The ACC just finalized their television deal with ESPN due to the additions of Syracuse and Pitt. The Big 12 is in the final stages of their negotiations with ESPN/Fox as they lost aTm/Missouri and added of West Virginia/TCU. The SEC is in initial talks regarding the addition of aTm/Missouri. I thought it might be a good time to recap the television deals for college football.
The main motivation that got me to write this was was an article I read that stated that Florida State should leave the ACC and join the Big 12 due to their favorable deal. The key in that article is that Florida State's athletic department is currently running a $2.4 million deficit and in the Big 12 Florida State would have the ability to create a Seminole Network. The expectation is that this would bring in at least $5 million which would balance the budget. I really can't believe Florida State would move for something as risky as that proposition but it has gotten traction over the weekend. My guess is this is merely posturing to get concessions from the other ACC members at the meetings this week as the numbers don't add up. There are rumors that ESPN and the Big 12 have agreed to a new deal that would give each team an estimated $20 million per season but I don't think it would be worth it for Florida State to leave for the $2.9 in additional television money when you consider the cost of additional travel. I guess time will tell.
The other interesting thing about the spreadsheet is that most leagues seem to be happy they are getting Big Ten/SEC money and there is no doubt that ESPN stepped up to the plate and gave huge contracts to the Pac 10/ACC/Big 12. Honestly when you think about television ratings I really don't think these deals can pay for themselves. Are we really to believe that games in the ACC are worth $2.3 million? I really think the key is ESPN is protecting its $5 per basic subscriber by making sure that they have long term college football contracts tied down all over the country so they have to be included on the basic tier.
That brings me to the SEC. If the ACC is worth $2.3 million a game and the Big 12 is worth almost $2.7 million then what is the SEC worth? That is where the question of subscriber fees vs ratings is interesting as the SEC's ratings are among the best though they are probably down the list when it comes to cable boxes in their area. The SEC started their current deal in 2009 before prices really jumped and while their deal goes through 2016, I expect ESPN to cave and give them at least as much as the Big 12 for the addition of Texas A&M and Missouri. If they don't the SEC could sell those home games to Fox/NBC/CBS for a huge sum and with 2016 not that far away they want to keep the SEC happy. As you might recall, the Big Ten Network started because an ESPN executive dared Delany to find a better deal. In the end I'd expect the SEC deal to be extended for at least another 10 years at least $3.0 million per game.
That brings us to the Big Ten. Their deal is up in 2017 and they are biding their time as these deals have gotten increasingly ridiculous. Looking at the Pac 12/Big 12, I expect the final deal to be a partnership between the ESPN and Fox for the 45 games ESPN would prefer to have them all but they only really care that 1-2 games a week are on their station so it will be impossible for Midwest cable companies to remove them from the basic tier. That's because their main national competitor (DirectTV) will always have ESPN as basic and that combined with a section of the country that loves college football will make it hard to change. This protects ESPN's $5/month which is the key.
So how much could the Big Ten get when they renew this contract? Considering the games they are selling are the 3-4 best matchups every week they will get more than the average as their tier 2 games are shown on BTN. My best guess would be at least $4 million in today's dollars. That may seem high but if the Pac 10 can get $2.8 for all it's games then $4.0 million/game for the best Big Ten games seems pretty reasonable. That's a nice bump from the $2.2 million per game they currently get and add an additional $7 million to each school in the league.
If the SEC and Big Ten get numbers like I expect the revenue per team for the next 15 - 20 years in college football would be as follows: Big Ten 27.7, SEC 23.0, Big 12 20.0, Pac 12 20.1, and ACC 17.1. The Pac 12 numbers could jump a little if they are able to get their web based Pac 12 Network going for their Tier 3 content (games that Fox/ESPN don't want to run). The same is true for Texas and the Longhorn Network.
