Jump to content

Conference Realignment


rico
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, olsontex said:

This is an interesting conversation (historical relative strength of different conferences, national championships) but how much do you think it matters in the context of conference realignment? 

I'm assuming this prestige would translate into the SEC dominating the other conferences in terms of current recruiting classes, and the Big 10 would be behind several other conferences as well.  After all, OSU is the only legitimate title contender we've had for quite a while.  Right?

image.png.0895ce35e95bd30f7e9cdcea304567f5.png

From my perspective, the distribution of the 2022 recruiting classes doesn't reflect this assumption.  Sure the SEC is in a class by themselves on the field and the top dog in recruiting, but it falls a little short of dominance over the Big 10 in the recruiting landscape.  The gap does widen though when you look at the SEC top-to-bottom. 

Something interesting is revealed when you remove the Top 20 recruiting classes and then compare conferences.  Here are the average recruit ratings for the Power 5:  86.22, 86.23, 86.06, 87.51, and 87.59.  The first 3 conferences are virtually identical (attractiveness to recruits is identical for 2nd and 3rd tier Power 5 schools in these conferences.).   The second 2 conferences are a step ahead and also virtually identical.  Do you know which conferences are in each of these two buckets?

Bucket 1:  ACC, Big 10, Big 12 (if you prefer the average total points as a gauge they are:  141.13, 140.58, and 140.30)

Bucket 2:  PAC 12 and SEC

I don't want to repeat it over and over again but prestige/appeal/marketability doesn't necessarily correlate to actual football success.  Consider Notre Dame's 33 year championship drought.  How about their W-L record over the 22 year period of recruiting rankings? That would be an average of W 8.0 - L 4.5 and includes 6 seasons failing to post a winning record.  It also includes 11 seasons failing to even finish in the Top 25 and a mere 4 Top 10 seasons.  If I hadn't mentioned "Notre Dame" would you look at these results and think "now there's an elite program!"?  There's no standard formula for looking at a range of 20+ years and pinpointing a combined ranking but this looks to be around the #15-18 ranking range to me.  So how has this decent but not great track record impact Notre Dame's athletic program annual revenue or their ability to recruit at a high level?  Their $170M revenue and $19M profit both ranked 6th in college sports last year, as it is year-in-year-out.  With 20 Top 15 and 12 Top 10 recruiting classes over this period they are clearly recruiting at an elite level.  If I used Texas as my example you'd see something fairly similar.

This isn't a tail wagging the dog situation, it's not because "They're Notre Dame".  They're "Notre Dame" because they have a large and influential national fan base who have achieved wealth and power, resulting in ND being one of the highest endowment receivers in the country.  Hmm... maybe education does play a role in all this after all.  Hint:  if the AAU sticking point seems like a dumb rule, consider that research and education endowments absolutely dwarf athletic revenue streams.  The leaders of Big Ten institutes aren't being nerdy, they're actually being just as greedy as the SEC, just along a different pathway to a much bigger pie.  That's why Stanford and Cal Berkeley are particularly appealing... and why Oklahoma State's excellent Wraslin' program, 187th ranked academic profile, and lack of AAU affiliation is not.

OK, so prestige and national exposure drive recruiting, and schools gain prestige and exposure largely as a result of their affiliation with a conference that's secured a national TV footprint (this is a large reason the PAC 12 led by USC is quite open to Big 10 proposals - they're current appeal is viewed as only regional).  Yes, winning matters too but it devolves into a chicken and egg circular argument in a hurry.  So if the Notre Dame example is true for most schools, then there must be a high correlation between annual athletic department revenue, recruiting success, and the level of a school's attractiveness to conferences in this realignment age.   Key to all of this is a large fan base with disposable income, and that trumps even the relative success on the field.  Advertiser dollars reach their target whether your team wins or loses... as long as you keep watching your lovable loser's games.  

