Official 2022 College Football Thread

[Edward64]

Let's get this monkey off our back this year. Unfortunately, don't see it happening.

The longest active SEC win streak among yearly opponents is … Alabama vs. Arkansas (16 years)

Arkansas is the last current SEC West foe yet to conquer Nick Saban’s Alabama. The last win vs. the Tide came in 2006 when a missed extra point in overtime opened the door for the Hogs. But Saban is a perfect 16-0 against Arkansas. His defense only surrendered more than 20 points on 5 of those occasions, though 2 of those were in the past 2 years with KJ Jefferson as the starting quarterback.

Here’s a thought — Sam Pittman inherited a program that was searching for its first SEC win in over 1,000 days when the 2020 season started. He has since beaten every SEC West team at least once … except for Alabama. If there’s a school that would gladly pay a fine for a field rush, it would be Arkansas finally getting the 16-year Alabama monkey of its back.

[Brian Swartz]

At this point we should just throw everyone in one 'conference' and have them play a random opponent each week at a random location, then have a playoff based on the results. It would seriously make more competitive sense than what college football is doing now.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

At this point we should just throw everyone in one 'conference' and have them play a random opponent each week at a random location, then have a playoff based on the results. It would seriously make more competitive sense than what college football is doing now.

Power 5 (or 4?) should break off and form their own league. Most of these non-power conference schools don't matter anyway and should probably play in a division of their own. Would be nice if the big schools scheduled other P5 schools instead of cupcakes, but most are cowards.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by bob

I saw online an interesting concept that paired 8 teams from each of the ACC and PacX together into a single conference. Each team would play the other 7 teams from their coast, then have one away and one home game against a cross-coast team. Then a championship game of East vs West. Now, not sure if the ACC 8 teams would be after FSU, Clemson, etc left or if it included those teams.

Also, some smoke that Arizona to Big12 will be done by EOD Tuesday.

PAC12 is rumored to have a TV deal that is Apple TV+ exclusive at $20 mil per school. If that's accurate nearly everyone is going to try to get off that ship.

[GrantDawg]

The board of regency that handles Arizona and Arizona State are having an emergency meeting tomorrow. Where they going to go?

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Atocep

PAC12 is rumored to have a TV deal that is Apple TV+ exclusive at $20 mil per school. If that's accurate nearly everyone is going to try to get off that ship.

I am seeing that this is expected to be for up to 12 teams and the hope is that they add 3 or 4 expansion teams, give them half shares, and then redistribute the extra $30M to $40M to the remaining 9 or 8 schools. That could get Oregon and Washington close to $30M. Top two expansion targets are SDSU and SMU.

The current PAC teams also hold a $50-70M debt to Comcast for overpayment of their regional network and it sounds like the PAC is trying to get Apple to cover that, as well (unclear if that would cover the portions of the teams that have announced their exits).

[Ksyrup]

Someone posted elsewhere that the Pac-12 is working on a TV deal... with the History Channel.

[RainMaker]

It has gotten to a point that I can't tell if you're joking or not.

[Swaggs]

Sounds like the PAC commissioner presented a media deal to the remaining members today and it was entirely streaming, through Apple, and only around $20M/per school per year with some incentives based on added subscribers to a potential sports package on AppleTV.

By comparison, the Big Ten (with USC/UCLA) is expected to have $80-100M and SEC (with Texas and OU) at $70-80M+, while the Big 12 (without Texas and OU) is reported at nearly $32M and the ACC is in the same range (have seen between $30-36M).

Apparently, ESPN has agreed to allow the Big 12 pro rata increases for additional P5 schools or UConn (seems hard to believe, but I guess between basketball and the relationship with ESPN) for up to 16 schools and Fox has agreed to pro rata increases up to 14 schools (includes Colorado) or 16 if Washington and Oregon are part of the mix.

There seems to be smoke that the Big 12 is trying to get a commitment from Arizona (who is hesitant to go without ASU) and perhaps trying to leverage them with UConn (so that part may be a rumor to force a Pac team to jump).

[Swaggs]

Those are just media dollars and don't include playoff, NCAA tournament, and bowl payouts that are also distributed by conferences and heavily favor the SEC and Big Ten.