A wildcard in the mix is Notre Dame as they will soon be making less than every other school in the top 5 college football conferences. Their contract is up in 2015 and there are rumors that NBC may walk away as they are losing money on the current deal. That's another clue that the real money in these college football deals is in subscriber fees as NBC doesn't get those as they are a broadcast company. If they walk away then Notre Dame will need to negotiate with ESPN/FOX or possibly CBS/NBC's cable counterparts. The issue for the Irish is one school isn't enough to motivate people to subscribe to a cable network so they will be negotiating from a position of weakness. That leaves them with two choices - get the best deal they can from the cable companies to be included with the rest or work with one of them to form the Irish network. There are undoubtedly thousands of Irish fans that would be happy to pay a premium for this channel. That actually may be their best choice and one of the reasons for the recent talks with Texas and their Longhorn Network.
Unless they want to join a conference....
Showing posts with label Big 12. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big 12. Show all posts
Monday, May 14, 2012
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Who's got the better coaching - Big Ten or Big 12?
The Sporting New is running a series of articles ranking the best coaches in college football by conference. These are no doubt arbitrary but a comment in the Big 12 article caught me offguard. Their claim is that the Big 12 has the best coaching in college football. I've thought for a while that one of the biggest issues in the B1G is coaching I thought I'd take this opportunity to use the Sporting New article on B1G coaching to see how I think the two conferences compare (Sporting News later released overall rankings which I put after each comparison)
#1 - Stoops vs Meyer (B1G) - I question putting Stoops at the top of the Big 12 and I've thought he's gotten a pass for years. Meyer has coached fewer years but has done more with his talent. (5 vs 2)
#2 - Patterson vs Bielema (B12) - Despite his ability to continually put his foot in his mouth, Bielema is a good coach. Patterson is better. It should be interesting to see how his defensive genius works in the Big 12. If he can continue this success it should enable him to steal a few recruits from Texas and get to the top of the Big 12 list. (7 vs 12)
#3 - Gundy vs Dantonio (B12) - There probably isn't a starker contrast between two coaches on this list. Gundy is one of the best offensive minds in the game. Dantonio is old school with his hard hitting defenses and tough running game. Until Dantonio can get MSU to the next level he's a step behind Gundy. (10 vs 13)
#4 - Snyder vs Hoke (B1G) - Snyder has been a miracle worker and his brief absence showed just how much he means to the university. Hoke on the other hand barely is over .500 in his career. You'd think that would mean an easy victory for Snyder but Hoke had an amazing run last season and is poised to make Michigan a perennial top 10 team. That isn't going to happen at Kansas State no matter what the 72 year old Snyder does. (11 vs 24)
#5 - Brown vs Ferentz (B1G) - Both coaches would have been ranked in the top two of their leagues 3 years ago. Both have slipped but Ferentz at least has the excuse of poor recruiting. Brown is a great recruiter that has always gotten the least of his team. In many ways he's the Ron Zook of the Big 12. (16 vs 33)
#6 - Weis vs Pelini (B1G) - I'm not a big fan of Pelini but Weis is a terrible coach. (40 vs 37)
#7 - Briles vs Fitzgerald (B1G) - Both coaches play at small schools with moderate past football success. Briles has recently done well on the arm of Robert Griffin while Fitzgerald seems to be able to reinvent his team into contenders every year. If Briles continues his success in the post Griffin era he may pass Fitzgerald but for now I give the edge to the Big Ten. (41 vs 42)
#8 - Holgorsen vs O'Brien (B12) - This is O'Brien's first year at Penn State so it isn't a fair comparison but Holgorsen is seen as one of the best young coaches in the game. I'd expect both to be ranked higher than 8th next season. If that doesn't happen quickly in O'Brien's case I'd expect a quick exit. (44 vs 62)
#9 - Rhoades vs Kill (B12) - Iowa State has gotten quite a few upsets under Rhoades while Kill has a big job ahead of him at Minnesota. I think Kill has a big upside but it's not enough to give him a better rank than Rhoades past success. (48 vs 64)
#10 - Tuberville vs Beckman (B12) - Tuberville once was considered one of the best coaches in the game. Now he's struggling to achieve the success of his predecessor at Texas Tech. Beckman has only coached in the MAC and took the job at Illinois in the off season. For that reason alone you have to give the nod to Tuberville but I suspect it won't take Beckman long to rocket up this list. (50 vs 69)
#11 & #12 - The Big 12 only has ten teams while the Big Ten has 12 so we can't compare Hope and Wilson vs a counterpart. FWIW I think it is only a matter of time before Hope is fired at Purdue while I think Wilson has a good shot to bring respectability to Indiana. 92 & 111
I'm sure my rankings are a bit jaded by the fact that I'm a fan of the Big Ten but my rankings has the two leagues tied 5 - 5. That isn't to say I think the Big Ten has the best coaching in the country but rather that the Sporting News statement that the Big 12 is the best is off the mark. Just like on the field, the best coaching in America is in the SEC (and it should be considering the money they invest). FWIW, the later Sporting News ranking gave the Big 12 the nod with only Meyer and Pelini rating better than their Big 12 counterpart.
