Frank the Tank and conference television deals (link)

[NittPicker]

Frank the Tank

With a blast from the past, former conference realignment junkie Frank the Tank wrote an interesting blog entry about the location of alumni bases and their possible effect on the next round of television deals. He makes it clear he's not predicting any conference shuffling but it's still an interesting read even if you don't agree with his reasoning.

 

[LurkerLazarus]

Funny that he never mentions Pitt.

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

I always liked FTT. He makes sense again. In the mid 2020's I believe we'll see the four 16-team super-duper-conferences. The TV contract will exceed the GNP of many countries.

Add up the existing Power 5 and you get 64. But don't forget Notre Dame which would make 65.

There's going to be a lot of knife fighting for the last seat in that lifeboat. The loser will be looking for membership in the Atlantic Sun Conference.

 

[tboyer]

Very interesting stuff. I would guess the WSJ figures are based on RECENT alumni. My generation graduating 30 years ago was not going to Seattle and San Francisco in great numbers. It's in the last 20 years that the West Coast tech economies have exploded.

Also, the point needs be made that alumni are only a portion, and may not even be the majority, of college football viewers. Notre Dame's following used to be, and still is to some extent, east coast Catholics who have no actual relationship with the school. And that's true for PSU, OSU, Michigan -- all the big legacy programs have a fan base that goes way, way beyond alumni. Plus there are fans of other conferences who will tune into a major B1G game just to watch a great game -- PSU-OSU has been a great game the last two years now.

The other big variable in conference realignment is going to be what happens to TV as streaming replaces scheduled broadcast. In a streaming world, from a consumer's standpoint, things like cable subscriptions or broadcast networks become completely unnecessary.

And that goes double for millennials and post-millennials. For the most part they are not going to have the $200 monthly bill with Comcast to get BTN bundled with 500 channels that they don't watch. That is just not happening.

So it is up to Comcast and BTN to figure out how to maximize revenue in a world of streaming. It will take some years for them to figure this out.

 

[michnittlion]

I read that article a few weeks ago --- it's a good one.

Living in Denver, it's very apparent how every B1G school is represented out here. Particularly the B1G West schools. Per FTT's numbers, 10 of the 14 schools have 1%+ of their alumni here - the exceptions are us, OSU, Rutgers and Maryland but we're fairly well-represented too (I know multiple OSU and MD alums out here, for instance).

I don't think CU moves to the B1G because they want to be where their alumni are (California). The $ gain would have to be huge for Colorado. But they definitely are under-the-radar in terms of an expansion candidate.

 

[NedFromYork]

Oklahoma is the one that breaks the dam loose or not. If they go to either B1G, SEC, or P12, then a big reshuffle happens but we have to wait 5-6 years. Virginia and UNC are gone, not going to leave ACC, there was a window there but it is closed. Once Oklahoma decides then stuff rolls. I think the B12 is silly to not add UConn, fans in good markets like NYC, Hartford, and Boston, gives WVU an eastern partner, great hoops. UConn would even be a good addition to the B1G but if 16 is the max conferences go would hold out for more for our last two spots. Going to be interesting.

 

[Ranger Dan]

Today's college football is like the old NFL and AFL being run separately, but agreeing to have a championship game (Superbowl) to settle who was the best team. There is so much more money in the NFL with both the NFC and AFC managed together and bargained as one and not against each other. If each conference wasn't so greedy, they could come together and create one large 64 team organization where the bargaining power would be immense. Then there would be no WVU in the Big 12, nor ND an independent.

 

[Art]

Today's college football is like the old NFL and AFL being run separately, but agreeing to have a championship game (Superbowl) to settle who was the best team. There is so much more money in the NFL with both the NFC and AFC managed together and bargained as one and not against each other. If each conference wasn't so greedy, they could come together and create one large 64 team organization where the bargaining power would be immense. Then there would be no WVU in the Big 12, nor ND an independent.

Return to the pre NCAA v Georgia/Oklahoma days? That is never happening.

 

[PSUFBFAN]

I always liked FTT. He makes sense again. In the mid 2020's I believe we'll see the four 16-team super-duper-conferences. The TV contract will exceed the GNP of many countries.

Add up the existing Power 5 and you get 64. But don't forget Notre Dame which would make 65.

There's going to be a lot of knife fighting for the last seat in that lifeboat. The loser will be looking for membership in the Atlantic Sun Conference.

"The TV contract will exceed the GNP of many countries".

