College Football--Big Ten Expansion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

ESPN already told the SEC that they don't want a 9th game. CFB isn't the NFL. Titans at Cardinals will still generate ratings; the same doesn't hold for Purdue at Rutgers. The B1g can try to renegotiate now that they've brought in more teams, but of those 4, only Oregon will generate ratings. Does anyone think CBS is popping champaign because they now have rights to air Cal games? I think that we're moving towards super conferences, because eventually OSU and Alabama will wonder why they are splitting money with Minnesota and South Carolina and that's how you get a super league. Regionalism is dead and it's all about money. Right now the money is in large conferences, but when only a handful of teams in those conferences are driving the revenue, those who aren't shouldn't feel comfortable.

OSU & Alabama need lesser teams to achieve winning records.

Also, there are other sports which need conference competitors.

Your final point is why the NFL has a draft with the worst teams getting the earliest picks in an attempt to create a more equal level of competition.

You can get patsies without an equal payout

Sure, but it will destroy the product. Plus, you misunderstand the politics of major college football which involves state politics and decades long rivalries.

So, sure you can destroy the product for the possibility of more money in the near term, but only a fool would do so.

Regarding moves out of the Pac-12 by teams to more stable conferences is about survival as much as it is about money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

ESPN already told the SEC that they don't want a 9th game. CFB isn't the NFL. Titans at Cardinals will still generate ratings; the same doesn't hold for Purdue at Rutgers. The B1g can try to renegotiate now that they've brought in more teams, but of those 4, only Oregon will generate ratings. Does anyone think CBS is popping champaign because they now have rights to air Cal games? I think that we're moving towards super conferences, because eventually OSU and Alabama will wonder why they are splitting money with Minnesota and South Carolina and that's how you get a super league. Regionalism is dead and it's all about money. Right now the money is in large conferences, but when only a handful of teams in those conferences are driving the revenue, those who aren't shouldn't feel comfortable.

OSU & Alabama need lesser teams to achieve winning records.

Also, there are other sports which need conference competitors.

Your final point is why the NFL has a draft with the worst teams getting the earliest picks in an attempt to create a more equal level of competition.

You can get patsies without an equal payout

Sure, but it will destroy the product. Plus, you misunderstand the politics of major college football which involves state politics and decades long rivalries.

So, sure you can destroy the product for the possibility of more money in the near term, but only a fool would do so.

Regarding moves out of the Pac-12 by teams to more stable conferences is about survival as much as it is about money.

You mean like the back yard brawl or the apple cup or the civil war? Expansion is showing just how little value tradition has when money is on the lone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

ESPN already told the SEC that they don't want a 9th game. CFB isn't the NFL. Titans at Cardinals will still generate ratings; the same doesn't hold for Purdue at Rutgers. The B1g can try to renegotiate now that they've brought in more teams, but of those 4, only Oregon will generate ratings. Does anyone think CBS is popping champaign because they now have rights to air Cal games? I think that we're moving towards super conferences, because eventually OSU and Alabama will wonder why they are splitting money with Minnesota and South Carolina and that's how you get a super league. Regionalism is dead and it's all about money. Right now the money is in large conferences, but when only a handful of teams in those conferences are driving the revenue, those who aren't shouldn't feel comfortable.

OSU & Alabama need lesser teams to achieve winning records.

Also, there are other sports which need conference competitors.

Your final point is why the NFL has a draft with the worst teams getting the earliest picks in an attempt to create a more equal level of competition.

You can get patsies without an equal payout

Sure, but it will destroy the product. Plus, you misunderstand the politics of major college football which involves state politics and decades long rivalries.

So, sure you can destroy the product for the possibility of more money in the near term, but only a fool would do so.

Regarding moves out of the Pac-12 by teams to more stable conferences is about survival as much as it is about money.

You mean like the back yard brawl or the apple cup or the civil war? Expansion is showing just how little value tradition has when money is on the lone

After some time passes, those rivalries can be renewed though. Kansas and Missouri are already playing again in basketball and will do so again in football too (2025 for the Border War). Maryland and Virginia are playing each other in football this year and have played one another in several other sports. Oklahoma and Nebraska renewed their football rivalry too.

[Anonymous]

Oregon State and Washington State have to be sweating bullets right about now...

[Anonymous]

I'd like to see Georgetown make a push into "real" D1 football. James Madison and others have had success and they'd get some $$ even in a smaller league. Long-term, the program could really grow and there is a ton of local talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

ESPN already told the SEC that they don't want a 9th game. CFB isn't the NFL. Titans at Cardinals will still generate ratings; the same doesn't hold for Purdue at Rutgers. The B1g can try to renegotiate now that they've brought in more teams, but of those 4, only Oregon will generate ratings. Does anyone think CBS is popping champaign because they now have rights to air Cal games? I think that we're moving towards super conferences, because eventually OSU and Alabama will wonder why they are splitting money with Minnesota and South Carolina and that's how you get a super league. Regionalism is dead and it's all about money. Right now the money is in large conferences, but when only a handful of teams in those conferences are driving the revenue, those who aren't shouldn't feel comfortable.

