Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
No, the PAC fan we’re dunking on is LHUCKS. You’re good people. I do feel for you.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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!
2023 College football thread - That's A Wrap (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Tom Servo
- Start date
- Status
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Eh, I gave up on college football a decade or more ago. I'm a Cal alum and I'd be fine with it if they rolled up the program altogether.
But what to do with that stadium though? They recently did a big renovation on it and made it seismically safe. They even have a section of seats with backs now, not just benches. Such a great spot to watch a game. Great views of the bay, good weather in the fall, right on campus...
But what to do with that stadium though? They recently did a big renovation on it and made it seismically safe. They even have a section of seats with backs now, not just benches. Such a great spot to watch a game. Great views of the bay, good weather in the fall, right on campus...
massraider
Footballguy
Doooooood
Iowa State QB had his parents help him in a scheme to place bets under his mom's name.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Was he betting on his team?Doooooood
Iowa State QB had his parents help him in a scheme to place bets under his mom's name.
massraider
Footballguy
Looks like betting on football, but I don't think anyone knows more.
WDIK2
Footballguy
Couldn't this be as simple as using his mom's sportsbook login?Doooooood
Iowa State QB had his parents help him in a scheme to place bets under his mom's name.
Capella
Footballguy
The Pac deal is reported as 20M a year, with upside for Apple TV subscriptions which are essentially impossible to reach. Something like 20M subscribers would be needed, which is how many Apple TV has now. Gotta imagine the Arizona schools and Utah will bail and that will be a wrap.
That sucks! This all sucks. Realignment was a disaster for CFB with the sole exception that these schools all got paid, except the ones who didn’t.
That sucks! This all sucks. Realignment was a disaster for CFB with the sole exception that these schools all got paid, except the ones who didn’t.
Capella
Footballguy
Why would the money dry up. Ratings are huge. Football is the only reliable thing tv networks can count on. People in the south and midwest will never stop watching their teams.
Moe.
Footballguy
Nothing lasts forever. There was some talk about this in the NBA thread recently and I’m on the side that thinks these traditional broadcast deals cannot continue to go up forever. The cable tv model is dead, and sports everywhere are going to shift to more direct to consumer avenues. Disney says they want to spin ESPN into a streaming-only platform but they also clearly would love to sell it and ABC. It’s very uncertain times for sports media in general, and youth participation in football is way down.
Capella
Footballguy
The memes are still funny though
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
Cannot believe we have a post about conferences w/o @SWC checking in.
As an Illinois alum I am fortunate and get to just watch the madness unfold while we're in one of the two safe harbors. As a B1G fan who always liked the Rose Bowl tradition (even as it clusterfudged a true playoff forever and ever) I hate seeing this happen to the PAC. This is mollified somewhat by the fact that I cannot stand Bill Walton so at least there is that.
I hope if and when they announce the dissolution of the PAC they at least tell us who gets custody of LHUCKS.
Haven't posted here but been following all the realignment news rumors and scenarios for a long long time now. Random thoughts
The calamity of errors that the PAC has made has been breathtaking. Just imagine if they had added the strong 6 of the prior version of the Big XII back in '10 or '11. Texas wanted to be special and keep it's own network (which was always a deal-breaker with them and the all-for-one/one-for-all B1G) but if they had made that concession, unpalatable as it would be, and have Texas, Oklahoma, etc in the fold they would have thrived.
Easy to dunk on them for not merging with the Big XII a couple years ago but I can see both sides being unreasonable there - easy to judge based on results with hindsight. But the lack of proactivity has been fatal.
I doubt the name PAC-12 dies, at least not right away, as I can see a "merger" with the last 2 standing (Or St and Wazzou) with the Mountain West. Mainly for the MW to acquire the PAC automatic stuff/business ties. Not sure how that works though so could be off base.
Cal dropping sports - at least D1 sports - feels more conceivable than Stanford. The football merits don't put Stanford in the B1G but the market might and the potential leverage that comes with adding another traditional ND rival to the B1G to finally land the white whale that is the Irish. But the Domers cherish their 1-team conference more than anything so it would take the money spigot being massively turned down for ND to give that up and join the B1G (or the SEC).
