, I won’t be
> one of them.

not quite as old as you, but I don't like where all this shit is going either. I grew up watching a great sport where certain games meant something......

But it is....and there is little we can do about it.

Although I don't rule out some chance that once we get ND's decision on whether they join the bigten(and that is
their only choice they would consider), maybe the sec and bigten does stay at 16. For awhile.

And then of course the other main question if we do get to 2 superconferences of 20 teams where all the most valuable programs
are in the sec and bigten- what happens to vandy, ky football, missississippi state, missouri, and a shit ton of bad to mediocre programs in the bigten?

If trolls like colin cowherd are going to pound their chest with this "isn't it great to have all the bigtime programs stacked in two conferences playing each other every week", how do they deal with the missouris and kentuckys and vandys and indianas and rutgers and marylands and illinois' and northwesterns? I mean those aren't bigtime football programs......wtf should they have a seat
at the table and not programs like oregon and washington(and even if oregon and washington get in, then Oklahoma State or Utah or
whoever).....

Another problem with trolls like colin cowherd is they act like there is some clear division between the haves and havenots and there are clean lines which can be drawn to see who gets a seat at the 'major college football' table and who doesn't.......but this is bullshit.

Take texas A&M and Oklahoma State. There is absolutely no doubt that Texas A&M is the better program. None. But the question is.....what percentage is Okie State relative to Texas A&M? 65% 70% 80%? I dont know the exact number, but it seems pretty damn clear that programs like Oklahoma State and Arizona State and West Virginia(just to name 3) very much have non-trivial value. More in some cases than the teams that do get a seat at the table due to grandfathering in.....

So it's all a big mess. People talk about having 40 or so teams that are playing 'bigtime college football' in what is essentially a couple conferences that will be where all the eyes and money and everything supposedly will be on.....but how true is this? Because as noted above, about 10 of those 40 teams won't even really be in the top 40 in terms of program profile.....and then there are another 10-12 programs that are fairly close in value to the bottom fourth of the 'top 30'......what happens to Utah and Okstate and West virginia? Do they just take their ball and go home because they don't get invited to the big boys table?? If so that would be bs because those programs have a lot of fans, a lot of passion, etc....

Just so many problems and questions.

OTOH it's funny to go over to the big12 forum and see fans of programs like UCF and Houston and Cincy beating their chest
as if being in a 'power 5' program means a damn thing anymore.

> --
> “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
> liberal personality.” — Altie

michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 8:53:42 PM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
>> michael anderson <miande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> hate to bring it up xy, but your conference(and school....Vatech isn't
>>> guaranteed a safe landing spot here at all lol) isn't exactly
>>> on stable ground.
>>>
>>> They aren't getting ND football(no way.....not even a chance) and it
>>> wouldn't shock anyone to wake up one morning soon and read that Clemson
>>> and FSU are bolting, perhaps to the SEC. That happens and the ACC is
>>> basically breaking apart as well......
>>>
>>> they(both the ACC and vatech) certainly aren't in a strong position. The
>>> bigten wouldn't piss on Vatech if they were on fire, and the sec
>>> has a bunch of other schools they are looking at if they keep expanding
>>> before Vatech. So it's not looking good for the
>>> conference of Vatech.
>>>
>> You aren’t telling me anything I don’t already know, dude.
>>
>> College football has changed enough that it’s pretty much beyond my caring.
>> If the ACC and the Hokies get screwed it’ll be a shame but that’s about all
>> I’ll think about it. The ACC I yearned to belong to and was so happy to
>> finally “come home to” no longer exists anyway, quite frankly.
>>
>> I’m 35 years and three head coaches and two conferences (four in sports
>> other than football) beyond my college years, and what happens there moves
>> farther down my list of concerns with every passing year. I don’t even
>> have cable TV any more.
>>
>> I’m the type of fan who’s probably exhibit A of why the ACC will not be in
>> the top tier when the dust settles. If it all goes back to local teams
>> playing on regional TV networks for stakes no bigger than Tobacco Road
>> bragging rights, I’ll be fine with it. That would still be 100% better
>> than the state of the program when I graduated, thinking beating NC State
>> in the Peach Bowl was the pinnacle of my team’s history.
>>
>> Get off my damb lawn with that super conference money grubbing bullshit.
>> There’s gonna be a lot of unhappy people when that bubble pops, I won’t be
>> one of them.
>
> not quite as old as you, but I don't like where all this shit is going
> either. I grew up watching a great sport where certain games meant something.....
>
> But it is....and there is little we can do about it.
>
> Although I don't rule out some chance that once we get ND's decision on
> whether they join the bigten(and that is
> their only choice they would consider), maybe the sec and bigten does
> stay at 16. For awhile.
>
> And then of course the other main question if we do get to 2
> superconferences of 20 teams where all the most valuable programs
> are in the sec and bigten- what happens to vandy, ky football,
> missississippi state, missouri, and a shit ton of bad to mediocre programs in the bigten?
>
> If trolls like colin cowherd are going to pound their chest with this
> "isn't it great to have all the bigtime programs stacked in two
> conferences playing each other every week", how do they deal with the
> missouris and kentuckys and vandys and indianas and rutgers and marylands
> and illinois' and northwesterns? I mean those aren't bigtime football
> programs......wtf should they have a seat
> at the table and not programs like oregon and washington(and even if
> oregon and washington get in, then Oklahoma State or Utah or
> whoever).....
>
> Another problem with trolls like colin cowherd is they act like there is
> some clear division between the haves and havenots and there are clean
> lines which can be drawn to see who gets a seat at the 'major college
> football' table and who doesn't.......but this is bullshit.
>
> Take texas A&M and Oklahoma State. There is absolutely no doubt that
> Texas A&M is the better program. None. But the question is.....what
> percentage is Okie State relative to Texas A&M? 65% 70% 80%? I dont
> know the exact number, but it seems pretty damn clear that programs like
> Oklahoma State and Arizona State and West Virginia(just to name 3) very
> much have non-trivial value. More in some cases than the teams that do
> get a seat at the table due to grandfathering in.....
>
> So it's all a big mess. People talk about having 40 or so teams that are
> playing 'bigtime college football' in what is essentially a couple
> conferences that will be where all the eyes and money and everything
> supposedly will be on.....but how true is this? Because as noted above,
> about 10 of those 40 teams won't even really be in the top 40 in terms of
> program profile....and then there are another 10-12 programs that are
> fairly close in value to the bottom fourth of the 'top 30'......what
> happens to Utah and Okstate and West virginia? Do they just take their
> ball and go home because they don't get invited to the big boys table??
> If so that would be bs because those programs have a lot of fans, a lot of passion, etc....
>
> Just so many problems and questions.