OSU & Alabama need lesser teams to achieve winning records.

Also, there are other sports which need conference competitors.

Your final point is why the NFL has a draft with the worst teams getting the earliest picks in an attempt to create a more equal level of competition.

You can get patsies without an equal payout

Sure, but it will destroy the product. Plus, you misunderstand the politics of major college football which involves state politics and decades long rivalries.

So, sure you can destroy the product for the possibility of more money in the near term, but only a fool would do so.

Regarding moves out of the Pac-12 by teams to more stable conferences is about survival as much as it is about money.

You mean like the back yard brawl or the apple cup or the civil war? Expansion is showing just how little value tradition has when money is on the lone

After some time passes, those rivalries can be renewed though. Kansas and Missouri are already playing again in basketball and will do so again in football too (2025 for the Border War). Maryland and Virginia are playing each other in football this year and have played one another in several other sports. Oklahoma and Nebraska renewed their football rivalry too.

You gave example of teams fleeing solely for money and being able to turn around and renew rivalries. If a super league formed in CFB, then the same would happen. With shrinking cable fees, I think we're at peak fees for CFB. When the Big10 deal comes up a decade from now, how valuable will all of the terrible filler games be? ESPN has already to the SEC that they have enough product and don't want more.

[Anonymous]

(OP here):

I'll throw out a bit of a wild idea.

What if the Big Ten Conference and U Oregon & U Washington do not come to an agreement expanding the Big Ten Conference ? Next year may be too late to bring on Oregon as USC will do everything it can to block Oregon from joining the Big Ten.

The Big Ten Conference should think about making Notre Dame an offer that it cannot refuse--something that in its initial years is more than a full share in the Big Ten spoils. Add in a traditional Notre Dame opponent such as Stanford and there would be far less interest in dealing with either U Oregon or U Washington--which can move to the Big 12 as the Pac-12 can barely offer survival money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oregon State and Washington State have to be sweating bullets right about now...

Not really as they will be offered membership by the Mountain West Conference.

[Anonymous]

Anyone who is familiar with intense in-state public university rivalries such as Alabama and Auburn universities knows that the politicians will never permit the two schools to play in different conferences. Granted that there may not be many such rivalries, but the poster suggesting a special conference for the current college football superpowers depends upon the University of Alabama as a basic foundation for any such move.

Also, who would join such a conference ? What if the success Alabama & Clemson football programs is due largely to the schools' respective head coaches ? At one time, FSU--under head Coach Bobby Bowdoin--would have been the bigest catch for a super conference. Things change.

Proposing such a conference for college football is short-sighted and unrealistic.

[Anonymous]

Oregon, Washington and Notre Dame would be good adds to B10. Maybe Stanford and Berkeley too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oregon State and Washington State have to be sweating bullets right about now...

Not really as they will be offered membership by the Mountain West Conference.

Exactly, have you seen what San Diego State has been doing this year trying to leave?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oregon, Washington and Notre Dame would be good adds to B10. Maybe Stanford and Berkeley too

Interesting thought.

If the Big Ten Conference could land Notre Dame in 2025--when Notre Dame's current NBC TV deal expires--the conference could be done with expansion for decades. I assume that if the Big Ten Conference added Notre Dame, that it would also look for one other team, but that is not a requirement.

Adding Notre Dame to the Big Ten Conference would add significant value for all Big Ten member schools which would justify offering a sweeter deal to Notre Dame than that enjoyed by its current members for an initial period of a few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:(OP here):

I'll throw out a bit of a wild idea.

What if the Big Ten Conference and U Oregon & U Washington do not come to an agreement expanding the Big Ten Conference ? Next year may be too late to bring on Oregon as USC will do everything it can to block Oregon from joining the Big Ten.

The Big Ten Conference should think about making Notre Dame an offer that it cannot refuse--something that in its initial years is more than a full share in the Big Ten spoils. Add in a traditional Notre Dame opponent such as Stanford and there would be far less interest in dealing with either U Oregon or U Washington--which can move to the Big 12 as the Pac-12 can barely offer survival money.

ND is only a good idea for the conference if they are fully locked-in for the long haul. A sweetheart deal with more money up front doesn't necessarily do that. ND also has 2 more years on their not-so-great NBC deal.

[Anonymous]

No way Michigan and Ohio State approve a larger share for Notre Dame. 0% chance of that happening.

[Anonymous]

Notre Dame's ratings haven't been phenomenal and their alumni base isn't huge. I'd actually argue people have been over-valuing them. It is unlikely they'll get a deal as an independent that rivals what the Big Ten and SEC can offer. It boils down to how much can they afford to lose and be independent.