So, about that correlation.  Don't let your eyes trick you into seeing a bunch of miss-matched colors resulting from the thinly sliced tiers.  Keep in mind the full population of this report is over 230 schools with close to 200 of them falling into the white shaded "Outside 45".  With that in mind, simply have both a revenue and recruiting rank shaded inside the Top 45 indicates correlation, and the closer the shades the higher correlation.  There are only two schools outside the Top 45 2022 recruiting classes with revenue inside the the Top 45, and vice-versa.  

image.png.d6023e84ba942184a8ba23e339270262.png

 Given how much I've written, and the fact that the conclusion from all this should be pretty apparent, I don't think anyone wants/needs me to tie a bow around a summary highlighting the implications for realignment.  If you need me to, let me know and I will.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sea Turtle said:

Herbie's network is what's driving this.

Man giving you a like and agreeing with you gives me the heebie-jebbies lol, but you are 100% right on this. Espn is pushing this realignment, everything about it comes back to them. 👍

 

Edited by Hoosier51
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2021 at 6:07 PM, olsontex said:

This is an interesting conversation (historical relative strength of different conferences, national championships) but how much do you think it matters in the context of conference realignment? 

I'm assuming this prestige would translate into the SEC dominating the other conferences in terms of current recruiting classes, and the Big 10 would be behind several other conferences as well.  After all, OSU is the only legitimate title contender we've had for quite a while.  Right?

image.png.0895ce35e95bd30f7e9cdcea304567f5.png

From my perspective, the distribution of the 2022 recruiting classes doesn't reflect this assumption.  Sure the SEC is in a class by themselves on the field and the top dog in recruiting, but it falls a little short of dominance over the Big 10 in the recruiting landscape.  The gap does widen though when you look at the SEC top-to-bottom. 

Something interesting is revealed when you remove the Top 20 recruiting classes and then compare conferences.  Here are the average recruit ratings for the Power 5:  86.22, 86.23, 86.06, 87.51, and 87.59.  The first 3 conferences are virtually identical (attractiveness to recruits is identical for 2nd and 3rd tier Power 5 schools in these conferences.).   The second 2 conferences are a step ahead and also virtually identical.  Do you know which conferences are in each of these two buckets?

Bucket 1:  ACC, Big 10, Big 12 (if you prefer the average total points as a gauge they are:  141.13, 140.58, and 140.30)

Bucket 2:  PAC 12 and SEC

I don't want to repeat it over and over again but prestige/appeal/marketability doesn't necessarily correlate to actual football success.  Consider Notre Dame's 33 year championship drought.  How about their W-L record over the 22 year period of recruiting rankings? That would be an average of W 8.0 - L 4.5 and includes 6 seasons failing to post a winning record.  It also includes 11 seasons failing to even finish in the Top 25 and a mere 4 Top 10 seasons.  If I hadn't mentioned "Notre Dame" would you look at these results and think "now there's an elite program!"?  There's no standard formula for looking at a range of 20+ years and pinpointing a combined ranking but this looks to be around the #15-18 ranking range to me.  So how has this decent but not great track record impact Notre Dame's athletic program annual revenue or their ability to recruit at a high level?  Their $170M revenue and $19M profit both ranked 6th in college sports last year, as it is year-in-year-out.  With 20 Top 15 and 12 Top 10 recruiting classes over this period they are clearly recruiting at an elite level.  If I used Texas as my example you'd see something fairly similar.

This isn't a tail wagging the dog situation, it's not because "They're Notre Dame".  They're "Notre Dame" because they have a large and influential national fan base who have achieved wealth and power, resulting in ND being one of the highest endowment receivers in the country.  Hmm... maybe education does play a role in all this after all.  Hint:  if the AAU sticking point seems like a dumb rule, consider that research and education endowments absolutely dwarf athletic revenue streams.  The leaders of Big Ten institutes aren't being nerdy, they're actually being just as greedy as the SEC, just along a different pathway to a much bigger pie.  That's why Stanford and Cal Berkeley are particularly appealing... and why Oklahoma State's excellent Wraslin' program, 187th ranked academic profile, and lack of AAU affiliation is not.

OK, so prestige and national exposure drive recruiting, and schools gain prestige and exposure largely as a result of their affiliation with a conference that's secured a national TV footprint (this is a large reason the PAC 12 led by USC is quite open to Big 10 proposals - they're current appeal is viewed as only regional).  Yes, winning matters too but it devolves into a chicken and egg circular argument in a hurry.  So if the Notre Dame example is true for most schools, then there must be a high correlation between annual athletic department revenue, recruiting success, and the level of a school's attractiveness to conferences in this realignment age.   Key to all of this is a large fan base with disposable income, and that trumps even the relative success on the field.  Advertiser dollars reach their target whether your team wins or loses... as long as you keep watching your lovable loser's games.  

