college conference realignment

[wardly]

I know we get tired of this subject, but 247 posted an article May 30th with an entirely new twist. When the P5 conference contracts expire 2023-2025 realignment will be decided by tech companies like Amazon, not ESPN. They have a lot more money, and will contract with the top 30 to 40 schools regardless of present conference affiliation. Texas and Oklahoma are in, the rest of the Big 12 are out. Its an interesting concept. To read entire article google "college conference realignment.

[Ben Gooding]

Realignment is inevitable. When TV contracts, specifically LHN, expire programs and conferences will see a shift. The first domino to fall is almost guaranteed to be LHN negotiations. We have 4, maybe 5 football seasons to completely change the perception of our program to best position ourselves. It can be done. And we are currently on the perfect trajectory. 

[Harry]

38 minutes ago, Ben Gooding said:

Realignment is inevitable. When TV contracts, specifically LHN, expire programs and conferences will see a shift. The first domino to fall is almost guaranteed to be LHN negotiations. We have 4, maybe 5 football seasons to completely change the perception of our program to best position ourselves. It can be done. And we are currently on the perfect trajectory. 

Agree 100%.  Texas is not going to let go of LHN, and they and most likely OU will jump ship.  Politics will not be able to dictate this round - it's all about the money. The Big 12 or whatever is left can then reform and start their own network.   We need to be positioned for this.  @Arkstfan has a lot of knowledge about this.  It will be interesting to see it unfold.

[El Paso Eagle]

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

Agree 100%.  Texas is not going to let go of LHN, and they and most likely OU will jump ship.  Politics will not be able to dictate this round - it's all about the money. The Big 12 or whatever is left can then reform and start their own network.   We need to be positioned for this.  @Arkstfan has a lot of knowledge about this.  It will be interesting to see it unfold.

The problem if Texas wants to keep the LHN without sharing could be a key. Could the Longhorns, and their arrogance, think they could go the route of ND? Just not sure if the Pac-12, or other conference members members would go for UT if they keep the LHN as is.

[TheColonyEagle]

36 minutes ago, Harry said:

Agree 100%.  Texas is not going to let go of LHN, and they and most likely OU will jump ship.  Politics will not be able to dictate this round - it's all about the money. The Big 12 or whatever is left can then reform and start their own network.   We need to be positioned for this.  @Arkstfan has a lot of knowledge about this.  It will be interesting to see it unfold.

Agree as well....

 

It's going to be really interesting to see what happens to TTech, Baylor and TCU.

Of those, ironically, TCU probably offers a big conference the most (from a national perception standpoint)

I think Baylor is pretty much done and what happened to TCU after the SWC broke up could very well happen to them this time around and it will be their own fault.

I don't know what TTech will do. Beg UT to take them with them I suppose....

Will OU leave OSU?

 

[Ben Gooding]

1 minute ago, TheColonyEagle said:

Agree as well....

 

It's going to be really interesting to see what happens to TTech, Baylor and TCU.

Of those, ironically, TCU probably offers a big conference the most (from a national perception standpoint)

I think Baylor is pretty much done and what happened to TCU after the SWC broke up could very well happen to them this time around and it will be their own fault.

I don't know what TTech will do. Beg UT to take them with them I suppose....

Will OU leave OSU?

 

OU will not leave OSU. Or OSU will not let OU leave them behind. 

WVU will get plucked by someone on the East coast, and the expansion of other conferences will then follow suit. 

KU will get picked up on the basis of basketball only, probably by the Big10. 

The SEC has been in talks of reorganizing their divisions to better suit travel schedules per geographic sense. Mizzou will soon enough be in the SEC West, other things will have to play into that for it to happen. 

In this, look for realignment version, look for 'P5' conferences to contemplate cutting dead weight as well. 

Somewhere, someone is going to get plucked and invited. 

KState, ISU, Tech, and Baylor are toast to me. I think TCU very well falls into this camp as well. Their numbers and TV pull just really isn't there. 

The plan for UNT should be to hitch the wagon to the Big12 rejects. That should be the absolute goal moving forward. And a 5 year plan should be put in place for just this, yesterday. 