[GrantDawg]

Pac-12 doesn't get much attention? Well the obvious solution is to put it on the most limit streaming visibility as possible. Does this make it official that the PAC is not a power 5 conference anymore?

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Pac-12 doesn't get much attention? Well the obvious solution is to put it on the most limit streaming visibility as possible. Does this make it official that the PAC is not a power 5 conference anymore?

I'd never heard the term before a few weeks ago, but the term "linear programming" is the new buzz phrase. I guess it is that there are only X amount of slots on the networks for games between the weeknight games and the 3 or 4 kick off times between the ESPN and Fox channels.

The SEC and Big Ten own most or all of those prime slots (with Notre Dame and now the Big Ten also owning NBC), the ACC has long had a good relationship with ESPN and are signed through the mid-2030s at a good rate, and the Big 12 recognized that there were only so many openings left, so did an end around and negotiated with ESPN and Fox a year before their contract ended and sort of secured what was left.

The PAC, even after losing USC and UCLA, were apparently still thinking they were on par with the SEC and Big Ten and were asking for "Big Ten Money" when they opened negotiations and were trying to play ESPN/Fox/Amazon/Apple against each other, while the Big 12 commish seemed to accept the pecking order better and got money and exposure on par with the ACC, leaving the Pac to hope for the best from other networks or streaming. Pretty fascinating to see unfold, when 10-12 years ago they could have probably added Oklahoma and Texas if they had been willing to add some other Big 12 schools and even 2 years ago, they probably could have sniped the best of what was left in the Big 12 after Oklahoma and Texas committed to the SEC.

[Solecismic]

The question is, though, is it worth it to trade long-time rivalries and connections with the non-revenue sports to run with this latest trend.

Or do you wait out the realignment, the inevitable CBA and transition of football/basketball players to employees, and see what happens then?

For the vast majority of college athletes, this isn't a good thing. Players spend too much time traveling. Parents can't go to road games as easily. I don't know that it's beneficial to be part of that while trying to get an education.

We can point to the Pac-12 as the poster child for missing the boat on this trend, but, until losing UCLA/USC/Colorado, it was an all-star league of mountain/western universities. I guess that's enough for heavy criticism today, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're just fine ten years from now.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

but I wouldn't be surprised if they're just fine ten years from now.

I don't see a landscape where the conference even exists ten years from now, unless it's as a western version of an Ivy-lite or something.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

The question is, though, is it worth it to trade long-time rivalries and connections with the non-revenue sports to run with this latest trend.

Or do you wait out the realignment, the inevitable CBA and transition of football/basketball players to employees, and see what happens then?

For the vast majority of college athletes, this isn't a good thing. Players spend too much time traveling. Parents can't go to road games as easily. I don't know that it's beneficial to be part of that while trying to get an education.

We can point to the Pac-12 as the poster child for missing the boat on this trend, but, until losing UCLA/USC/Colorado, it was an all-star league of mountain/western universities. I guess that's enough for heavy criticism today, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're just fine ten years from now.

All of the issues that you raise have been affecting other schools for 20+ years. Why start caring now? You are a UM and Big Ten alum/fan, so my guess is because of Rose Bowl nostalgia and memories of some of the remaining teams taking turns being powerhouses, but without USC they are not much different than the Big East without Miami or the Big 12 without Texas, Nebraska, and Oklahoma.

Long term, I guess it depends on what your definition of “fine” is, but without USC, Washington is the only remaining team with top 25ish attendance, they haven’t had a team in the playoffs since 2016, and they are not going to have much national exposure if ESPN isn’t broadcasting their games or talking about them. I think Oregon and Washington will probably find their way out sooner rather than later because they will perform better without USC around (like Louisville and WVU managed to do out of the Big East when Miami and VT left), but unless they can get a network to throw them a lifeline and hold the remaining teams together, the majority of those schools may end up going the way of the SWC or Big East.

[Solecismic]

I don't see football remaining in the NCAA much longer, at least major college football. Yet all this conference movement is driven by football.

And it seems the money from broadcast/major cable channels is limited. The offer to the Pac-12 mainly from Apple seems to be around $20 million per school.

