Conference Realignment: What Next?
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2019 3:10 pmThere is an article titled Five scenarios for the future of college conference realignment in THE ATHLETIC:
https://theathletic.com/1090554/2019/07/25/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-college-conference-realignment/
Some reaction to it includes much of what we've concluded here about it:
1. It's no longer just about linear media deals, but the combination of linear and digital in media economics that will influence media deals moving forward.
2. The programs that didn't find a chair in musical chairs the last time, UC, UCF, UConn, et al most likely won't have one made available the next time around. The Big XII's last full run at expansion is cited as the reason for that. As widely understood, none of those programs moved the economic needle enough to warrant their inclusion in the conference.
3. A premise is that change has happened so much before that change should be expected in the future. Pay for play could become THE issue in forcing some kind of separation from the real haves from the true have nots. Someone mentioned virtually detaching the top programs from their universities and turning them into investment opportunities for super boosters! Good luck getting alumni to care about that.
4. A specific example of a possible change catalyst for the next round involves Texas, specifically, and Texas and Oklahoma as a packaged deal. Texas gets $31mm from its Big XII distribution and another $15mm from the Longhorn Network, or $51mm total. That amount - $51mm - apparently equals the B1G's payout per team next year. So, Texas is "fine" while the other Big XII members "languish" at $31mm apiece. The conjecture is that they could go independent or they could saddle up with the B1G or the ACC. Will they feel a need to do that? That becomes a function of how well the Big XII does with its next media deal, and with only its existing 10 members involved in it.
If anyone has access to THE ATHLETIC, please feel free to share some of the key notes from the article.
My bottomline with all this:
1. They continue to solve and will always primarily solve for football at the top, leaving basketball and the NCAAT alone as the cash cow that it is.
2. UConn was smart to say enough is enough and go the route they're now going.
3. The AAC is the closest thing to Purgatory on earth that exists, at least in the world of sports, and there is no hope for UC, UCF, Houston, etc.
In the face of all this, subject to what happens with any movement involving paying collegiate basketball players, I'd say the Big East could not be in a better position, unless it finds itself adding Notre Dame down the road.
https://theathletic.com/1090554/2019/07/25/five-scenarios-for-the-future-of-college-conference-realignment/
Some reaction to it includes much of what we've concluded here about it:
1. It's no longer just about linear media deals, but the combination of linear and digital in media economics that will influence media deals moving forward.
2. The programs that didn't find a chair in musical chairs the last time, UC, UCF, UConn, et al most likely won't have one made available the next time around. The Big XII's last full run at expansion is cited as the reason for that. As widely understood, none of those programs moved the economic needle enough to warrant their inclusion in the conference.
3. A premise is that change has happened so much before that change should be expected in the future. Pay for play could become THE issue in forcing some kind of separation from the real haves from the true have nots. Someone mentioned virtually detaching the top programs from their universities and turning them into investment opportunities for super boosters! Good luck getting alumni to care about that.
4. A specific example of a possible change catalyst for the next round involves Texas, specifically, and Texas and Oklahoma as a packaged deal. Texas gets $31mm from its Big XII distribution and another $15mm from the Longhorn Network, or $51mm total. That amount - $51mm - apparently equals the B1G's payout per team next year. So, Texas is "fine" while the other Big XII members "languish" at $31mm apiece. The conjecture is that they could go independent or they could saddle up with the B1G or the ACC. Will they feel a need to do that? That becomes a function of how well the Big XII does with its next media deal, and with only its existing 10 members involved in it.
If anyone has access to THE ATHLETIC, please feel free to share some of the key notes from the article.
My bottomline with all this:
1. They continue to solve and will always primarily solve for football at the top, leaving basketball and the NCAAT alone as the cash cow that it is.
2. UConn was smart to say enough is enough and go the route they're now going.
3. The AAC is the closest thing to Purgatory on earth that exists, at least in the world of sports, and there is no hope for UC, UCF, Houston, etc.
In the face of all this, subject to what happens with any movement involving paying collegiate basketball players, I'd say the Big East could not be in a better position, unless it finds itself adding Notre Dame down the road.