Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

The Alabaster Yak said:
Equal rules, level scheduling, revenue sharing, collective bargaining, one league to negotiate media contracts. Look at the NFL pre merger. That’s where this is heading… and then ultimately a full merger into one league. It’s the most profitable business model for the sport
Click to expand...
and none of those are reasons why it has to happen.

even if we take it as fact this would be the most profitable business model for the sport (I'm not sure I'm there), unless a case is made that it's the most profitable model for the SEC and the B1G members, there's no compelling reason for them to do so.

I'll let Liver get into anti-trust issues

stated elsewise, just because it's something that fans want (e.g. equal rules, level scheduling, revenue sharing), doesn't mean it has to happen
 
a bunch of acc teams might vote to leave or whatever, but that doesn't mean there is a new home waiting for them. again, do the math. why would the networks who have the acc locked in at reasonable rates, just decide to sponsor them into the sec at double the cost per school?

same math applies to the big... they probably can offer reduced shares and pull in uw and uo but beyond that? no value add.

same math applies to the b12. the 4 corners are accretive and appear to be pre-approved. beyond that? going to guess nothing else happens.

conferences "wanting" to expand means nothing without the networks deciding the money is right. AND, conference members don't want their shares diluted to close the gap between want networks will pay for and what new additions will want.

this is not the nuclear option. yet.

the big 12 goes to 16 with pac teams.

the big goes to 18 (maybe) with pac teams.

the remnant pac and the mwc merge at 17 teams. the mwc folks get playoff access and the jump into an alleged power conference.

the sec waits it out at their current 16 for the acc deal to expire.
 
Liver said:
a bunch of acc teams might vote to leave or whatever, but that doesn't mean there is a new home waiting for them. again, do the math. why would the networks who have the acc locked in at reasonable rates, just decide to sponsor them into the sec at double the cost per school?

same math applies to the big... they probably can offer reduced shares and pull in uw and uo but beyond that? no value add.

same math applies to the b12. the 4 corners are accretive and appear to be pre-approved. beyond that? going to guess nothing else happens.

conferences "wanting" to expand means nothing without the networks deciding the money is right. AND, conference members don't want their shares diluted to close the gap between want networks will pay for and what new additions will want.

this is not the nuclear option. yet.

the big 12 goes to 16 with pac teams.

the big goes to 18 (maybe) with pac teams.

the remnant pac and the mwc merge at 17 teams. the mwc folks get playoff access and the jump into an alleged power conference.

the sec waits it out at their current 16 for the acc deal to expire.
Click to expand...
Except that the ACC situation is not sustainable, even until the end of the current media deal.

Things that are not sustainable don't.
 
skibum said:
Except that the ACC situation is not sustainable, even until the end of the current media deal.

Things that are not sustainable don't.
Click to expand...
one needs a buyer and a seller. who is the buyer at better rates for the acc?
 
Liver said:
a bunch of acc teams might vote to leave or whatever, but that doesn't mean there is a new home waiting for them. again, do the math. why would the networks who have the acc locked in at reasonable rates, just decide to sponsor them into the sec at double the cost per school?

same math applies to the big... they probably can offer reduced shares and pull in uw and uo but beyond that? no value add.

same math applies to the b12. the 4 corners are accretive and appear to be pre-approved. beyond that? going to guess nothing else happens.

conferences "wanting" to expand means nothing without the networks deciding the money is right. AND, conference members don't want their shares diluted to close the gap between want networks will pay for and what new additions will want.

this is not the nuclear option. yet.

the big 12 goes to 16 with pac teams.

the big goes to 18 (maybe) with pac teams.

the remnant pac and the mwc merge at 17 teams. the mwc folks get playoff access and the jump into an alleged power conference.

the sec waits it out at their current 16 for the acc deal to expire.
Click to expand...
Figure it this way:

They're paying roughly $30M per ACC with additional production, management and distribution costs. It's a long-term liability through 2035 as they're restructuring.

Let's say they move FSU, Clemson, UNC and GT to the SEC. They'd be at reduced share but ultimately cost $60M with a much shorter term liability.

Then they move ACC assets which were valued appropriately to the Big 12 with Louisville, Pitt, NC State and VA Tech. Same $30M per year but now split cost with Fox.

They lose Notre Dame, UVA, Duke and Miami to the B1G, but that takes $100M per year off their books.

Syracuse, Boston College and Wake Forest join the Big East and become football independents. If they want the BE, they can have it for $6-8M per school and not bid on their football rights.

They save a ton of money, focus their assets, and get out of long term financial commitment of over $400m per year and ACCN obligations.

I don't know if they will do it, but I think there's a path here that has significant appeal to ESPN.
 
Liver said:
one needs a buyer and a seller. who is the buyer at better rates for the acc?
Click to expand...
X
Elon Musk Smoking GIF
 
Buffnik said:
Figure it this way:

They're paying roughly $30M per ACC with additional production, management and distribution costs. It's a long-term liability through 2035 as they're restructuring.

Let's say they move FSU, Clemson, UNC and GT to the SEC. They'd be at reduced share but ultimately cost $60M with a much shorter term liability.

Then they move ACC assets which were valued appropriately to the Big 12 with Louisville, Pitt, NC State and VA Tech. Same $30M per year but now split cost with Fox.

They lose Notre Dame, UVA, Duke and Miami to the B1G, but that takes $100M per year off their books.

Syracuse, Boston College and Wake Forest join the Big East and become football independents. If they want the BE, they can have it for $6-8M per school and not bid on their football rights.

They save a ton of money, focus their assets, and get out of long term financial commitment of over $400m per year and ACCN obligations.