[Mean Green 93-98]

History has shown us that more than 6 months out, no one has any idea what is going to happen with conference realignment.  What Ben said a few posts above about positioning ourselves is true--we need to keep raising donations, building facilities, and building our programs--with football far away #1, men's basketball a distant #2, and everything else gravy.  If we have a football program clearly head and shoulders above the other G5 programs in Texas, we could have a shot to jump into the new P5/BCS AQ/"big boy" status.

[oldguystudent]

In nothing more valid than my own personal perception, South Carolina, Iowa, and Arkansas are odd choices.  

Excluding LSU is beyond silly.  They should definitely be in.  Either Stanford or Cal (probably Stanford) should be in. 133COMMENTS

Quote

In order: Ohio State; Texas; Oklahoma; Alabama; Michigan; Notre Dame; Georgia; Tennessee; Auburn; Florida; Penn State; Texas A&M; Nebraska; South Carolina; Iowa; Arkansas; Wisconsin; Washington; Florida State; Oregon; Michigan State; Mississippi; Clemson; Southern California; Arizona State; UCLA.

Finally, how could they even consider excluding SMU?  Popped collars across the land turn into those games!  OK, I couldn't even type that with a straight face. 

[oldguystudent]

The other thing I wonder is if football and basketball compensation will be independent of each other, so maybe you've got Indiana in the big boys' table for basketball, but not invited to the football party -- reverse that for say, Texas. 

 

[untjim1995]

I would say that any conference alignment in 5-10 years that involves being conference bunkmates  with some combo of Tech, Baylor, TCU, SMU, and UH would be huge for us. I just don't know how realistic it will be. All we know right now us that the Big XII's GOR ends in 2025. UT and OU won't extend it and they won't expand either. But the Big XII makes a lot more money than the Pac schools, which could make a Pac expansion over here even more necessary than it has been, to the point of needing new markets and allowing a LHN setup for UT to be in place in some reduced fashion.

I still think that the Pac adds the Texoma 4, with the real possibility of adding in the Kansas schools, too. That gives them 18 schools, which would normally sound ridiculous, but they could then make the league into 3 divisions of 6. That gives you a CST, MST, and PST section of 6 schools. You get 5 teams intra-division, plus two schools in each other division, for 9 conference games. Then, you take the two highest ranked division champs to play each other for the conference title. I think that setup fits best for the Pac, since it is only state schools from the three states that make up most of the league and keeps legislatures happy for their state schools (sorry TCU and BU).

If that happens, the leftovers, including West Virginia, will not be Power Schools anymore. WVU and ISU will probably just go to the AAC, while Baylor and TCU are probably MWC members. That would make each of the top two G5 leagues at 14 members. That leaves 4 spots available in those two leagues. I don't know who fills those spots, how much TV markets matter to their leagues, or how much overlap in a TV market matters, so its just gonna be something that makes itself clearer in the years ahead. You'd have a lot of teams who would want those spots though.

[wardly]

Guys, I don't think you read the same article I referred to. If tech companies get involved ,they only want Oklahoma, not OSU, and Texas, not T.T. Everyone thought Texas and A&M were joined at the hip until they weren't. Going thru the  5 Power Conferences its pretty easy to see who will be chosen and who will be left behind. Its a given that none of the Group of 5 programs will move up into a "SUPER SIX-A" alignment for lack of another term, but under the "TECH" scenario of the approximately 60 P5 schools at least 20 to 30 will be left behind . That will offer interesting realignment opportunities, and actually could mean more money for the unchosen  as we may be the networks only option for programing.The future is going to be interesting,but at 75 I doubt I will make it to 2025, and if I do I may not know it.

[Arkstfan]

The first order of business is to understand what business you are in. Google isn't a search company, it's an ad company. ABC isn't in the TV programming business they are in the advertising business. ESPN is in the carriage fee business.

The economics change over time.

In the 1970's NCAA controlled television and capped how many times a team could be on national TV over two years. A part of the revenue went to everyone, the rest was paid based on appearance.

With appearances constrained, there was a cap on how many "TV worthy" games existed in a conference and the SWC and Pac-8 addressed that by adding Houston, Arizona and Arizona State to their line-ups.