There have been housing market bubbles, stock market bubbles, and there is about to be a sports related TV broadcasting bubble. The pigs at the trough are probably going to have to learn to live with less money, not more.

 

[heckmans]

"The TV contract will exceed the GNP of many countries".

There have been housing market bubbles, stock market bubbles, and there is about to be a sports related TV broadcasting bubble. The pigs at the trough are probably going to have to learn to live with less money, not more.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

The internet is balkanizing everything. The Cable TV bubble is bursting. Streaming companies will try to hold on to the package subscription for a while, but that's going to fall apart too. I believe we will see a pay-per-view style option for many sporting events which will kill the low-tier of CFB. The Blue-bloods will get richer while the purdue's and FIUs of the world will return to anonymity.

 

[Beachwineguy]

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

The internet is balkanizing everything. The Cable TV bubble is bursting. Streaming companies will try to hold on to the package subscription for a while, but that's going to fall apart too. I believe we will see a pay-per-view style option for many sporting events which will kill the low-tier of CFB. The Blue-bloods will get richer while the purdue's and FIUs of the world will return to anonymity.

Purdue, and any members of the Power 4/5 conferences, will be fine. The Marshalls and Boise States of the world will feel the impact the hardest.

 

[Lyons212]

Purdue, and any members of the Power 4/5 conferences, will be fine. The Marshalls and Boise States of the world will feel the impact the hardest.

Exactly. Each P5 conference will sell a pay per view package of their conferences games, buy a season package for all games or pay for individual games. A lot of casual fans will still pay the per game charge for Ohio State - Penn State, not so many for Boise State - Colorado State.

 

[pandaczar12]

Add up the existing Power 5 and you get 64. But don't forget Notre Dame which would make 65.

There's going to be a lot of knife fighting for the last seat in that lifeboat. The loser will be looking for membership in the Atlantic Sun Conference.

Someone is going to get kicked out, and an argument could be made that a local specialty interest school would be the one. Pitt has arguably the worst P5 athletic program. They've never won an NCAA national championship.

Who else would be in the running... Iowa State? Vanderbilt? Rutgers? Washington State? They've all won NCAA national championships.

 

[Art]

Someone is going to get kicked out, and an argument could be made that a local specialty interest school would be the one. Pitt has arguably the worst P5 athletic program. They've never won an NCAA national championship.

Who else would be in the running... Iowa State? Vanderbilt? Rutgers? Washington State? They've all won NCAA national championships.

If a super conference forms, it will be considerably fewer than 64. Think along the lines of 32. The flotsam become the solution to the OOC scheduling problem.

 

[psu00]

It will be interesting as things pick up with tv contracts in a few years.

I’m not sold on Kansas in any future conference alignment. I know their b-ball is usually good (although a bit over rated each year). Their football is just horrible. I’d pass on them.

Colorado would be great with Oklahoma IMO but I don’t think either ever leave their current set up. Oklahoma has Stockholm syndrome with regard to Texas. They aren’t leaving unless Texas bolts first. From what I hear the Colorado fans like the PAC 12 and I don’t see them leaving either. It’s unfortunate as Colorado would be a great road trip.

 

[pandaczar12]

If a super conference forms, it will be considerably fewer than 64. Think along the lines of 32. The flotsam become the solution to the OOC scheduling problem.

I think you missed the part of the discussion about "the four 16-team super-duper-conferences".

 

[Art]

I think you missed the part of the discussion about "the four 16-team super-duper-conferences".

Doesn't matter. If they go in that direction, they're going to jettison those schools that don't carry their own weight, which means fewer than 64.

 

[Cosmos]

Purdue, and any members of the Power 4/5 conferences, will be fine. The Marshalls and Boise States of the world will feel the impact the hardest.

I disagree. The "Purdues" of the world won't be fine. Money is going to become so tight conferences will look at its members and evaluate who's bringing what to the table and cut loose the underperformers. There just won't be annexations in play such as ND, OU and Texas. It will keep the super conferences at the manageable level of 12 - 14 teams.

 

[michnittlion]

If a super conference forms, it will be considerably fewer than 64. Think along the lines of 32. The flotsam become the solution to the OOC scheduling problem.

I tend to agree. 32 or 48, both are feasible.

The difficulty would be in jettisoning teams from conferences. Contracts and all. I think there would need to be NEW constructs - e.g., how the MWC formed in 1998. The 8 most powerful teams left the then 16-team WAC.