I think the “grandfathered” teams stay right where they are and reap the
rewards. For the Big Ten it’s also an academic alliance. But that’s a minor
factor.

The main reason the crappy B1G/SEC teams stay is because otherwise
everyone’s schedule would be brutal and someone has to be at the bottom of
the standings. If the top 40 only play each other, ~20 of them are going to
have losing conference records and ~5-10 of them will have really terrible
conference records. Their fans will hate that and they know it. It would
be too costly in coach buyouts and fan interest to set up like this.

Keeping a base of 10-15 bottom feeders in the super conferences protects
the Texas, USC, Florida, Auburn type teams from consistent 4-8, 3-9 etc
records.

--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
liberal personality.” — Altie

On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 9:53:42 PM UTC-4, xyzzy wrote:
> michael anderson <miande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > hate to bring it up xy, but your conference(and school....Vatech isn't
> > guaranteed a safe landing spot here at all lol) isn't exactly
> > on stable ground.
> >
> > They aren't getting ND football(no way.....not even a chance) and it
> > wouldn't shock anyone to wake up one morning soon and read that Clemson
> > and FSU are bolting, perhaps to the SEC. That happens and the ACC is
> > basically breaking apart as well......
> >
> > they(both the ACC and vatech) certainly aren't in a strong position. The
> > bigten wouldn't piss on Vatech if they were on fire, and the sec
> > has a bunch of other schools they are looking at if they keep expanding
> > before Vatech. So it's not looking good for the
> > conference of Vatech.
> >
> You aren’t telling me anything I don’t already know, dude..
[snip]

VT is by no means a weak program. Just ahead of UCLA in TV viewers at 31[1]; just behind in attendance at 25 [2]. Number of fans would put it 6th in the SEC (inc Texas) and 13th overall according to Nate Silver [3].

But the details don't really matter. There are a lot of people interested in watching good but not marquee teams.

A conference/payout reconfiguration that screws Temple, UConn, even BYU? Sure. But one that screws lots of teams like VT leaves too much money on the table to be plausible.

-rsfcm

[1] https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-programs-bring-in-the-most-tv-viewers-efc03c689e50
[2] https://collegefootballnews.com/2019/07/college-football-attendance-rankings-no-1-130-2019-cfn-five-year-program-analysis
[3] https://archive.nytimes.com/thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/

On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 2:16:58 PM UTC-4, RSFC Moderator wrote:
> On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 9:53:42 PM UTC-4, xyzzy wrote:
> > michael anderson <miande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > hate to bring it up xy, but your conference(and school....Vatech isn't
> > > guaranteed a safe landing spot here at all lol) isn't exactly
> > > on stable ground.
> > >
> > > They aren't getting ND football(no way.....not even a chance) and it
> > > wouldn't shock anyone to wake up one morning soon and read that Clemson
> > > and FSU are bolting, perhaps to the SEC. That happens and the ACC is
> > > basically breaking apart as well......
> > >
> > > they(both the ACC and vatech) certainly aren't in a strong position. The
> > > bigten wouldn't piss on Vatech if they were on fire, and the sec
> > > has a bunch of other schools they are looking at if they keep expanding
> > > before Vatech. So it's not looking good for the
> > > conference of Vatech.
> > >
> > You aren’t telling me anything I don’t already know, dude.
> [snip]
>
> VT is by no means a weak program. Just ahead of UCLA in TV viewers at 31[1]; just behind in attendance at 25 [2]. Number of fans would put it 6th in the SEC (inc Texas) and 13th overall according to Nate Silver [3].
>

Presumably, both USC and UCLA think they can get their TV numbers up by joining the Big Ten and getting better TV times. And is Stanford really ahead of UCLA? I guess in Stanford's good years, there was more national interest in them.