I don't know if they will do it, but I think there's a path here that has significant appeal to ESPN.
Click to expand...
That's a really interesting scenario, Nik. I'm impressed with how much you've thought this through
 
Buffnik said:
Figure it this way:

They're paying roughly $30M per ACC with additional production, management and distribution costs. It's a long-term liability through 2035 as they're restructuring.

Let's say they move FSU, Clemson, UNC and GT to the SEC. They'd be at reduced share but ultimately cost $60M with a much shorter term liability.

Then they move ACC assets which were valued appropriately to the Big 12 with Louisville, Pitt, NC State and VA Tech. Same $30M per year but now split cost with Fox.

They lose Notre Dame, UVA, Duke and Miami to the B1G, but that takes $100M per year off their books.

Syracuse, Boston College and Wake Forest join the Big East and become football independents. If they want the BE, they can have it for $6-8M per school and not bid on their football rights.

They save a ton of money, focus their assets, and get out of long term financial commitment of over $400m per year and ACCN obligations.

I don't know if they will do it, but I think there's a path here that has significant appeal to ESPN.
Click to expand...
to vote to dissolve, i would presume the acc needs a certain number of member votes and i would guess that number is more teams than the sec would actually like to poach and more teams that the networks don't want to pay for.

so, they would likely have to "buy" some votes to dissolve from less desirable members ... do they get into the sec? at full share?

it is an interesting path you laid out.
 
Liver said:
to vote to dissolve, i would presume the acc needs a certain number of member votes and i would guess that number is more teams than the sec would actually like to poach and more teams that the networks don't want to pay for.

so, they would likely have to "buy" some votes to dissolve from less desirable members ... do they get into the sec? at full share?

it is an interesting path you laid out.
Click to expand...
They need 8 votes.
 
Liver said:
one needs a buyer and a seller. who is the buyer at better rates for the acc?
Click to expand...
If 8 schools decide to kill the ACC's GOR, the networks can't stop them. In other words, the schools have the ability to make the value of the network's current $30mm/school/year nearly worthless.

Basically, if 8 schools get together and decide to do it, they can effectively tear up the ACC's network contract.

I mean, espn could continue to pay $350/mm/year to air ncstate vs wake forest games, but they're not going to.

So the 8 schools effectively void the ACC's current contract, which creates a bunch of scheduling holes the networks need to fill, and "hey, you can fill them with high quality B1G match ups like fsu vs tOSU or SEC Miami vs Georgia that you'll have to pay for, or you can see how many viewers and advertisers you get with Wake vs Syracuse.
 
skibum said:
If 8 schools decide to kill the ACC's GOR, the networks can't stop them. In other words, the schools have the ability to make the value of the network's current $30mm/school/year nearly worthless.

Basically, if 8 schools get together and decide to do it, they can effectively tear up the ACC's network contract.

I mean, espn could continue to pay $350/mm/year to air ncstate vs wake forest games, but they're not going to.

So the 8 schools effectively void the ACC's current contract, which creates a bunch of scheduling holes the networks need to fill, and "hey, you can fill them with high quality B1G match ups like fsu vs tOSU or SEC Miami vs Georgia that you'll have to pay for, or you can see how many viewers and advertisers you get with Wake vs Syracuse.
Click to expand...
are there 8 votes to dissolve?

interesting stuff and glad it isn't us. hooray for the truck stop 12 leaving a light on for us!

c'mon ua, asu, and utah! we are massive adds to the conference together.
 
Liver said:
are there 8 votes to dissolve?
Click to expand...
I just go back to one of my mantras on things like this: unsustainsble things don't last.

And Clemson, fsu, Miami, unc, etc getting lapped on revenue isn't sustainable.
 
Liver said:
the sec is at 16 with ut and ou.

the big 12 would be at 16 with the 4 corners.

the big will be at 16 with usc and ucla.

the pac would have have 6 at that point and the mwc has 11. merge and still call it the pac at 17 teams.

the acc has 15... maybe they grab one moe?

this feels somewhat rational in a ridiculous situation.
Click to expand...
I’ll be happy with any combo of teams…OTHER THAN Utah and Oregon.
 
Tatanka™ said:
Actually, I think you can make this stuff up! :ROFLMAO:

I'm trying to come up with Big 12 schools the SEC would want.

Colorado - Huge potential upside with Coach Prime, the AD changes and the #16 TV market. Seems extremely unlikely until we prove it for a few years.

Kansas - Hoops blue blood and a natural rivalry with Mizzou. A football nothing, though. And they split the KC market, so they don't bring many eyeballs. Unlikely.

Okie State - Solid FB and BB, but small TV market and second fiddle to OU. Can't see it.

Baylor and Houston - Decent football brands and excellent basketball brands, but the the SEC already has the Texas markets locked up. Don't see it. (Yes, I vomited after typing that Baylor is a decent brand. 🤮)

TCU - Coming off a great season, but there is no reason to believe they'll continue to be a top 10 team. And the SEC already has the DFW eyeballs. Nope.

West Virginia - Kind of a cultural fit I guess, but no major TV market and not a power. Nope.

UCF, BYU, Cincy, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas Tech - 0% chance.
Click to expand...
It’s funny how people keep knob polishing TCU‘s knob and throwing away Cincy like they didn’t do almost the same thing a year ago.
 
Last edited:
CUAviator said:
It’s funny how people keep knob polishing TCU and throwing away Cincy like they didn’t do almost the same thing a year ago.
Click to expand...

Well, almost isn't the same as doing something. More importantly, Cincinnati just took a massive step down at the head coach position and they are moving up to a much better league. All sorts of reasons to discount the first year or five of a G5-to-P5 team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top