Be it 32 or 48 - Purdue is flotsam in either case. That's their structural reality.

 

[Art]

I tend to agree. 32 or 48, both are feasible.

The difficulty would be in jettisoning teams from conferences. Contracts and all. I think there would need to be NEW constructs - e.g., how the MWC formed in 1998. The 8 most powerful teams left the then 16-team WAC.

Be it 32 or 48 - Purdue is flotsam in either case. That's their structural reality.

The lawyers, as always, will be well paid. Inevitably someone will start asking, if they aren't already, "Why the **** do we need Iowan State?" And if Iowa steps forward and says "No Iowa State, no us," the retort will be "Then no you."

Wait a minute, just remembered that we're dealing with college presidents here, so who knows?

 

[pandaczar12]

Doesn't matter. If they go in that direction, they're going to jettison those schools that don't carry their own weight, which means fewer than 64.

There is no way that your 32-48 team super conference ever materializes. There will always be smaller conferences. Whether those smaller conferences jettison schools to reduce the number of P5 schools from 65 to something smaller is a different topic.

 

[pandaczar12]

I tend to agree. 32 or 48, both are feasible.

The difficulty would be in jettisoning teams from conferences. Contracts and all. I think there would need to be NEW constructs - e.g., how the MWC formed in 1998. The 8 most powerful teams left the then 16-team WAC.

Be it 32 or 48 - Purdue is flotsam in either case. That's their structural reality.

So you agree that his proposed super conference would have 32-48 schools? Then you go on to talk about jettisoning teams from conferences. If there is one large super conference, then jettisoning schools from smaller conferences is moot, because they wouldn’t exist, because they would have been broken up for the large super conference of 32-48 schools.

 

[michnittlion]

So you agree that his proposed super conference would have 32-48 schools? Then you go on to talk about jettisoning teams from conferences. If there is one large super conference, then jettisoning schools from smaller conferences is moot, because they wouldn’t exist, because they would have been broken up for the large super conference of 32-48 schools.

What I'm saying --- let's say the B1G's more powerful teams come up with an idea: "let's boot Purdue & Rutgers from the conference. We make most of the $ and we are tired of sharing our $ with them."

Do you think that vote will pass? Obviously Purdue & Rutgers vote no. But if you're Northwestern or Iowa or Maryland, you're thinking about voting no also. Their thinking is "well, crap, we might be next. We can't vote yes on this because of such."

Without those votes, Purdue & Rutgers aren't getting the boot.

But that's not the end of it all, of course. The B1G's powerful teams then tell Northwestern and Iowa and Maryland: "OK, fine. Go along or WE are leaving on our own, we have our plan in place." (said plan may be forming a new conference with some other conference's more powerful teams, who are having the same conversation with their own "flotsam.")

Via a process like that, that's how we eventually get to Art's "super-conference" of teams.

If I had to bet, the # of teams in that super-conference is either 4 x 8 (32), 4 x 12 (48) or 4 x 14 (56). 32 is a REAL super-conference - that structure would have basically zero dead weight. Pittsburgh, for instance, never makes a cut of 32. 48 or 56 eliminates the "deadest" weights but you'll still have some lesser weights. Pittsburgh, again, is the example here - they likely make a cut of 48 or 56.

32, 48, 56 ............ I'm not sure exactly what the number is but I think it's inevitable it'll be a smaller # than the present. It all depends on how "lean" things get.

 

[Art]

There is no way that your 32-48 team super conference ever materializes. There will always be smaller conferences. Whether those smaller conferences jettison schools to reduce the number of P5 schools from 65 to something smaller is a different topic.

Why not? One conference, four divisions of 8-12 teams each controlling the vast majority of TV revenue, the major bowls, and the playoff. The castoffs can fight for table scraps.

That's what I'd do. Then again, I'm not a college president. So you're right; it probably won't happen for no good reasons other than outright wussification and sheer stupidity.

 

[ivan brunetti]

Why not? One conference, four divisions of 8-12 teams each controlling the vast majority of TV revenue, the major bowls, and the playoff. The castoffs can fight for table scraps.

That's what I'd do. Then again, I'm not a college president. So you're right; it probably won't happen for no good reasons other than outright wussification and sheer stupidity.

Because there is a ton of INERTIA with the way things are. I think a larger super division (64 or more) is more likely than under 64. It will be tough enough whittling down to even 64. There will be a lot of old blood (Pitt, Cal, Minny) vs new blood (Boise, Oregon, UCF) brawling. It'll get ugly.