Supposedly the Big XII wants 14. Feels like a leverage play to me in the dance with UofA/Ariz State/Utah. Would love to see UConn join - mainly bc it would be hilarious and bring back the Civil ConFLiCT.
The B1G is able to picky in the way the PAC imagined it could - U Duh and Oregon fit in the one sense but the shares have gotten so big for the B1G now that they don't grow the pie (which is nutty). If they get added at a discount maybe the B1G goes for it but they aren't really a HAVE to do. It is almost a defensive/squatting type deal. And how many slots do they have in their final form? Those two getting added precludes the down the road ACC play perhaps. Not sure USC prefers Oregon being in the league (if they were insistent at the time then the B1G would have added 4 to get USC in if that is what it took) but now with them in the fold I don't think that would play strong enough if enough of the others want Oregon
I don't believe any rumor that has an ACC team moving out (or in). The freak out Grant of Rights that they formulated after Maryland left is what keeps them together and what drags them down. It lasts until 2036 which is just comical. And it is definitely a conference that has clear huge brands that are attractive and then a bunch of others that would get the Wazzou treatment. And the smaller fry's have no reason to have that GOR discarded. And it even hampers grabbing schools from other conferences - as such a change probably reopens the GOR and thus would give the likes of Florida State, Miami, UNC, Clemson a way out. Given how expensive and protracted it was for Oklahoma and Texas to leave 1 year early one can only imagine the $ it would take to buy out 13. Now maybe schools desperate enough to move take it to the courts for massive stakes but it never has been done and the downside risk is comically huge.
But that said if the B1G has a notion that the FSU and/or Miami etc will try it maybe the upside of snagging them WOULD grow the pie and they keep room for them at the inn (assuming they don't mind 20 schools but don't want it to be 24).
But in the meantime the next movers looks like the 3 remaining 4-corners schools in the PAC
-QG
As an Illinois alum I am fortunate and get to just watch the madness unfold while we're in one of the two safe harbors. As a B1G fan who always liked the Rose Bowl tradition (even as it clusterfudged a true playoff forever and ever) I hate seeing this happen to the PAC. This is mollified somewhat by the fact that I cannot stand Bill Walton so at least there is that.
I hope if and when they announce the dissolution of the PAC they at least tell us who gets custody of LHUCKS.
Haven't posted here but been following all the realignment news rumors and scenarios for a long long time now. Random thoughts
The calamity of errors that the PAC has made has been breathtaking. Just imagine if they had added the strong 6 of the prior version of the Big XII back in '10 or '11. Texas wanted to be special and keep it's own network (which was always a deal-breaker with them and the all-for-one/one-for-all B1G) but if they had made that concession, unpalatable as it would be, and have Texas, Oklahoma, etc in the fold they would have thrived.
Easy to dunk on them for not merging with the Big XII a couple years ago but I can see both sides being unreasonable there - easy to judge based on results with hindsight. But the lack of proactivity has been fatal.
I doubt the name PAC-12 dies, at least not right away, as I can see a "merger" with the last 2 standing (Or St and Wazzou) with the Mountain West. Mainly for the MW to acquire the PAC automatic stuff/business ties. Not sure how that works though so could be off base.
Cal dropping sports - at least D1 sports - feels more conceivable than Stanford. The football merits don't put Stanford in the B1G but the market might and the potential leverage that comes with adding another traditional ND rival to the B1G to finally land the white whale that is the Irish. But the Domers cherish their 1-team conference more than anything so it would take the money spigot being massively turned down for ND to give that up and join the B1G (or the SEC).
Supposedly the Big XII wants 14. Feels like a leverage play to me in the dance with UofA/Ariz State/Utah. Would love to see UConn join - mainly bc it would be hilarious and bring back the Civil ConFLiCT.