So, about that correlation.  Don't let your eyes trick you into seeing a bunch of miss-matched colors resulting from the thinly sliced tiers.  Keep in mind the full population of this report is over 230 schools with close to 200 of them falling into the white shaded "Outside 45".  With that in mind, simply have both a revenue and recruiting rank shaded inside the Top 45 indicates correlation, and the closer the shades the higher correlation.  There are only two schools outside the Top 45 2022 recruiting classes with revenue inside the the Top 45, and vice-versa.  

image.png.d6023e84ba942184a8ba23e339270262.png

 Given how much I've written, and the fact that the conclusion from all this should be pretty apparent, I don't think anyone wants/needs me to tie a bow around a summary highlighting the implications for realignment.  If you need me to, let me know and I will.

Hmm.  I read it and understand most of it.  I love what you bring with your research and articulation.  One thing I learned from the reddit revolution is this TLDR= Too Long Didn't Read.  For those in the crowd that didn't read or lost the point, what's your conclusion? 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Hoosier51 said:

Man giving you a like and agreeing with you gives me the heebie-jebbies lol, but you are 100% right on this. Espn is pushing this realignment, everything about it comes back to them. 👍

 

That doesn't mean Herbstreit has to agree with what his employer is doing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hoosier51 said:

Where in my post did i say anything about him having to agree with his employer?

Ya didn't.  My apologies for using your post to make a point.  I could have done it on Sea Urchin's but chose not to.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, GaloisGroupe said:

This i could get behind.  A team to kick the shit out of in football and boost the conference in basketball

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also... 

Any B1G fan touting the academic side of things, as a reason we should feel superior morally and intellectually, should probably slow that roll REAL quick.... 

3 of the biggest "sex" scandels from this century originated at B1G Universities. Hate even using the word "sex" to describe what those universities allowed to happen. 🤢🤢

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be worried that in the rare years we play Kansas in football a victory wouldn't be worth anything (and a loss would be crushing).  On the basketball side I'd be worried that joining the Big 10 would actually raise their already extremely high profile and it would become a match-up we might lose more often than win.  While the Big 12 offers to easiest path for expansion, none of the remaining teams offer enough to move the dial.  It would be a move that screams of desperation and wouldn't even come close to countering the SEC moves.

I'm in the camp of either:

(1) Do nothing  (don't expand that is - there are some vindictive options that I think are justified)

- Make sure the CFP doesn't expand from the current format of 4 teams.  We aren't getting in unless we win the Big 10 anyway.  If the remaining Power 5 conferences collectively keep the CFP limited, it will pour an Olympic sized swimming pool of cold water on both ESPN and the SEC. 

- To add maximum pain, convince the Big 12 to let OU and UT out of their Big 12 obligation immediately.  I have a sense the extra TV games resulting from a 12 team field was a major element of ESPN's push for SEC expansion, as an important additional source of revenue to cover financial expectations of this coup.  The Longhorn Network is owned by an ESPN subsidiary, it's a money pit, and parent network is on the hook until 2031.  They currently owe Texas $160M in differed payments.  I'm starting to believe a secondary element of ESPN's push to bring Texas to the SEC is the opportunity to buyout the Longhorn Network as part of renegotiating the 2025 CFP contract (assuming they can hold on to it). 

- No matter how good the SEC becomes, they aren't getting more than two teams in, and it's far from a given they can even get a second team in consistently.  To get a second SEC team in, at least two Power 5 conferences have to be down enough that the conference champion is not worthy of a playoff spot AND there has to be a clearly deserving 1 loss team behind the SEC winner.  This was a significant hurdle before adding a Top 10 and a Top 20 program to the schedule of their second place hopefuls.  They've just made the road a lot harder for the old members.