On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 6:10:06 PM UTC-7, miande...@gmail.com wrote:
> hate to bring it up xy, but your conference(and school....Vatech isn't guaranteed a safe landing spot here at all lol) isn't exactly
> on stable ground.
>
> They aren't getting ND football(no way.....not even a chance) and it wouldn't shock anyone to wake up one morning soon and read that Clemson and FSU are bolting, perhaps to the SEC. That happens and the ACC is basically breaking apart as well......
>
> they(both the ACC and vatech) certainly aren't in a strong position. The bigten wouldn't piss on Vatech if they were on fire, and the sec
> has a bunch of other schools they are looking at if they keep expanding before Vatech. So it's not looking good for the
> conference of Vatech.

IF the ACC survives, it'll probably be the Eastern "Division II" conference -- second-tier college football. (It'll catch the Vanderbilts and Northwesterns the Big SEC will drop on the Eastern end.)

The Western would be whatever the Pac-12/Big XII ends up.

Level of player? Probably mid-level BCS-II at best.

Mike

On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 9:22:32 PM UTC-7, miande...@gmail.com wrote:

> not quite as old as you, but I don't like where all this shit is going either. I grew up watching a great sport where certain games meant something......
>
> But it is....and there is little we can do about it.
>
> Although I don't rule out some chance that once we get ND's decision on whether they join the bigten(and that is
> their only choice they would consider), maybe the sec and bigten does stay at 16. For awhile.

16 is a good number, but some schools are simply going to have to get jettisoned. Vanderbilt? Rutgers?
> And then of course the other main question if we do get to 2 superconferences of 20 teams where all the most valuable programs
> are in the sec and bigten- what happens to vandy, ky football, missississippi state, missouri, and a shit ton of bad to mediocre programs in the bigten?

Gone, gone, and gone. They now have 2 16s, which is the perfect number. Toss them, replace with ND, Clemson, Miami, Florida State, Nike...
> If trolls like colin cowherd are going to pound their chest with this "isn't it great to have all the bigtime programs stacked in two conferences playing each other every week", how do they deal with the missouris and kentuckys and vandys and indianas and rutgers and marylands and illinois' and northwesterns? I mean those aren't bigtime football programs......wtf should they have a seat
> at the table and not programs like oregon and washington(and even if oregon and washington get in, then Oklahoma State or Utah or
> whoever).....

They won't. That's the idea -- and there's a lot of money (both externally -- ESPN post-2025 -- and internally -- Nike being ONE example) to see it happen.
> Another problem with trolls like colin cowherd is they act like there is some clear division between the haves and havenots and there are clean lines which can be drawn to see who gets a seat at the 'major college football' table and who doesn't.......but this is bullshit.

I think there are several "clean lines" of clear "havenots". Who sanely thinks Rutgers should have a seat in this reality, even at 32 total teams?

> Take texas A&M and Oklahoma State. There is absolutely no doubt that Texas A&M is the better program. None. But the question is.....what percentage is Okie State relative to Texas A&M? 65% 70% 80%? I dont know the exact number, but it seems pretty damn clear that programs like Oklahoma State and Arizona State and West Virginia(just to name 3) very much have non-trivial value. More in some cases than the teams that do get a seat at the table due to grandfathering in.....

You get rid of the latter. Because you're not looking Ok State in relation to A&M, but in relation to the likes of Vanderbilt and Rutgers.
> So it's all a big mess. People talk about having 40 or so teams that are playing 'bigtime college football' in what is essentially a couple conferences that will be where all the eyes and money and everything supposedly will be on.....but how true is this? Because as noted above, about 10 of those 40 teams won't even really be in the top 40 in terms of program profile.....and then there are another 10-12 programs that are fairly close in value to the bottom fourth of the 'top 30'......what happens to Utah and Okstate and West virginia? Do they just take their ball and go home because they don't get invited to the big boys table?? If so that would be bs because those programs have a lot of fans, a lot of passion, etc....

Yes they do, because the fact of the matter is it's not going to matter about fans or passion if it's clear it's subordinate football. Just ask much of that passion about the current Group of 5.

> OTOH it's funny to go over to the big12 forum and see fans of programs like UCF and Houston and Cincy beating their chest
> as if being in a 'power 5' program means a damn thing anymore.

You don't think that's part of the reason for this, do you?

PS: Look at that new Big XII and tell me 95% of the relevance isn't the soon-to-be former Group of 5's.

Mike