The B1G is able to picky in the way the PAC imagined it could - U Duh and Oregon fit in the one sense but the shares have gotten so big for the B1G now that they don't grow the pie (which is nutty). If they get added at a discount maybe the B1G goes for it but they aren't really a HAVE to do. It is almost a defensive/squatting type deal. And how many slots do they have in their final form? Those two getting added precludes the down the road ACC play perhaps. Not sure USC prefers Oregon being in the league (if they were insistent at the time then the B1G would have added 4 to get USC in if that is what it took) but now with them in the fold I don't think that would play strong enough if enough of the others want Oregon
I don't believe any rumor that has an ACC team moving out (or in). The freak out Grant of Rights that they formulated after Maryland left is what keeps them together and what drags them down. It lasts until 2036 which is just comical. And it is definitely a conference that has clear huge brands that are attractive and then a bunch of others that would get the Wazzou treatment. And the smaller fry's have no reason to have that GOR discarded. And it even hampers grabbing schools from other conferences - as such a change probably reopens the GOR and thus would give the likes of Florida State, Miami, UNC, Clemson a way out. Given how expensive and protracted it was for Oklahoma and Texas to leave 1 year early one can only imagine the $ it would take to buy out 13. Now maybe schools desperate enough to move take it to the courts for massive stakes but it never has been done and the downside risk is comically huge.
But that said if the B1G has a notion that the FSU and/or Miami etc will try it maybe the upside of snagging them WOULD grow the pie and they keep room for them at the inn (assuming they don't mind 20 schools but don't want it to be 24).
But in the meantime the next movers looks like the 3 remaining 4-corners schools in the PAC
-QG
The Commish
Footballguy
FSU, Clemson, Oregon and Washington rumor?? Random guys I know from over the years speculating among themselves.
massraider
Footballguy
Ready to unban LHUCKS
AAABatteries
Footballguy
I‘ll still watch some games but between how top-heavy football is consistently and all this realignment nonsense I just don’t give a **** any more.
bigbottom
Footballguy
Lots of great info in your post, and apologies for cherry-picking, but this phrase stood out. The idea that Stanford would even be in a discussion to drop D1 sports seems bonkers. In terms of national championships, Stanford is the most successful Division 1 school in NCAA history. And it's not like we're talking ages ago. Stanford has won at least one team national championship for 47 straight years (starting in 1976 through the 22-23 season) and have 54 national championships since 2000.
Capella
Footballguy
I believe what they said is they are offering a streaming only option. They are not abandoning cable. It’s far too lucrative for them.
WDIK2
Footballguy
With the SEC and Big 10 at 16 teams starting next year it would make sense for the Big 12 to get from 13 with Colorado to 16. The ACC is currently at 14 if you don't include Notre Dame. I had to look those numbers up because I've lost track.
Is there a number of teams that is too many for a conference? We know that apparently geography doesn't matter.
I like the chaos and reading the rumors, but it's getting a little silly. I'm also in the camp that will miss some of the regional rivalries and think college football is losing some of it's appeal. Get off my lawn I guess.
Moe.
Footballguy
There is literally an article in the NYT today with the headline “How ESPN Went From Disney’s Financial Engine to Its Problem”
The days of these rights fees being propped up by subscribers who don’t watch sports are over. Nobody has figured out the new model yet. Streaming companies aren’t going to use these as loss leaders forever, that’s not feasible. The money is going to have to come from the people who watch the sports directly and it just hasn’t been figured out yet. I guess I don’t want to get political so I’ll leave it alone, but unfettered growth forever in a finite world just doesn’t work, and ESPN’s days of growth are over, and “investors” just can’t handle that
Moe.
Footballguy
This link might only get around the paywall once since it’s a “gift article” but here it is:
www.nytimes.com
How ESPN Went From Disney’s Financial Engine to Its Problem (Published 2023)
The sports juggernaut continues to earn billions of dollars for Disney, but profits are down and opportunities for growth have dwindled.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
So Wetzel reporting that the B1G is discussing Washington and Oregon and perhaps Cal and Stanford too.
It is funny in a way but Stanford and Cal's one best hope would be the B1G but it makes sense as they are a strong culture fit and have the academic (and more importantly research heft). I don't have numbers or anything but I can see where the Bay Area has a sizable B1G alumni base as well.