On a positive note, I've complained a lot in the past about the coaching in the B1G but they've recently made great strides. In the last 2 years the B1G has brought in Meyer, Beckmann, O'Brien, Kill, and Wilson. Compare that to the Big 12 and Tuberville, Holgorsen, and Weis. It's obvious to me that the Big Ten is getting better than their opposition and it is only a matter of time before we see the results on the field.
#1 - Stoops vs Meyer (B1G) - I question putting Stoops at the top of the Big 12 and I've thought he's gotten a pass for years. Meyer has coached fewer years but has done more with his talent. (5 vs 2)
#2 - Patterson vs Bielema (B12) - Despite his ability to continually put his foot in his mouth, Bielema is a good coach. Patterson is better. It should be interesting to see how his defensive genius works in the Big 12. If he can continue this success it should enable him to steal a few recruits from Texas and get to the top of the Big 12 list. (7 vs 12)
#3 - Gundy vs Dantonio (B12) - There probably isn't a starker contrast between two coaches on this list. Gundy is one of the best offensive minds in the game. Dantonio is old school with his hard hitting defenses and tough running game. Until Dantonio can get MSU to the next level he's a step behind Gundy. (10 vs 13)
#4 - Snyder vs Hoke (B1G) - Snyder has been a miracle worker and his brief absence showed just how much he means to the university. Hoke on the other hand barely is over .500 in his career. You'd think that would mean an easy victory for Snyder but Hoke had an amazing run last season and is poised to make Michigan a perennial top 10 team. That isn't going to happen at Kansas State no matter what the 72 year old Snyder does. (11 vs 24)
#5 - Brown vs Ferentz (B1G) - Both coaches would have been ranked in the top two of their leagues 3 years ago. Both have slipped but Ferentz at least has the excuse of poor recruiting. Brown is a great recruiter that has always gotten the least of his team. In many ways he's the Ron Zook of the Big 12. (16 vs 33)#6 - Weis vs Pelini (B1G) - I'm not a big fan of Pelini but Weis is a terrible coach. (40 vs 37)
#7 - Briles vs Fitzgerald (B1G) - Both coaches play at small schools with moderate past football success. Briles has recently done well on the arm of Robert Griffin while Fitzgerald seems to be able to reinvent his team into contenders every year. If Briles continues his success in the post Griffin era he may pass Fitzgerald but for now I give the edge to the Big Ten. (41 vs 42)#8 - Holgorsen vs O'Brien (B12) - This is O'Brien's first year at Penn State so it isn't a fair comparison but Holgorsen is seen as one of the best young coaches in the game. I'd expect both to be ranked higher than 8th next season. If that doesn't happen quickly in O'Brien's case I'd expect a quick exit. (44 vs 62)
#9 - Rhoades vs Kill (B12) - Iowa State has gotten quite a few upsets under Rhoades while Kill has a big job ahead of him at Minnesota. I think Kill has a big upside but it's not enough to give him a better rank than Rhoades past success. (48 vs 64)
#10 - Tuberville vs Beckman (B12) - Tuberville once was considered one of the best coaches in the game. Now he's struggling to achieve the success of his predecessor at Texas Tech. Beckman has only coached in the MAC and took the job at Illinois in the off season. For that reason alone you have to give the nod to Tuberville but I suspect it won't take Beckman long to rocket up this list. (50 vs 69)
#11 & #12 - The Big 12 only has ten teams while the Big Ten has 12 so we can't compare Hope and Wilson vs a counterpart. FWIW I think it is only a matter of time before Hope is fired at Purdue while I think Wilson has a good shot to bring respectability to Indiana. 92 & 111
I'm sure my rankings are a bit jaded by the fact that I'm a fan of the Big Ten but my rankings has the two leagues tied 5 - 5. That isn't to say I think the Big Ten has the best coaching in the country but rather that the Sporting News statement that the Big 12 is the best is off the mark. Just like on the field, the best coaching in America is in the SEC (and it should be considering the money they invest). FWIW, the later Sporting News ranking gave the Big 12 the nod with only Meyer and Pelini rating better than their Big 12 counterpart.