- Where will the money come from to help cover the conference shares for UT and OU?  Watch the discontent blossom as the remaining 4 years on ESPN's exclusive CFP rights aren't enhanced 1 penny.  Watch the SEC scramble to figure out where the revenue will come from to cover two more programs without reducing the pie of the other 14 programs.  The only way the SEC wouldn't be negatively impacted is if ESPN takes on an even larger financial burden by making them whole, years ahead of the potential financial benefits.

(2) Merge with the suitable programs in the PAC 12 for the start of next season.  It's looking more like an inevitability that we're eventually moving towards a league structure that resembles the NFL.  The Big 10 can get ahead of it and lock up a good chunk of the best remaining programs.  Above all, block the SEC from an opportunity to be a coast-to-coast conference.

My preference is for #1 with a premeditated attempt to make this situation as painful as possible for the instigators of this fiasco.  Any form of deterrent to additional SEC moves would be a good thing.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think the SEC has plans to go coast to coast…but I do see them going after Clemson and Florida St…maybe Miami. Even though to get out of the ACC contracts are almost too painful financially id say they are the next target once this merger goes through and if it proves successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, olsontex said:

I'd be worried that in the rare years we play Kansas in football a victory wouldn't be worth anything (and a loss would be crushing).  On the basketball side I'd be worried that joining the Big 10 would actually raise their already extremely high profile and it would become a match-up we might lose more often than win.  While the Big 12 offers to easiest path for expansion, none of the remaining teams offer enough to move the dial.  It would be a move that screams of desperation and wouldn't even come close to countering the SEC moves.

I'm in the camp of either:

(1) Do nothing  (don't expand that is - there are some vindictive options that I think are justified)

- Make sure the CFP doesn't expand from the current format of 4 teams.  We aren't getting in unless we win the Big 10 anyway.  If the remaining Power 5 conferences collectively keep the CFP limited, it will pour an Olympic sized swimming pool of cold water on both ESPN and the SEC. 

- To add maximum pain, convince the Big 12 to let OU and UT out of their Big 12 obligation immediately.  I have a sense the extra TV games resulting from a 12 team field was a major element of ESPN's push for SEC expansion, as an important additional source of revenue to cover financial expectations of this coup.  The Longhorn Network is owned by an ESPN subsidiary, it's a money pit, and parent network is on the hook until 2031.  They currently owe Texas $160M in differed payments.  I'm starting to believe a secondary element of ESPN's push to bring Texas to the SEC is the opportunity to buyout the Longhorn Network as part of renegotiating the 2025 CFP contract (assuming they can hold on to it). 

- No matter how good the SEC becomes, they aren't getting more than two teams in, and it's far from a given they can even get a second team in consistently.  To get a second SEC team in, at least two Power 5 conferences have to be down enough that the conference champion is not worthy of a playoff spot AND there has to be a clearly deserving 1 loss team behind the SEC winner.  This was a significant hurdle before adding a Top 10 and a Top 20 program to the schedule of their second place hopefuls.  They've just made the road a lot harder for the old members.

- Where will the money come from to help cover the conference shares for UT and OU?  Watch the discontent blossom as the remaining 4 years on ESPN's exclusive CFP rights aren't enhanced 1 penny.  Watch the SEC scramble to figure out where the revenue will come from to cover two more programs without reducing the pie of the other 14 programs.  The only way the SEC wouldn't be negatively impacted is if ESPN takes on an even larger financial burden by making them whole, years ahead of the potential financial benefits.

(2) Merge with the suitable programs in the PAC 12 for the start of next season.  It's looking more like an inevitability that we're eventually moving towards a league structure that resembles the NFL.  The Big 10 can get ahead of it and lock up a good chunk of the best remaining programs.  Above all, block the SEC from an opportunity to be a coast-to-coast conference.

My preference is for #1 with a premeditated attempt to make this situation as painful as possible for the instigators of this fiasco.  Any form of deterrent to additional SEC moves would be a good thing.

If the B12 were to remain in existence, your reasons would be valid. However, I look at it from the perspective of the B12’s collapse being inevitable. We’re not chasing after Kansas, but if they need a place to land, why not? Same goes for Iowa State. No, they aren’t major media markets, but they fit. 