The result is that Arizona/Arizona State/Utah are at least open to the Big-12, with Washington/Oregon/Stanford/California likely going through another round of asking the Big Ten if it wants to go to 18 or 20. The money gap is going to drive the split - make this a professional sport.

So I see the outline for the demise of the Pac-12 football conference. They have nowhere to turn for new members, other than trying to conquer the Mountain West. I don't think that's going to shake any more money out of streamers - they're already in a world of trouble themselves.

But what happens if all this takes place? Or a subset. We know at some point, the players will become employees and they'll receive a share of the revenue. And that model might work for basketball, but since most of the revenue is tied to the NCAA tournament, it's going to look very different.

With football gone, smaller conferences, geographically organized, existing rivalries... all of that makes too much sense to abandon.

The three sub-majors are using all their effort to preserve a status quo that won't even exist five years from now. The question is what happens then. And the Pac-12 makes a lot of sense again, just without football. And apparently Colorado, which is mountain, but much more connected with the Big-12 for many reasons.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Does this make it official that the PAC is not a power 5 conference anymore?

If they lose Oregon and Washington, I'd say yes.

[Ksyrup]

FSU doing all sorts of big talking during their BOT meeting today. I think what's happening is that they are now going public to try to force ESPN to the table. I think working something out within the conference was Plan A. Ain't happening, they said they've worked on it for a year and no answer. Plan B is for ESPN to be threatened with the possibility of losing FSU and Clemson (at a minimum) and the value the current ACC brings them, and hope that the possibility of losing the ACC brings them to the table for some sort of re-negotiation. Plan C would be the nuclear option. But, that also requires a place to go and the B1G is already talking with 4 Pac-12 schools, so... I still don't see the SEC. Is the Big 12 a possibility? I suppose if the money works...

[GrantDawg]

ESPN isn't as healthy as it once was. I think they want to keep the sweetheart deal they have or they will just walk away all together.

[Swaggs]

I get why FSU is concerned with falling behind their peer schools, but I believe the grant of rights is to ESPN, not the ACC. I’m no attorney, but it seems like they have no leverage whatsoever, unless ESPN wants them in the SEC (no way they let them go to the Big Ten, since their broadcast rights are split so many ways). I despise ESPN and all the harm they’ve done to college sports, but why would it be fair to break the 20-year contract they signed in 2016?

I’m not referring to anyone here, but things have been broken for awhile now and the ACC has done their fair share of damage, so it is quite a sight seeing people showing concern now, when schools from the SWC, old eastern independents, Big East, Big 12, and AAC have been struggling out in the wild for years.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

ESPN isn't as healthy as it once was. I think they want to keep the sweetheart deal they have or they will just walk away all together.

That’s the thing. If FSU, Clemson, and the few other bellcow schools leave, what happens to BC, Wake, Syracuse, etc. with 12 more years on the ACC deal? I’m guessing they are going to want indemnified by ESPN and/or the schools that broke the deal. That is 30M+ per school for 12 years, plus whatever bowls they lose, plus however much less their conference championship game earns. I just have a tough time seeing how anyone leaves the ACC until there is only a year or two left on the deal.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

That’s the thing. If FSU, Clemson, and the few other bellcow schools leave, what happens to BC, Wake, Syracuse, etc. with 12 more years on the ACC deal? I’m guessing they are going to want indemnified by ESPN and/or the schools that broke the deal. That is 30M+ per school for 12 years, plus whatever bowls they lose, plus however much less their conference championship game earns. I just have a tough time seeing how anyone leaves the ACC until there is only a year or two left on the deal.

The move may end up being to wait until there's a full split between football D1s that matter and the rest.

That would lead to new TV deal(s) and probably provide enough money (especially if the remnants you mentioned got to be among the only not-really-D1-anymore schools/conferences who had any sort of a TV deal to speak of)

[cartman]

how long until the Saudi Investment Fund tries to buy the SEC/Big 10/Big 12

[Swaggs]

Jason Scheer, Arizona’s 247 editor who has been pretty reasonable and realistic throughout this mess, is reporting that Arizona, ASU, and Utah are “likely” to join the Big 12. Good for the Big 12 and security for the teams, but not so great for WVU. I was hoping for some room to remain if Pitt, VPI, Louisville, and/or Syracuse become available down the road.