On a positive note, I've complained a lot in the past about the coaching in the B1G but they've recently made great strides. In the last 2 years the B1G has brought in Meyer, Beckmann, O'Brien, Kill, and Wilson. Compare that to the Big 12 and Tuberville, Holgorsen, and Weis. It's obvious to me that the Big Ten is getting better than their opposition and it is only a matter of time before we see the results on the field.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Texas and TCU hold the cards in expansion
A few weeks ago I wrote that Texas A&M's move to the SEC was the death knell to the Big East. A few days after that I wrote on the Ozone this statement,
Yesterday a story broke from Oklahoma that they'd stay in the Big 12 if Texas changed the revenue sharing for the Longhorn network and fired their commissioner Dan Beebe who has long been looked at as a Texas lacky. That was an interesting development considering they had publicly stated for over a month that they were leaving if Texas A&M left. I should have realized there was more to the story but I wasn't surprised when late last night the Pac 12 announced they weren't expanding.
The funny thing from the announcement is it initially said that the Pac 12 decided not to expand but after the reporters started talking to their inside sources it fell apart mostly because they couldn't get Texas' assurance about the Longhorn Network. That doesn't mean the Pac 12 isn't going to expand, it just means that both Oklahoma and the Pac 12 are saying that if they are in either league there will be revenue sharing and they need to change their thinking. It appears they've had to resort to a public statements to make the trustees at Texas see the light.
That doesn't mean they will do it. Oklahoma has very little bargaining power as Texas knows that they are going anywhere without them. The Oklahoma State anchor is their achilles heel as no one will take both. That puts the decision where it has always been -- in Texas.
At this point I'd be shocked if Texas went to the Pac12. There's just too many reasons not to go, least of all is geographically and the fact that most of the Pac 12 games are shown when Texans have moved on with their day. I'm sure there aren't many fans that would have enjoyed the 1800 mile road trip to Seattle to watch a conference game (And I thought my dad's 600 mile trip to see Iowa was crazy).
In any event the question in my mind is where does the Big 12 go from here. My guess is Texas will give the league a few concessions on the Longhorn network and announce a new commissioner but they have a few other obstacles. Texas A&M is leaving and as I've said before, Missouri is the SEC's best option for the 14th team. There are rumors out there that the SEC has already given them an invite and Missouri is waiting to see how things play out in the Big 12 before responding. Don't believe that for a second. What Missouri is really doing is waiting to see if the league disbands so they won't have to pay the exit fee. That is probably what is happening with Texas A&M as well. When it becomes apparent that the Big 12 will survive I think both schools will go despite the exit fee.
That will then mean the Big 12 is sitting at 8 schools of which only Texas has a realistic option to leave. The question is what happens next and the obvious answer is they will grab at least 2 schools. As I've said before I think the best choices are TCU and BYU though SMU/Houston/NTexas/Tulane/Rice are possibilities. Some might think that some of these schools are too small to join the Big 12 but they are forgetting that the fact that the league doesn't share revenues equally so size doesn't matter as it won't impact any other schools revenue.
The other league in turmoil is the Big East and they are hurting from the recent defections of Pitt and Syracuse to the ACC. The ACC might not be done as they are waiting to see if the SEC takes one of their schools (Florida State/Georgia Tech/Clemson/Va Tech) before making their next move. If the SEC doesn't take anyone they may stay at 14 as it is much more manageable then 16 though they could take Rutgers/UConn to try to pin down the Northeast market.