What kind of share those schools would and for how long is the calculation. Would they at least be neutral value-wise in subsequent B1G deals?
The more I think about it the more I could see it being adding 4 or adding 0.
20 teams would mean the long game of 24 probably. But like I said with the ACC tough to break up because of the GOR those last 4 (or of the B1G got its way 3 plus Notre Dame) might be on a longer timeline.
Picking 4 of them out of a hat you can have a B1G with 4 6-school pods based on region as a sort of rotation. Or not since they just scrapped that. Definitely helps the Olympic sport logistics.
But that said I wish we were still at 10. Penn State being in the league is still weird to me.
-QG
It is funny in a way but Stanford and Cal's one best hope would be the B1G but it makes sense as they are a strong culture fit and have the academic (and more importantly research heft). I don't have numbers or anything but I can see where the Bay Area has a sizable B1G alumni base as well.
What kind of share those schools would and for how long is the calculation. Would they at least be neutral value-wise in subsequent B1G deals?
The more I think about it the more I could see it being adding 4 or adding 0.
20 teams would mean the long game of 24 probably. But like I said with the ACC tough to break up because of the GOR those last 4 (or of the B1G got its way 3 plus Notre Dame) might be on a longer timeline.
Picking 4 of them out of a hat you can have a B1G with 4 6-school pods based on region as a sort of rotation. Or not since they just scrapped that. Definitely helps the Olympic sport logistics.
But that said I wish we were still at 10. Penn State being in the league is still weird to me.
-QG
Mookie Gizzy
Footballguy
I think 20 is the limit if they want to stay at 9 conference games. You have 4 5 team pods. Say for example Michigan Ohio State Penn State Maryland Rutgers are pod 1. They would pay every year. Pod 2 is USC UCLA Washington Stanford Cal. Pod 1 plays pod 2 for 2 years, and for those 2 years they would be in 1”division”. The winner of that “division “ plays in the conference championship game. After 2 years pod 1 would play pod 3 , then after 2 years they would play pod 4. It’s not perfect going 4 years without playing certain teams. But the schedule fits. I don’t see the math working with 24
Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
D2 and D3 play great football too. Just sayin’…
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
So 4 pods of 5 teams with one pod being: USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, and Washington....
....so what does the pod with Oregon look like?
-QG
WDIK2
Footballguy
Can the SEC and Big 10 just go to 32 teams each already? Break those up into 4 x 8 team regional "pods", and play teams from other pods early in the season. Those early season games can be called OOP. Champions of each "pod" can proceed to a playoff.
And let each pod negotiate their own media deal. Simple. Solves everything.
And let each pod negotiate their own media deal. Simple. Solves everything.
Galileo
Footballguy
Pods 3 and 4 would suck donkey balls. Of course, that is the current B1G situation with the West
Mookie Gizzy
Footballguy
Pod 3 would be in the same “division “ as Michigan and Ohio State twice every 6 years. Ditto pod 2 and 4. And any pod w/o Michigan and Ohio State would suck donkey balls. You can’t just divide into 2 10 team divisions.
Mookie Gizzy
Footballguy
Ok. But with 20 teams you’re still going to need some kind of divisions to get 2 teams for a conference championship. I don’t need NASA calculating to the 54th tiebreaker to decide who plays
bigbottom
Footballguy
Why can’t it work the way they currently have it planned for 2024 for the B1G? There are no divisions, but protected rivalry games each year as QuizGuy mentions.
Long Ball Larry
Footballguy
Oregon, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
Long Ball Larry
Footballguy
Purdue , indiana, Illinois, northwestern, Michigan state
yikes
yikes
Yeah that isn't going to happen.