I’d assume that means that Washington and Oregon (and possibly Cal and Stanford) have a good shot at joining the Big Ten. Some reports that they will be offered partial shares until the next media deal. Will the Rose Bowl become the Big Ten championship game now or just another Big Ten-SEC bowl?

[Ghost Econ]

I like to imagine Vandy and Northwestern hiding in a corner praying the actual football schools just forget they're there.

It's also insane to me that the Big 12 is going to survive this as a nominal major conference and not the PAC 12.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Ghost Econ

I like to imagine Vandy and Northwestern hiding in a corner praying the actual football schools just forget they're there

I've wondered about this.

Do the actual football schools like having a team or two that they can (most years) chalk up as an easy in-conference win? Or, if things were perfect, would they prefer to replace them with a school that would bring in a larger fan base?

[JPhillips]

I don't think the B1G would give away Northwestern. They fit the academic profile and that's a big deal for the conference. They also like having a school in Chicago. They'll soon have NY(almost), Chicago, and LA.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I don't think the B1G would give away Northwestern. They fit the academic profile and that's a big deal for the conference. They also like having a school in Chicago. They'll soon have NY(almost), Chicago, and LA.

But Vandy is another matter. They actually have a good track record in baseball, but that is about it. Their academics actually fit better in the Big1G than the SEC, but I really doubt that is a consideration in keeping them in the SEC. They do have some big money donors attached to them. IDK if that is enough tosave them.

[HerRealName]

It sounds like Oregon and Washington to the Big 10 is imminent. It's just a matter of agreeing on the final numbers. It seems they may not get full shares initially.

[cuervo72]

B1G West and the B1G REALLY West

[Swaggs]

I think things are far from guaranteed, but this feels like the closest we have been to the damn breaking open and things getting real crazy, real fast.

Oregon and Washington have apparently been fully vetted previously and the Big Ten is supposedly just waiting to get numbers back from their media partners. Realistically, anything above the offer they just got from the PAC and/or the $31Mish from the Big 12 should be good enough for a partial share until the next negotiation.

Arizona State has apparently come around, after initially being one of the more supportive administrations about staying in the Pac. Arizona seems to be as good as gone to the Big 12, if their Board of Regents will allow them to go without ASU. Otherwise, they need to be a package deal.

I still don't see anything happening with the ACC until a few years before their grant of rights expires in 2036. FSU is rattling the cage, but if there was a way out and a place to go, they would have done it by now. They are posturing for uneven revenue distribution from the ACC, but there can't be much motivation for the other members to go for that. It isn't like the good will would prevent FSU from leaving when their first opportunity comes.

Some talked that the Pac and ACC are trying for a Hail Mary merge, but again, who is going to take those two groups that are valued well below the SEC and Big Ten and think that mixing them together is going to make their value go up?

The greatest strength of the Big 12 is that they have been picked over enough times that all of the remaining schools realize there are not greener pastures elsewhere and they have accepted that they need to position themselves securely behind the SEC and Big Ten, rather than trying to catch or overtake them.

[NobodyHere]

Well this is a new way to get kicked off a college football team.

LB T.J. Dudley allegedly dismissed from Clemson football for sharing private locker room pictures on OnlyFans account

[Ghost Econ]

That's why every team needs their own OnlyFans. Never would have come out if it was an Clemson.OnlyFans

[sovereignstar v2]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Well this is a new way to get kicked off a college football team.

LB T.J. Dudley allegedly dismissed from Clemson football for sharing private locker room pictures on OnlyFans account

what a dumbass

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Some talked that the Pac and ACC are trying for a Hail Mary merge, but again, who is going to take those two groups that are valued well below the SEC and Big Ten and think that mixing them together is going to make their value go up?

The greatest strength of the Big 12 is that they have been picked over enough times that all of the remaining schools realize there are not greener pastures elsewhere and they have accepted that they need to position themselves securely behind the SEC and Big Ten, rather than trying to catch or overtake them.