That means the Big East has 6 schools in the league with TCU joining as the 7th next year. That puts TCU in a pivotal spot. The Big East is talking about expanding but their choices of Army/ Navy/ Villanova/ Temple/ Central Florida/ Marshall aren't exactly powerhouses so I'd be shocked if they kept their automtic BCS qualifier status. All it would take is that Texas give TCU assurances that they are committed to the Big 12 there is no doubt in my mind that they will join. Their defection would pretty much end the Big East as a BCS league and bring them to the equivalent of Conference USA.
The bottom line for the Big 12 is how badly does Texas want to keep the Longhorn Network. There is no way the Pac 12 is going to accept them and keep that network in tact. The funny thing is Oklahoma has made no secret of the fact that they want to go to the Pac 12 regardless of Texas decision. I guess no one told them that while the Pac 12 would love to have Oklahoma's tradition, the only way they would extend an invite to them is if Texas joins as well. The Big 12 will have a BCS invite as long as Texas is in the league and they from all reports they want to keep it. The league's survival depends entirely on Texas' decision on the Longhorn network.Many people thought this statement about Oklahoma was ludicrous as they are a top 10 program in terms of wins and tradition. The Pac 12 no doubt would like that but they are more concerned with academics and market share. The first problem for them is that they cannot move anywhere without taking Oklahoma State as well which dilutes profitability. Also, Oklahoma academics are third tier and their sister school Oklahoma State is even worse. Finally, Oklahoma has a lot of fans but they are centered in a low market share with many graduates in Texas. There aren't enough of them to create a regional network like the Pac 12 network plans to do in their current markets. That wouldn't be the case if Texas joined.
Yesterday a story broke from Oklahoma that they'd stay in the Big 12 if Texas changed the revenue sharing for the Longhorn network and fired their commissioner Dan Beebe who has long been looked at as a Texas lacky. That was an interesting development considering they had publicly stated for over a month that they were leaving if Texas A&M left. I should have realized there was more to the story but I wasn't surprised when late last night the Pac 12 announced they weren't expanding.
The funny thing from the announcement is it initially said that the Pac 12 decided not to expand but after the reporters started talking to their inside sources it fell apart mostly because they couldn't get Texas' assurance about the Longhorn Network. That doesn't mean the Pac 12 isn't going to expand, it just means that both Oklahoma and the Pac 12 are saying that if they are in either league there will be revenue sharing and they need to change their thinking. It appears they've had to resort to a public statements to make the trustees at Texas see the light.
That doesn't mean they will do it. Oklahoma has very little bargaining power as Texas knows that they are going anywhere without them. The Oklahoma State anchor is their achilles heel as no one will take both. That puts the decision where it has always been -- in Texas.
At this point I'd be shocked if Texas went to the Pac12. There's just too many reasons not to go, least of all is geographically and the fact that most of the Pac 12 games are shown when Texans have moved on with their day. I'm sure there aren't many fans that would have enjoyed the 1800 mile road trip to Seattle to watch a conference game (And I thought my dad's 600 mile trip to see Iowa was crazy).
In any event the question in my mind is where does the Big 12 go from here. My guess is Texas will give the league a few concessions on the Longhorn network and announce a new commissioner but they have a few other obstacles. Texas A&M is leaving and as I've said before, Missouri is the SEC's best option for the 14th team. There are rumors out there that the SEC has already given them an invite and Missouri is waiting to see how things play out in the Big 12 before responding. Don't believe that for a second. What Missouri is really doing is waiting to see if the league disbands so they won't have to pay the exit fee. That is probably what is happening with Texas A&M as well. When it becomes apparent that the Big 12 will survive I think both schools will go despite the exit fee.
That will then mean the Big 12 is sitting at 8 schools of which only Texas has a realistic option to leave. The question is what happens next and the obvious answer is they will grab at least 2 schools. As I've said before I think the best choices are TCU and BYU though SMU/Houston/NTexas/Tulane/Rice are possibilities. Some might think that some of these schools are too small to join the Big 12 but they are forgetting that the fact that the league doesn't share revenues equally so size doesn't matter as it won't impact any other schools revenue.