Mookie Gizzy
Footballguy
It can’t work without divisions. You can make it work schedule wise to ensure that every one plays every one else over a certain amount of time. Do you go to a 4 team conference playoff? You’re going to have a nightmare breaking ties with a 2 team conference championship with 20 teams.
bigbottom
Footballguy
To be honest I haven’t really thought that through. But is it really that much harder breaking ties to find the top 2 teams among 20 than it is to find the top 1 team among 10?
culdeus
Footballguy
Fsu to the pac12 would be peak everything
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
But that's where the fun is. The folks in the World Cup threads will back me up on this I hope
-QG
culdeus
Footballguy
I mean with the pac10 gone, you now have schools like Oregon that had some success being diluted into the big 10 where a championship may be 20 years apart. Maybe 50?
They play Ohio State twice a decade in the regular season and this is fun?
What is the upside here for anyone?
Florida State may be bag holding too if the acc melts down next week. They go to the big 12? Seems unlikely if arizonas go there first.
This sucks. All of it. May as well let the Saudis buy it all.
Capella
Footballguy
Multiple fsu fans have mentioned a new Saudi conference. Saudis would buy out the acc deal, start their own thing etc. I don’t know why the Saudis would do that but I also don’t know why they’d pay a bunch of mediocre golfers millions to play in a league nobody watches.
Actually I do know they are sports washing their money but anyways.
Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
Capella
Footballguy
Article states that they made 3 BILLION in profits the last two quarters and that’s without football. You think they are going to get rid of that lol? Those cuts were to make Wall Street happy, nothing more nothing less. Espn will keep spending.This link might only get around the paywall once since it’s a “gift article” but here it is:
How ESPN Went From Disney’s Financial Engine to Its Problem (Published 2023)
The sports juggernaut continues to earn billions of dollars for Disney, but profits are down and opportunities for growth have dwindled.
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
QuizGuy66
Footballguy
While things are in speed mode it will be interesting to see what the B1G does (or doesn't) with the 4 PAC schools.
Part 1 is what would the dollars be for those 4 through 2030 (the end of the current contract). Are the TV partners willing to pony anything up? If not, even at a value of $30m year for the 4 new schools though would be taking $7.5m out of each existing school's pocket. Don't see how they would excited by that. If that $120m can come from the TV partners then no harm no foul.
Part 2 is about the NEXT contract. I think this is the bigger piece of the puzzle. Down the road in 2030 will the shares be higher per team with 20 members than with 16? If UW and Oregon are rejected and go to the Big XII does that do anything to the B1G's position.
A lesser factor is dilution with the new schools balanced with the travel costs - particularly for the Olympic sports. Adding 4 more schools means that the previous 14 schools get to see less of UCLA and USC - which was a big part of the appeal of adding those 2 in the first place.
The deeper part of the game is will the broadcast/streaming landscape continue to contract? Will the streamers beef things up and keep the dollars glowing to feed these big contracts?
I think things will be decided fast (unlike with the PAC leadership) but fast doesn't always mean yes.
-QG
Part 1 is what would the dollars be for those 4 through 2030 (the end of the current contract). Are the TV partners willing to pony anything up? If not, even at a value of $30m year for the 4 new schools though would be taking $7.5m out of each existing school's pocket. Don't see how they would excited by that. If that $120m can come from the TV partners then no harm no foul.
Part 2 is about the NEXT contract. I think this is the bigger piece of the puzzle. Down the road in 2030 will the shares be higher per team with 20 members than with 16? If UW and Oregon are rejected and go to the Big XII does that do anything to the B1G's position.
A lesser factor is dilution with the new schools balanced with the travel costs - particularly for the Olympic sports. Adding 4 more schools means that the previous 14 schools get to see less of UCLA and USC - which was a big part of the appeal of adding those 2 in the first place.
The deeper part of the game is will the broadcast/streaming landscape continue to contract? Will the streamers beef things up and keep the dollars glowing to feed these big contracts?
I think things will be decided fast (unlike with the PAC leadership) but fast doesn't always mean yes.
-QG
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Cal dropping sports - at least D1 sports - feels more conceivable than Stanford.
I would be OK if they dropped football and focused on the other sports..
And Cal D1 sports has had success, even recently, just not in football or men's basketball. Swimming, track, water polo have won national championships recently. In non-D1 sports (yet still giving out scholarships), rugby and rowing have done well historically too.
I would be OK if they dropped football and focused on the other sports..
- Status