 

[Art]

Because there is a ton of INERTIA with the way things are. I think a larger super division (64 or more) is more likely than under 64. It will be tough enough whittling down to even 64. There will be a lot of old blood (Pitt, Cal, Minny) vs new blood (Boise, Oregon, UCF) brawling. It'll get ugly.

New blood, old blood is horseshit. It's the guys that make the money versus the guys that don't and the networks will tell you which is which.

But you're right about there being a ton of inertia. They're called college presidents and Indiana Fats is a good start.

 

[psu00]

I just can’t see most teams leaving to form a new super conference. There’s just too much provincialism in college football. Ohio State and Michigan leave the precious big ten? Never. USC and UCLA leave the ‘conference of champions’? Alabama, Georgia, and LSU leave the SEC...SEC...SEC? Just not seeing that.

That leaves cutting the dead weight from conferences and I agree that that’s unlikely to happen (especially in the big ten) because there are too many schools that would think ‘we could be next’. There just won’t be enough votes.

The only conference I could see maybe make that move would be the SEC. The number of ‘producers’ in that conference is higher than most and they could jettison Missouri, Vandy, and the Mississippi schools and then try to get Oklahoma and Texas to join.

 

[michnittlion]

I just can’t see most teams leaving to form a new super conference. There’s just too much provincialism in college football. Ohio State and Michigan leave the precious big ten? Never. USC and UCLA leave the ‘conference of champions’? Alabama, Georgia, and LSU leave the SEC...SEC...SEC? Just not seeing that.

That leaves cutting the dead weight from conferences and I agree that that’s unlikely to happen (especially in the big ten) because there are too many schools that would think ‘we could be next’. There just won’t be enough votes.

The only conference I could see maybe make that move would be the SEC. The number of ‘producers’ in that conference is higher than most and they could jettison Missouri, Vandy, and the Mississippi schools and then try to get Oklahoma and Texas to join.

If I am a B1G West team (someone like Iowa, Purdue or Minnesota), my biggest fear in the realignment game is Notre Dame. More specifically, Notre Dame going 11-1 some year but missing the playoff, with their lack of a 13th game on their resume being specifically called out.

That gives Notre Dame football a kick in the ass to (kicking and screaming) consider joining a conference.

Now, Notre Dame football could always join the ACC. The invite is there. But Notre Dame is an elitist bunch of snobs. They like some of the ACC's current members. They don't like all of them. Olympic Sports are fine but Notre Dame doesn't really want to be full conference members with the likes of NC State, Virginia Tech or Louisville. They're "beneath" them (in ND's eyes). Clemson is "beneath" ND too but they would tolerate them. Pedestrian academically but their football is absolutely elite.

So, what if Notre Dame starts thinking about engineering their own conference? What if they could pick the best of the ACC and meld it was something else?

A conference made up of Notre Dame, 8 B1G teams, primarily from the East (say: U-M, MSU, OSU, PSU, RU, Mryld, IU and Northwestern) and 7 ACC teams (pick 7 from BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Virg, UNC, Duke, GT, Clemson, Miami and FSU) would look pretty darn good to Notre Dame.

It would also look pretty good to all those other schools too. That conference makes us more $ than the current B1G. No more visits to the "corn states" west of Chicago.

That's a not-overly-ridiculous scenario which involves teams leaving the B1G, while also leaving others behind. And gets us onto the path to consolidation into a more "elite" group of teams at the top of college football.

 

[psu00]

If I am a B1G West team (someone like Iowa, Purdue or Minnesota), my biggest fear in the realignment game is Notre Dame. More specifically, Notre Dame going 11-1 some year but missing the playoff, with their lack of a 13th game on their resume being specifically called out.

That gives Notre Dame football a kick in the ass to (kicking and screaming) consider joining a conference.

Now, Notre Dame football could always join the ACC. The invite is there. But Notre Dame is an elitist bunch of snobs. They like some of the ACC's current members. They don't like all of them. Olympic Sports are fine but Notre Dame doesn't really want to be full conference members with the likes of NC State, Virginia Tech or Louisville. They're "beneath" them (in ND's eyes). Clemson is "beneath" ND too but they would tolerate them. Pedestrian academically but their football is absolutely elite.

So, what if Notre Dame starts thinking about engineering their own conference? What if they could pick the best of the ACC and meld it was something else?