The biggest problem the Pac-12 has is its media approach. I've been studying college football ratings over the last season. The Pac-12 has brands - major brands - and their football approach is just wrong when it comes to televising.

First: 48% of Americans live in the Eastern time zone, 29% Central, 6% Mountain and 17% Western. Those who live in the Central time zone are used to television life starting an hour earlier. Mountain drifts into Pacific for the most part. So that's 77%-23%.

The Pac-12 dominates that 23%. But instead of giving them multiple viewing windows, they stick to a prime matchup at 3:30 Eastern on Saturday, then use the 10:30pm Eastern windows on Friday and Saturday.

The result is that the 77% can't really follow these brands. They're almost never on. You get one game a week, and that's competing with a lot of big games. They don't work their advantages anywhere.

Meanwhile, the Big Ten generally features its big game at 12:00 on Saturday, followed by the SEC's big game in the 3:30 window. Then someone hits that that 7:00 window with a big game.

I don't know if this is the Pac-12's fault, but there were weeks when a Pac-12 game didn't even crack the top ten in ratings.

So a merger would give them games in other windows. A network embracing this merger would have the Pac-12 playing in that 7:00 Saturday window that they ignore for reasons I can't understand. There is no excuse for a big Pac-12 game ever to be played at 10:30pm Eastern, yet many are.

I think the merger idea is a interesting one - I have for a long time. The problem is too many teams to sort out.

Meanwhile, the Big-12 has that third-place value with lesser brands, but a top-to-bottom time slot approach.

That's all lost when your national approach is "Here's my 3:30 game, enjoy it... the rest of us will go into hiding until 10:30."

However, and this a big however... I think the media miscalculated on the Big 12's value. You look at the ratings from last year, take away TCU's run for the championship, and it's Oklahoma... Texas... Oklahoma... Texas... they draw in the 3:30 and 7:00 slots the Big-12 uses, and they try to put one of those schools on nationally every week.

The hit the Big-12 will take when those schools go to the SEC... that makes the ACC a very solid #3 ratings-wise. The ACC has the national brands that the Big-12 doesn't. So the merger - well, if Arizona/Arizona State/Utah go to the Big-12 and 16 becomes the new 14, maybe the ACC should make a Washington/Oregon pitch, only with full rights rather than the piece they'd get from the Big Ten.

Still, I maintain that five years from now, football will be separate from other sports, and the old conference structures will make more sense. There's a lot of deck-chair shuffling going on with football that isn't going to mean a whole lot in the end.

[RainMaker]

I actually think an ACC/Pac-12 merger would make sense in a way if everyone is going the superconference route. Each conference acts as its own "division" and the winners play in a title game. Covers both coasts.

[bob]

https://twitter.com/RedditCFB/status...46798902857729

[cuervo72]

Oh that's fantastic.

[Ksyrup]

Now it's looking like the Pac-12 might pull itself back together.

[HerRealName]

The yo yo of the Pac death, rebirth, to death again this morning has been fascinating. To me it feels like Oregon and Washington are doing a good job of negotiating.

[Ghost Econ]

I'm waiting for the UAE and Saudis to start buying colleges

[Swaggs]

It really is interesting to watch from the outside.

This is just a guess, but I'm thinking that the best (and maybe only) strategy left is for Oregon and Washington to make a play to let 1 or 2 more teams go and then backfill with some G5 teams (sounds like maybe San Diego St and SMU are the A-tier possibilities and them seen mention of Fresno St, Tulane, UNLV, and/or Colorado St) that get much smaller partial shares. If, say, just Arizona goes and they add four new teams that are willing to take $10M per year, that would allow Oregon and Washington to get up to $35-40M and maybe let the Cal/Stanford get a little more than the reported $20-22M, as well. It seems like the preference for most of the schools is for the Pac to stick together and this would buy them another five years to see if the landscape changes. It seems like a big issue is still the streaming vs linear exposure, thought. Not being on ESPN/CBS/Fox really cuts down on branding and the ability of recruits to see teams and expecting schools without the largest fanbases to boost the sales of a premium service on Apple doesn't seem like the greatest business strategy.