The one that intrigues me is A&M. If they decide to tell the SEC to go pee up a rope over UT, I say we chase them. But, that also leaves us with an odd number, provided we admit Kansas and ISU. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zlinedavid said:

If the B12 were to remain in existence, your reasons would be valid. However, I look at it from the perspective of the B12’s collapse being inevitable. We’re not chasing after Kansas, but if they need a place to land, why not? Same goes for Iowa State. No, they aren’t major media markets, but they fit. 

The one that intrigues me is A&M. If they decide to tell the SEC to go pee up a rope over UT, I say we chase them. But, that also leaves us with an odd number, provided we admit Kansas and ISU. 

 I think you are right about the Big 12 collapse being inevitable, and everyone associated with the schools in it knows this as well. The B1G doesn't have to chase any of the remaing schools, those schools will be almost begging the B1G for membership since their other alternatives will be a lackluster Pac 12, AAC, or Mountain West. The ACC might take West Virgina and one other but that would be it for them.

A&M would be a homerun in my opinion, but unfortunately with them voting yes on OU and Texas joining I think they are falling in line with the rest of the SEC and not going anywhere.

Edited by Hoosier51
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hoosier51 said:

 I think you are right about the Big 12 collapse being inevitable, and everyone associated with the schools in it knows this as well. The B1G doesn't have to chase any of the remaing schools, those schools will be almost begging the B1G for membership since their other alternatives will be a lackluster Pac 12, AAC, or Mountain West. The ACC might take a team like West Virgina and maybe one other but that would be it with them.

A&M would be a homerun in my opinion, but unfortunately with them voting yes on OU and Texas joining I think they are falling in line with the rest of the SEC and not going anywhere.

Maybe A&M voted yes to make it easier to leave secretly... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, GaloisGroupe said:

It is more wishful thinking than anything else. If we are going to expand, A&M seems like one of the most valuable potential schools out there...

 

 

Texas A&M plus a couple of Pac 12 schools like USC and Oregon would be a homerun for the B1G. Throw in Kansas for their basketball and to make it even then call it a day.

Edited by Hoosier51
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GaloisGroupe said:

FYI: The Kansas board seems to think they will be joining the B1G and that it will be announced "soon."

They may be falling prey to the same type of momentum that created the Brad to IU hype though..

 

I think Kansas joining the B1G is only a matter of time. 👍

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hoosier51 said:

Texas A&M plus a couple of Pac 12 schools like USC and Oregon would would be a homerun for the B1G. Throw in Kansas for their basketball and to make it even then call it a day.

That is pretty much where I would go... if we have to throw in a couple of other like Colorado/UCLA... could work as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, olsontex said:

 

- Where will the money come from to help cover the conference shares for UT and OU?  Watch the discontent blossom as the remaining 4 years on ESPN's exclusive CFP rights aren't enhanced 1 penny.  Watch the SEC scramble to figure out where the revenue will come from to cover two more programs without reducing the pie of the other 14 programs.  The only way the SEC wouldn't be negatively impacted is if ESPN takes on an even larger financial burden by making them whole, years ahead of the potential financial benefits.

 

On this point, I am pretty sure they have language in their agreement with ESPN that states as long as they bring in "A" brands, this will not dilute the payouts per team and, I believe (going off memory from an article), it will increase the per school amount share.  At minimum, I know it wouldn't decrease it, unless that added somebody like Southern Miss for example.  This just proves more that they are working in lock step with ESPN in any moves they make, because I would assume ESPN would have to be on board with any selection prior to them pursuing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, btownqb said:

Also... 

Any B1G fan touting the academic side of things, as a reason we should feel superior morally and intellectually, should probably slow that roll REAL quick.... 

3 of the biggest "sex" scandels from this century originated at B1G Universities. Hate even using the word "sex" to describe what those universities allowed to happen. 🤢🤢

I agree. Also, when the BIG added Maryland and Ritgers, BC I believe Nebraska was first (doesn't matter in my point) I wanted the conference to quit with the AAC stuff because this is all sports driven, and TV markets can only be so successful in the grand scheme of things. I wanted the BIG to once again offer Notre To s*** or get off the pot. If they do want in, bring them and WV. If they dont want in go get WV and Pitt. I know I'll get roasted for this 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...