A conference made up of Notre Dame, 8 B1G teams, primarily from the East (say: U-M, MSU, OSU, PSU, RU, Mryld, IU and Northwestern) and 7 ACC teams (pick 7 from BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Virg, UNC, Duke, GT, Clemson, Miami and FSU) would look pretty darn good to Notre Dame.

It would also look pretty good to all those other schools too. That conference makes us more $ than the current B1G. No more visits to the "corn states" west of Chicago.

That's a not-overly-ridiculous scenario which involves teams leaving the B1G, while also leaving others behind. And gets us onto the path to consolidation into a more "elite" group of teams at the top of college football.

I don’t think you’re ever going to get OSU, MSU or Michigan to voluntarily leave the big ten. They are just too emotionally tied to the conference.

As for the ACC, I’m not sure of the dynamics there outside of the Carolina mafia and Virginia (given their relationship with UNC). That core isn’t leaving IMO. They pretty much control the conference.

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

Frank the Tank

With a blast from the past, former conference realignment junkie Frank the Tank wrote an interesting blog entry about the location of alumni bases and their possible effect on the next round of television deals. He makes it clear he's not predicting any conference shuffling but it's still an interesting read even if you don't agree with his reasoning.

Haha...I LOVE Frank the Tank!!

 

[BoilerBulldog]

I disagree. The "Purdues" of the world won't be fine. Money is going to become so tight conferences will look at its members and evaluate who's bringing what to the table and cut loose the underperformers. There just won't be annexations in play such as ND, OU and Texas. It will keep the super conferences at the manageable level of 12 - 14 teams.

I guess we’ll see. I believe the majority of Purdue alums probably don’t care. But I believe being a founding member of the most lucrative and sharing conference means something. But I also believe new platforms for viewing and streaming will monetize very quickly and the dip in the revenue post 2025 will be less than people expect.

I know most on here don’t share this sentiment but there is a certain amount of goodwill between members of this conference and I believe a founding school carries some weight.

I also readily acknowledge we’d never get in today.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

Meanwhile, the Big Ten just blew out the SEC again in FY 2018 Conference revenue payout. This year by roughly $9 million dollars per school ($51 million to SEC's $42 million). Even more disturbing to Pac 12 Presidents, the B1G distributed roughly $18 million more per school than the Pac 12's $33 million payout.

Pac 12 Presidents aren't happy with the way things are going. The Big Ten will be negotiating their Tier 1 television contracts the year before the Pac 12 negotiates theirs, and two years before the Big 12 negotiates theirs. This leaves the Pac 12's and Big 12's Tier 1 television contracts at the mercy of what's left while in a fight with the SEC's Tier 1 television negotiations (CBS) after the 2023/2024 season.

Right now, as of today, the most likely B1G candidates to go to 16 are Oklahoma and Kansas. But with four Conference 1st Tier television contracts coming due at roughly the same time (ACC's 1st Tier rights are locked up through 2036), Pac 12 Presidents are antsy that they will be left with chicken scraps, and Big 12 Presidents are antsy that their artificially propped up sweetheart deal with ESPN and FOX will end. There have been some rumors of a Big Ten, Pac 12, Big 12 mega merger. Something like the Big Ten would go to four Divisions/Pods of five, with USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, and Colorado being added. Iowa State would come over from the Big 12 to make an even 20. All AAU and all geographically compatible.

The balance of the Pac 12 would merge with the Big 12 (minus Iowa State) to form a new 16 team Conference. In essence, a Power Four with the Rose Bowl Champ (B1G/ Big 16) vs the Sugar Bowl Champ (SEC vs ACC) for the National Championship.

This makes sense in a lot of ways for the "Rose Bowl coalition". The Big Ten would have teams in 6 of the top 7 television markets in the Country including 1 through 4. The Rose Bowl coalition as a whole would have teams in all of the top 8 television markets in the Country. The Rose Bowl coalition would have teams in 15 of the top 20 television markets. Of the top 20 television markets, only Boston (9), Atlanta (10), Tampa/St Pete (11), Miami (16), and Orlando (18) would not have a B1G/Big 16 (Rose Bowl coalition) team in its television market or DMA.

The politics would not be an issue since no school (ie. Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Washington State, Oregon State, etc) would be left on the outside looking in or be required to go outside the Conference to play its in state or traditional rival (ie. the Red River Shootout).