I think the other, very real possibility is that this is Washington and Oregon posturing and negotiating without directly negotiating with the Big Ten, since the reports have been that they would 'only' be getting $30-35M from the Big Ten until the next round of TV deals, when they would then be full partners. If this bumps them up closer to $40M, with the promise of becoming one of the big boys, they would be crazy to stick around think they are going to get any closer to the big 2 conferences.

[Swaggs]

and I have been as in to expansion, for years and years, as much as anyone I know, but I saw things put into perspective quite well yesterday. Someone posted about how little the media deal actually affects the fans and, with NIL, really the players. Big money boosters can pay NIL and it isn't like getting a bigger TV deal trickles down to fans on gamely, making tickets and concessions any more affordable.

These TV deals have damaged college sports a lot like how for profit health insurance has damaged medicine/healthcare.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Now it's looking like the Pac-12 might pull itself back together.

FAKE NEWS

[Ksyrup]

I don't think there are many coincidences in the business of college sports, so coming on the heels of FSU's loud proclamations on Wednesday, this seems to have been a perfectly timed "report."

Florida State considering partnership with private equity firm in effort to raise capital, per report - CBSSports.com

[Swaggs]

Enjoyed this quote that I read on the Reddit college football boards: The real grant of rights were the friends we made along the way.

[Swaggs]

Looks like Brett McMurphy is calling Oregon and Washington to the Big Ten.

I read that there was some talk that Oregon State and Washington State offered to give some of their shares to their partner state schools to entice them to stay, but apparently no dice. Just horrendous leadership from the Pac presidents and last two commissioners. I'm happy that it isn't West Virginia in the conference not being picked apart, for a change. But it does just suck all around that college football is going to be so much different going forward.

On the realignment front, I guess Florida State, Miami, Notre Dame, UNC, and maybe UVA and Clemson are the last remaining prizes that don't belong to the Big Ten or ACC.

[Ksyrup]

This is what half my timeline looks like right now:

Folks, I've just thought of an odd and rather humorous discrepancy between the number of teams in the conferences of college football, and the names of those respective conferences, and man am I excited to share it with you

— Benjamin Solak (@BenjaminSolak) August 4, 2023

[JonInMiddleGA]

Repurposing from my own social media (which is written for a more general audience that's less sports sophisticated than the one here, so don't take it that I'm talking down to anybody here m'kay)
--------------------------------

With the disintegration of the Pac-12 (10/9/7/TBD) several things come to mind

1) The Big 12 is kinda nuts if they offer anybody who isn't already on board a full TV share at this point

2) The Mountain West TV deal lasts another three years (two after the current season) and pays members around $4m each. Would the CBS/Fox combo prorate the deal by that amount for the scraps in a merger? I'm not sure doing so would be good business

3) The proposed "Coastal Conference" (or whatever) that would merge the remaining Pac teams with the existing ACC doesn't seem to do anything for the already struggling ACC. I'm pretty sure nobody is enthused by a random Virginia / Washington State matchup in any sport, nor does anyone smell money or ratings for Ga Tech vs Oregon State.

3b) Talking head Josh Pate explained things succinctly earlier this week when he noted that the two words you never hear mentioned in conference realignment discussions are "fans" and "athletes". The reason is simple: neither of those matter one bit to realignment. The only two things that matter are money and power.

Which is why I figure the least interesting possibility: merging the ACC and the shell of the Pac 12 will be the thing that eventually happens.

[Swaggs]

I'd expect Arizona to the Big 12 will be the next move.

I kind of hope the Big 12 pumps the breaks a bit after that. It seems like Utah and Arizona State are the next most talked about, but they would be in redundant markets with BYU and (assuming) Arizona. I think Arizona and ASU might be politically tied, however.

I would like to see more eastern partners to pair with WVU, Cincy, and UCF. UConn and Memphis have been mentioned. And the combo of UConn and San Diego State have also been mentioned, as have Gonzaga and Villanova (without football, obviously). Commissioner Yormark apparently wants to focus on basketball, being in multiple timelines, and sees it as a way to stay tied to the SEC and Big Ten and believes that the live programming could become more lucrative going forward than it has been.