The other league in turmoil is the Big East and they are hurting from the recent defections of Pitt and Syracuse to the ACC. The ACC might not be done as they are waiting to see if the SEC takes one of their schools (Florida State/Georgia Tech/Clemson/Va Tech) before making their next move. If the SEC doesn't take anyone they may stay at 14 as it is much more manageable then 16 though they could take Rutgers/UConn to try to pin down the Northeast market.
That means the Big East has 6 schools in the league with TCU joining as the 7th next year. That puts TCU in a pivotal spot. The Big East is talking about expanding but their choices of Army/ Navy/ Villanova/ Temple/ Central Florida/ Marshall aren't exactly powerhouses so I'd be shocked if they kept their automtic BCS qualifier status. All it would take is that Texas give TCU assurances that they are committed to the Big 12 there is no doubt in my mind that they will join. Their defection would pretty much end the Big East as a BCS league and bring them to the equivalent of Conference USA.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
How Texas A&M's move dooms the Big East
If you've read any of my past columns you'd know I'm an unabashed Big East hater. Part of it is due to my allegience to Ohio State and Miami University which means I have an inbred hatred for all things related to the University of Cincinnati. The other part is the fact that the Big East has one of the coveted automatic BCS slots that they earned through sheer politics and has nothing to do with football prowess. Be that as it may, I think the recent announcement by Texas A&M that they are moving to the SEC is a death blow to the Big East.
I know it sounds crazy. Most thing the Big 12 is the conference that is in real trouble but as long as Texas wants to be a part of it they will keep their BCS designation which will attract other teams. Even if the worst happens and somehow Oklahoma decides leaves Oklahoma State (won't happen), Texas knows it has a good thing in the Big 12. Texas really doesn't need to move to continue as the biggest moneymaker in college sports and they know it. Even if the SEC really went off the deep end and went to 16 with Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Missouri there are a bunch of teams that would jump at the chance to join a league with an automatic bid.
Who are these teams? The first 4 are SMU, Houston, TCU and BYU. Plug these schools into a new Big 12 and you'd have a weak league but one filled mostly with schools that really have no other options that could make them nearly as much money. The exception would be BYU but as long as they were able to continue to broadcast their games on the own network, I'd think they would jump at the chance to be the western division counterpart to Texas' eastern division dominance.
The best scenario for the Big East is that the SEC only takes Big 12 teams. The thing is there are a few ACC schools that might make good sense like Florida State, Clemson, Ga Tech, or Virginia Tech. These aren't likely to happen because of politics (Florida doesn't want Florida State to join, Georgia doesn't want Ga Tech, etc, while the Virginia legislature won't let Va Tech leave Virginia) but it isn't out of the realm of possibility. If the ACC loses a school the only place they are going to look is the Big East which will weaken the league.
If the SEC doesn't come after an ACC school another good option would be to just target a Big East school. Syracuse, West Virginia, Pittsburgh and possibly Louisville are all targets that would open up additional markets and add television dollars. Losing any of these schools would be a big loss for the Big East.
In the end I still think the most obvious thing that will happen is the SEC will only add Missouri. It adds huge population base to the SEC footprint that is currently firmly follows Big Ten/Big 12 football and the politics are simple. If that happens then that should be good news for the Big East but they aren't out of the woods because of their recent addition of TCU. That's a problem for the Big East because after BYU, TCU is the most obvious target for the Big 12.
TCU is important to the Big East for a reason that few realize. After this season the BCS does another recalculation which determines which schools get to participate as an automatic qualifier. Many people don't know that the last time the BCS gave out the automatic qualifiers that they held a special hearing to give the Big East its slot. That's because they'd just lost their 3 premier teams in Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College to the ACC so their existing members didn't rank high enough on their own to earn a spot. Politics got involved and the members didn't want the political hassle with taking it away so they gave them a pass. Fast forward to today and you have the Mountain West pushing hard for the 6th automatic spot. After the completion of the 2011 season the BCS will take the results of the last 4 seasons and recalculate the automatic rankings which will determine automatic bids.