Both Pac 12 and Big 12 know that they have their issues as stand alones against the B1G and SEC. A three Conference merger to two would help alleviate the Pac 12's and Big 12's issues while leaving all existing schools in a Power 5. It would also give leverage to the Rose Bowl coalition to have their Champion get an automatic bid to the National Championship Game.

One of the biggest roadblocks is Texas with its LHN Contract with ESPN. The fact that the LHN has been such a disaster from the start makes some think that ESPN would be more than happy to dump it on a potential bidder. However, the Big 12 (now Big 16) as a whole would become a lot more enticing to ESPN. You add three top 25 television markets (Seattle, Phoenix, and Portland) to a Conference that was once Texas and a bunch of farm states , and ESPN may actually find the old Big 12 (now Big 16) worth a fight.

Who knows? We will see.

 

[pandaczar12]

Why not? One conference, four divisions of 8-12 teams each controlling the vast majority of TV revenue, the major bowls, and the playoff. The castoffs can fight for table scraps.

That's what I'd do. Then again, I'm not a college president. So you're right; it probably won't happen for no good reasons other than outright wussification and sheer stupidity.

It would be very tough on non-revenue generating sports.

The better way is to have 4 conferences, feeding the 4 team playoff. I'd prefer 16 teams conferences, 8 team divisions. That would be a true playoff... 8 division winners face off in the conference title game, 4 conference champions go to the existing playoff. No extra games played.

 

[Art]

It would be very tough on non-revenue generating sports.

The better way is to have 4 conferences, feeding the 4 team playoff. I'd prefer 16 teams conferences, 8 team divisions. That would be a true playoff... 8 division winners face off in the conference title game, 4 conference champions go to the existing playoff. No extra games played.

Easy solutions to deal with the non-revenue sports:

a. eliminate a lot of them (that's a real possibility regardless as football continues to eat a greater percentage of the revenue it generates);

b. form separate conferences for them.

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

I know most on here don’t share this sentiment but there is a certain amount of goodwill between members of this conference and I believe a founding school carries some weight.

I also readily acknowledge we’d never get in today.

You are correct that most here don’t share your goodwill amongst schools sentiment. As a non-founding red-headed step-child of the conference, very little goodwill has been cast in our general direction.

That said, they let Rutgers in recently, so you’d have no problem getting in today.

 

[heckmans]

I just can’t see most teams leaving to form a new super conference. There’s just too much provincialism in college football. Ohio State and Michigan leave the precious big ten? Never. USC and UCLA leave the ‘conference of champions’? Alabama, Georgia, and LSU leave the SEC...SEC...SEC? Just not seeing that.

That leaves cutting the dead weight from conferences and I agree that that’s unlikely to happen (especially in the big ten) because there are too many schools that would think ‘we could be next’. There just won’t be enough votes.

The only conference I could see maybe make that move would be the SEC. The number of ‘producers’ in that conference is higher than most and they could jettison Missouri, Vandy, and the Mississippi schools and then try to get Oklahoma and Texas to join.

What you aren't considering is that the driver for all of this is the CFB TV bubble bursting as cable subscribers plummet and TV contracts follow.
The conferences expanded to add geography to increase the pie of forced cable subscribers. When the pie gets smaller and dollars get harder to come by, there will be a lot of anxious college presidents and ADs that will look for any mechanism to keep their budgets and organizations in tact. If that means the Alabama, Auburn, OSU, and Michigan sacking a few of the hangers on, they won't even think twice.

 

[heckmans]

You are correct that most here don’t share your goodwill amongst schools sentiment. As a non-founding red-headed step-child of the conference, very little goodwill has been cast in our general direction.

That said, they let Rutgers in recently, so you’d have no problem getting in today.

Not so sure. Rutgers was not admitted for the quality of their athletic dept, they were admitted for their zip code. Nothing against Purdue, but no conference is circling Indianapolis on their must-have expansion list of media markets.

 

[heckmans]

I don’t think you’re ever going to get OSU, MSU or Michigan to voluntarily leave the big ten. They are just too emotionally tied to the conference.

As for the ACC, I’m not sure of the dynamics there outside of the Carolina mafia and Virginia (given their relationship with UNC). That core isn’t leaving IMO. They pretty much control the conference.

$$ is a hell of a motivator to overcome emotions. When the bubble bursts, and their fiefdoms are threatened, OSU and scUM will drop Purdue, Iowa, and Ilinois like a hot potato.