In the 80's with the CFA break up you had two factors. 1 Was market size. Data on viewership wasn't collected regularly from a decent sample so estimates were made based on what percentage of a market watches similar programming (this was arguably the pinnacle of value for a school like SMU). 2 Was a new product, the conference championship game.

By 2000 we had better information about who was viewing but a new revenue stream. The carriage fee which was fueled by Dish and Direct spending less time trying to sell TV to rural customers and enter the more lucrative suburban markets. XYZ Cable Co was over a barrel. If they didn't meet ESPN's demands many of their customers would call Direct or Dish who were already targeting sports fans by offering to show anything on the regional sports nets that wasn't blacked out for $5 a month.

The truly valuable school was the one who had fans who would switch TV providers if they couldn't get the game. They started getting PAID.

The logical extension became the conference network and of course LHN. How many cable/sat customers live in your state became the most important metric if you wanted a conference network.

Now we have a wealth of data about what people actually watch. With streaming, Facebook knows what game Harry watched and for how long. Online Stadium knows this and ESPN+ knows it too. Cerebus watched ODU-La.Tech for 32 minutes type data.

The dual driving forces absent some unexpected disruption are going to be: 1 How many of their fans will shell out $X per month to see their team. 2. How many people will watch a given game and for how long?

WHY DOES REALIGNMENT HAPPEN

To cure a financial imbalance. Simple as that.

In the post NCAA TV world, SMU, Houston, Rice, and temporarily TCU delivered far less value than the rest of the league. MWC 8 understood that they could make more dollars per school in a tighter conference than they could make as part of the WAC16. Big East figured out that adding schools like Tulane diluted the value of Big East branded basketball as a television and gate receipts product.

If the disparity between who generates the revenue and who gets the revenue becomes too great, the conference becomes unstable. If a conference can increase its per team value by expanding then it will expand assuming the target is interested.

Texas has two stabilizers attached right now. One is unbalanced revenue sharing. The lesser value of say Iowa State doesn't hurt Texas because Texas takes a larger share of Big XII revenue. The other is third tier television rights. By keeping that inventory Texas generates added revenue they do not share. The imbalance that tore SWC apart is prevented.

Texas is stable until 2031 when LHN expires. Between today and then, one of the largest richest companies in the world owes Texas an annual rights fee and barring some wild growth in rights, Texas got a great deal, they even have protection if that inflation takes place because they get the greater of the guarantee or a percentage of profit.

Nothing short of OU leaving the Big XII gives Texas any incentive to leave or renegotiate.

ESPN probably would love to cut their losses and parlay their stake in LHN into an equity stake in Pac-12 Network but Texas isn't going to the west coast. The next best financial outcome for ESPN is for Texas to go ACC but ACC already has 15 hoop members and 14 football, there is precious little room to add travel buddies. They'd probably rather eat Bevo's turds than be seen following TAMU to the SEC. Big 10 creates its own issues. The Big 10 would probably gladly take KU in order to get Texas and grudgingly take OU but there is no one else the Big 10 would bother with. ESPN might give up LHN equity to equity in BTN but the Big 10 isn't giving up their 49% to get Texas unless Fox gives up some of their 51% as well.

So in baseball terms, its a pickle. But its a pickle that doesn't really have to be addressed until 2031.

But going forward, pay attention to who has fans who care enough to buy tickets, subscribe to pay services, and watch the games. That will dictate value.

[Arkstfan]

2 hours ago, oldguystudent said:

In nothing more valid than my own personal perception, South Carolina, Iowa, and Arkansas are odd choices.  

Excluding LSU is beyond silly.  They should definitely be in.  Either Stanford or Cal (probably Stanford) should be in. 133COMMENTS

Finally, how could they even consider excluding SMU?  Popped collars across the land turn into those games!  OK, I couldn't even type that with a straight face. 

Arkansas was supposed to be the key that would unlock the door to adding UT, TAMU, maybe even OU. But with or without that, Arkansas (with South Carolina) were the key to unlock the conference title game. Beyond adding the #53 or whatever market Little Rock was at the time and the #90th or so market in Fayetteville, Arkansas coupled with South Carolina made the championship game possible. If the ten team title game had existed in 1989, maybe the Hogs don't go, but remember Arkansas had just won the last two SWC football titles and been in the Final Four just five months earlier.