This is why TCU is important. The calculations are based on the leagues current affiliation and last season was putrid for the Big East. In fact their champion ended up out of the top 25 in the final BCS standings while Boise State and TCU were in the top 5. That is huge hit in the calculation and will almost certainly mean that the Big East won't automatically qualify unless TCU joins their league. That's when the politics will start again and as the Mountain West has had a lot more success they have a much better claim on the 6th spot. That will be even more true if the ACC picks off a Syracuse or the SEC West Virginia.
I'm sure most Big East fans don't even realize the danger but I'm sure the league office is well aware and are working to get assurances of TCU's loyalty but in the end I can't believe they'd turn down a Big 12 offer. I'm rooting for them to leave as it might be the final blow to break up the Big East so their teams can revert to their proper place in college football.
I know it sounds crazy. Most thing the Big 12 is the conference that is in real trouble but as long as Texas wants to be a part of it they will keep their BCS designation which will attract other teams. Even if the worst happens and somehow Oklahoma decides leaves Oklahoma State (won't happen), Texas knows it has a good thing in the Big 12. Texas really doesn't need to move to continue as the biggest moneymaker in college sports and they know it. Even if the SEC really went off the deep end and went to 16 with Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Missouri there are a bunch of teams that would jump at the chance to join a league with an automatic bid.
Who are these teams? The first 4 are SMU, Houston, TCU and BYU. Plug these schools into a new Big 12 and you'd have a weak league but one filled mostly with schools that really have no other options that could make them nearly as much money. The exception would be BYU but as long as they were able to continue to broadcast their games on the own network, I'd think they would jump at the chance to be the western division counterpart to Texas' eastern division dominance.
The best scenario for the Big East is that the SEC only takes Big 12 teams. The thing is there are a few ACC schools that might make good sense like Florida State, Clemson, Ga Tech, or Virginia Tech. These aren't likely to happen because of politics (Florida doesn't want Florida State to join, Georgia doesn't want Ga Tech, etc, while the Virginia legislature won't let Va Tech leave Virginia) but it isn't out of the realm of possibility. If the ACC loses a school the only place they are going to look is the Big East which will weaken the league.
If the SEC doesn't come after an ACC school another good option would be to just target a Big East school. Syracuse, West Virginia, Pittsburgh and possibly Louisville are all targets that would open up additional markets and add television dollars. Losing any of these schools would be a big loss for the Big East.
In the end I still think the most obvious thing that will happen is the SEC will only add Missouri. It adds huge population base to the SEC footprint that is currently firmly follows Big Ten/Big 12 football and the politics are simple. If that happens then that should be good news for the Big East but they aren't out of the woods because of their recent addition of TCU. That's a problem for the Big East because after BYU, TCU is the most obvious target for the Big 12.
TCU is important to the Big East for a reason that few realize. After this season the BCS does another recalculation which determines which schools get to participate as an automatic qualifier. Many people don't know that the last time the BCS gave out the automatic qualifiers that they held a special hearing to give the Big East its slot. That's because they'd just lost their 3 premier teams in Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College to the ACC so their existing members didn't rank high enough on their own to earn a spot. Politics got involved and the members didn't want the political hassle with taking it away so they gave them a pass. Fast forward to today and you have the Mountain West pushing hard for the 6th automatic spot. After the completion of the 2011 season the BCS will take the results of the last 4 seasons and recalculate the automatic rankings which will determine automatic bids.
This is why TCU is important. The calculations are based on the leagues current affiliation and last season was putrid for the Big East. In fact their champion ended up out of the top 25 in the final BCS standings while Boise State and TCU were in the top 5. That is huge hit in the calculation and will almost certainly mean that the Big East won't automatically qualify unless TCU joins their league. That's when the politics will start again and as the Mountain West has had a lot more success they have a much better claim on the 6th spot. That will be even more true if the ACC picks off a Syracuse or the SEC West Virginia.
I'm sure most Big East fans don't even realize the danger but I'm sure the league office is well aware and are working to get assurances of TCU's loyalty but in the end I can't believe they'd turn down a Big 12 offer. I'm rooting for them to leave as it might be the final blow to break up the Big East so their teams can revert to their proper place in college football.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)